Call/WhatsApp: +1 914 416 5343

Instrumentation and Control/Assignment 2: Control

Instrumentation and Control/Assignment 2: Control

Intended Learning Outcomes assessed by this work
1. Understand the basic underpinning theory of linear continuous-time dynamical systems and be
able to simulate their behaviour;
2. Manipulate and solve differential equations using Laplace transforms and interpret the system
poles and zeros.
Hand-in date: 18 April 2016
Note that the Hand-in date is a ‘hard’ deadline, in the sense that if the coursework is handed in late
then a zero mark is awarded. You are encouraged to submit this coursework well in advance of the
deadline date.
Marks allocated
Question 1: 10 marks
Question 2: 20 marks
Question 3: 20 marks
Question 4: 20 marks
Question 5: 20 marks
Presentation: 10 marks
Coursework Submission
The completed coursework should be submitted, over the counter, to the Assignment Office before
16.00 hours on the deadline date. The coursework must include a printed bar-coded coversheet. The
bar-coded coversheets can be generated from NOVA, online assessments system, which can be
accessed by all students from
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 2 of 7
Please note that the work submitted should be your individual effort. The penalties for plagiarism
are severe. Evidence of plagiarism will be dealt with according to the rules and regulations outlined
in the Student Handbook (Faculty of Engineering and Computing).
Assessment Criteria
There are 100 marks in total for this assignment and a breakdown of these marks is provided in the
assignment details. Of these marks, 90 marks are for accuracy in the mathematics, clear logical
arguments, calculations and use of software packages (if appropriate). The remaining 10 marks are
for the general presentation.
Marks may be deducted for:
1. writing mathematics without suitable explanatory text (as a general rule, all mathematics
should be contained in proper, full sentences);
2. mathematical errors (including errors of notation);
3. poor proof-reading (for example, poor spelling, poor grammar, etc.);
4. poor readability, for example, confusing explanations, etc.;
5. not suitably commenting any computer software package commands.
Items 1 and 2 will normally lead to deductions from the marks for accuracy, whereas items 3-4 relate
to the presentation mark. (Suitable allowance will be made for students with a recognised disability
such as dyslexia.)
Typically, to obtain a first class mark (= 70%), the report should have few mathematical errors and all
work should be suitably explained. Similarly, to obtain a pass mark (= 40%), the report should
typically show evidence that the basic concepts are understood, but several errors and/ or lack of
proper explanations may be present. It should be understood that these are only typical cases and
that the marking scheme will determine the final mark obtained.
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 3 of 7
Question 1
a) Suppose ??(??) and ??(??) are the Laplace transforms of the reference ??(??) and system output ??(??)
respectively. If the blocks ??1, ??2, ??, ?? and ?? in Figure 1 are transfer functions in the Laplace variable
??, e.g. ??1(??), find the closed loop transfer function of the form ??(??)
(10 marks)
R(s) Y(s)


Figure 1: Linear time-invariant system
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 4 of 7
Question 2
a) For the closed loop system configuration in Figure 2, obtain an expression for the overall closed
loop transfer function
b) Hence or otherwise write down the closed loop characteristic equation
(2 marks)
c) Use the Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion to find the values of ?? for which the system is stable
(6 marks)
d) Sketch the root locus for this system and indicate the main points
(4 marks)
e) Use MATLAB to confirm your findings in part d)
(4 marks)

(?? + 1)
(?? – 1)(?? + 2)
Figure 2: Closed-loop transfer-function
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 5 of 7
Question 3
A system is configured as a negative unity feedback control system having a transfer function
??(??) =
(?? + 1)(?? + 4)
which is cascaded with a proportional controller having a gain ??.
a) With the gain ?? initially set to unity, determine the closed loop transfer function and calculate the
system poles.
(3 marks)
b) With the gain ?? set to unity apply a unit step at time ?? = 0 (assuming zero initial conditions). Use
MATLAB to obtain the step response. Comment on the form of the response i.e. describe the key
features (Hint: relate this to the inverse Laplace transform of ??(??).
.(6 marks)
c) In an attempt to reduce the steady state error, the gain ?? is increased to 10. With this value of ??
repeat steps a) and b). Check your results using MATLAB.
(6 marks)
d) The proportional controller is now replaced by a proportional plus integral controller. You are now
required to produce a closed-loop system response which is critically damped (i.e. fastest response
without overshoot). Determine the controller gains required. Implement the controller in MATLAB
and demonstrate that the response is as required.
(5 marks)
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 6 of 7
Question 4
The system given by the transfer function in Question 3 is now configured in state space form
??? = ?? ?? + ?? ??
?? = ??
where ?? is the system matrix, ?? is the input vector, ?? is the output vector, ?? and ?? are the system
input and output, respectively, and ?? is the system state vector.
(a) By defining ??1 = ?? and ??2 = ??? write down the corresponding phase variable canonical form.
(4 marks)
(b) The system is now configured for state variable feedback in order to control the dynamic
behaviour of the system, i.e. ?? = ??
???? where ??
is a feedback vector containing controller gains.
Making use of modal control the slow eigenvalue is to be relocated such that its response is now 10
times faster. Determine the feedback vector to achieve this response, and demonstrate the
performance using MATLAB.
(6 marks)
(c) Explain what is meant by observability and controllability. Show that the system is both
observable and controllable using the modal matrix method.
(3 marks)
(d) Write down the Kalman observability and controllability test matrices, hence or otherwise
confirm your results in (c).
(3 marks)
(e) Work back from the state space representation obtained in (a) to show how a transfer function
representation can be obtained. Hence or otherwise write down the open-loop characteristic
equation and show that the eigenvalues of the system matrix ?? are the same as the system poles.
(4 marks)
Control Coursework J. E. Trollope
Page 7 of 7
Question 5
In the UK, research is being undertaking on the feasibility of railway carriages coupling and
uncoupling whilst on the move. The new railway concept is to increase the railway network capacity,
connectivity and to reduce the cost of travel and carbon emissions.
As an engineer your task is to design a control system for the future frontal structure of the railway
carriage. It is envisaged this new design will be transformed from today’s passive design to an active
design, with a stiffness controller to deal with all possible scenarios. The premise of the future
frontal structure is to absorb the collision energy between the coupling trains in an effective manner
to minimise the jerk (change in acceleration) experienced by the occupants on-board the carriages.
The control system must be designed for the following two scenarios:
1) A train consisting of three carriages coupling onto a train consisting of 1 carriage with a
speed difference of 5kmh (each carriages mass is 43 tonnes)
2) A train consisting of five carriages coupling onto a train consisting of 1 carriage with a speed
different of 7khm (each carriage mass is 43 tonnes)
In both cases the front of the larger train couples up to the rear of the single carriage.
You may wish to consider the following points:
? The energy resulting from the coupling action can be determined by using the conservation
of momentum and energy equations
? Based on the passive design case, the coupling energy is distributed between the carriages
based on the mass ratios i.e. three carriages mass versus one carriage mass (3:1) as in
scenario one
o Is this desirable? No. Thus, the need the active design of the frontal structure
? The use of a mass spring damper model for the frontal structure of the railway carriage
o This is used to capture the displacement (y-axis) versus time (x-axis) of the coupling
mechanism and further possible simulation models e.g. force versus deformation
(relating to work done/delta energy)
? The use of feedback control to achieve desired outcome
? List any assumptions made
? The use of MATLAB to simulate the design
This open ended question is designed for you to demonstrate your understanding of the control
lectures by applying your knowledge to a realistic control system design problem. We are not
expecting completed designs – rather a good understanding of the control problem will achieve high
(20 marks)

Leave a Reply