# 265_adv_control_eng - /SYS21/D/B&H3B2/ACE/REVISES/ACEC08.3D...

This preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

where M is the controllability matrix, equation (8.88) W ± a 1 a 2 ... a n ÿ 1 1 a 2 a 3 10 . . . a n ÿ 1 1 00 2 6 6 6 6 6 4 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 (8 : 102) Note that T ± I when the system state equation is already in the controllable canonical form. (c) Ackermann's formula : As with Method 2, Ackermann's formula (1972) is a direct evaluation method. It is only applicable to SISO systems and therefore u ( t )and y ( t ) in equation (8.87) are scalar quantities. Let K ± 01 ²³ M ÿ 1 ± ( A )( 8 : 103) where M is the controllability matrix and ± ( A ) ± A n ´ ² n ÿ 1 A n ÿ 1 ´µµµ´ ² 1 A ´ ² 0 I (8 : 104) where A is the system matrix and ² i are the coefficients of the desired closed-loop characteristic equation. Example 8.11 (See also Appendix 1, examp811.m ) A control system has an open-loop transfer function Y U ( s ) ± 1 s ( s ´ 4) When x 1 ± y and x 2 ± _ x 1 ,expressthestateequationinthecontrollablecanonicalform. Evaluate the coefficients of the state feedback gain matrix using: (a) The direct comparison method (b) The controllable canonical form method (c) Ackermann's formula such that the closed-loop poles have the values s ±ÿ 2, s 2 Solution From the open-loop transfer function  y ´ 4 _ y ± u (8 : 105) Let x 1 ± y (8 : 106) Then _ x 1 ± x 2 _ x 2 4 x 2 ´ u (8 : 107) State-space methods for control system design 251

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
Equation (8.106) provides the output equation and (8.107) the state equation _ x 1 _ x 2 ±² ± 01 0 ÿ 4 x 1 x 2 ² 0 1 u (8 : 108) y ± [1 0] x 1 x 2 (8 : 109) The characteristic equation for the open-loop system is j s I ÿ A s 0 0 s ÿ 0 ÿ 4 ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ± s 2 ² 4 s ² 0 ± s 2 ² a 1 s ² a 0 (8 : 110) Thus a 1 ± 4, a 0 ± 0 The required closed-loop characteristic equation is ( s ² 2)( s ² 2) ± 0 or s 2 ² 4 s ² 4 ± 0( 8 : 111) i.e. s 2 ² ± 1 s ² ± 0 ± 8 : 112) hence ± 1 ± 4, ± 0 ± 4 (a) Direct comparison method : From equations (8.99) and (8.111) j s I ÿ A ² BK s 2 ² 4 s ² 4( 8 : 113) s 0 0 s ÿ 0 ÿ 4 ² 0 1 k 1 k 2 ³´ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ± s 2 ² 4 s ² 4 s ÿ 1 0 s ² 4 ² 00 k 1 k 2 ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ± s 2 ² 4 s ² 4 s ÿ 1 k 1 s ² 4 ² k 2 ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ³ ± s 2 ² 4 s ² 4 s 2 ² (4 ² k 2 ) s ² k 1 ± s 2 ² 4 s ² 8 : 114) From equation (8.114) k 1 ± 4 (4 ² k 2 ) ± 4i : e : k 2 ± 0 (8 : 115) 252 Advanced Control Engineering
(b) Controllable canonical form method : From equation (8.100) K ± [ ± 0 ÿ a 0 : ± 1 ÿ a 1 ] T ÿ 1 ± [4 ÿ 0 : 4 ÿ 4] T ÿ 1 ± [4 0] T ÿ 1 (8 : 116) now T ± MW where M ± [ B : AB ] AB ± 01 0 ÿ 4 ±² 0 1 ± 1 ÿ 4 giving M ± 1 ÿ 4 (8 : 117) Note that the determinant of M is non-zero, hence the system is controllable. From equation (8.102) W ± a 1 1 10 ± 41 Hence T ± MW ± 1 ÿ 4 ± ± I (8 : 118) Thus proving that equation (8.108) is already in the controllable canonical form. Since T ÿ 1 is also I , substitute (8.118) into (8.116) K ± I ± (8 : 119) (c) Ackermann's formula : From (8.103) K ± [0 1] M ÿ 1 ² ( A )( 8 : 120) From (8.117) M ÿ 1 ± 1 ÿ 1 ÿ 4 ÿ 1 ÿ ± (8 : 121) From (8.104) ² ( A ) ± A 2 ² ± 1 A ² ± 0 I State-space methods for control system design 253

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
inserting values ± ( A ) ± 01 0 ÿ 4 "# 2 ² 4 0 ÿ 4 ² 4 10 ± 0 ÿ 4 6 ² 04 0 ÿ 16 ² 40 ± (8 : 122) Insert equations (8.121) and (8.122) into (8.120) K ± [0 1] 41 ±² ± 16 4 K ± [4 0] (8 : 123) These results agree with the root locus diagram in Figure 5.9, where
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}