Question 7 of 8: State-space model, controllability & pole placement
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
Paper format. National Exams, 07-Elec-A2 Systems & Control, December 2014, 3 hours, closed book (approved Casio/Sharp calculator plus one signed, double-sided 8.5 × 11" formula sheet). Questions 1 and 2 are compulsory; a complete paper is five questions, so candidates choose three of Q3–Q8. Each question is worth 20 marks. All eight are worked below so the set is a complete study resource.
Reference texts: N. S. Nise, Control Systems Engineering (7th ed., Wiley) — time response and second-order specs (Ch. 4), Routh–Hurwitz stability (Ch. 6), steady-state error and error constants (Ch. 7), root locus (Ch. 8), PID and lead/lag design (Ch. 9–11), frequency response, Bode, Nyquist, gain and phase margins (Ch. 10–11), state space, controllability/observability and pole placement (Ch. 3, 12); K. Ogata, Modern Control Engineering (5th ed., Prentice Hall) — dominant-poles modelling and Mason’s rule; G. F. Franklin, J. D. Powell & A. Emami-Naeini, Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems. All block diagrams, pole–zero maps, root loci, Bode plots and signal-flow graphs below are redrawn as inline figures.
Reading the exam figures. Q1 supplies open- and closed-loop Bode plots and Q6 supplies uncompensated/compensated open-loop Bode plots. Where a transfer function is stated exactly in the text, every graphical reading is also confirmed analytically and the exact model governs; where only a plot is given (Q6), the values are read from the printed curves and flagged as such.
[Figure not reproduced: Figure Q7.1 redrawn — integrator chain with feedback into $\dot x_1,\dot x_2$ and output taps $1,3,1$. See the official exam paper.]
Part A — State equations & structural tests [10]
Approach. Each integrator output is a state; read the incoming branch gains at every $\dot x_i$ node and the output taps.
State equations. From the graph, $$\dot x_1=-2x_1-x_2-x_3+u,\quad \dot x_2=x_1-2x_3,\quad \dot x_3=x_2,\quad y=x_1+3x_2+x_3.$$
Controllability. $\mathcal{C}=[B\ AB\ A^2B]$ has $AB=\begin{bmatrix}-2\\1\\0\end{bmatrix},\ A^2B=\begin{bmatrix}3\\-2\\1\end{bmatrix}$; $\det\mathcal{C}=-1\ne0\Rightarrow\boxed{\text{controllable (rank 3)}}$.
Observability. $\mathcal{O}=[C;\ CA;\ CA^2]$ has rank 3 $\Rightarrow\boxed{\text{observable}}$. Full pole placement is therefore possible.
Part B — State-feedback pole placement [10]
Approach. Write the composite feedback row $\mathbf{f}=K\mathbf{k}^T$; match $\det(sI-A+B\mathbf{f})$ to the desired polynomial, then fix $K$ from the unity-DC-gain (zero step-error) condition.
Coefficient match. With $\mathbf{f}=[f_1\ f_2\ f_3]$ acting on the first row only, $\det(sI-A+B\mathbf{f})=s^3+(2+f_1)s^2+(2+1+f_2\!-\!\ldots)$ — solving the three equations gives $\boxed{\mathbf{f}=[5\ \ 22\ \ 24]}$.
Scalar gain for zero step-error. $K=-\dfrac{1}{C\,A_{cl}^{-1}B}$ with $A_{cl}=A-B\mathbf{f}$ gives $C A_{cl}^{-1}B=-\tfrac{1}{13}$, hence $\boxed{K=13}$.
Feedback vector. $\mathbf{k}=\mathbf{f}/K=\Bigl[\tfrac{5}{13}\ \ \tfrac{22}{13}\ \ \tfrac{24}{13}\Bigr]=\boxed{[0.385\ \ 1.692\ \ 1.846]}$. This makes the closed-loop DC gain $-CA_{cl}^{-1}BK=1$, so $e_{ss}(\text{step})=0$.
State-feedback places the closed-loop poles at $-3$ and $-2\pm j3$.