Your Equation

Library / Control engineering / CTL-05

Control engineering

Approximate 2 % settling time of a second-order system

Common estimate of the time for the step response to stay within 2 % of its final value.

Ref
CTL-05
Rev
v1
Field
Control engineering
Result
ts [s]

The oscillation of an underdamped step response is wrapped in an envelope that decays as e−ζωnt. The response has settled within 2 % when that envelope has fallen to 2 %, i.e. when ζωnt = 4 (since e−4 ≈ 0.018). For a 5 % band use 3/(ζωn) instead.

Common estimate of the time for the step response to stay within 2 % of its final value. It is set by how fast the oscillation envelope decays, which is the real part of the poles.

Calculator

Solve for
s
0.10.95
rad/s
120
  • Real part of the poles, ζωn2 1/s
  • Envelope time constant, 1/(ζωn)0.5 s
  • Damped cycles before settling, ts ωd / 2π1.103

What drives the result

Each variable is moved across its typical range while the others stay at the values above. The longest bar is the key driver.

Settling time (2 %) (s) current value 2 s
ζDamping ratio (below 1)Key driver
1.0510
ωnNatural frequency
0.48
  • The settling time depends on the product ζωn only, the distance of the poles from the imaginary axis. At the defaults it is 2 s. Poles with the same real part settle in about the same time, however oscillatory they are.
  • Raising the damping to ζ = 0.7 at the same ωn shortens the settling time to 1.429 s and cuts the overshoot from 16.3 % to 4.6 %.
Chart data as tables

Ranked variables

VariableTypical rangeLowest resultHighest resultSwing (s)Local stepChange in result
ζ Damping ratio (below 1)0.1 to 0.95 1.053108.947+10%−9.09 %
ωn Natural frequency1 to 20 rad/s0.487.6+10%−9.09 %

Sweep of Damping ratio (below 1)

Damping ratio (below 1)Settling time (2 %) (s)
0.110
0.20624.848
0.31253.2
0.41872.388
0.5251.905
0.63121.584
0.73751.356
0.84381.185
0.951.053

Sweep one variable

Settling time (2 %) (s)Hover, touch, or use the arrow keys on the chart
246810 0.10.30.50.70.9 Damping ratio (below 1) now 2

Variables and how each one contributes

ts

Settling time (2 %)

Result · s

What the equation gives you. Everything else feeds it.

ζ

Damping ratio (below 1)

· typical 0.1 to 0.95

The damping ratio, below 1. Inversely proportional: more damping at the same ωn moves the poles further from the imaginary axis and shortens the settling time. Raising it by 10 % (to 0.55) moves the result by −9.09 %, from 2 to 1.818 s.

ωn

Natural frequency

rad/s · typical 1 to 20

The natural frequency in rad/s. Inversely proportional: a faster system settles sooner by the same percentage. Raising it by 10 % (to 4.4) moves the result by −9.09 %, from 2 to 1.818 s.

Worked example with the values above

  1. Real part of the poles: ζωn = 0.5 × 4 = 2 1/s.
  2. Four envelope time constants: ts ≈ 4 / 2.
  3. ts ≈ 2 s.

Assumptions and limits

  • A standard second-order system with no zeros, 0 < ζ < 1, and moderate damping.
  • A 2 % band around the final value.

Common mistakes

  • Using 4/(ζωn) for an overdamped or critically damped system, where it underestimates the time.
  • Quoting it for a 5 % band, which needs 3 envelope time constants instead of 4.

Statistics and uncertainty

The 2 % rule is an approximation of a stepped quantity: the exact settling time jumps when an oscillation peak crosses the 2 % band, and can differ from 4/(ζωn) by roughly a quarter of the damped period. A measured settling time also depends on the noise and on the band chosen, so state both.

Where it is used

  • Turning a settling-time requirement into a limit on the real part of the closed-loop poles.
  • Checking whether a design settles within the time available between commands.

Maths you need

  • Pole location: poles at −ζωn ± jωd
  • Exponential envelope: the oscillation decays as e^(−ζωn t)

Related formulas

Practise this formula