Teaching modern control theory to undergraduates using a state space model of a synchronous generator

Modern control system analysis and design uses state space methods to develop models of both physical systems and their respective controllers. However, teaching state space to undergraduate students is often difficult due to the mathematical complexity and lack of visual validation when compared to classical control system design. The authors in this paper have employed state space analysis to design controllers for a reduced-order model of a synchronous generator to demonstrate the advantages of state space techniques over classical control design. The information in this paper was presented to both Electrical Engineering (EE) as well as Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology (ECET) students as an out-of-class assignment to implement the various controller designs and reflect on the results. A survey was administered to these students after completion of the assignment to assess their active and reflective learning. This survey included both Likert scale as well as open-ended questions to gauge their ability to both build and simulate the control system as well as reflect on the importance of state space. Based on the survey results provided, students were generally able to implement the various controllers but the ECET students had difficulty relating their results to a more general understanding of the importance of state space.

[1]  Bernard Friedland,et al.  Control System Design: An Introduction to State-Space Methods , 1987 .

[2]  Naresh K. Sinha,et al.  Modern Control Systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[3]  Manuel Berenguel,et al.  An Interactivity-Based Methodology to Support Control Education: How to Teach and Learn Using Simple Interactive Tools [Lecture Notes] , 2016, IEEE Control Systems.

[4]  Xidong Tang,et al.  Adaptive actuator failure compensation for nonlinear MIMO systems with an aircraft control application , 2007, Autom..

[5]  James E. Bobrow,et al.  An Analysis of a Pneumatic Servo System and Its Application to a Computer-Controlled Robot , 1988 .

[6]  Scott D. Sudhoff,et al.  Analysis of Electric Machinery and Drive Systems , 1995 .

[7]  Chi-Tsong Chen,et al.  Linear System Theory and Design , 1995 .

[8]  R. Felder,et al.  Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education. , 1988 .

[9]  Karl Johan Åström Challenges in Control Education , 2006 .

[10]  Babu Narayanan,et al.  POWER SYSTEM STABILITY AND CONTROL , 2015 .

[11]  Y. H. Ku,et al.  Electric Power System Dynamics , 1983 .

[12]  O.P. Malik,et al.  Identification of physical parameters of a synchronous Generator from online measurements , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion.

[13]  Charles Concordia,et al.  Concepts of Synchronous Machine Stability as Affected by Excitation Control , 1969 .

[14]  Ole Ravn,et al.  Towards a Modern Concept for Teaching Control Engineering , 2010 .

[15]  R. A. Phillips,et al.  Effect of a Modern Amplidyne Voltage Regulator on Underexcited Operation of Large Turbine Generators [includes discussion] , 1952, Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. Part III: Power Apparatus and Systems.

[16]  H. H. Happ,et al.  Power System Control and Stability , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[17]  P. N. Paraskevopoulos,et al.  Modern Control Engineering , 2001 .

[18]  Guido Koch,et al.  Driving State Adaptive Control of an Active Vehicle Suspension System , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[19]  B. Anderson,et al.  Linear Optimal Control , 1971 .

[20]  O. P. Malik,et al.  Identification of Heffron-Phillips model parameters for synchronous generators using online measurements , 2004 .