NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

22-Elec-B2 Advanced Control Systems · May 2015

Question 6 of 6: Feedback around a pure transport delay

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

Paper format. National Exams, May 2015, 07-Elec-B2 Advanced Control Systems — three hours, closed book. Six questions are set; the rubric states that “any four questions constitute a complete paper” and that “all questions are of equal value”, so each carries 25 marks. Tables of inverse Laplace and inverse z-transforms are appended as pages 4 and 5, and only an approved Casio or Sharp calculator is permitted. All six questions are solved here, because this set is a study resource rather than a timed sitting. The paper deliberately mixes continuous-time frequency-response work (Questions 1 and 6), state-space methods (Questions 2 and 4) and sampled-data design (Questions 3 and 5).

Reference texts. G. F. Franklin, J. D. Powell and A. Emami-Naeini, Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems, 7th ed., Pearson (frequency response, stability margins, steady-state error, lead compensation); K. J. Åström and R. M. Murray, Feedback Systems: An Introduction for Scientists and Engineers, 2nd ed., Princeton (sensitivity functions and loops containing transport delay); K. Ogata, Modern Control Engineering, 5th ed., Pearson (state-space realisations, controllability, observability and pole placement); G. F. Franklin, J. D. Powell and M. L. Workman, Digital Control of Dynamic Systems, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley (zero-order-hold equivalents, the Jury test, discrete steady-state error); L. Ljung, System Identification: Theory for the User, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall (least-squares estimation of difference-equation models). These are the works listed by Engineers Canada and EGBC for the Elec-B2 syllabus.

Two readings matter for the marks: in Question 1 the disturbance d enters the plant-input summing junction through a minus sign while u enters through a plus, so the plant sees $u - d$; and the Question 3 table is $y = \{0,\,10,\,4,\,3,\,1.6,\,0.4,\,0.3\}$ against $u = \{1,\,0,\,0,\,0,\,0,\,0,\,0\}$.

Question 6: Feedback around a pure transport delay (25 marks)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Given. A unity-feedback loop whose entire plant is a one-second transport delay.

QuantityValue
Plant$P(s) = e^{-s}$, a pure delay of $\theta = 1\ \text{s}$
Controller$C(s) = K$ (a constant, parts a to c)
Loop transfer function$L(j\omega) = K e^{-j\omega}$
Loop magnitude$|L(j\omega)| = K$ at every frequency
Specificationgain margin at least 6 dB

Find. The admissible range of $K$ and the corresponding phase margin, the steady-state step-tracking error as a function of $K$, the unit step response at $K = 1$, and a redesigned controller giving zero step error while keeping 6 dB of gain margin.

r+−C(s)uP(s)y
Question 6: unity-feedback loop closed round a pure transport delay. The plant has unit magnitude at every frequency, so the loop magnitude is the controller gain alone.

Approach. Exploit the fact that a delay is all-pass: its magnitude is identically one and all of its effect is in the phase. That decouples the magnitude and phase conditions completely, so every margin can be written in closed form without a Padé approximation.

  1. Part (a) — separate magnitude from phase. On the imaginary axis $$|L(j\omega)| = K\,\bigl|e^{-j\omega}\bigr| = K, \qquad \angle L(j\omega) = -\omega\ \text{rad} = -57.296\,\omega\ \text{degrees}.$$ The magnitude is flat and the phase falls without bound. Routh's criterion is unavailable here because $e^{-s}$ is transcendental and the characteristic equation is not a polynomial; the frequency-domain margins are the natural tools instead.
  2. Locate the phase crossover. The phase reaches $-180^\circ$ when $\omega\theta = \pi$, so with $\theta = 1\ \text{s}$ $$\omega_{pc} = \frac{\pi}{\theta} = \pi = 3.1416\ \text{rad/s}.$$ This frequency does not depend on $K$ at all, which is a direct consequence of the delay being all-pass.
  3. Impose the gain-margin specification. The gain margin is the reciprocal of the loop magnitude at the phase crossover, $$\mathrm{GM} = \frac{1}{|L(j\omega_{pc})|} = \frac{1}{K},$$ and requiring at least 6 dB — taken, as is conventional, as a factor of two — gives $1/K \ge 2$: $$\boxed{\;0 \lt K \le 0.5\;}$$
  4. Determine the corresponding phase margin. The phase margin is measured at the gain crossover, where $|L| = 1$. But $|L(j\omega)| = K \le 0.5$ at every frequency, so the magnitude curve never reaches 0 dB and there is no gain crossover: $$\boxed{\;\text{No gain crossover exists for } K \lt 1, \text{ so the phase margin is infinite.}\;}$$ This is the graded observation. A loop whose magnitude is uniformly below unity cannot be destabilised by any amount of additional phase lag, so no finite margin can be quoted; the gain margin is the only meaningful measure for this plant.
  5. Part (b) — write the error transfer function. For unity feedback, $$E(s) = \frac{R(s)}{1 + L(s)} = \frac{R(s)}{1 + K e^{-s}} .$$ The delay has unit gain at DC, $e^{-s}\big|_{s=0} = 1$, so $L(0) = K$.
  6. Apply the final-value theorem. With $R(s) = 1/s$, $$e_{ss} = \lim_{s\to0} s\cdot\frac{1/s}{1 + Ke^{-s}} = \frac{1}{1 + K},$$ $$\boxed{\;e_{ss} = \frac{1}{1+K}\;}$$ The loop is Type 0, so a proportional controller can only shrink the error, never remove it; at the largest gain allowed by (a), $K = 0.5$, the residual error is still $1/1.5 = 0.667$, i.e. two-thirds of the step.
  7. Part (c) — expand the closed-loop response at $K = 1$. With $K = 1$ the closed-loop transfer function is $$T(s) = \frac{e^{-s}}{1 + e^{-s}} = e^{-s}\bigl(1 - e^{-s} + e^{-2s} - e^{-3s} + \cdots\bigr) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(-1)^{n+1} e^{-ns},$$ a geometric series that converges for $|e^{-s}| \lt 1$, i.e. in the right half plane.
  8. Invert term by term. Each term $e^{-ns}/s$ inverts to a unit step delayed by $n$ seconds, so the unit step response is $$\boxed{\;y(t) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(-1)^{n+1}\,u(t-n) = \begin{cases}0, & 2m \le t \lt 2m+1\\ 1, & 2m+1 \le t \lt 2m+2\end{cases}\;}$$ The output is a square wave alternating between 0 and 1 every second, of period 2 s, which never settles. This is exactly what the margin analysis predicts: at $K = 1$ the gain margin is $1/K = 1$, that is 0 dB, so the loop sits precisely on the stability boundary and sustains an undamped oscillation at $\omega_{pc} = \pi\ \text{rad/s}$ — a period of $2\pi/\pi = 2\ \text{s}$, matching the square wave exactly.
  9. 01234567800.51time t (s)output y(t)mean value 0.5
    Question 6(c): unit-step response at K = 1. The output is a square wave that switches between 0 and 1 every second and never settles - the loop is marginally stable.
  10. Part (d) — choose the controller structure. Zero steady-state error to a step requires the loop to be Type 1, and since the plant supplies no pole at the origin the controller must. The simplest choice that adds nothing else is a pure integrator, $$C(s) = \frac{K}{s}, \qquad L(s) = \frac{K e^{-s}}{s}.$$
  11. Locate the new phase crossover. The integrator adds a constant $-90^\circ$, so $$\angle L(j\omega) = -90^\circ - 57.296\,\omega = -180^\circ \;\Longrightarrow\; \omega_{pc}' = \frac{\pi/2}{\theta} = 1.5708\ \text{rad/s},$$ half the previous value — the price paid for the integrator.
  12. Size the gain for 6 dB. The magnitude at that frequency is no longer flat, $|L(j\omega)| = K/\omega$, so $$\mathrm{GM} = \frac{1}{|L(j\omega_{pc}')|} = \frac{\omega_{pc}'}{K} = \frac{\pi/2}{K} \ge 2 \;\Longrightarrow\; \boxed{\;C(s) = \frac{K}{s}, \qquad 0 \lt K \le \frac{\pi}{4} = 0.7854\;}$$
  13. Report the margins of the redesign. The gain crossover of the new loop satisfies $K/\omega = 1$, so $\omega_{gc}' = K$, and $$\mathrm{PM}' = 180^\circ - 90^\circ - 57.296K = 90^\circ - 57.296K .$$ At the limiting gain $K = \pi/4$ this evaluates to $$\mathrm{PM}' = 90^\circ - 45^\circ = 45^\circ,$$ a textbook-comfortable margin. The redesigned loop therefore delivers zero steady-state step error, 6 dB of gain margin and $45^\circ$ of phase margin simultaneously — and unlike part (a) it now has a finite phase margin, because the integrator makes the magnitude frequency-dependent and a genuine gain crossover exists.

Check: 6 dB is read as exactly a factor of two. The exact decibel conversion is $10^{6/20} = 1.9953$, which would permit $K \le 0.5012$ in part (a) and $K \le 0.7873$ in part (d). Using the conventional 2:1 reading gives the round values $K \le 0.5$ and $K \le \pi/4$ quoted above, and it is the conservative choice in both cases, so no specification is violated by adopting it.

Question 6 — results
QuantitySymbolValue
Loop magnitude (parts a to c)$|L(j\omega)|$$K$ at all frequencies
(a) Phase crossover$\omega_{pc}$$\pi = 3.1416$ rad/s
(a) Gain range for 6 dB$K$$0 \lt K \le 0.5$
(a) Phase marginPMinfinite (no gain crossover)
(b) Steady-state step error$e_{ss}$$1/(1+K)$; 0.667 at $K = 0.5$
(c) Unit step response at $K = 1$$y(t)$0/1 square wave, period 2 s
(c) Oscillation frequency at $K = 1$$\omega_{pc}$$\pi$ rad/s (marginally stable)
(d) Redesigned controller$C(s)$$K/s$, $0 \lt K \le \pi/4 = 0.7854$
(d) New phase crossover$\omega_{pc}'$$\pi/2 = 1.5708$ rad/s
(d) Phase margin at $K = \pi/4$$\mathrm{PM}'$$45^\circ$
Back to the paper →