I measured the step response of a system. Now, I can find the transfer function H(s) as a first or second order approximation. Then I'm able to select the right gains for the PID controller.
The PID itself is implemented into a microcontroller, so it has an ADC on the input and a DAC on the output.
I don't understand if I can create the PID transfer function in s-domain G(s) and then convert to z-domain to find the new kp, ki, kd or I have to convert the whole H(s) to H(z) and then discuss about the PID (in z-domain).
Another question: to convert either H(s) to H(z) or G(s) to G(z) may I use the Tustin approximation?
z=(2+Ts)/(2-Ts)
I read this on the "Applied Control Theory for Embedded System" by Tim Wescott (who I thank for his suggestion to buy the book!) but I'm not sure about "[the Tustin approximation] is generally useful [...] when you are converting an inherited analog controller to digital".
You can do either. I prefer to model the system in the s domain, then transform it into the z domain. If you do this right it'll take the behavior of the DAC into account -- see the section titled "Exact" (which should say "Exact Models") starting on page 179 in my book.
This doesn't matter much if you're sampling really fast, or if you know you're going to do tuning once you get the thing into the sampled-time domain.
You can also find the P, I and D gains in the continuous time domain, then construct a controller with those same gains in the sampled time domain. This keeps your controller parameterized in terms of its gains, which is helpful for future tuning.
Yes you may. The only downside to converting your plant model is that the Tustin approximation always gives you an improper fraction in z, where the leading term of the numerator is of the same order as the leading term of the denominator. This doesn't matter too much for your controller, but the model of the plant would imply an instantaneous response, which is absurd given that in reality the write to the DAC happens strictly after the read from the ADC. You can fix this by just dividing by an extra 'z', or ignoring the fact that the plant polynomial isn't realizable and getting on with life.
That refers to a situation where you may be you may be tasked with taking an analog controller that works just fine and converting it to a digital controller. In such a case you can extract the analog controller's s-domain transfer function, use the Tustin approximation to convert it to digital, then implement your digital controller.
In the early days of digital control, and to a great extent now, the procedure was to design a controller in the s domain even though you had no intention of implementing a continuous-time controller. When you were happy with it, you'd convert it to z. This is the right thing to do if you are significantly more comfortable in the s domain than z, but I think it's better overall to get comfortable in the z domain and do all your design there -- this slant is _quite_ discernible in my book, if you know what to look for.
I'm glad that you're finding the book helpful. I've recently expanded the errata, so you may want to check the book's page on my web site. I hope to be putting interesting things in the addenda as well, but I'm buried in work at the moment -- look at it every month or so for developments.
--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Well, so for simple systems it's better to use the 'extact model'.
Now I understand!
[cut]
I'll check on your website for errata and updates, thanks.
I think your book is very useful because it shows the whole world of the system control (for embedded system, of course :) ) using few words for each concept. Once one read it, one knows problems and some solutions and then can study more detailed books for the specific concept.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.