Order & Poles: Basics of Control Engineering

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the classification of systems in control engineering, specifically focusing on the concept of system order and the significance of poles in the transfer function. Participants explore the definitions and implications of these classifications in the context of system response and design.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the classification of systems based on the number of poles, questioning the rationale behind this approach.
  • Another participant clarifies that the order of the system refers to the total number of poles, both at the origin and elsewhere.
  • A third participant supports this clarification and elaborates on the importance of the transfer function's format, noting that the presence of poles at the origin has significant implications for system response and design.
  • A later reply indicates that a participant has resolved their confusion between the concepts of order and type of the system.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definition of system order as the total number of poles, but there is some uncertainty regarding the implications of this classification and its aesthetic presentation in transfer functions.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the definitions of order and type may not be fully articulated, and the discussion does not resolve the broader implications of pole placement on system behavior.

dhruv.tara
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


In control engg. we define the order of the system as (or atleast as far as I have understood as) Nu/s^m*(s+a)(s+b)...

I cannot understand the base for such classification? Why are we classifying systems based on the number of poles they have on origin?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the order of the system is the number of poles (at the origin and elsewhere).
 
CEL is correct.

Something to add however is the way you have written the transfer function - it's done for a purpose. In controls seeing how many poles are at the origin, you're s^m part of the denomenator, has many ramifications that can be crucial when interpreting a system response or designing for one. So in seeing, and perhaps formatting a transfer function in this fashion, it is an aesthetic move but can make things easier.
 
thanks guys I was confusing myself with the order and type of the system... good I could get that clear just in time :)
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K