Time Response, Stability, and

Steady State Error

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 1

 1 Time Response
• The mathematical representation of a system (Transfer function or State space) is used to
analyze its transient and steady-state responses to see if these characteristics yield the desired
behavior.

• Performance of controlled systems can be tested and compared by their responses to

certain test signals (Step functions, impulse functions, ramp functions, sinusoidal
functions, etc.).

• A response of a dynamic system can be analyzed in two parts:

o Steady-state response: The behavior of the output as
o Transient response: The behavior of the output as it goes from an initial state to a final state.

• This chapter is devoted to the analysis of system transient response.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 2

 Time Response
Poles, Zeros, and System Response
• The output response of a system is the sum of two responses:
1. the forced response (steady-state response or particular solution),
2. the natural response (the homogeneous solution).

Output response = forced response (e.g. constant) + natural response (e.g. exponential)
roots of the denominator (characteristic
• Poles of a Transfer Function (TF): The values of s that cause polynomial) of the transfer function

• Zeros of a TF: the values of s that cause TF = 0. roots of the numerator of the transfer function

Example: Poles and Zeros of a First-Order System

System Output (unit step response)

where and
System showing input and output

System Output in time

Inverse Laplace transform: domain (time response)
pole-zero plot of the system

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 3

 Example: Poles and Zeros of First Order System

Input function

generates
Input poles Forced response
( pole at the origin generated a step function at the output)

generates
System poles Natural response
Transfer function

(A pole on the real axis generates an exponential response of

the form that will decay to zero).

System poles generates Amplitudes for both the

And zeros forced and natural responses

Evolution of a system response.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 4
 Evaluating Response using Poles

Problem:
Given the following system, write the output, c(t), in general terms.
Specify the forced and natural parts of the solution.
Solution:

Forced Natural
response response
Taking inverse Laplace transform,

• Each system pole generates an exponential as part of the

natural response.

• The input's pole generates the forced response.

Poles of the system produce the

Natural response that Will decay to zero
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 5
 First-Order System: Time Constant
• A first-order system without zero:

• If the input is a unit step: then the Laplace

transform of the step response is :

the input pole at the

origin generated the
• Taking the inverse transform forced response

The system pole at

–a generated the
• Significance of parameter a (system pole) natural response
(only parameter needed to describe the
transient response),

When

Hence, CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 6

 Some Terminology
(three transient response performance specifications).

1. Time constant : Time it takes for the step response to rise to 63% of its final value. 1
𝑇 𝑐=
𝑎
• we can call the parameter (system pole) the exponential frequency (The reciprocal of the time constant)
• is related to the speed at which the system responds to a step input.

2. Rise Time : Rise time is defined as the time for the response to go from 0.1 to 0.9 of its final value.
found by solving for the difference in time at c() = 0.9 and c() = 0.1
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐶(𝑡)=0.1
ln ( 0.1 ) 2.31
𝐶 ( 𝑡 2 )= 0.9=1 − 𝑒
− 𝑎𝑡 2
𝑡 2=− = 2.13 0.11 2.2 2.2
𝑎 𝑎 𝑇 𝑟 =𝑡 2 −𝑡 1 = − = 𝑇 =
−𝑎 𝑡1 ln ( 0.9) 0.11 𝑎 𝑎 𝑎 Rise time: 𝑟
𝑎
𝐶 ( 𝑡 1 ) = 0.1=1 − 𝑒 𝑡 1 =− = 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝐶(𝑡)=0.9
𝑎 𝑎
3. Settling time : The time for the response to reach, and stay within, 2% of its final value.
Lettingand solving for time, , we find the settling time to be
ln ( 0. 98 ) 4 4
𝐶 ( 𝑇 𝑠 ) =0.98=1 − 𝑒
− 𝑎 𝑇𝑠 𝑇 𝑠 =− = 𝑇 𝑠=
𝑎
𝑎 𝑎

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 7

 First-Order Transfer Function via Testing
• With a step input, we can measure the time constant and the steady-state value, from which the transfer function can be
calculated.
• A simple first order system has : 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 0.72

and step response is:

In the time domain (ILT): 𝑐 (𝑡 )= 𝐾 − 𝐾 𝑒− 𝑎𝑡 ( 𝑒𝑞.1) 63 % 𝑜𝑓 0.72=0.45

𝑎 𝑎
• From the response, we identify K and a to obtain the
transfer function.
63 % 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 0.72
To find a:
𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡=𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 (0.63 × 0.72) 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡h𝑒 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑝h
¿ 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 ( 0.45 ) =0.13 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 ( 𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒= 0.45 ) =0.13 𝑠

1
𝑎= =7.7
0.13

To find K: From , the forced response reaches a steady-state value of

𝐾 =5.54 𝐾 Transfer function,

and 𝐺 ( 𝑠 ) = 𝑠+ 𝑎
𝑎=7.7 8
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour
 Second-Order System1
• Parameters of First-order system determine the speed of the system.
• Parameters of Second-order system determine the form (shape) of the system.

Consider the general system,

System poles 𝑎 √ 𝑎2 − 4 𝑏
𝑠1 , 2=− ∓ General case of second order system
2 2
• For un-damped(without damping) system, , and the poles are on at ,
Natural Frequency
Hence un-damped system
• For an under-damped system, poles have real part (exponential decay ),
Exponential decay frequency
D

Natural frequency
( 𝛏=
exponential decay
𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 )
: (Natural Frequency ) the frequency of oscillation of the system without damping.
(D) dimensionless measure describing how oscillations in a system decay.
exponential decay , real part of the pole

Poles
𝑏=𝝎 𝒏 2
𝑎=2 ξ 𝜔 𝑛
Canonical form
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 9
(two finite poles and no zeros)
 Second-Order System2
The sign of the discriminant of the denominator polynomial depends on the damping ratio , three cases.
𝑎 √ 𝑎 2
−4𝑏 𝑎=2 ξ 𝜔 𝑛
System poles 𝑠 =− ∓
1, 2
2 2 2
𝑏=𝝎 𝒏
Case1: Overdamped system: () Two real poles
𝑎=9 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑏=9 the general case
(two finite poles and no zeros)

1 0.171 1 .171
𝐶 ( 𝑠 )= + −
𝑠 𝑠 +7.854 𝑠 +1.146

− 7.854 𝑡 − 1.146𝑡
𝑐 (𝑡 )=1+ 0.171 𝑒 −0 1 .171 𝑒

Overdamped system

𝑇𝑤𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑠

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 10
 Second-Order System
Case 2: Under-damped Response () : (Two complex poles that come from the system).

Poles from the system:

exponential decay frequency of the
sinusoidal oscillation.

𝑎=2𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑏=9

𝑇𝑤𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑥 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑠

From,𝐾 4 cos ( 𝛼+ 𝛽 )= 𝐾 4 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝛽 − 𝐾 4 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛼 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝛽

¿ 𝐾 2 cos ( √ 8𝑡 ) + 𝐾 3 si s ( √ 8 𝑡 )
Second-order
step response
components
Where, generated by
complex poles

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 11

 Second-Order System
Case 3: Un-damped Response (: pole at the origin that Case 4: Critically Damped Response ( : pole at the origin that comes
comes from the input and two imaginary poles that from the input and two multiple real poles that come from the system.
come from the system.
3

𝑎=6𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑏=9
𝑎=0𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑏=9 two system poles on the imaginary axis 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑠

There is no exponential term, so no decay.

There is no sinusoidal term, so no oscillation.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 12

 Over-damped responses Second-Order System
Two realTwo
poles at All Together

𝛏 >1
Under-damped responses
Two complex
Two poles at
0 < 𝛏 <1

Un-damped responses
Two imaginary
Two poles at 𝛏 =0

Critically damped responses 𝛏 =1

Two real poles
Twoat

Step responses for second-order system damping cases

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 13

 Second-Order System As a Function of Damping Ratio
• Relationship between the quantities and the pole location.

Solving for the poles of the transfer function

Example
For the system find the value of and report the kind of
response expected.

2
𝜔𝑛 12
We have 𝐺 ( 𝑠 ) = 2 2
= 2
𝑠 + 2 𝛏 𝜔𝑛 𝑠 + 𝜔𝑛 𝑠 + 8 𝑠 +12

𝜔 2𝑛 =12 𝜔 𝑛 =√ 12
and 2 𝛏 𝜔𝑛 =8 𝛏=
8
=
2
>1
2 √ 12 √ 3
System is over-damped.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour Second-order response as a function of damping ratio 14

 Underdamped Second-Order Systems
• The nature of the response obtained is related to the value of the damping ratio (over-damped, critically damped,
underdamped, and un-damped responses.).

• Step response for the general second-order system,

2
1 𝜔𝑛
𝐶 ( 𝑠 )= 𝑅 ( 𝑠 ) 𝐺 ( 𝑠 )=
𝑠 𝑠 2 +2 𝛏 𝜔𝑛 𝑠+ 𝜔2𝑛

Expanding by partial fractions, (< 1 the underdamped case )

The lower the value of ζ, the

more oscillatory the response is.
inverse
Laplace
transform

Where,

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour Second-order underdamped responses for damping ratio values 15
 Underdamped Second-Order Systems
Specifications
• Other parameters associated with the underdamped response are rise time, peak time, percent overshoot, and settling time.

Rise time The time required for the waveform

𝑇𝑟 to go from 0.1 of the final value to
Second-order underdamped
0.9 of the final value. response specifications

The time required to reach the first,

Peak time or maximum, peak.
𝑇𝑝
The amount that the waveform overshoots the steady-
percent state, or final, value at the peak time, expressed as a
overshoot percentage of the steady-state value.
% 𝑂𝑆
and
% 𝑂𝑆=𝑒
−
( 𝛏𝜋
√ 1− 𝛏2 ) ×100
The time required for the transient's damped
settling time oscillations to reach and stay within ±2% of
𝑇𝑠 the steady-state value.
Derivation: self study.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 16

 Under-damped Second-Order Systems
Specifications (continued)
from the Pythagorean theorem
Damped frequency of oscillation
2 2 2
𝜔 +𝜎 =𝜔
𝜔 𝑑 =√ 𝜔 −𝜎 =√ 𝜔 − 𝛏 𝜔 →𝜔 𝑑=𝜔𝑛 √ 1− 𝛏
2 2 2 2 2 2
𝑑 𝑑 𝑛

𝜎 𝑑 =𝛏 𝜔𝑛 𝑛 𝑑 𝑛 𝑛
Damping Ratio
damped frequency of oscillation,
𝜎 𝑑 𝛏 𝜔𝑛
cos ( 𝜃 )= = =𝛏 Natural frequency
𝜔𝑛 𝜔𝑛
inversely proportional to the
imaginary part of the pole.

inversely proportional to the

real part of the pole.

exponential damping frequency.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 17

 Under-damped Second-Order Systems
Step Response as Pole moves

poles move in a • frequency increases

vertical direction • envelope remains the same (constant real part )
(with constant real • settling time is virtually the same
part )
• overshoot increases, the rise time decreases

poles move in a • As the poles move to the left, response damps

horizontal direction out more rapidly.
(with constant
imaginary part ) • peak time is the same for all waveforms
(constant imaginary part )

poles move in along a • The percent overshoot remains the same.

constant radial line
direction • The farther the poles are from the origin, the more
rapid the response.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 18

 Finding TP, %OS, and TS From Pole Location

Problem: Given the pole plot find , , , %OS, and .

Solution:

Damping ration,

2 2
Natural frequency, 𝜔 𝑛 =𝜔 𝑑 + 𝜎 𝑑
2
𝜔 𝑛 =√ 𝜔 +𝜎 =√ 7 +3 =7.616
2
𝑑
2
𝑑
2 2

Peak time,

Percent overshoot, % 𝑂𝑆=𝑒

−
( √ 1−
𝛏𝜋
2
𝛏 )
×100=26 %

The approximate settling time,

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 19

 System Response with Additional Poles
• If a system has more than two poles or has zeros, we cannot use the formulas to calculate the performance
specifications that we derived.

• We need to approximate that system to a second-order system that has just two dominant complex poles.

Assuming two complex poles at And the real pole at

Time domain step response,

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 20

Comparing Responses of Three-Pole Systems

if the real pole is five times system is represented by

farther to the left than the its dominant second-
dominant poles order pair of poles.

21
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour
 Evaluating Pole-Zero Cancellation
Effect of a zero on the system: A system with a zero consists of the derivative of the original response and the scaled version of the original
response. If the zero is very large, the Laplace transform of the response is approximately the scaled version of the original response. As the
zero becomes smaller, the derivative term contributes more to the response and has a greater effect. ( 𝑠+ 𝑎 ) 𝐶 ( 𝑠 )=𝑠𝐶 ( 𝑠 ) +𝑎𝐶 (𝑠)
derivative scaled
pole-zero cancellation response response
Problem: For any function for which pole-zero cancellation is valid, find the approximate response.

Effect of adding a zero

to a two-pole system

Solution:

The partial-fraction expansion of is

That residue (1) is not negligible. So a 2 -order step response

nd

approximation cannot be made for .

The partial-fraction expansion of is

That residue (0.033) is negligible, so cancel zero and that pole.

Hence, the approximate response,
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 22
 2. Stability
Stability is the most important system specification.
the total response
c(t )  c forced (t )  cnatural(t ) of a system

Stable system: If natural response approaches zero as time approaches infinity (LTI System).

Marginally stable system: If natural response neither decays nor grows but remains constant or
oscillates as time approaches infinity.

BIBO (Bounded Input, Bounded Output) yields stable system.

Stable systems have closed-loop transfer functions with poles only in the left-half plane.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 23

 Routh-Hurwitz Criterion
This method Provides stability information with solving for system poles.

How many poles are in left / right plane or in jw axis, not where
Routh Table Generation:

Completed Routh table

Denominator:

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 24

 Routh-Hurwitz Criterion: Example
PROBLEM: Make the Routh table for the system shown in Figure
SOLUTION: The first step is to find the equivalent closed-loop
system
Interpreting the Basic Routh Table
How many sign changes in the first column 
the number of poles in the right-half plane
Two such poles : unstable system.

Any row can be multiplied

by a positive number. the
row was multiplied by 1/10

the number of roots of the

polynomial that are in the
right half-plane is equal to
the number of sign
changes in the first
column.

the first column

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 25
 Routh-Hurwitz Criterion: Special Cases
1. Zero Only in the First Column
If the first element of a row is zero,
division by zero in the next row

10
Example: T (s) 
s 5  2 s 4  3s 3  6 s 2  5s  3

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 26

 Routh-Hurwitz Criterion: Special Cases
Zero Only in the First Column: reverse coefficients
The polynomial that has the reciprocal roots of the original, is another method that can be used
when a zero appears only in the first column of a row .
reciprocal roots (s is replaced by l/d),

Since there are two sign changes, the system is

unstable and has two right-half-plane poles

Example:
10
T (s) 
s 5  2 s 4  3s 3  6 s 2  5s  3

Reverse coefficients:
D ( s )  3s 5  5 s 4  6 s 3  3 s 2  2 s  1

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 27

 Routh-Hurwitz Criterion: Special Cases
2. Entire Row is Zero
An entire row consists of zeros because there is an even polynomial that is a factor of the original
polynomial (only even powers of s and have roots that are symmetrical about the origin.)

Example: 10
T (s) 
P( s)  s  6s  8
4 2
s 5  7 s 4  6 s 3  42 s 2  8s  56
dP( s )
 4 s 3  12s  0 Derivative of the polynomial of the row above the zeros row
ds

the row was

multiplied by
1/7

entire row
consists of zeros

Stable system.
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 28
 Pole Distribution via Routh Table
PROBLEM:
with Row of Zeros
Tell how many poles are in the right half-plane, in the
left half-plane, and on the jw-axis.
20
T (s) 
s  s  12 s  22 s  39 s 4  59 s 3  48s 2  38s  20
8 7 6 5

P( s )  s 4  3s 2  2 :Even polynomial
Taking the derivative

Two sign changes

dP( s )
 4s 3  6s  0
ds the row was multiplied by 1/10

the row was multiplied by 1/20

entire row consists of zeros

the row was multiplied by 1/2

interpretation

No sign change

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 29

 Stability Design via Routh-Hurwitz
Changes in the gain K of a feedback control system change the closed-loop pole locations (can move poles
from region to another region on the S-plane).

PROBLEM: Find the range of gain, K, for the system that will cause the system to be stable, unstable, and
marginally stable. Assume K > 0.

Variable gain K
1. If K < 1386, then stable system.
2. If K > 1386, then two sign changes; two right-half plane
poles and one left-half plane pole. Unstable system.
3. If K = 1386, an entire row of zeros  j poles.
K
T (s)  replacing K=1386
s 3  18s 2  77 s  K
dP( s )
P( s )  18s 2  1386   36 s  0
ds

No sign change
can be positive,
zero, or negative
Row of
zeros

2 poles in j axis and one left-half plane pole

no sign changes above the even polynomial
the system is marginally stable
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 30
 Factoring via Routh-Hurwitz
The Routh-Hurwitz criterion is often used in limited applications to factor polynomials containing even
factors.
PROBLEM: Factor the polynomial s 4  3s 3  30 s 2  30 s  200 (1)

P( s )  s 2  10 (2)

• Dividing polynomial (1) by (2) yields:

s 4  3s 3  30 s 2  30s  200  ( s 2  10)( s 2  3s  20)

 ( s  j 3.1623)( s  j 3.1623)  ( s  1.5  j 4.213)( s  1.5  j 4.213)

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 3

1
 Stability in State Space
• The values of the system's poles are equal to the eigenvalues of the system matrix, A.

PROBLEM: find out how many poles are in the left half-plane, in the right half-plane, and on the jw-axis.

 0 3 1  10
x   2 8 1  x   0 u
 10  5  2  0 
y  1 0 0x
SOLUTION:
 s 0 0  0 3 1  s 3 1 
det( sI  A)  s 3  6 s 2  7 s  52
( sI  A)  0 s 0   2 8 1    2 s  8  1 
0 0 s   10  5  2  10 5 s  2
Using this polynomial, form the Routh table

one sign change: One right-half-plane pole and two

left-half-plane poles.
Unstable system.

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 32

 3. Steady-State Errors
Steady-State Error: The difference between the input and the output for a prescribed test input (step /
ramp / parabola) as t 

Test waveforms for evaluating steady-state errors of position

control systems

step input

ramp input

Steady-state error
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 33
 Evaluating Steady-State Errors1

Problem: Find the steady-state error for

the following system with
input output Error
5
Closed-loop control system error T ( s)  2
s  7 s  10
and input is step response.
E (s)  R( s)  C ( s) and C ( s )  R ( s )T ( s ) Solution:
Step input
 E ( s )  R( s )[1  T ( s )] We have the error E ( s )  R ( s )[1  T ( s )]

s 2  7s  5
Applying final value theorem [ f ()  lim sF ( s )] E (s) 
s0 s ( s 2  7 s  10)
T(s) is stable, hence E(s) is stable.
e()  lim e(t )  lim sE ( s )  lim sR ( s )[1  T ( s )] Applying final value theorem,
t  s 0 s 0

e( )  1 / 2
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 34
 Evaluating Steady-State Errors2

E ( s )  R ( s )  C ( s ), and C ( s )  E ( s )G ( s ) Ramp input: tu(t)

s (1 / s 2 ) 1 1
e()  eramp ()  lim  lim 
R( s) s 0 1  G ( s ) s 0 s  sG ( s ) lim sG ( s )
 E (s)  s 0
1  G(s)

sR ( s ) For zero steady-state error, lim sG ( s )  

e()  lim [Final-value theorem] s 0
s 0 1  G ( s )

Parabolic input: (1/2)t2u(t)

Step input: u(t)
s (1 / s 3 ) 1 1
e()  e parabolic()  lim  lim 2 2 
s (1 / s ) 1 s 0 1  G ( s ) s 0 s  s G ( s ) lim s 2G ( s )
e()  estep ()  lim  s 0
s 0 1  G ( s ) 1  lim G ( s )
s 0
For zero steady-state error, lim s 2G ( s )  
s 0
For zero steady-state error, lim G ( s )  
s 0

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 35

 Evaluating Steady-State Errors example1

u(t): unity step

Problem: Find steady-state errors for inputs 5u(t), 5tu(t), and 5t2u(t) to the above system.
Solution: Let, the system is stable.
5 5 5
5u (t ) : e()   
1  lim G ( s ) 1  20 21
s 0

5 5
5tu (t ) : e()   
lim sG ( s ) 0
s 0

10 10
5t 2u (t ) : e( )   
lim s 2G ( s ) 0
s 0

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 36

Evaluating Steady-State Errors-example2

One integration, s1

5 5 No integration will make it constant,

5u (t ) : e()   0
1  lim G ( s )  one integration makes it zero.
s 0

5 5 1
5tu (t ) : e()    No integration will make it infinity.
lim sG ( s ) 100 20 one integration makes it constant.
s 0

10 10 Two integrations will make it constant

5t 2u (t ) : e( )   
lim s 2G ( s ) 0 and 3 or more will make it zero.
s 0

CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 37

 Static Error Constants
The steady-state error performance specifications are called static error constants.
steady-state error. PROBLEM:
evaluate the static error constants and find the expected error
for the standard step, ramp, and parabolic inputs.
step input, u(t)

ramp input, t u(t)

K p  lim G ( s )  
s 0

500  2  5  6
K v  lim sG ( s )   31.25
s 0 8  10  12
Position constant, Kp:
K a  lim s 2G ( s )  0
s 0
K p  lim G ( s )
s 0
1
For step input, e()  0
1 K p
Velocity constant, Kv:
1 1
For ramp input, e()    0.032
K v  lim sG ( s ) K v 31.25
s 0
1
Acceleration constant, Ka: For parabolic input, e()  
Ka
K a  lim s 2G ( s )
s 0
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 38
 System Type

Type 0: if n = 0; (no integration)

Type 1: if n = 1; (one integration)
Type 2: if n = 2; (two integrations)

Problem: Find the value of K so that there is 10% error

in the steady state.

Solution: Type 1. Input should be ramp, because only ramp

yields a finite error in Type 1 system.

39
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour
 System Type

Relationships between input, system type, static error constants, and steady-state errors

CEN455: Dr. Ghulam Muhammad 40

 Steady-State Error for Disturbances
Feedback control systems are used to compensate for disturbances or unwanted inputs that enter
a system. disturbance

Problem:
Find the steady-state error component
due to a step disturbance

e()  lim sE ( s )  eR ()  eD ()

s 0
Solution:
steady-state error
due to R(s),

sG2 ( s ) steady-state error due

eD ()   lim D( s)
s 0 1  G ( s )G ( s ) to disturbance D(s),
1 2

1 steady-state error due to

 , for step disturbanc e step disturbance D(s)=1/s,
1
lim  lim G1 ( s )
s 0 G ( s ) s 0
2 CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 41
Steady-State Error for Nonunity Feedback System
Form a unity feedback system by adding and subtracting unity feedback paths (input and output units must
be same.).

PROBLEM:
Find the system type, error constant, and the steady-state error for a unit step input.

G ( s) 100( s  5)
Ge ( s )   3
1  G ( s ) H ( s )  G ( s ) s  15s 2  50s  400

Type 0 (as no integration).

100  5 5
For step input, static error constant is Kp. K p  lim Ge ( s )  
s 0  400 4
1 1
Negative value means the output step is larger e( )    4
than the input step. 1 K p 1 5
4
CEN455: Dr. Nassim Ammour 42