Lec 6: State Feedback, Controllability, Integral Action

Similar documents
Intro. Computer Control Systems: F8

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

Intro. Computer Control Systems: F9

SYSTEMTEORI - ÖVNING 5: FEEDBACK, POLE ASSIGNMENT AND OBSERVER

Control Systems Design

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

CONTROL DESIGN FOR SET POINT TRACKING

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

Topic # Feedback Control

Topic # Feedback Control

5. Observer-based Controller Design

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

Controls Problems for Qualifying Exam - Spring 2014

SAMPLE SOLUTION TO EXAM in MAS501 Control Systems 2 Autumn 2015

Introduction to Modern Control MT 2016

sc Control Systems Design Q.1, Sem.1, Ac. Yr. 2010/11

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

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

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

MAE 143B - Homework 8 Solutions

Chap. 3. Controlled Systems, Controllability

Lecture 2 and 3: Controllability of DT-LTI systems

Control Systems I. Lecture 5: Transfer Functions. Readings: Emilio Frazzoli. Institute for Dynamic Systems and Control D-MAVT ETH Zürich

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

Course roadmap. Step response for 2nd-order system. Step response for 2nd-order system

1 (30 pts) Dominant Pole

Time Response of Systems

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

Review: transient and steady-state response; DC gain and the FVT Today s topic: system-modeling diagrams; prototype 2nd-order system

16.31 Fall 2005 Lecture Presentation Mon 31-Oct-05 ver 1.1

EEE582 Homework Problems

ECEN 605 LINEAR SYSTEMS. Lecture 8 Invariant Subspaces 1/26

Pole Placement Design

Pole placement control: state space and polynomial approaches Lecture 2

Exam in Systems Engineering/Process Control

1. Find the solution of the following uncontrolled linear system. 2 α 1 1

Advanced Control Theory

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

EEE 184: Introduction to feedback systems

Control Systems I. Lecture 7: Feedback and the Root Locus method. Readings: Jacopo Tani. Institute for Dynamic Systems and Control D-MAVT ETH Zürich

TRACKING AND DISTURBANCE REJECTION

PID Control. Objectives

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

NPTEL Online Course: Control Engineering

Chapter 12. Feedback Control Characteristics of Feedback Systems

1 Continuous-time Systems

Kalman Decomposition B 2. z = T 1 x, where C = ( C. z + u (7) T 1, and. where B = T, and

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)

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

Lecture 4 and 5 Controllability and Observability: Kalman decompositions

Multivariable Control Laboratory experiment 2 The Quadruple Tank 1

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

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

Identification Methods for Structural Systems

Raktim Bhattacharya. . AERO 422: Active Controls for Aerospace Vehicles. Dynamic Response

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

Laboratory Exercise 1 DC servo

Control Systems. Laplace domain analysis

Synthesis via State Space Methods

AUTOMATIC CONTROL. Exercises

EE221A Linear System Theory Final Exam

MEM 355 Performance Enhancement of Dynamical Systems MIMO Introduction

State Space Control D R. T A R E K A. T U T U N J I

Control Systems. Design of State Feedback Control.

Control, Stabilization and Numerics for Partial Differential Equations

Stability of Parameter Adaptation Algorithms. Big picture

Automatique. A. Hably 1. Commande d un robot mobile. Automatique. A.Hably. Digital implementation

Control Systems. Frequency domain analysis. L. Lanari

Exam in Systems Engineering/Process Control

Pole Placement (Bass Gura)

Module 07 Controllability and Controller Design of Dynamical LTI Systems

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science : Dynamic Systems Spring 2011

ECE 388 Automatic Control

Multivariable Control. Lecture 03. Description of Linear Time Invariant Systems. John T. Wen. September 7, 2006

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Mechanical Engineering Dynamics and Control II Fall 2007

Robust Control 2 Controllability, Observability & Transfer Functions

ECEN 605 LINEAR SYSTEMS. Lecture 20 Characteristics of Feedback Control Systems II Feedback and Stability 1/27

Contents. PART I METHODS AND CONCEPTS 2. Transfer Function Approach Frequency Domain Representations... 42

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

ECE557 Systems Control

The disturbance decoupling problem (DDP)

The control of a gantry

Topic # /31 Feedback Control Systems

Controllability, Observability, Full State Feedback, Observer Based Control

Course Summary. The course cannot be summarized in one lecture.

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

Chapter 5 HW Solution

Digital Control: Summary # 7

Linear System Theory

Lecture 9 Nonlinear Control Design

Chapter 3. State Feedback - Pole Placement. Motivation

A FEEDBACK STRUCTURE WITH HIGHER ORDER DERIVATIVES IN REGULATOR. Ryszard Gessing

Control System Design

Controllability. Chapter Reachable States. This chapter develops the fundamental results about controllability and pole assignment.

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

MODERN CONTROL DESIGN

AUTOMATIC CONTROL. Andrea M. Zanchettin, PhD Spring Semester, Introduction to Automatic Control & Linear systems (time domain)

Nonlinear Control Systems

EE C128 / ME C134 Final Exam Fall 2014

MAE 143B - Homework 7

Transcription:

Lec 6: State Feedback, Controllability, Integral Action November 22, 2017 Lund University, Department of Automatic Control

Controllability and Observability Example of Kalman decomposition 1 s 1 x 10 x 20 2 s+2 + y u x 30 3 s+3 x 40 4 s 4 How does the system behave? From outside the blue box we only see the input u and output y but a lot can happen inside!! 1

Controllability and Observability Example of Kalman decomposition 1 s 1 x 10 x 20 2 s+2 + y u x 30 3 s+3 x 40 4 s 4 Introduce states and write the system in state-space form. 1

Controllability and Observability How well can we control two subsystems at the same time? Q: Are there any differences for the two cases below and how does it depend on gain b? u y 1 1 s+1 b 2 s+2 y 2 u y 1 1 s+1 b 1 s+1 y 2 2

Different Ways to Describe a Dynamical System Differential equation ÿ + a 1ẏ + a 2y = b 1 u + b 2u x 1 = y x 2 = ẏ... State space ẋ = Ax + Bu y = Cx + Du Collection of Formulae G(s) = C(sI A) 1 B + D ( ) d L n f (t) (s) = s n F (s) dt n Transfer function Y (s) = G(s)U(s) = Q(s) P(s) U(s) 3

Recap of states and statespace realization Physical systems are modeled by differential equations. Example: Damped spring-mass system (ẏ velocity, y position) mÿ(t) = cẏ(t) ky(t) + F (t) The state vector x is a collection of physical quantities required to predict the evolution of the system x 1 x 2 x =. x i s could be positions, velocities, currents, voltages, queue lengths, number of virtual machines, temperatures, concentrations, etc. x n 4

Recap of states and statespace realization The evolution of the state vector (for an LTI system), subject to an external signal u, can be described by ẋ = Ax + Bu where A is a matrix and B a column vector. The measured signal of the system is given by y = Cx (+ Du) 5

Statespace Transfer function conversion A system with state-space representation ẋ = Ax + Bu y = Cx (+ Du) has transfer function G(s) = C(sI A) 1 B + D A transfer function model can have (infinitely) many different state-space realizations. Standard forms are: controllable canonical form, observable canonical form, diagonal form, see Collection of Formulae. 6

Lecture 6: State feedback control 1. Controllable form 2. State feedback control 3. Example 4. Controllability 5. Integral Action 7

Controllable canonical form The system with transfer function G(s) = D + b 1s n 1 + b 2 s n 2 + + b n s n + a 1 s n 1 + + a n has controllable canonical form a 1 a 2... a n 1 a n 1 0 0 0 1 dz dt = 0 0 1 0 0 z +. u. 0 0 0 1 0 ] y = [1 b 2... b n z + Du 8

Observable canonical form The system with transfer function has observable canonical form G(s) = D + b 1s n 1 + b 2 s n 2 + + b n s n + a 1 s n 1 + + a n a 1 1 0... 0 b 1 a 2 0 1 0 b 2 dz dt =. z +. u a n 1 0 0 1 a n 0 0 0 b n [ ] y = 1 0 0... 0 z + Du 8

PID and state feedback controller PID-controller: u = K ( e + 1 t ) de e(τ)dτ + T d, e = r y T i dt State feedback controller u = l ref r + l 1 (x 1,ref x 1 ) + l 2 (x 2,ref x 2 ) + l n (x n,ref x n ) 9

PID and state feedback controller PID-controller: u = K ( e + 1 t ) de e(τ)dτ + T d, e = r y T i dt State feedback controller u = l ref r + l 1 (x 1,ref x 1 ) + l 2 (x 2,ref x 2 ) + l n (x n,ref x n ) = = l ref r l 1 x 1 l 2 x 2 l n x n if x 1,ref = x 2,ref =... = x n,ref = 0 We will also add integral part to the state feedback later on. 9

Process {ẋ = Ax + Bu y = Cx Y (s) = C(sI A) 1 BU(s) The characteristic polynomial is det(si A) 10

Controller Linear state feedback controller u = l ref r l 1 x 1 l 2 x 2 l n x n = l ref r Lx ] L = [l 1 l 2... l n x = x 1. x n 11

Closed-Loop System ẋ = Ax + B(l ref r Lx) = (A BL)x + Bl ref r y = Cx Y (s) = C[sI (A BL)] 1 Bl ref R(s) We have new system matrix. The characteristic polynomial is Choose L to get desired poles. Choose l ref to get y = r in stationarity. det[si (A BL)]. 12

Example 1 DC-motor Transfer function from voltage to angle: G p (s) = b s(s + a) = 100 s(s + 10) Q: What are x 1 and x 2? 13

Example 1 DC-motor Transfer function from voltage to angle: G p (s) = b s(s + a) = 100 s(s + 10) Q: What are x 1 and x 2? State x 1 corresponds to angular speed State x 2 corresponds to motor angle 13

Example 1 DC-motor Transfer function from voltage to angle: G p (s) = P-control: u = K(r y) b s(s + a) = 100 s(s + 10) G o (s) = Kb s(s + a) G t (s) = G o(s) 1 + G o (s) = bk s 2 + as + bk s 2 + as + bk = s 2 + 2ζω 0 s + ω 2 os 2 ω 0 = bk ζ = 0.5a bk 13

Example 1 (cont d) State space model {ẋ1 = ax 1 + bu ẋ 2 = x 1 y = x 2 [ ] [ ] a 0 b ẋ = x + u 1 0 0 [ ] y = 0 1 x 14

Example 1 (cont d) Feedback from both x 1 and x 2 Control law: u = l ref r l 1 x 1 l 2 x 2 Closed-loop system: [ ] [ ] a bl1 bl 2 b ẋ = x + u 1 0 0 [ ] y = 0 1 x 15

DC-motor example The control law Figure 1: State feedback motor control. u = l r r l 1 x 1 l 2 x 2 = l r r Lx yields the closed-loop system [ ] [ ] 10 100l 1 100l 2 100 ẋ = x + l r r 1 0 0 y = [ ] 0 1 x 16

Example 1 (cont d) Characteristic polynomial: det(si A) = s + a + bl 1 bl 2 1 s = (s + a + bl 1 )s + bl 2 = s 2 + (a + bl 1 )s + bl 2 The poles can be placed anywhere want by choosing l 1, l 2. At stationarity: 0 = [ ẋ 1 ẋ 2 ] = [ (a + bl 1 )x 1 bl 2 x 2 + bl ref r x 1 ] { x1 = 0 l 2 x 2 = l ref r Choose l ref = l 2. This gives x 2 = r in stationarity. 17

Example 2 Can we choose characteristic polynomial (poles) freely how we want? {ẋ1 = x 1 + u We can not affect x 2! det(si A + BL) = ẋ 2 = 2x 2 [ ] [ ] 1 0 1 ẋ = x + u 0 2 0 s + 1 + l 1 l 2 0 s + 2 = (s + 1 + l 1 )(s + 2) 18

Controllability The system ẋ = Ax + Bu is called controllable if for any a and b there exist a control signal u which transfers from state x(0) = a to state x(t) = b. NOTE! Controllability does NOT concern y, C or D! 19

Cayley-Hamilton: t x(t) = e At x(0) + e A(t s) Bu(s)ds 0 0 = A n + a 1 A n 1 + + a n 1 A + a n where det(si A) = s n + a 1 s n 1 + + a n 1 s + a n. Thus, we have e At = I + At + 1 2 A2 t 2 + = α 0 (t)i + α 1 (t)a + + α n 1 (t)a n 1 20

It follows that t x(t) = e At a + where β k = t 0 α k(t s)u(s)ds. 0 n 1 = e At a + β k A k B k=0 e A(t s) Bu(s)ds Solutions for all a and b = x(t) exist if and only if are linearly independent. B, AB, A 2 B,..., A n 1 B 21

Criteria for controllability The system ẋ = Ax + Bu is controllable if and only if (iff) [ ] rank B AB... A n 1 B = n } {{ } W s The matrix W s is called the controllability matrix. 22

Example 2 [ ] [ ] a 0 b ẋ = Ax + Bu = x + u 1 0 0 [ ] b ab rank W s = rank = 2 Controllable! 0 b [ ] [ ] 1 0 1 ẋ = Ax + Bu = x + u 0 2 0 [ ] 1 1 rank W s = rank = 1 Not controllable! 0 0 23

Example 3a Pumping to lower tank {ẋ1 = ax 1 ẋ 2 = ax 1 ax 2 + bu [ ] [ ] a 0 0 ẋ = x + u a a b [ ] 0 0 W s = b ab Not controllable! 24

Example 3b Pumping to upper tank {ẋ1 = ax 1 + bu ẋ 2 = ax 1 ax 2 [ ] [ ] a 0 b ẋ = x + u a a 0 [ ] b ab W s = 0 ab Controllable! 25

Example 3c Pumping to parallel tanks {ẋ1 = ax 1 + bu ẋ 2 = ax 2 + bu [ ] [ ] a 0 b ẋ = x + u 0 a b [ b W s = b ] ab ab Not controllable! 26

Controllable form G(s) = b 1s n 1 + + b n 1 s + b n s n + a 1 s n 1 + + a n 1 s + a n a 1 a 2... a n 1 a n 1 1 0... 0 0 0 ẋ = 0 1... 0 0 x + 0 u..... 0 1 0 0 ] y = [b 1 b 2... b n 1 b n x 1... 0 1 W s =..... 0 0... 1 Controllable! 27

state feedback in canonical controllable form a 1 l 1 a 2 l 2... a n 1 l n 1 a n l n 1 0... 0 0 A BL = 0 1... 0 0.... 0 1 0 New charachteristic polynomial s n + (a 1 + l 1 )s n 1 + (a 2 + l 2 )s n 2 + + a n + l n 28

Integral action A limitation with ordinary state feedback controllers is that they lack integral action, which consequently may result in stationary control errors. 29

Introduce an extra state x i as the integral of the error. x i = (r y)dt ẋ i = r y = r Cx Figure 2: Introduce extra state x i for state feedback with integral action. 30

If we augment the state vector x with the integral state x i such that ẋ i x 1 x e =. the augmented system can be written [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ẋ A 0 B 0 ẋ e = = x e + u + r = A e x e + B e u + B r r C 0 0 1 y = [ ] C 0 x e = C e x e x n x i 31

If we augment the state vector x with the integral state x i such that ẋ i x 1 x e =. the augmented system can be written [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] ẋ A 0 B 0 ẋ e = = x e + u + r = A e x e + B e u + B r r C 0 0 1 y = [ ] C 0 x e = C e x e We have hence augmented the state-space system with a state which represents the integral of the control error and thus arrived at a controller with integral action. In stationarity it holds that ẋ e = 0 and thereby that ẋ i = r y = 0. x n x i 31

stet feedback with Integral Action (cont d) The controller now becomes u = l r r Lx l i x i = l r r L e x e where ] L e = [L l i This yields the following closed-loop state-space equations ẋ e = (A e B e L e )x e + (B e l r + B r )r y = C e x e The parameters in the vector L e are chosen 1 so that we obtain a desired closed-loop pole placement, just as previously. Here the poles are given by the characteristic polynomial det(si (A e B e L e )) 1 NOT same L with and without intgral action!! 32

Remark: We no longer need the parameter l r in order to achieve y = r in stationarity. The parameter does not affect the poles of the closed-loop system, only its zeros. However, it can therefore be chosen so that the system obtains desired transient properties at setpoint changes. We shall come back to zero placement in a later lecture. 33

Summary 1. Controllable form 2. State feedback control 3. Example 4. Controllability 5. Integral Action 34