1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Control theory: block diagram, problem (detailed below)

  1. Sep 17, 2016 #1
    I´m taking a course on control engineering and I have a test next Tuesday so I need to study the basics which are: Laplace transform, simplification of block diagrams, and analysis of transient and steady state responses. Right now I am dealing with the second one.

    I know the basic rules of block diagram simplification and the specific case I want to deal in this thread is this one:

    Image taken from: http://www.msubbu.in/sp/ctrl/BD-Rules.htm

    In other words, the equivalent transfer function is the product of the feed-forward path divided by one plus the product of the transfer functions that make the loop.

    So I get stuck on this and the problem is that the author (the book is MODERN CONTROL ENGINEERING by KATSUHIKO OGATA 5th ed.) skipped steps explaining how to simplify this:

    This is the way the author simplified it:
    The author simplified from step c) to step d). The equivalent transfer function is not similar to what I get. I'll explain you what I did and I will compare the results:

    First of all let's start in step c). The blocks containing the transfer functions [itex]\frac{G_{1}G_{2}}{1-G_{1}G_{2}H_{1}}[/itex] and [itex]G_{3}[/itex] are in series, therefore the equivalent transfer function is [itex]\frac{G_{1}G_{2}G_{3}}{1-G_{1}G_{2}H_{1}}[/itex]. The reduced diagram is the following:
    Here's now where my problem starts. As far as I see the loop formed by the second-to right summation point, the transfer function [itex]\frac{G_{1}G_{2}G_{3}}{1-G_{1}G_{2}H_{1}}[/itex], and the transfer function [itex]\frac{H_{2}}{G_{1}}[/itex] are forming the negative feedback loop configuration, when I did it the result was not the same as the author's. Trust me, I actually did it and I would put the proof below but my computer is failing so don't insist please, I'm trying to understand this topic but I keep stuck so I would want someone to tell me what the author exactly did step by step.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 17, 2016 #2
    I mean, how did he actually simplify to that?
  4. Sep 18, 2016 #3
    $$Y=\frac{G_{1}G_{2}G_{3}}{1-G_{1}G_{2}H_{1}}X -




    You probably just mixed up a numerator and denominator somewhere

    edit: Earlier I had a '+' instead of '-' in that first equation. Fixed!
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2016
  5. Sep 18, 2016 #4
    • Poster has been reminded not to post in all capital letters (and post has been fixed)
    Please someone answer. I have an exam of this on Tuesday. Please, I'm desperate.

    I find this example everywhere and everyone skips the same damn steps. Please, I'm tired of getting stuck and confused. I did this following the definition of negative feedback, and I got the result I am showing in the photo which is completely different, and my teacher will just give us thirty minutes for the exam and I can't waste too much time with long steps.

    Please I need help. If I can't even do this simple problem, who thinks I'm going to do harder problems?

    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 21, 2016
  6. Sep 18, 2016 #5
    Take a deep breath. This part that you did was unnecessary.


    It's easier to simply eliminate the term ##\frac{1}{1-G_{1}G_{2}H_{1}}## from the numerator and denominator like so:


    Does that make it more clear?
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2016
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted