Introduction To Automatic Control Week8-Slides
Introduction To Automatic Control Week8-Slides
Control
8 - Compensator Design
Dr Sebastian East
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
2 / 37
Intro
• Last week we developed a control theoretic understanding of
the principles of PID controller design.
3 / 37
Why ‘Compensators’?
• No good answer
I Just think of them as a particular form of LTI control structure.
R(s) + Y (s)
C(s) G(s)
−
4 / 37
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
5 / 37
Compensator Structure
6 / 37
Proportional Integral Recap
• Recall the bode plot of the PI controller:
C(s) = kp + ksi = K (s+!
s
1)
20 log10 |C(i!)|
Low frequency magnitude
PI
boost (0 steady state error for
20 stable systems)
20 log10 K
!
!1 !1
10
7 / 37
Lag Compensator Frequency Response
• Lag compensator given by
“ ”
1
!1
s +1
C(s) = K “ ”
1
!2
s +1
with !2 < !1 .
8 / 37
First Order Lag/Lead Bode Plot
• Bode plots of first order lag and first order lead:
20 log10 |C(i!)|
( !11 s + 1)
20
!
!2 !1
−20
−40 1
( !1 s+1)
2
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1) !
1
!2 ( !1
!1
−45 2
s+1)
−90
9 / 37
Combined Bode Plot
• The two previous Bode plots combine to:
20 log10 |C(i!)|
( !11 s + 1)
20
!
( !1 s+1)
1
!2 !1
−20 ( !1 s+1)
2
−40 1
( !1 s+1)
2
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1) !
1
( !1 s+1) !2 ( !1
!1
−45 1
2
s+1)
( !1 s+1)
−90 2
10 / 37
Fixed Gain
• Relation to PI control (discussed later) made easier by
introducing fixed gain !!12 :
40 20 log10 |C(i!)|
( !11 s + 1)
20
!1 ( !1 s+1) !
1
!2 (1!1 s+1)
( ! 2s+1)
1
!2 !1
−20 ( !1 s+1)
2
−40 1
( !1 s+1)
2
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1) !
1
1 !2 !1
−45 !1 ( !1 s+1) ( !1
2
s+1)
!2 ( !1 s+1)
−90 2
11 / 37
Chosen Gain
• Arbitrary gain boost then provided by chosen value of K̂ (so that
K = K̂ !!21 :
20 log10 |C(i!)|
40
( 1
s+1) ( !11 s + 1)
20 log10 K̂ K̂ !!21 ( !11 s+1)
!2 !
( !1 s+1) !2 !1
-20 ( !1
1
s+1)
-40
2
1
( !1 s+1)
2
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1) !
1
1 !2 !1
−45 K̂ !1 ( !11 s+1) ( !1
2
s+1)
!2 ( ! s+1)
−90 2
12 / 37
Comparison with PI
• Lag Compensator is similar to PI controller, except two
differences:
20 log10 |C(i!)|
13 / 37
Effect of !2
• Design process for Lag Compensator is the same as for PI, with
the exception of also choosing !2
I 0 s.s. error no longer guaranteed.
14 / 37
Lag Compensator vs PI
• Possible case:
I PI introduces phase lag, and increases gain at frequencies ! < !1
I Both of these changes can reduce margins, so Lag Comp. could
be preferable.
I But, you could just make !1 lower...
15 / 37
A Possible Use Case
16 / 37
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
17 / 37
Root Locus Interpretation
• Recall that PI controller equivalent to
1 (s − –1 )
C(s) = ki + kp ⇔ K
s s
• Recall that the root locus process of designing a PI controller is
1. Place open-loop pole at 0
2. Choose open-loop zero at s = –1
3. Choose gain K that places dominant poles in desired region.
18 / 37
Conclusion
19 / 37
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
20 / 37
Lead Compensation
21 / 37
PD Controller Recap
• Recall the bode plot of the PD controller:
C(s) = kp + kd s = K( !11 s + 1)
20 log10 |C(i!)|
High frequency
20 magnitude boost
PD
20 log10 K
!
!1 10!1
90 \C(i!)
45 PD !
!1 10!1
−45
+90◦ phase lead
−90
22 / 37
Lead Compensator Lead/Lag
• When !1 < !2 , the first order lead occurs before the first order
lag:
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1)
!
1
!1 !2( !1 s+1)
−45 2
−90
23 / 37
Combined Response
• Following the same steps as before, this results in the same
response, reflected in vertical axis:
20 log(101 |C(i!)|
s+1)
40 K ( !11 s+1) ( !11 s + 1)
!2
20 log10 K
!
( !1 s+1) !1 !2
-20 1
( !1 s+1) 1
-40
2 ( !1 s+1)
2
90 \C(i!)
45 ( !11 s + 1)
!
( !1 s+1) 1
K 1 !1 !2( !1 s+1)
−45 ( !1 s+1) 2
2
−90
24 / 37
Comparison with PD
• Lead compensator is similar to PD controller, except two
differences:
20 log10 |C(i!)|
High frequency magnitude PD
boost saturates at !2
40 Lead Comp.
20 log10 K
!
!1 !2
90 \C(i!) PD
45
!
!1 !2 Lead Comp.
−45
High frequency phase lead is
−90
attenuated at !2
25 / 37
Lead Compensator vs PD
• Possible case:
I Previously discussed how derivative gain amplifies noise
I This effect is automatically reduced by saturating the PD amplitude
ratio at a given value.
26 / 37
Alternative Interpretation
1
Error Signal fi s+1 kd s Derivative Action
1 ”
“ ”
“
Error Signal 1
!2 s+1 K 1
!1
s +1 Lead Comp.
27 / 37
Example
• Consider the nominal system G(s) = 0.1s+1
s 2 +2s+1
20 log10 |G(i!)| !
10−1 100 101 102 103 104
−40
−80
G(s)
\G(i!) !
10−1 100 101 102 103 104
−45
−90 G(s)
−135
28 / 37
PD Control
• Consider PD control C(s) = 0.01s + 1:
20 log10 |G(i!)| !
10−1 100 101 102 103 104
−40
PD
−80
G(s)
\G(i!) PD !
−1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10 104
−45
−90 G(s)
−135
29 / 37
Lead Compensator
• Consider lead compensator C(s) = 0.01s+1
0.001s+1
:
20 log10 |G(i!)| !
10−1 100 101 102 103 104
−40
PD
−80 Lead
G(s)
\G(i!) PD !
10−1 100 101 102 103 104
−45 Lead
−90 G(s)
−135
30 / 37
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
31 / 37
Root Locus Interpretation
• Same as lag: PD design but can now choose pole on real axis.
• Pole and zero generally chosen further to left than system
dynamics, and !2 > !1
• Zero ‘pulls’ the root locus, pole ‘pushes it’
• Order of system stays the same, so do number of asymptotes.
32 / 37
Conclusion
33 / 37
Contents
1. Overview
2. Lag Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
3. Lead Compensators
Frequency Domain
Root Locus
4. Lead-Lag Compensators
34 / 37
Lead-lag Compensation
• Final piece in the puzzle is the lead-lag compensator
• Equivalent to
“ ”“ ”
1 1
!1
s +1 !3
s +1
C(s) = K “ ”“ ”
1 1
!2
s +1 !4
s +1
35 / 37
Comparison with PID
• Can be interpreted as a PID controller with saturation on both
amplitude boosts and attenuation of phase lead/lag:
20 log10 |G(i!)|
PID
Lead-lag
!
90 \G(i!)
Lead-lag !
−90 PID
36 / 37
Conclusion
• We have introduced compensators as an alternative form of
controller