Scribd
Upload
78 views6 pages

Introduction To Simulink (Implementing PD Controller) : Control Laboratory

The document describes implementing a PD controller for a mass-spring-damper system with two masses. The open loop system is unstable, but adding a PD controller with gains of kP=10 and kD=30 stabilizes the system, reducing the overshoot from 260% to 0.6% and steady state error from 100% to 4.7%. While the PD controller improves the response, it does not eliminate steady state error entirely. The closed loop system meets design specifications with negligible overshoot and 10 second settling time.

Uploaded by

v ahmad
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
78 views6 pages

Introduction To Simulink (Implementing PD Controller) : Control Laboratory

The document describes implementing a PD controller for a mass-spring-damper system with two masses. The open loop system is unstable, but adding a PD controller with gains of kP=10 and kD=30 stabilizes the system, reducing the overshoot from 260% to 0.6% and steady state error from 100% to 4.7%. While the PD controller improves the response, it does not eliminate steady state error entirely. The closed loop system meets design specifications with negligible overshoot and 10 second settling time.

Uploaded by

v ahmad
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

Introduction to Simulink
(Implementing PD controller)
Report
ME Department

1. Ahmad Saleh (0160328)

1|Page
CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

Abstract

Controlling mechanical mass-spring-damper system with step force input and


displacement output using PD controller. The system is represented by two masses
vertically connected with two dampers, and one spring connected vertically to the first
block. the open loop system is represented by the blocks connected with dampers only and
no springs. the spring provide the feedback in the model.

2|Page
CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

Results
 By hand

3|Page
CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

 Using Matlab
for m=1 , b=0.1 , k=0.5 , step size of 0.1 , step input=1

The system equations for the open loop are :

1. my” = - b*(y’- x’) + u


2. mx” = - b*x’ + b*(y’- x’)

we simplify the equations to draw the block diagram to:

1. y” = - (b/m)*y’ + (b/m)*x’ + (1/m)*u


2. x” = - (b/m)*x’ + (b/m)*y’- (b/m)* x’

The block diagram of the two equations is shown in Figure 1

Figure 1

The response of this open loop system (as we can see in Figure 1) is unstable

4|Page
CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

The system equation for the closed loop is :

 my” = - b*(y’- x’) + u – k*y

we simplify the equation to draw the block diagram to:

 y” = - (b/m)*y’+ (b/m)* x’ + (1/m)* u – (k/m)*y

The block diagram of the equation is shown in Figure 2

Figure 2

The response of this closed loop system (as we can see in Figure 2) is stable, but as we can see
that the overshoot percentage and the steady state error are very high.
The steady state of the system is 2. The steady state error approximately is 100% and the
overshoot percentage approximately is 260% with approximately
ess=((2-1)/1)*100=100
peak overshoot value of 3.6
PO=((3.6-1)/1)*100=260

5|Page
CONTROL LABORATORY Friday, 03, 27, 2019

Using PD controller we can reduce the overshoot percentage and the steady state error, we
connected the PD controller In the block diagram as shown in Figure 3

Figure 3

I adjust the controller gains such that there is a negligible overshoot and settling time of about 10
seconds using manual tuning for the PD controller and I ended up with kD=30 and kP=10.

By using the PD controller we reduced the over shoot percentage from 260% to 0.6%, And the
steady state error from 100% to 4.7%, but we couldn't eliminate the ess= ((0.953-1)/1)*100=-4.7
steady state error completely because the PD controller can adjust only
PO= ((1.006-1)/ 1)*100=0.6
the overshoot percentage.
The final closed loop step reasons did meet the design satisfaction
because we have achieved the negligible overshoot and settling time of 10 seconds. But we still
have a steady state error which is too small, we can neglected it depend on the application of the
system, if the system is not sensitive to this small error we can neglect it.

6|Page

You might also like