performance of feedback control systems (stachowicz, 2010)
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
1/107
Performance of Feedback Control
Systems
Prof. Marian S. StachowiczLaboratory for Intelligent Systems
ECE Department, University of Minnesota Duluth
February 25 March 2, 2010
ECE 3151 - Spring 2010
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
2/107
Outline
Introduction
Test Input Signals
Performance of a second-order system Effects of a Third Pole and a Zero on the Second-
Order System Response
Estimation of the Damping Ratio
The s-plane Root Location and the TransientResponse
2Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
3/107
References for reading
1. R.C. Dorf and R.H. Bishop, Modern Control Systems,
11th Edition, Prentice Hall, 2008,Chapter 5.1 - 5.12
2. J.J. DiStefano, A. R. Stubberud, I. J. Williams,Feeedback and Control Systems, Schaum's OutlineSeries, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1990Chapter 9
3Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
4/107
Test Input Signal
Since the actual input signal of the systemis usually unknown, a standard test input
signal is normally chosen. Commonlyused test signals include step input, rampinput, and the parabolic input.
4Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
5/107
General form of the standard test
signals
r(t) = tn
R(s) = n!/sn+1
5Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
6/107
Test signals r(t) = A tn
n = 0 n = 1 n = 2
r(t) = A r(t) = At r(t) = At2R(s) = 2A/s3R(s) = A/s R(s) = A/s2
6Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
7/107
Table 5.1 Test Signal Inputs
Test Signal r(t) R(s)
Step
position
r(t) = A, t > 0
= 0, t < 0
R(s) = A/s
Ramp
velocity
r(t) = At, t > 0
= 0, t < 0
R(s) = A/s2
Parabolic
acceleration
r(t) = At2, t > 0
= 0, t < 0
R(s) = 2A/s3
7Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
8/107
Test inputs vary with target type
parabola
ramp
step
8Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
9/107
Steady-state error
Is a difference between input and the
output for a prescribed test input as
t
9Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
10/107
Application to stable systems
Unstable systems represent loss ofcontrol in the steady state and are
not acceptable for use at all.
10Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
11/107
Steady-state error:a) step input, b) ramp input
11Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
12/107
Time response of systems
c(t) = ct(t) + css(t)
The time response of a control system is dividedinto two parts:
ct(t) - transient response
css(t) - steady state response
12Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
13/107
Transient response
All real control systems exhibit transientphenomena to some extend before steady
state is reached.
lim ct(t) = 0 for t
13Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
14/107
Steady-state response
The response that exists for a long timefollowing any input signal initiation.
14Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
15/107
Poles and zeros of a first order system
Css(t) Ct(t
) 15Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
16/107
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
17/107
A pole on the real axis generate an exponential response
of the form Exp[-t] where - is the pole location on real axis.
The farther to the left a pole is on the negative real axis,
the faster the exponential transit response will decay to zero.
Effect of a real-axis pole upon transientresponse
17Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
18/107
Evaluating response using poles
C(s) K1
s
K2
s 2
K3
s 4
K4
s 5
Css(t) Ct(t
)
c(t) K1 K2e2t K3e
4 t K4e5t
18Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
19/107
c(t) 1 eat
First order system
19Control Systems
C(s) R(s) G(s) as(s a)
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
20/107
First-order system response to a unit step
Transient response specification:
1. Time-constant, 1/a
2. Rise time, Tr
3. Settling time, Ts
20Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
21/107
Transient response specification
for a first-order system
1. Time-constant, 1/aCan be described as the time for (1 - Exp[- a t])
to rise to 63 % of initial value.
1. Rise time, Tr = 2.2/aThe time for the waveform to go from 0.1 to 0.9of its final value.
3. Settling time, Ts = 4/aThe time for response to reach, and stay within,2% of its final value
21Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
22/107
Transfer function via laboratory testing
G(s) K
(s a)
C(s) K
s(s a)
Ka
s
Ka
(s a)
22Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
23/107
Identify K and a from testing
The time for amplitude to reach 63% of its final value:63 x 0.72 = 0.45, or about 0.13 sec , a = 1/0.13 = 7.7
From equation, we see that the forced response reachesa steady-state value of K/a =0.72 .K= 0.72 x 7.7= 5.54
G(s) = 5.54/(s+7.7) .
23Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
24/107
Exercise
A system has a transfer function
G(s)= 50/(s+50).
Find the transit response specifications
such as Tc, Tr, Ts.
24Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
25/107
25Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
26/107
Steady-state response
If the steady-state response of the output does notagree with the steady-state of the input exactly, thesystem is said to have a steady-state error.
It is a measure of system accuracy when a specific typeof input is applied to a control system.
26Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
27/107
Y(s) = R(s) G(s)
27Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
28/107
Steady-state error
T(s) = 9/(s + 10) Y(s) = 9/s(s+10)
y(t) = 0.9(1- e
-10t
)
y() = 0.9
E(s) = R(s) - Y(s)
ess = lim s 0 s E(s) = 0.1
28Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
29/107
E(s)
R(s)
1K
E(s)
R(s)
1 Ks
e(t) 1
1K e(t) eK t
29Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
30/107
30Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
31/107
Control Systems 31
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
32/107
Performance of a second-order system
32Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
33/107
Numerical example of the second-
order system
33Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
34/107
Overdamped
C(s) 9
s(s2 9s 9)
9
s(s 7.854)(s 1.146)
c(t) 1 0.171e7.854t 1.17e1.146t
34Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
35/107
Underdamped
C(s) 9
s(s
2
2s 9)
9
s(s 1 j 8)(s 1 j 8)
c(t) 1 et(cos 8t8
8sin 8t)
35Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
36/107
c(t) 1 et(cos 8t8
8sin 8t)
36Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
37/107
Undamped
C(s) 9s(s
2 9)
c(t) 1cos3t
37Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
38/107
Critically damped
C(s)
9
s(s2 6s 9)
9
s(s 3)2
c(t) 1 3te3t e3t
38Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
39/107
Step response for second order systemdamping cases
39Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
40/107
fig_04_11
40Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
41/107
Summary
Overdamped
Poles: Two real at - 1, - 2
Underdamped
Poles: Two complex at - d + jd, - d - jd
Undamped
Poles: Two imaginary at + j1, - j1
Critically dampedPoles: Two real at - 1,
41Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
42/107
Performance of a second-order system
42Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
43/107
Response to unit step input
Y(s) G(s)
1 G(s)R(s)
)(2)( 22
2
sRsssY nn
n
)2()(
22
2
nn
n
ssssY
)sin(1
1)(
tety ntn
21
1cos
43Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
44/107
Natural frequency n - the frequency of naturaloscillation that would occur for two complexpoles if the damping were equal to zero
Damping ratio - a measure of damping forsecond-order characteristic equation
44Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
45/107
s2 2ns n 2 0
s1 n n 2 1
s2
n
n
2 1
Characteristic equation
45Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
46/107
Finding nand for a second-order
system
G(s) n2
s2 2nsn2
n2
362n 4.2
n 6
0.35
s2 2ns n2 0
s1 n n 2 1
s2 n n 2 1
G(s) 36
s2 4.2s 36
46Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
47/107
Second-order responses for
underdamped
47Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
48/107
48Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
49/107
Transit response
For step input as
a function of
For step input asa function of and nt
49Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
50/107
Unit impulse response
Y(s) n
2
(s2 2nsn2
)R(s)
y(t) n
ent sinnt
R(s)=1 T(s)=Y(s)
50Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
51/107
51Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
52/107
52Control Systems
Constant real part
Constant imaginary part
Constant damping ratio
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
53/107
Standard performance measures
Ts(s) 44
n
21
n
pT
Peak time
Mpt1 e
12
P.O. 100 e
12
Settling time
Percent overshoot
Peak response
53Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
54/107
fig_04_14
54Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
55/107
Settling time
The settling time is defined as the timerequired for a system to settle within acertain percentage of the input amplitude.
Ts(s) 44
n
55Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
56/107
Settling time
Ts(s) 44
n
56Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
57/107
Rise time
The time it takes for a signal to go from10% of its value to 90% of its final value
Tr(s) 2.16 0.60
n0.3 0.8
57Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
58/107
Rise time
58Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
59/107
Peak time
Peak time is the time required by a signalto reach its maximum value.
21
n
pT
59Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
60/107
Peak time
21
n
pT
60Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
61/107
Percent overshoot
Percent Overshoot is defined as:
P.O. = [(Mpt fv) / fv] * 100%
Mpt = The peak value of the time response
fv = Final value of the response
P.O. 100 e
12
61Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
62/107
Percent overshoot
62Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
63/107
Percent overshoot and normalizedpeak time versus
63Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
64/107
Finding transient response
G(s) 25
s(s 5)
64Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
65/107
T(s) 25
s2 5s 25
s2 5s 25
s2 2nsn2
n 25 5
2n 5, 0.5
Tp
n 12
0.726 sec
P.O. 100 e
12 16.3%
Ts(s) 4n
1.6 sec
65Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
66/107
Gain design for transient response
G(s) K
s(s 5)
66Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
67/107
T(s) K
s2 5sK
s2 5sK
s2 2nsn2
n K
2n 5, 5
2 K
for P.O.10%
P.O.100e
12 10.0%
0.591, K17.9
67Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
68/107
Performance Indices
Elevator
Control Systems 68
Simplified description of a control
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
69/107
Simplified description of a controlsystem
69Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
70/107
Elevator input and output
When the fourth floor button is pressed on the firstfloor, the elevator rises to the fourth floor with aspeed and floor level accuracy designed for
passenger comfort.70Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
71/107
Push of the fourth-floor button is an input thatrepresent a desired output, shown as a stepfunction.
71Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
72/107
Transient response
Passenger comfort and passenger patience are
dependent upon the transient response.If this response is too fast, passenger comfortis sacrificed; if too slow, passenger patience issacrificed.
72Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
73/107
Steady-state error
Passenger safety and convenience would be
sacrificed if the elevator is not properly level.
73Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
74/107
Performance Indices
A performance index is a quantitativemeasure of the performance of a
system and is chosen so thatemphasis is given to the importantsystem specifications.
74Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
75/107
Response of the system
75Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
76/107
ISE - Integral of Square of Error
I1 e2(t)0
T
dt
76Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
77/107
The Integral Squared Error
I1 e2(t)
0
T
dt
77Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
78/107
IAE - Integral of the AbsoluteMagnitude of the Error
I2 e(t)0
T
dt
78Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
79/107
ITAE - Integral of Time Multiplied byAbsolute Error
I3 t e(t)0
T
dt
79Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
80/107
ITSE - Integral of Time Multiplied bySquared Error
I4 te2 (t)0
T
dt
80Control Systems
General form of the performance
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
81/107
General form of the performanceintegral
I f[e(t), r(t),c((t), t]0
T
dt
81Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
82/107
Section 5.9
T
dtteISE
0
2)(
T
dtteIAE
0
|)(|
T
dttetITAE
0
|)(| T
dttteITSE
0
2)(
T
dtttytrtefI
0
)),(),(),((
82Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
83/107
Performance criteria
T(s) 1
s2 2s 1
83Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
84/107
84Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
85/107
Optimum system
A control system is optimum when theelected performance index is minimized.
The optimum value of the parametersdepends directly upon the definition ofoptimum, that is, the performance index.
85Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
86/107
The coefficients that will minimize theITAE performance criterion for a stepinput and a ramp input have beendetermined for the general closed-looptransfer function.
86Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
87/107
General closed-loop T(s)
T(s) Y(s)
R(s)
b0
sn
bn1sn1
... b1s b0
The T(s) has n poles and no zeros.
This T(s) has a steady-state error equal zero for a step input.
87Control Systems
T bl Th O i
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
88/107
Table 5.6 The OptimumCoefficients of T(s) Based on the
ITAE Criterion for a Step Input
s + n
s2 + 1.4ns + n2
s3 + 1.75n s2 + 2.15n2s+ n3
s4 + 2.1 n s3 + 3.4 n
2s2 + 2.7 n3s + n
4
s5 + 2.8 n s4 + 5.0 n
2s3 + 5.5 n3s2 + 3.4n
4s +n5
s6 + 3.25ns5 + 6.60 n
2s
4 + 8.60n3s3 + 7.45 n
4s2 + 3.95n5s
+
n
6
88Control Systems
Step response for optimum coefficients
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
89/107
Step response for optimum coefficients
89Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
90/107
90Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
91/107
Table 5.7 The Optimum Coefficientsof T(s) Based on the ITAE Criterion
for a Ramp Input
s2 + 3.2ns + n2
s3
+ 1.75
n s2
+ 3.25
n
2
s
+
n
3
s4 + 2.41 n s3 + 4.93 n
2s2 + 5.14 n3s + n
4
s5 + 2.19 n s4 + 6.50 n
2s3 + 6.30 n3s2 + 5.24n
4s +n5
91Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
92/107
T(s) Y(s)
R(s)
b1s b0s
n bn1sn1 ... b1s b0
T(s) has a steady-state error equal to zero for aramp input.
T(s) has two or more pure integrations asrequired to provide zero steady-state error.
92Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
93/107
A: Simplification of linear system
G(s) K
s(s 2)(s 30)
G(s) K/30s(s 2)
We can neglect the impact of the pole at s = - 30 ,however we must retain the steady-state responseand reduce the system to
93Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
94/107
Impulse response
94Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
95/107
95Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
96/107
B: Simplification of linear systems
H(s) Kams
m am1sm1 a1s 1
bnsn an1s
n1 b1s 1, m n
L(s) Kcps
p c1s 1
dgsg d1s 1
, p g n
96Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
97/107
)()()(
sMds
dsM
k
kk
)()()(
sds
ds
k
kk
)!2(!
)0()0()1()2(2
02
kqk
MMM
kqkqkq
kq
M2q 2q q 1,2...
97Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
98/107
Simplified model
3223)6/1()6/11(1
1
6116
6)(ssssss
sH
L(s) 6
1 d1s d2s2
2
211)( sdsdsM
32 )6/1()6/11(1)( ssss
2
21
)0(1)( sdsdsM M(0)(0) 1
98Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
99/107
Example 5.9
sddsdsdds
dsM k 21
2
21
)(2)1()(
1)0()0( M
1
)1()0( dM
2)2( 2)0( dM
1)0()0(
6/11)0()1(
2)0()2(
1)0()3( 0)0()3( M
99Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
100/107
Example 5.9
2
)0()0()1(
1
)0()0(
2
)0()0()1(
021120
2
MMMMMMM
2
122
2
122 2 dddddM
36
49
2
)0()0()1(
1
)0()0(
2
)0()0()1(
021120
2
100Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
101/107
Example 5.9
18
72 d
22584.260.1
60.1
625.0165.11
1)(
sssssL
36
492
2
12 dd
101Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
102/107
Example 5.9
6116
6)(
23
ssssH
L(s) 1.60
1.60 2.584s s2
102Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
103/107
103Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
104/107
Impulse response
104Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
105/107
105Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
106/107
Dominant poles of transfer function
It has been recognized in practice and inthe literature that if the magnitude of thereal part of a pole is at least 5 to 10 times
of a dominant pole or pair of complexdominant poles, than the pole may beregarded as insignificant insofar as thetransient response is concerned.
106Control Systems
-
7/29/2019 Performance of Feedback Control Systems (Stachowicz, 2010)
107/107
Thank You.