Department of Electrical Engineering

University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore

EE-340L Control Systems

Spring 2023

Experiment No. 5

Root Locus Controller Design – Part A

CLOs Covered : CLO1 and CLO 2

Objective
The objective of this lab is to introduce the root locus, show how to create it using MATLAB, and demonstrate how to
design feedback controllers that satisfy certain performance criteria through the use of the root locus.

Reference Material
Modern Control Engineering 5th Edition by Katsuhiko Ogata

Resources Required
MATLAB Version 2019 and above

Introduction
The root locus of an (open-loop) transfer function is a plot of the locations (locus) of all possible closed-loop poles
with some parameter, often a proportional gain , varied between 0 and .
The figure below shows a unity-feedback architecture, but the procedure is identical for any open-loop transfer
function , even if some elements of the open-loop transfer function are in the feedback path.

The closed-loop transfer function in this case is:

and thus the poles of the closed-loop system are values of such that .

If we write , then this equation can be rewritten as:

Let be the order of and be the order of (the order of the polynomial corresponds to the highest power
of ).

We will consider all positive values of . In the limit as , the poles of the closed-loop system are solutions
of (poles of ). In the limit as , the poles of the closed-loop system are solutions
of (zeros of ).
No matter our choice of , the closed-loop system has poles, where is the number of poles of the open-loop
transfer function . The root locus then has branches, each branch starts at a pole of and approaches
a zero of . If has more poles than zeros (as is often the case), and we say that has zeros at
infinity. In this case, the limit of as is zero. The number of zeros at infinity is , the number of
open-loop poles minus the number of open-loop zeros, and is the number of branches of the root locus that go to
"infinity" (asymptotes).
Since the root locus consists of the locations of all possible closed-loop poles, the root locus helps us choose the value
of the gain to achieve the type of performance we desire. If any of the selected poles are on the right-half complex
plane, the closed-loop system will be unstable. The poles that are closest to the imaginary axis have the greatest
influence on the closed-loop response, so even if a system has three or four poles, it may still behave similar to a
second- or a first-order system, depending on the location(s) of the dominant pole(s).
Task 1
Consider an open-loop system which has a transfer function of

a- Create the root locus plot.

b- Let's assume our design criteria are 5% overshoot and 1 second rise time. Calculate damping ratio ( ) and natural
frequency ( ). Use the command sgrid(zeta,wn) to plot lines of constant damping ratio and natural frequency.

c- Highlight what part of the root locus, which possible closed-loop pole locations, satisfy the given requirements. Is a
proportional controller enough to move the poles to the desired region?
d- Use the rlocfind command in MATLAB to choose the desired poles on the locus. Verify the selection of K by
plotting a step response. The response should have an overshoot less than 5% and a rise time less than 1 second.
e- Another way to complete what was done above is to use the interactive Control System Designer tool within
MATLAB. Use the command controlSystemDesigner(plant)to open it. Design the same controller using this
tool.

Task 2: Cruise Control

The transfer function model for the cruise control problem is given below. Please see experiment 2 for the derivation.

Let's assume that the parameters of the system are as follows.

• (m) vehicle mass 1000 kg

• (b) damping coefficient 50 N.s/m
• (r) reference speed 10 m/s

The block diagram of such a unity feedback system is shown below.

Performance specifications are as follows.
• Rise time < 5 sec
• Overshoot < 10%
• Steady-state error < 2%

a- Generate a root-locus plot and indicate an acceptable region on the root-locus.

b- Find a gain to place the closed-loop poles in the desired region and plot the closed-loop step response. By choosing
a proper gain, the rise time and the overshoot criteria will be met; however, a steady-state error of more than 10%
remains.

c- To reduce the steady-state error, a lag controller will be added to the system. The transfer function of the lag controller
is:

The pole and the zero of a lag controller need to be placed close together. In this way, the steady-state error will be
reduced by a factor of . For these reasons, let equal 0.3 and equal 0.03. Plot the root locus and select a
new loop gain so that the poles are about -0.4. As you can see, the steady-state error has been reduced to near
zero. The overshoot is a result of the zero added in the lag controller. All of the design criteria have been met and no
further iterations are needed.

Task 3 DC Motor Speed Control

From the experiment 2, the dynamic equations in the Laplace domain and the open-loop transfer function of the DC
Motor are the following.

The structure of the control system has the form shown in the figure below.

For a 1-rad/sec step reference, the design criteria are the following.
 ▪ Settling time less than 2 seconds
▪ Overshoot less than 5%
▪ Steady-state error less than 1%

a- Represent the system transfer function in MATLAB.

b- Use the Control System Designer graphical user interface to meet overshoot and settling time criteria with the
proportional controller.
c- Add a lag compensator to eliminate steady state error requirement. A lag compensator is one type of controller
known to be able to reduce steady-state error. However, we must be careful in our design to not increase the settling
time too much. Let's first try adding a lag compensator of the form given below.

Use the Control System Designer to design the lag compensator.

c- Find a loop gain with lag compensator to meet the design criteria.

Task 4 DC Motor Position Control

From the experiment 2, the open-loop transfer function of the DC Motor is given as follows.

The structure of the control system has the form shown in the figure below.

With a 1-radian step reference, the design criteria are the following.

▪ Settling time less than 0.040 seconds

▪ Overshoot less than 16%
▪ No steady-state error, even in the presence of a step disturbance input

a- Plot the root locus of the system.

b- Construct the reduced transfer function to neglect the non dominant pole without affecting the steady-state behavior
of the system. The correct way to neglect this pole in order to maintain its steady-state contribution is to keep the DC
gain of the transfer function the same, as follows.

Show that the other poles have not been affected. Draw the root locus of the reduced system. If you examine the
original root locus near the origin, it would closely approximate the locus of the reduced transfer function shown above.

c- Plot the root locus by adding a unity gain integrator. From this root locus we can see that the closed-loop system
under integral control is never stable, therefore, a different controller must be employed.

d- Now, let's modify the integral controller to a PI controller. Using PI instead of I control adds a zero to the open-loop
system. We'll place this zero at s = -20. The zero must lie between the open-loop poles of the system in this case so
that the closed-loop system will be stable. Draw the root locus of the system. We have managed to stabilize the system
and achieve zero steady-state error to a constant disturbance, but the system is still not fast enough.

e- In order to pull the root locus further to the left, to make it faster, we need to place a second open-loop zero, resulting
in a PID controller. Determine the position of these zeros and plot the root locus and step response.

Laboratory Performance Rubrics

Excellent (100%) Good (80%) Satisfactory (60%) Needs Improvement (0%
– 40%)

Execution of Properly done the experiment Experiment results had Experiment results had Did not try to perform the
Lab Tasks and results shown to the minor issues but corrected issues and could not correct experiment, Participation
instructor. Used time well in lab on its own. Used time well. own its own. Did the lab but was minimal, or student
and focused attention on the Stayed focused on the did not appear very was hostile about
experiment. Routinely provides experiment most of the interested. Sometimes participating. Rarely
CLO 2 useful ideas when participating time. Usually provides provides useful ideas when provides useful ideas
in the group and in classroom useful ideas when participating in the group and in when participating in the
5 Marks per discussion. Actively looks for participating in the group classroom discussion. A group and discussion.
Sub Task and suggests solutions to and in classroom satisfactory group member who May refuse to participate.
problems. discussion. does what is required.

Report Well defined problem with Well defined problem Well defined problem with Poorly defined problem
clear cut objectives and with clear objectives and clear objectives but not so with un-clear objectives
methodology methodology appropriate methodology and methodology
Results are relevant and Results are relevant but Results are somewhat Results are neither
CLO 1 presented in appropriate not presented in relevant but not presented in relevant nor presented
manner. appropriate manner appropriate manner appropriately
5 Marks Work is not summarised
Work is well summarised and Work is well summarised Work is summarised and
and concluded concluded and concluded properly
concluded

Viva Well prepared with related Fairly prepared with Gone through the related Didn’t prepare the
theory concepts and related theory concepts theory concepts and could related theory concepts
CLO 1 accurately answered all and accurately not answer some questions. and could not answer
the questions. answered most of the questions.
5 Marks most of the questions.

Discipline Came in the lab in-time with Came late (within 5 min) Came late (more than 5 Came late (more than
full preparation, used time with full preparation, min), not properly prepared, 15 min), not
CLO 1 well and focused attention on used time well and did the lab but did not prepared at all, did
the experiment. Stayed in stayed focused on the appear very interested. A not look interested in
5 Marks seat and got up for a experiment most of the satisfactory student who does lab work, did not try to
specific lab-related reason, time. Stayed in seat and what is required. Got out of
took care of lab-related focus the attention
got up for a specific seat and wander around. toward lab task. Got out
business and sat down Had to be reminded to clean
lab-related reason. of seat and wander
right away. Kept the working Good job on cleaning up working area and around. Chased others,
area clean and in proper up working area and careless about the ran, or played
order. Lab is carried out handling the equipment use. Lab is carried
with full attention to around. Had to be asked
equipment. Lab is out with some attention to by teacher to keep
relevant safety procedures & generally carried relevant safety work area clean, did
directions. out with attention to procedures & directions. not clean up area or
relevant safety refused to clean up.
procedures & directions. Safety procedures were
ignored and did not
follow directions.