Drawing the step response of a second order system

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around drawing the step response of two second-order systems, G1 and G2, represented by their transfer functions. Participants explore the implications of system parameters on the step response, particularly focusing on the presence of zeros and poles.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how to represent the step response in standard form and note discrepancies in coefficients between G1 and G2.
  • There is a discussion about the effect of the zero at -4/3 on the overshoot of G1's step response, with some participants questioning the definition and implications of this overshoot.
  • One participant suggests considering the impact of changing the location of the zero and its proximity to the poles, indicating that this relationship affects the system's response.
  • Another participant provides a formal method for obtaining the step response, including multiplying by 1/s and performing a partial fraction expansion.
  • Some participants mention the importance of the damping ratio in determining the step response characteristics.
  • There is a contention regarding the significance of the zero's effect on overshoot, with differing opinions on whether it is a critical factor or an overemphasis by instructors.
  • One participant highlights that the total response includes contributions from both the step response and the derivative of the step response, which is influenced by the zero's position relative to the poles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the importance of the zero's effect on overshoot, with some arguing it is significant while others suggest it may be overstated. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to analyze the step response of the systems.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for careful consideration of the definitions and relationships between poles and zeros, as well as the potential for pole/zero cancellation affecting system behavior. There are also references to specific mathematical expressions and transformations that may require clarification.

Ortix
Messages
63
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I have to draw the step response of the following two systems.
G1 = (4+3s)/(s^2+4s+4)
G2 = 3/(s^2+4s+4)

So I started to draw the step response of the second system first. It has to be in the funky standard form:
<br /> \frac{ω<sup>2</sup>}{s<sup>2</sup> + 2ζωs + ω<sup>2</sup>}<br />

EDIT:
Seems like the above doesn't work..

2)/(s2 + 2ζωs + ω2)
Problem is that 4 =/= 3 ;) So I'm not sure how to go about fixing that..

Furthermore, I have NO idea how to even do the first system, G1.

In the solutions they just wrote the following:
G1 has a slight overshoot due to the zero at -4/3
4/(s^2+4s+4) + 3s/(s^2+4s+4)

That is exactly what they wrote. Now I'm curious as to WHY there is an overshoot just because the zero is -4/3? What is the definition for that?

So how would I go about solving this problem?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ortix said:
G1 = (4+3s)/(s^2+4s+4)
G2 = 3/(s^2+4s+4)

So I started to draw the step response of the second system first. It has to be in the funky standard form:

2)/(s2 + 2ζωs + ω2)
Problem is that 4 =/= 3 ;) So I'm not sure how to go about fixing that..

What about multiplying by a constant?

Furthermore, I have NO idea how to even do the first system, G1.

In the solutions they just wrote the following:
G1 has a slight overshoot due to the zero at -4/3
4/(s^2+4s+4) + 3s/(s^2+4s+4)

s F(s) <-> df/dt

That is exactly what they wrote. Now I'm curious as to WHY there is an overshoot just because the zero is -4/3? What is the definition for that?

The question wants you to think about what happens as you change the location of the zero (better to write the zero as 4s+a to have the correct form immediately). Something special happens at (4s+8) but what you should get out of it is what happens if it's close to the poles, close but not too close, and what happens if it's far away.
 
Last edited:
Ortix said:

Homework Statement


I have to draw the step response of the following two systems.
G1 = (4+3s)/(s^2+4s+4)
G2 = 3/(s^2+4s+4)

So I started to draw the step response of the second system first. It has to be in the funky standard form:
<br /> \frac{ω<sup>2</sup>}{s<sup>2</sup> + 2ζωs + ω<sup>2</sup>}<br />

EDIT:
Seems like the above doesn't work..
Don't use the superscript and subscript keys in a tex expression. TeX also has built in capability for Greek letters. Do it like this:$$
\frac{\omega^2}{s^2 + 2\zeta\omega s + \omega^2}
$$Right click on that expression to see the TeX.
 
The formal way to get step response is to multiply your G(s) by 1/s, then do a partial fraction expansion of the resulting G(s)/s and inverse-transform each term.

Better yet, get a good table of transforms.

You might have noticed that s^2 + 4s + 4 = (s+2)^2.

Also remember that if f(t) → F(s), then
df/dt → sF(s) - f(0+) but for transfer functions initial conditions are ignored by definition.
Also, ∫f(t')dt' from 0 to t → F(s)/s.

I would not spend too much time wondering why the zero creates overshoot. Probably a snow-job by your prof.
 
Last edited:
rude man said:
The formal way to get step response is to multiply your G(s) by 1/s, then do a partial fraction expansion of the resulting G(s)/s and inverse-transform each term.

The step response for a system in standard second order form can be determined from the coefficients. The damping ratio is particularly important.

I would not spend too much time wondering why the zero creates overshoot. Probably a snow-job by your prof.

Not so. The unexpected bump in the step response is easily seen by noticing the total response is the sum of the usual step response plus some fraction of the derivative of the step response. The derivative comes from s*F(s) and its origin is the zero. The relative size of the derivative term depends on how close the zero is to the poles of the second order system. A special situation occurs when the zero is equal to one of the poles, in which case you get pole/zero cancellation and a first order system will result.

A lot of system design is focussed on where the poles are and ignore where the zeroes are, which you can't always do. In control system design, a condition might be to have the zeroes far enough in the left side of the plane while designing the dominant poles so that the response you are trying to get is not changed by the zeroes.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
10K