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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the analysis of a transfer function H(s) as the gain parameter m approaches infinity. Participants explore the implications for settling time and overshoot, focusing on theoretical aspects of control systems and dynamic response characteristics.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a transfer function and seeks to determine the settling time and overshoot as m approaches infinity, questioning their understanding of the implications of this limit.
  • Another participant introduces the root locus method, suggesting it may help in understanding how the roots of the system change with varying m.
  • A participant acknowledges familiarity with the root locus but expresses uncertainty about calculating overshoot and settling time, mentioning the need to analyze the Bode graph of a related expression.
  • One participant agrees that as m approaches infinity, H(s) simplifies to 1/C(s), leading to an exponential response without overshoot, expressing confusion about the implications.
  • Another participant discusses how to compute settling time based on the definition used, particularly in the context of a step input.
  • A later reply raises a concern that allowing m to approach infinity leads to a response that goes to zero, suggesting instead to consider m as sufficiently large to dominate the response.
  • This participant also provides a method for simplifying the equation by dividing by m, leading to a single pole response, and discusses the implications for the root locus analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of letting m approach infinity, with some agreeing on the simplifications that arise while others caution against the assumption that the response behaves as expected in that limit. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact behavior of settling time and overshoot under these conditions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their assumptions about the behavior of the system as m increases, particularly regarding the significance of certain poles and the definition of settling time.

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 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
94
Views
13K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K