Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Solution 9 – Disturbance Rejection and Integral Control
Solution for Problem 9.1 – Disturbance models
a) The first signal is a piecewise exponential function. The tangent at the initial point, say
t = t0, crosses the axis (which also marks the final value of the function) at t = T. Hence,
the exponential function decays with − 1
T
. We assume that at each instant ti, the initial
value z(ti) of z is reset. Thus, the disturbance can be represented by
z(t) = e− t
T z(ti).
Then, for each interval of the disturbance, Differentiating z gives
˙z(t) = −
1
T
e− t
T z(ti)
= −
1
T
z(t).
Choosing w(t) = z(t), the disturbance model reads
˙w = −
1
T
w
z = w.
b) Here, z is a piecewise constant disturbance which can be denoted by z(ti). For every time
interval between two jumps, say t ∈ [ti, ti+1),
˙z(t) = 0.
By defining w(t) = z(t), the disturbance model reads
˙w = 0
z = w.
c) In the last case, z is a piecewise harmonic oscillations disturbance, which features a
constant angular frequency ω = 2π
T
, and different phases ϕi and amplitude Ai in various
segments. Additionally, it has a constant offset z(ti). Combining the oscillation and the
offset yields
z(t) = zsin(t) + zconst(t)
= Ai sin
2π
T
t + ϕi + z(ti).
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 1
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Differentiating z twice gives
˙z(t) =
2π
T
Ai cos
2π
T
t + ϕi + z(ti)
¨z(t) = −
2π
T
2
Ai sin
2π
T
t + ϕi + z(ti)
= −ω2
zsin(t).
Thus, with the definition
w =



w1
w2
w3


 =



zsin
˙zsin
zconst


 ,
the disturbance model can be expressed in terms of
˙w =



0 1 0
−ω2
0 0
0 0 0


 w
z = 1 0 1 w.
Solution for Problem 9.2 – Disturbance feedback
a) Since the block diagram of the system is given in the frequency domain, the relationship
between the states can be written as follows:
X1(s)
X2(s) + Z(s)
=
2
s + 2
t d ˙x1(t) = −2x1(t) + 2x2(t) + 2z(t)
X2(s)
U(s)
=
1
s + 1
t d ˙x2(t) = −x2(t) + u(t),
which in state representation is equivalent to
˙x1
˙x2
=
−2 2
0 −1
x1
x2
+
0
1
u +
2
0
z
y = 1 0
x1
x2
.
b) For this question, the feedback vector r , and the gains nx, nu, mx and mu are going to
be designed one by one. Due to the superposition principle, this is always possible.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 2
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
i) Feedback matrix r
From the state representation we know that the system is characterized by the
following matrices
A =
−2 2
0 −1
, b =
0
1
, e =
2
0
, c = 1 0 ,
while we assume the feedback matrix to have the form
r = r1 r2 .
With all of the eigenvalues at −5, the desired characteristic polynomial is given by
(s + 5)2
= s2
+ 10
p1
s + 25
p0
.
The characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system is calculated as follows:
det sI − A + br = det
s + 2 −2
0 s + 1
+
0 0
r1 r2
=
s + 2 −2
r1 s + r2 + 1
= s2
+ (r2 + 3)
α1
s + 2r1 + 2r2 + 2
α0
Applying the coefficient matching method
s2
+ (r2 + 3)
α1
s + 2r1 + 2r2 + 2
α0
!
= s2
+ 10
p1
s + 25
p0
,
we obtain
r2 + 3
!
= 10
2r1 + 2r2 + 2
!
= 25.
Thus,
r1 = 7
r2 = 4.5,
i.e. the state feedback vector is
r = 7 4.5 .
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 3
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
ii) Gains nx, nu
The goal is to design nx and nu such that the eigenvalue of the disturbance model
are rendered unobservable. According to the Hautus Criterion (for observability),
the goal is equivalent to to the matrix
H(λi) =





A − br − λiI eZ + b(nu + r nx)
0 W − λiI
c 0
−I nx





being rank deficient for λi which is an eigenvalue of W . Hence
H(λi)
vx,i
vw,i
= 0. (1)
Given a (piecewise) constant disturbance, the disturbance model
˙w = 0
z = w
is characterized by scalars
W = 0
Z = 1.
Apparently, the eigenvalues of W is λ = 0, whose eigenvector can be computed from
(W − λ)vw = 0.
The result of which is chosen as
vw = 1.
The last row of (1) gives the relationship between vx and vw:
vx = nxvw. (2)
Then, introducing the shortcut
q = nuvw, (3)
and substituting (2) and (3) into the first equation in (1), we obtain
(A − λ) vx + bqi = −eZvw.
This can further be combined with the third equation in (1) and gives
A − λI b
c 0
P (λ)
vx
q
=
−eZvw
0
⇔



−2 2 0
0 −1 1
1 0 0






vx,1
vx,2
q


 =



−2
0
0


 .
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 4
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
From that, vx and q can be then calculated as
vx =
0
1
, q = −1.
Then, according to (2) and (3),
nx =
0
1
, nu = −1.
iii) Gains mx, mu
To achieve steady state accuracy, the feed-forward gains mx and mu have to satisfy
P (0)
mx
mu
=
A b
cT
0
mx
mu
=
0
1
⇔



−2 2 0
0 −1 1
1 0 0






mx1
mx2
mu


 =



0
0
1


 .
Hence, mx and mu can be solved as
mx =
1
1
, mu = 1.
c) Considering a sinusoidal disturbance with angular frequency ω = 2, from differentiation
we have
z(t) = sin(2t)
˙z(t) = 2 cos(2t)
¨z(t) = −4 sin(2t) = −4z(t).
Choosing
w =
z
˙z
the disturbance model can be written as
˙w =
0 1
−4 0
W
w
z = 1 0
Z
w.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 5
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
The eigenvalues of W are calculated as the roots λ of the characteristic equation
0 = det(λI − W )
=
λ −1
4 λ
= λ2
+ 4,
which gives the result
λ1 = 2j, λ2 = −2j.
The corresponding eigenvectors vw,i can be calculated from
(W − λiI)vw,i = 0.
For λ1,
−2j 1
−4 −2j
vw,1,1
vw,1,2
= 0
vw,1 =
1
2j
is an eigenvector, for λ2,
2j 1
−4 2j
vw,2,1
vw,2,2
= 0
vw,2 =
1
−2j
.
Thus the matrix of the eigenvectors reads
V w =
1 1
2j −2j
.
Equivalently to (2) and (3)
V x = NxV w
q = nu V w.
Substituting λ1 and λ2 respectively into
A − λiI b
c 0
P (λi)
vx
q
=
−eZvw
0
, (4)
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 6
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
we get
for λ1:



−2 − 2j 2 0
0 −1 − 2j 1
1 0 0






vx,1,1
vx,1,2
q1


 =



2
0
0



for λ2:



−2 + 2j 2 0
0 −1 + 2j 1
1 0 0






vx,2,1
vx,2,2
q2


 =



2
0
0


 ,
which then gives
vx,1 =
0
1
, q1 = 1 + 2j
vx,2 =
0
1
, q2 = 1 − 2j.
Having determined vw,i, vx,i, and qi, with
vx,1 vx,2 = Nx vw,1 vw,2
q1 q2 = nu vw,1 vw,2 ,
Nx and nu can be determined from
0 0
1 1
=
nx,1,1 nx,1,2
nx,2,1 nx,2,2
1 1
2j −2j
1 + 2j 1 − 2j = nu,1 nu,2
1 1
2j −2j
.
Solving the system of equations
nx,1,1 + 2jnx,1,2 = 0
nx,2,1 + 2jnx,2,2 = 1
nx,1,1 − 2jnx,1,2 = 0
nx,2,1 − 2jnx,2,2 = 1
nu,1 + 2jnu,2 = 1 + 2j
nu,1 − 2jnu,2 = 1 − 2j
finally gives
Nx =
0 0
1 0
, nu = 1 1 .
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 7
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Solution for Problem 9.3 – Integral control and disturbance observer
a) Given the state representation
˙x = Ax + bu + ez
y = c x
where
A =
−2 2
0 −1
, b =
0
1
, e =
2
0
, c = 1 0 ,
we can get the following representation of the above state representation in the frequency
domain by Laplace transformation:
sX(s) = AX(s) + bU(s) + eZ(s)
Y (s) = c X(s)
By solving the first equation for X(s) and replacing the result in the second one, we
obtain a relation between the transformed input U(s), the disturbance Z(s) and the
output Y (s):
(sI − A)X(s) = bU(s) + eZ(s)
X(s) = (sI − A)−1
bU(s) + (sI − A)−1
eZ(s)
Y (s) = c (sI − A)−1
bU(s) + c (sI − A)−1
eZ(s).
From that, the transfer function between z and y reads
Y (s)
Z(s)
= gzy = c (sI − A)−1
e
= 1 0
s + 2 −2
0 s + 1
−1
2
0
= 1 0
1
s+2
2
(s+1)(s+2)
0 1
s+1
2
0
=
2
s + 2
.
If you take a look back at the block diagram in Problem 9.2, you will find the answer in
the second block since these two problems share the same system. Surprise!
b) In the undisturbed case, the general controller
u = −Rx + (Nu + RNx)w + (Mu + RMx)yref
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 8
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
for this case reads
u = −r x + (mu + r mx)yref.
To achieve steady state accuracy, the feed-forward gains mx and mu have to satisfy
P (0)
mx
mu
=
A b
cT
0
mx
mu
=
0
1



−2 2 0
0 −1 1
1 0 0






mx1
mx2
mu


 =



0
0
1


 .
Hence, mx and mu read
mx =
1
1
, mu = 1.
c) In order to design the integral feedback, the new state xi is added to the state represen-
tation:
˙x = Ax + bu + ez
˙xi = yref − c x.
Then the extended controller
u = −rx x + rixi + (mu + rx mx)
f
yref
can be substituted in the state representation and we obtain the closed loop
˙x
˙xi
=
A − rx bri
−c 0
x
xi
+
bf
1
yref +
e
0
z
=



−2 2 0
−rx,1 −1 − rx,2 ri
−1 0 0



˜A



x1
x2
xi


 +
bf
1
˜b
yref +



2
0
0



˜e
z.
With the eigenvalues at −4, −5, and −6, the desired characteristic polynomial is given
by
(s + 4)(s + 5)(s + 6) = s3
+ 15
p2
s2
+ 74
p1
s + 120
p0
.
The characteristic polynomial of the system is
det sI − ˜A =
s + 2 −2 0
rx,1 s + rx,2 + 1 −ri
1 0 s
= s3
+ (rx,2 + 3)
α2
s2
+ (2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2)
α1
s + 2r1
α0
.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 9
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Applying the coefficient matching method
s3
+ (rx,2 + 3)
α2
s2
+ (2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2)
α1
s + 2ri
α0
!
= s3
+ 15
p2
s2
+ 74
p1
s + 120
p0
,
we obtain
rx,2 + 3
!
= 15
2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2
!
= 74
2ri
!
= 120.
Thus,
rx,1 = 24
rx,2 = 12
ri = 60,
i.e.
rx = 24 12 , ri = 60.
d) Given a constant disturbance z, its corresponding disturbance model can be written as
˙w = 0
z = w.
Hence, the augmented state representation reads
˙x
˙w
=



−2 2 2
0 −1 0
0 0 0



Ad



x1
x2
w


 +



0
1
0



bd
u
y = 1 0 0
cd



x1
x2
w


 .
As for observability, here, we apply the Kalman’s Criterion. The columns of the observ-
ability matrix
Qo =



cd
cd Ad
cd A2
d


 =



1 0 0
−2 2 2
4 −2 −4


 ,
are linearly independent and thus, the matrix has full rank. Hence, the system is observ-
able.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 10
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
e) The desired characteristic polynomial is to be matched with the characteristic polynomial
of the observer error dynamics:
det sI − Ad + lcd
!
= (s + 10)3
.
Here, the unknown correction matrix L = l has dimension 3 × 1 since one measurement
is used to correct the three-dimensional state of observer dynamics.
Calculating each side of the equation gives
det sI − Ad + lcd =
s + l1 + 2 −2 −2
l2 s + 1 0
l3 0 s
= s3
+ (l1 + 3)
α2
s2
+ (l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2)
α1
s + 2l3
α0
,
(s + 10)3
= s3
+ 30
p2
s2
+ 300
p1
s + 1000
p0
.
Applying the coefficient matching method
s3
+ (l1 + 3)
α2
s2
+ (l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2)
α1
s + 2l3
α0
!
= s3
+ 30
p2
s2
+ 300
p1
s + 1000
p0
,
we obtain
l1 + 3 = 30
l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2 = 300
2l3 = 1000,
from which we can then calculate
l1 = 27
l2 = −364.5
l3 = 500.
Thus, the Luenberger observer is designed as
˙ˆx = Ad ˆx + bdu + l(y − ˆy),
where the correction matrix is
l =



27
−364.5
500


 .
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 11
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Solution for Problem 9.4 – Three-tank system
a) Inserting the known matrices into the state representation of the three-tank system gives
˙x
˙w
=







−1 1 0 0 0
1 −2 1 1 0
0 1 −2 0 1
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0







˜A
x
w
+







1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0







˜B
u.
i) In the first case, the output y is
y = 1 0 0 0 0
˜c1
x
w
.
Then the observability matrix of the (augmented) system is
Qo =









˜c1
˜c1
˜A
˜c1
˜A
2
˜c1
˜A
3
˜c1
˜A
4









=







1 0 0 0 0
−1 1 0 0 0
2 −3 1 1 0
−5 9 −5 −3 1
14 −28 19 9 −5







,
where the last three columns are linearly dependent:







0
0
1
−5
19







=







0
0
1
−3
9







− 2







0
0
0
1
−5







.
Thus the matrix is rank deficient and the system is unobservable.
ii) In the second case, the output y is
y = 0 0 1 0 0
˜c2
x
w
.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 12
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Then the observability matrix of the system is
Qo =









˜c2
˜c2
˜A
˜c2
˜A
2
˜c2
˜A
3
˜c2
˜A
4









=







0 0 1 0 0
0 1 −2 0 1
1 −4 5 1 −2
−5 14 −14 −4 5
19 −47 42 14 −14







.
Again, one finds the columns to be linearly dependent:







0
1
−4
14
47







= −







0
0
1
−5
19







−







0
0
1
−4
14







+







0
1
−2
5
−14







,
Thus the matrix is rank deficient and the system is unobservable.
iii) In the third case, the output y is
y =
1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
˜C
x
w
.
Then the observability matrix of the system is the combination of the ones of the
previous two cases:
Qo =









˜C
˜C ˜A
˜C ˜A
2
˜C ˜A
3
˜C ˜A
4









=



















1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
−1 1 0 0 0
0 1 −2 0 1
2 −3 1 1 0
1 −4 5 1 −2
−5 9 −5 −3 1
−5 14 −14 −4 5
14 −28 19 9 −5
19 −47 42 14 −14



















.
It can be seen that the first five rows are linearly independent. Thus the matrix has
full rank and the system is observable.
b) Apparently, both eigenvalues of W are λ = 0. The matrix of the corresponding eigenvec-
tors can be chosen as
V w =
1 0
0 1
.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 13
Lehrstuhlfür
Regelungstechnik
”Advanced Control”
Winter 2015/16
Exercise 9
Then, Nx and Nu can be determined as follows:
A − λI B
C 0
Nx
Nu
=
−EZV w
0







−1 1 0 1 0
1 −2 1 0 0
0 1 −2 0 1
1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0














nx,1,1 nx,1,2
nx,2,1 nx,2,2
nx,3,1 nx,3,2
nu,1,1 nu,1,2
nu,2,1 nu,2,2







=





0 0
−1 0
0 −10 0
0 0





4th
row: nx,1,1 = 0, nx,1,2 = 0
5th
row: nx,3,1 = 0, nx,3,2 = 0
2nd
row: nx,2,1 =
1
2
, nx,2,2 = 0
1st
row: nu,1,1 = −
1
2
, nu,1,2 = 0
3rd
row: nu,2,1 = −
1
2
, nu,2,2 = −1.
Consequently, we have
Nx =



0 0
1
2
0
0 0


 , Nu =
−1
2
0
−1
2
−1
.
Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 14

More Related Content

PDF
Partial Differential Equation - Notes
PDF
Legendre
PPTX
Newton's forward difference
PDF
MA8353 TPDE
PPTX
Complex analysis
PDF
Complex analysis and differential equation
PPTX
Finite difference method
PPTX
Partial differentiation
Partial Differential Equation - Notes
Legendre
Newton's forward difference
MA8353 TPDE
Complex analysis
Complex analysis and differential equation
Finite difference method
Partial differentiation

What's hot (20)

PDF
Complex analysis notes
PPTX
Partial differential equations
PDF
Partial Differential Equations, 3 simple examples
PPT
Calculus of variation problems
PDF
Composed short m sequences
DOC
It 05104 digsig_1
PDF
Newton's Forward/Backward Difference Interpolation
PPTX
Newton's forward & backward interpolation
PPTX
Complex variables
PDF
Example triple integral
PPT
PPT
Partial Differentiation & Application
PPTX
Newton’s Forward & backward interpolation
PDF
Interpolation with unequal interval
DOC
Chapter 3 (maths 3)
PDF
Local linear approximation
PPTX
Digital Signal Processing
PPTX
Calculus ppt on "Partial Differentiation"#2
PPTX
SERIES SOLUTION OF ORDINARY DIFFERENTIALL EQUATION
Complex analysis notes
Partial differential equations
Partial Differential Equations, 3 simple examples
Calculus of variation problems
Composed short m sequences
It 05104 digsig_1
Newton's Forward/Backward Difference Interpolation
Newton's forward & backward interpolation
Complex variables
Example triple integral
Partial Differentiation & Application
Newton’s Forward & backward interpolation
Interpolation with unequal interval
Chapter 3 (maths 3)
Local linear approximation
Digital Signal Processing
Calculus ppt on "Partial Differentiation"#2
SERIES SOLUTION OF ORDINARY DIFFERENTIALL EQUATION
Ad

Viewers also liked (7)

PDF
Joe Paine Portfolio
PDF
Princess cut diamond engagement ring
PDF
Cushion diamond engagement ring
DOCX
Terrance Brown revised Fueler Resume
PDF
Portfolio Marion Saive
ODP
Trabajo de musica (no borrar)
ODP
Trabajo de musica (no borrar)
Joe Paine Portfolio
Princess cut diamond engagement ring
Cushion diamond engagement ring
Terrance Brown revised Fueler Resume
Portfolio Marion Saive
Trabajo de musica (no borrar)
Trabajo de musica (no borrar)
Ad

Similar to adv-2015-16-solution-09 (20)

PDF
alt klausur
PDF
Sbe final exam jan17 - solved-converted
PDF
Julio Bravo's Master Graduation Project
PPTX
Lecture Notes: EEEC4340318 Instrumentation and Control Systems - Fundamental...
DOCX
Arna Friend Controls II Final
DOCX
Discrete control2
PDF
Servo systems
PDF
Servo systems-integral-state-feedback-lecture-2020
PDF
Discrete control2 converted
DOCX
Discrete control
PDF
Digital control book
PDF
Project_Report.pdf
PDF
The Controller Design For Linear System: A State Space Approach
PDF
ICCUBEA_2015_paper
PDF
Lecture11
PDF
Discretization
PDF
598Lecture12.pdf
PPTX
Process Dynamics Exercises and their solutions
PDF
Feedback linearisation
PPTX
Lec 1 introduction
alt klausur
Sbe final exam jan17 - solved-converted
Julio Bravo's Master Graduation Project
Lecture Notes: EEEC4340318 Instrumentation and Control Systems - Fundamental...
Arna Friend Controls II Final
Discrete control2
Servo systems
Servo systems-integral-state-feedback-lecture-2020
Discrete control2 converted
Discrete control
Digital control book
Project_Report.pdf
The Controller Design For Linear System: A State Space Approach
ICCUBEA_2015_paper
Lecture11
Discretization
598Lecture12.pdf
Process Dynamics Exercises and their solutions
Feedback linearisation
Lec 1 introduction

adv-2015-16-solution-09

  • 1. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Solution 9 – Disturbance Rejection and Integral Control Solution for Problem 9.1 – Disturbance models a) The first signal is a piecewise exponential function. The tangent at the initial point, say t = t0, crosses the axis (which also marks the final value of the function) at t = T. Hence, the exponential function decays with − 1 T . We assume that at each instant ti, the initial value z(ti) of z is reset. Thus, the disturbance can be represented by z(t) = e− t T z(ti). Then, for each interval of the disturbance, Differentiating z gives ˙z(t) = − 1 T e− t T z(ti) = − 1 T z(t). Choosing w(t) = z(t), the disturbance model reads ˙w = − 1 T w z = w. b) Here, z is a piecewise constant disturbance which can be denoted by z(ti). For every time interval between two jumps, say t ∈ [ti, ti+1), ˙z(t) = 0. By defining w(t) = z(t), the disturbance model reads ˙w = 0 z = w. c) In the last case, z is a piecewise harmonic oscillations disturbance, which features a constant angular frequency ω = 2π T , and different phases ϕi and amplitude Ai in various segments. Additionally, it has a constant offset z(ti). Combining the oscillation and the offset yields z(t) = zsin(t) + zconst(t) = Ai sin 2π T t + ϕi + z(ti). Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 1
  • 2. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Differentiating z twice gives ˙z(t) = 2π T Ai cos 2π T t + ϕi + z(ti) ¨z(t) = − 2π T 2 Ai sin 2π T t + ϕi + z(ti) = −ω2 zsin(t). Thus, with the definition w =    w1 w2 w3    =    zsin ˙zsin zconst    , the disturbance model can be expressed in terms of ˙w =    0 1 0 −ω2 0 0 0 0 0    w z = 1 0 1 w. Solution for Problem 9.2 – Disturbance feedback a) Since the block diagram of the system is given in the frequency domain, the relationship between the states can be written as follows: X1(s) X2(s) + Z(s) = 2 s + 2 t d ˙x1(t) = −2x1(t) + 2x2(t) + 2z(t) X2(s) U(s) = 1 s + 1 t d ˙x2(t) = −x2(t) + u(t), which in state representation is equivalent to ˙x1 ˙x2 = −2 2 0 −1 x1 x2 + 0 1 u + 2 0 z y = 1 0 x1 x2 . b) For this question, the feedback vector r , and the gains nx, nu, mx and mu are going to be designed one by one. Due to the superposition principle, this is always possible. Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 2
  • 3. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 i) Feedback matrix r From the state representation we know that the system is characterized by the following matrices A = −2 2 0 −1 , b = 0 1 , e = 2 0 , c = 1 0 , while we assume the feedback matrix to have the form r = r1 r2 . With all of the eigenvalues at −5, the desired characteristic polynomial is given by (s + 5)2 = s2 + 10 p1 s + 25 p0 . The characteristic polynomial of the closed-loop system is calculated as follows: det sI − A + br = det s + 2 −2 0 s + 1 + 0 0 r1 r2 = s + 2 −2 r1 s + r2 + 1 = s2 + (r2 + 3) α1 s + 2r1 + 2r2 + 2 α0 Applying the coefficient matching method s2 + (r2 + 3) α1 s + 2r1 + 2r2 + 2 α0 ! = s2 + 10 p1 s + 25 p0 , we obtain r2 + 3 ! = 10 2r1 + 2r2 + 2 ! = 25. Thus, r1 = 7 r2 = 4.5, i.e. the state feedback vector is r = 7 4.5 . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 3
  • 4. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 ii) Gains nx, nu The goal is to design nx and nu such that the eigenvalue of the disturbance model are rendered unobservable. According to the Hautus Criterion (for observability), the goal is equivalent to to the matrix H(λi) =      A − br − λiI eZ + b(nu + r nx) 0 W − λiI c 0 −I nx      being rank deficient for λi which is an eigenvalue of W . Hence H(λi) vx,i vw,i = 0. (1) Given a (piecewise) constant disturbance, the disturbance model ˙w = 0 z = w is characterized by scalars W = 0 Z = 1. Apparently, the eigenvalues of W is λ = 0, whose eigenvector can be computed from (W − λ)vw = 0. The result of which is chosen as vw = 1. The last row of (1) gives the relationship between vx and vw: vx = nxvw. (2) Then, introducing the shortcut q = nuvw, (3) and substituting (2) and (3) into the first equation in (1), we obtain (A − λ) vx + bqi = −eZvw. This can further be combined with the third equation in (1) and gives A − λI b c 0 P (λ) vx q = −eZvw 0 ⇔    −2 2 0 0 −1 1 1 0 0       vx,1 vx,2 q    =    −2 0 0    . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 4
  • 5. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 From that, vx and q can be then calculated as vx = 0 1 , q = −1. Then, according to (2) and (3), nx = 0 1 , nu = −1. iii) Gains mx, mu To achieve steady state accuracy, the feed-forward gains mx and mu have to satisfy P (0) mx mu = A b cT 0 mx mu = 0 1 ⇔    −2 2 0 0 −1 1 1 0 0       mx1 mx2 mu    =    0 0 1    . Hence, mx and mu can be solved as mx = 1 1 , mu = 1. c) Considering a sinusoidal disturbance with angular frequency ω = 2, from differentiation we have z(t) = sin(2t) ˙z(t) = 2 cos(2t) ¨z(t) = −4 sin(2t) = −4z(t). Choosing w = z ˙z the disturbance model can be written as ˙w = 0 1 −4 0 W w z = 1 0 Z w. Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 5
  • 6. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 The eigenvalues of W are calculated as the roots λ of the characteristic equation 0 = det(λI − W ) = λ −1 4 λ = λ2 + 4, which gives the result λ1 = 2j, λ2 = −2j. The corresponding eigenvectors vw,i can be calculated from (W − λiI)vw,i = 0. For λ1, −2j 1 −4 −2j vw,1,1 vw,1,2 = 0 vw,1 = 1 2j is an eigenvector, for λ2, 2j 1 −4 2j vw,2,1 vw,2,2 = 0 vw,2 = 1 −2j . Thus the matrix of the eigenvectors reads V w = 1 1 2j −2j . Equivalently to (2) and (3) V x = NxV w q = nu V w. Substituting λ1 and λ2 respectively into A − λiI b c 0 P (λi) vx q = −eZvw 0 , (4) Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 6
  • 7. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 we get for λ1:    −2 − 2j 2 0 0 −1 − 2j 1 1 0 0       vx,1,1 vx,1,2 q1    =    2 0 0    for λ2:    −2 + 2j 2 0 0 −1 + 2j 1 1 0 0       vx,2,1 vx,2,2 q2    =    2 0 0    , which then gives vx,1 = 0 1 , q1 = 1 + 2j vx,2 = 0 1 , q2 = 1 − 2j. Having determined vw,i, vx,i, and qi, with vx,1 vx,2 = Nx vw,1 vw,2 q1 q2 = nu vw,1 vw,2 , Nx and nu can be determined from 0 0 1 1 = nx,1,1 nx,1,2 nx,2,1 nx,2,2 1 1 2j −2j 1 + 2j 1 − 2j = nu,1 nu,2 1 1 2j −2j . Solving the system of equations nx,1,1 + 2jnx,1,2 = 0 nx,2,1 + 2jnx,2,2 = 1 nx,1,1 − 2jnx,1,2 = 0 nx,2,1 − 2jnx,2,2 = 1 nu,1 + 2jnu,2 = 1 + 2j nu,1 − 2jnu,2 = 1 − 2j finally gives Nx = 0 0 1 0 , nu = 1 1 . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 7
  • 8. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Solution for Problem 9.3 – Integral control and disturbance observer a) Given the state representation ˙x = Ax + bu + ez y = c x where A = −2 2 0 −1 , b = 0 1 , e = 2 0 , c = 1 0 , we can get the following representation of the above state representation in the frequency domain by Laplace transformation: sX(s) = AX(s) + bU(s) + eZ(s) Y (s) = c X(s) By solving the first equation for X(s) and replacing the result in the second one, we obtain a relation between the transformed input U(s), the disturbance Z(s) and the output Y (s): (sI − A)X(s) = bU(s) + eZ(s) X(s) = (sI − A)−1 bU(s) + (sI − A)−1 eZ(s) Y (s) = c (sI − A)−1 bU(s) + c (sI − A)−1 eZ(s). From that, the transfer function between z and y reads Y (s) Z(s) = gzy = c (sI − A)−1 e = 1 0 s + 2 −2 0 s + 1 −1 2 0 = 1 0 1 s+2 2 (s+1)(s+2) 0 1 s+1 2 0 = 2 s + 2 . If you take a look back at the block diagram in Problem 9.2, you will find the answer in the second block since these two problems share the same system. Surprise! b) In the undisturbed case, the general controller u = −Rx + (Nu + RNx)w + (Mu + RMx)yref Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 8
  • 9. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 for this case reads u = −r x + (mu + r mx)yref. To achieve steady state accuracy, the feed-forward gains mx and mu have to satisfy P (0) mx mu = A b cT 0 mx mu = 0 1    −2 2 0 0 −1 1 1 0 0       mx1 mx2 mu    =    0 0 1    . Hence, mx and mu read mx = 1 1 , mu = 1. c) In order to design the integral feedback, the new state xi is added to the state represen- tation: ˙x = Ax + bu + ez ˙xi = yref − c x. Then the extended controller u = −rx x + rixi + (mu + rx mx) f yref can be substituted in the state representation and we obtain the closed loop ˙x ˙xi = A − rx bri −c 0 x xi + bf 1 yref + e 0 z =    −2 2 0 −rx,1 −1 − rx,2 ri −1 0 0    ˜A    x1 x2 xi    + bf 1 ˜b yref +    2 0 0    ˜e z. With the eigenvalues at −4, −5, and −6, the desired characteristic polynomial is given by (s + 4)(s + 5)(s + 6) = s3 + 15 p2 s2 + 74 p1 s + 120 p0 . The characteristic polynomial of the system is det sI − ˜A = s + 2 −2 0 rx,1 s + rx,2 + 1 −ri 1 0 s = s3 + (rx,2 + 3) α2 s2 + (2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2) α1 s + 2r1 α0 . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 9
  • 10. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Applying the coefficient matching method s3 + (rx,2 + 3) α2 s2 + (2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2) α1 s + 2ri α0 ! = s3 + 15 p2 s2 + 74 p1 s + 120 p0 , we obtain rx,2 + 3 ! = 15 2rx,1 + 2rx,2 + 2 ! = 74 2ri ! = 120. Thus, rx,1 = 24 rx,2 = 12 ri = 60, i.e. rx = 24 12 , ri = 60. d) Given a constant disturbance z, its corresponding disturbance model can be written as ˙w = 0 z = w. Hence, the augmented state representation reads ˙x ˙w =    −2 2 2 0 −1 0 0 0 0    Ad    x1 x2 w    +    0 1 0    bd u y = 1 0 0 cd    x1 x2 w    . As for observability, here, we apply the Kalman’s Criterion. The columns of the observ- ability matrix Qo =    cd cd Ad cd A2 d    =    1 0 0 −2 2 2 4 −2 −4    , are linearly independent and thus, the matrix has full rank. Hence, the system is observ- able. Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 10
  • 11. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 e) The desired characteristic polynomial is to be matched with the characteristic polynomial of the observer error dynamics: det sI − Ad + lcd ! = (s + 10)3 . Here, the unknown correction matrix L = l has dimension 3 × 1 since one measurement is used to correct the three-dimensional state of observer dynamics. Calculating each side of the equation gives det sI − Ad + lcd = s + l1 + 2 −2 −2 l2 s + 1 0 l3 0 s = s3 + (l1 + 3) α2 s2 + (l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2) α1 s + 2l3 α0 , (s + 10)3 = s3 + 30 p2 s2 + 300 p1 s + 1000 p0 . Applying the coefficient matching method s3 + (l1 + 3) α2 s2 + (l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2) α1 s + 2l3 α0 ! = s3 + 30 p2 s2 + 300 p1 s + 1000 p0 , we obtain l1 + 3 = 30 l1 + 2l2 + 2l3 + 2 = 300 2l3 = 1000, from which we can then calculate l1 = 27 l2 = −364.5 l3 = 500. Thus, the Luenberger observer is designed as ˙ˆx = Ad ˆx + bdu + l(y − ˆy), where the correction matrix is l =    27 −364.5 500    . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 11
  • 12. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Solution for Problem 9.4 – Three-tank system a) Inserting the known matrices into the state representation of the three-tank system gives ˙x ˙w =        −1 1 0 0 0 1 −2 1 1 0 0 1 −2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0        ˜A x w +        1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0        ˜B u. i) In the first case, the output y is y = 1 0 0 0 0 ˜c1 x w . Then the observability matrix of the (augmented) system is Qo =          ˜c1 ˜c1 ˜A ˜c1 ˜A 2 ˜c1 ˜A 3 ˜c1 ˜A 4          =        1 0 0 0 0 −1 1 0 0 0 2 −3 1 1 0 −5 9 −5 −3 1 14 −28 19 9 −5        , where the last three columns are linearly dependent:        0 0 1 −5 19        =        0 0 1 −3 9        − 2        0 0 0 1 −5        . Thus the matrix is rank deficient and the system is unobservable. ii) In the second case, the output y is y = 0 0 1 0 0 ˜c2 x w . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 12
  • 13. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Then the observability matrix of the system is Qo =          ˜c2 ˜c2 ˜A ˜c2 ˜A 2 ˜c2 ˜A 3 ˜c2 ˜A 4          =        0 0 1 0 0 0 1 −2 0 1 1 −4 5 1 −2 −5 14 −14 −4 5 19 −47 42 14 −14        . Again, one finds the columns to be linearly dependent:        0 1 −4 14 47        = −        0 0 1 −5 19        −        0 0 1 −4 14        +        0 1 −2 5 −14        , Thus the matrix is rank deficient and the system is unobservable. iii) In the third case, the output y is y = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 ˜C x w . Then the observability matrix of the system is the combination of the ones of the previous two cases: Qo =          ˜C ˜C ˜A ˜C ˜A 2 ˜C ˜A 3 ˜C ˜A 4          =                    1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 −1 1 0 0 0 0 1 −2 0 1 2 −3 1 1 0 1 −4 5 1 −2 −5 9 −5 −3 1 −5 14 −14 −4 5 14 −28 19 9 −5 19 −47 42 14 −14                    . It can be seen that the first five rows are linearly independent. Thus the matrix has full rank and the system is observable. b) Apparently, both eigenvalues of W are λ = 0. The matrix of the corresponding eigenvec- tors can be chosen as V w = 1 0 0 1 . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 13
  • 14. Lehrstuhlfür Regelungstechnik ”Advanced Control” Winter 2015/16 Exercise 9 Then, Nx and Nu can be determined as follows: A − λI B C 0 Nx Nu = −EZV w 0        −1 1 0 1 0 1 −2 1 0 0 0 1 −2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0               nx,1,1 nx,1,2 nx,2,1 nx,2,2 nx,3,1 nx,3,2 nu,1,1 nu,1,2 nu,2,1 nu,2,2        =      0 0 −1 0 0 −10 0 0 0      4th row: nx,1,1 = 0, nx,1,2 = 0 5th row: nx,3,1 = 0, nx,3,2 = 0 2nd row: nx,2,1 = 1 2 , nx,2,2 = 0 1st row: nu,1,1 = − 1 2 , nu,1,2 = 0 3rd row: nu,2,1 = − 1 2 , nu,2,2 = −1. Consequently, we have Nx =    0 0 1 2 0 0 0    , Nu = −1 2 0 −1 2 −1 . Dr.-Ing. Nicole Gehring 14