Scribd
Upload
26 views

lecture_7_lag_lead_compensation Design by the Time Response Method

Uploaded by

salmamagdii53
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views

lecture_7_lag_lead_compensation Design by the Time Response Method

Uploaded by

salmamagdii53
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 24

Automatic Control 2

Lecture-7
Lag-Lead Compensation

Dr. Mountasser Mohamed Ramadan


email: [email protected]

1
Lecture Outline

2
Introduction
• Lead compensation basically speeds up the response
and increases the stability of the system.

• Lag compensation improves the steady-state accuracy of


the system, but reduces the speed of the response.

• If improvements in both transient response and steady-


state response are desired, then both a lead
compensator and a lag compensator may be used
simultaneously.

• Rather than introducing both a lead compensator and a


lag compensator as separate units, however, it is
economical to use a single lag–lead compensator. 3
Lag-Lead Compensation
• Lag-Lead compensators are represented by following
transfer function
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛾 1 , (γ > 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 β > 1)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽𝑇2

• Where Kc belongs to lead portion of the compensator.

4
Lag-Lead Compensation

𝑠+1 𝑠+0.4
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐
𝑠+2 𝑠+0.1

5
Design Procedure
• In designing lag–lead compensators, we consider two
cases where

• Case-1: γ ≠ 𝛽 (γ = 1 𝛼)
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛾 1 , (γ > 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 β > 1)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽𝑇2

• Case-2: γ = 𝛽
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛽 1 , (β > 1)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽𝑇2 6
Design Procedure (Case-1)
• Case-1: γ ≠ 𝛽
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛾 1 , (γ > 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 β > 1)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽𝑇2

• Step-1: Design Lead part using given


specifications.

• Step-2: Design lag part according to given values


of static error constant.
7
Example-1 (Case-1)
• Consider the control system shown in following figure

• The damping ratio is 0.125, the undamped natural frequency is 2


rad/sec, and the static velocity error constant is 8 sec–1.

• It is desired to make the damping ratio of the dominant closed-loop


poles equal to 0.5 and to increase the undamped natural frequency
to 5 rad/sec and the static velocity error constant to 80 sec–1.

• Design an appropriate compensator to meet all the performance


specifications. 8
Example-1 (Case-1)
• From the performance specifications, the dominant
closed-loop poles must be at
𝑠 = −2.50 ± 𝑗4.33

• Since
4
  235
s ( s  0.5) s  2.50  j 4.33

• Therefore the phase-lead portion of the lag–lead


compensator must contribute 55° so that the root locus
passes through the desired location of the dominant
closed-loop poles. 9
Example-1 (Case-1)
• The phase-lead portion of the lag–lead compensator
becomes 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+0.5
𝑇1
𝐾𝑐 𝛾 = 𝐾𝑐
𝑠+ 𝑠+5.02
𝑇1
𝛾
• Thus 𝑇1 = 2, = 5.02 and 𝛾 = 5.02 ∗ 𝑇1 = 10.04.
𝑇1

• Next we determine the value of Kc from the magnitude


condition:
(𝑠 + 0.5) 4
𝐾𝑐 =1
𝑠 + 5.02 𝑠(𝑠 + 0.5) 𝑠=−2.5+𝑗4.33

𝑠(𝑠 + 5.02)
𝐾𝑐 = = 6.26
4 𝑠=−2.5+𝑗4.33
10
Example-1 (Case-1)
• The phase-lag portion of the compensator can be designed
as follows.
• First the value of 𝛽 is determined to satisfy the
requirement on the static velocity error constant

𝐾𝑣 = lim 𝑠𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺(𝑠)


𝑠→0

1
25.04 𝑠 +
𝑇2
80 = lim 𝑠
𝑠→0 1
𝑠 𝑠 + 5.02 𝑠+
𝛽𝑇2

80 = 4.988𝛽
𝛽 = 16.04 11
Example-1 (Case-1)
• Finally, we choose the value of 𝑇2 such that the following
two conditions are satisfied:

12
Example-1 (Case-1)
• Now the transfer function of the designed lag–lead
compensator is given by

𝑠+0.5 𝑠+0.2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 6.26
𝑠+5.02 𝑠+0.0127

• The unit-step response curves and unit-ramp


response curves before and after compensation
are shown in the following figure
13
Transient-response curves for the compensated system and
uncompensated system. (a) Unit-step response curves;14
Transient-response curves for the compensated system and
uncompensated system. (b) unit-ramp response curves.15
Example-2 (Case-2)
• Case-2: γ = 𝛽
• Consider the control system of the previous example again.
Suppose that we use a lag–lead compensator of the form
given by the following equation
1 1
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 𝐾𝑐 𝛽 1 , (β > 1)
𝑠+ 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝛽𝑇2

• Assuming the specifications are the same as those given


in the previous example, design a compensator Gc(s).
The desired locations for the dominant closed-loop poles
are at
𝑠 = −2.50 ± 𝑗4.33 16
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The open-loop transfer function of the compensated
system is
1
𝑠+
1 𝑠+ 4
𝑇2
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑐
𝑇1
𝛽 1 .
𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑠+ 𝑠(𝑠+0.5)
𝛽𝑇2
• Since the requirement on the static velocity error
constant Kv is 80 sec–1, we have
4
𝐾𝑣 = lim 𝑠𝐺𝑐 𝑠 𝐺 𝑠 = lim 𝐾𝑐 = 8𝐾𝑐 = 80
𝑠→0 𝑠→0 0.5
Thus Kc = 10
17
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The time constant T1 and the value of β are
determined from
1 1
𝑠+ 40 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇1 8
= =1
𝛽 𝑠 𝑠 + 0.5 𝛽 4.77
𝑠+ 𝑠=−2.50+𝑗4.33 𝑠+
𝑇1 𝑇1

18
Example-2 (Case-2)
• (The angle deficiency
of 55° was obtained in
the previous example)
Referring to the shown
figure, we can easily
locate points A and B
such that

• (Use a graphical approach or a trigonometric approach.) The result is


𝐴𝑂 = 2.38, 𝐵𝑂 = 8.34
or
1
𝑇1 = = 0.42, β = 8.34𝑇1 = 3.503
2.38 19
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The phase-lead portion of the lag–lead network thus
becomes
𝑠 + 2.38
10
𝑠 + 8.34
• For the phase-lag portion, we choose such that it satisfies
the conditions

• By simple calculations, we find that if we choose , then


1 > magnitude > 0.98, -1.5° < angle < 0°
• and if we choose T2 = 10, then
1 > magnitude > 0.99, -1 ° < angle < 0° 20
Example-2 (Case-2)
• Since T2 is one of the time constants of the lag–lead
compensator, it should not be too large. If T1 = 10
can be acceptable from practical viewpoint, then
we may choose T2 = 10 . Then
1 1
= = 0.0285
𝛽𝑇2 3.503 × 10

• Thus, the lag–lead compensator becomes


𝑠 + 2.38 𝑠 + 0.1
𝐺𝑐 𝑠 = 10
𝑠 + 8.34 𝑠 + 0.0285

21
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The unit-step response curves of the compensated and
uncompensated systems are shown in the following figure.

22
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The unit-ramp response curves for both systems are
depicted in in the following figure.

23
Example-2 (Case-2)
• The maximum overshoot in the step response of
the compensated system is approximately 38%.
(This is much larger than the maximum overshoot
of 21% in the design presented in the previous
example) It is possible to decrease the maximum
overshoot by a small amount from 38%, but not
to 20% if 𝛾 = 𝛽 is required, as in this example.
Note that by not requiring 𝛾 = 𝛽, we have an
additional parameter to play with and thus can
reduce the maximum overshoot.
24

You might also like