Question 8 of 8: Signal-flow state model (Mason) and Nyquist stability
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
Paper format. National Exams, 07-Elec-A2 Systems & Control, May 2015, 3 hours, closed book (approved Casio/Sharp calculator plus one signed, double-sided 8.5 × 11" formula/notes sheet; a Laplace-transform table and design plots are supplied with the paper). 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 specifications (Ch. 4), block/signal-flow reduction and Mason’s rule (Ch. 5), Routh–Hurwitz stability (Ch. 6), steady-state error and static error constants (Ch. 7), root locus (Ch. 8), PID / 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 gain formula; G. F. Franklin, J. D. Powell & A. Emami-Naeini, Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems. All block diagrams, pole–zero maps, root loci, Bode plots, signal-flow graphs and the Nyquist plot below are redrawn as inline figures.
Reading the exam figures. Where a transfer function is stated exactly (Q1–Q5, Q7, Q8A) every result is confirmed analytically and the exact model governs. Q4 supplies a Bode plot ($G_m=16.1$ dB at $2.05$ rad/s, $P_m=-85.1^\circ$ at $0.589$ rad/s) and a root locus; Q5 Parts A–B and Q6 use printed frequency-response plots, and Q8B a printed Nyquist diagram — values read from those curves are flagged as reads and cross-checked against the analytics wherever a transfer function is available.
Question 8 — Signal-flow state model (Mason) and Nyquist stability [12 + 8]
Part A — State equations & transfer function by Mason [12]
[Figure not reproduced: Figure Q8.1 redrawn — forward chain of three $1/s$ integrators; self-loops $-2,-1,-1$; an output feedforward of gain $2$ from $x_1$ to $Y$; and a long feedback of gain $-1$ from $x_3$ to $\dot x_1$. See the official exam paper.]
Approach. Read each $\dot x_i$ node as the sum of its incoming branch gains; then apply Mason’s rule with the integrator loops.
State equations (from the $\dot x_i$ nodes). $\dot x_1=-2x_1-x_3+u$; $\dot x_2=2x_1-x_2$; $\dot x_3=x_2-x_3$; output $y=2x_1+x_3$. Hence $$A=\begin{bmatrix}-2&0&-1\\2&-1&0\\0&1&-1\end{bmatrix},\ B=\begin{bmatrix}1\\0\\0\end{bmatrix},\ C=\begin{bmatrix}2&0&1\end{bmatrix}.$$
Loops (Mason). Three self-loops $L_1=-\tfrac2s$, $L_2=-\tfrac1s$, $L_3=-\tfrac1s$ (mutually non-touching) and the long feedback $L_4=(\tfrac1s)(2)(\tfrac1s)(1)(\tfrac1s)(-1)=-\tfrac{2}{s^3}$ (touches all).
Determinant. $\Delta=1-(L_1+L_2+L_3+L_4)+(L_1L_2+L_1L_3+L_2L_3)-L_1L_2L_3=1+\tfrac4s+\tfrac5{s^2}+\tfrac4{s^3}$; $\times s^3\Rightarrow s^3+4s^2+5s+4$ (the characteristic polynomial).
Forward paths. $P_1$: $U\!\to\!\dot x_1\!\to\!\cdots\!\to\!x_3\!\to\!Y=\tfrac{2}{s^3}$, $\Delta_1=1$ (touches all). $P_2$: $U\!\to\!\dot x_1\!\to\!x_1\!\to\!Y=\tfrac2s$, touching only $L_1,L_4$, so $\Delta_2=1-(L_2+L_3)+L_2L_3=1+\tfrac2s+\tfrac1{s^2}$.
Transfer function. $G=\dfrac{P_1\Delta_1+P_2\Delta_2}{\Delta}$; multiplying through by $s^3$,$$\boxed{G(s)=\frac{2s^2+4s+4}{s^3+4s^2+5s+4}=\frac{2(s^2+2s+2)}{s^3+4s^2+5s+4}.}$$ (Identical to $C(sI-A)^{-1}B$, confirming the reading.)
Part B — Nyquist stability [8]
[Figure not reproduced: Figure Q8.2 redrawn — figure-eight Nyquist. The critical point $-1$ lies inside the right lobe, which is traced clockwise ; the negative-real-axis crossing (waist) is at $\approx-1.7$. See the official exam paper.]
Count the encirclements. Only the right lobe encloses $-1$, and its arrows (top moving right, bottom moving left) show it is traced clockwise: $N=+1$ CW encirclement of $-1$.
Apply the criterion. For a clockwise $\Gamma$-path, $Z=N+P$ with $P=1$ open-loop RHP pole: $Z=1+1=\boxed{2}$. Since $Z\ne0$, the closed loop is $\boxed{\text{unstable}}$.
Closed-loop pole count. The system is 4th order (3 LHP + 1 RHP open-loop poles $\Rightarrow$ 4 closed-loop poles). With $Z=2$ in the RHP, there are $\boxed{2\text{ in the LHP and }2\text{ in the RHP}}$.
Gain margin. The plot crosses the negative real axis (phase crossover) at $\approx-1.7$, so $|L(j\omega_{pc})|=1.7$ and $\text{GM}=\dfrac{1}{1.7}=\boxed{0.59\ \text{V/V}=-4.6\ \text{dB}}$. The $\lt1$ (negative-dB) margin is the signature of a conditionally stable, open-loop-unstable loop: reducing the gain to $\approx59\%$ would push $-1$ out of the lobe and change the encirclement count.
Check: figure reads. The waist crossing is read as $\approx-1.7$ and the $-1$ marker sits inside the right lobe; the clockwise sense is taken from the printed arrowheads. The stability verdict (unstable, $Z=2$) follows from the encirclement count and is independent of the exact crossing value; only the numerical gain margin depends on the $-1.7$ read.