enter image description hereenter image description here

I was reading an article about disturbance rejection of closed loop control system and I came across the sentence "becomes almost zero, and the effect of the disturbance is suppressed."

I have also attached snapshot of article and highlighted the confusing part of sentence. I am not able to understand how closed loop transfer function of the disturbance accounted in the system becomes zero??

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Please don't write in capital letters, it's regarded as if you were shouting. \$\endgroup\$ – Enric Blanco Sep 20 '19 at 6:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ Writing "reducing something to almost zero" doesn't mean much in my opinion. Example: the noise is 1 uV which is almost zero Sure, 1 uV is a small voltage but what if my signal is also 1 uV? In feedback systems usually the disturbances are reduced by the excess loopgain. I would just ignore the "almost zero" statement as it is meaningless. \$\endgroup\$ – Bimpelrekkie Sep 20 '19 at 7:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also please remove the capital letters in the title. \$\endgroup\$ – Bimpelrekkie Sep 20 '19 at 7:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Bimpelrekkie For a transfer function (where the text is about) that reduces to zero, is definitely means something. \$\endgroup\$ – Huisman Sep 20 '19 at 7:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Huisman Note "consider the case... the >> 1" that means that the transfer function will be zero only if the gain approaches infinity. It is more like a limit function. It never really becomes zero. But feel free to prove me wrong :-) \$\endgroup\$ – Bimpelrekkie Sep 20 '19 at 7:41

In control systems the loop gain LG (product of all transfer functions within the closed loop) is a very important parameter.

In your case, the loop gain is LG(s)=G1(s)*G2(s)*H(s).

As you can see, the closed-loop transfer function for the disturbed input


will be rather small ("almost zero" in the text) for a large loop gain LG(s)>>1.

For the reference input the situation is different because the product G1(s)*G2(s) appears also in the numerator of the closed-loop function Hr(s)=Cr(s)/R(s).

With other words: Both closed-loop functions have the same denominator (1+LG) - however, the numerator for the closed-loop reference function (G1*G2) is larger than for the closed-loop disturbance function (G2). Hence, the influence of the disturbance signal is smaller if compared with the reference signal.


Assume there's an integrator somewhere in the system, so that \$ G_1(s)G_2(s)H(s)=\large\frac{A(s)}{sB(s)}\$ where \$A(s)\$ and \$B(s)\$ are polynomials without a free \$s\$ term.

Now Set \$\small R(s)=0\$, and work out the CLTF: \$G(s)=\frac{C(s)}{D(s)}=\frac{sB(s)}{A(s)+sB(s)}\$. The DC gain is found by setting \$s=0\$, thus \$G(0)=0\$.

This means that disturbance will have no effect on the response once once the transients have decayed to zero. We say that the disturbance is rejected (but not instantaneously!)

  • \$\begingroup\$ @Chu....of course, I agree (theoretically). However, this is true only if there would be an IDEAL integrator which - however - cannot be realized. Hence, the disturbance cannot be fully rejected. \$\endgroup\$ – LvW Sep 20 '19 at 9:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @lvw , of course, nothing’s ideal. That’s life. \$\endgroup\$ – Chu Sep 20 '19 at 13:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.