EXPERIMENT NO: - 12
TITLE: Design controller using pole placement method.
After successful completion of this experiment students will be able to,
• Understand pole placement method of controller design
• Design feedback gain matrix to achieve desired response
Theory :
There are various methods for design of controller in state space representation. Among them
pole placement is a simple method which is used to determine the gain matrix such that the poles
of system can be designed as per the system’s response requirement.
Pole placement method
In order to lay the groundwork for the approach, consider a plant represented in state space by
In a typical feedback control system, the output, y, is fed back to the summing junction. It is
now that the topology of the design changes. Instead of feeding back y, what if we feedback all
of the state variables? If each state variable is fed back to the control, u, through a gain, ki,
there would be n gains, ki, that could be adjusted to yield the required closed-loop pole values.
The feedback through the gains, ki, is represented by the feedback vector _K.
To apply pole-placement methodology to plants represented in phase-variable form, we take
the following steps:
1. Represent the plant in phase-variable form.
2. Feed back each phase variable to the input of the plant through a gain, ki.
3. Find the characteristic equation for the closed-loop system represented in Step 2.
4. Decide upon all closed-loop pole locations and determine an equivalent characteristic
equation.
5. Equate like coefficients of the characteristic equations from Steps 3 and 4 and
solve for ki.
Following these steps, the phase-variable representation of the plant is given by
Simulation:
1 For the given plant design a phase variables feedback gains to yield 9.5% overshoot and a settling
time of 0.74 sec.
Solution: CODE: A = [0 1 0; 0 0 1; -413.1 -136.08 -15.9];
B = [0; 0; 1];
C = [100 20 0];
D= [0];
[b, a] = ss2tf (A,B, C, D)
T = tf ([b], [a])
step (T)
I = stepinfo (T)
RESULT: b=
0 0 20 100
a=
1.0 15.9000 136.0800 413.1000
T=
20 s + 100
s^3 + 15.9 s^2 + 136.1 s + 413.1
Continuous-time transfer function.
I=
struct with fields:
RiseTime: 0.2028
SettlingTime: 0.6637
SettlingMin: 0.2224
SettlingMax: 0.2666
Overshoot: 10.1145
Undershoot: 0
Peak: 0.2666
PeakTime: 0.4349
Conclusion: In this Experiment, I learned how to construct a controller using the pole
placement method. And after completing it, I gained a better understanding of this system
and its process for designing controllers. I also learned how to create a feedback gain matrix
in order to achieve the desired phase response. I also learned about the advantages and
disadvantages of this approach, as well as some concepts about the pole displacement
process.
Quiz:
1. Write the steps to design controller using pole placement method
Solution:
Pole Placement Design Steps: Method 1 (low order systems, n ≤ 3)
➔ Check controllability
➔ Define K = [k1 k2 k3]
➔ Substitute this gain in the desired characteristic polynomial equation
| sI – A + BK | = (s – μ1)…… (s – μn)
➔ Solve for k1, k2, k3 by equating the like powers on both sides.
Method 2: Bass-Gurra Approach
➔ Check the controllability condition
➔ Form the characteristic polynomial for A
| sI – A | = sn + a1sn -1 + a2sn-2 + ….. + an
➔ Find the Transformation matrix T
➔ Write the desired characteristic polynomial
(s – μ1) … (s – μn) = sn + α1sn -1 + α2sn-2 + ….. + αn and determine the αi’s
➔ The required state feedback gain matrix is
K = [(αn - an) (αn-1 - an-1) … (α1 - a1)]T-1
2. What is the advantage of designing controller using pole placement method?
Solution: The main advantage of pole placement over other classical synthesis techniques is that
we can force both the dominant and the non-dominant poles to lie at arbitrary locations.
3. What is the difficulty in controller design using pole placement method?
Solution: One obvious limitation is that the poles must be placed (for continuous time) on the
open left half of the complex plane (i.e., the real parts of all poles must be strictly negative) so as
to ensure closed loop stability (for discrete time, they must be placed inside the open unit disk).
Another (maybe not so obvious) limitation is the state and control input constraints, which are
always present in practical applications and thus should be considered when conducting control
design: After doing pole placement (actually this is true for any kind of control design), one needs
to simulate the closed loop system and verify that the constraints are satisfied, and then possibly
redo the pole placement in case they are not satisfied.
