Bode of Controller and Sensitivity Functions in a State Feedback Controller System












1














I have a system:



enter image description here



$A$, $B$ and $C$ forms the state space representation of the system. The system has a state feed back controller with an integral controller. I want to draw bode plot of controller, sensitivity function and complementary sensitivity function. How can I create these plots from a system like this? I know that sensitivity function is defined as $1/(1+PC)$ but I can not define $P$ and $C$ in this system; it is same in other two plots.










share|cite|improve this question





























    1














    I have a system:



    enter image description here



    $A$, $B$ and $C$ forms the state space representation of the system. The system has a state feed back controller with an integral controller. I want to draw bode plot of controller, sensitivity function and complementary sensitivity function. How can I create these plots from a system like this? I know that sensitivity function is defined as $1/(1+PC)$ but I can not define $P$ and $C$ in this system; it is same in other two plots.










    share|cite|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1







      I have a system:



      enter image description here



      $A$, $B$ and $C$ forms the state space representation of the system. The system has a state feed back controller with an integral controller. I want to draw bode plot of controller, sensitivity function and complementary sensitivity function. How can I create these plots from a system like this? I know that sensitivity function is defined as $1/(1+PC)$ but I can not define $P$ and $C$ in this system; it is same in other two plots.










      share|cite|improve this question















      I have a system:



      enter image description here



      $A$, $B$ and $C$ forms the state space representation of the system. The system has a state feed back controller with an integral controller. I want to draw bode plot of controller, sensitivity function and complementary sensitivity function. How can I create these plots from a system like this? I know that sensitivity function is defined as $1/(1+PC)$ but I can not define $P$ and $C$ in this system; it is same in other two plots.







      control-theory






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Nov 26 at 2:31









      Kwin van der Veen

      5,2602826




      5,2602826










      asked Nov 25 at 14:11









      Arda

      82




      82






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          0














          The open loop $P,C$ can not be defined when you are using cascading control and you want the open loop to be a SISO system. You could define a MIMO open loop using



          begin{align}
          begin{bmatrix}
          dot{x} \ dot{x}_i
          end{bmatrix} &=
          begin{bmatrix}
          A & -B,K_i \ 0 & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ x_i
          end{bmatrix} +
          begin{bmatrix}
          B,K & 0 \ 0 & I
          end{bmatrix}v \
          y &= begin{bmatrix}
          I & 0 \ C & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ x_i
          end{bmatrix},
          end{align}



          with in closed loop $v = vec{r} - y$ where $vec{r} = begin{bmatrix}r_x^top & r^top end{bmatrix}^top$, so in order to get the same closed loop you would have to set $r_x=0$. I do have to note that the order of multiplication matters when calculating the transfer functions that you are interested, since you are dealing with a MIMO open loop which is a (transfer function) matrix and does not commute.



          Another approach is to add an observer and use the error $e=r-y$ instead of the output to estimate the state. In that case only the output of the system will be used in the feedback loop and is $e$ the only input to the controller. Normally the observer dynamics is defined as



          $$
          dot{hat{x}} = A,hat{x} + B,u + L(y - C,hat{x}),
          $$



          such that the combined closed loop dynamics can be written as



          $$
          begin{bmatrix}
          dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
          end{bmatrix} =
          begin{bmatrix}
          A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
          L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
          -C & 0 & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ hat{x} \ x_i
          end{bmatrix} +
          begin{bmatrix}
          0 \ 0 \ I
          end{bmatrix} r.
          $$



          But if $-e=y-r$ is used instead of $y$ in $dot{hat{x}}$ then the closed loop dynamics becomes



          $$
          begin{bmatrix}
          dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
          end{bmatrix} =
          begin{bmatrix}
          A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
          L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
          -C & 0 & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ hat{x} \ x_i
          end{bmatrix} +
          begin{bmatrix}
          0 \ -L \ I
          end{bmatrix} r,
          $$



          so the same system matrix but a different input matrix, therefore the closed loop poles will be the same, but the zeros might be different. The open loop then becomes



          begin{align}
          begin{bmatrix}
          dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
          end{bmatrix} &=
          begin{bmatrix}
          A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
          0 & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
          0 & 0 & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ hat{x} \ x_i
          end{bmatrix} +
          begin{bmatrix}
          0 \ -L \ I
          end{bmatrix} e \
          y &= begin{bmatrix}
          C & 0 & 0
          end{bmatrix}
          begin{bmatrix}
          x \ hat{x} \ x_i
          end{bmatrix}.
          end{align}






          share|cite|improve this answer





















            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012886%2fbode-of-controller-and-sensitivity-functions-in-a-state-feedback-controller-syst%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            0














            The open loop $P,C$ can not be defined when you are using cascading control and you want the open loop to be a SISO system. You could define a MIMO open loop using



            begin{align}
            begin{bmatrix}
            dot{x} \ dot{x}_i
            end{bmatrix} &=
            begin{bmatrix}
            A & -B,K_i \ 0 & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ x_i
            end{bmatrix} +
            begin{bmatrix}
            B,K & 0 \ 0 & I
            end{bmatrix}v \
            y &= begin{bmatrix}
            I & 0 \ C & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ x_i
            end{bmatrix},
            end{align}



            with in closed loop $v = vec{r} - y$ where $vec{r} = begin{bmatrix}r_x^top & r^top end{bmatrix}^top$, so in order to get the same closed loop you would have to set $r_x=0$. I do have to note that the order of multiplication matters when calculating the transfer functions that you are interested, since you are dealing with a MIMO open loop which is a (transfer function) matrix and does not commute.



            Another approach is to add an observer and use the error $e=r-y$ instead of the output to estimate the state. In that case only the output of the system will be used in the feedback loop and is $e$ the only input to the controller. Normally the observer dynamics is defined as



            $$
            dot{hat{x}} = A,hat{x} + B,u + L(y - C,hat{x}),
            $$



            such that the combined closed loop dynamics can be written as



            $$
            begin{bmatrix}
            dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
            end{bmatrix} =
            begin{bmatrix}
            A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
            L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
            -C & 0 & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ hat{x} \ x_i
            end{bmatrix} +
            begin{bmatrix}
            0 \ 0 \ I
            end{bmatrix} r.
            $$



            But if $-e=y-r$ is used instead of $y$ in $dot{hat{x}}$ then the closed loop dynamics becomes



            $$
            begin{bmatrix}
            dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
            end{bmatrix} =
            begin{bmatrix}
            A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
            L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
            -C & 0 & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ hat{x} \ x_i
            end{bmatrix} +
            begin{bmatrix}
            0 \ -L \ I
            end{bmatrix} r,
            $$



            so the same system matrix but a different input matrix, therefore the closed loop poles will be the same, but the zeros might be different. The open loop then becomes



            begin{align}
            begin{bmatrix}
            dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
            end{bmatrix} &=
            begin{bmatrix}
            A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
            0 & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
            0 & 0 & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ hat{x} \ x_i
            end{bmatrix} +
            begin{bmatrix}
            0 \ -L \ I
            end{bmatrix} e \
            y &= begin{bmatrix}
            C & 0 & 0
            end{bmatrix}
            begin{bmatrix}
            x \ hat{x} \ x_i
            end{bmatrix}.
            end{align}






            share|cite|improve this answer


























              0














              The open loop $P,C$ can not be defined when you are using cascading control and you want the open loop to be a SISO system. You could define a MIMO open loop using



              begin{align}
              begin{bmatrix}
              dot{x} \ dot{x}_i
              end{bmatrix} &=
              begin{bmatrix}
              A & -B,K_i \ 0 & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ x_i
              end{bmatrix} +
              begin{bmatrix}
              B,K & 0 \ 0 & I
              end{bmatrix}v \
              y &= begin{bmatrix}
              I & 0 \ C & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ x_i
              end{bmatrix},
              end{align}



              with in closed loop $v = vec{r} - y$ where $vec{r} = begin{bmatrix}r_x^top & r^top end{bmatrix}^top$, so in order to get the same closed loop you would have to set $r_x=0$. I do have to note that the order of multiplication matters when calculating the transfer functions that you are interested, since you are dealing with a MIMO open loop which is a (transfer function) matrix and does not commute.



              Another approach is to add an observer and use the error $e=r-y$ instead of the output to estimate the state. In that case only the output of the system will be used in the feedback loop and is $e$ the only input to the controller. Normally the observer dynamics is defined as



              $$
              dot{hat{x}} = A,hat{x} + B,u + L(y - C,hat{x}),
              $$



              such that the combined closed loop dynamics can be written as



              $$
              begin{bmatrix}
              dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
              end{bmatrix} =
              begin{bmatrix}
              A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
              L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
              -C & 0 & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ hat{x} \ x_i
              end{bmatrix} +
              begin{bmatrix}
              0 \ 0 \ I
              end{bmatrix} r.
              $$



              But if $-e=y-r$ is used instead of $y$ in $dot{hat{x}}$ then the closed loop dynamics becomes



              $$
              begin{bmatrix}
              dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
              end{bmatrix} =
              begin{bmatrix}
              A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
              L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
              -C & 0 & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ hat{x} \ x_i
              end{bmatrix} +
              begin{bmatrix}
              0 \ -L \ I
              end{bmatrix} r,
              $$



              so the same system matrix but a different input matrix, therefore the closed loop poles will be the same, but the zeros might be different. The open loop then becomes



              begin{align}
              begin{bmatrix}
              dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
              end{bmatrix} &=
              begin{bmatrix}
              A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
              0 & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
              0 & 0 & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ hat{x} \ x_i
              end{bmatrix} +
              begin{bmatrix}
              0 \ -L \ I
              end{bmatrix} e \
              y &= begin{bmatrix}
              C & 0 & 0
              end{bmatrix}
              begin{bmatrix}
              x \ hat{x} \ x_i
              end{bmatrix}.
              end{align}






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                0












                0








                0






                The open loop $P,C$ can not be defined when you are using cascading control and you want the open loop to be a SISO system. You could define a MIMO open loop using



                begin{align}
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} &=
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K_i \ 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                B,K & 0 \ 0 & I
                end{bmatrix}v \
                y &= begin{bmatrix}
                I & 0 \ C & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ x_i
                end{bmatrix},
                end{align}



                with in closed loop $v = vec{r} - y$ where $vec{r} = begin{bmatrix}r_x^top & r^top end{bmatrix}^top$, so in order to get the same closed loop you would have to set $r_x=0$. I do have to note that the order of multiplication matters when calculating the transfer functions that you are interested, since you are dealing with a MIMO open loop which is a (transfer function) matrix and does not commute.



                Another approach is to add an observer and use the error $e=r-y$ instead of the output to estimate the state. In that case only the output of the system will be used in the feedback loop and is $e$ the only input to the controller. Normally the observer dynamics is defined as



                $$
                dot{hat{x}} = A,hat{x} + B,u + L(y - C,hat{x}),
                $$



                such that the combined closed loop dynamics can be written as



                $$
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} =
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                -C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ 0 \ I
                end{bmatrix} r.
                $$



                But if $-e=y-r$ is used instead of $y$ in $dot{hat{x}}$ then the closed loop dynamics becomes



                $$
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} =
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                -C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ -L \ I
                end{bmatrix} r,
                $$



                so the same system matrix but a different input matrix, therefore the closed loop poles will be the same, but the zeros might be different. The open loop then becomes



                begin{align}
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} &=
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                0 & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                0 & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ -L \ I
                end{bmatrix} e \
                y &= begin{bmatrix}
                C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix}.
                end{align}






                share|cite|improve this answer












                The open loop $P,C$ can not be defined when you are using cascading control and you want the open loop to be a SISO system. You could define a MIMO open loop using



                begin{align}
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} &=
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K_i \ 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                B,K & 0 \ 0 & I
                end{bmatrix}v \
                y &= begin{bmatrix}
                I & 0 \ C & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ x_i
                end{bmatrix},
                end{align}



                with in closed loop $v = vec{r} - y$ where $vec{r} = begin{bmatrix}r_x^top & r^top end{bmatrix}^top$, so in order to get the same closed loop you would have to set $r_x=0$. I do have to note that the order of multiplication matters when calculating the transfer functions that you are interested, since you are dealing with a MIMO open loop which is a (transfer function) matrix and does not commute.



                Another approach is to add an observer and use the error $e=r-y$ instead of the output to estimate the state. In that case only the output of the system will be used in the feedback loop and is $e$ the only input to the controller. Normally the observer dynamics is defined as



                $$
                dot{hat{x}} = A,hat{x} + B,u + L(y - C,hat{x}),
                $$



                such that the combined closed loop dynamics can be written as



                $$
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} =
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                -C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ 0 \ I
                end{bmatrix} r.
                $$



                But if $-e=y-r$ is used instead of $y$ in $dot{hat{x}}$ then the closed loop dynamics becomes



                $$
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} =
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                L,C & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                -C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ -L \ I
                end{bmatrix} r,
                $$



                so the same system matrix but a different input matrix, therefore the closed loop poles will be the same, but the zeros might be different. The open loop then becomes



                begin{align}
                begin{bmatrix}
                dot{x} \ dot{hat{x}} \ dot{x}_i
                end{bmatrix} &=
                begin{bmatrix}
                A & -B,K & -B,K_i \
                0 & A-B,K-L,C & -B,K_i \
                0 & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix} +
                begin{bmatrix}
                0 \ -L \ I
                end{bmatrix} e \
                y &= begin{bmatrix}
                C & 0 & 0
                end{bmatrix}
                begin{bmatrix}
                x \ hat{x} \ x_i
                end{bmatrix}.
                end{align}







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Nov 26 at 4:28









                Kwin van der Veen

                5,2602826




                5,2602826






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3012886%2fbode-of-controller-and-sensitivity-functions-in-a-state-feedback-controller-syst%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Bundesstraße 106

                    Verónica Boquete

                    Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten