Type a branch, a subject or a topic — “round robin”, “paging”, “civil”.

Steady-State Error and System Type

Why a proportional controller can never quite arrive, and why counting integrators answers the whole question.

Skip to the animation

A proportional controller must retain an error to produce any output, so it never quite arrives — and the fix is structural rather than a matter of gain: each integrator in the open loop removes the error for one more order of input, at a cost of 90° of phase margin.

Why proportional control cannot arrive

With u = K_p·e, zero error means zero output — so the loop settles at whatever error produces exactly the drive the plant needs. For a step, e_ss = 1/(1 + K_p).

Raising the gain shrinks the error and approaches zero only as gain approaches infinity — and long before that the loop rings and then goes unstable. Gain is the wrong lever; something structural has to change.

The integrator

An integrator's output can be non-zero while its input is zero, because it holds what it has accumulated. So the drive persists with no error sustaining it, and the loop settles at exactly the target. This is precisely the argument the proportional term could not make.

System type

System type is the number of poles at the origin in the open-loop transfer function — the number of integrators. Nothing else about G(s) affects steady-state error.

TypeStepRampParabola
0finite
1zerofinite
2zerozerofinite

The diagonal structure is the whole content: type n tracks inputs up to order n exactly, lags order n+1 by a constant, and cannot follow order n+2. Each integrator buys exactly one order of input.

Why not simply use type 2 everywhere

Each integrator contributes −90° of phase lag, eating the phase margin that keeps the loop stable. Type 2 systems are hard to stabilise and type 3 essentially impractical.

This is why PID pairs its integral term with derivative action: the D term returns phase, paying for the accuracy the I term bought. Accuracy and stability are traded against each other, and this is the exchange rate.

The numbers you will be asked for

Position error constant

K_p = lim(s→0) G(s)H(s)

Step error = 1/(1 + K_p).

Velocity error constant

K_v = lim(s→0) s·G(s)H(s)

Ramp error = 1/K_v.

Acceleration error constant

K_a = lim(s→0) s²·G(s)H(s)

Parabola error = 1/K_a.

System type

the power of s in the denominator at the origin

Count the integrators.

Final value theorem

e_ss = lim(s→0) s·E(s)

Valid only if the system is stable.

Advantages and disadvantages

Advantages

  • Steady-state error is answered by counting integrators, with no response computed.
  • An integrator removes the error exactly, not approximately.
  • The error constants give the number directly for standard inputs.
  • It explains the I term in PID structurally rather than empirically.

Disadvantages

  • Each integrator costs 90° of phase margin.
  • The final value theorem is invalid for an unstable system, and applying it anyway gives a plausible wrong answer.
  • It says nothing about the transient, only the destination.
  • Integrators introduce windup when the actuator saturates.

Watch it work

loading visualisation…

Check yourself

question 1 / 4

One question at a time. Pick an answer to see why it is right or wrong, then move on — there is no score to keep and nothing is saved.

Why does a proportional controller leave a permanent offset?
How does an integrator remove the steady-state error exactly?
A type 1 system is given a ramp input. What happens?
If integrators remove error, why not use three of them?

0 / 4

4 still unanswered — the dots above jump straight to them.