Abstract

This paper analyzes the first-order and first-order time-delayed systems control approaches, focusing mainly on unstable systems. First, it discusses asymmetries between the disturbance observer-based (DOB) control with decoupled tracking and the disturbance rejection responses, stressing applications to stable and unstable plants. The paper analyzes some DOB-based control solutions for unstable systems which do not use internal closed-loop stabilization. The novelty of the paper is thorough study accompanied with a comprehensive explanation of the differences between two distinct approaches: the transfer-function- and the closed-loop-based feedforward control approach from the point of view of control constraints. It is clearly illustrated that the main cause of instability of DOB-based approaches, applied to unstable systems, is given by their effort to impose on the system the unstable dynamics of the chosen nominal process model. It is also shown that the closed-loop stability of the DOB-based control, applied to the unstable systems, can be restored by using the supervising reference model control (RMC). The main novelty of the proposed approach is that its eliminates the mentioned stability problems while maintaining the full functionality of the chosen control structures. RMC has so far only been implemented for generating a setpoint feedforward signal. However, by generalization of this approach for disturbance rejection, the methodology of DOB design, based on nominal models, can be extended to the control of unstable systems. Without the use of disturbance reference models, the interactions of the master stabilizer with disturbance compensation cannot be eliminated. Without the internal stabilization, the stable transients can only be achieved by designing controllers based on stable models, instead of unstable ones. The existing modifications of DOB-based schemes for unstable plants, proposed in some references, are shown to lead to traditional Proportional-Integrative (PI) control, thus losing all the advantages over the PI controllers. In all the considered structures, the role of integrating models is also emphasized.

Highlights

  • The increase of computing power and functionality of industrial and embedded control solutions, together with the development of communication networks, leads to the explosion of automatic control applications in all areas of our lives

  • We have shown in the form of simple examples the two most important aspects in terms of integral and unstable systems

  • The primary difference in the approach to the control of stable and unstable systems by SDOB-based loops with decoupled dynamics according to Figure 3 is that, while in stable systems the highest performance achieved is tied to the highest possible matching between the controlled plant and its model, in unstable systems, the use of an unstable model inevitably leads to loop instability

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The increase of computing power and functionality of industrial and embedded control solutions, together with the development of communication networks, leads to the explosion of automatic control applications in all areas of our lives. After several modifications with gradually improved performance, the first dead-beat DTC applicable to all stable, integrative and unstable systems [3] was designed using the (sometime later introduced notion of) extended state observer (ESO) within the state-space approach In constrained control, it guaranteed time-suboptimal performance. The paper will suggest some ways to improve (correct) the mentioned designs In both DTC and PID control design, the use of a model-based approach has been extended. The term “internal model control” (IMC) was frequently used in the mentioned extended approach, where both, the PID control [14] or DOB-based control [15], can be applied besides the output disturbance reconstruction scheme proposed in Reference [16]. When augmented by the reference closed-loop model approach and the additional stabilizing controller, the IMC with DOB may be still maintaining full functionality, guaranteeing not just the stable closed-loop responses and providing the additional data about the acting disturbances

Problem Formulation
Feedforward Control
Stabilizing P Control
P Control as a Closed Loop Feedforward Implementation
Constrained Setpoint Feedforward Design
External and Internal Disturbances and Their Compensation
Decoupled Setpoint and Disturbance Feedforwards
Sample of Transient Responses
Explanation of Stability Problems
Setpoint and Disturbance Reference Model Control
Constrained Control with Discussion of Some Modifications Proposed
Generalization to Time Delayed Systems
Setpoint and Disturbance Reference Models
Proportional Gains for FOTD Systems
Conclusions and Future Work
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call