Compensator design for non-minimum phase systems

Thread starter maverick280857
Start date Aug 23, 2008
Tags

Compensator Design Phase Systems

AI Thread Summary

For designing a compensator for open loop non-minimum phase systems, several approaches can be considered, including the use of complementary root locus techniques. When the desired closed loop poles are specified, employing negative root locus is a common practice, particularly when a negative gain is involved. This method helps in achieving stability and desired transient response despite the non-minimum phase characteristics. Additionally, other design methods like pole placement and frequency domain techniques may also be relevant. Effective compensator design requires careful consideration of the system's dynamics and the desired performance criteria.

Aug 23, 2008

maverick280857

Hi

Given an open loop non-minimum phase transfer function, what in general are the approaches preferable to design a compensator for it? Suppose one is given the location of the desired closed loop poles, is it a standard practice to use complementary root locus (or negative root locus) for design, assuming a negative value of the gain?

Thanks.

Engineering news on Phys.org

Aug 24, 2008

maverick280857

Anyone?

Thread '3-terminal device external modeling'

Very basic question. Consider a 3-terminal device with terminals say A,B,C. Kirchhoff Current Law (KCL) and Kirchhoff Voltage Law (KVL) establish two relationships between the 3 currents entering the terminals and the 3 terminal's voltage pairs respectively. So we have 2 equations in 6 unknowns. To proceed further we need two more (independent) equations in order to solve the circuit the 3-terminal device is connected to (basically one treats such a device as an unbalanced two-port...

View full post »

Thread 'When 50,000 volts go through a wire at 5,000,000 FPS - The Slow Mo Guy'

View full post »

Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'

I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...

View full post »