Behavior of isPassive and hinfnorm.

Question

Siva 2022-6-3

0
链接

此问题的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/1733315-behavior-of-ispassive-and-hinfnorm

评论： Paul 2022-6-6

HzPw.mat

For the transfer function HzPw attached, I am not getting the behavior I expect from the function isPassive and hinfnorm. Any suggestions on what I am interpreting incorrectly would be much appreciated.

load HzPw.mat;

nopt = nyquistoptions;

nopt.XLim = [-5e-3 2e-2];

nyquistplot(HzPw, nopt);

The Nyquist plot of this transfer function is entirely in the right half plane. So, I expect this transfer function to be passive. However,

 [pf,R] = isPassive(HzPw)
pf = logical
   0
R = Inf

Then, I look at a scattering function corresponding to this transfer function, and the Bode plot of this scattering function.

Hscat = (1-HzPw)/(1+HzPw);

bode(Hscat);

I expect the

norm of this to be 1. Indeed, by my thinking, the transfer function is passive, and so the scattering function

norm should be ≤ 1. However,

 hinfnorm(Hscat)
ans = Inf

I am wondering what I am not thinking about correctly.

Thank you.

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

请先登录，再进行评论。

请先登录，再回答此问题。

Answer 1

Jon 2022-6-3

2
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/1733315-behavior-of-ispassive-and-hinfnorm#answer_978405

编辑：Jon 2022-6-3

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

I'm thinking that you may have some numerical issues with poles very close to the jw axis. Your transfer function uses quite high order polynomials. Your numerator is a 9th order polynomial and your denominator is a 10th order polynomial. For such high order polynomials very small changes in the coefficient values may result in large changes in the pole and zero location. They are therefore generally to be avoided in favor of other representations.

In particular I see using MATLAB's pole command

p = pole(HzPw)
p =
   1.0e+02 *
  -9.0685 + 0.0000i
  -0.9015 + 3.3574i
  -0.9015 - 3.3574i
  -0.3718 + 0.2699i
  -0.3718 - 0.2699i
  -0.0566 + 0.1218i
  -0.0566 - 0.1218i
  -0.0031 + 0.0036i
  -0.0031 - 0.0036i
   0.0036 + 0.0000i

So you in fact have an unstable pole in the right half plane at 0.0036.

I'm not an expert in the relation between stability and passivity, but my intuition is that an unstable system is not passive.

12 个评论
显示 10更早的评论隐藏 10更早的评论

Siva 2022-6-3

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

HzPw.mat

Thank you @Jon and @Paul. I had missed HzPw having an unstable pole, and the near pole-zero cancellation.

Following up, I did

load HzPw.mat;

HzPw_reduced = minreal(HzPw,3e-2);

bode(HzPw, HzPw_reduced)

The frequency responses are nearly identical, but the reduced order transfer function is stable (the near pole-zero cancellation dynamics has been discarded?).

zero(HzPw_reduced)
ans = 
   1.0e+02 *

  -9.3875 + 0.0000i
  -0.8611 + 3.3513i
  -0.8611 - 3.3513i
  -0.3093 + 0.2775i
  -0.3093 - 0.2775i
  -0.0000 + 0.0000i
pole(HzPw_reduced)
ans = 
   1.0e+02 *

  -9.0685 + 0.0000i
  -0.9015 + 3.3574i
  -0.9015 - 3.3574i
  -0.3718 + 0.2699i
  -0.3718 - 0.2699i
  -0.0566 + 0.1218i
  -0.0566 - 0.1218i

The reduced transfer function is indeed passive.

[pf,R] = isPassive(HzPw_reduced)
pf = logical
   1
R = 1.0000

And the corresponding scattering function has

norm = 1.

Hscat_reduced = (1-HzPw_reduced)/(1+HzPw_reduced);
hinfnorm(Hscat_reduced)
ans = 1

HzPw is a product of using systune. I am doing an optimal control calculation with a tuanbleTF in the model. I was trying to apply a TuningGoal.Passivity constraint on HzPw, but was unable to, even though it ended up looking passive. That is what led me to this line of exploration. I can post a minimal version of the systune calculation, or perhaps that would better belong in a different thread?

I am guessing I have to scale my problem better before passing it off to systune to avoid issues like near cancellations of unstable poles and zeros?

In fact, I can reduce the order even further without changing the dynamics much.

HzPw_reduced2 = minreal(HzPw,5e-2);

bode(HzPw, HzPw_reduced2)

Maybe this does point to poor conditioning?

Paul 2022-6-4

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

I don't know anymore how connect() is implemented and so would only be able to speculate, but I will speculate that at least it's using state space math, since it returns an ss object for numeric LTI inputs.

C = pid(2,1); 
G = zpk([],[-1,-1],1);
blksys = append(C,G);
connections = [2 1; 1 -2];
T = connect(blksys,connections,1,2)
T =
 
  A = 
           x1      x2      x3
   x1       0  -1.414       0
   x2       0      -1       1
   x3  0.7071      -2      -1
 
  B = 
          u1
   x1  1.414
   x2      0
   x3      2
 
  C = 
       x1  x2  x3
   y1   0   1   0
 
  D = 
       u1
   y1   0
 
Continuous-time state-space model.
zpk(T)
ans =
 
             2 (s+0.5)
  --------------------------------
  (s+0.4302) (s^2 + 1.57s + 2.325)
 
Continuous-time zero/pole/gain model.

As expected, T is third order.

But doing transfer function / zpk algebra we get

zpk(C*G/(1+C*G))
ans =
 
             2 s (s+0.5) (s+1)^2
  ------------------------------------------
  s (s+1)^2 (s+0.4302) (s^2 + 1.57s + 2.325)
 
Continuous-time zero/pole/gain model.

which would be the same as zpk(T) after cancelling the common poles/zerost that arise from essentially doing the polynomial math.

Those common poles/zeros can be eliminated using minreal(), but minreal() would also eliminate common poles/zeros that are actually inherent to the system, that may actually be of interest. For example

C = zpk(-1,3,1); 
G = zpk([],[-1,-1],1);
blksys = append(C,G);
connections = [2 1; 1 -2];
T = connect(blksys,connections,1,2);
zpk(T)
ans =
 
            (s+1)
  --------------------------
  (s-2.732) (s+1) (s+0.7321)
 
Continuous-time zero/pole/gain model.

Here, T maintains the zero from C that cancels the pole in G. But if we do

C*G/(1 + C*G)
ans =
 
            (s+1)^3 (s-3)
  ----------------------------------
  (s-3) (s-2.732) (s+1)^3 (s+0.7321)
 
Continuous-time zero/pole/gain model.

then it would be difficult to know, in general, that only two of the poles/zeros at s = -1 are phantom that should be eliminated.

Moreal of the story is that it's generally best to use interconnection functions like series, ,parallel, connect, etc. The doc pages talk about this as well.

Should that be, "... if it is internally stable and its frequency response is positive real ..."?

That's probably correct wrt to how isPassive is actually implemented, but I thought passivity is really an input/output characteristic of the transfer function as discussed on isPassive , so then going on to say anything about internal stability without furhter explanation would be odd. But I agree with your sentiment that the doc page should do a better job of explaining how isPassive() handles systems with RHP poles..

Siva 2022-6-6

Just ran into this, related to the discussion in this thread.

Paul 2022-6-6

This link might also be of interest, though I disagree with the "guarantee" in the very last sentence on that page, which is clearly incorrect as shown above.

请先登录，再进行评论。

Answer 2

Paul 2022-6-3

1
链接

此回答的直接链接

https://ww2.mathworks.cn/matlabcentral/answers/1733315-behavior-of-ispassive-and-hinfnorm#answer_978415

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

Hi Siva,

I'm not able to load the .mat file, so can't really look at the problem.

load('https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/uploaded_files/1020880/HzPw.mat');
Error using load
Unable to read file 'https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/uploaded_files/1020880/HzPw.mat'. If it is a Version 7 or earlier MAT-file, consider saving your data afresh in Version 7.3
MAT-files to access it from a remote location.

Can you save in v7.3 format and upload, or, if simple enough, just show what it is otherwise, like displaying the A,B,C,D or zpkdata, or the tfdata?

If not, can you post the output of the following commands:

pole(HzPw)
zero(HzPw)
pole(Hscat)

I'm asking because this doc page states "As a result, passive systems are intrinsically stable."

So maybe HzPw is not BIBO stable, but has a Nyquist plot all in the RHP, like this

h = zpk(2,1,1)
nyquist(h)

Similary, the H-infinity norm, IIRC, is not defined for unstable systems, so if Hscat is not BIBO stable, then hinfnorm will return inf as stated on hinfnorm

7 个评论
显示 5更早的评论隐藏 5更早的评论

Paul 2022-6-3

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

load('https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/uploaded_files/1021010/HzPw.mat');
Error using load
Unable to read file 'https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/uploaded_files/1021010/HzPw.mat'. If it is a Version 7 or earlier MAT-file, consider saving your data afresh in Version 7.3
MAT-files to access it from a remote location.

Hmm, same problem. I'm probably not using load() correctly for a remote file.

Siva 2022-6-4

在 MATLAB Online 中打开

@Paul From this thread, this seems to work:

load(websave('HzPw', 'https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/answers/uploaded_files/1020880/HzPw.mat'));
pole(HzPw)
ans = 
   1.0e+02 *

  -9.0685 + 0.0000i
  -0.9015 + 3.3574i
  -0.9015 - 3.3574i
  -0.3718 + 0.2699i
  -0.3718 - 0.2699i
  -0.0566 + 0.1218i
  -0.0566 - 0.1218i
  -0.0031 + 0.0036i
  -0.0031 - 0.0036i
   0.0036 + 0.0000i

请先登录，再进行评论。

Behavior of isPassive and hinfnorm.

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

采纳的回答

12 个评论
显示 10更早的评论隐藏 10更早的评论

更多回答（1 个）

7 个评论
显示 5更早的评论隐藏 5更早的评论

另请参阅

类别

标签

产品

版本

Community Treasure Hunt

Behavior of isPassive and hinfnorm.

0 个评论 显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

采纳的回答

12 个评论 显示 10更早的评论隐藏 10更早的评论

更多回答（1 个）

7 个评论 显示 5更早的评论隐藏 5更早的评论

另请参阅

类别

标签

产品

版本

Community Treasure Hunt

0 个评论
显示 -2更早的评论隐藏 -2更早的评论

12 个评论
显示 10更早的评论隐藏 10更早的评论

7 个评论
显示 5更早的评论隐藏 5更早的评论