PI/PID Controller Design Based On Direct Synthesis and Disturbance Rejection

PI/PID Controller Design Based on Direct Synthesis and
Disturbance Rejection
Dan Chen and Dale E. Seborg*
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106
A desi gn method for PI D control l ers based on the di rect synthesi s approach and speci fi cati on of
the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for di sturbances i s proposed. Anal yti cal expressi ons
for PI D control l ers are deri ved for several common types of process model s, i ncl udi ng fi rst-
order and second-order pl us ti me del ay model s and an i ntegrator pl us ti me del ay model . Al though
the control l ers are desi gned for di sturbance rejecti on, the set-poi nt responses are usual l y
sati sfactory and can be tuned i ndependentl y vi a a set-poi nt wei ghti ng factor. Ni ne si mul ati on
exampl es demonstrate that the proposed desi gn method resul ts i n very good control for a wi de
vari ety of processes i ncl udi ng those wi th i ntegrati ng and/or nonmi ni mum phase characteri sti cs.
The si mul ati ons show that the proposed desi gn method provi des better di sturbance rejecti on
than the standard di rect synthesi s and i nternal model control methods when the control l ers
are tuned to have the same degree of robustness.
1. Introduction
The ubi qui tous PI D control l er has conti nued to be the
most wi del y used process control techni que for many
decades. Al though advanced control techni ques such as
model predi cti ve control can provi de si gni fi cant i m-
provements, a PI D control l er that i s properl y desi gned
and tuned has proved to be sati sfactory for the vast
majori ty of i ndustri al control l oops.
1,2
The enormous
l i terature on PI D control l ers i ncl udes a wi de vari ety of
desi gn and tuni ng methods based on di fferent perfor-
mance cri teri a.
3-6
Two earl y and wel l -known desi gn
methods were reported by Zi egl er and Ni chol s (ZN)
7
and
Cohen and Coon.
8
Both methods were devel oped to
provi de a cl osed-l oop response wi th a quarter decay
rati o. Other wel l -known formul as for PI control l er
desi gn i ncl ude desi gn rel ati ons based on i ntegral error
cri teri a
9-11
and gai n and phase margi n formul as.
12
The desi gn methods for PI D control l ers are typi cal l y
based on a ti me-domai n or frequency-domai n perfor-
mance cri teri on. However, the rel ati onshi ps between the
dynami c behavi or of the cl osed-l oop system and these
performance i ndi ces are not strai ghtforward. I n the
di rect synthesi s (DS) approach,
13-15
however, the con-
trol l er desi gn i s based on a desi red cl osed-l oop transfer
functi on. Then, the control l er i s cal cul ated anal yti cal l y
so that the cl osed-l oop set-poi nt response matches the
desi red response. The obvi ous advantage of the di rect
synthesi s approach i s that performance requi rements
are i ncorporated di rectl y through speci fi cati on of the
cl osed-l oop transfer functi on. One way to speci fy the
cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i s to choose the cl osed-l oop
pol es. Thi s pol e pl acement method
4,13
can be i nterpreted
as a speci al type of di rect synthesi s.
I n general , control l ers desi gned usi ng the DS method
do not necessari l y have a PI D control structure. How-
ever, a PI or PI D control l er can be deri ved for si mpl e
process model s such as fi rst- or second-order pl us ti me
del ay model s by choosi ng appropri ate cl osed-l oop trans-
fer functi ons.
15,16
For exampl e, the -tuni ng method was
ori gi nal l y proposed by Dahl i n
17
and i s wi del y used i n
the process i ndustri es. I t i s based on a fi rst-order pl us
ti me del ay model that has a rel ati vel y l arge ti me del ay.
The resul ti ng control l er i s a PI control l er wi th ti me-
del ay compensati on.
4
Al so, the wel l -known i nternal
model control (I MC) desi gn method
1,18-20
i s cl osel y
rel ated to the DS method and produces i denti cal PI D
control l ers for a wi de range of probl ems. For hi gher-
order systems, a model reducti on techni que and I MC
can be used to synthesi ze PI D control l ers.
21
Al terna-
ti vel y, a hi gh-order control l er can be desi gned and then
reduced to PI D form by a seri es expansi on.
22
DS desi gn methods are usual l y based on speci fi cati on
of the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for set-poi nt
changes. Consequentl y, the resul ti ng DS control l ers
tend to perform wel l for set-poi nt changes, but the
di sturbance response mi ght not be sati sfactory. For
exampl e, the I MC-PI D control l er provi des good set-
poi nt tracki ng but very sl uggi sh di sturbance responses
for processes wi th a smal l ti me-del ay/ti me-constant
rati o.
1
However, for many process control appl i cati ons,
di sturbance rejecti on i s much more i mportant than set-
poi nt tracki ng. Therefore, control l er desi gn that em-
phasi zes di sturbance rejecti on, rather than set-poi nt
tracki ng, i s an i mportant desi gn probl em that has
recei ved renewed i nterest recentl y.
Mi ddl eton and Graebe
23
have i nvesti gated the rel a-
ti onshi p between i nput di sturbance responses and
robustness. They concl uded that the deci si on to cancel ,
rather than shi ft, sl ow stabl e open-l oop pol es i nvol ves
a desi gn tradeoff between i nput di sturbance rejecti on
and robustness. Lee et al .
22
extended the I MC desi gn
approach for two degree of freedom control l ers to
i mprove di sturbance performance. Thei r control l er i s a
combi nati on of two control l ers, a standard I MC control -
l er for set-poi nt changes and a second I MC type of
control l er desi gned to shape the di sturbance response.
Thei r control system al so i ncl udes a set-poi nt fi l ter that
i s speci fi ed as the i nverse of the I MC control l er for
di sturbances. Thi s desi gn provi des a set-poi nt response
that i s i denti cal to that for the standard I MC control l er.
Thi s novel control scheme can provi de i mproved dy-
* Correspondi ng author. Tel .: (805) 893-3352. Fax: (805)
893-4731. E-mai l : seborg@engi neeri ng.ucsb.edu.
4807 I nd. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 4807-4822
10.1021/i e010756m CCC: $22.00 2002 Ameri can Chemi cal Soci ety
Publ i shed on Web 08/16/2002
nami c performance over standard I MC control l ers, but
the desi gn procedure i s more compl i cated and mi ght
resul t i n unstabl e control l ers.
I t i s somewhat surpri si ng that the devel opment of
di rect synthesi s desi gn methods for di sturbance rejec-
ti on has recei ved rel ati vel y l i ttl e attenti on. Earl y desi gn
methods for sampl ed-data systems were based on
speci fyi ng the z transform of the desi red cl osed-l oop
response to a parti cul ar di sturbance.
14
However, thi s
approach i s sensi ti ve to the assumed di sturbance and
does not necessari l y produce a PI D control l er. A more
promi si ng approach was proposed recentl y by Szi ta and
Sanathanan.
24-26
They speci fy the desi red di sturbance
rejecti on characteri sti cs i n terms of a cl osed-l oop trans-
fer functi on for di sturbances. The resul ti ng control l er
usual l y i s not a PI or PI D control l er and mi ght be of
hi gh order. The authors propose approxi mati ng the
hi gh-order control l er by a l ow-order control l er usi ng
error mi ni mi zati on i n the frequency domai n.
I n thi s paper, anal yti cal expressi ons for PI and PI D
control l ers are deri ved for common process model s
through the di rect synthesi s method and di sturbance
rejecti on. The proposed desi gn method has a si ngl e
desi gn parameter, the desi red cl osed-l oop ti me constant,
c
. The performance-robustness tradeoff i nvol ved i n
speci fyi ng
c
i s anal yzed. A si mpl e set-poi nt wei ghti ng
factor i s used to i mprove control l er performance for set-
poi nt changes wi thout affecti ng the response to di stur-
bances. Si mul ati on resul ts for ni ne exampl es demon-
strate that the proposed desi gn method provi des robust
PI D control l ers that perform wel l for both di sturbance
and set-poi nt changes.
2. Direct Synthesis Method Based on Set-Point
Responses
I n the di rect synthesi s approach, an anal yti cal ex-
pressi on for the feedback control l er i s deri ved from a
process model and a desi red cl osed-l oop response. I n
most of the DS l i terature, the desi red cl osed-l oop
response i s expressed as a cl osed-l oop transfer functi on
for set-poi nt changes. Consequentl y, thi s popul ar ver-
si on of the di rect synthesi s method wi l l be bri efl y
i ntroduced i n the next secti on.
2.1. Direct Synthesis for Set-Point Tracking
(DS). Consi der a feedback control system wi th the
standard bl ock di agram i n Fi gure 1a. Assume that G
p
(s)
i s a model of the process, measuri ng el ement, transmi t-
ter, and control val ve.
The cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for set-poi nt changes
i s deri ved as
Rearrangi ng gi ves an expressi on for the feedback con-
trol l er
Let the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for set-poi nt
changes be speci fi ed as (y/r)
d
, and assume that a process
model G
p
(s) i s avai l abl e. Repl aci ng the unknown (y/r)
and G
p
(s) by (y/r)
d
and G
p
(s), respecti vel y, gi ves a desi gn
equati on for G
c
(s)
Because the characteri sti cs of (y/r)
d
have a di rect i mpact
on the resul ti ng control l er, (y/r)
d
shoul d be chosen so
that the cl osed-l oop performance i s sati sfactory and the
resul ti ng control l er i s physi cal l y real i zabl e.
The DS control l er i n eq 3 resul ts i n the fol l owi ng
cl osed-l oop transfer functi ons
For the i deal case where the process model i s perfect
(i .e., G
p
) G
p
), the cl osed-l oop transfer functi ons become
respecti vel y.
2.2. Comparison with Internal Model Control
(IMC). A wel l -known control system desi gn strategy,
i nternal model control (I MC) was devel oped by Morari
and co-workers
20
and i s cl osel y rel ated to the di rect
synthesi s approach. Li ke the DS method, the I MC
method i s based on an assumed process model and
rel ates the control l er setti ngs to the model parameters
i n a strai ghtforward manner. The I MC approach has
the advantages that i t makes the consi derati on of model
uncertai nty and the maki ng of tradeoffs between control
system performance and robustness easi er.
The I MC approach has the si mpl i fi ed bl ock di agram
shown i n Fi gure 1b, where G
p
(s) i s the process model
and G
c
/
(s) i s the I MC control l er. The I MC control l er
desi gn i nvol ves two steps:
Step 1. The process model G
p
(s) i s factored as
Figure 1. Feedback control strategi es. (a) Cl assi cal feedback
control . (b) I nternal model control .
y
r
)
G
p
(s) G
c
(s)
1 + G
p
(s) G
c
(s)
(1)
G
c
(s) )
(
y
r
)
G
p
(s)
[
1 -
(
y
r
)]
(2)
G
c
(s) )
(
y
r
)
d
G
p
(s)
[
1 -
(
y
r
)
d
]
(3)
(
y
r
)
DS
)
G
p(
y
r
)
d
G
p
+
(
y
r
)
d
(G
p
- G
p
)
(4)
(
y
d
)
DS
)
G
p
G
d[
1 -
(
y
r
)
d
]
G
p
+
(
y
r
)
d
(G
p
- G
p
)
(5)
(
y
r
)
DS
)
(
y
r
)
d
(6)
(
y
d
)
DS
) G
d[
1 -
(
y
r
)
d
]
(7)
G
p
(s) ) G
p+
(s) G
p-
(s) (8)
4808 I nd. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol . 41, No. 19, 2002
where G
p+
(s) contai ns any ti me del ays and ri ght-hal f-
pl ane zeros. I t i s speci fi ed so that i ts steady-state gai n
i s 1.
Step 2. The I MC control l er i s speci fi ed as
where f i s a l ow-pass fi l ter wi th a steady-state gai n of
1. The I MC fi l ter f typi cal l y has the form
where
c
i s the desi red cl osed-l oop ti me constant.
Parameter r i s a posi ti ve i nteger that i s sel ected so that
ei ther G
c
/
i s a proper transfer functi on or the order of
i ts numerator exceeds the order of the denomi nator by
1, i f i deal deri vati ve acti on i s al l owed.
The I MC structure, Fi gure 1b, can be converted i nto
the conventi onal feedback control structure, Fi gure 1a.
27
Compari ng the resul ti ng control l ers and the cl osed-l oop
responses of the I MC and di rect synthesi s (DS) ap-
proaches, i t i s obvi ous that these two approaches
produce equi val ent control l ers and i denti cal cl osed-l oop
performances i n certai n si tuati ons. For exampl e, i f the
desi red cl osed-l oop response for set-poi nt change i s
speci fi ed as (y/r)
d
) G
p+
f, then the DS control l er i s
equi val ent to the I MC control l er, and i denti cal cl osed-
l oop performance resul ts, even when model i ng errors
are present.
2.3. Direct Synthesis for PI/PID Controllers. I n
general , both the di rect synthesi s and I MC methods do
not necessari l y resul t i n PI /PI D control l ers. However,
by choosi ng the appropri ate desi red cl osed-l oop response
and usi ng ei ther a Padeapproxi mati on or a power-seri es
approxi mati on for the ti me del ay, PI /PI D control l ers can
be deri ved for process model s that are commonl y used
i n i ndustri al appl i cati ons.
Choose the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on as
where i s the ti me del ay of the system and
c
i s the
desi gn parameter. Then, the DS desi gn eq 3 and a
truncated power-seri es expansi on for the ti me del ay
term i n the denomi nator, e
-s
1 - s, gi ves
For systems that can be descri bed by fi rst-order and
second-order pl us ti me del ay model s, a PI or PI D
control l er can be obtai ned from eq 12. For a fi rst-order
pl us ti me del ay model
eq 12 reduces to
Equati on 14 can be expressed as an i deal PI control l er
wi th the fol l owi ng control l er setti ngs
For a second-order pl us ti me del ay model
substi tuti ng i nto eq 12 gi ves an i deal PI D control l er
wi th the fol l owi ng setti ngs
I denti cal PI /PI D setti ngs have been obtai ned usi ng the
I MC approach.
1,18
3. Direct Synthesis Design for Disturbance
Rejection
The PI /PI D setti ngs obtai ned from the DS and I MC
approaches are based on speci fyi ng the cl osed-l oop
transfer functi on for set-poi nt changes. For processes
wi th smal l ti me-del ay/ti me-constant rati os, these PI /PI D
control l ers provi de very sl uggi sh di sturbance responses.
1
Therefore, i t i s worthwhi l e to devel op a modi fi ed di rect
synthesi s approach based on di sturbance rejecti on. The
new desi gn method wi l l be denoted by DS-d.
Consi der a control system wi th the standard bl ock
di agram shown i n Fi gure 1a. The cl osed-l oop transfer
functi on for di sturbances i s gi ven by
Rearrangi ng gi ves an expressi on for the feedback con-
trol l er
Let the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for di stur-
bances be speci fi ed as (y/d)
d
, and assume that a process
model G
p
(s) and a di sturbance model G
d
(s) are avai l abl e.
Repl aci ng the unknown (y/d), G
p
(s), and G
d
(s) by (y/d)
d
,
G
p
(s), and G
d
(s), respecti vel y, gi ves a desi gn equati on
for G
c
(s)
G
c
/
(s) )
1
G
p-
(s)
f (9)
f )
1
(
c
s + 1)
r
(10)
(
y
r
)
d
)
e
-s
c
s + 1
(11)
G
c
)
1
G
p
e
-s
(
c
+ )s
(12)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s + 1
(13)
G
c
)
s + 1
K(
c
+ )s
(14)
G
PI
(s) ) K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
)
(15)
K
c
)
1
K

c
+
(16)
I
) (17)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
(18)
G
PI D
(s) ) K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+
D
s
)
(19)
K
c
)
1
K

1
+
2
+
c
(20)
I
)
1
+
2
(21)
D
)

1
1
+
2
(22)
y
d
)
G
d
(s)
1 + G
p
(s) G
c
(s)
(23)
G
c
(s) )
G
d
(s)
(
y
d
)
G
p
(s)
-
1
G
p
(s)
(24)
I nd. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol . 41, No. 19, 2002 4809
For the DS-d control l er i n eq 25, the cl osed-l oop transfer
functi ons are
For the i deal case where the model i s perfect (i .e., G
p
)
G
p
and G
d
) G
d
), the cl osed-l oop transfer functi ons
become
respecti vel y.
The DS-d desi gn method does not necessari l y produce
a PI or PI D control l er. The structure and order of the
control l er depend on the speci fi cati on of the desi red
cl osed-l oop response and the process model . I n thi s
secti on, the new DS-d desi gn method i s used to deri ve
PI /PI D control l ers for si mpl e process model s that are
wi del y used.
3.1. DS-d PI Settings. The DS-d methods wi l l now
be used to desi gn PI control l ers for a fi rst-order pl us
ti me del ay model and then an i ntegrator pl us ti me del ay
model .
3.1.1. First-Order Plus Time Delay Model. As-
sume that the process i s descri bed by a fi rst-order pl us
ti me-del ay model
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). (Thi s l atter assumpti on wi l l be
removed i n secti on 3.3). Thus, i f the PI control l er i n eq
15 i s used, the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i n eq 23 can
be expressed as
Approxi mati ng the ti me del ay term i n the denomi nator
by a fi rst-order power-seri es expansi on, e
-s
1 - s,
and rearrangi ng gi ves
Therefore, for PI control l er desi gn, i t i s reasonabl e to
speci fy the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on as
wi th
The DS-d desi gn equati on, eq 25, produces a standard
PI control l er i f the ti me del ay i n the denomi nator i s
approxi mated by, e
-s
1 - s. The resul ti ng PI
control l er parameters are
and K
d
i s gi ven by
From eqs 35 and 36, i t i s apparent that, for l arge
val ues of
c
, anomal ous resul ts can occur because K
c
and
K can have opposi te si gns and
I
can become negati ve.
Both of these undesi rabl e si tuati ons can be avoi ded,
however, i f the desi gn parameter
c
sati sfi es
Thi s constrai nt on
c
i s not restri cti ve at al l because
di rect synthesi s control l ers are typi cal l y desi gned so
that
c
< 2.
For thi s PI control l er and G
p
) G
p
, the cl osed-l oop
transfer functi on for set-poi nt changes i s
3.1.2. Integrator Plus Time Delay Model. Pro-
cesses wi th i ntegrati ng characteri sti cs are qui te com-
mon i n the process i ndustri es. Assume that the process
i s descri bed by
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). I f a PI control l er i s used, the
cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for di sturbances i n eq 23
becomes
by e
-s
1 - s gi ves
G
c
(s) )
G
d
(s)
(
y
d
)
d
G
p
(s)
-
1
G
p
(s)
(25)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
)
G
p[
G
d
-
(
y
d
)
d
]
G
p
G
d
+
(
y
d
)
d
(G
p
- G
p
)
(26)
(
y
d
)
DS-d
)
G
p
G
d(
y
d
)
d
G
p
G
d
+
(
y
d
)
d
(G
p
- G
p
)
(27)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
) 1 -
(
y
d
)
d
G
d
(s)
(28)
(
y
d
)
DS-d
)
(
y
d
)
d
(29)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s + 1
(30)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
s + 1
1 +
Ke
-s
s + 1
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
)
(31)
(
y
d
)
I
K
c
se
-s
(
K

I
K
c
-
I
)
s
2
+
(

I
KK
c
+
I
-
)
s + 1
(32)
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
2
(33)
K
d
)

I
K
c
(34)
K
c
)
1
K
+ 2
c
-
c
2
(
c
+ )
2
(35)
I
)
+ 2
c
-
c
2
+
(36)
K
d
) K
(
c
+ )
2
+
(37)
0 <
c
< +
2
+ (38)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
I
s + 1
(
c
s + 1)
2
e
-s
(39)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s
(40)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
s
1 +
Ke
-s
s
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
)
(41)
Therefore, i f the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on
for di sturbances i s speci fi ed as
wi th K
d
)
I
/K
c
, then the control l er obtai ned usi ng the
DS-d method can be rearranged to gi ve a standard PI
control l er wi th
and K
d
i s gi ven by
For thi s control l er and G
p
) G
p
, the cl osed-l oop
response for set-poi nt changes i s
3.2. DS-dPIDSettings. I n thi s secti on, the proposed
DS-d method i s used to desi gn PI D control l ers for some
commonl y used process model s, i ncl udi ng fi rst-order and
second-order pl us ti me del ay model s and an i ntegrator
pl us ti me del ay model .
3.2.1. First-Order Plus Time Delay Model. As-
sume that the process i s descri bed by a fi rst-order pl us
ti me del ay model
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). Thus, i f the PI D control l er i n eq
19 i s used, the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i n eq 23 can
be expressed as
by a fi rst-order Pade approxi mati on
Thus, for PI D control l er desi gn, i t i s reasonabl e to
speci fy the desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on as
wi th K
d
)
I
/K
c
. Then, the control l er obtai ned from the
DS-d method, eq 25, can be rearranged to gi ve a
standard PI D control l er. The resul ti ng PI D control l er
parameters are
and K
d
i s gi ven by
I t i s apparent from the above equati ons that KK
c
,
I
,
and
D
can be negati ve for l arge val ues of
c
. However,
si mul ati on experi ence has demonstrated that thi s po-
tenti al probl em does not occur i f the cl osed-l oop ti me
constant
c
i s chosen i n a reasonabl e manner.
For thi s PI D control l er and G
p
) G
p
, the cl osed-l oop
transfer functi on for set-poi nt changes i s obtai ned as
3.2.2. Integrator Plus Time Delay Model. Now
assume that the process i s descri bed by
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). I f a PI D control l er i s used, the
cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i n eq 23 becomes
(
y
d
)

[
I
K
c
s
(
1 +
2
s
)
e
-s
]
/
[(

I
2KK
c
-
D
)
s
3
+
(
( + /2)
I
KK
c
+
I
D
-
I
)
s
2
+
(

I
KK
c
+
I
-
2
)
s + 1
]
(51)
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
s
(
1 +
2
s
)
e
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
(52)
K
c
)
1
K
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
2
c
3
+ 3
c
2
+
2
2
(
3
c
+
2
)
(53)
I
)
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
(2 + )
(54)
D
)
3
c
2
+
2
2
(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2( + )
c
3
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
(55)
K
d
) K
2
c
3
+ 3
c
2
+
2
2
(
3
c
+
2
)
(2 + )
(56)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
(
I
D
s
2
+
I
s + 1)
(
1 +
2
s
)
(
c
s + 1)
3
e
-s
(57)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s
(58)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
s
1 +
Ke
-s
s
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+
D
s
)
(59)
(
y
d
)
I
K
c
se
-s
(

I
KK
c
-
I
)
s
2
+ (
I
- )s + 1
(42)
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
2
(43)
K
c
)
1
K
2
c
+
(
c
+ )
2
(44)
I
) 2
c
+ (45)
K
d
) K(
c
+ )
2
(46)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
I
s + 1
(
c
s + 1)
2
e
-s
(47)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s + 1
(48)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
s + 1
1 +
Ke
-s
s + 1
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+
D
s
)
(49)
e
-s

1 -
2
s
1 +
2
s
(50)
by eq 50 gi ves
for di sturbances i s speci fi ed as
wi th K
d
)
I
/K
c
, then the control l er obtai ned usi ng the
DS-d method can be rearranged to gi ve a standard PI D
control l er. The resul ti ng PI D control l er parameters are
and K
d
i s gi ven by
For thi s control l er and G
p
)G
p
, the cl osed-l oop response
for set-poi nt change i s obtai ned as
3.2.3. Second-Order Plus Time Delay Model.
Assume that the process i s descri bed by a second-order
pl us ti me del ay model
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). Thus, i f a PI D control l er i s used,
the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i n eq 23 can be
expressed as
by a fi rst-order power-seri es expansi on, e
-s
1 - s,
for di sturbance i s speci fi ed as
wi th K
d
)
I
/K
c
, then the control l er obtai ned from the
DS-d method, eq 25, can be rearranged to gi ve a
standard PI D control l er. The resul ti ng PI D control l er
parameters are
and K
d
i s gi ven by
p
) G
p
, the cl osed-l oop
3.2.4. First-Order with an Integrator Plus Time
Delay Model. Assume that the process i s descri bed by
and that G
d
(s) ) G
p
(s). I f a PI D control l er i s used, then
the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on i n eq 23 becomes
by e
-s
1 - s gi ves
(
y
d
)

[
I
K
c
s
(
1 +
2
s
)
e
-s
]
/
[(

I
2KK
c
-
D
)
s
3
+
(

I
KK
c
+
I
D
-
I
)
s
2
+
(
I
-
2
)
s + 1
]
(60)
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
s
(
1 +
2
s
)
e
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
(61)
K
c
)
1
K

(
3
c
+
2
)
(
c
+
2
)
3
(62)
I
) 3
c
+
2
(63)
D
)
3
2
c
2
+
3
4
2
+
3
8
-
c
3
(
3
c
+
2
)
(64)
K
d
) K
(
c
+
2
)
3
(65)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
(
I
D
s
2
+
I
s + 1)
(
1 +
2
s
)
(
c
s + 1)
3
e
-s
(66)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
(67)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
1 +
Ke
-s
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+
D
s
)
(68)
(
y
d
)

[
I
K
c
se
-s
]
/
[(
I
KK
c
-
I
D
)
s
3
+
(
(
1
+
2
)
I
KK
c
+
I
D
-
I
)
s
2
+
(

I
KK
c
+
I
-
)
s + 1
]
(69)
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
(70)
K
c
)
1
K
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
(
c
+ )
3
(71)
I
)
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
2
+ (
1
+
2
+ )
(72)
D
)
3
c
2
2
+
1
2
(3
c
+ ) - (
1
+
2
+ )
c
3
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
(73)
K
d
) K
(
c
+ )
3
2
+ (
1
+
2
+ )
(74)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
(
I
D
s
2
+
I
s + 1)
(
c
s + 1)
3
e
-s
(75)
G
p
(s) )
Ke
-s
s(s + 1)
(76)
y
d
)
Ke
-s
s(s + 1)
1 +
Ke
-s
s(s + 1)
K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+
D
s
)
(77)
(
y
d
)

[
I
K
c
se
-s
]
/
[(

I
KK
c
-
I
D
)
s
3
+
(

I
KK
c
+
I
D
-
I
)
s
2
+ (
I
- )s + 1
]
(78)
for di sturbance i s speci fi ed as
wi th K
d
)
I
/K
c
, then the control l er obtai ned from the
DS-d method can be rearranged to gi ve a standard PI D
control l er. The resul ti ng PI D control l er parameters are
and K
d
i s gi ve by
p
) G
p
, the cl osed-l oop
3.3. Discussion. I n the previ ous secti ons, the DS-d
method has been used to desi gn PI /PI D control l ers for
wi del y used process model s. The resul ti ng PI /PI D
control l er setti ngs are shown i n Tabl e 1.
Remark 1. The onl y desi gn parameter,
c
, i s di rectl y
rel ated to the cl osed-l oop ti me constant. As
c
decreases,
the cl osed-l oop response becomes faster.
Remark 2. Larger val ues of
c
gi ve l arger val ues of
K
d
because K
d
)
I
/K
c
.
For a uni t step di sturbance at the process i nput,
A strom and Haggl und
4
deri ved the fol l owi ng rel ati on
for the i ntegral error (I E) associ ated wi th PI /PI D control
Thus
Thi s expressi on means that smal l er
c
val ues provi de
smal l er I E val ues for step di sturbances.
Remark 3. Al though smal l er val ues of
c
provi de
better performance for disturbance and set-point changes,
the control system robustness i s worse. Therefore, the
system robustness shoul d be consi dered when
c
i s bei ng
chosen.
Remark 4. The PI /PI D tuni ng rul es i n Tabl e 1 were
deri ved based on the assumpti on that G
d
) G
p
. For the
more general case where G
d
* G
p
, the desi red cl osed-
Table 1. PI/PID Controller Settings for the DS-d Design Method
case
a,b
model KKc I D
A
Ke
-s
s + 1
2
+ - (
c
- )
2
(
c
+ )
2
2
+ - (
c
- )
2
+
-
B
Ke
-s
s + 1
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
2(
c
+ /2)
3
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
(2 + )
3
c
2
+
2
2
(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2( + )
c
3
(
2 +
2
2
)(
3
c
+
2
)
- 2
c
3
- 3
c
2
C
Ke
-s
s
2
c
+
(
c
+ )
2
2c + -
D
Ke
-s
s

(
3
c
+
2
)
(
c
+
2
)
3
3
c
+

2
(
c
+
2
)
3
- 2
c
3
(
3
c
+
2
)
E
Ke
-s
s(s + 1)
(3
c
+ )( + )
(
c
+ )
3
3c +
3
c
2
+ 3
c
-
c
3
+
2
(3
c
+ )( + )
F K(
a
s + 1)
s(s + 1)
(3
c
-
a
)( -
a
)
(
c
-
a
)
3
3c - a 3
c
2
- 3
c
a
-
c
3
+
a
2
(3
c
-
a
)( -
a
)
G
Ke
-s
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
(
c
+ )
3
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
2
+ (
1
+
2
+ )
3
c
2
2
+
1
2
(3
c
+ ) - (
1
+
2
+ )
c
3
[(
1
+
2
) +
1
2
](3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
H
Ke
-s
2
s + 2s + 1
(2 +
2
)(3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
(
c
+ )
3
(2 +
2
)(3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
2
+ (2 + )
3
c
2
2
+
2
(3
c
+ ) - (2 + )
c
3
(2 +
2
)(3
c
+ ) -
c
3
- 3
c
2
I K(
a
s + 1)
(
1
s + 1)(
2
s + 1)
3
c
2
a
+ [
1
2
- (
1
+
2
)
a
](3
c
-
a
) -
c
3
(
c
-
a
)
3
3
c
2
a
+ [
1
2
- (
1
+
2
)
a
](3
c
-
a
) -
c
3
2
- (
1
+
2
-
a
)
a
(
a
-
1
-
2
)
c
3
+ 3
c
2
2
-
1
a
(3
c
-
a
)
3
c
2
a
+ [
1
2
- (
1
+
2
)
a
](3
c
-
a
) -
c
3
a
Cases A and C,
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
2
; cases B and D,
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
s
(
1 +
2
s
)
e
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
; cases E, G, and H,
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
; cases F and I ,
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
s(
a
s + 1)
(
c
s + 1)
3
.
b
Kd ) I /Kc.
(
y
d
)
d
)
K
d
se
-s
(
c
s + 1)
3
(79)
K
c
)
1
K
(3
c
+ )( + )
(
c
+ )
3
(80)
I
) 3
c
+ (81)
D
)
3
c
2
+ 3
c
+
2
-
c
3
(3
c
+ )( + )
(82)
K
d
) K
(
c
+ )
3
+
(83)
(
y
r
)
DS-d
(
I
D
s
2
+
I
s + 1)
(
c
s + 1)
3
e
-s
(84)
I E )
[r(t) - y(t)] dt )

I
K
c
(85)
I E ) K
d
(86)
l oop response for di sturbances i s speci fi ed as
where (y/d)
d
i s gi ven i n Tabl e 1. Thus, the PI /PI D
setti ngs and the cl osed-l oop responses for set-poi nt
changes are the same as for the speci al case where G
d
) G
p
.
Remark 5. The proposed PI tuni ng rul es for i ntegrat-
i ng processes are equi val ent to the I MC PI setti ngs of
Chi en and Fruehauf.
1
3.4. Set-Point and Derivative Weighting. Equa-
ti ons 15 and 19 are conventi onal PI and PI D control l ers.
A more fl exi bl e control structure that i ncl udes set-poi nt
wei ghti ng and deri vati ve wei ghti ng i s gi ven by A strom
and Haggl und
4
where the set-poi nt wei ghti ng coeffi ci ent b i s bounded
by 0 e b e 1 and the deri vati ve wei ghti ng coeffi ci ent c
i s al so bounded by 0 e c e 1. The overshoot for set-
poi nt changes decreases wi th i ncreasi ng b.
The control l ers obtai ned for di fferent val ues of b and
crespond to di sturbances and measurement noi se i n the
same way as conventi onal PI /PI D control l ers, i .e., di f-
ferent val ues of b and c do not change the cl osed-l oop
response for di sturbances. Therefore, the same PI /PI D
tuni ng rul es devel oped here usi ng the DS-d method are
al so appl i cabl e for the modi fi ed PI /PI D control l er i n eq
88. However, the set-poi nt response does depend on the
val ues of b and c. I f set-poi nt wei ghti ng and deri vati ve
wei ghti ng are used, the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for
set-poi nt changes i s gi ven by
where G
c
(s) i s the conventi onal PI D control l er gi ven by
eq 19.
4. Simulation Results
Several si mul ati on exampl es are used to demonstrate
the proposed PI /PI D tuni ng rul es for the DS-d method.
I n practi ce, the deri vati ve wei ghti ng factor c i s usual l y
set to zero to avoi d a l arge deri vati ve ki ck. Thus, i n thi s
paper, c i s chosen to be zero for al l of the si mul ati on
exampl es. Furthermore, the PI D control l er i s i mpl e-
mented i n the wi del y used paral l el form
The deri vati ve fi l ter parameter R i s speci fi ed as R ) 0.1.
Other i mpl ementati ons of PI D control , such as the seri es
form, are al so wi del y used. The control l er setti ngs for
one form can easi l y be converted to other forms.
3
For each exampl e, the DS-d, DS, ZN, and/or some
other methods were used to desi gn PI /PI D control l ers.
As menti oned i n secti on 2.3, the DS and I MC methods
can provi de i denti cal PI /PI D setti ngs i f the same cl osed-
l oop transfer functi on i s speci fi ed and the same ap-
proxi mati on i s used for ti me del ay term. For some
process model s, however, the I MC tuni ng rul es are very
wel l -known. Thus, the I MC method was used i nstead
of the DS method for a few exampl es.
The fol l owi ng robustness and performance metri cs
were used as eval uati on cri teri a for the compari son of
the PI /PI D control l ers:
Robustness Metric. The peak val ue of the sensi ti v-
i ty functi on, M
S
,
28
has been wi del y used as a measure
of system robustness. Recommended val ues of M
S
are
typi cal l y i n the range of 1.2-2.0.
29
To provi de fai r compari sons, the model -based control -
l ers (DS-d, DS, and I MC) were tuned by adjusti ng
c
so
that the M
S
val ues were very cl ose. Thi s tuni ng faci l i -
tated a compari son of control l er performance for di s-
turbance and set-poi nt changes for control l ers that had
the same degree of robustness.
Performance Metrics. Two metri cs were used to
eval uate control l er performance. The i ntegrated abso-
l ute error (I AE) i s defi ned as
15
To eval uate the requi red control effort, the total vari a-
ti on (TV) of the mani pul ated i nput u was cal cul ated
The total vari ati on i s a good measure of the smooth-
ness of a si gnal and shoul d be as smal l as possi bl e.
30
4.1. Example 1. Consi der the fol l owi ng model wi th
a step di sturbance acti ng at the pl ant i nput
31
The DS-d, I MC, and ZN methods were used to desi gn
the PI D control l ers shown i n Tabl e 2. For the DS-d
method, a val ue of
c
) 1.2 was chosen so that M
S
)
1.94. To obtai n a fai r compari son,
c
) 0.85 was sel ected
for the I MC method so that M
S
) 1.94.
The si mul ati on resul ts i n Fi gure 2 and the I AE and
TV val ues i n Tabl e 2 i ndi cate that the di sturbance
response for the DS-d control l er i s much better and
faster than the I MC response, whereas the movements
of these two control l er outputs are si mi l ar. The di stur-
bance response of the ZN control l er has a smal l er peak
val ue but i s more osci l l atory than the DS-d response.
The set-poi nt response of the DS-d control l er i s more
sl uggi sh and has a l arger overshoot than the I MC
control l er. However, the overshoot for the DS-d control -
l er can be el i mi nated, wi thout affecti ng the di sturbance
response, by setti ng b)0.5. By compari ng the responses
and the M
S
, I AE, and TV val ues of al l three control l ers,
(
y
d
)
d
/
)
(
y
d
)
d
G
d
G
p
(87)
u(t) ) K
c
(
[br(t) - y(t)] +
1
0
t
[r() - y()] d +
D
d[cr(t) - y(t)]
dt
)
(88)
y
r
)
c
I
D
s
2
+ b
I
s + 1
D
s
2
+
I
s+1
G
p
(s) G
c
(s)
1 + G
p
(s) G
c
(s)
( G
sp
(s) (89)
G
c
(s) ) K
c
(
1 +
1
I
s
+

D
s
R
D
s + 1
)
(90)
Table 2. PID Controller Settings for Example 1 (/ )
0.01)
set poi nt di sturbance
tuni ng method Kc I D MS I AE TV I AE TV
DS-d (c ) 1.2, b ) 1) 0.829 4.05 0.354 1.94 3.06 1.46 4.89 1.89
DS-d (c ) 1.2, b ) 0.5) 0.829 4.05 0.354 1.94 2.19 0.82 4.89 1.89
I MC (c ) 0.85) 0.744 100.5 0.498 1.94 1.88 1.10 84.4 1.59
ZN 0.948 1.99 0.498 2.30 3.52 2.82 3.22 3.06
I AE (
| r(t) - y(t)| dt (91)

TV (

k)1
|u(k+1) - u(k)| (92)

G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
100
100s + 1
e
-s
(93)
i t can be concl uded that the DS-d control l er provi des
the best performance wi thout usi ng excessi ve control
effort.
4.2. Example 2. Consi der a process i s descri bed by
The PI control l er characteri sti cs for the DS-d, DS, and
ZN control l ers are shown i n Tabl e 3.
Uni t step changes were i ntroduced i n the set poi nt
(at t ) 0) and i n the di sturbance (at t ) 4 mi n). The
si mul ati on resul ts i n Fi gure 3 i ndi cate that the di stur-
bance response of the DS-d PI control l er i s faster than
that of the DS PI control l er and l ess osci l l atory than
that of the ZN PI control l er. The set-poi nt response of
the DS-d PI control l er exhi bi ts overshoot, but i t can be
reduced by setti ng b ) 0.5. These concl usi ons can be
confi rmed by the I AE and TV val ues i n Tabl e 3.
Fi gure 4 shows the si mul ati on resul ts for the practi cal
si tuati on where there are i nequal i ty constrai nts on the
mani pul ated vari abl e u: -2 e u e 2. A compari son of
Fi gures 3 and 4 i ndi cates that the i ni ti al set-poi nt
responses of the DS-d (b) 1), DS, and ZN PI control l ers
were sl ower because of control l er saturati on. Al so, the
osci l l ati ons for the DS and ZN PI control l ers were
damped. The di sturbance responses were not affected
because i nequal i ty constrai nts on u were not acti ve.
Exampl es 1 and 2 demonstrate that the DS-d method
provi des better performance than the DS and I MC
methods for processes wi th smal l / rati os. The fol l ow-
Figure 2. Si mul ati on resul ts of PI D control l ers for exampl e 1
(/ ) 0.01). (a) Response to a uni t step set-poi nt change. (b)
Response to a uni t step di sturbance.
Table 3. PI Controller Settings for Example 2 (/ ) 0.25)
tuni ng method Kc I MS I AE TV I AE TV
DS-d (c ) 0.35, b ) 1) 2.30 0.662 1.88 0.635 3.64 0.288 1.54
DS-d (c ) 0.35, b ) 0.5) 2.30 0.662 1.88 0.630 2.10 0.288 1.54
DS (c ) 0.13) 2.63 1 1.90 0.532 3.80 0.37 1.40
ZN 3.12 0.763 2.37 0.632 6.63 0.244 2.02
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
e
-0.25s
s + 1
(94)
Figure 3. Si mul ati on resul ts wi thout u constrai nts for exampl e
2 (/ ) 0.25). (a) Control l ed vari abl e y. (b) Mani pul ated vari abl e
u.
Figure 4. Si mul ati on resul ts wi th u constrai nts for exampl e 2
(/ ) 0.25). (a) Control l ed vari abl e y. (b) Mani pul ated vari abl e u.
i ng exampl e i s used to i l l ustrate how the proposed DS-d
method works for processes wi th l arger / rati os.
4.3. Example3. Different Valuesof the/ Ratio.
Consi der the process model
I n thi s exampl e, two val ues of / rati o are consi dered:
/ ) 1 and / ) 5.
For / ) 1, PI and PI D control l ers were desi gned
usi ng the DS-d, DS/I MC, and ZN methods. The control -
l er characteri sti cs are shown i n Tabl es 4 and 5. The
si mul ati on resul ts i n Fi gures 5 and 6 i ndi cate that the
PI and PI D responses for the DS-d and DS/I MC methods
are very si mi l ar. The DS-d and DS/I MC control l ers
provi de better performance than the ZN control l ers.
For the process wi th / ) 5, the DS-d, DS/I MC, and
ZN methods were used to desi gn PI and PI D control l ers.
Luyben
2
has used thi s l arge-ti me-del ay exampl e to
compare the I MC, Ci ancone-Marl i n (CM),
34
and ZN
methods. Consequentl y, the CM PI and PI D setti ngs
were al so consi dered for compari son. The CM tuni ng
rul es were deri ved usi ng an opti mi zati on procedure that
i ncorporates consi derati ons of performance, robustness,
and saturati on of the mani pul ated vari abl e. The CM
tuni ng rul es are val i d onl y for fi rst-order pl us ti me del ay
processes and are presented graphi cal l y.
34
The control l er characteri sti cs are gi ven i n Tabl es 6
and 7. The responses to uni t step changes i n the set
poi nt and di sturbance are shown i n Fi gures 7 and 8.
The DS-d and DS PI control l ers gi ve the fastest PI
responses wi th smal l overshoots that are very si mi l ar.
The responses of the ZN PI control l er are very sl uggi sh.
The CM PI control l er provi des the best performance
among al l four PI control l ers. For the PI D control l ers,
the responses of the DS-d, I MC, and CM control l ers are
rel ati vel y cl ose. The ZN PI D control l er gi ves very errati c
Figure5. Si mul ati on resul ts of PI control l ers for exampl e 3 (/
) 1).
(/ ) 1).
Table 4. PI Controller Settings for Example 3 (/ ) 1)
DS-d (c ) 0.8, b ) 1) 0.60 0.98 1.80 2.13 1.09 1.80 1.30
DS-d (c ) 0.8, b ) 0.5) 0.60 0.98 1.80 2.34 1.09 1.80 1.30
DS (c ) 0.62) 0.62 1.00 1.81 2.11 1.09 1.80 1.30
ZN 1.02 2.58 2.05 2.52 1.62 2.50 1.45
Table 5. PID Controller Settings for Example 3 (/ ) 1)
DS-d (c ) 0.75, b ) 1) 1.11 1.45 0.317 1.92 1.68 2.18 1.30 1.46
DS-d (c ) 0.75, b ) 0.7) 1.11 1.45 0.317 1.92 1.74 1.70 1.30 1.46
I MC (c ) 0.85) 1.11 1.50 0.333 1.94 1.65 2.21 1.35 1.51
ZN 1.36 1.55 0.387 2.59 1.81 4.46 1.16 2.79
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
e
-s
s + 1
(95)
Figure7. Si mul ati on resul ts of PI control l ers for exampl e 3 (/
) 5).
(/ ) 5).
Table 6. PI Controller Settings for Example 3 (/ ) 5)
DS-d (c ) 1.9) 0.11 0.87 1.86 10.9 1.27 10.8 1.37
DS (c ) 2.8) 0.13 1.00 1.86 10.6 1.24 10.5 1.36
CM 0.35 3.3 1.68 9.43 0.68 9.43 1.01
ZN 0.515 9.8 1.89 18.8 0.96 18.5 1.34
Table 7. PID Controller Settings for Example 3 (/ ) 5)
DS-d (c ) 2.5) 0.4 2.86 0.313 1.86 7.69 0.939 7.39 1.18
I MC (c ) 4.5) 0.5 3.5 0.714 1.87 7.38 1.28 6.99 1.48
CM 0.4 3.0 1.2 1.92 7.60 1.20 7.52 1.57
ZN 0.66 5.9 1.48 42.2 9.48 5.94 9.26 9.64
responses that are not shown i n the pl ot but can be
found i n Luyben.
2
I ts M
S
val ue i n Tabl e 7 i s extremel y
l arge.
The resul ts for these two / val ues i l l ustrate that the
DS-d method provi des better di sturbance rejecti on than
the DS method for processes wi th smal l val ues of /.
As / becomes l arger, the control l er setti ngs and the
cl osed-l oop performance for the DS-d method become
cl oser to those for the conventi onal DS method.
4.4. Example 4. Effect of
c
. The DS-d method has
a si ngl e tuni ng parameter,
c
, that i s di rectl y rel ated to
the speed of the cl osed-l oop response. I n thi s exampl e,
the effect of
c
i s anal yzed. Consi der the general model
For three di fferent val ues of / (0.25, 0.5, 1), DS-d PI
control l er setti ngs were cal cul ated for di fferent
c
val ues.
Fi gure 9 shows the DS-d PI control l er setti ngs for
di fferent val ues of
c
. As
c
i ncreases, K
c
decreases, and
the i ntegral ti me,
I
, i ncreases i f
c
e 1 but decreases i f
c
g 1. The symmetry of
I
around
c
) i s confi rmed
by eq 36.
Si mi l arl y, for three di fferent / val ues (0.25, 0.5,
0.75), the DS-d PI D control l er setti ngs were cal cul ated
for di fferent
c
val ues and are shown i n Fi gure 10. As
c
i ncreases, K
c
decreases, whi l e
I
and
D
fi rst i ncrease
and then decrease. I f
c
i s very l arge,
I
and
D
become
negati ve. Thus, for thi s exampl e, the upper bounds on
c
for posi ti ve K
c
,
I
, and
D
val ues obtai ned from Fi gure
10 are
For / ) 0.25, the DS-d PI D control l ers were de-
si gned for four val ues of
c
(0.25, 0.3, 0.35, 0.4), and the
Figure 9. DS-d PI control l er setti ngs for di fferent c val ues
(exampl e 4).
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
e
-s
s + 1
(96)
Figure 10. DS-d PI D control l er setti ngs for di fferent c val ues
(exampl e 4).
c
e 0.4 for / ) 0.25 (97)
c
e 0.7 for / ) 0.5 (98)
c
e 0.935 for / ) 0.75 (99)
correspondi ng si mul ati on resul ts are shown i n Fi gure
11. The si mul ati on resul ts demonstrate that the DS-d
control l ers for smal l er
c
val ues provi de di sturbance
responses wi th smal l er peaks and smal l er I E val ues.
4.5. Example 5. Different Disturbance Time
Constants. I n thi s exampl e, a process descri bed by the
same transfer functi on as i n exampl e 2
but di sturbance transfer functi ons wi th di fferent val ues
of
d
i s consi dered
PI D control l ers were desi gned usi ng the DS-d, I MC, and
ZN methods and assumi ng that
d
) . The control l er
characteri sti cs are shown i n Tabl e 8. The DS-d control -
l er was modi fi ed for other val ues of
d
by usi ng eq 87.
After substi tuti ng the transfer functi ons for the process
and di sturbance, the cl osed-l oop transfer functi on for
the DS-d PI D control l er i n eq 87 becomes
Thus, when
d
/ i ncreases, the di sturbance response of
the DS-d PI D control l er has a smal l er peak val ue and
i s more sl uggi sh.
Because
d
does not affect the set-poi nt response, onl y
the di sturbance responses were si mul ated. The si mul a-
ti on resul ts for four
d
val ues (0.25, 0.5, 1, 2) shown i n
Fi gure 12 confi rm that DS-d control l ers provi de di stur-
bance responses wi th smal l er peak val ues but l onger
settl i ng ti mes as
d
/ i ncreases. For smal l
d
/ val ues,
the di sturbance performance of the I MC control l er i s
better than that of the DS-d control l er.
4.6. Example 6. Consi der a second-order pl us ti me
del ay system descri bed by Seborg et al .
15
The DS-d, DS, and ZN methods were used to desi gn PI D
control l ers, and the resul ti ng control l er setti ngs are
shown i n Tabl e 9.
The si mul ati on resul ts for a uni t step change i n the
set poi nt at t ) 0 mi n and a uni t step di sturbance at t
) 50 mi n are presented i n Fi gure 13. The di sturbance
response for the DS-d PI D control l er i s fast and has a
smal l peak val ue, but the set-poi nt response has an
overshoot. By usi ng a set-poi nt wei ghti ng factor of b )
0.5, the overshoot i s el i mi nated. The set-poi nt and
di sturbance responses for the DS PI D control l er are
qui te sl uggi sh, whereas the ZN PI D control l er provi des
very osci l l atory responses. Agai n, the I AE and TV
val ues i n Tabl e 9 confi rm that the DS-d control l er
provi des superi or performance wi thout usi ng excessi ve
control efforts.
4.7. Example 7. Distillation Column Model. A
di sti l l ati on col umn that separates a smal l amount of a
l ow-boi l i ng materi al from the fi nal product was consi d-
ered by Chi en and Fruehauf.
1
The bottom l evel of the
di sti l l ati on col umn i s control l ed by adjusti ng the steam
fl ow rate. The process model for the l evel control system
i s an i ntegrator wi th a ti me del ay
The DS control l er obtai ned from eq 12 has the form
Because the DS method resul ts i n a proporti onal -onl y
control l er for the i ntegrati ng process, onl y the DS-d
tuni ng methods was used to desi gn PI control l ers. Note
that the DS-d and I MC methods provi de i denti cal PI
tuni ng rul es for thi s type of process model . The resul ti ng
control l er setti ngs from the DS-d method are shown i n
Tabl e 10. The I MC PI control l er setti ngs wi th
c
) 8
used by Chi en and Fruehauf
1
are i ncl uded i n the tabl e.
Furthermore, for i ntegrator pl us ti me del ay processes,
Tyreus and Luyben
35
have devel oped a desi gn method
that yi el ds the best PI setti ngs attai nabl e for a speci fi ed
degree of cl osed-l oop dampi ng. Thei r tuni ng rul e can be
expressed i n terms of the ul ti mate gai n K
u
and ul ti mate
frequency P
u
as K
c
) K
u
/3.22 and
I
) 2.2P
u
. Thus, i t i s
a modi fi ed versi on of ZN tuni ng. The TL PI control l er
setti ngs
35
are i ncl uded i n Tabl e 10 for compari son.
set poi nt (at t ) 0) and a 0.5 step di sturbance (at t )
150 mi n) are shown i n Fi gure 14. The di sturbance
performance of the DS-d control l er i s good, but the set-
poi nt response has a l arge overshoot that can be
el i mi nated by setti ng b ) 0.5. The I MC PI control l er
desi gned by Chi en and Fruehauf
1
provi des a faster
di sturbance response than the DS-d method, but the set-
poi nt response i s too aggressi ve, as confi rmed by the
l arge M
S
and TV val ues i n Tabl e 10. The use of set-
poi nt wei ghti ng can reduce the l arge set-poi nt overshoot
for the I MC control l er, but i t woul d not affect the
osci l l atory nature of the response. The l arge M
S
val ue
Figure 11. DS-d PI D control l ers for di fferent c val ues and b )
1 (exampl e 4, / ) 0.25).
Table 8. PID Controller Settings for Example 5 (/ )
0.25)
tuni ng method Kc I D MS
DS-d (c ) 0.26, b ) 1) 3.46 0.702 0.0887 1.89
DS-d (c ) 0.26, b ) 0.5) 3.46 0.702 0.0887 1.89
I MC (c ) 0.22) 3.26 1.13 0.111 1.90
ZN 4.16 0.458 0.115 2.37
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
2e
-s
(10s + 1)(5s + 1)
(103)
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
0.2e
-7.4s
s
(104)
G
c
(s) )
1
K(
c
+ )
(105)
G
p
(s) )
e
-0.25s
s + 1
(100)
G
d
(s) )
e
-0.25s
d
s + 1
(101)
(
y
d
)
*
1.125s(s + 1)e
-0.25s
(
d
s + 1)(
c
s + 1)
3
(102)
i ndi cates that the
c
val ue used by Chi en and Fruehauf
1
i s so smal l that the resul ti ng system has poor robust-
ness. The responses of the TL PI control l er are very
sl uggi sh because of the l arge
I
val ue.
4.8. Example8. Level Control Problem. Consi der
a l evel control probl em gi ven by Seborg et al .
15
The
l i qui d l evel i n a reboi l er of a steam-heated di sti l l ati on
col umn i s to be control l ed by adjusti ng the control val ve
Figure 12. Di sturbance responses for PI D control and di fferent d val ues (exampl e 5, / ) 0.25). (a) d ) 0.25. (b) d ) 0.5. (c) d ) 1.
(d) d ) 2.
Figure 13. Si mul ati on resul ts for exampl e 6.
Table 9. PID Controller Settings for Example 6
DS-d (c ) 2.4, b ) 1) 6.3 7.60 2.10 1.87 5.59 13.3 1.19 2.10
DS-d (c ) 2.4, b ) 0.5) 6.3 7.60 2.10 1.87 4.58 6.78 1.19 2.10
DS (c ) 0.5) 5 15 3.33 1.92 6.25 11.7 3.03 2.34
ZN 4.72 5.83 1.46 2.27 8.41 12.9 1.74 2.77
Table 10. PI Controller Settings for Example 7
DS-d (c ) 15, b ) 1) 0.373 37.4 1.94 27.1 0.675 50.1 0.932
DS-d (c ) 15, b ) 0.5) 0.373 37.4 1.94 19.6 0.354 50.1 0.932
I MC (c ) 8) 0.49 23 3.06 30.9 1.63 30.9 1.58
TL 0.33 64.7 1.67 28.4 0.455 93.2 0.742
on the steam l i ne. The process transfer functi on i s gi ven
by
The PI D setti ngs obtai ned from the DS-d, I MC, and ZN
methods are shown i n Tabl e 11.
set poi nt at t ) 0 mi n and a uni t step di sturbance at t
) 50 mi n are presented i n Fi gure 15. The di sturbance
response for the DS-d PI D control l er i s good, but the
set-poi nt response has an overshoot. Wi th a set-poi nt
wei ghti ng factor set at b ) 0.5, the DS-d control l er
provi des a fast set-poi nt response wi thout overshoot.
The performance of the I MC PI D control l er i s cl ose to
that of the DS-d PI D control l er, whi ch i s confi rmed by
the si mi l ar PI D setti ngs. The ZN control l er produces
very osci l l atory responses.
4.9. Example 9. Fourth-Order Process. Consi der
a fourth-order process descri bed by
29,30
For hi gh-order processes, the DS-d, DS, and I MC desi gn
methods do not yi el d PI /PI D control l ers di rectl y. Thus,
the model order must be reduced, or the resul ti ng
control l er must be approxi mated by a PI /PI D control l er.
Skogestad
30
has proposed a si mpl e method of ap-
proxi mati ng hi gh-order model s wi th l ow-order model s.
He al so deri ved modi fi ed I MC rul es, whi ch were named
si mpl e control or Skogestad I MC (SI MC). For the
fi rst-order model i n eq 30, the PI control l er obtai ned
from SI MC has the fol l owi ng parameters
For the second-order model i n eq 67 wi th
1
>
2
, the
SI MC method provi des the fol l owi ng rul es for PI D
control l ers wi th the seri es structure
Usi ng Skogestads approxi mati on method, the fourth-
order process i n eq 107 can be approxi mated as a fi rst-
order pl us ti me del ay model
or as a second-order pl us ti me del ay model
Both model s provi de accurate approxi mati ons, but the
second-order model i s more accurate.
PI control l ers were desi gned usi ng the approxi mate
fi rst-order model and the DS-d, DS, and SI MC methods.
Val ues of
c
) 0.4 and 0.148 were sel ected for the DS-d
and DS methods, respecti vel y, so that thei r M
S
val ues
were very cl ose to the 1.59 val ue for the SI MC control l er
reported by Skogestad.
30
For
c
) 0.148, the same PI
control l er setti ngs were cal cul ated usi ng the DS and
SI MC methods. Al so, the TL method,
35
whi ch was
di scussed i n exampl e 7, was used to desi gn a PI
control l er for the process. The PI setti ngs are shown i n
Tabl e 12.
PI D control l ers were desi gned usi ng the approxi mate
second-order model and the DS-d, I MC, and SI MC
methods. The
c
val ues for these methods were sel ected
to gi ve M
S
val ues cl ose to the 1.58 val ue of Tabl e 13.
Because the tuni ng rul es for the SI MC method are for
the seri es PI D structure, these PI D setti ngs were
converted to the paral l el structure, whi ch was then used
for the si mul ati on. Al so, the ZN PI D setti ngs were
cal cul ated for the fourth-order model . The PI D control l er
characteri sti cs are shown i n Tabl e 13.
The si mul ati on responses for a uni t step change i n
the set poi nt at t ) 0 mi n and a step di sturbance (d )
3) at t ) 5 mi n are gi ven i n Fi gures 16 and 17 for PI
and PI D control l ers, respecti vel y. The val ues of M
S
, I AE,
and TV for al l of these control l ers are presented i n
Tabl es 12 and 13. Fi gure 16 i ndi cates that the di stur-
bance response of the DS-d PI control l er i s better and
faster than the responses of the DS and SI MC control -
l ers. The I AE val ues for the TL PI control l er are smal l er
than those of the other PI control l ers, but i ts responses
are osci l l atory and i ts M
S
and TV val ues are l arge. A
DS-d (c ) 1.6, b ) 1) -1.25 5.3 1.45 1.94 3.42 3.39 4.33 2.86
DS-d (c ) 1.6, b ) 0.5) -1.25 5.3 1.45 1.94 2.82 1.62 4.33 2.86
I MC (c ) 1.25) -1.22 6.0 1.50 1.96 3.48 3.29 4.99 2.83
ZN -0.752 3.84 0.961 2.76 7.17 2.86 9.31 3.91
Table 12. PI Controller Settings for Example 9
DS-d (c ) 0.4, b ) 1) 2.94 0.707 1.61 0.553 3.66 0.721 4.56
DS-d (c ) 0.4, b ) 0.5) 2.94 0.707 1.61 0.594 2.08 0.721 4.56
DS (c ) 0.148) 3.72 1.1 1.59 0.450 4.45 0.874 4.22
SI MC (c ) 0.148) 3.72 1.1 1.59 0.450 4.45 0.874 4.22
TL 9.46 1.24 2.72 0.498 25.9 0.387 8.67
DS-d (c ) 0.135, b ) 1) 22.4 0.415 0.106 1.58 0.276 38.0 0.056 5.56
DS-d (c ) 0.135, b ) 0.5) 22.4 0.415 0.106 1.58 0.231 18.3 0.056 5.56
I MC (c ) 0.025) 22.6 1.2 0.167 1.58 0.311 48.3 0.160 6.57
SI MC (c ) 0.028) 21.8 1.22 0.18 1.58 0.333 48.7 0.168 6.85
ZN 18.1 0.281 0.07 2.38 0.423 52.0 0.070 9.03
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
-1.6(-0.5s + 1)
s(3s + 1)
(106)
G
p
(s) ) G
d
(s) )
1
(s + 1)(0.2s + 1)(0.04s + 1)(0.008s + 1)
(107)
K
c
)

K(
c
+ )
,
I
) mi n{, 4(
c
+ )} (108)
K
c
)

1
K(
c
+ )
,
I
) mi n{
1
, 4(
c
+ )},
D
)
2
(109)
G
1
(s) )
e
-0.148s
1.1s + 1
(110)
G
2
(s) )
e
-0.028s
(s + 1)(0.22s + 1)
(111)
compari son of the PI D control l ers i n Fi gure 17 i ndi cates
that the DS-d PI D control l er provi des better and faster
di sturbance responses than the other PI D control l ers.
The l arge overshoot for the set-poi nt response of the
DS-d PI D control l er can be el i mi nated by setti ng b )
0.5. The superi or performance of the DS-d PI D control l er
i s al so confi rmed by the I AE and TV val ues i n Tabl e
13. Furthermore, a si gni fi cant i mprovement was ob-
tai ned usi ng PI D control i nstead of PI control , because
thi s process i s a domi nant second-order process.
An al ternati ve approach for hi gh-order systems i s to
desi gn the DS-d control l er usi ng eq 25 and then reduce
the resul ti ng hi gh-order control l er usi ng a seri es expan-
si on
22
or a frequency domai n approxi mati on.
24-26
Be-
cause thi s approach i s more compl i cated than Skoges-
tads model reducti on approach, i t was not appl i ed here.
5. Conclusions
A new di rect synthesi s method for control l er desi gn
based on di sturbance rejecti on (DS-d), rather than set-
poi nt tracki ng, has been devel oped. By speci fyi ng the
desi red cl osed-l oop transfer functi on properl y, PI /PI D
control l ers can be synthesi zed for wi del y used process
model s such as fi rst-order and second-order pl us ti me
del ay model s and i ntegrator pl us ti me del ay model s. For
hi gher-order model s, PI D control l ers can be deri ved by
approxi mati ng the hi gh-order model wi th a l ow-order
model or by approxi mati ng the hi gh-order control l er
usi ng ei ther a seri es expansi on or a frequency domai n
approxi mati on.
I n the proposed DS-d desi gn method, the cl osed-l oop
ti me constant
c
i s the onl y desi gn parameter, and i t
has a strai ghtforward rel ati on to the di sturbance rejec-
ti on characteri sti cs. Thus, the proposed desi gn proce-
dure i s si mpl e and easy to i mpl ement. Al though the PI /
PI D control l ers are desi gned for di sturbance rejecti on,
the set-poi nt responses are usual l y sati sfactory and can
be i ndependentl y tuned vi a a standard set-poi nt wei ght-
i ng factor or a set-poi nt fi l ter constant. The set-poi nt
tuni ng does not affect the di sturbance response.
Ni ne si mul ati on exampl es have been used to compare
al ternati ve desi gn methods and to i l l ustrate the effect
of
c
. The si mul ati on resul ts demonstrate that the DS-d
method provi des better di sturbance performance than
standard DS and I MC methods and that sati sfactory
responses to set-poi nt changes can be obtai ned by si mpl y
tuni ng the set-poi nt wei ghti ng factor b. The DS-d
method furni shes a conveni ent and fl exi bl e desi gn
method that provi des good performance i n terms of
di sturbance rejecti on and set-poi nt tracki ng.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowl edge the UCSB Process Control
Consorti um for fi nanci al support and Professor Si gurd
Skogestad for hi s hel pful comments and suggesti ons.
Literature Cited
(1) Chi en, I .-L.; Fruehauf, P. S. Consi der I MC Tuni ng to
I mprove Control l er Performance. Chem. Eng. Prog. 1990, 86(10),
33.
(2) Luyben, W. L. Effect of Deri vati ve Al gori thm and Tuni ng
Sel ecti on on the PI D Control of Dead-Ti me Processes. I nd. Eng.
Chem. Res. 2001, 40, 3605.
(3) McMi l l an, G. K. Tuningand Control LoopPerformance, 3rd
ed.; I nstrument Soci ety of Ameri ca: Research Tri angl e Park, NC,
1994.
(4) A strom, K. J.; Haggl und, T. PI D Controllers: Theory,
Design, and Tuning, 2nd ed.; I nstrument Soci ety of Ameri ca:
Research Tri angl e Park, NC, 1995.
(5) Tan, K. K.; Wang, Q.-G.; Hang, C. Advances in PI D Control;
Spri nger: New York, 1999.
(6) Yu, C. C. Autotuning of PI D Controllers: Relay Feedback
Approach; Spri nger: New York, 1999.
(7) Zi egl er, J. G.; Ni chol s, N. B. Opti mum Setti ngs for Auto-
mati c Control l ers. Trans. ASME 1942, 64, 759.
(8) Cohen, G. H.; Coon, G. A. Theoreti cal Consi derati on of
Retarded Control . Trans. ASME 1953, 75, 827.
(9) Lopez, A. M.; Murri l l , P. W.; Smi th, C. L. Control l er Tuni ng
Rel ati onshi ps Based on I ntegral Performance Cri teri a. I nstrum.
Technol. 1967, 14 (11), 57.
(10) Rovi ra, A. A.; Murri l l , P. W., Smi th, C. L. Tuni ng Control -
l ers for Setpoi nt Changes. I nstrum. Control Syst. 1969, 42 (12),
67.
(11) Zhuang, M.; Atherton, D. P. Automati c Tuni ng of Opti mum
PI D Control l ers. I EE Proc. D 1993, 140, 216.
(12) Ho, W. K.; Hang, C. C.; Cao, L. S. Tuni ng of Mul ti l oop
Proporti onal -I ntegral -Deri vati ve Control l ers Based on Gai n and
Phase Margi n Speci fi cati ons. Automatica 1995, 31, 497.
(13) Truxal , J. G. Automatic Feedback Control SystemSynthe-
sis; McGraw-Hi l l : New York, 1955.
(14) Ragazzi ni , J. R.; Frankl i n, G. F. Sampled-Data Control
Systems; McGraw-Hi l l : New York, 1958.
(15) Seborg, D. E.; Edgar, T. F.; Mel l i champ, D. A. Process
Dynamics and Control; John Wi l ey & Sons: New York, 1989.
(16) Smi th, C. L.; Corri pi o, A. B.; Marti n, J. Control l er Tuni ng
from Si mpl e Process Model s. I nstrum. Technol. 1975, 22 (12), 39.
(17) Dahl i n, E. B. Desi gni ng and Tuni ng Di gi tal Control l ers.
I nstrum. Control Syst. 1968, 42 (6), 77.
(18) Ri vera, D. E.; Morari , M.; Skogestad, S. I nternal Model
Control . 4. PI D Control l er Desi gn. I nd. Eng. Chem. Process Des.
Dev. 1986, 25, 252.
(19) Chi en, I .-L. I MC-PI D control l er desi gnsAn extensi on.
Adapt. Control Chem. Processes 1988 (ADCHEM 88), Sel. Pap.
I nt. I FAC Symp. 1988, 155.
(20) Morari , M.; Zafi ri ou, E. Robust Process Control; Prenti ce
Hal l : Engl ewood Cl i ffs, NJ, 1989.
Figure 16. Si mul ati on resul ts of PI control l ers for exampl e 9.
Figure 17. Si mul ati on resul ts of PI D control l ers for exampl e 9.
(The responses of the I MC PI D control l er are very si mi l ar to those
of the SI MC PI D control l er.)
(21) I saksson, A. J.; Graebe, S. F. Anal yti cal PI D Parameter
Expressi ons for Hi gher Order Systems. Automatica1999, 35, 1121.
(22) Lee, Y.; Park, S.; Lee, M.; Brosi l ow, C. PI D Control l er
Tuni ng for Desi red Cl osed-Loop Responses for SI /SO Systems.
AI ChE J . 1998, 44, 106.
(23) Mi ddl eton, R. H.; Graebe, S. F. Sl ow Stabl e Open-Loop
Pol es: To Cancel or Not To Cancel . Automatica 1999, 35, 877.
(24) Szi ta, G.; Sanathanan, C. K. Model Matchi ng Control l er
Desi gn for Di sturbance Rejecti on. J . Franklin I nst. 1996, 333B,
747.
(25) Szi ta, G.; Sanathanan, C. K. Robust Desi gn for Di stur-
bance Rejecti on i n Ti me Del ay Systems. J . Franklin I nst. 1997,
334B, 611.
(26) Szi ta, G.; Sanathanan, C. K. A Model Matchi ng Approach
for Desi gni ng Decentral i zed MI MO Control l ers. J . Franklin I nst.
2000, 337, 641.
(27) Garci a, C. E.; Morari , M. I nternal Model Control . 1. A
Uni fyi ng Revi ew and Some New Resul ts. I nd. Eng. Chem. Process
Des. Dev. 1982, 21, 308.
(28) Skogestad, S.; Postl ethwai te, I . Multivariable Feedback
Control: Analysis and Design; John Wi l ey & Sons: New York,
1996.
(29) A strom, K. J.; Panagopoul os, H.; Haggl und, T. Desi gn of
PI Control l ers Based on Non-Convex Opti mi zati on. Automatica
1998, 34, 585.
(30) Skogestad, S. Si mpl e Anal yti c Rul es for Model Reducti on
and PI D Control l er Tuni ng. J . Process Control, i n press.
(31) Lundstrom, P.; Lee, J. H.; Morari , M.; Skogestad, S.
Li mi tati ons of Dynami c Matri x Control . Comput. Chem. Eng. 1995,
19, 409.
(32) Fruehauf, P. S.; Chi en, I .-L.; Lauri tsen, M. D. Si mpl i fi ed
I MC-PI D Tuni ng Rul es. I SA Trans. 1993, 33, 43.
(33) Meyer, C.; Seborg, D. E.; Wood, R. K. An Experi mental
Appl i cati on of Ti me-Del ay Compensati on Techni ques to Di sti l l a-
ti on Col umn Control . I nd. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1978, 17,
62.
(34) Ci ancone, R.; Marl i n, T. E. Tune Control l ers to Meet Pl ant
Objecti ves. Control 1992, 5, 50.
(35) Tyreus, B. D.; Luyben, W. L. Tuni ng PI Control l ers for
I ntegrator/Dead Ti me Processes. I nd. Eng. Chem. Res. 1992, 31,
2628.
Received for review September 7, 2001
Revised manuscript received January 22, 2002
Accepted Jul y 1, 2002
I E010756M

PI/PID Controller Design Based On Direct Synthesis and Disturbance Rejection

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PI/PID Controller Design Based On Direct Synthesis and Disturbance Rejection

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PI/PID Controller Design Based on Direct Synthesis and

| r(t) - y(t)| dt (91)

|u(k+1) - u(k)| (92)

You might also like