Teaching Modern Control System Analysis and Design

Session 2793
Teaching Modern Control System Analysis and Design
Robert H. Bishop, Richard C. Dorf

The University of Texas at Austin / The University of California, Davis
Abstract
In today s university classroom, the process by which classical and modern control theory is
taught must address the issue of integrating the theory with pertinent design issues, including
modeling, implementation, complexity, and cost. In this paper the authors discuss a control
system analysis and design approach adopted in their textbooks in which a series of steps
embodied in a block diagram is suggested to guide students through the design process. Two
examples are presented to highlight the use of the design process block diagram.
I. Introduction
Most engineering professors understand that a design paradigm shift has occurred in recent years
wherein product performance issues are overshadowed by manufacturing and cost issues.
Practical matters are paramount. As might be expected, the various engineering disciplines have
been impacted to varying degrees. In the systems and controls area, the design paradigm shift
emphasizes the need for students to understand the practical issues (such as modeling and
implementation) associated with control system design. In the past, these practical issues have
been the forte of mechanical, chemical, and aerospace engineering departments, while the
delivery of systems and control theory has been the strength of electrical engineering
departments. This comment is based on anecdotal (hence debatable) evidence and certainly there
are exceptions. What is clear, however, is that to prepare students for productive careers in
systems and controls, engineering courses must address the issue of integrating the theory with
relevant design issues, including modeling, implementation, complexity, and cost. As always,
we must remain cognizant of the fact that every student should design control systems upon a
firm foundation of mathematics and systems theory. So in the end it is a question of balance.
We believe that the control system analysis and design approach adopted by the authors in their
learning materials, including the textbook entitled Modern Control Systems1, the supplemental
text Modern Control Systems Analysis and Design Using MATLAB and Simulink2, and the
website http://www.prenhall.com/dorf achieves this balance, hence can play a significant
role in presenting practical notions of design of control systems in a chalk-and-talk lecture.
It is important to introduce students to the process of control system design in a fashion that is
familiar and inviting. To this end, for students studying control systems we suggest a series of
steps embodied in the familiar block diagram form shown in Fig. 1 to guide students through the
design process. Since design is a creative endeavor, there is not a unique design approach that
always leads to a good design for different classes of problems. Recognizing this fact, we
Page 6.951.1
Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright ' 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
present in our learning materials a reasonably structured methodology to guide professors and
their students. Can the design approach based on the structured flow of steps illustrated in Fig.1
be applied in areas other than control system design? The answer is probably not. Obviously,
control system design is only one important example of design, but since control systems are the
focus of our efforts here, we concentrate on classification and description of techniques
applicable to controls. Can the design methodology presented here be directly used in the
design of control systems in the world outside of the classroom? Again, the answer is probably
not. The physical world is in general more complex than can be presented in the classroom
without obsfucation of the main control theoretic ideas and methods. So, what is the proper
balance? The answer is to utilize an approach that, while simple enough to be useful in the
classroom setting and allows the usual emphasis on control theory, addresses the main deficiency
that many students recognize when confronted with real-world control design problems, namely,
the lack of sufficient skills in modeling of physical systems. How many times have we heard
students ask, Where does the transfer function come from? We can address this question by
presenting the derivations of interesting examples in supplementary material in more detail than
Figure 1. The design process block diagram.

Page 6.951.2
possible in the main text. A controls class is not the optimal place to address physical system
modeling, but nevertheless, it does provide a means for introducing the subject and for pointing
out its importance.
With the advent of powerful computers and software for control system design, students are
sometimes tempted to bypass modeling simplification and controller design and analysis
techniques, and use MATLAB1 (or equivalent program) to iterate on certain controller
parameters (e.g., the three controller gains in a PID controller). This is especially true with the
development of very interactive SISO design tools such as SISO Design Tool and LTI Viewer
available in recent versions of the MATLAB Controls Toolbox. There are many reasons why it is
important to develop a basic understanding of the underlying characteristics and fundamental
relationships of the problem, including hand-sketching root locus and Bode diagrams. For
example, suppose the design specifications change. Or maybe the plant changes in response to
other than engineering pressures (e.g., management decisions for cost considerations). Then
which controller gains change to meet the new design specifications? Is a completely different
controller structure needed? With a fundamental understanding of the underlying control theory
and coupled with knowledge of the physical system dynamics, students can more readily obtain
practical design solutions. MATLAB and Simulink are valuable tools in the design process
effectively performing repetitive design steps quickly. Time saved in performing mundane
computations can be better spent confirming engineering intuition regarding the design variables
and how they affect the system response. Traditional lectures on control system design using
root locus, frequency response techniques, and state-space design methods should not be
replaced with lectures on computer programming.
In our design approach, we emphasize the use of analytic methods based on the notion of
dominant poles to obtain initial control system designs (using root locus methods, for
example). The idea is to design the controller such that the closed-loop system response is
dominated by poles placed appropriately to meet the design specifications. Then, MATLAB and
Simulink are used to verify that he design specifications have indeed been satisfied and to fine-
tune the design, if necessary. Thus, in the design block diagram in Fig. 1, the use of MATLAB
becomes a factor only in the final block to Optimize the parameters and analyze the
performance of the controlled system.
II. Pedagogy
Our teaching materials are continually evolving and improving with the advent of new tools
(such as low-cost, high-performance desktop computers), advancements in software (such as
MATLAB and Simulink), especially with regard to the effective uses of graphical user
interfaces, and increased access to the Internet. Some of us can envision the day when students
will effectively interact with their computers to such an extent that hand-sketching of root locus
will be unnecessary—we are not there yet, but moving in that direction.
1
MATLAB, Simulink, and the Control Toolbox are registered trademarks of The Mathworks, Inc.
Page 6.951.3
Effective use of the Internet provides yet another avenue for efficient transmission of new and
additional material to students. For those students that need more practice with modeling
physical systems, the latest edition of Modern Control Systems utilizes the Internet to provide
that additional material. The website also offers the opportunity for students to practice their
problem-solving skills. Many students need extra time honing their problem-solving skills and
benefit by having instant feedback. In the old days this was provided by showing answers to
odd-problems at the end of the book. It is preferable to utilize the Internet since problems can be
easily added, modified, and improvements do not wait for future editions. The MCS website
hosts a set of true-and-false exercises, multiple-choice problems, and word matching games.
Also, access to the Internet by students allows authors to transfer important, space-consuming
appendices for hosting on the website. This then provides more room to increase the coverage of
design issues, including a greater variety of real-world examples, more complete coverage of
modeling, and so forth. In the latest edition of Modern Control Systems, five appendices were
moved to the website, leaving room for increased coverage of operational amplifiers and the
introduction of Simulink in the main text. Students are alerted to the existence of supplemental
web-based information via the margin icon .
For the foreseeable future, however, the main textbook will focus on the basics of control
systems (mathematical fundamentals, root locus, Bode plots, and so forth), while the design
supplement and the Internet will be used to deliver related information (such as modeling, design
methods, and so on). We organize the presentation of topics in design according to following
pattern: early on, we focus on modeling, design specifications, and identification of important
variables to be to controlled. Only later does the focus change to controller selection and design
and analysis of the controlled system.
One important characteristic of our teaching
materials is our connections. That is, connections
between control theory presented in the classroom
and control system design in practice outside the
classroom, connections between the main text
Modern Control Systems and the supplement
Modern Control Systems Analysis and Design
Using MATLAB and Simulink, connections between
the MATLAB scripts and the surrounding text in
the books, and connections between problem
statements and associated visual references (such as
photographs or schematics). The connections begin
on the cover where the interrelationship between the
world around us (represented by the flower), the
past and present (represented by the tracks in the
sand), and the future (represented by the small
electro-mechanical insect ) are depicted. The
photo is taken from the book by Menzel and
D Aluisio3 , but the interpretation is ours. There are numerous other connections that can be
considered, but we want to focus here on those that impact directly the control design issues.
Page 6.951.4
Each design example in the supplement is adapted from the main text Modern Control Systems,
thereby establishing the relationship between the MATLAB design supplement and the main
textbook. The connection between the supplement and the main text has been an important
aspect to the success our approach in the classroom. One of the strengths of our approach to
introducing students to design is to make a direct connection between the theory in the main
textbook and the analysis and design " in the supplement. This provides continuity of material
for the students, and also supports the learning process by reinforcing important concepts. The
relationship between the chapter design problems in the supplement (denoted by MCS A&D) and
the main text (denoted by MCS) is shown in Table 1. In this paper, we discuss two of our design
examples: Fluid Flow Modeling and Blood Pressure Control.
Table 1. Relationship between design problems in the supplement and the main text.
MCS A&D Design Problem MCS

Chapter Problem
1 Space Shuttle P9.9
2 Fluid Flow Modeling P2.12
3 Space Station Modeling website
4 Blood Pressure Control AP4.5
5 Airplane Lateral Dynamics DP5.1
6 Robot-controlled Motorcycle DP6.6
7 Automobile Velocity Control DP7.12
8 Six-legged Ambler DP8.2
9 Hot Ingot Robot Control DP9.10
10 Milling Machine Control P10.36
11 Diesel Electric Locomotive DP11.3
12 Digital Audio Tape Control DP12.2
13 Fly-by-wire Control Surface AP13.2
III. Example: Fluid Flow Modeling
The fluid flow example (taken from Chapter 2 of Modern Control Systems Design and Analysis)
demonstrates the application of basic physical principles, such as the conservation of mass, to the
development of pertinent equations of fluid motion. This problem is adapted from P2.12 in the
main text Modern Control Systems. The development of the underlying equations of motion
requires making important simplifying assumptions, such as steady, inviscid, and irrotational
fluid flow. Students need to become familiar with the concept of making appropriate
assumptions as a natural part of the design process. Obviously, not all students will be experts in
fluid dynamics, but many may be one-day required to design control systems for such physical
plants. We hope that they can locate and read the appropriate literature and develop reasonable
Page 6.951.5
models from the published materials. Each example in Modern Control Systems Design and
Analysis comes with an appropriate list of references4-6. The obtained equations of motion are
then linearized about an equilibrium condition to obtain linear, constant coefficient equations for
which transfer functions models can be obtained using Laplace transform methods.
The design process in this example focuses on the two elements: (i) Establish the system
configuration, and (ii) Obtain a model of the process, the actuator, and the sensor. The
students are presented with the design block diagram, shown in the center of Fig. 2. The block
diagram has the two blocks highlighted to indicate that these are the emphasized design elements
for that chapter. Notice that the design block diagram also contains a list (running down the right
hand-side) that connects equation numbers, figures, and so on in the text with elements of the
design block diagram. This connects the design process elements with specific information in
the written text.
Each example in the book utilizes three main teaching elements: (i) the text itself, which includes
system descriptions, equations, numbers, etc., (ii) figures and diagrams, and (iii) MATLAB
scripts and associated graphs. All three elements are illustrated in Fig. 2. The MATLAB scripts
include call-outs that provide additional information. For example, in Fig. 2, we see that one
of the lines of the MATLAB script corresponds to Eq. (2.33) of the supplement, and that more
information on the step function utilized in the m-file can be found in the main text. We are
assisting the students to again connect the material, this time, the material text with the
MATLAB scripts.
IV. Example: Blood Pressure Control
In this example (taken from Chapter 4 of Modern Control Systems Design and Analysis), the
students work through the design process block diagram from the top down (skipping only the
controller block, as this topic comes later in the book). This exercise is adapted from AP4.5 in
the main text Modern Control Systems. The first step in the process is to establish the control
goal. In a modern operating room, the anesthetist utilizes an automated system to control the
depth of anesthesia. This is an example of human computer interaction. Most anesthetists
regard mean arterial pressure (MAP) as the most reliable measure of the depth of anesthesia and
the level of the MAP serves as a guide for the delivery of the anesthesia7-11. As indicated in the
design process block diagram in Fig.3, the goal here is to regulate the mean arterial pressure to
any desired set point and maintain the prescribed set point in the presence of unwanted
disturbances. Associated with the stated control goal, the variable to be controlled is the mean
arterial pressure (MAP).
If the overall system is to function in a real-world setting, the closed-loop system should respond
rapidly and smoothly to changes in the MAP set point (made by the anesthetist) without
excessive overshoot. The closed-loop system should also minimize the effects of unwanted
disturbances. There are two important categories of disturbances: surgical disturbances, such as
skin incisions, and measurement errors, such as calibration errors and random stochastic noise.
Page 6.951.6
Relationship to
fluid flow in a water tank.
Topics emphasized in this chapter See example in Sections 2.2 − 2.6.
Input
valve
A1
Q 1 + ∆Q 1 Establish the control goals Excerpted from text ...
% Physical constants
global RHO G A1 A2 Hstar Qstar
H + ∆H RHO=1000; %(kg/m3)
Identify the variables to be controlled
G=9.8; %(m/sec2)
function Hdot=hdot(t,H)
A1=pi/4; A2=pi/400; %(m2) global RHO G A1 A2 Hstar Qstar
A2 Hstar=1; %(m) Q=q(t);
Qstar=34.7711; %(kg/sec) k1=-A2*sqrt(2*G)/A1;
% Nonlinear step response k2=1/RHO/A1;
Q 2 + ∆Q 2 Hdot=k1*sqrt(H)+k2*Q;
t0=0; %Initial time (sec)
tf=300; %Final time (sec)
Write the specifications H0=Hstar; %Steady-state value (m)
Excerpted from text ... function Q=q(t)
[tn,H] = ode45('Hdot',t0, tf, H0); global Qstar
DHn=H-Hstar; % Subtract Hstar to obtain DH DQ=1;
2.3 MATHEMATICAL MODEL AND ASSUMPTIONS Q=Qstar+DQ;
% Linear step response
The general equations of motion (in the context of this chapter) and energy de- t=[0:0.1:300];
scribing uid ow are quite complicated and not currently used in control system k2=1/RHO/A1;
design. The governing equations are coupled nonlinear partial differential equa- See Figure 2.2 for Omega=A2^2*G*RHO/A1/Qstar; See Eq. (2.13)
tions. We must make some selective assumptions that reduce the complexity of Establish the system configuration num=[k2]; den=[1 Omega];
the mathematical model. Although the control engineer is not required to be a water tank with input DH=step(num,den,t); See Section 2.10 in
uid dynamicist, and a deep understanding of uid dynamics is not necessarily and output ports. Modern Control Systems
% Plot results in centimeters (cm)
acquired during the control system design process, it makes good engineering
sense to gain at least a rudimentary understanding of the important simplifying plot(t,100*DH,tn,100*DHn,'--'); grid
assumptions. For a more complete discussion of uid motion, see [12]—[14]. xlabel('Time (sec)'), ylabel('DH (cm)')
Obtain a model of the process, the See Eqs. (2.4) and

2.3.1 Compressibility actuator, and the sensor 6
(2.5) for the non- Nonlinear step response
We assume that the water in the tank is an incompressible uid. An incompress- linear model. See
ible uid has a constant density , ρ (kg/m 3 ). In fact, all uids are compressible Linear step response
to some extent. The compressibility factor, k, is a measure of the compressibil-
Eqs. (2.10) and 5
ity of a uid. A smaller value of k indicates less compressibility. Air (which is (2.12) for the linear
a compressible uid) has a compressibility factor of kair = 0.98 m2 /N, while models.
water has a compressibility factor of k H2 O = 4.9 x 10 -10 m2 /N = 50 x 10 -6 Describe a controller and select key 4
atm -1 . In other words, a given volume of water decreases by 50 one-millionths parameters to be adjusted
of the original volume for each atmosphere (atm) increase in pressure. Thus
3
DH (cm)
Optimize the parameters and 2

analyze the performance See Section 2.5.
This chapter deals 1
with analysis only.
0
If the performance meets the specifications, 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time (sec)
If the performance does not meet the then finalize the design.
specifications, then iterate the configuration.
Figure 2: A fluid flow modeling exercise.
Page 6.951.7
Excerpted from text ... Relationship to blood pressure
control example in Section 4.3.
How can we measure the depth of anesthesia? Most anesthetists regard mean
arterial pressure (MAP) as the most reliable measure of the depth of anesthesia Establish the control goals Regulate the mean
[45]. The level of the MAP serves as a guide for the delivery of inhaled anesthe- Excerpted from text ...
sia. Based on clinical experience and the procedures followed by the anesthetist, arterial pressure to
we determine that the variable to be controlled is the mean arterial pressure. any given set point.
From the control system design perspective, the control goal can be stated in
more concrete terms: 0.2
Control Goal Regulate the mean arterial pressure to any desired set-point and maintain the pre- Identify the variables to be controlled Mean arterial
scribed set-point in the presence of unwanted disturbances. 0.15
curve fit
pressure. measured
Associated with the stated control goal, we identify the variable to be controlled: Five specifications: 0.1
Variable to Be
Mean arterial pressure (MAP).
DS1: settling time
Controlled DS2: % overshoot
Write the specifications 0.05
DS3: tracking error
DS4: dist. rejection
DS5: sys. sensitivity Baseline MAP
Percent decrease in mean arterial pressure, y(t) 0
Time delay
Establish the system configuration -0.05

Based on clinical experience [43], we can explicitly state the control speci- 0 1 2 3 4 5
cations as follows:
See Figure 4.7. Time (min)
Controller, pump,
Control Design DS1 Settling time less than 20 minutes for a 10% step change from the MAP patient, and sensor.
Specifications set-point.
DS2 Percent overshoot less than 15% for a 10% step change from the MAP set- Obtain a model of the process, the
point. See Eqs. (4.5)−(4.7).
actuator, and the sensor
DS3 Zero steady-state tracking error to a step change from the MAP set-point.
DS4 Zero steady-state error to a step surgical disturbance input (of magnitude
|d(t) | < 50) with a maximum response less than ± 5% of the MAP set-
point.
DS5 Minimum sensitivity to plant parameter changes. Describe a controller and select key Three PID controllers given.
parameters to be adjusted See Eq. (4.8) and Table 4.1.
We cover the notion of percent overshoot (DS1) and settling time (DS2) more
thoroughly in Chapter 5. They fall more naturally in the category of system per- This chapter deals
with analysis only. Excerpted from text ...
Optimize the parameters and
analyze the performance
14
Valve Surgical
setting disturbance
12
D(s)
PID 1
PID 2
If the performance meets the specifications, 10 PID 3
Controller Pump
If the performance
Plant does not meet the then finalize the design.
V(s) —
specifications, then iterate the configuration. 8

+ +
R(s) Gc(s) Gp(s) G(s) Y(s)
Desired U(s) Actual blood 6
—
blood pressure
4
pressure
Vapor
Percent decrease in mean arterial pressure (%)
2
Sensor
0
0 5 10 15 20
H(s) Time (min)
Measured blood +
+
pressure change
N(s) - Measurement noise
Figure 3: A blood pressure regulation system.
Page 6.951.8
For example, a skin incision can increase the MAP rapidly by 10 mmHg. Finally, since we want
to apply the same control system to many different patients and we cannot (for practical reasons)
have a separate model for each patient, we must have a closed-loop system that is insensitive to
changes in the plant parameters (that is, it meets the specifications for many different people).
With these thoughts in mind, we determine that reasonable (for use in our classroom setting)
control specifications are: (i) settling time less than 20 minutes for a 10% step change from the
MAP set-point, (ii) percent overshoot less than 15% for a 10% step change from the MAP set-
point, (iii) zero steady-state tracking error to a step change from the MAP set-point, (iv) zero
steady-state error to a step surgical disturbance input (of magnitude |d(t) | ≤ 50) with a maximum
response less than –5% of the MAP set-point, and (v) minimum sensitivity to plant parameter
changes (see Fig. 3). The last specification is somewhat vague, although that is a characteristic
of many real-world specifications.
In the system configuration, depicted in Fig. 3, we identify the major system elements as the
controller, anesthesia pump/vaporizer, sensor, and patient. The system input, R(s), is the desired
mean arterial pressure change, and the output, Y(s), is the actual pressure change. The difference
between the desired and the measured blood pressure change is used by the controller to
determine value settings to the pump/vaporizer that delivers the anesthesia.
Developing an accurate model of a sick patient starting from basic principles of physiology is
difficult. Since the physiological systems in the patient (especially in a sick patient) are not well
understood and not easily modeled, a modeling procedure based on knowledge of the underlying
natural processes is not practical. Even if such a model could be developed, it would, in general,
be a nonlinear, time-varying, multi-input, multi-output model. This type of model is not directly
applicable here in our linear, time-invariant, single-input, single-output system setting. On the
other hand, if we take an input/output viewpoint, we can use impulse response methods to obtain
a patient model experimentally. Then if we restrict ourselves to small changes in blood pressure
from a given set point (such as 100 mmHg), we might make the case that in a small region
around the set point the patient behaves in a linear time-invariant fashion. This approach fits
well into our requirement to maintain the blood pressure around a given set point. The impulse
response approach to modeling the patient response to anesthesia is being used successfully in
practice.
Suppose that we take a black box approach and obtain an impulse response for a patient. This
response is shown in Fig. 3 (for a hypothetical patient---this is not actual data). Notice that the
impulse response initially has a time-delay. This reflects the fact that it takes a finite amount of
time for the patient MAP to respond to the infusion of anesthesia vapor. At this point in the
book, we tell the students to ignore the time-delay, since in subsequent chapters they will learn to
handle time-delays appropriately. A reasonable fit of the data is
y(t) = t e-pt for t ≥0 ,
where p=2 and time (t) is measured in minutes. Different patients are associated with different
Page 6.951.9
values of p. The corresponding transfer function is
1
G( s) = .
(s + p ) 2
This simple model allows us to parameterize the patient with one parameter p. This provides a
mechanism to study sensitivity of the closed-loop system to variations in p by looking at the
sensitivity of the closed-loop transfer function to changes in p. This allows students to apply the
theory that they learn in class to a problem in which they understand where the transfer
function comes from, thus, understanding the limitation of the model.
V. Summary and Conclusions
In summary, the fluid flow problem introduces students to the process of developing a model
beginning with basic physical principles, making simplifying assumptions, appropriately
linearizing, and finally, obtaining a transfer function which can be used in the design process.
The blood pressure regulation problem introduces students to the idea of obtaining models via
experimental means using impulse responses. In both cases, the discussion may be considered
overly simplified by some (especially practicing engineers). However, we feel it provides a good
balance between teaching the basic concepts in controls and helping students connect the theory
to the world around them.
Bibliography
1. Dorf, R. C. and Bishop R. H., Modern Control Systems, 9th Ed., Prentice Hall, 2000.
2. Bishop R. H., Modern Control Systems Analysis and Design Using MATLAB and SIMULINK, Addison Wesley
Longman, Inc., 1997.
3. P. Menzel and Faith D-Aluisio, Robo Spapiens, Material World Books, MIT Press, 2000.
4. J. D. Anderson, Fundamentals of Aerodynamics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1991.
5. G. Emanuel, Gasdynamics Theory and Applications, AIAA Education Series, New York, 1986.
6. Arnold M. Kuethe and Chuen-Yen Chow, Foundations of Aerodynamics: Bases of Aerodynamic Design, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986.
7. J. B. Slate, L. C. Sheppard, V. C. Rideout, and E. H. Blackstone, Closed-loop Nitroprusside Infusion: Modeling
and Control Theory for Clinical Applications, Proceedings IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and
Systems, 1980, pp. 482—488.
8. B. C. McInnis and L. Z. Deng, Automatic Control of Blood Pressures with Multiple Drug Inputs, Annals of
Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 13, 1985, pp. 217—225.
9. R. Meier, J. Nieuwland, A. M. Zbinden, and S. S. Hacisalihzade, Fuzzy Logic Control of Blood Pressure During
Anesthesia, IEEE Control Systems, December 1992, pp. 12—17.
10. L. C. Sheppard, Computer Control of the Infusion of Vasoactive Drugs, Proceedings IEEE International
Symp. on Circuits and Systems, 1980, pp. 469—473.
11. R. Vishnoi and R. J. Roy, Adaptive Control of Closed-Circuit Anesthesia, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical
Engineering, Vol. 38, No. 1, 1991, pp. 39—47.
Page 6.951.10
ROBERT H. BISHOP
Robert H. Bishop is a Professor of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics at The University of Texas at
Austin and holds the Myron L. Begeman Fellowship in Engineering. An active member of AIAA, IEEE, and ASEE,
he recently received the John Leland Atwood Award from the American Society of Engineering Educators and the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics given periodically to a leader who has made lasting and
significant contributions to aerospace engineering education. Dr. Bishop is an active researcher in the area of
planetary exploration with NASA funding for precision navigation and adaptive orbit determination.
RICHARD C. DORF
Richard C. Dorf is a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of California, Davis.
Known as an instructor who is highly concerned with the discipline of electrical engineering and its application to
social and economic needs, Professor Dorf has written and edited several successful engineering textbooks and
handbooks, including the best selling Engineering Handbook and the Second Edition of the Electrical Engineering
Handbook. Professor Dorf is a Fellow of the IEEE and is active in the fields of control system design and robotics.
Dr. Dorf holds a patent for the PIDA controller.
Page 6.951.11

Teaching Modern Control System Analysis and Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Teaching Modern Control System Analysis and Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Session 2793

Teaching Modern Control System Analysis and Design

Robert H. Bishop, Richard C. Dorf

Figure 1. The design process block diagram.

MCS A&D Design Problem MCS

III. Example: Fluid Flow Modeling

IV. Example: Blood Pressure Control

Obtain a model of the process, the See Eqs. (2.4) and

Optimize the parameters and 2

Copyright ' 2001, American Society for Engineering Education

Establish the system configuration -0.05

Copyright ' 2001, American Society for Engineering Education

Figure 3: A blood pressure regulation system.

y(t) = t e-pt for t ≥0 ,

V. Summary and Conclusions

You might also like