lag compensation design assumptions?

I have a plant, Gp = 100/s(1+s/100)^2

I need to compensate this plant using lag compensation to give a phase margin of 45 and a Kv=200...

So I know that my compensator will be of form:

Gc = Kc(1+s/b)/(1+s/a).

I know Kc = 2.

Now, I made some assumptions:

a < b < c < 100, where c = crossover frequency in rad/s and a, b are respective frequencies at which the lag compensator comes into affect. I solve a system of 3 equations from:

|GcGp|= 1 @ c

phase GcGp @c = -3pi/4 (using Taylor series arctan approximations)

and

d/dw[phase] @ c = 0.

Solving the 3 equations, I came up with nonsense results-- ie values for a,b, and c that violated the assumed relationships between a,b,c,100. So, I know the assumption is wrong--but I do not understand how one knows what the 'right' assumption is regarding the lag compensation parameters and the cross over frequency and the double pole at 100.

Yes, this is a homework -- and I'm not looking for a direct answer--but rather a hint in knowing--or rather how to know what the relationships of a,b, c and 100 are? Or can this only be done by trial and error? Tim Wescott has been quite helpful in the past with giving me clues--and hoping he or someone else here will again. My thanks in advance to any/all.

My next best guess is a < c < b < 100-- but I REALLY don't want to solve 3 more nasty simultaneuos equations again only to discover the assumption is bad. How do you determine a 'best' assumption? My original assumption was modeled after an in class example the teacher worked.

Thanks,

Bo

Reply to
Bo
Loading thread data ...

Your instructor uses different notation than I do, so I'm not sure what the 'Kv' means. Illuminate me, and maybe I'll be more help.

Since you're using approximations for the phase contributions, it may be a good idea to get things close with a Bode plot -- you can use nearly any math package, including pencil and paper. Once you find a combination that's close, _then_ use your approximations to figure out the 'exact' answer.

Reply to
Tim Wescott

You need to calcuate the closed loop transfer function (CLTF) T(s)=Gp(s)*Gc(s)/(1+Gp(s)*Gc(s)) I do this symbollically using Mathcad. Then one must find the a and b that meet your requirements. I use a minimization package the minimizes the error between my CLTF and the desired response or Bode plot.

Yes, the minimization function uses a lot of trial and error but it is very smart about picking values for a and b.

What is Kv?

Peter Nachtwey

Reply to
Peter Nachtwey

Dnia 01-03-2007 o 23:54:19 Peter Nachtwey napisa³(a):

(...)

I'm almost sure that:

1/Kv = e [velocity steady error] (when input is a ramp signal) describes ability to follow the ramp signal

e(t)lim't->0' = lim 's->0' s*R*1/(1+openloopTF) where R=1/s^2 is input e(t)lim't->0' = lim 's->0' s/s^2 * 1/(1+openloopTF) e(t)lim't->0' = lim 's->0' 1/(s*(1+openloopTF)) e(t)lim't->0' = lim 's->0' 1/(s+s*openloopTF)

e=1/Kv Kv = lim 's->0' (s*openloopTF)

I hope it looks human readible.

Reply to
Mikolaj

Dnia 01-03-2007 o 23:54:19 Peter Nachtwey napisa³(a):

(...)

Not necessarily. There are very simple procedures based on open-loop bode plot. Of course you can then design phase margin only and overshoot will be the sweet mistery without calculating CLTF.

Procedure (simplified and without comments):

assumption: LAG (PI) form C=(1+aTs)/(1+Ts) and a

Reply to
Mikolaj

Thanks to all who responded.

Yes, Mikolaj had the meaning of Kv correct-- ie the velocity constant. I'll followup to his post...

Bo

Reply to
Bo

Yes-- but trying to solve by hand--without a lot of trial and error--is my objective. Solving with matlab is easy :)

Velocity constant

Bo

Reply to
Bo

The method our prof has outlined, while an estimate because of arctan approximations, is a 'more' exact method than guessing how much additional phase one needs for the CLTF. We actually design for max (d/dw = 0) of the arctan equation of the open loop transfer function equation. It is interesting that this procedure gives pretty good phase margin results--+/-

3 degrees--but that the % overshoot is 30% higher than the approximations would suggest.

Turns out I made math errors that were giving me the incongruent answers/assumptions. Solving the system of 3 non-linear equations has proven to be the hardest thing to do by hand. Using MATLAB, it's a piece of cake--but no matlab/laptops allowed on midterms :(

Your 10 times higher statement in step 4-- proved to be true--although that generality has yet to show up in class lectures...is this always true?

Thanks again to all who replied.

Bo

Reply to
Bo

Tim is right, except I would suggest always sketching a Bode Plot. Walking through the mathematics can lead to many dead ends/unrealistic solutions. Whereas the Bode plot is a really good way to get in a realistic neighborhood. Typically you can do a sketch in a short period of time.

Ray

Reply to
RRogers

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.