You are on page 1of 6

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.

Gp

IV. SIMULATION STUDY

Ke-T s
Ws 1

(10)

ZKHUH . LV WKH SURFHVV JDLQ 2 WKH WLPH FRQVWDQW, DQG


time delay, the IMC filter structure selected is

LV WKH

Ds 1

Wcs 1

(11)

After utilizing the above design principle the ideal feedback


controller is given as
Gc

W s 1 Ds 1

(12)

2
K W c s 1 - e-T s D s 1

Although the simulation study is conducted on the


different types of processes, only few of them are discussed
below. The proposed tuning rule provides acceptable
controller settings in all cases with respect to both
SHUIRUPDQFH DQG UREXVWQHVV $OO UHVXOWV DUH ZLWKRXW ORFDO
GHWXQLQJ )
7KH FORVHG-loop performance is evaluated
by introducing a unit step change in both the set-point and
load disturbance i.e, (ys=1 and d=1). The brief overview of
the performance and robustness measure is mentioned here.
To evaluate the robustness, we compute the maximum
closed-loop sensitivity, defined as Ms =max& 1/[1+g c(j& @ . A
small Ms-value indicates that the control system has a large
stability margin.

From Eq.(12), the resulting PI controller can be obtained


using Taylor series expansion, e T s 1 T s and then
simplification
K 2W c D T

; WI

Process Variable

Kc

1.25

(13)
(a)

Wcs 1
s

0
1W

10

20

30

35

Proposed method
SIMC
Lee et al.

Process Variable

0.1

0.05

0
0

10

20

30

35

Time

Figure 2. Responses of PI-control of first-order process

DQG WKH YDOXH RI . LV REWDLQHG as

0
0

(b)

7KH YDOXH RI . LV VHOHFWHG VR WKDW LW FDQFHOV RXW WKH SROH DW


s=- 2 From Eq.(4), this requires 1 D s 1 e

Proposed method
SIMC
Lee et al.

0.15

on the control performance, while keeping the simple PI


control structure.
2

0.5
0.25

Time

Furthermore, it is obvious that the remaining part of the


denominator in Eq.(12) contains the factor of the process
poles W s 1 . It has been ignored because of its little impact

Ts

1
0.75

10s 1 (C1). For both setpoint and load disturbance

of magnitude 1 at t=0.
D

W 2
W 1 1 c e
W

TW

(14)

The ORFDO GHWXQLQJ IDFWRU ) is included in Eq.(13) and the


final form of the proposed tuning rule is given in conclusion
section.
Setpoint filter to enhance servo response
In the proposed controlOHU GHVLJQ WHUP .V
VKRZV D
large overshoot for the step set-point change, it is because
the controller is design based on the disturbance rejection.
Therefore, a setpoint filter f r is suggested to remove
excessive overshoot and enhance the servo response.

fr

Wcs 1
Ds 1

(15)

Tan et al. [9] also suggested this form of set-point filter. Due
to this type of lead-lag filter, resulting response will be first
RUGHU ZLWK WKH WLPH FRQVWDQW RI 2c for the set-point change.

To achieve the fair comparisons in the simulation study, all


FRQWUROOHU KDYH EHHQ WXQHG E\ DGMXVWLQJ 2c for the same
degree of robustness by fixing Ms. In the simulation of the
second
order
process,
series
form,
Gc

1 W D s 1 of PID structure has been used


Kc 1

W
I s W D N s 1

with N=100 and no differentiation of the setpoint [5].


The results of 4 different processes are listed in Table 1.
Figure 2-4 show comparison of the proposed method with
other methods like SIMC (Skogestad [5]), DCLR (Lee et al.
[4]), TL (Tyreus and Luyben [14]) and Yang et al. [10]. In
case of stable and integrating process proposed method
gives faster disturbance rejection and has clear advantage
over the DCLR and SIMC method. The proposed method
also works well in first and second order unstable processes
with dead time. The results of examples C4 clearly shows
that the proposed method gives both smaller overshoot and
faster disturbance rejection while maintaining setpoint
performance for unstable process. From above analysis it
seems that the proposed method constantly gives better

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.


closed-loop response for several types of processes at same
Ms-value compared with other methods.
Note: For the PI-controller design, delay integrating process
(DIP) should be approximated to the FOPDT process. In the
present simulation case C2 has been modeled as
20e 7.4s 100s 1 .
Figure 5 shows the manipulated variable (MV) response for
C1 as the representative case. The response of the MV of the
proposed method is comparable with the SIMC [5] and Lee
et al [4].

(a)

0.8

Proposed method
SIMC
TL

0.4

0
0

40

80
Time

120

Process Variable

160
Proposed method
SIMC
TL

2c guideline for proposed tuning rule


In the proposed tuning rule, the closed-loop time constant
2c controls the tradeoff between robustness and performance
of the control system. As 2c decreases, the closed-loop
response becomes faster and can be unstable. On the other
hand, as 2c increases, the closed-loop response becomes
sluggish and more stable. A good tradeoff is obtained by
choosing 2c to give Ms-value in the range of 1.2~2.0 for
stable process. An analysis of the 2c selection has been
conducted and plot of Ms YHUVHV 2 for different value of 2c
ZKHUH
DQG
LV VKRZQ LQ WKH Figure 7. The
figure clearly shows that 2c
LV QRW WKH SURSHU FKRLFH
because for the lag dominant process it gives tight controller
setting. For 2c
LW JLYHV VPRRWK DQG UREXVW VHWWLQJ
because Ms lies between 1.61 to 1.25. A good tradeoff
between robustness and performance can be achieved for 2c
ZKHUH LW ZLOO JLYH 0s=2.0 for lag dominant process and
Ms=1.26 for delay dominant process.

1.5

(b) 0
0

40

80
Time

120

Process Variable

Process Variable

1.2

V. DISCUSSIONS

160

0
0

Proposed method
Yang et al.
5

10

15

20

25

Time
0.5

Proposed method
Yang et al.

0.4

Process Variable

of magnitude 1 at t=0.

0.3
0.2
0.1

(b) 0
0

10

15

20

25

Time

Figure 4. Responses of PID-control for high order unstable


process Gp e 0.5s 5s 1 2s 1 0.5s 1 (C4). For both
setpoint and load disturbance of magnitude 1 at t=0.
6

Effect of setpoint filter on servo response: The proposed


method is based on the disturbance rejection so the large
overshoot for the step setpoint change can occur particularly
for the unstable and integrating processes. Therefore, leadlag setpoint filter similar to Tan et al. [9] is recommended
to remove the overshoot in setpoint response. To show the
performance improvement a first-order unstable process
with time delay (Case C3) has been considered. The
resulting setpoint filter of the proposed study for C3 should
be f r 1.36s 1 8.25s 1 . Figure 6 shows the closed-loop
response of the proposed method for both with and without
setpoint filter where IAE is reduced from 6.72 to 1.90. As
expected the output response with setpoint filter is fast
without any overshoot.

0.5

(a)

Figure 3. Responses of PI-control of integrating process


G p 0.2e 7.4s s (C2). For both setpoint and load disturbance
(IIHFW RI ORFDO GHWXQLQJ IDFWRU ) Although the figure is
QRW VKRZQ LQ WKLV SDSHU WKH HIIHFW RI ORFDO GHWXQLQJ IDFWRU
F has been investigated using a first order process with time
delay (Case C1). As expected, using F=1.25 (here F>1)
results in more robust controller settings with M s=1.43. The
original setting which represent F=1 gives Ms=1.60. As
mentioned earlier the closed-loop response can be speed-up
by selecting F=0.75 (here F<1) and then resulting robustness
will reduced to Ms=2.05.

Proposed method
SIMC
Lee et al.

MV

2
(a)

0
0

10
Time

15

20

0.5
Proposed method
SIMC
Lee et al.

MV

0
-0.5
-1
(b)

-1.5
0

10
Time

15

20

Figure 5. MV plots of PI-control for first-order process

10s 1 (C2). For both setpoint and load disturbance of

magnitude 1 at t=0.

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.

Table 1: PI/PID controller setting for proposed method (F=1) and performance matrix.
Case

Process model

Methods

Resulting PI/PID-controller and its performance


2c

C1

C2

C3
C4

e s
10s 1
0.2e 7.4 s
s
0.5 s

e
s 1

0.5 s

e
5s 1 2s 1 0.5s 1

Ms

Kc

2I

Setpoint
IAE (y)

Load
disturbance
IAE (y)

Proposed

2.46

1.60

4.57

4.85

3.1

1.06

SIMC

1.0

1.60

5.0

8.0

2.5

1.60

Lee et al.

1.0

1.60

5.12

10.25

2.17

2.0

Proposed

19.37 1.70

0.304

39.63

30.21

131.9

SIMC

7.4

1.70

0.338

59.2

28.8

174.5

TL

1.67

0.33

64.7

29.13

195

Proposed

1.36

6.0

1.646

8.25

6.72

5.01

Lee et al.
Proposed

1.4
2.9

6.0
2.2

1.668
3.22

8.67
9.50

6.77
6.37

5.20
2.95

Yang et al.

1.5

2.2

2.564

10.98

8.57

4.28

Note: For case C4: 2D =2.25 and 1.82 is used for the proposed and Yang et al. [10], respectively.

3.5
Proposed method without setpoint-filter (IAE=6.72, TV=11.98)
Proposed method with setpoint-filter (IAE=1.90, TV=2.26)

2c=

3
2c=2

Process Variable

2.5

2c=3
3

1.5
Ms

0.5

0
0

10

15

Time

Figure 6. Effect of setpoint filter to remove the overshoot


from setpoint response: Setpoint responses of PI-control of
first-order
unstable
process
with
time
delay

Gp

0.5s

s 1

(C3). For both setpoint and load

disturbance of magnitude 1 at t=0.

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Figure 7. 2c guidelines of first order stable process with time


delay based on the time delay in the process.

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

CONFIDENTIAL. Limited circulation. For review only.


VI. CONCLUSIONS

Process Control, vol. 13, p. 291309, 2003.

A simple analytical design method for PI/PID controller


was proposed based on the IMC principle in order to
improve disturbance rejection performance. Another
important feature of the proposed methodology is that it
dealt stable, integrating and unstable process in a unified
way. As we have seen earlier a single tuning rule gives
satisfactory performance and robustness for all cases. In the
resulting method 2c controls the tradeoff between robustness
and performance of the control system.
In conclusion, the final tuning formula for the proposed
PI/PID tuning rule is summarized as:
Kc

D
;
K 2W c D T F
W 2
W 1 1 c e
W

TW

WI

D F;

WD

W2

[6] M. Shamsuzzoha and M. Lee, "IMCPID controller


design for improved disturbance rejection of time
delayed processes," Ind Eng Chem Res, vol. 46, p.
20772091, 2007.
[7] D. Rivera, M. Morari and S. Skogestad, "Internal model
control. 4. PID controller design," Ind Eng Chem
Process Des Dev, vol. 25, p. 252265, 1986.
[8] Y. Lee, J. Lee and S. Park, "PID controller tuning for
integrating and unstable processes with time delay,"
Chemical Engineering Science , vol. 55, pp. 3481-3493,
2000.
[9] W. Tan, H. Marquez and T. Chen, "IMC design for
unstable processes with time delays," Journal of
Process Control , vol. 13, p. 203213, 2003.
[10] X. Yang, Q. Wang, C. Hang and C. Lin, "IMC-based
control system design for unstable processes,"
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research , vol.
41, p. 42884294, 2002.

where F is a ORFDO GHWXQLQJ IDFWRU F=1 gives the original


proposed setting and to detune the response and get more
robustness one selects F>1. To speed-up the closed-loop
response in special cases where it appears slow, one may
select F<1. For the first order and integrating process with
WLPH GHOD\ WKH UHVXOWLQJ WXQLQJ UXOH LV 3, ZKHUH 2 D=0. Several
important representative processes were considered in the
simulation study in order to demonstrate the advantage of
the proposed method. The design method was based on the
disturbance rejection and a setpoint filter was
recommended to eliminate the overshoot in setpoint
response. In particular, the proposed controller shows
excellent performance when the lag time dominates. A
JXLGHOLQH RI 2c was also proposed for a wide range of 2
ratio.
VII. WORKS CITED
[1] L. D. Desborough and R. M. Miller, "Increasing
customer value of industrial control performance
monitoring+RQH\ZHOOV H[SHULHQFH LQ Chemical
Process Control VI AIChE Symposium Series ,
Tuscon, Arizona, Jan. 2001, 2002.

[11] M. Shamsuzzoha and M. Lee, "Design of advanced PID


controller for enhanced disturbance rejection of second
order process with time delay," AIChE, vol. 54, pp.
1526-1536, 2008.
[12] M. Shamsuzzoha and M. Lee, "Enhanced disturbance
rejection for open-loop unstable process with time
delay," ISA Transactions, vol. 48, pp. 237-244, 2009.
[13] M. Shamsuzzoha and M. Lee, "Analytical design of
enhanced PIDfilter controller for integrating and first
order unstable processes with time delay," Chemical
Engineering Science, vol. 63, pp. 2717-2731, 2008.
[14] B. Tyreus and W. Luyben, "Tuning PI controllers for
integrator/dead time processes," Ind. Eng. Chem. Res,
p. 26252628, 1992.
[15] M. Shamsuzzoha and S. Skogestad, "The setpoint
overshoot method: A simple and fast closed-loop
approach for PID tuning," Journal of Process Control,
vol. 20, p. 12201234, 2010.
[16] M. Shamsuzzoha, "Closed-loop PI/PID controller
tuning for stable and integrating process with time
delay," Ind. Eng. Chem. Res, , vol. 52, pp. 1297312992, 2013.

[2] M. Kano and M. Ogawa, "The state of art in chemical


process control in Japan: Good practice and
questionnaire survey," Journal of Process Control, vol.
20, pp. 969-982, 2010.
[3] D. Seborg, T. Edgar and D. Mellichamp, Process
Dynamics and Control, New York: Wiley, 2004.
[4] Y. Lee, S. Park, M. Lee and C. Brosilow, "PID
controller tuning for desired closedloop responses for
SI/SO systems," AIChE, vol. 44, p. 106115, 1998.
[5] S. Skogestad, "Simple analytic rules for model
reduction and PID controller tuning," journal of

Preprint submitted to 2014 American Control Conference.


Received September 27, 2013.

You might also like