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)
Given. A unity-feedback loop whose entire plant is a one-second transport
delay.
Quantity
Value
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
Specification
gain 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 $1/K \ge 2$:
$$\boxed{\;0 \lt K \le 0.5\;}$$
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.
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 $L(0) = K$.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
$$C(s) = \frac{K}{s}, \qquad L(s) = \frac{K e^{-s}}{s}.$$
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.
Size the gain for 6 dB. The magnitude at that frequency is no longer
flat, $|L(j\omega)| = K/\omega$, so
$$\mathrm{GM} = \frac{1}{|L(j\omega_{pc}')|} = \frac{\omega_{pc}'}{K}
= \frac{\pi/2}{K} \ge 2
\;\Longrightarrow\; \boxed{\;C(s) = \frac{K}{s}, \qquad 0 \lt K \le \frac{\pi}{4} = 0.7854\;}$$
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.