Unit2
Compensator Design
Prof.H.T.Patil
Lead Compensation
• Lead Compensation essentially yields an
appreciable improvement in transient
response and a small change in steady state
accuracy.
• There are many ways to realize lead
compensators and lag compensators: electronic
networks using operational amplifiers, electrical RC
networks, and mechanical spring-
dashpot systems.
Lead Compensation
• Generally Lead compensators are represented
by following transfer function
, ()
• or
, ()
Lead Compensation
, ()
Bode Diagram
Pole-Zero Map 0
1
Magnitude (dB)
-5
-10
0.5
-15
Imaginary Axis
-20
0 60
Phase (deg)
-0.5 30
-1 0
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10 10
Real Axis Frequency (rad/sec)
Lead Compensation Techniques Based
on the Root-Locus Approach.
• The root-locus approach to design is very
powerful when the specifications are given
in terms of time-domain quantities, such as
:
– damping ratio
– undamped natural frequency
– desired dominant closed-loop poles
– maximum overshoot
– rise time
– settling time.
Constatnt Parameter Curves on
S-Plane
θ = cos −1 ζ
Lead Compensation Techniques Based
on the Root-Locus Approach.
Lead Compensation Techniques Based
on the Root-Locus Approach.
• The procedure for designing a lead
compensator by the root-locus method may
be stated as follows:
– Step-1: Analyze the given system via root
locus.
– Step-2: From the performance
specifications, determine the desired
location for the dominant closed-loop poles.
Step-3
• From the root-locus plot of the
uncompensated system (original system),
ascertain whether or not the gain
adjustment alone can yield the desired
closed loop poles.
• If not, calculate the angle deficiency.
• This angle must be contributed by the lead
compensator if the new root locus is to
pass through the desired locations for the
dominant closed-loop poles.
Step-4
• Assume the Lead Compensator to be:
• Where α and T are determined from the
angle deficiency.
• Kc is determined from the requirement
of the open-loop gain.
Step-5
• If static error constants are not specified, determine
the location of the pole and zero of the lead
compensator so that the lead compensator will
contribute the necessary angle.
• If no other requirements are imposed on the system,
try to make the value of α as large as possible.
• A larger value of α generally results in a larger value of
Kv, which is desirable.
• Larger value of α will produce a larger value of Kv and
in most cases, the larger the Kv is, the better the
system performance.
Step-6
• Determine the value of Kc of the lead
compensator from the magnitude
condition.
Final Design check
• Once a compensator has been designed,
check to see whether all performance
specifications have been met.
• If the compensated system does not meet
the performance specifications, then repeat
the design procedure by adjusting the
compensator pole and zero until all such
specifications are met.
Final Design check
• If the selected dominant closed-loop
poles are not really dominant, or if
the selected dominant closed-loop
poles do not yield the desired result,
it will be necessary to modify the
location of the pair of such selected
dominant closed-loop poles.
Example-1
• Consider the position control system shown in
following figure.
• It is desired to design an Electronic lead
compensator Gc(s) so that the dominant closed
poles have the damping ratio 0.5 and
undamped natural frequency 3 rad/sec.
Step-1 (Example-1)
• Draw the root Locus plot of the given system.
10
G ( s) H ( s) =
s ( s + 1)
• The closed loop transfer
function of the given system
is:
C (s) 10
= 2
R ( s ) s + s + 10
• The closed loop poles are
s = −0.5 ± j 3.1225
Step-1 (Example-1)
• Determine the characteristics of given system
using root loci.
C (s) 10
= 2
R ( s ) s + s + 10
• The damping ratio of the closed-
loop poles is 0.158.
• The undamped natural frequency
of the closed-loop poles is 3.1623
rad/sec.
• Because the damping ratio is
small, this system will have a
large overshoot in the step
response and is not desirable.
Step-2 (Example-1)
• From the performance specifications,
determine the desired location for the
dominant closed-loop poles.
• Desired performance Specifications are:
• It is desired to have damping ratio 0.5 and undamped
natural frequency 3 rad/sec.
C (s) ωn2 9
= 2 = 2
R( s ) s + 2ζω n s + ωn s + 3s + 9
2
s = −1.5 ± j 2.5981
Step-2 (Example-1)
• Alternatively desired location of closed loop
poles can also be determined graphically
• Desired ωn= 3 rad/sec
• Desired damping ratio= 0.5
θ = cos −1 ζ
θ = cos −1 (0.5) = 60°
Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• From the root-locus plot of the uncompensated
system ascertain whether or not the gain
adjustment alone can yield the desired closed
loop poles.
Desired
Closed Loop
Pole
Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• If not, calculate the angle deficiency.
• To calculate the angle of deficiency apply Angle
Condition at desired closed loop pole.
Desired Closed Loop Pole
s = −1.5 ± j 2.5981
θ d = 180° − 120° − 100.8°
-2
θ d = −40.89°
-1
100.8o 120o
-2 -1
Step-3 (Exampl-1)
• Alternatively angle of deficiency can be
calculated as.
10
θ d = 180° + ∠
s ( s + 1) s = −1.5+ j 2.5981
Where s = −1.5 ± j 2.5981 are desired closed loop poles
θ d = 180° + ∠10 − ∠s s = −1.5+ j 2.5981 − ∠( s + 1) s = −1.5+ j 2.5981
θ d = 180° − 120° − 100.8°
θ d = −40.89°
Step-4 (Exampl-1)
• This angle must be contributed by the lead
compensator if the new root locus is to pass
through the desired locations for the
dominant closed-loop poles.
• Note that the solution to such a problem is
not unique. There are infinitely many
solutions.
Step-5 (Exampl-1)Solution-1
• Solution-1
– If we choose the zero of
the lead compensator at
s = -1 so that it will
cancel the plant pole at s
=-1, then the 40.89°
compensator pole must
be located at s =-3.
Step-5 (Example-1)
Solution-1
• If static error constants are not specified,
determine the location of the pole and zero of the
lead compensator so that the lead compensator
will contribute the necessary angle.
40.89°
Step-5 (Example-1)
Solution-1
• The pole and zero of compensator are determined
as
=
• The Value of can be
determined as 40.89°
Step-6 (Example-1)Solution-1
• The Value of Kc can be
determined using
magnitude condition.
40.89°
Solution-1
Final Design Check
• The open loop transfer function of the
designed system then becomes
• The closed loop transfer function of
compensated system becomes.
Final Design Check Solution-1
Root Locus Root Locus
5 5
0.158 3.16 3
0.5
Imaginary Axis
Imaginary Axis
0 0
0.158 3.16 0.5
3
-5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 -5
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
Real Axis
Real Axis
Solution-1
Final Design Check
• The static velocity error constant for original
system is obtained as follows.
• The steady state error is then calculated as
Final Design Check Solution-1
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 CompensatedSystem
0.8
Amplitude
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec)
Solution-1
Final Design Check
• The static velocity error constant for the
compensated system can be calculated as
• The steady state error is then calculated as
Step-5 (Exampl-1) Solution-2
• Solution-2
-2
40.89°
-1
90o
49.2o
-3 -2 -1
Step-5 (Exampl-1) Solution-2
• Solution-2
-2
40.89°
-1
90o
49.2o
-3 -2 -1
Step-5 (Example-1)Solution-3
• If no other requirements are imposed on the system,
try to make the value of α as large as possible. A larger
value of α generally results in a larger value of Kv,
which is desirable.
• Procedure to obtain a largest possible value for α.
– First, draw a horizontal line passing through point P, the desired
location for one of the dominant closed-loop poles. This is shown
as line PA in following figure.
– Draw also a line connecting point P and the origin O.
P
A
-2
-1
O
-3 -2 -1
Step-5 (Example-1)Solution-3
• Bisect the angle between the lines PA and PO, as shown
in following figure.
P
A
γ
γ -2
2 γ
2 -1
O
-3 -2 -1
Step-5 (Example-1)Solution-3
•• Draw
two lines PC and PD that make angles with the
the bisector PB.
• The intersections of PC and PD with the negative real
axis give the necessary locations for the pole and zero
of the lead network.
P
A
-2
θd
2
θd -1
2
O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
D
Step-5 (Example-1)Solution-3
• The lead compensator has zero at s=–1.9432 and pole
at s=–4.6458.
P
A
-2
θd
2 θd -1
2
O
-3 -2 -1
C
B
• Thus, Gc(s) can
D be given as
=
Step-5 (Example-1)Solution-3
•
=
• For this compensator value of is
• Also
Step-6 (Example-1) Solution-3
• Determine the value of Kc of the lead
compensator from the magnitude condition.
Step-6 (Example-1) Solution-3
• The Kc is calculated as
• Hence, the lead compensator Gc(s) just
designed is given by
Solution-3
Final Design Check
Desired Desired
Closed Loop Closed Loop
Pole Pole
Uncompensate Compensated
d System System
Final Design Check Solution-3
• It is worthwhile to check the static velocity
error constant Kv for the system just
designed.
• Steady state error is
94
Final Design Check Solution-3
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Solution-3
0.8
Amplitude
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec)
Final Design Check Solution-1
Solution-3
Step Response
1.4
Actual System
1.2 Solution-1
Solution-3
1
0.8
Amplitude
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Time (sec)
Mechanical Lead
Compensator
• Figure shows the mechanical lead
compensator.
• Equations are obtained as
• Taking Laplace transform of these
equations assuming zero initial
conditions and eliminating Y(s), we
obtain
Mechanical Lead
Compensator
• By defining
• We obtain
Exampl-2
• Design a mechanical lead compensator for
following system.
4
s ( s + 2)
• The damping ratio of closed loop poles is 0.5
and natural undamped frequency 2 rad/sec. It
is desired to modify the closed loop poles so
that natural undamped frequency becomes 4
rad/sec without changing the damping ratio.
Example-3
• Consider the model of space vehicle control
system depicted in following figure.
• Design an Electrical lead compensator such
that the damping ratio and natural undamped
frequency of dominant closed loop poles are
0.5 and 2 rad/sec.
