EEET2109 DC Motor Controller Design Assignment Dr Manoj Datta Page 1 EEET2109 DC Motor Controller Design Assignment DC Motor Controller Design: Root Locus and Frequency Domain Techniques A. Objectives Design of a DC motor position controller via root-locus and frequency domain techniques Design of a DC motor speed controller via root-locus and frequency domain techniques Meeting specific transient and steady-state design specifications for the controllers Comparing the advantages and disadvantages of root-locus and frequency domain-based controller design techniques B. Design Specifications: You are required to design the controllers for a specific industry-level DC motor based on the name-plate data and design specifications as follows. 1. Please download the data and design specifications file available in the design assignment sections on the Canvas. 2. Please input your student ID without the “s” in the data and design specifications file. This file will specify the name-plate data of an industry level DC motor and the required design criteria which are assigned to you. 3. You are to design a position controller and a speed controller. You can only use the root-locus and frequency- domain techniques to design these controllers. 4. You are free to select any form of the controllers from the proportional, integral, derivative, lead compensator, lag compensator or any combination of these controllers to meet the design specifications. In a nutshell, the choice is yours as long as the controller meets the design specifications. 5. A DC motor controller design explanatory note is provided for better understanding which can be downloaded from the assignment section. 6. Total four (4) controllers should be designed. For DC motor position control: (1) by root locus technique; and (2) by frequency-domain technique. Both should meet the design specifications, similarly, for DC motor speed control: (3) by root locus technique; and (4) by frequency-domain technique. All should meet the design specifications. 7. Individual design and report submission is preferred for this assignment. However, completing the assignment in a group is also acceptable. For a group-based design, a maximum of two students is allowed in a group. Please clearly mention the contribution percentages and contribution domains when submitted as a group. 8. For a group submission, one of the student’s name-plate data and design specifications should be used. No need to design based on both students’ name-plate data and design specifications. Please clearly mention the name of the student in the report as well as the name-plate data and design specifications which have been used for the controller design. C. Report Writing & Discussions Write a report based on the controller designs, their performances, and simulation results. The report should show some of the points or more as follows: S-domain representation of the design criteria In detail modelling and development of the open-loop & closed-loop transfer functions of the system. Root-locus plots and bode plots of the system before and after the controller design and implementation Open-loop Step and Ramp Responses Closed-loop Step and Ramp Responses showcasing that all the design specifications have been met. You can use MATLAB commands and MATLAB/SIMULINK models to help you with these designs. However, in-detail calculations, explanations and discussions should be presented for both root-locus and frequency domain-based design techniques. Tutorial 9 and 10 and their associated solutions can help you with these calculations. If your controller does not meet a design criteria or specification, you should clearly explain the reasons and provide sufficient arguments and discussions. Discussion on an alternative technique to meet the design specifications (for example Z-N method). EEET2109 DC Motor Controller Design Assignment Dr Manoj Datta Page 2 D. Assessment Criteria, Report Writing & Discussions This assignment will be assessed according to the following criteria (250 marks total) and will be counted 25% towards the final grade. 5% of the marks is allocated to model file submissions. Any MATLAB model file and their extensions are OK. These files should clearly show your design codes or modelling blocks along with the instructions on how to execute/run them. These model files will be checked against the name- plate data and design specifications assigned to you. You will have two sperate submission links: (a) Model file submissions, and (b) Report submissions. Design Report (250 marks): You are required to submit one design report which should include all the plots, graphs, results, calculations, system block diagrams, tables, comparisons, simulation block diagrams and annotations/discussions relating to the controller design steps and results as well as any other technical data and relevant information and justification. The final report may consist of the following sections as a simple guideline: Title, Introduction, System Modelling, System Analysis, Design Requirements, Position Controller Design, Speed Controller Design, Controller Performance Validations (Step and Ramp Responses), Suitability and Practicality of the design performances, Discussions, Conclusion, References, Appendix. Page limit: Maximum 30 pages (cover page and appendix are not counted in the limit). Minimum font-size: 10 pt. You should submit the report via the assignment submission links. All submission links are “TurnItin” links. Maximum 20% similarity is accepted. If the similarity is over 20%, marks will be deducted, and the reports with similarities over 30% will get zero marks. Similarity based on same report submission by both group members are not counted in the 20% or 30% similarity check. If you are submitting as a group, only one submission is necessary, and it should have all students’ names, their contribution percentages and student IDs on the cover page. Remember for a group, only one submission is necessary. Double submission will create a 100% similarity. The report is due: by Monday, November 1, 23:59 PM You should submit the report (*.pdf or *.doc or *.docx ) and model file (*.any MATLAB file extension) separately through course canvas assignment submission links. Don’t mix them up. The assignment submission deadline is Monday, November 1, 23:59 PM. Late submission will incur 10% deduction/day as per the RMIT late submission policy. Marking Criteria/Rubrics are given in the next page. EEET2109 DC Motor Controller Design Assignment Dr Manoj Datta Page 3 Marking Criteria/Rubrics Criteria NN (0-24) PA (25-29) CR (30-34) DI (35-39) HD (40-50) Quality of Report writing, e.g. ,grammar, coherency, quality of figures, citations, references, etc. 50 points Many spelling and grammatical errors. Figures are incorrect/difficult to interpret, and no discussion has been held on the material presented. Irrelevant technical references are included or no references at all. References are not listed in IEEE format. Some spelling and grammatical errors are present. Supporting figures are present; however, they may not be 100% clear or limited discussion has been held on their meaning. References may be inappropriate and / or lack technical depth (e.g. use of Wikipedia or opinion pieces). References are listed in an incomplete format which does not adhere to the IEEE format. Spelling and grammar were of an acceptable level. Graphs and figures were clear but may have had unclear titles/captions. Figures have been linked back to the main text. References are most appropriate and show some variation in type. Reference style correct (IEEE format). Spelling and grammar were mostly correct. Graphs and figures are mostly clear and labelled. A discussion has been held on the figure and how it relates to the project. References used are appropriate and cover many perspectives. (IEEE format). Exceptional use of language. No spelling / grammatical errors. All figures are clear and well labelled. A thorough discussion has been held on their meaning and purpose. Students have obtained references from technically sound sources and listed them in IEEE format. Criteria NN (0-49) PA (50-59) CR (60-69) DI (70-79) HD (80-100) Correct Methodology and Engineering Practice for the designed controller (Design steps and methodology and their validity for the controller design) 100 points Only 60% or less of the design selections, practices and steps are correct. Half of the technical drawings are not correct, and a controller layout diagram is not shown. The designed controller will not fulfil the assignment’s requirements. Recommendations are not present or are technically unsound. Significant issues exist with the proposed controller designs. 70% of the design selections, practices and steps are correct. 50% of the technical drawings are correct, and a controller layout diagram is shown. The designed controller will fulfil some of the assignment’s requirements, but more needs to be performed. Conclusions and recommendations are lacking detail which may lead to unsatisfactory outcomes. 80% the design selections, practices and steps are correct. 60% of the technical drawings are correct, and a proper controller layout diagram is shown. The designed controller will fulfil most of the assignment’s aims but may have some weaknesses. Conclusions and recommendations are sufficiently detailed however lacking technical justification 90% of the design selections, practices and steps are correct. Technical drawings are mostly correct, and a good controller layout diagram is shown. The designed controller will fulfil all the assignment’s requirements to a satisfactory level. Conclusions and recommendations are justified, and a solid technical direction has been discussed. Recommendations are comprehensive and follow a sound engineering practice. All the design selections, practices and steps are correct. Technical drawings are all correct, and the best controller layout diagram is shown. The designed controller will fulfil all the assignment’s requirements and has the potential to be the best controller. Conclusions and recommendations are justified and well explained Criteria NN (0-49) PA (50-59) CR (60-69) DI (70-79) HD (80-100) Design results and Discussions (Appropriate selection of the controller gains and proper calculations and discussion to validate) 100 points Few calculations are correct, and justifications are poor. Significant technical errors are present in the report illustrating gaps in knowledge. An alternative technique is not listed Some of the calculations are correct, and some justifications are made. Technical errors exist in the report, which could be detrimental to the outcome. An alternative technique is not listed Many of the calculations are correct, and good justifications are made. The report is technically sound, however, may be lacking in technical detail. An alternative technique has been listed but insufficient detail on its suitability. Most of the calculations are correct, and the best justifications are made. A solid technical discussion has been held demonstrating an in-depth understanding of the design topic. An alternative technique has been mentioned; however, a limited discussion has been held on its suitability. All design calculations are correct, and excellent justifications are made. Comprehensive techniques have been presented, which are correctly executed and lead to the successful completion of the controller designs. An alternative technique has been considered and evaluated for its suitability for the given tasks.
