How Do Settling Time and Overshoot Change as System Gain Increases to Infinity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MathematicalPhysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on analyzing the settling time and overshoot of the transfer function H(s) = P(s)/(1 + C(s)P(s)) as the gain m approaches infinity. The transfer function components are defined as P(s) = 20/((s^2 - 2s + 9)(s + 100)) and C(s) = m(s + 40). As m increases, the system's response simplifies to H(s) ≈ 1/C(s), leading to an exponential decay response with no overshoot. The settling time can be calculated using the equation t_s ≈ -ln(0.05)/40, resulting in a finite settling time despite the infinite gain.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of transfer functions and their components
  • Familiarity with settling time and overshoot calculations
  • Knowledge of the root locus method in control systems
  • Basic concepts of Bode plots and frequency response
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the root locus method for analyzing system stability
  • Learn how to compute settling time using exponential decay functions
  • Explore Bode plot analysis for control system frequency response
  • Investigate the implications of infinite gain on system behavior
USEFUL FOR

Control system engineers, students studying feedback systems, and anyone involved in analyzing system dynamics and stability in engineering applications.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
1. Homework Statement + the attempt at solution
I have the next transfer function:

H(s)=\frac{P(s)}{1+C(s)P(s)}

where P(s)=\frac{20}{(s^2-2s+9)(s+100)}

C(s)=m(s+40)

Now I want to find the settling time and overshoot of H(s) as m\rightarrow \infty to whithin 5 percent accuracy.

Now what I thought when m\rightarrow \infty H(s)\approx \frac{1}{C(s)}.

So basically in this case the quadratic equation (in the notation of next webpage:
http://wikis.lib.ncsu.edu/index.php/Second_Order_Dynamics) is:

s^2+(-2s+20ms)+(9+800m)

Is this right or am I just rambling nonsense here, I am lost here.



Homework Equations


I know that when we have the Quadratic ploynomial in the denominator of G(s)=P(s)C(s) s.t:
s^2+2\zeta \omega_n s +\omega_n ^2

then the settling time is given by:

t_s \approx \frac{3}{\zeta \omega_n}

and the overshoot is given by:

\sigma = exp(\frac{-\zeta \pi}{\sqrt{1-\zeta^2}})

Any hints or advice are welcomed and much appreciated.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you familiar with the root locus method? It describes the path the roots take when a single parameter, like m, is varied. I would need to do a little review before giving a better answer but maybe this will get you started.
 
Yes I know about the RL.

I am not sure how to calculate the overshoot and settling time here, though I know that I need to look at the Bode graph of \frac{1}{m(s+40)}

And I know that the frequency that the asymptote to the the magnitude of the above expression intersects the \omega axis is given by: \omega= 40.

Other than that, I am not sure how to procceed, any advice?
 
My reaction is to agree with you that as m → ∞, H(s) = 1/C(S) = 1/m(s+40).

The impulse response to this H(s) is simply (1/m)exp(-40t). The step response is simply (1/m)[1 - exp(-40t)]. In neither case is there any overshoot. So I am as confused as you ... :smile:
 
And what of the settling time of 1/C(s)?

Thank you for your help.
 
MathematicalPhysicist said:
And what of the settling time of 1/C(s)?

Thank you for your help.

Since the output is an exponential decay you can compute settling time depending on your definition of "settling time". For example, if the input is a step function, and "settling time" ts is defined as 95% of "final" value, then you solve for ts from 1 - exp(-40ts) = 0.95.
 
OK, thanks.

Then the overshoot is zero.
 
The problem with m→∞ is that the response goes to zero. So you can't let m→∞. Maybe you can say m becomes large enough that it dominates the response. Then I do agree with what you have been saying. You can call the (s+100) pole insignificant as I think you did or you could do this, which is another way to deal with these sorts of boundary case problems:

0=1+C(s)P(s)=s^3+98s^2+(20m-191)s+(900+800m)

Making m large can simplify this by making most terms too small to be counted. Dividing by m yields this:

0=\frac{1}{m}(s^3+98s^2-191s+900)+20s+800\approx s+40

This means you have a single pole response as you found.

Your root equation can be written in the standard form with the parameter m in the right place for root locus:

1+C(s)P(s)=1+m\frac{20(s+40)}{(s^2-2s+9)(s+100)}=1+mQ(s)

The root locus method says as m begins at 0 and approaches ∞, the roots of this equation begin at the poles of Q(s) and end at the zeroes of Q(s). Q(s) has two zeroes at ∞ and one zero at -40. It has three poles, one at -100 and two complex conjugate ones. The conclusion from root locus is that with m→∞, there will be two roots at ∞ and one at -40. The finite root is (s+40) as found above.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
94
Views
12K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K