Milestone map
Milestone map
4 milestones
Modelling and time response
about 3 weeks (about 12 hrs/week)
Work through the 6.302 lectures on block diagrams and first- and second-order systems; read Feedback Systems (first edition) chapters 2–5. Then solve MIT 2.004 problem sets 1–6. Self-check: MIT 2.004 Dynamics and Control II problem sets 1–10 with solutions. Free tools only.
Proof required
Link the public repo with MIT 2.004 problem sets 1–6 written up (a typeset PDF, LaTeX source or notebook), and show the self-check: which answers matched and how you fixed the ones that did not.
What gets checked
- Transfer functions are derived from the physics, with units.
- Rise time, overshoot and settling time are read from the model, then checked in code.
- Answers match the published solutions, and misses are reworked.
Common mistakes
- Answers copied from a solution with no working.
- Missing units, or a sign or factor-of-2π slip left unexplained.
Powstik Guide
A public write-up of MIT 2.004 problem sets 1–6, with the self-check shown.
Steps
- Study the linked course material.
- Solve the problems on your own first.
- Check them against the self-check and rework the misses.
- Typeset the write-up (LaTeX or a notebook) in a public repo.
- Ask someone who knows the subject to check it.
Template
README ECE 7: Feedback Control, unit 1: Modelling and time response Problems: Self-check result (matched / reworked): What I got wrong first and why:
What gets sent back
- No working shown.
- The self-check result is missing.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Transfer functions are derived from the physics, with units.
- Rise time, overshoot and settling time are read from the model, then checked in code.
- Answers match the published solutions, and misses are reworked.
- Is the engineering right, not just the final number?
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Stability and the root locus
about 3 weeks (about 12 hrs/week)
Work through the 6.302 lectures on stability and the root locus; read Feedback Systems (first edition) chapter 8 on transfer functions, poles and zeros. Then solve MIT 2.004 problem sets 7–9. Self-check: MIT 2.004 Dynamics and Control II problem sets 1–10 with solutions. Free tools only.
Proof required
Link the public repo with MIT 2.004 problem sets 7–9 written up (a typeset PDF, LaTeX source or notebook), and show the self-check: which answers matched and how you fixed the ones that did not.
What gets checked
- Stability is tested (Routh or poles), not assumed.
- Root loci are sketched by the rules, then checked in code.
- Answers match the published solutions, and misses are reworked.
Common mistakes
- Answers copied from a solution with no working.
- Missing units, or a sign or factor-of-2π slip left unexplained.
Powstik Guide
A public write-up of MIT 2.004 problem sets 7–9, with the self-check shown.
Steps
- Study the linked course material.
- Solve the problems on your own first.
- Check them against the self-check and rework the misses.
- Typeset the write-up (LaTeX or a notebook) in a public repo.
- Ask someone who knows the subject to check it.
Template
README ECE 7: Feedback Control, unit 2: Stability and the root locus Problems: Self-check result (matched / reworked): What I got wrong first and why:
What gets sent back
- No working shown.
- The self-check result is missing.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Stability is tested (Routh or poles), not assumed.
- Root loci are sketched by the rules, then checked in code.
- Answers match the published solutions, and misses are reworked.
- Is the engineering right, not just the final number?
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Frequency response and compensation
about 3 weeks (about 12 hrs/week)
Work through the 6.302 lectures on Bode and Nyquist plots and lead and lag compensation; read Feedback Systems (first edition) chapters 9–11. Then solve MIT 2.004 problem set 10, then a lead and a lag compensator for one 2.004 plant, each to a written margin spec. Self-check: Python Control Systems Library. Free tools only.
Proof required
Link the public repo with MIT 2.004 problem set 10, then a lead and a lag compensator for one 2.004 plant, each to a written margin spec written up (a typeset PDF, LaTeX source or notebook), and show the self-check: which answers matched and how you fixed the ones that did not.
What gets checked
- Gain and phase margins are read from the Bode plot, then checked with python-control.
- Each compensator meets its written spec in a simulated step response.
- Problem set 10 matches its solution, and misses are reworked.
Common mistakes
- Answers copied from a solution with no working.
- Missing units, or a sign or factor-of-2π slip left unexplained.
Powstik Guide
A public write-up of MIT 2.004 problem set 10, then a lead and a lag compensator for one 2.004 plant, each to a written margin spec, with the self-check shown.
Steps
- Study the linked course material.
- Solve the problems on your own first.
- Check them against the self-check and rework the misses.
- Typeset the write-up (LaTeX or a notebook) in a public repo.
- Ask someone who knows the subject to check it.
Template
README ECE 7: Feedback Control, unit 3: Frequency response and compensation Problems: Self-check result (matched / reworked): What I got wrong first and why:
What gets sent back
- No working shown.
- The self-check result is missing.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Gain and phase margins are read from the Bode plot, then checked with python-control.
- Each compensator meets its written spec in a simulated step response.
- Problem set 10 matches its solution, and misses are reworked.
- Is the engineering right, not just the final number?
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Design a controller that meets a written spec
about 3 weeks (about 12 hrs/week)
Make a lead or PID controller for a DC-motor speed model (or another plant with real parameters from a datasheet), designed and tested in simulation. Model the plant from datasheet values and write the spec (overshoot, settling time, steady-state error, phase margin). Design by root locus or Bode, then simulate step and disturbance responses with the drive voltage limited to the supply. Fill a predicted-vs-simulated table. Optional, costs money: a small DC motor rated 6 V or less with an encoder, a motor driver and a microcontroller, powered from AA batteries or USB. Safety: 12 V DC or less, from AA, AAA or 9 V batteries or USB only. Never mains power, never a lithium-polymer pack or loose lithium cell, and never a home-made battery charger. Wear eye protection when soldering or cutting leads. Under 18? Use the simulator, or build and solder with an adult present.
Proof required
Link the public repo with the code or design files, the one command that reruns it, and the predicted-vs-simulated table, and a README that says how to rerun it and what limits the result.
What gets checked
- The plant model cites its datasheet values.
- Predicted and simulated overshoot, settling time and margins are compared.
- The simulated design meets every line of the spec with the drive voltage limited to the supply.
Common mistakes
- A result that nobody else can rerun from the repo.
- A table with no explanation of the gaps.
Powstik Guide
A lead or PID controller for a DC-motor speed model (or another plant with real parameters from a datasheet), designed and tested in simulation, in a public repo.
Steps
- Write down what you expect before you start.
- Model the plant from datasheet values and write the spec (overshoot, settling time, steady-state error, phase margin). Design by root locus or Bode, then simulate step and disturbance responses with the drive voltage limited to the supply. Fill a predicted-vs-simulated table.
- Fill the predicted-vs-measured table.
- Explain every gap with a cause someone can check.
- Write the README and ask someone who knows the subject to rerun it.
Template
README ECE 7: Feedback Control — Design a controller that meets a written spec What I expected: How to rerun it: Predicted vs measured: Why they differ:
What gets sent back
- It does not run from the repo.
- No predicted-vs-measured table.
- Mains power, a lithium pack or loose cell, a home-made charger, or more than 12 V DC.
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- The plant model cites its datasheet values.
- Predicted and simulated overshoot, settling time and margins are compared.
- The simulated design meets every line of the spec with the drive voltage limited to the supply.
- Rerun it from the repo: does it run, and do the numbers match the table?
- The build uses 12 V DC or less from AA, AAA or 9 V batteries or USB; nothing touches mains, and there is no lithium pack, loose cell or home-made charger.
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Part of