Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SIMC tuning rules (Skogestad IMC)(*) Main message: Can usually do much better by taking a systematic approach Key: Look at initial part of step response
Initial slope: k = k/1
Reference: S. Skogestad, Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID controller design, J.Proc.Control, Vol. 13, 291-309, 2003 (*) Probably the best simple PID tuning rules in the world
Model: Dynamic effect of change in input u (MV) on output y (CV) First-order + delay model for PI-control
Make step change in one u (MV) at a time Record the output (s) y (CV)
: Delay - Time where output does not change 1: Time constant - Additional time to reach 63% of final change k : steady-state gain = y(1)/ u k : slope after response takes off = k/1
Example
Half rule
half rule
original
1st-order+delay
2nd-order+delay
Approximation of zeros
Idea: Specify desired response: and from this get the controller. Algebra:
Integral time
Found: Integral time = dominant time constant (I = 1) Works well for setpoint changes Needs to be modified (reduced) for integrating disturbances
d c u g y
Integral Time
I = 1
Integral time
Want to reduce the integral time for integrating processes, but to avoid slow oscillations we must require:
Derivation:
The effective delay (which limits the achievable closed-loop time constant 2/2 ) is independent of the dominant process time constant 1
It depends on 2/2 (PI) or 3/2 (PID) Beware of large I-action (small I) for level control
2.
3.
These tunings turn out to be almost identical to the tunings given on page 104-106 in the Ph.D. thesis by O. Slatteke, Lund Univ., 2006 and K. Forsman, "Reglerteknik for processindustrien", Studentlitteratur, 2005.
Note: Derivative action is commonly used for temperature control loops. Select D equal to 2 = time constant of temperature sensor
2.
SMOOTH CONTROL: Want slowest possible SMOOTH CONTROL: control subject to acceptable disturbance rejection
Want smooth control if fast setpoint tracking is not required, for example, levels and unconstrained (self-optimizing) variables
TIGHT CONTROL
TIGHT CONTROL
TIGHT CONTROL
Example. Integrating process with delay=1. G(s) = e-s/s. Model: k=1, =1, 1=1 SIMC-tunings with c with ==1:
IMC has I=1
TIGHT CONTROL
1.
Approximate as first-order model with k=1, 1 = 1+0.1=1.1, =0.1+0.04+0.008 = 0.148 Get SIMC PI-tunings (c=): Kc = 1 1.1/(2 0.148) = 3.71, I=min(1.1,8 0.148) = 1.1 Approximate as second-order model with k=1, 1 = 1, 2=0.2+0.02=0.22, =0.02+0.008 = 0.028 Get SIMC PID-tunings (c=): Kc = 1 1/(2 0.028) = 17.9, I=min(1,8 0.028) = 0.224, D=0.22
2.
TIGHT CONTROL
SMOOTH CONTROL
Selecting c= (tight control) is reasonable for cases with a relatively large effective delay
Other cases: Select c > for
What is the largest possible value for c ? Or equivalently: The smallest possible value for Kc?
Will derive Kc,min. From this we can get c,max using SIMC tuning rule
SMOOTH CONTROL
ymax -ymax
SMOOTH CONTROL
Kc
Minimum controller gain for PI-and PID-control: Kc Kc,min = |u0|/|ymax| |u0|: Input magnitude required for disturbance rejection |ymax|: Allowed output deviation
SMOOTH CONTROL
Minimum gain for smooth control ) Common default factory setting Kc=1 is reasonable !
SMOOTH CONTROL
Example
Does not quite reach 1 because d is step disturbance (not not sinusoid)
Reason for having tank is to smoothen disturbances in concentration and flow. Tight level control is not desired: gives no smoothening of flow disturbances. Let |u0| = | q0| expected flow change [m3/s] (input disturbance) |ymax| = |Vmax| - largest allowed variation in level [m3]
Minimum controller gain for acceptable disturbance rejection: Kc Kc,min = |u0|/|ymax| From the material balance (dV/dt = q qout), the model is g(s)=k/s with k=1. Select Kc=Kc,min. SIMC-Integral time for integrating process: I = 4 / (k Kc) = 4 |Vmax| / | q0| = 4 residence time provided tank is nominally half full and q0 is equal to the nominal flow.
LEVEL CONTROL
Level loop starts oscillating Operator detunes by decreasing controller gain Level loop oscillates even more ......
LEVEL CONTROL
V
LC
Apply PI-control: u = c(s) (ys-y); c(s) = Kc(1+1/Is) Closed-loop response to input disturbance: The denominator can be rewritten on standard form
(02 s2 + 2 0 s + 1) with 02 = I/kKc and 2 0 = I Algebra gives: y/d = gd / (1+gc) = I s / (I/k s2 + Kc I s + Kc)
This is the basis for the SIMC-rule for the minimum integral time
LEVEL CONTROL
LEVEL CONTROL
We were called upon to solve a problem with oscillations in a distillation column Closer analysis: Problem was oscillating reboiler level in upstream column Use of Sigurds rule solved the problem
LEVEL CONTROL
SMOOTH CONTROL
Exception to rule: Can have Kc < 1 if disturbances are handled by the integral action.
Applies to: Process with short time constant (1 is small) and no delay ( 0).
SMOOTH CONTROL
Easy loops: Small effective delay ( 0), so closedloop response time c (>> ) is selected for smooth control ASSUME VARIABLES HAVE BEEN SCALED WITH RESPECT TO THEIR SPAN SO THAT |u0/ymax| = 1 (approx.). Flow control: Kc=0.2, I = 1 = time constant valve (typically, 2 to 10s) Level control: Kc=2 (and no integral action) Other easy loops (e.g. pressure control): Kc = 2, I = min(4c, 1)
Note: Often want a tight pressure control loop (so may have Kc=10 or larger)
Input saturation.
Problem. Input may overshoot if we speedup the response too much (here speedup = /c). Solution: To avoid input saturation, we must obey max speedup:
Factor 5 rule: Only dynamics within a factor 5 from control time scale (c) are important Integrating process (1 = 1)
Time constant 1 is not important if it is much larger than the desired response time c. More precisely, may use 1 =1 for 1 > 5 c
SLOW TUNING DESIRED (smooth control, c > ): HERE YOU MAY WANT TO WAIT LONGER TO GET 1 RIGHT BECAUSE IT MAY AFFECT THE INTEGRAL TIME BUT THEN ON THE OTHER HAND, GETTING THE RIGHT INTEGRAL TIME IS NOT ESSENTIAL FOR SLOW TUNING SO ALSO HERE YOU MAY STOP AT 10 TIMES THE EFFECTIVE DELAY ()
Example. Step change in u: Initial value for y: Observed delay: At T=10 min: Initial slope: u = 0.1 y(0) = 2.19 = 2.5 min y(T)=2.62
y(t)
2.4 2.3
7.5 min 2.62-2.19
2.2 2.1 0
=2.5
2 4 6
t [min]
8 10
2. Smooth control. Select Kc Note: Having selected Kc (or c), the integral time I should be selected as given above
Cascade control
Tuning: 1. First tune TC (based on response from V to T) 2. Close TC and tune CC (based on response from Ts to xB)
Ts
TC
K1
y2s
K2
u2
G2
y2
G1
y1
ys
K1
y2s
K2
G2
y2
G1
y1
Without cascade
With cascade
CONTROLLABILITY
Controllability
(Input-Output) Controllability is the ability to achieve acceptable control performance (with any controller) Controllability is a property of the process itself Analyze controllability by looking at model G(s) What limits controllability?
CONTROLLABILITY
Controllability
Recall SIMC tuning rules 1. Tight control: Select c= corresponding to
CONTROLLABILITY
Controllability
More general disturbances. Requirement becomes (for c=):
Following step disturbance d 0: Time it takes for output y to reach max. deviation
CONTROLLABILITY
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2
x 10
Data for column A Product purities: xD = 0.99 0.002, xB =0.01 0.005 (mole fraction light component) Small reboiler holdup, MB/F = 0.5 min
time [min]
time to exceed bound = ymax/kd |d| = 3 min
Controllability: Must close a loop with time constant (c) faster than 1.5 min to avoid that bottom composition xB exceeds max. deviation If this is not possible: May add tank (feed tank?, larger reboiler volume?) to smooth disturbances
CONTROLLABILITY
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2
x 10
Original holdup
16 14
-3
x 10
Larger holdup
xB(t)
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2
xB(t)
10
10
3 min
5.8 min
time [min]
Conclusion controllability
1.
If the plant is not controllable then improved tuning will not help Alternatives
Change the process design to make it more controllable
Better self-regulation with respect to disturbances, e.g. insulate your house to make y=Tin less sensitive to d=Tout.
2.