A Novel Speed Control of DC Motor Using

Sliding Mode Technique

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of degree
of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY

In

ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING

(CONTROL SYSTEMS)

Submitted by

BALAGA RAMPRASAD
(15MN1D9501)
Under the esteemed guidance of

K.VENKATARATNAM M.Tech.

Assistant professor, department of EEE.

Submitted to

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING

SRI SIVANI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(Approved by AICTE, Affiliated to Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinada)

Chilakapalem, Srikakulam-532402

(2015-2017)
 SRI SIVANI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(Approved by AICTE, Affiliated to J.N.T.U, Kakinada, A.P)

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project work entitled “A NOVEL SPEED

CONTROL OF DC MOTOR USING SLIDING MODE TECHNIQUE” being
submitted by BALAGA RAMPRASAD (Roll No:15MN1D9501) in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the award of degree of MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY in
CONTROL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING in DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL
AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING (CONTROL SYSTEMS).It is a record of
bonafide work carried out under the esteemed guidance and supervision of
MS.K. VENKATARATNAM Assistant Professor, Faculty of the Department of EEE during
the academic year 2015-2017.

Signature of the Project Guide Signature of the Head of the department

Ms. K.VENKATARATNAMM.Tech Ms. K.VENKATARATNAM M.Tech
Assistant Professor. Head of the Department
Department of EEE Department of EEE
SSIT, Ssrikakulam-532402. SSIT, Ssrikakulam-532402.

Signature of the External

 INDEX
Acknowledgement i
preface ii
Abstract iii
List of figures and tables iv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background of variable structure control 2
1.3 variable structure systems with sliding mode Approach 3
1.4 comparisons with classical linear approach 4
1.5 project out line 4
CHAPTER 2: MODELLING OF DC MOTOR
2.1 over view of dc motor 5
2.2 types of motors 5
2.3 types of speed control 6
2.4 definition of speed control 6
2.5 speed controlling of dc motor 6
2.6 speed controlling by varying Armature circuit resistance 7
2.7 speed controlling by varying Field flux 8
2.8 speed controlling by varying Armature terminal voltage 9
2.9 speed controlling with controlled rectifiers 10
2.10 modeling of dc motor 11
2.11 the state space model of dc motor 11
CHAPTER 3: CONTROLLERS
3.1 Controllers 16
3.2 Two-position or on-off controller 16
3.3 proportional controller 17
3.4 Proportional plus integral controller 17
3.5 Proportional plus Derivative controller 18
3.6 PID controller 19
3.7 characteristics of PID controller 20
3.8 Sliding mode controller 21
CHAPTER 4: CONTROLLER DESIGN
4.1 Sliding mode controller 26
4.2 modeling of dc motor 27
4.3 design of switching function 29
4.4 controller design 31
4.5 switching function &controller design for real motor 34
CHAPTER 5 : CLASSICAL PID CONTROL AND TUNIN
5.1 Historical Note 38
5.2 Tuning of PID Controllers 39
5.3 Ziegler-Nichols’ Tuning 39
5.4 Ziegler-Nichols rules for tuning PID controller 40
5.5 Ziegler-Nichols Reaction Curve Method 41
5.6 Ziegler-Nichols Oscillation Method 42
5.7 Cohen-Coon Reaction Curve Method 44
5.8 PID tuning for real plant 45
CHAPTER 6: SIMULATION RESULTS
6.1 Introduction to Mat lab 48
6.2 Simulation 48
6.3 Comparisons between smc & pid & pd 52
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION AND FUTURE SCOPE
7.1 conclusion 60
7.2 Future Scope 60
REFERENCES 61
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We profoundly grateful to sir B. TATALU Principal for the presenting us this
opportunity and for extending constant support and providing facilities for the project work

I take this opportunity to express my deep sense of gratitude and sincere

thanks to MS.K.VENKATARATNAM Head of the Department, Electrical and Electronics
engineering, Sri Sivani Institute of Technology for providing the facilities of the department,
cooperation and encouragement.

I would like to convey my gratitude and my sincere thanks to my Guide

MS.K.VENKATARATNAM Assistant professor, Department of EEE, Sri Sivani Institute of
Technology for guiding me throughout the course of this thesis and for his valuable
suggestions in making of this thesis. His constant encouragement and support has been the
cause of my success in completing this thesis.

I express my thanks to all the teaching and non-teaching staff of Electrical and
Electronics Engineering Department for their direct and indirect help in completing this thesis
work. I shall be failing in my duty if I forget to thank all other people who helped me in
completion of this work.

(BALAGA RAMPRASAD)

(15MN1D9501)

i
 PREFACE

In the formulation of any control problem there will typically be discrepancies between the actual
system and the mathematical modal available to the designer. This mismatch may be due to un-modelled
dynamics, variation in system parameters or the approximation of complex, possibly nonlinear, system
behaviour by a straight forward model. The engineer must ensure that controllers have the ability to produce the
required performance despite such mismatches. This has led to an intense interest in the development of so-
called robust control methods. One particular approach to robust controller design is the so-called variable
structure control methodology.

Variable structure control systems (VSCS) are characterised by a suite of feedback control laws and a
decision rule. The decision rule, termed the switching function, has as its input some measure of the current
system behaviour and produces as an output the particular feedback controller that should be used at that instant
in time. The well known sliding mode control methodology is a particular type of VSCS. In sliding mode
control, VSCS are designed to drive and then constrain the system state to lie within a neighbourhood of the
switching function. There a number of advantages of this approach. First the dynamic behaviour of the system
may be tailored by the particular choice of switching function. Second, the closed loop response becomes totally
insensitive to a particular class of uncertainty in the system; this provides a very strong and inherent robustness
to the resulting controllers. Finally, analysis of the discontinuous signals applied to the system can be used as
technique to model the signal activity required in order to achieve the ideal performance from the system.

The concept of a variable structure control system originated in the Soviet Union in the 1960s and the
design paradigm now forms a mature and established approach for robust control and estimation.

The sliding mode control approach is recognised as an efficient tool to design robust controllers for
complex high-order nonlinear dynamic plant operating under uncertain conditions. The research in this area
initiated in the former Soviet Union about 40 years ago, and the sliding mode control methodology has
subsequently received much more attention from the international control community within the last two
decades.

The major advantage of sliding mode is low sensitivity to plant parameter variations and disturbances
which eliminates the necessity of exact modelling. Sliding mode control enables the decoupling of the overall
system motion into independent partial components of lower dimension and, as a result, reduces the complexity
of feedback design. Sliding mode control implies that control actions are discontinuous state functions which
may easily be implemented by conventional power converter with ‘on-off’ as the only admissible operation
mode. Due to these properties, the intensity of the research at many scientific centres of industry and universities
is maintained at a high level, and sliding mode control has been proved to be applicable to a wide range of
problems in robotics, electric drives and generators, process control, vehicle and motion control.

ii
 ABSTRACT

Direct Current (DC) motors have been used extensively in industry mainly
because of the simple strategies required to achieve good performance in speed or
position Control applications. Due to the robustness of Sliding Mode Control (SMC),
especially against parameters variations and external disturbances, and also its ability
in controlling linear and nonlinear systems. This paper deals with the sliding mode
control adjustment of a speed control for DC motor. Firstly, the paper introduces the
principle of sliding mode control method. Then, design controller for DC motor after
that the comparison between PID and PD is made on the real model of the DC motor
.The main result of the paper is the analysis the terminal sliding mode control. After
obtaining the entire model of speed control system, Performance of these controllers
has been verified through simulation results using MATLAB/SIMULINK software.
The simulation results showed that SMC was a superior controller than PID and PD
controller for speed control of a separately excited DC motor.

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES:

Figure 2.1: A separately excited DC motor 11

Figure 3.1: Proportional controller 17
Figure 3.2: Proportional plus integral control action 18
Figure 3.3: System with PID controller 20
Figure 3.4: Phase portrait of a sliding motion 23
Figure 4.1: DC motor controller parameters (Table4.1)Sliding mode control method 35
Figure 4.2: Block diagram of the sliding mode controller 35
Figure 5.1: Basic feedback control loop 38
Figure 5.2: Unit-step response of a plant 41
Figure 5.3: S-shaped response curve or reaction curve 41
Figure 5.4: Closed-loop with a proportional controller 43
Figure 5.5: Sustained oscillation with period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 43
Figure 5.6: PID controller with plant 45
Figure 5.7: Simulink model of motor along with PID controller 47
Figure 6.1: The block diagram of the controller equation 49
Figure 6.2: Original system Simulink model 49
Figure 6.3: Original system output 50
Figure6.4: Simulink model of the sliding mode controller 50
Figure 6.5: Sliding mode controller output 51
Figure 6.6: Simulink model of dc motor with PID controller 51
Figure 6.7: PID controller output 52
Figure 6.8: Block diagram of combined SMC and PID 53
Figure 6.9: Output of combined SMC and PID 53
Figure 6.10: Simulink model of original plant, smc and pid 54
Figure 6.11: Output of original plant, smc and pid 54
Figure 6.12: Simulink model of original plant, smc, pid, pd controllers 55
Figure 6.13: Output of original plant, smc, pid, pd controllers 55
Figure 6.14: Simulink model when system parameter viscous friction coefficient
Increased by 10% 56

iv
Figure6.15: Output scope when system parameter viscous friction coefficient

Increased by 10% 56
Figure 6.16: Simulink model when system parameter armature inductance

Increased by 10% 57
Figure 6.17: Output scope when system parameter armature inductance

Increased by 10% 57
Figure 6.18: Simulink model when system parameter armature resistance

Increased by 10% 58
Figure 6.19: Output scope when system parameter armature resistance

Increased by 10% 58

LIST OF TABLES:

Table 3.1: The Characteristics of P, I, and D controllers 21

Table 4.1: Parameters of maxon motor 34
Table 5.1: Ziegler – Nichols Tuning Rule Based on

Critical Gain 𝐾 and critical period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 (First Method) 42

Table 5.2: Ziegler – Nichols Tuning Rule Based on

Critical Gain 𝐾𝑐𝑟 and critical period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 (Second Method) 43

Table 5.3: Cohen-Coon tuning using the reaction curve 44
Table 6.1: Comparisons between SMC and PID and PD controllers 57
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction:

The development of high performance motor drives is very important in industrial as

well as other purpose applications such as steel rolling mills, electric trains and robotics.
Generally, a high performance motor drive system must have good dynamic speed command
tracking and load regulating response to perform task. DC drives, because of their simplicity,
ease of application, high reliabilities, flexibilities and favourable cost have long been a
backbone of industrial applications, robot manipulators and home appliances where speed
and position control of motor are required.
DC drives are less complex with a single power conversion from AC to DC. Again the
speed torque characteristics of DC motors are much more superior to That of AC motors. A
DC motors provide excellent control of speed for acceleration and deceleration. DC drives
are normally less expensive for most horsepower ratings. DC motors have a long tradition of
use as adjustable speed machines and a wide range of options have evolved for this purpose.
In these applications, the motor should be precisely controlled to give the desired
performance. The controllers of the speed that are conceived for goal to control the speed of
DC motor to execute one variety of tasks, is of several conventional and numeric controller
types, the controllers can be: proportional integral (PI), proportional integral derivative
(PID),sliding mode controller etc…
The proportional –integral – derivative (PID) controller operates the majority of the
control system in the world. It has been reported that more than 95% of the controllers in the
industrial process control applications are of PID type as no other controller match the
simplicity, clear functionality, applicability and ease of use offered by the PID controller. PID
controllers provide robust and reliable performance for most systems if the PID parameters
are tuned properly.

The major problems in applying a conventional control algorithm (PI, PD, PID) in a
speed controller are the effects of non-linearity in a DC motor. The nonlinear characteristics
of a DC motor such as saturation and fiction could degrade the performance of conventional
controllers. Generally, an accurate nonlinear model of an actual DC motor is difficult to find

1
and parameter obtained from systems identification may be only approximated values. The
field of sliding mode control has been making rapid progress in recent years. Interests in the
application of sliding mode control technique in variable speed drives have increased in
recent years. It is well known that a distinguished property of a sliding mode control
technique is its insensitivity to system uncertainties and external disturbances. Compared to
the conventional PI controller, the system is sensitive to the parameter variations and
inadequate rejection of external disturbances or load variations. Furthermore in order to
design PI controller, the challenge faced by the researchers due to multi loop system structure
and trial and error design approach which make the control design time consuming and
expensive. This has lead to the development of the sliding modes control technique, which is
very attractive for its excellent performance, easy to implement with simple control
algorithm. It is desirable to achieve robust performance against external disturbances
especially sudden or step load applications.

In this thesis, This paper deals with the sliding mode control adjustment of a speed
control for DC motor. Firstly, the paper introduces the principle of sliding mode control
method. Then, design controller for DC motor after that the comparison between PID and
SMC is made on the real model of the DC motor .The main result of the paper is the analysis
the terminal sliding mode control. After obtaining the entire model of speed control system,
the model is utilized with MATLAB (SIMULINK). The simulations of the performance
comparisons between sliding mode control and PID control show that variable structure
system with sliding mode control approach is less sensitive to parameter variations, produce
faster dynamic response, eliminate overshoot and performs better in rejecting disturbance.
The excellent features of the sliding mode control based on variable structure system are
mainly due to the high gain effect, which suppresses influence of disturbances and
uncertainties in system behaviour.

1.2 Background of the Variable Structure Control:

Variable structure system (VSS) with sliding mode control was first proposed and
elaborated in the early 1950's in the Soviet Union by Emelyanov and several co-researchers.
At the very beginning, VSS is well known as special class of nonlinear systems for solving
several specific control tasks in second order linear and nonlinear systems. However VSS did
not receive wide acceptance among engineering professionals until the first survey paper that
is IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control in 1977 was published by Utkin. The most

2
interesting fact is that robustness has becomes a major requirement in modern control
application.

1.3 Variable Structure System with Sliding Mode Approach:

The most distinguishing property of VSS is its ability to result in very robust control
systems. In other words, the system is completely insensitive to parametric uncertainty and
external disturbances. Due to its excellent invariance and robustness properties, the VSS
concepts have been developed into practical application mainly in the field of control of DC
servo motors, robotic manipulators, PM synchronous servomotors, induction motors, aircraft
control, spacecraft control and flexible space structure control. These experiments confirm
the theoretical results regarding robustness of VSS with sliding modes. However, in some of
these experimental results, it was found that the resulting control is discontinuous and the
chattering phenomenon which can leads to low accuracy in control system. These problems
can be solved by replacing a continuous control into the computation of the control input (a
sign function). As a result, the large error behaviour of a system is identical to that with
discontinuous control. It can be assumed that, the behaviour of the system in small error
region as a high gain system and this is similar to that of system with discontinuous control.
Hence, this high gain effect of sliding mode control based on VSS, suppressed the
uncertainties due to parametric variations, external disturbances and variable payloads.
Besides that the proper selection of the switching functions will avoid chattering
problem in the DC drive systems, hence result in high accuracy control. The choice of
switching functions to control the system states, such that current, speed or position has been
discussed and examined in detail in literature [7]. In [8], under this control strategy, the
dynamic performance of the system can be shaped according to the system specification by
an appropriate choice of switching function.
It is well known, that the sliding mode control is a popular robust control Method.
However it has a reaching phase problem and an input chattering problem (as discussed
above). These problems cause the sliding mode control (SMC) is very conservative to be
used with other controller design methods because the state trajectory of the sliding mode
control system is determined by sliding mode dynamics, which cannot have the same order
dynamics of the original system. This leads to the introduction of robust controller design
with novel sliding surface. To overcome the conservatism of the SMC, the novel sliding
surface has been used which the same dynamics of the nominal original system has controlled

3
by a nominal controller. The reaching phase problem can be eliminated, by using an initial
virtual state that makes the initial sliding function equal to zero. Therefore, it is possible to
use the SMC technique with various types of controller.

1.4 Comparison with Classical Linear Approach:

Many papers discussed about the comparison between the SMC and classical linear
approach that is proportional integral (PI) control. In [8], the performance comparisons
between the sliding mode and PI controllers have been analysed. A simple SMC is applied to
a dc motor. The comparisons of the performance responses for both control schemes are
analysed in terms of which technique results an excellent robustness in responses to system
parameter uncertainties, load disturbances and in case of noisy measurement. The simulation
results show that the SMC performs better compared to the classical PI control. As discussed
in literature, the PID control is subject to limitations due to the intrinsic conflict between the
steady state accuracy and dynamic response speed. In PI control, the dynamic performance
specification can be achieved only if the compromise has been made to solve the conflict
between excessive oscillation or overshoot and long settling time. Besides that, to meet
higher system specification, the challenge faced by the design engineers due to multi loop
system structure and trial and error design approach which lead to the control design time
consuming and expensive. It was concluded that the principal weakness of the PI control is its
sensitivity to parameter system variations and also not capable of rejecting any external
disturbances or load variations.

1.5 projects out line:

This paper deals with the sliding mode control adjustment of a speed control for DC
motor. Firstly, the paper introduces the principle of sliding mode control method. Then,
design a controller for DC motor after that the comparison between PID and SMC is made on
the real model of the DC motor. The main result of the paper is the analysis the terminal
sliding mode control. After obtaining the entire model of speed control system, Performance
of these controllers has been verified through simulation results using MATLAB/SIMULINK
software. The simulation results showed that SMC was a superior controller than PID
controller for speed control of a separately excited DC motor.

4
CHAPTER 2

MODELLING OF DC MOTOR
2.1 Overview of dc motor:

Mechanical motion control systems finds widespread applications in industry

since the invention of steam engine in eighteenth century. Since then the evolution of motion
control has been rapidly influenced by development of electrical machines. In motion control
applications, the most two important machine are

2.2 Types of motors:

 D.C Machines
 A.C Machines
Out of these two types of machines the D.C machines finds widespread applications
in the industries due to their many advantages over the other type of machines. The main
advantages of D.C machines over the A.C machines can be listed as given below
 Easier Methods of speed control
 Provides good speed regulation
 Provides four quadrant operation
 Provides good starting torque
 Provides operation at low speeds.

The main disadvantages of A.C motors over the D.C machines are
 Complex circuits for the drive control
 Expensive speed control
 Poor starting torque
 Low operating power factor
 Inability to operate at low speeds.

Thus these advantages make D.C Motor to be highly versatile machine for motion control
applications in the industries.

5
 2.3 Types of speed control:

Modern industries employ different machines which operate at different and variable
speeds. Some of the areas where speed control plays an important role are metal-cutting and
rods-welding machine tools, electronics cranes of various types, electric-traction units and
also many kinds of equipment used in the paper, coal-mining, textile, and other industries.

The purpose of speed control for various drives can be simply accounted for high
productivity, proper-operation, and high-quality products.

2.4 Definition of speed control:

By “SPEED CONTROL” it is meant intentional change of the motor speed to a value

needed for performing the required-work process. This concept of speed-control should not
be taken to include the natural change in speed, which occurs when the load on the drive shaft
undergoes some change.

The desired change in speed is accomplished by acting accordingly on the motor. This
may be done manually by the operator (or) by means of some automatic control-device. It is
found at the present time that electrical speed-control has many economical as well as
engineering advantages over mechanical speed control.

2.5 Speed controlling of DC Motor:

DC motor are most suitable for wide range speed control and are, therefore,
indispensable for many adjustable speed drives. The speed of a DC motor is given by

(Vt  I a Ra )

ka
Where, ka = PZ/2Пa

= Armature Constant

It follows from above equation that for a DC motor, there are basically three methods
of speed control and these are:

 Variation of resistance in the armature circuit, called as the Armature Control.

 Variation of the field flux, called as the Field Control

6
2.6 Speed control by varying armature circuit resistance:

The speed of a dc motor can be controlled by means of a variable resistor connected

in series with the armature. The wattage rating of the resistor is higher compared to that of a
controller used in the starter. The resistance of the controller should only be inserted in the
circuit for a short interval, whereas the speed control resistance can remain in the circuit
indefinitely. For a given armature current, the larger the resistance of the controller, the
smaller will be the voltage drop across the armature, hence the speed will be lower.

This method is also called armature circuit resistance control method. With this
method, the speed can be obtained only below the base speed of a dc motor. The resistance in
the armature is increased, Ia*Ra drop increases, numerator of equation decreases and hence
the speed.

Disadvantages of armature resistance control method:

1. Lower efficiency and higher operational costs at reduced speeds.
2. Poor speed regulation.

The advantages of this method is that speeds below base speed down to creeping
speeds of only a few rpm are easily obtainable. But, because of considerable waste of energy
at reduced speeds: this method is mainly employed where only short time or intermittent
slowdowns are required.

2.7 Speed control by varying the field flux:

In a shunt wound D.C Motor the reduction in field voltage to less than the design
rating will result in increase in speed for a given armature voltage. It is important to note,
however that this results in a higher armature current for a given load.

Control is obtained by weakening the shunt field current of the motor to increase
speed and to reduce output torque for a given armature current. Since the rating of a D.C
Motor is determined by heating, the maximum permissible armature current is approximately
constant over the speed range. This means that at rated current, output torque varies inversely
with speed, and the motor has constant-horse power capability over its speed range.

Thus, this method of speed control, also called as field-weakening method, gives
speeds above the base speed only.

7
Disadvantages of field control method:
 Top speeds are obtained with very weak field. This weak field at top speeds causes
the armature current to increase for the development of certain load torque. With
Increased armature current associated with weak main field, the resultant ld
waveform is badly distorted.

 The armature may get overheated at high speeds, because the increased armature
current results in more ohmic losses whereas cooling by ventilation does not improve
proportionally.
 If the field flux is weakened considerably, the speed become very high and due to
these changes, the motor operation may become unstable.

 Speeds lower than the base speeds cannot be obtained, because field cannot be made
stronger, it can only be weakened.
 Since the speed is inversely proportional to the flux/pole while the torque is directly
proportional to it for a given armature current, it can cope with constant KW drives
only where the load torque falls with speed.
 This control method is not suited to applications needing speed reversal, since the
only way to reverse the speed is to disconnect the motor from the source and reverse
the field/armature polarity. The field circuit being highly inductive, it is normally the
armature which is reversed.

2.8 Speed control by varying the armature terminal voltage:

The main requirement of this control is a variable voltage supply to the armature
whose current rating must be somewhat larger than that of the motor. It is superior to the field
control method.

In this method, shunt-field current is maintained constant from a separate source

while the voltage applied to the armature is varied; the speed is proportional to the counter
emf, which is equal to the applied voltage drop minus the armature IR drop. At rated current,
the torque remains constant regardless of the speed (since the magnetic flux is constant) and
therefore, the motor has constant torque capability over its speed range. So, when the
armature terminal voltage Vt is varied counter emf. (Vt - I a*Ra) changes almost
proportionally and for a constant flux motor the speed changes approximately in the same

8
proportion as Vt. Speed control by varying the armature terminal voltage is obtained by the
following methods.

 Ward-Leonard system

 Controlled rectifiers.

 Chopper Control.

Advantages of armature voltage control:

1. It provides constant torque drive. In the shunt motor case by keeping the field current
at maximum value full motor torque can be obtained at full load armature current at
all speeds.
2. Since the main field ampere-turns are maintained at a large value, the flux density
distortion caused by armature reaction is limited.
3. Unlike field control method speed reversal can be easily implemented here.

Thus, these advantages of the armature voltage control method make it superior to the field
control method and are used widely in speed control applications in industries.

2.9 Speed control with controlled rectifiers

Controlled rectifiers dc supply can be used in place of motor generator sets of the
Ward-Leonard system. Now a day the silicon controlled rectifiers have made the SCR dc
motor scheme much more economical and its other advantages are less floor space, higher
efficiency and quick control of the output voltage. Because of these advantages thyristor
controlled rectifiers are most extensively used.

Advantages of thyristorised controlled rectifiers

 Fast response of the thyristor system as compared to electromechanical converter
system.
 High efficiency due less loss in thyristor.
 Long life and reliability due to absence of loving parts.
 Less noise and easy maintenance.
 Control flexibility.

9
Disadvantages of thyristorised control
 These thyristorised converters have a very poor power factor especially when they are
operating with high firing angle.
 They introduce very high harmonic currents in the A.C input line current due to their
discontinuous nature.
 The current through these phase controlled converters is unidirectional, while the
output voltage can reverse polarity.
 This two-quadrant operation with reversible voltage is not suited for D.C motor
braking.
 The four-quadrant operation of the motor, is not possible with this unidirectional
current, requires two converters of the same rating are required to be connected in
back to back connection.
2.10 Modelling of Dc motor
2.11 The State Space Model of DC Motor:

Direct current motors are widely used for industrial and domestic applications. The
control of the speed of a DC motor with high accuracy is required. There are various DC
motor types. Depending on type, a DC motor may be controlled by varying the input voltage
or by changing the input current. In this paper, the separately excited DC motor (maxon
motor) model is chosen due to its good electrical and mechanical performances compared to
other DC motor models. The separately excited DC motor is driven by applied armature
voltage. Figure 1 shows a separately excited DC motor equivalent model.Consider armature
controlled dc motor circuit shown below

Figure 2.1: A separately excited DC motor

10
Where

T or 𝑇𝑚=Torque developed by motor.

𝜃=Angular displacement of motor shaft.

B=equivalent viscous friction co-efficient of motor and load referred to motor.

J= equivalent moment of inertia of motor and load referred to motor.

R or 𝑅𝑎=armature resistance.

L or 𝐿𝑎 =armature inductance.

𝐸𝑏=back emf of motor.

𝑉𝑎 or 𝐸𝑎 =armature voltage.

𝐼𝑎=armature current.

The dynamics of a separately excited DC motor may be expressed as:

The air gap flux ∅ is proportional to the field current

∅ =𝐾𝑓𝐼𝑓 (1)

Torque developed by motor is proportional to the field current and airgap flux

𝑇𝑚=𝐾𝑓𝐼𝑓𝐾1𝐼𝑎

In armature controlled dc motor field current is kept constant.

𝑇𝑚=𝐾𝑇𝐼𝑎 (2)

The motor back emf being proportional to speed

𝐸=𝐾 𝑑𝜃 (3)
𝑏 𝑏 𝑑𝑡

The differential equation of armature current is

𝑑𝐼𝑎
𝐿 + 𝐼 𝑅 +𝐸 =𝐸 (4)
𝑑𝑡 𝑎 𝑎 𝑏 𝑎

11
The torque equation is given by

𝑑 2𝜃 𝑑𝜃
J +B =𝑇 =𝐾 𝐼 (5)
𝑑𝑡2 𝑑𝑡 𝑚 𝑇𝑎

on taking Laplace transforms on both sides with zero initial conditions we get

𝐸𝑏(s)= 𝐾𝑏s𝜃(s) (6)

(Ls+R) 𝐼𝑎(s)+ 𝐸𝑏(s) = 𝐸𝑎(s) (7)

(J𝑠2+Bs)𝜃(s) =𝐾𝑇𝐼𝑎(s) (8)

The transfer function of the system is given by G(s) = 𝜃(s)

𝐸𝑎(s)

From eqn.(7)

(Ls+R) 𝐼𝑎(s)+ 𝐸𝑏(s) = 𝐸𝑎(s)

(Ls+R) 𝐼𝑎(s)+ 𝐾𝑏s𝜃(s) =𝐸𝑎(s)

𝐾𝑇
(𝐿𝑠 + 𝑅) 𝐼 (𝑠) + 𝐾 𝑠 ∗ ( ) 𝐼 (s) = 𝐸 (s)
𝑎 𝑏 ( 2+𝐵𝑠) 𝑎 𝑎

𝐾𝑇
[(Ls + R) + ( ) ] 𝐼 (s)= 𝐸 (s)
( +B) 𝑎 𝑎

𝜃(s) 𝜃(s) 𝐼𝑎(s)

G(s) = = *
𝐸𝑎(s) 𝐼𝑎(s) 𝐸𝑎(s)

Therefore the t/f of motor is given by

𝐾𝑇
G(s) =
([(Ls+R) ( 𝑠+B)+𝐾𝑏 𝐾𝑇] )

The armature circuit inductance is generally negligible i.e. L=0

𝜃(s) 𝐾𝑇
=G(s)=
𝐸𝑎(s) ([(R)( 𝐽𝑠+B)+𝐾𝑏 𝐾𝑇] )

12
 𝐾
( 𝑇)
𝜃(s) 𝑅
𝐸𝑎(s) = 2 B+𝐾 𝑏 𝐾 𝑇
J +s[ 𝑅
]

B+𝐾𝑏
The term indicates the back emf of the motor effectively increases the viscous
𝐾𝑇
𝑅

friction of the system.

B+𝐾𝑏 𝐾𝑇
Let b= then
𝑅

𝐾𝑇
𝜃(s) 𝑅
=
𝐸𝑎(s) s(Js+b)

𝐾𝑇
Let =motor gain constant.
=𝐾
𝑅 𝑚

𝐽
=𝑇𝑚 =motor time constant.
𝑏

Now the final transfer function obtained is given by

𝜃(s) 𝐾𝑚
G(s)= =
𝐸𝑎(s) s(s𝑇𝑚+1)

Now take the motor transfer function including armature inductance for state space

representation

Let 𝑥1= 𝜃

𝑥2=𝑥1̇ =𝜃̇ (a)

𝑥3= 𝐼𝑎

From eqns (4)&(5)

𝑑𝐼𝑎
(4)------ > 𝐿 + 𝐼 𝑅 +𝐸 =𝐸
𝑑𝑡 𝑎 𝑎 𝑏 𝑎

13
 2𝜃
(5)------> J𝑑 +B𝑑𝜃=𝑇 =𝐾 𝐼
𝑑𝑡2 𝑑𝑡 𝑚 𝑇𝑎

i.e. L𝐼𝑎̇ +𝐼𝑎𝑅𝑎+𝐾𝑏𝜃̇=𝐸𝑎 and

J𝜃+B𝜃̇=𝐾𝑇𝐼𝑎

Now substitute the state vectors in above equations we get

J𝑥2̇ +B𝑥2=𝐾𝑇 𝑥3

𝑏 𝐾
𝑥̇ =-( ) 𝑥 +( 𝑇) 𝑥 (b)
2 𝐽 2 𝐽 3

From eqn (4)

L𝑥3̇ +R 𝑥3+𝐾𝑏𝑥2=𝐸𝑎

𝑥̇ = 𝐸𝑎
-
𝐾𝑏 - 𝑥 - 𝑅 (c)
3 ( ) ( ) 2 ( ) 𝑥3
𝐿 𝐿 𝐿

From eqns (a)&(b)&(c) the state model of the system is given by

In the state space model of a separately excited DC motor, Equations (a),(b) and (c) can be
expressed by choosing the angular speed (𝜃) and armature current (𝐼𝑎) as state variables and
the armature voltage (𝐸𝑎) as an input. The output is chosen to be the angular speed

𝑚 𝑏 𝑘
𝜃̇ −𝐽 𝐽 𝑥2 0
𝑥̇ = [ ̇ ] =Ax+Bu =[ � ]
𝑅 𝑥
[ ]+[1 ] 𝑢
𝐼𝑎 3
− 𝑒 − 𝐿
𝐿 𝐿

Output of the motor is angular speed .so output obtained is given below

Hence the output of the motor is

Y=𝜃=𝑥1

𝑥1
Y=[1 0 0] [ 𝑥 2 ]
𝑥3

14
The above equations describe the state space model of dc motor and modelling of dc motor.
In next chapters to design controller i.e. sliding mode controller we are going to use this state
space model of dc motor while designing to controller to control the speed of the real model
of dc motor. The designing process and its mat lab/Simulink model are drawn and verified.
the process of designing controller and its outputs are given in next chapters.

15
CHAPTER 3

CONTROLLERS
3.1 Controllers:

Industrial controllers may be classified according to their control actions

They are:
 Two position or On-Off controllers or bang-bang controller.
 Proportional controllers.
 Integral controllers.
 Derivative controller.
 Proportional plus Integral controllers.
 Proportional plus Derivative controllers.
 Proportional plus Integral plus Derivative controllers.
 Sliding mode controller

3.2 Two position or On-Off controllers or bang-bang controller:

An on-off controller is the simplest type of controller, where the control signal
has only two levels. If the variables are defined such that a positive control error (𝑡)
should be corrected by an increase of the control signal (𝑡), the control law is

𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥 if 𝑒(𝑡) ≥𝑒ℎ𝑖

U(t) = 𝑢0 or unchanged if 𝑒𝑙𝑜 < 𝑒(t) <𝑒ℎ𝑖

𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛 if 𝑒(𝑡)≤ 𝑒𝑙𝑜

Where 𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑥, 𝑢0, 𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛 is the high, normal, low value of the control signal. The interval
(𝑒𝑙𝑜,ℎ𝑖) is a dead zone. In the simplest case, 𝑒𝑙𝑜=𝑒ℎ𝑖=0.
The on-off controller is inexpensive, but it causes oscillations in the process. It is often used
for temperature control in simple appliances such as ovens, irons, refrigerators and freezers,
where oscillations are tolerated.

16
 3.3 Proportional Controller:

A P controller implements the simple control law

(𝑡) = 𝐾𝑐 (𝑡) + 𝑢0

where 𝐾𝑐 is the adjustable controller gain and 𝑢0 is the normal value of the control
signal, which is also be adjustable. In principle, 𝑢0 is selected to make the control
error (𝑡)=0 at the nominal operating point.

If the output is changed by a disturbance or a set-point change, the P controller is

unable to bring the control error to zero, i.e., there will be a remaining control error.
The higher the controller gain, the smaller the control error. Thus, P control is used
when a (small) control error is allowed and a high controller gain can be used without
risk of instability.
A typical application for P control is level control in liquid tank. Another situation when P
control is often sufficient is as an inner loop (a secondary loop) in so-called cascade control

Figure 3.1 proportional controller

17
3.4 Proportional plus Integral Control:

In a proportional control of a plant whose transfer function doesn’t possess an

integrator 1/s, there is a steady-state error, or offset, in the response to a step input. Such an
offset can be eliminated if integral controller is included in the system.
In the integral control of a plant, the control signal, the output signal from the
controller, at any instant is the area under the actuating error signal curve up to that instant.
But while removing the steady-state error, it may lead to oscillatory response of slowly
decreasing amplitude or even increasing amplitude, both of which is usually undesirable.
PI controller:

A PI controller is by far the most common type of controller. The ideal PI

controller implements the control law

Figure 3.2 proportional plus integral control action

1
𝐶(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝(1 + )
𝑇 𝑠𝑖

where the gain 𝐾𝑐 and the integral time 𝑇𝑖 are adjustable parameters; 𝑢0 is less
important due to the integral. The main advantage of the PI controller is that there will
be no remaining control error after a set-point change or a process disturbance. A
disadvantage is that there is a tendency for oscillations. PI control is used when no
steady-state error is desired and there is no reason to use derivative action.
Measurement noise is often a reason for not using derivative action. PI control is
suitable for noisy processes, integrating processes and processes resembling first-
order systems. The most typical application is flow control. PI control might also be
preferable for processes with large time.

18
3.5 Proportional plus Derivative control:

The ideal form of a PD controller implements the control law

𝐶(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝(1 + 𝑇𝑑𝑠)

where the gain 𝐾𝑐 and the derivative time 𝑇𝑑 are adjustable parameters; 𝑢0 is chosen
as for a P controller. A PD controller is preferred when integral action is not needed, but
the dynamics of the process are so slow that the predictive nature of derivative action is
useful.

Many thermal processes, where energy is stored with small heat losses (e.g., ovens),
usually have slow dynamics, almost as integrating systems. A PD controller might then
be suitable for temperature control.

Another typical application for PD control is in servo mechanisms such as electrical

motors, which usually behave as second-order integrating systems.

3.6 PID controller:

It is clear from above discussions that a suitable combination of proportional, integral

and derivative actions can provide all the desired performances of a closed loop system. The
transfer function of a P-I-D controller is given by

1
𝐶𝑃(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + + 𝑇𝑑𝑠)
𝑇𝑠𝑟

The order of the controller is low, but this controller has universal applicability; it can
be used in any type of SISO system, e.g. linear, nonlinear, time delay etc. Many of the MIMO
systems are first decoupled into several SISO loops and PID controllers are designed for each
loop. PID controllers have also been found to be robust, and that is the reason, it finds wide
acceptability for industrial processes. However, for proper use, a controller has to be tuned
for a particular process; i.e. selection of P,I,D parameters are very important and process
dependent. Unless the parameters are properly chosen, a controller may cause instability to
the closed loop system.

19
 Figure 3.3 System with PID controller

3.7 The Characteristics of P, I, and D controllers:

 A proportional controller (𝐾𝑃) will have the effect of reducing the rise time and will
reduce, but never eliminate, the steady-state error.
 An integral control (𝐾𝐼) will have the effect of eliminating the steady-state error, but it
may make the transient response worse.
 A derivative control (𝐾𝐷) will have the effect of increasing the stability of the system,
reducing the overshoot, and improving the transient response.

Proportional Control:
By only employing proportional control, a steady state error occurs. It is simple
regulating type; tuning is easy. But it normally introduces steady state error. It is
recommended for process transfer functions having a pole at origin, or for transfer functions
having a single dominating pole.

Integral Control:
It does not exhibit steady state error, but is relatively slow responding. It is particularly
effective for:
(i) Very fast process, with high noise level
(ii) Process dominated by dead time
(iii) High order system with all-time constants of the same magnitude.

20
Proportional and Integral Control
The response becomes more oscillatory and needs longer to settle, the error
disappears. It does not cause offset associated with proportional control. It also yields much
faster response than integral action alone. It is widely used for process industries for
controlling variables like level, flow, pressure, etc., those do not have large time constants.

Proportional plus Derivative (P-D) Control:

It is effective for systems having large number of time constants. It results in a more
rapid response and less offset than is possible by pure proportional control. But one must be
careful while using derivative action in control of very fast processes, or if the measurement
is noisy (e.g. flow measurement).

Proportional, Integral and Derivative Control

All design specifications can be reached. It finds universal application. But proper
tuning of the controller is difficult. It is particularly useful for controlling slow variables, like
pH, temperature, etc. in process industries.

The Characteristics of P, I, and D controllers

CL
RISE OVERSH SETTLING S-S
RESPONS
TIME OOT TIME ERROR
E

Kp Decrease Increase Small Change Decrease

Ki Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate

Small Small
Kd Decrease Decrease
Change Change

21
3.8 Sliding mode controller :

The theory of sliding mode control has been developed firstly in the Soviet Union in
early1950s. However, sliding mode control did not receive wide acceptance among
engineering professionals until the mid 1970s when a book by Itkis (8) and a survey paper by
Utkin were published in English. Since then, and especially during the late 80’s, the control
research community has shown significant interest in sliding mode control this increased
interest is explained by the fact that robustness has become a major requirement in modern
control applications.

Sliding mode control concepts have subsequently been utilized in the design of robust
regulators, tracking system, state observers, model reference systems and fault detection
schemes. The ideas have successfully been applied to problems as diverse as control of
electric motors, aircraft and space craft flight, control of flexible structure, robot
manipulators, and chemical processes. In general, the phase trajectory of a sliding mode
control can be investigated in two parts, representing two modes of the system as shown in
Figure 3.4.

 The first part, the trajectory starting from anywhere on the phase plane moves toward
sliding surface and reaches the surface in finite time. This is known as reaching,
hitting, or non-sliding phase and the system is sensitive to parameter variations and
disturbance rejection in this part of the phase trajectory.
 The second part is the sliding phase in which the state trajectory moves to the origin
along the sliding surface and the states never leave the sliding surface. During this
period, the system is defined by the equation of the sliding surface and thus it is
independent of the system parameters and external disturbances

In general, the sliding mode controller design approach usually consists of two steps.
First, the sliding or switching surface(s) is designed such that the system motion in sliding
mode satisfies design specifications. Second, a control law is designed making the switching
surface attractive to the system state. Sliding surface can be either linear or nonlinear. For
simplicity, only a linear sliding surface is used in this paper below figure (3.4) shows state
trajectory in sliding motion

22
 Figure 3.4: Phase portrait of a sliding motion.

In the figure the upper arrow indicates the state trajectory and the lower arrow i.e. trajectory
on dotted line is sliding surface. Slotting proposed a form of general equation to determine
the sliding surface which ensures the convergence of a variable towards its desired value as:

𝑑 𝑛−1
S=( + 𝜆) 𝑒 (1)
𝑑𝑡

where n is the system order, e is the tracking error, and 𝜆 is a strictly positive constant that
determine the bandwidth of the system. Having chosen the sliding surface at this stage, the
next step would be to choose the control law (u) that will allow the error vector (𝑒,̇) to reach
the sliding surface. To do so, the control law should be designed in such a way that the
following condition, also named reaching condition, is met:

s 𝑠̇ < 0 (2)

In order to satisfy this condition, the basic discontinuous control law of sliding mode control
is given by:

u =-K sign(s) (3)

where K is a positive constant known as the hitting control gain or parameter, s is the sliding
surface, and sign is the signum function.

23
Now the signum function defined as

1 if s >0

Sign(s)= (4)

-1 if s <0

The discontinuous control law described by Equation (4) presents high robustness,
insensitive to parameter fluctuations and disturbances. However, using a sign function often
causes chattering phenomenon in practice. Several solutions have been proposed in research
literature to alleviate the chattering phenomenon.

In this thesis

A linear system can be described in the state space as follows:

𝑥̇ = Ax+Bu

Where 𝑥 ∈ , u ∈ R, A ∈ Rn*n, and B∈ Rn and B is full rank matrix. A and B are controllable
matrixes. The functions of state variables are known as switching function:

𝜎=sx

The main idea in sliding mode control is:

• Designing the switching function so that   0 manifold (sliding mode)provide the
desired dynamic.
• Finding a controller ensuring sliding mode of the system occurs in finite time First of
all, the system should be converted to its regular form:
𝑥 = Tx
T is the matrix that brings the system to its regular form
The switching function in regular form is: 𝜎 = 𝑠1 𝑥
1+ 𝑠2 𝑥
2

The control rule is:

𝑢 = 𝑢𝑐+𝑢𝑑

Where 𝑢𝑐 and 𝑢𝑑 are continuous and discrete parts, respectively and can be calculated as
follows:

24
 ̃ ̃
𝑢 =- A x - A𝜎
𝑐 21 1 22

𝑢𝑑 = -𝐾𝑠sgn 𝜎 - 𝐾𝑝𝜎

Where sign is signup function. , and 𝐾𝑝are constants calculated regarding to lyapunov
stability function.
The controller is designed and the speed of the maxon motor is controlled. in this
thesis it is required to calculate the switching function first and then control law which forces
the given system on to the sliding surface has to be designed i.e. 𝑢 = 𝑢𝑐+𝑢𝑑 is required to be
solved. In the next chapter the methodology for design switching function as well as control
law and a controller for real model of dc motor is given.

25
CHAPTER 4

CONTROLLER DESIGN
4.1 Sliding mode control:

A linear system can be described in the state space as follows:

𝑥̇ = Ax+Bu (1)

Where 𝑥 ∈ , u ∈ R, A ∈ Rn*n, and B∈ Rn and B is full rank matrix. A and B are

controllable matrixes. The functions of state variables are known as switching function:

𝜎=sx (2)

The main idea in sliding mode control is

• Designing the switching function so that   0 manifold (sliding mode) provide

the desired dynamic.
• Finding a controller ensuring sliding mode of the system occurs in finite time First of
all, the system should be converted to its regular form:
𝑥 = Tx (3)
T is the matrix that brings the system to its regular form

1̇ = 𝐴
𝑥 1 +𝐴
11𝑥 12𝑥
2 (4)

𝑥2̇ =𝐴21𝑥1 +𝐴22𝑥2 + 𝐵2 𝑢 (5)

The switching function in regular form is:

𝜎 = 𝑠1 𝑥
1+ 𝑠2 𝑥2

On the sliding mode manifold (𝜎 = 0):

0=𝑠1 𝑥
1+ 𝑠2 𝑥
2

𝑥
2= -𝑠2
−1 𝑠 𝑥
11 (6)

26
 From(6)&(4)

𝑥1̇ =𝐴11𝑥1 - 𝐴12𝑠2 −1 𝑠1 𝑥

1

𝑥1̇ = (𝐴11-𝐴12𝑠2 −1 𝑠1 )𝑥
1 (7)

One of matrixes in product: 𝑠2 −1𝑠1 should be chosen arbitrary. Usually (8) is

used to ensure that 𝑠2 is invertible
𝑠2 = 𝐵2 −1
(8)
𝑠1 can be calculated by assigning the Eigen value of (7) by pole placement method.
Hence, switching function will be obtained as follows:

S=[ 𝑠1 𝑠2 ]T (9)
The control rule is:
𝑢 = 𝑢𝑐+𝑢𝑑 (10)
Where 𝑢𝑐 and 𝑢𝑑 are continuous and discrete parts, respectively and can be calculated as
follows:
𝑢𝑐 = - ̃A x - Ã 𝜎 (11)
21 1 22

= -𝐾𝑠sgn 𝜎 - 𝐾𝑝𝜎 (12)

Where sgn is sign function. , and 𝐾𝑝are constants calculated regarding to lyapunov
stability function.

4.2 Modelling of Dc motor:

The state space model of DC motor is as follows

The modelling and state space model of dc motor is already discussed in chapter2

𝑏 𝑘𝑚
− 𝑥 0
𝒙̇̇ =Ax+Bu =[ 𝐽 ] [ 1 ]+[1 ] 𝑢 (13)
𝑘𝑒 𝑅 𝑥2
− 𝐿
−𝐿 𝐿

𝑥1
In this equation x is two dimensional vector x = [ ]
𝑥2
Where

𝑥1= angular velocity of shaft.

27
 𝑥2= armature current.

u is the armature voltage.

R= resistance of armature coil.

L= inductance of the armature coil.

𝑘𝑒 = velocity constant.

𝑘𝑚 = torque constant.

J= moment of inertia.

b is viscous friction coefficient.

By using the Laplace transform of (13), the transfer functions of system according to
angular speed of shaft (𝜔 (s) ) and armature voltage (U(s)) can be calculated:

Take 𝜃̇(s)= 𝜔 (s) and 𝐸𝑎(𝑠)=U(s) from motor model we have

𝜔 (s) 𝑘𝑚
= (14)
U(s) ([(Ls+R) ( +B)+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚] )

𝜔 (s) 𝑘𝑚
U(s) = 2 𝑏 𝑅 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘 𝑒 𝑘 𝑚)
(𝐽𝐿[s +((𝐽 )+(𝐿))s+ 𝐽𝐿
])

𝑘𝑚
𝜔 (s) 𝐽𝐿
= (15)
U(s) 2 𝑏 𝑅 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘 𝑒 𝑘 𝑚)
([s +((𝐽)+(𝐿))s+ 𝐽𝐿
])

(15) in time domain is as follows:

𝑏 𝑅 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) 𝑘𝑚
s2 𝜔 (s)+ (( ) + ( )) s 𝜔 (s)+ 𝜔 (s)= U(s)
𝐽 𝐿 𝐽𝐿 𝐽𝐿

𝑑2 𝜔 𝑏 𝑅
(𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚)
2
+ (( ) + ( )) 𝑑𝜔+ 𝑘
𝜔= 𝑚 u (16)
𝑑𝑡 𝐽 𝐿 𝑑𝑡 𝐽𝐿 𝐽𝐿

28
However, if the state variables consider 𝑥
1 = 𝜔 and 𝑥 1̇ =𝜔̇
2= 𝑥 .The system described by
equation (14) by equation (17) will be expressed, Where the only variable is the angular
velocity and derivative.
𝑥1̇ =𝜔̇ =𝑥
2 (a)
From eqn (16)
𝑥̇ + 𝑏 𝑅 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) 𝑘
𝑥 = 𝑚u
2 ((𝐽) + (𝐿)) 𝑥2 + 𝐽𝐿
1 𝐽𝐿

𝑘𝑚)
𝑥̇ =- 𝑏 𝑅 -(𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑥 +1𝑘𝑚 u (b)
((𝐽 ) + (𝐿 )) 𝑥2 𝐽𝐿 𝐽𝐿
2

Therefore the state space model is

𝑥1 0 1 𝑥1 0
[ ] =[ ] [ ]+[ 𝑚] 𝑢
𝑘 (17)
̇ ��1 𝐴2 𝑥 2
𝑥2 𝐽𝐿

Where

𝐴 = - (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚)) (18)

1 ( 𝐽𝐿

𝑏 𝑅
𝐴2= -( () + ()) (19)
𝐽 𝐿

The methodology to design switching function is given below

4.3 Design of the switching function:

We are going to set the angular velocity over a certain value r, so switching function is

𝜎 = 𝑠1 (𝑥-r)1 + 𝑠 2 𝑥2 (20)

If the controller switching function is designed to be placed on the surface

𝜎 = 0. Put 𝜎 = 0 in eqn (20)

0=𝑠1 (𝑥-r)1+ 𝑠 2 𝑥2

We have 𝑥1 = 𝜔 and 𝑥2= 𝑥1̇ =𝜔̇

29
 𝑑𝜔
𝑠1 𝜔 -𝑠1 r+𝑠2 𝑑𝑡
=0

𝑑𝜔
𝑠 = 𝑠 (r- 𝜔)
2 1

𝑑𝜔 𝑠1
= 𝑑𝑡
(r−𝜔) 𝑠2

On applying integration on both sides from 0 to t as limits

𝑑𝜔 𝑠1
∫ =∫ 𝑑𝑡
(r−𝜔) 𝑠2

It gives log(r − 𝜔)= - 𝑠1 t

𝑠2

𝑠
− 1𝑡
(r − 𝜔)=𝑒 𝑠2

From above eqn

𝑠
− 1𝑡
𝜔 = r- 𝑒 𝑠2 (21)

𝑠1
𝜔̇ =𝑠1 𝑒 −𝑠2 𝑡
(22)
𝑠2

As equation (17) it is regular form, so the transformation matrix is equal to the unit matrix
Factor 𝑠2 according to equation (8) must be calculated

𝑠2 =𝐵2 −1

This gives

𝐽𝐿
𝑠2 = (23)
𝑘𝑚

Also according to (1-8) 𝑠1 calculated and w Pole placement method using

(1-10) .Suppose we have to placed system poles in 𝜆 so we have

𝑠1
=-𝜆 (24)
𝑠2

30
 As (21), (22) and (24) shown 𝜆 determines the speed of convergence of the system
output So it is better to choose a small negative value Thus, the switching function was
designed as follows
𝜎 = 𝑠1 (𝑥-r)+ 𝑠 𝑥
1 2 2

We have

𝑠1 = -𝑠2 𝜆
𝜎 = −𝑠2 (𝑥-r)+1 𝑠 2 𝑥2

σ = (- 𝜆 (𝜔 − 𝑟))+ 𝜔̇ ) (25)
𝑘𝑚

is the switching function obtained which is involved in speed and different parameters of
motor and is calculated with help of the given real motor parameters which further used in
controller design given below.

4.4 Controller design:

If the equation (17) can be rewritten based on the state variables and 𝑋1 =(𝑥-r)1 the
following is reached

̇ 𝐴̃ 𝐴̃12 𝑋1 0
[𝑋1 ]=[ 11 ] [ ]+ (26)
[ ]𝑢
𝜎 𝐴̃21 𝐴̃22 σ 1 𝑛

𝐴̃11 & 𝐴̃12 can be obtained as follows

We have 𝑋1 =(𝑥-r)1= 𝜔-r

𝑋1̇ = 𝑥
1̇ =𝑥
2

To obtain parameters in 𝑋1 and σ adding and subtracting 𝜆 (𝑥-r)1 on both sides

𝑋̇ = -𝑠1 (𝑥-r) + 𝑠1 (𝑥-r) + 𝑥

1 𝑠2 1 𝑠2 1 2

𝑋̇ =-𝑠1 (𝑥-r) + 1 (𝑠 (𝑥-r) + 𝑠 𝑥

)
1 𝑠2 1 𝑠2 1 1 22

But from eqn (20) σ = 𝑠 (𝑥-r) + 𝑠 𝑥and 𝑋1 =(𝑥-r)

1 1 2 2 1

31
 𝑋̇ =- 𝑠1 + 1 σ
1 𝑠2 1 𝑠
2

𝑋̇ =𝜆 𝑋 + 1 σ
1 1 𝑠
2

1
𝐴̃11 = 𝜆 = -𝑠 (27)
𝑠2

̃𝐴12 = 1 (28)
𝑠2

𝐴̃21 &𝐴̃22 can be obtained by

We have σ = 𝑠1 (𝑥-r)+
1 𝑠 2 𝑥2

1̇ +𝑠2 𝑥
𝜎̇ =𝑠1 𝑥 2

From eqn (17)

̇ +𝑠 (𝐴 𝑥
𝜎̇ =𝑠 𝑥 +𝐴 𝑥+𝑢)
1 1 2 11 2 2 𝑠2

On adding and subtracting 𝐴1𝑠2 𝑟 we get

𝜎̇ =𝑠1 𝑥1̇ +𝐴1 𝑠2 𝑥

1− 𝐴1 𝑠2 𝑟 +𝐴2 𝑠2 𝑥
2+ 𝐴1 𝑠2 𝑟 +u

1̇ +𝐴1 𝑠2 (𝑥
𝜎̇ =𝑠1 𝑥 1− 𝑟) +𝐴2 𝑠2 𝑥
2+𝑢𝑛

𝑠1 = - 2 1̇ =𝑥
and 𝑥 2

𝜎̇ =-𝜆 𝑠2 𝑥
2+𝐴1 𝑠2 (𝑥1− 𝑟) +𝐴2 𝑠2 𝑥
2+𝑢𝑛

𝜎̇ =(𝑥
1− 𝑟)([𝐴1 𝑠2 +𝜆𝑠1-𝜆𝑠1 + 𝐴2 𝑠1 − 𝐴2 𝑠1 ] + 𝐴2 𝑠2 𝑥
2-𝜆 𝑠2 𝑥
2+𝑢𝑛

1− 𝑟)[𝐴1 𝑠2 −𝐴2 𝑠1]+ 𝑠1 (𝐴2 -𝜆) (𝑥

𝜎̇ =(𝑥 1− 𝑟)+𝑠2 𝑥
2(𝐴2 - 𝜆)+ 𝑢𝑛

𝜎̇ =[𝐴1 𝑠2 + 𝜆 𝑠1 − 𝐴2 𝑠1] 𝑋1+(𝐴2 - 𝜆)[ 𝑠1 (𝑥-r)+

1 𝑠2 𝑥
2]+ 𝑢𝑛

32
 𝜎̇ =[𝐴1𝑠2 + 𝜆 𝑠1 − 𝐴2𝑠1] 𝑋1+(𝐴2- 𝜆)[ σ]+ 𝑢𝑛

2
𝜎̇ =[𝐴 𝑠 +𝑠1 + 𝐴 ] 𝑋 +(𝐴 - 𝜆)[ σ]+ 𝑢
1 2 𝑠2 2 1 1 2 𝑛

𝜎̇ =[𝐴1𝑠2 -𝜆2 𝑠2 + 𝐴2𝜆𝑠2] 𝑋1+(𝐴2- 𝜆)[ σ]+ 𝑢𝑛

𝐴̃21 =𝐴1 +𝐴2 𝜆 - 𝜆2 (29)

𝐴̃22 = 𝐴2 - 𝜆 (30)

𝑢𝑛=𝑠2 −1u+𝐴1𝑟 (31)

Thus the relations (10), (11) and (12) controller for the system (26) is designed as follows.

𝑢𝑛=- 𝐴̃21 𝑋1-𝐴̃22 σ -𝑘𝑠 sgn(σ)- 𝑘𝑝 σ (32)

The below equation Sets armature voltage feedback based on the derivative of the angular
velocity for motor

U=-𝑠2 [𝐴1r+𝑠2 (𝐴1+𝐴2 - 𝜆2) (𝜔-r)+ (𝐴2- 𝜆) σ +𝑘𝑠sgn(σ)+ 𝑘𝑝 σ (33)

Put 𝐴1r=𝐴1𝜔- 𝐴1 ( 𝜔-r) in eqn (33) we have

U=-𝑠2 [𝐴1 𝜔- 𝐴1 ( -r)+𝑠2 (𝐴1+𝐴2𝜆 - 𝜆2) (𝜔-r)+ (𝐴2- 𝜆) σ +𝑘𝑠sgn(σ)+ 𝑘𝑝 σ] U=

-𝑠2 {[𝐴1 𝜔 + [𝑠2 (𝐴1 + 𝐴2𝜆 − 𝜆2) − 𝐴1 ](𝜔 − r) + (𝐴2 − 𝜆 + 𝑘𝑝)σ +

𝑘𝑠sgn(σ) } (34)

33
So the sliding mode controller is

𝐽𝐿 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒𝑘𝑚
) 𝑏 𝑅
U= {( ) 𝜔 + [( 𝐽𝐿 ) (( (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) ) + (( ) + ( )) λ + λ2) −
𝑘𝑚 𝐽𝐿 𝑘𝑚 𝐽𝐿 𝐽 𝐿

(𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) 𝑏 𝑅
(
𝐽𝐿
)] (𝜔 − r ) + (( ) + ( ) + λ− 𝑘𝑝)σ − 𝑘𝑠sgn(σ)} (35)
𝐽 𝐿

Is controller designed for controlling the speed of dc motor now consider the real
model of dc motor i.e. maxon motor its name plate details is given in the table and
switching function and controller design for the same motor is given by

4.5 Switching function and controller design for a real motor:

Switching function of sliding mode controller for DC motor control method

according to the relations (35) and (33) are designed. If the motor parameters like table
(1),then the controller we will numerically designed as follows. Table 1
The parameters of maxon DC motor

Parameter Value

R 7.17 𝛺

L 0.953*10−3 H

𝑘𝑒 0.29Vs

𝑘𝑚 46*10−3 Nm𝐴−1

J 4.46*10−6 Kg𝑚2

34
 B 2.99*10−4 Nms

𝜆 -100

𝑘𝑠 1

𝑘𝑝 0

Table 4.1 Parameters of maxon motor

Below Figure 4.1 shows the scheme of the controller equation (36) given below.

Figure 4.1: DC motor controller parameters (Table1) sliding mode control method

Block diagram of the sliding mode controller is implemented with the relations (36) and
(37) in the Mat lab SIMULINK (Figure2) is displayed below

35
 Figure 4.2: Block diagram of the sliding mode controller

From the data given in table1 the sliding mode controller for dc motor calculated is
given below:

𝐽𝐿
We have 𝑠2 =
𝑘𝑚

4.46∗10−6 ∗0.953∗10−3
𝑠2 = =.0924*10−6
46∗10−3

𝑠1= -𝑠2 𝜆 =.0924*10−6 *100=.0924*10−4

𝜎 =𝑠1 (𝑥-r)1 + 𝑠 2 𝑥 2 i.e

𝜎 =𝑠1 (𝜔-r) + 𝑠2 𝜔

𝜎 =.0924*10−4 (𝜔-r) +.0924*10−6𝜔̇ (36)

36
After solving The controller u is given by

U= (.0924*10−6){(3675896.1𝜔 + (. 0924 ∗ 10−6)[3675896.1 − 7591.256 + 10000] −

3675896.1)(𝜔 − r) + [7591.256 − 100]𝜎 − 𝑠𝑔𝑛(𝜎)}

U= (.0924*10−6)(3675896.1 𝜔 − 3675895.1(𝜔 − r))+7491.256 𝜎 - 𝑠𝑔𝑛(𝜎) (37)

the above procedure describes the designing of switching function as well as sliding
mode controller for the given dc motor i.e. maxon motor is calculated and its mat lab
SIMULINK model is implemented and its block diagrams are given and its outputs are given
in next chapters.

37
CHAPTER 5

CLASSICAL PID CONTROL & TUNING

This chapter examines a particular control structure that has become almost
universally used in industrial control. It is based on a particular fixed structure controller
family, the so-called PID controller family. These controllers have proven to be robust and
extremely beneficial in the control of many important applications.

PID stands for:

P (Proportional)

I (Integral)

D (Derivative)

5.1 Historical Note:

Early feedback control devices implicitly or explicitly used the ideas of proportional,
integral and derivative action in their structures. However, it was probably not until Minor
sky’s work on ship steering published in 1922, that rigorous theoretical consideration was
given to PID control.

This was the first mathematical treatment of the type of controller that is now used to
control almost all industrial processes. Current situation is Despite the abundance of
sophisticated tools, including advanced controllers, the Proportional, Integral, Derivative
(PID controller) is still the most widely used in modern industry, controlling more that 95%
of closed-loop industrial processes .

PID Structure Consider the simple SISO control loop shown in Figure 5.1:

Figure 5.1: Basic feedback control loop

38
The standard forms PID are:

Proportional only : (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝(𝑠)

1
Proportional plus Integral : 𝐶𝑃𝑇 (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + )
𝑇𝑟𝑠

𝑇
Proportional plus derivative : 𝐶𝑃𝐷 (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + )
𝑇 𝑑𝑠+1

Proportional, integral and

1
Derivative :𝐶 (𝑠) = 𝐾 (1 + +
𝑇𝑑𝑠
)
𝑃𝐼𝐷 𝑝 𝑇𝑑𝑠+1
𝑇𝑟𝑠

5.2 Tuning of PID Controllers:

Tuning:
Users of control systems are frequently faced with the task of adjusting the controller
parameters to obtain a desired behaviour. There are many different ways to do this. One way
to do this is to go through the steps of modelling and control design. Since the PID controller
has so few parameters a number of special empirical methods have also been developed. A
simple idea is to connect a controller, increase the gain until the system starts to oscillate, and
then reduce the gains by an appropriate factor. Another is to measure some features of the
open loop response and to determine controller parameters based on these features. We will
present the Ziegler-Nichols methods which are the most celebrated tuning rules.

5.3 Ziegler-Nichols’ Tuning:

Ziegler and Nichols developed two techniques for controller tuning in the 1940s. The
idea was to tune the controller based on the following idea: Make a simple experiment,
extract some features of process dynamics from the experimental data, and determine
controller parameters from the features.
One method is based on direct adjustment of the controller parameters. A controller is
connected to the process, integral and derivative gain are set to zero and the proportional gain
is increased until the system starts to oscillate. The critical value of the proportional gain Kc is
observed together with the period of oscillation Tc. The controller parameters are then given
in Table6.1. The values in the table were obtained based on many simulations and
experiments on processes that are normally encountered in process industry. There are many
variations of the method which are widely used in industry.

39
 Another method proposed by Ziegler and Nichols is based on determination of the
open loop step response of the process, as shown Figure. The step response is measured by
applying a step input to the process and recording the response. The response is scaled to
correspond to a unit step input and characterized by parameters a and Tdel, which are the
intercepts of the steepest tangent of the step response with the coordinate axes. The parameter
Tdel is an approximation of the time delay of the system and Because of their widespread use
in practice, we present below several methods for tuning PID controllers. Actually these
methods are quite old and date back to the 1950’s. Nonetheless, they remain in widespread
use today.

5.4 Ziegler-Nichols rules for tuning PID controller:

Ziegler and Nichols proposed rules for determining values of the proportional gain𝑘𝑝,
integral Time , and derivative time 𝑇𝑑 based on the transient response characteristics of a
given plant, such determination of the parameters of PID controllers can be made by
engineers on-site by experiments on plant.

 Numerous tuning rules for PID controller have been proposed since the Ziegler-
Nichols proposal. They are available in the literature and from the manufacturers of
such controller.

There are two methods called Ziegler-Nichols tuning rules: the first method and the
second method. We shall give a brief presentation of these two methods. And also one
more method based on Ziegler-Nichols first method or Ziegler-Nichols Reaction Curve
Method i.e. Cohen-Coon Reaction Curve Method

In particular, we will study.

 Ziegler-Nichols first method or Ziegler-Nichols Reaction Curve Method

 Ziegler-Nichols second method or Ziegler-Nichols Oscillation Method
 Cohen-Coon Reaction Curve Method

40
 5.5 Ziegler-Nichols first method or Ziegler-Nichols Reaction Curve Method:

In the first method, we obtain experimentally The response of the plant to a unit-
step input as shown in Figure (5.2).

Plant
U(t) C(t)
Fig. (5.2) unit-step response of a plant

Fig.(5.3) S-shaped response curve

If plant involves neither integrator(s) nor dominant complex-conjugate poles, then such a
unit-step response curve may look S-shaped, as shown Figure (5.3). This method applies if
the response to a step input exhibits an S-shaped curve, such step-response curves may be
generated experimentally or from a dynamic simulation of the plant.

The S-shaped curve may be characterized by two constants, delay time L and time
constant T. The delay time and time constant are determined by drawing a tangent line at the
inflection point of the S-shaped curve and determined the intersections of the tangent line
with the axis and line c(t) = K, as shown in Figure (5.3).

The transfer function C(s)/U(s) may then be approximated by a first-order system with a
transport lag as follows:

𝐶(𝑠) 𝐾𝑒−𝐿𝑠
=
𝑈(𝑠) 𝑇𝑠 + 1

41
Ziegler and Nichols suggested to set the values of 𝐾𝑝, 𝑇𝑖 and 𝑇𝑑 according to the formula in

Shown Table.(5.1).

𝐾𝑝 𝑇𝑖 𝑇𝑑
Type of
controller
𝑇 ∞ 0
P 𝐿

0.9 𝑇 𝐿 0
PI 𝐿
0.3

0.6 𝑇 0.2L 0.5L

PID 𝐿

Table (5.1) Ziegler – Nichols Tuning Rule Based on

Critical Gain 𝐾𝑐𝑟 and critical period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 (First Method)

Notice that the PID controller tuned by the first method of Ziegler- Nichols rule gives
1
(𝑠) = 𝐾 (1 + + 𝑇 𝑠)
𝑐 𝑇 𝑖(𝑠) 𝑑

1
= 1.2 𝑇 (1 + + 0.5𝐿𝑠)
𝐿 2𝐿𝑠

1
(𝑠+ )𝐿2
= 0.6T
𝑠

thus, the PID controller has a pole at origin and double zeros at s = -1/L.

42
5.6 Ziegler-Nichols second method or Ziegler-Nichols Oscillation Method:

In the second method, we first set 𝑇𝑖= ∞ and 𝑇𝑑 = 0. Using the proportional control
action only ( see figure (5.5), increase 𝐾𝑝 from 0 to a critical value 𝐾𝑐𝑟 at which the output
first exhibits sustained oscillation.

Fig (5.4). Closed-loop with a proportional controller

 If the output does not exhibit sustained oscillation for whatever value 𝐾𝑝
may take, then this method does not apply.
Thus, the critical gain 𝐾𝑐𝑟 and the corresponding period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 are experimentally determined
(see Figure (5.5)).

Fig (5.5). Sustained oscillation with period 𝑃 Ziegler

and Nichols suggested that we set the values of the parameters𝐾𝑝, 𝑇𝑖 , and 𝑇𝑑
according to the formula shown in Table.(3.2).

Type of 𝐾𝑝 𝑇𝑖 𝑇𝑑
controller
P 0.5𝐾𝑐𝑟 ∞ 0
PI 0.45𝐾𝑐𝑟 1 0
𝑃
1.2 𝑐𝑟
PID 0.6𝐾𝑐𝑟 0.5𝑃𝑐𝑟 0.125𝑃𝑐𝑟

Table (5.2). Ziegler – Nichols Tuning Rule Based on

43
Critical Gain 𝐾𝑐𝑟 and critical period 𝑃𝑐𝑟 (Second Method)
Notice that the PID controller tuned by the first method of Ziegler- Nichols rule gives
1
(𝑠) = K(1 + + 𝑇 𝑠)
𝑐 𝑇 𝑖(𝑠) 𝑑

1
=0.6𝐾𝑐𝑟 (1 + + 0.125𝑃𝑐𝑟 𝑠)
𝑃𝑐𝑟𝑠

4 2
(𝑠+𝑃 )
=0.075 𝐾𝑐𝑟 𝑃𝑐𝑟 𝑠
𝑐𝑟

Thus, the PID controller has pole at the origin and double zeros at s = - 4
𝑃𝑐𝑟

Note that if the root-locus method to find the critical gain 𝐾 𝑐𝑟 and the frequency of the
sustained oscillations𝜔 , where 2𝜋 = 𝑃 these values can be found from the crossing points
𝑐𝑟 𝜔𝑐𝑟 𝑐𝑟

of root-locus branches with the jω axis.

 If the root-locus branches do not cross the jω axis, this method does not apply.

5.7 Cohen-Coon Reaction Curve Method:

Cohen and Coon carried out further studies to find controller settings which, based on
the same model, lead to a weaker dependence on the ratio of delay to time constant. Their
suggested controller settings are shown in Table 5.3:

Table 5.3: Cohen-Coon tuning using the reaction curve

PID controllers are commonly been employed in process control industries hence
various techniques for tuning PID controllers to achieve certain performance index for
system’s dynamic response has presented above now the technique to be adopted for

44
determining the proportional integral and derivative constants of the controller (called tuning
process in process control parlance) depends upon the dynamical response of the plant.

In presenting the various techniques we shall assume the basic control configuration
of figure shown below, wherein the controller input is the error between the desired output
and the actual output .this error is manipulated by the controller(PID) to produce a command
signal for the plant according to relationship

1
(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + + 𝑇𝑑)
𝑇 𝑠𝑖

Where 𝐾𝑝= proportional gain 𝑇𝑖= integral time constan 𝑇𝑑 = derivative time constant

Figure 5.6. PID controller with plant

5.8 PID tuning for real plant:

For my thesis work the dynamic model of the plant is known, so the PID controller
can be tuned by using Ziegler-Nichols method. It is first assumed that the controller has only
proportional gain(𝐾𝑝)term. we then proceed to determine the critical gain , 𝐾𝑒𝑟 for the closed
loop system(here the motor transfer along with proportional term shown in figure ) to just get
into oscillations. The corresponding period 𝑇𝑒𝑟 of the oscillations is determined. Knowing
these two values the PID controller can be tuned using the following results

= 0.6 𝐾𝑒𝑟

= 0.5 𝑇𝑒𝑟

= 0.125𝑇𝑒𝑟

Hence I have the dynamic model of the plant and along with proportional gain is given by

45
Now consider plant transfer function is given by

𝜔 (s) 𝑘𝑚
=
U(s) ([(Ls+R) ( +B)+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚] )

After substituting the values in the above transfer function from the maxon motor
parameters the transfer function is given by
𝜔 (s) 46∗10^−3
=
U(s) 4.21226∗10−9 𝑠2+6.01861∗10−5𝑠+0.01334

The closed loop equation along with proportional gain is given by

𝜔 (s) 46∗10^−3𝐾 𝑝
=
U(s) 4.21226∗10−9 𝑠2+6.01861∗10−5𝑠+(0.01334+𝐾 𝑝 )

From the above transfer function the characteristic equation is given by

4.21226 ∗ 10−9 𝑠2 + 6.01861 ∗ 10−5𝑠 + (0.01334 + )=0

The critical gain is determined by Rout array for the characteristic equation

4.21226 ∗ 10−9 𝑠2 + 6.01861 ∗ 10−5𝑠 + (0.01334 + )=0

𝑠2 4.21226 ∗ 10−9 0.01334 + 𝐾𝑝

𝑠1 6.01861 ∗ 10−5 0

𝑠0 0.01334 + 𝐾𝑝 0

It is easily seen from the routh array the plant would be unstable for

0.01334 + >0
𝐾𝑝> -0.01334 so this gives 𝐾𝑒𝑟=0.01

46
 4.21226 ∗ 10−9 𝑠2 + (0.01334 + )=0

From this 𝜔 = ± 2142.75

2𝜋
𝑇𝑒𝑟 = 2142.75 =2.9323*10−3

So 𝐾𝑝 = 0.6*10−3
𝑇𝑖 = 0.5*2.9323*10−3 =1.1466*10−3

𝑇𝑑 =.125*2.9323*10−3 =1.8327*10−4
We have

1
(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 (1 + + 𝑇𝑑𝑠)
𝑇 𝑠𝑖
1
(𝑠) = 0.6*10−3( 1 + +1.8327*10−4 s
1.1466∗10−3𝑠

This is the equation obtained for PID plant and this plant is added before the real motor
i.e. in this thesis maxon motor is taken and its transfer function also given above and combine
it is developed in mat lab Simulink model is given below the block diagram

Figure 5.7.simulink model of motor along with PID controller.

Figure(5.7) shows the Simulink model of real motor with PID controller and it simulated in
mat lab and output is obtained for tuned values. And also a comparison is made between
proposed sliding mode controller and PID controller its output and comparison simulink
model along with its outputs are given in next chapter.

47
CHAPTER 6

SIMULATION RESULTS
6.1 Introduction to Mat lab:
Mat lab is a high-performance language for technical computing. It integrates
computation, visualization, programming in an easy-to-use environment where problems and
solutions are expressed in familiar mathematical notation. Certain tools in the simulink of mat
lab help us to realize the required networks i.e. power system network or control system
plants etc.

6.2 Simulation:
In this thesis work firstly simulink model of sliding mode controller was introduced
and then the smc is attached with the real model of dc motor i.e. for maxon motor. With the
help of the given parameters of the maxon motor its dynamical model is obtained and a
controller is designed to control the speed of dc motor is designed the process was explained
in chapter 4.the figure below gives the sliding mode controller and controller equation
obtained to control the speed of dc motor which was designed with help of state space model
of dc motor is given by

So the sliding mode controller is

𝐽𝐿 (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒𝑘𝑚) 𝑏 𝑅
U= {( ) 𝜔 + [( 𝐽𝐿 ) (( (𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) ) + (( ) + ( )) λ + λ2) −
𝑘𝑚 𝐽𝐿 𝑘𝑚 𝐽𝐿 𝐽 𝐿

(𝑅𝑏+𝑘𝑒 𝑘𝑚) ( ) 𝑏 𝑅
( + (( ) + ( ) + λ− 𝑘𝑝)σ − 𝑘𝑠sgn(σ)}
𝐽𝐿
)] 𝜔 − r 𝐽 𝐿
(6.1)

The final controller equation obtained for the real model of maxon motor is given by

The controller u is given by

U= (.0924*10−6){(3675896.1𝜔 + (. 0924 ∗ 10−6)[3675896.1 − 7591.256 +

10000] − 3675896.1)(𝜔 − r) + [7591.256 − 100]𝜎 − 𝑠𝑔𝑛(𝜎)} (6.2)

U= (.0924*10−6)(3675896.1 𝜔 − 3675895.1(𝜔 − r))+7491.256 𝜎 - 𝑠𝑔𝑛(𝜎) (6.3)

Is the final equation obtained to control the speed.

48
with help of reference speed we can maintain the constant speed so the controller
designed for the above equation is shown in the block diagram given below

Figure 6.1 the block diagram of the controller equation

The mat lab model and response of the real plant is given below

Figure 6.2 original system simulink model

The corresponding output is shown in fig 6.3

49
 Figure 6.3 original system output

Block diagram of the sliding mode controller is implemented with the relations (6.2)
and (6.3) in the Mat lab SIMULINK (Figure6.4) is displayed below

Figure6.4: simulink model of the sliding mode controller.

Figure(6.4) shoes the simulink model of the sliding mode controller. After simulating the
above diagram in MAT LAB for the reference speed of 1000rpm is given below

50
 Figure 6.5 sliding mode controller output

Now for the same maxon motor a PID controller is attached and the corresponding simulink
model and its output for the same reference input of 1000rpm is given below

Figure 6.6 simulink model of dc motor with PID controller

Now the output of the above simulink model after simulation is given by

51
 Figure (6.7) PID controller output

Figure shows the PID controller output and the PID controller is connected to the
same maxon motor to which smc is connected. If we observe the output the PID gives some
oscillations whereas SMC gives output without any oscillations and its steady state and
transient responses are completely zero whereas PID produces some oscillations and its
steady state and transient responses are not zero. The comparisons are made in the next topic.
6.3 Comparison:
From above Simulink models we can make a comparison between the sliding mode controller
and the PID controller. The block diagram of combined SMC and PID is given below

52
 Figure 6.8 block diagram of combined SMC and PID

The corresponding output obtained after simulating the above diagram is given by

Figure 6.9 outputs of combined SMC and PID

53
 Now if we compare the above two with original system the corresponding simulink
model and its output is given by

Figure 6.10 simulink models of original plant, smc and pid

Figure 6.11 outputs of original plant, smc and pid

54
 Now another Comparison is made original system along with sliding mode controller,
pid and pd controllers corresponding simulink model and its output are given below.

Figure 6.12 Simulink model of original plant, smc, pid, pd controllers

Figure 6.13 output of original plant, smc, pid, pd controllers

55
 Now to explain the robustness of SMC if any parameters of system like armature
resistance, armature inductance and viscous friction coefficient of the original system is
increased by 10% and corresponding responses are observed and its Simulink models and
corresponding outputs are given below.

Fig6.14 Simulink model when system parameter viscous friction coefficient increased by10%

Fig 6.15 output scope when system parameter viscous friction coefficient increased by 10%

56
Fig 6.16 simulink model when system parameter armature inductance increased by 10%

Fig 6.17 output scope when system parameter armature inductance increased by 10%

57
Fig 6.18 Simulink model when system parameter armature resistance increased by 10%

Fig 6.19output scope when system parameter armature resistance increased by 10 %

58
 If we observe the out puts of the above figures PID and PD controller gives some
oscillations and contains steady state error. whereas SMC gives output without any
oscillations and its undershoot and overshoots are completely zero whereas PID &PD
produces some oscillations and undershoots and overshoots. This reveals that SMC is a robust
controller i.e. irrespective of any disturbances SMC produce the same output where as for the
same motor and same reference speed PID produces oscillations for which the system
parameters are disturbed.

Controller Under shoot Peak Overshoot Steady state Settling time in

(%) (%) error (%) mille sec
Original plant 0 0 0 12.5

PID 18 39 2.45 2.5

SMC 0 0 0 3.1

PD 22 45 1.82 4.2
Table 6.1 comparisons between SMC and PID and PD controllers with original plant

The above table shows the differences in terms of undershoots and overshoots of the system.
If we observe the above table SMC doesn’t contains any undershoots and overshoots it shows
the robustness of sliding mode controller a small difference observed in settling time while
comparing with pid and pd controllers of the system it may not effect that much the system.

59
CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSIONS

7.1 Conclusions:

In this paper sliding mode control (SMC) Proposed to speed control of DC motor. At
first for controlling speed of DC motor a simplified closed loop is utilized. Then DC motor is
modelled after that speed controller is designed. As sliding mode control is based on the
system Dynamic characteristics also it took a lack of influence of external disturbances from
user as result it worked more useful and results confirms that used sliding mode control for
speed control is more efficient in comparison with PID and PD controllers. And also the
designed SMC is robust controller shown by varying the different parameters of the motor.

7.2 Future Scope:

From The table given in chapter 6.1 shows the differences in terms of undershoot and
overshoot and steady state error of the system. If we observe the table SMC doesn’t contains
any undershoots and overshoots and steady state error. It shows the robustness of sliding
mode controller. And if we observe the comparisons of all controllers, graphs pid and pd
controller and SMC the settling time of SMC is slightly less than PID controller. This may
not affect the system that much but this can be achieved by making certain variations in the
system.

60
 REFERENCES

[1] J.Huspeka, “Second order sliding mode control of the DC motor”, international
conference on process control, pp0 134-139, 2009.

[2] A.Rhif, “Stabilizing sliding mode control design and application for DC motor:
speed control”, international journal of instrumentation and control systems, vol.2,
no.1, 2012.

[3] P. Sicard, K. Al-Haddad, and Y. Dude, “DC motor position control using sliding
mode and disturbance estimator”, 20th annual IEEE power electronics specialist
conference, pp. 431-437, 1989.

[4] J.Chakravorty, R.Sharma, “Fuzzy logic based method of speed control of DC

motor”, international journal of emerging technology and advanced engineering, vol.
3, no. 4, 2013.

[5] V.I. Utkin, “sliding mode control design principles and applications to electric
drives”, IEEE transactions on industrial electronics, vol. 40, no. 1, 1993.

[6] W. Xia, J. Wang, J. Shi, “Fuzzy+PID variable sliding mode control for servo plat”,
IEEE 3rd international conference on informatization, pp. 32-35, 2012.

[7] Infineon Technologies, Basic DC motor speed PID control with the Infineon
Technologies

[8] R. Malhotra, T. Kaur, “DC motor control using fuzzy logic controller”, international
journal of advanced engineering sciences and technologies, vol.8, no. 2, pp. 291-
296, 2011.

[9] Perruquetti, W., Barbot, J. P.: Sliding Mode Control in Engineering. Control
Engineering Series, 11.New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 432 pp,. ISBN 0-8247-
0671-4 ,2002.

[10] M.M. Shaker,Y.M.B.I.Al-khashab, “Design and implementation of fuzzy logic

61
 system for DC motor speed control”, first International Conference on Energy,
Power and Control, pp.123-130, 2010.

[11] K.M.A.Prasad, B.M. Krishna, U. Nair, “Modified chattering free sliding mode
control of DC motor”, international journal of modern engineering research, vol. 3,
pp.1419-1423, 2013.

[12] H. Komurcugil, “Non-singular terminal sliding mode control of DC-DC buck

converters”, control engineering practice, vol.21 no. 3, pp. 321-332,2013.

[13] Auzani bin jidin”Sliding mode Variable structure control design principles and
application to dc drives” Universiti Teknologi Malaysia,OCTOBER 2004

[14] John Y. Hung, W. Gao, J.C. Hung. Variable Structure Control: A survey, IEEE
Trans. On Industrial Electronics, Vol.40, no.1, pp.1- 22, February 1993.

[15] De Carlo, Zak S. H. Mathews G.P. Variable structure control of nonlinear

multivariable systems: A Tutorial, Proceedings of IEEE, Vol.76, No.3, pp. 212-232,
March 1988.

[16] I. Utkin.Sliding mode control design principles and applications to Electric drives,
IEEE Trans on Industrial Electronics, Vol.40, no.1, pp. 23-36, February 1993.

62