State Space Analyis - the 'B' matrix

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the transition from equations 3-17 and 3-18 to equation 3-20 in state space analysis as presented in "Control Engineering" by Ogata. The user queries the representation of the input matrix 'u' and whether it can be expressed as [1/m 0]T instead of [0 1/m]T. It is established that equations 3-20, 3-17, and 3-18 represent the same set of simultaneous equations in matrix form, emphasizing the importance of understanding matrix multiplication in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of state space representation in control systems
  • Familiarity with matrix multiplication principles
  • Knowledge of simultaneous equations in engineering
  • Basic concepts of control theory as outlined in "Control Engineering" by Ogata
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of state space models from differential equations
  • Learn about matrix representation of control systems
  • Explore the implications of different input matrix configurations in state space analysis
  • Review examples of state space transformations in control engineering
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in control engineering, particularly those focusing on state space analysis and matrix representations in dynamic systems.

phiby
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
Below is a screen shot from state space analysis in "Control Engineering" by Ogata.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66943862@N06/6230432028/"

I am trying to get at 3-20 from 3-18.

Can't the u part of the matrix also be written as
[1/m 0]T instead of [0 1/m]T?

What's the rationale in choosing one over the other?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There is nothing to do to get to 3-20...if you got to 3-18, you are already at 3-20...well, if you got to 3-17 AND 3-18, you are already at 3-20.

3-20 is exactly the same as 3-17 and 3-18 together, it is simply the expresion of the same set of simultaneous equations, but in matrix form:
Code:
x1dot = (  0 )x1 + (  1 )x2 + ( 0 )u
x2dot = (-k/m)x1 + (-b/m)x2 + (1/m)u

When 3-17 and 3-18 are written as above, it should be clear to you why 3-20 looks the way it does, right?

Keep in mind the orderly manner in which matrix multiplication works, too, in order to answer your question.
 
gsal said:
There is nothing to do to get to 3-20...if you got to 3-18, you are already at 3-20...well, if you got to 3-17 AND 3-18, you are already at 3-20.

3-20 is exactly the same as 3-17 and 3-18 together, it is simply the expresion of the same set of simultaneous equations, but in matrix form:


Code:
x1dot = (  0 )x1 + (  1 )x2 + ( 0 )u
x2dot = (-k/m)x1 + (-b/m)x2 + (1/m)u

When 3-17 and 3-18 are written as above, it should be clear to you why 3-20 looks the way it does, right?

Keep in mind the orderly manner in which matrix multiplication works, too, in order to answer your question.

Yes, I got that. My original question was silly!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K