A Suboptimal Shifting Based Zero-pole Placement Method for Systems with Delays

  • Libor Pekař
  • Radek Matušů
Regular Paper Control Theory and Applications


An appropriate setting of eventual controller parameters for a derived controller structure represents an integral part of many control design approaches for dynamical systems. This contribution is aimed at a practically applicable and uncomplicated controller tuning method for linear time-invariant time delay systems (LTI-TDSs). It is based on placing the dominant poles as well as zeros of the given infinite-dimensional feedback control system by matching them with the desired ones given by known dynamical properties of a simple fixed finite-dimensional model. The desired placing is done successively by applying the Quasi-Continuous Shifting Algorithm (QCSA) first such that poles and zeros are forced to be as close as possible to those of the model. Concurrently, rests of both system spectra are shifted to the left as far as possible to minimize the spectral abscissa. The obtained results are then enhanced by a non-convex optimization technique applied to a selected objective function reflecting the distance of desired model roots from the eventual system ones and the spectral abscissae. Retarded LTI-TDS are primarily considered; however, systems with neutral delays are touched as well. The efficiency of the proposed method is proved via numerical examples in Matlab/Simulink environment. Some drawbacks and possible improvements or extensions of the algorithm for the future research are also concisely suggested to the reader.


Controller tuning direct-search optimization algorithm model matching time delay system zero-pole assignment 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    J. P. Richard, “Time-delay systems: An overview of some recent advances and open problems,” Automatica, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1667–1694, October 2003. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. J. Loiseau, W. Michiels, S.-I. Niculescu, and R. Sipahi, Topics in Time Delay Systems. Analysis, Algorithms and Control, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Sipahi, T. Vyhlídal, S.-I. Niculescu, and P. Pepe, Time Delay Systems: Methods, Applications and New Trends, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2012.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    T. Vyhlídal, J. F. Lafay, and R. Sipahi, Delay Systems: From Theory to Numerics and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2014.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. O. R. Moheimani and I. R. Petersen, “Optimal quadratic guaranteed cost control of a class of uncertain time-delay systems,” IEE Proc.: Control Theory and Applications, vol. 144, no. 2, pp. 183–188, March 1997. [click]zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    K. J. Aström and T. Hägglund, Advanced in PID Control, ISA, Research Triangle Park, 2006.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    S. Srivastava and V. S. Pandit, “A PI/PID controller for time delay systems with desired closed loop time response and guaranteed gain and phase margins,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 37, pp. 70–77, January 2016. [click]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. R. Partington, “Some frequency-domain approaches to the model reduction of delay systems,” Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 28, pp. 65–73, 2004. [click]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    E. B. Lee and S. H. Zak, “On spectrum placement for linear time invariant delay systems,” IEEE Trans. on Automatic Control, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 446–449, April 1982.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Zítek and T. Vyhlídal, “Dominant eigenvalue placement for time delay systems,” Proc. of the 5th Portuguese Conf. Automation and Control, pp. 605–610, September 2002.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Q. G. Wang, Z. Zhang, K. J. Åström, and L. S. Chek, “Guaranteed dominant pole placement with PID controllers,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 349–352, February 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Vítečková and A. Víteček, “2DOF PIand PID controllers tuning,” IFAC Proc. Volumes (9th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems), vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 343–348, June 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. Liu, H. Wang, and Y. Zhang, “New result on PID controller design of LTI systems via dominant eigenvalue assignment,” Automatica, vol. 62, pp. 93–97, December 2015. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    W. Michiels, K. Engelborghs, P. Vansevant, and D. Roose, “Continuous pole placement for delay equations,” Automatica, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 747–761, May 2002. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    W. Michiels and T. Vyhlídal, “An eigenvalue based approach for the stabilization of linear time-delay systems of neutral type,” Automatica, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 991–998, June 2005. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    T. Vanbiervliet, K. Verheyden, W. Michiels, and S. Vandewalle, “A nonsmooth optimization approach for the stabilization of time-delay systems,” ESAIM Control Optimisation and Calculus of Variations, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 478–493, July 2008. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    W. Michiels and S. Gumussoy, “Eigenvalue-based algorithms and software for the design of fixed-order stabilizing controllers for interconnected systems with timedelays,” T. Vyhlídal, J. F. Lafay, and R. Sipahi (eds.), Delay Systems: From Theory to Numerics and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 243–256, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    P. Zítek, J. Fišer, and T. Vyhlídal, “IAE optimization of PID control loop with delay in pole assignment space,” IFAC-PapersOnLine (13th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems), vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 177–181, June 2016. [click]Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    A. F. Ergenc, “A matrix technique for dominant pole placement of discrete-time time-delayed systems,” IFAC Proc. Volumes (10th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems), vol. 45, no. 14, pp. 167–172, June 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    W. Michiels, T. Vyhlídal, and P. Zítek, “Control design for time-delay systems based on quasi-direct pole placement,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 337–343, March 2010. [click]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    T. Vyhlídal and M. Hromčík, “Parameterization of input shapers with delays of various distribution,” Automatica, vol. 59, pp. 256–263, September 2015. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    J. A. Nelder and R. Mead, “A simplex method for function minimization,” The Computer Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 308–313, January 1965.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    J. K. Hale and S. M. Verduyn Lunel, Introduction to Functional Differential Equations, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    T. Vyhlídal and P. Zítek, “QPmR - Quasi-polynomial rootfinder: algorithm update and examples,” T. Vyhlídal, J. F. Lafay, and R. Sipahi (eds.), Delay Systems: From Theory to Numerics and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 299–312, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    W. Michiels and S.-I. Niculescu, Stability, Control, and Computation for Time-Delay Systems: An Eigenvalue-Based Approach, SIAM, Philadelphia, 2014.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    C. Bonnet, A. R Fioravanti, and J. R. Partington, “Stability of neutral systems with commensurate delays and poles asymptotic to the imaginary axis,” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 498–516, April 2011. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    A. S. Lewis and M. L. Overton, “Nonsmooth optimization via quasi-Newton methods,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 141, no. 1, pp. 135–163, October 2013. [click]MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    H. E. Erol and A. Iftar, “Decentralized controller design by continuous pole placement for incommensurate-timedelay systems,” IFAC-PapersOnLine (12th IFAC Workshop on Time Delay Systems), vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 462–467, June 2015.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    P. Zítek, V. Kučera, and T. Vyhlídal, “Meromorphic observer-based pole assignment in time delay systems,” Kybernetika, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 633–648, October 2008.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    L. Pekař and R. Prokop, “The revision and extension of the RMS ring for time delay systems,” Bulletin of Polish Academy of Sciences–Technical Sciences, vol. 65, no. 3, June 2017.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems and The Korean Institute of Electrical Engineers and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Applied InformaticsTomas Bata University in ZlínZlínCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations