i
Assignment 2
Loopshaping Design for Antenna Azimuth
Control
docsity.com
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Loopshaping Design for Antenna Azimuth Control-Control System-Assignment Solved, Exercises of Control Systems Analysis
This assignment is solved by me. It was submitted to Prof. Anup Kodi at Alliance University for Control System. Its main points are: Loopshaping, Design, Antenna, Azimuth, COntrol, Frequency, Sensor, Noise, Sensitivity, Transient, Behavior
Typology: Exercises
2011/2012
1 / 26
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Related documents
Partial preview of the text
Download Loopshaping Design for Antenna Azimuth Control-Control System-Assignment Solved and more Exercises Control Systems Analysis in PDF only on Docsity!
i
Assignment 2
Loopshaping Design for Antenna Azimuth
Control
ii
Table of Contents
1. First Design ........................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Second Design ....................................................................................................................................... 9
3. A Bad design ....................................................................................................................................... 17
Chapter 1. First Design
Chapter 1. First Design
Chapter 1. First Design
Chapter 1. First Design
Chapter 1. First Design
Chapter 2. Second Design
In first design, we put more emphasis on control energy consuption, hence a small T after a small
frequency range. This had resulted into a small control signal. however, a disadvantage was less
attenuation of disturbance and sluggish response. Now, we would like to pay more emphsis to
disturbance attenuation, i.e., we would like to keep the sensitivity smaller over a wider range of
frequencies. This would result into larger bandwith, which in turn means a large control energy, faster
response. As we know from the waterbed effect, that compression of sensitivity at some frequencies will
result into a peak at other frequencies, hence we also expect a larger overshoot.
Zero/pole/gain: 10 (s+0.1)
s (s+0.01) (s+2) Zero/pole/gain: 100 (s+0.1)^
(s+0.01) (s+2) Zero/pole/gain: 10 (s+0.1)
(s+0.1018) (s^2 + 1.908s + 9.826) Zero/pole/gain: s (s+2) (s+0.01)
(s+0.1018) (s^2 + 1.908s + 9.826)
Chapter 2. Second Design
Chapter 2. Second Design
Chapter 2. Second Design
Chapter 2. Second Design
Chapter 3. A Bad design
In last section, we tries to improve the disturbance attenuation property of the control system. We could
have compressed the sensitivy at some frequencies using the following loopgain. However, as it is
apparent from the complementary sensitivity function that its magnitude is not 1 at lower frequencies, it
means that there will be a tracking problem with this design. However, the disturbance attenuation will
be achieved, as expected.
Zero/pole/gain: 10 (s+0.1)
s (s+1) (s+2) Zero/pole/gain: 100 (s+0.1)^
(s+1) (s+2) Zero/pole/gain: 10 (s+0.1)
(s+0.08509) (s^2 + 2.915s + 11.75) Zero/pole/gain: s (s+1) (s+2)
(s+0.08509) (s^2 + 2.915s + 11.75)