International Journal of xxx

Vol.x, No.x, Month 201x, pp. xx~xx

ISSN: xxxx-xxxx  31

The Linear Quadratic Regular Algorithm-Based Control

System of the Direct Current Motor

Trong-Thang Nguyen
Faculty of Energy Engineering, Thuyloi University, Vietnam

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: This research aims to propose an optimal controller for controlling the speed
of the Direct Current (DC) motor. Based on the mathematical equations of
Received Jun 12, 201x DC Motor, the author builds the equations of the state space model and
Revised Aug 20, 201x builds the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) controller to minimize the error
Accepted Aug 26, 201x between the set speed and the response speed of DC motor. The results of the
proposed controller are compared with the traditional controllers as the PID,
the feed-forward controller. The simulation results show that the quality of
Keyword: the control system in the case of LQR controller is much higher than the
traditional controllers. The response speed always follows the set speed with
LQR control the short conversion time, there isn't overshoot. The response speed is almost
PID control unaffected when the torque impact on the shaft is changed.
DC motor
Optimal control
Copyright © 201x Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science.
All rights reserved.

Corresponding Author:
Trong-Thang Nguyen,
Faculty of Energy Engineering, Thuyloi University,
175 Tay Son, Dong Da, Ha Noi, Viet Nam
Email: nguyentrongthang@tlu.edu.vn

1. INTRODUCTION
The DC motor is a traditional electric motor. In comparison to the other electric motor such as
brushless DC motors [1], induction machine [2], [3], the DC motor has the intrinsic advantages such as the
ease of maintenance, the large electromagnetic torque, the simple control structure and the adjust ability of
the speed in a wide range. Thus, the DC motor is still very popular in the application of industrial areas
required the high-quality motion, such as mining, transportation, steel rolling, etc. So, it is very important to
enhance the performance of the DC motor control system. There are many studies on the DC motor control
such as [4], [5], [6], [7], most of these studies use a simple controller such as Proportional–Integral–
Derivative (PID) controllers. The advantage of the PID control is a simple structure, but the drawback is that
the quality of the control system is not high. The research [8] have proposed a solution to control the DC
motor that has achieved high-quality, it is the control method based on the flatness principle, but the
limitation of this method is that the control algorithm is complex.
To overcome all the limitations of the previous method, in this study, the author proposes a solution
to build a control system based on the linear quadratic regulator controller. The control algorithm is simple
and the control quality is optimized. By using LQR controller, the deviation of the DC Motor speed can be
minimized, and the response speed is not changed when the disturbance such as shaft torque is changed.
The LQR control method is used to control a lot of objects in practice as two-wheels self-balancing
mobile robot [9], [10], [11], converter [12], [13], quad-rotor [14], [15], wind power generator [16]. The
Linear Quadratic Regulator method is setting the controller by using a mathematical algorithm to minimize
the cost function with weighting factors defined by the designer. The cost-function is often defined as a sum
of the deviations of response output and their desired values [17], [18].

Journal homepage: http://iaesjournal.com/online/index.php/xxxxx

32  ISSN: xxxx-xxxx

2. THE LQR CONTROL SYSTEM

Considering the object with state equation:
x (t )  A.x(t )  B.u (t ) (1)
Where: x (t )  [ x1 (t ), x 2 (t ),..., x n (t )] is the vector of state signal,
u (t )  [u1 (t ), u 2 (t ),..., u m (t )] is the vector of control signal.
The requirement of the control system is to find the control signal u (t ) in order for the control
object from the initial state x (t 0 )  x (0) go to the end state x(t f )  0 and satisfy the following condition
(cost functional):
1 T 1 tf
J x (t f ).M .x (t f )   [ x T (t ).Q.x (t )  u T (t ).R.u (t )]dt  min (2)
2 2 t0
Where Q and M are the symmetric, positive semi-definite weight matrix. R is the symmetric,
positive definite weight matrix.
To solve the problem, we establish the Hamilton function:
1
H  [ x T (t ).Q.x(t )  u T (t ).R.u (t )]  T [ A.x (t )  B.u (t )] (3)
2
The optimal experiment is the solution of the following equations:
- The state equation:
x (t )  A.x (t )  B.u (t ) (4)
- The equilibrium equation:
H
 (t )    Q.x (t )  A.T (t ) (5)
x
- The optimal condition:
H
 R.u (t )  B T .T (t )  0 (6)
u
From equation (6), we have:
u (t )   R 1 .B T .T (t ) (7)
Replace u (t ) into (4), we have:
x (t )  A.x (t )  B.R 1 .B T .T (t ) (8)
Combining (8) and (5) we have:
 x (t )   A  B.R 1.B T   x(t ) 
 (t )    T  (9)
   Q  A   (t )
Solving the above equations, we have the optimal control signal:
u * (t )   K (t ).x (t ) (10)
1 T
Where K (t )  R .B .P (t )
P (t ) is the positive semi-definite solution of the Riccati equation:
 P  P. A  AT .P  Q  P.B.R 1 .B T .P (11)
In the case of the infinite time = ∞, the cost function is as follows:
1 tf T
J [ x (t ).Q.x (t )  u T (t ).R.u (t )]dt  min
2 0
(12)

The optimal control signal:

u * (t )   K .x (t ) (13)
1 T
Where K  R .B .P
P is the positive semi-definite solution of the Riccati equation:
P. A  AT .P  Q  P.B.R 1 .B T .P  0 (14)
(K and P do not depend on the time)

IJxx Vol. x, No. x, Month 201x : xx – xx

IJxx ISSN: xxxx-xxxx  33

3. THE DIAGRAM AND THE EQUTIONS OF THE DC MOTOR

The diagram of a separately excited DC Motor is presented as Figure 1 [11], it includes:
- The field windings are in the stator, they are used to excite the field flux.
- The armature coils are on the rotor, they are supplied current via brush and the commutator.

Figure 1. The diagram of a separately excited DC Motor

The mathematical equations of the DC Motor include:
- The voltage equation:
dia
V a  R a i a  La  E (V) (15)
dt
Where Va is the armature voltage, which is fed into the armature coil; Ra , La is the armature
resistance and inductance, E is the electromotive.
- The electromotive equation:
E  K E  ( Laf .i f ). (V) (16)
Where ω is the speed of the rotor, KE is the coefficient of voltage, i f is the winding field current,
Laf is the field armature mutual inductance.
- The motion equation:
d
J  Te  TL  Bm  T f (N.m) (17)
dt
Where J is the inertia, Te is the electromechanical torque, TL is the torque which impact to the
shaft, Bm is the coefficient of the viscous friction, T f is the coulomb friction torque.
- The electromechanical torque equation:
Te  K T ia  ( Laf .i f ).ia (N.m) (18)
Where K T is the coefficient of the torque.
Based on the equations of the DC Motor, we build the model diagram of DC Motor as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The model diagram of DC Motor

The parameters of the DC Motor in this study are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. The DC Motor parameters
Ra() La(H) Kt Ke J(kg.m^2) Bm(N.m.s) Tf(N.m)
0.5 0.011 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 Var

To investigate the dependence of the Motor speed on the armature voltage, we set the armature
voltage change from Va = 75V to Va = 100V. To investigate the dependence of the Motor speed on the shaft

Title of manuscript is short and clear, implies research results (First Author)
34  ISSN: xxxx-xxxx

torque, we set the shaft torque change from TL = 10(N.M) to TL = 20(N.M). Running the simulation model,
we obtain the time characteristic of the speed shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The time characteristic of the speed when changing the armature voltage and the shaft torque
The control mission of the system is to control the speed of the DC motor following the desired
value. It also minimizes the change in speed when changing the torque impacted on the shaft of the DC
Motor. In this study, the author proposes an optimal controller LQR to control the response speed following
the set speed with the shortest conversion time.

4. BUILDING THE CONTROL SYSTEM FOR THE DC MOTOR

4.1. The PI controller and Feed-forward controller

Based on the dependence of the Motor speed on the armature voltage and the shaft torque, the
author built and tested the traditional controllers for DC motors as a basis for comparison with LQR
controllers. The first controller is a Feed-forward controller with the gain coefficient K=2.14. The second
controller is the PI controller, the control system model shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. The control system model with the PI controller

The parameters of the PI controller are determined experimentally. We define the appropriate
parameters in order that the quality of the control system is good. Finally, the PI controller parameters are
defined as follows: Kp=1, Kp=5
Running the system in two cases of the controller (PI and Feed-forward), the simulation result is
shown as Figure 5.

IJxx Vol. x, No. x, Month 201x : xx – xx

IJxx ISSN: xxxx-xxxx  35

Figure 5. The simulation result in the cases of Feed-forward and PI controller

The simulation results show that the Feed-forward controller has met the control requirement. The
response speed of the DC motor has been following the set speed. However, the control quality is low. In
particular, the response speed of the DC Motor is not maintained when changing the torque impacted on the
shaft. This will have a very negative effect when applying in the electric motion of the production process. In
the case of the PI controller, the control quality has been improved a lot. The response speed has been
followed the set speed with the short transition time, and it is has been maintained when changing the torque
impacted on the shaft. However, the limitations are that there is the overshot, and there is oscillation before
the response speed is stable.
Thus, the author proposes an optimal controller (LQR) to address these limitations and improve the
quality of the control system.

4.2. The optimal LQR controller

From the equations of DC Motors, changing into the state equations with the state variables are the
armature current and the rotor speed:
 d Bm KT 1 1
 dt   J   J ia  J TL  J T f
 di (19)
 a   K E   Ra ia  1 Va
 dt La La La
To increase the efficiency of the control process, we add the state variable ( / s ) to the state
equations:
 d ( / s )
 dt  

 d   Bm   K T i  1 T  1 T
 a L f (20)
 dt J J J J
 dia KE Ra 1
 dt   L   L ia  L Va
 a a a

In the above state equations, the state variables are x  ( x1 , x2 , x3 )  ( / s, , ia ) , the control
1 1
signal is Va . The torque T   TL  T f is the noise.
J J
We design the control signal u (t )   K LQR .x (t ) in order for lim t  ( x response  x set )  0 .
Named xe is the error between xresponse and x set .
xe  (x1  x1 _ response  x1 _ set , x2  x2 _ response  x2 _ set , x3  x3 _ response x  x3 _ set ) .
The state equation (20) is rewritten as follows:
Title of manuscript is short and clear, implies research results (First Author)
36  ISSN: xxxx-xxxx

xe  A.xe  B.u (21)

 
   
0 1
B
0  0 1 0  0  0 
KT     
Where A  0  m   0  0 .5 2 ; B 0  0 
 J J   1 
 KE Ra  0  9.1  45.45   90.9
0  L    La 
 a La 
In order for the response speed following the set speed with the short transition time, we define the
optimal control signal LQR to minimize the goal function:
1
J [ x T (t ).Q..x (t )  u T (t ).R.u (t )]dt  min
2
(22)

 2 0 0
 
With Q  0 30 0 , R  0.02 .
 
0 0 0
The optimal control signal:
u * (t )   K LQR .x(t ) (23)
Where:
K LQR  R 1.B T .P (24)
P is the positive semi-definite solution of the Riccati equation:
P.A  A T .P  Q  PBR1 .BT .P  0 (25)
Solving the equation (25) we have:
 7.7821 0.1394 0.0022
P  0.1394 0.5380 0.0085 (26)
0.0022 0.0085 0.0002
Replace P into (24), we have:
K LQR  (10.0000 ,38.4622, 0.8937) (27)
The control system diagram is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. The control system diagram in the case of LQR controller

5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

We run the simulation model in the following cases: the Feed-forward controller, PI Controller,
optimal LQR controller. The simulation results are shown in Figure 7.
The simulation results show that the quality of the control system in the case of using the optimal
controller LQR is extremely better than that of the Feed-forward controller and the PI controller. In the case
of the system with LQR controller, the response speed always follows to the set speed with a very short
transition time, there is not overshot.
When changing the disturbance (shaft torque), the speed in case the Feed-forward controller is
changed and is unrecoverable, the speed in the case of PI controller is changed and oscillated, after a time of
about 4 s, the response speed is restored. Especially in the case of the LQR controller, the response speed is

IJxx Vol. x, No. x, Month 201x : xx – xx

IJxx ISSN: xxxx-xxxx  37

almost unaffected by the change of the shaft torque. To more clearly show the different qualities in the
different cases, the simulation results are zoom and shown in Figure 8.

Figure 7. The simulation results in the different cases: Feed-forward, PI, LQR controller

Figure 8. The simulation results in the zoom view

6. CONCLUSION
In this study, the author has succeeded in building the optimal controller LQR for the DC Motor.
The control quality of the proposed controller LQR is compared with the traditional controllers. The
simulation results show that the system with LQR controller offers superior quality compared to traditional
controllers. The response speed always follows to the set speed with a very short transition time. The
response speed is almost unaffected when changing the shaft torque. Finally, the proposed controller has very
simple control algorithms, but the quality is optimal. This is a good basis for applying control algorithm to
electric motion using the DC Motor.

REFERENCES
[1] Park, J. S., & Lee, K. D. Design and Implementation of BLDC Motor with Integrated Drive Circuit. International
Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS), 8(3), 1109-1116, 2017.
[2] Abdelhak, B., & Bachir, B. A High gain observer based sensorless nonlinear control of induction
machine. International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems, 5(3), 305, 2015.
[3] Gunabalan, R., & Subbiah, V. Speed Sensorless Vector Control of Induction Motor Drive with PI and Fuzzy
Controller. International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems, 5(3), 315, 2015.
[4] Bosco, Maycon Chimini, et al,"Estimation of parameters and tuning of a speed PI of permanent magnet DC Motor
using differential evolution", Electric Machines and Drives Conference (IEMDC), IEEE International,2017,pp.1-6.
[5] Yao, Jianyong, Zongxia Jiao, and Dawei Ma,"Adaptive robust control of DC Motors with extended state
observer", IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics Vol 61.7 ,2014, pp. 3630-3637.

Title of manuscript is short and clear, implies research results (First Author)
38  ISSN: xxxx-xxxx

[6] Xue, Dingyu, Chunna Zhao, and YangQuan Chen, "Fractional order PID control of a DC-Motor with elastic shaft:
a case study", American Control Conference, IEEE, 2006, pp.1-6
[7] Thomas, Neenu, and Dr P. Poongodi, "Position control of DC Motor using genetic algorithm based PID
controller", Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, 2009, vol. 2, pp. 1-3.
[8] Trong, T. N. (2017). The Control Structure for DC Motor based on the Flatness Control. International Journal of
Power Electronics and Drive Systems (IJPEDS), 8(4), 1814-1821.
[9] Xu, C., Li, M., & Pan, F. (2011, September). The system design and LQR control of a two-wheels self-balancing
mobile robot. In Electrical and Control Engineering (ICECE), 2011 International Conference on (pp. 2786-2789).
IEEE.
[10] Zhao, J., & Ruan, X. (2008). The LQR control and design of dual-wheel upright self-balance Robot. Intelligent
Control and Automation, 4864-4869.
[11] Qiang, L., Ke-Ke, W., & Guo-Sheng, W. (2009, June). Research of LQR controller based on two-wheeled self-
balancing robot. In Control and Decision Conference, 2009. CCDC'09. Chinese (pp. 2343-2348). IEEE.
[12] Zhang, M., Li, X., Liu, J., Su, H., & Song, J. (2016, May). Digital LQR steady-state optimal control with
feedforward for nonminimum phase boost DC-DC converter. In Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), 2016
Chinese (pp. 384-389). IEEE.
[13] Rakhshani, E., Cantarellas, A. M., Remon, D., Luna, A., & Rodriguez, P. (2013, June). PSO-based LQR controller
for multi modular converters. In ECCE Asia Downunder (ECCE Asia), 2013 IEEE (pp. 1023-1027). IEEE.
[14] Reyes-Valeria, E., Enriquez-Caldera, R., Camacho-Lara, S., & Guichard, J. (2013, March). LQR control for a
quadrotor using unit quaternions: Modeling and simulation. In Electronics, Communications and Computing
(CONIELECOMP), 2013 International Conference on (pp. 172-178). IEEE.
[15] Liu, C., Pan, J., & Chang, Y. (2016, July). PID and LQR trajectory tracking control for an unmanned quadrotor
helicopter: Experimental studies. In Control Conference (CCC), 2016 35th Chinese (pp. 10845-10850). IEEE.
[16] Slavov, T. P. T. (2018, January). LQR power control of wind generator. In 2018 Cybernetics & Informatics
(K&I) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
[17] Friedland, B. (2005). An introduction to state-space methods. Control System Design, 3-16.
[18] Lewis, Frank L., Draguna Vrabie, and Vassilis L. Syrmos. Optimal control. John Wiley & Sons, 2012.

IJxx Vol. x, No. x, Month 201x : xx – xx