Intro. Computer Control Systems: F9

Similar documents
Intro. Computer Control Systems: F8

POLE PLACEMENT. Sadegh Bolouki. Lecture slides for ECE 515. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Fall S. Bolouki (UIUC) 1 / 19

CONTROL DESIGN FOR SET POINT TRACKING

5. Observer-based Controller Design

Lec 6: State Feedback, Controllability, Integral Action

Topic # Feedback Control. State-Space Systems Closed-loop control using estimators and regulators. Dynamics output feedback

Control Systems Design, SC4026. SC4026 Fall 2010, dr. A. Abate, DCSC, TU Delft

6 OUTPUT FEEDBACK DESIGN

ECE 388 Automatic Control

EL 625 Lecture 10. Pole Placement and Observer Design. ẋ = Ax (1)

EEE582 Homework Problems

Linear State Feedback Controller Design

Control Systems Design

ECEEN 5448 Fall 2011 Homework #4 Solutions

EL2520 Control Theory and Practice

State Regulator. Advanced Control. design of controllers using pole placement and LQ design rules

State Feedback and State Estimators Linear System Theory and Design, Chapter 8.

ẋ n = f n (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (5) y 1 = g 1 (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (6) y p = g p (x 1,...,x n,u 1,...,u m ) (7)

One-Sided Laplace Transform and Differential Equations

Pole placement control: state space and polynomial approaches Lecture 2

Identification Methods for Structural Systems

EE C128 / ME C134 Fall 2014 HW 9 Solutions. HW 9 Solutions. 10(s + 3) s(s + 2)(s + 5) G(s) =

TRACKING AND DISTURBANCE REJECTION

Observability and state estimation

Control Systems I. Lecture 4: Diagonalization, Modal Analysis, Intro to Feedback. Readings: Emilio Frazzoli

Introduction to Computer Control Systems

Lecture 19 Observability and state estimation

Control Systems. Frequency domain analysis. L. Lanari

Solution via Laplace transform and matrix exponential

Final: Signal, Systems and Control (BME )

State Feedback and State Estimators Linear System Theory and Design, Chapter 8.

Time Response of Systems

Chapter 3. State Feedback - Pole Placement. Motivation

SYSTEMTEORI - ÖVNING 5: FEEDBACK, POLE ASSIGNMENT AND OBSERVER

Control Systems. Laplace domain analysis

CDS Solutions to the Midterm Exam

Zeros and zero dynamics

Synthesis via State Space Methods

ME 132, Fall 2015, Quiz # 2

1 (30 pts) Dominant Pole

Control Systems Design, SC4026. SC4026 Fall 2010, dr. A. Abate, DCSC, TU Delft

ECEN 420 LINEAR CONTROL SYSTEMS. Lecture 6 Mathematical Representation of Physical Systems II 1/67

SYSTEMTEORI - KALMAN FILTER VS LQ CONTROL

Controls Problems for Qualifying Exam - Spring 2014

There are none. Abstract for Gauranteed Margins for LQG Regulators, John Doyle, 1978 [Doy78].

EE C128 / ME C134 Final Exam Fall 2014

University of Toronto Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering ECE410F Control Systems Problem Set #3 Solutions = Q o = CA.

Chapter 3. LQ, LQG and Control System Design. Dutch Institute of Systems and Control

Control Systems I. Lecture 6: Poles and Zeros. Readings: Emilio Frazzoli. Institute for Dynamic Systems and Control D-MAVT ETH Zürich

ECE504: Lecture 9. D. Richard Brown III. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. 04-Nov-2008

1 Continuous-time Systems

State will have dimension 5. One possible choice is given by y and its derivatives up to y (4)

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science : MULTIVARIABLE CONTROL SYSTEMS by A.

DESIGN OF OBSERVERS FOR SYSTEMS WITH SLOW AND FAST MODES

Control Systems Design, SC4026. SC4026 Fall 2009, dr. A. Abate, DCSC, TU Delft

Perspective. ECE 3640 Lecture 11 State-Space Analysis. To learn about state-space analysis for continuous and discrete-time. Objective: systems

Model reduction via tangential interpolation

LMIs for Observability and Observer Design

Topic # Feedback Control

Contents lecture 5. Automatic Control III. Summary of lecture 4 (II/II) Summary of lecture 4 (I/II) u y F r. Lecture 5 H 2 and H loop shaping

16.30/31, Fall 2010 Recitation # 13

EC Control Engineering Quiz II IIT Madras

BALANCING-RELATED MODEL REDUCTION FOR DATA-SPARSE SYSTEMS

Systems Engineering/Process Control L4

Pole Placement Design

D(s) G(s) A control system design definition

Linear Systems. Linear systems?!? (Roughly) Systems which obey properties of superposition Input u(t) output

Full State Feedback for State Space Approach

Modelling and Control of Dynamic Systems. Stability of Linear Systems. Sven Laur University of Tartu

2E1252 Control Theory and Practice

Topics in control Tracking and regulation A. Astolfi

Course Outline. Higher Order Poles: Example. Higher Order Poles. Amme 3500 : System Dynamics & Control. State Space Design. 1 G(s) = s(s + 2)(s +10)

Advanced Control Theory

Raktim Bhattacharya. . AERO 632: Design of Advance Flight Control System. Preliminaries

Design of Positive Linear Observers for Positive Systems via Coordinates Transformation and Positive Realization

Chapter 9 Observers, Model-based Controllers 9. Introduction In here we deal with the general case where only a subset of the states, or linear combin

Introduction to Nonlinear Control Lecture # 4 Passivity

LECTURE NOTES ON CONTROL

Lecture 9 Nonlinear Control Design

Transfer Functions. Chapter Introduction. 6.2 The Transfer Function

= m(0) + 4e 2 ( 3e 2 ) 2e 2, 1 (2k + k 2 ) dt. m(0) = u + R 1 B T P x 2 R dt. u + R 1 B T P y 2 R dt +

ECEN 605 LINEAR SYSTEMS. Lecture 7 Solution of State Equations 1/77

EECS C128/ ME C134 Final Thu. May 14, pm. Closed book. One page, 2 sides of formula sheets. No calculators.

Internal Model Principle

State Variable Analysis of Linear Dynamical Systems

Introduction to Modern Control MT 2016

EEE 184: Introduction to feedback systems

Section 5 Dynamics and Control of DC-DC Converters

Linearization problem. The simplest example

Linear dynamical systems with inputs & outputs

EECS C128/ ME C134 Final Wed. Dec. 15, am. Closed book. Two pages of formula sheets. No calculators.

State estimation and the Kalman filter

Exam in Automatic Control II Reglerteknik II 5hp (1RT495)

Control engineering sample exam paper - Model answers

Power System Control

Time Response Analysis (Part II)

9.5 The Transfer Function

Dr Ian R. Manchester Dr Ian R. Manchester AMME 3500 : Review

Steady State Kalman Filter

Observability. It was the property in Lyapunov stability which allowed us to resolve that

Transcription:

Intro. Computer Control Systems: F9 State-feedback control and observers Dave Zachariah Dept. Information Technology, Div. Systems and Control 1 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

F8: Quiz! 2 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

F8: Quiz! 1) For an observable system a the effect of all x(t) can be observed in y(t) b we have det O = 0 c we have stability 2 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

F8: Quiz! 1) For an observable system a the effect of all x(t) can be observed in y(t) b we have det O = 0 c we have stability 2) If a state-space form of G(s) is a minimal realization, a A:s eigenvalues < G(s):s poles b A:s eigenvalues = G(s):s poles c there exist more compact state-space forms 2 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

F8: Quiz! 1) For an observable system a the effect of all x(t) can be observed in y(t) b we have det O = 0 c we have stability 2) If a state-space form of G(s) is a minimal realization, a A:s eigenvalues < G(s):s poles b A:s eigenvalues = G(s):s poles c there exist more compact state-space forms 3) For a controllable system with state-feedback control a the closed-loop system is stable b the poles of the closed-loop system can be designed arbitrarily c no information about the system is required 2 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State-feedback control 3 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State-feedback control State-space form of linear time-invariant system ẋ = Ax + Bu y = Cx G(s) = C(sI A) 1 B u x y (si A) 1 B C 4 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State-feedback control Controller using state feedback u = Lx + l 0 r gives closed-loop system ẋ = (A BL)x + Bl 0 r y = Cx where r is the reference signal. 4 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State-feedback control Controler using state feedback gives closed-loop system u = Lx + l 0 r ẋ = (A BL)x + Bl 0 r y = Cx where r is the reference signal. rl 0 u x y (si A) 1 B C + L G c (s) = C(sI A + BL) 1 Bl 0 4 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Pole placement Rules of thumb for designing L Eigenvalues/poles given by det(si A + BL) = 0, which we can design Im{s} Re{s} 5 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Pole placement Rules of thumb for designing L Eigenvalues/poles given by det(si A + BL) = 0, which we can design Im{s} Re{s} Distance to the origin: Quick system but also sensitive to disturbances 5 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states via simulation 6 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Via simulation Controller u = Lx + l 0 r requires states x which are often unknown. 7 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Via simulation Controller u = Lx + l 0 r requires states x which are often unknown. In practice, feedback using u = Lˆx + l 0 r where ˆx is an estimate of x. 7 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Via simulation Controller u = Lx + l 0 r requires states x which are often unknown. In practice, feedback using u = Lˆx + l 0 r where ˆx is an estimate of x. Naive idea: Estimate x by simulating the states where ˆx 0 is an initial guess. ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx(0) = ˆx 0 7 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Ex.: Damper y State-space form: [ ] [ ] 0 1 0 ẋ(t) = x(t) + u(t), x(0) = x k/m 0 1/m 0 y(t) = [ 1 0 ] x(t) u 8 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Example using impulse u input u(t), output y(t) 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 u(t) y(t) 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 100 t [s] System with unknown initial state x 0 8 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using perfect initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 = x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 0 + 8 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using perfect initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 = x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 20 8 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using perfect initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 = x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 100 8 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using wrong initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 0 + 9 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using wrong initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 20 9 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation Naive estimate using wrong initial guess: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu, ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 100 9 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition from simple systems State estimation via simulation x och ˆx correspond to different outputs: y = Cx versus ŷ = C ˆx output y(t) 0.4 0.2 0 0.2 y(t) C ˆx(t) 0.4 0 20 40 60 80 100 t [s] 9 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states via observer 10 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Correcting the state estimates Idea: Feedback the prediction error y C ˆx to correct ˆx Observer: an estimator with a correction term ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx(0) = ˆx 0 }{{} correction 11 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Correcting the state estimates Idea: Feedback the prediction error y C ˆx to correct ˆx Observer: an estimator with a correction term Using matrix ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx(0) = ˆx 0 }{{} correction we can design the estimator. k 1 k 2 K =. k n 11 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Estimating the states Correcting the state estimates Idea: Feedback the prediction error y C ˆx to correct ˆx Observer: an estimator with a correction term ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx(0) = ˆx 0 }{{} correction u x y (si A) 1 B C ˆx Obs. 11 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition using simple systems State estimation using observer Estimation using observer: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 0 + 12 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition using simple systems State estimation using observer Estimation using observer: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 20 12 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Build intuition using simple systems State estimation using observer Estimation using observer: ˆx = Aˆx + Bu + K ( y C ˆx ), ˆx 0 x 0 0.15 0.1 x 2 (velocity) [m/s] 0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 x 1 (position) [m] x versus ˆx at t = 100 12 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State estimation Estimation error and observability Estimation error: x x ˆx [Board: derive evolution of estimation errors] 13 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State estimation Estimation error and observability Estimation error: x x ˆx [Board: derive evolution of estimation errors] Result Errors of observer described as system x(t) = e (A KC)t x(0) and therefore x(t) decays at a rate given by maximum Re{ s i } where s i are observer poles/eigenvalues of (A KC). 13 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State estimation Estimation error and observability Estimation error: x x ˆx Result 9.2 State-space form is observable (cf. det O 0) matrix K can be chosen such that x vanish arbitrarily quick 14 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State estimation Estimation error and observability Estimation error: x x ˆx Result 9.2 State-space form is observable (cf. det O 0) matrix K can be chosen such that x vanish arbitrarily quick K is solved by polynomial det(si A + KC) = 0 with desired roots in left halfplane 14 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

State estimation Estimation error and observability Estimation error: x x ˆx Result 9.2 State-space form is observable (cf. det O 0) matrix K can be chosen such that x vanish arbitrarily quick K is solved by polynomial det(si A + KC) = 0 with desired roots in left halfplane Quick observer ˆx is however sensitive to measurement noise! 14 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Combining feedback with estimated states 15 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states Controller the Laplace domain rl 0 + u x y (si A) 1 B C L ˆx Obs. 16 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states Controller the Laplace domain rl 0 + u x y (si A) 1 B C L ˆx Obs. System and controller with observer: { { ẋ = Ax + Bu u and y = Cx ˆx = Lˆx + l 0 r = Aˆx + Bu + K(y C ˆx) 16 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states Controller the Laplace domain rl 0 + u x y (si A) 1 B C L ˆx Obs. Controller with observer: { U(s) = L L : X(s) + l 0 R(s) s X(s) = A X(s) + BU(s) + K ( Y (s) C X(s) ) [Board: solve for controller] 16 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states General linear feedback control General linear feedback form, ch.9.5 G&L Controller with observer can be written as where U(s) = F r (s)r(s) F y (s)y (s), F r (s) = (1 L(sI A + KC + BL) 1 B)l 0 F y (s) = L(sI A + KC + BL) 1 K r F r + u G y F y 17 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Resulting closed-loop system 18 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states Effect of estimation error rl 0 + u x y (si A) 1 B C L ˆx Obs. Study system and controller with observer: { ẋ = Ax + Bu and u = Lˆx + l 0 r y = Cx by substituting ˆx = x x [Board: derive the closed-loop system with estimation error x] 19 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states Effect of estimation error rl 0 + u x y (si A) 1 B C L ˆx Obs. Yields closed-loop system: ẋ = (A BL)x + y = Cx with additional error states effect of estimation error {}}{ BL x +Bl 0 r x = (A KC) x 0 [Board: write the closed-loop system in state-space form] 19 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states The closed-loop system with observer The closed-loop system with estimation error can be written as [ẋ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] A BL BL x B = + l x 0 A KC x 0 0 r }{{}}{{} Ã B y = [ C 0 ] }{{} C with extended state vector. [ x x This yields transfer function from r to y: ] G c (s) = C(sI Ã) 1 B 20 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Feedback using estimated states The closed-loop system with observer Closed-loop system transfer function, ch.9.5 G&L Insert matrices Ã, B and C yields G c (s) = C(sI Ã) 1 B = C(sI A + BL) 1 Bl 0 with same poles as if states were known and K is gone! r F r + u G y F y 20 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se

Summary and recap Rules of thumb for pole placement Estimation using observer Feedback using estimated states Closed-loop system with observer 21 / 21 dave.zachariah@it.uu.se