Can the u part of the matrix be written differently in state space analysis?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter phiby
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Matrix
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the representation of the input matrix 'u' in state space analysis as presented in "Control Engineering" by Ogata. Specifically, the user inquires whether the 'u' part can be expressed as [1/m 0]T instead of [0 1/m]T. The consensus is that while this alternative representation is possible, it necessitates swapping the first and second rows in all related matrices to maintain consistency in the equations derived from Eqn 3-20 and Eqn 3-18.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of state space representation in control systems
  • Familiarity with matrix operations and transformations
  • Knowledge of the equations presented in "Control Engineering" by Ogata
  • Basic concepts of control theory and system dynamics
NEXT STEPS
  • Review matrix multiplication and addition in the context of state space models
  • Study the derivation and implications of Eqn 3-20 and Eqn 3-18 in Ogata's text
  • Explore the effects of row swapping in matrix representations on system behavior
  • Investigate alternative representations of input matrices in control systems
USEFUL FOR

Control engineers, students of control systems, and anyone involved in state space analysis and matrix representations in engineering applications.

phiby
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
I posted this question in the engineering section, but didn't get any replies there - hence posting it here.

Below is a screen shot from state space analysis in "Control Engineering" by Ogata.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66943862@N06/6230432028/"

I am trying to get at Eqn 3-20 from Eqn 3-18.

Can't the u part of the matrix also be written as
[1/m 0]T instead of [0 1/m]T?

What's the rationale in choosing one over the other?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
phiby said:
I posted this question in the engineering section, but didn't get any replies there - hence posting it here.

Below is a screen shot from state space analysis in "Control Engineering" by Ogata.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66943862@N06/6230432028/"

I am trying to get at Eqn 3-20 from Eqn 3-18.

Can't the u part of the matrix also be written as
[1/m 0]T instead of [0 1/m]T?

What's the rationale in choosing one over the other?
It can, but only if you swap the first and the second row in all the other matrices as well. If you only do it to the last term as you suggest, then if you perform the matrix multiplication and matrix addition on the right-hand side of (3-20) you get two equations that are similar to (3-17) and (3-18) but have the term involving u in the one that looks like (3-17) instead of in the one that looks like (3-18).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fredrik said:
It can, but only if you swap the first and the second row in all the other matrices as well. If you only do it to the last term as you suggest, then if you perform the matrix multiplication and matrix addition on the right-hand side of (3-20) you get two equations that are similar to (3-17) and (3-18) but have the term involving u in the one that looks like (3-17) instead of in the one that looks like (3-18).


Yes, true. Stupid of me not to see that. Thank you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K