Understanding Pole Speed in Digital Control System Design

AI Thread Summary
In digital control system design, observer poles should be approximately ten times faster than controller poles for effective performance. The mapping from the s-plane to the z-plane is crucial, as vertical lines in the s-plane correspond to circles in the z-plane, affecting stability. To achieve faster observer poles, one can determine the controller poles, map them to the s-plane, adjust their real parts, and then map them back to the z-plane. However, this adjustment may also influence the damping ratio of the poles. The discussion confirms that this mapping approach is valid for determining observer poles in a digital context.
NeuralNet
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
When designing a State Observer for a control system the observer poles (eig(A-LC)) should typically be about 10 times faster than the controller poles (eig(A-BK)).

But when designing a digital control system what does it mean for the poles to be faster? For the analog case it simply means that to get more negative on the real axis, but since the s-plane is mapped to the z-plane, how does one determine how a pole is faster?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Vertical lines in the s-plane (real part = constant) maps to circles of constant radius in the z-plane with the origin as their center.

In the z-plane, as you move from within the unit circle to outside of it, you move from the stable region to the unstable, i.e. the time constant of the pole(s) increase in magnitude as you move away from the origin.
 
Okay, so the mapping from the s-plane to z-plane is as follows:
z=e^{sT}

And from s-plane to z-plane:
s=\frac{1}{T}ln(z)

Where T is the sampling period.

So if the observer poles are supposed to be "10 time faster" than the controller poles can I do the following, given a digital control system:
1. Determine the controller poles.
2. Map them to the s-plane.
4. Take the real part of the poles and multiply by 10. These will be the continuous Observer Poles.
5. Map the continuous observer poles back to the z-plane. These are the discrete Observer Poles.

Would that work?
 
Last edited:
NeuralNet said:
1. Determine the observer poles.
The "controller poles" yeah?

NeuralNet said:
4. Take the real part of the poles and multiply by 10. These will be the continuous Observer Poles.
You're going to affect the damping ratio of the poles as well if you do that. You can move them out along a loci of constant damping ratio (constant angle) until you get the time constant you want.

But yes, you're free to map back and forth as you please.
 
milesyoung said:
The "controller poles" yeah?

Yes, I meant "controller poles" (which I have edited).


You have answered my question. Thank you very much.
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top