This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

1007/s00202-004-0276-9

O R I GI N A L P A P E R

Ibrahim Kaya Æ Nusret Tan Æ Derek P. Atherton

A reﬁnement procedure for PID controllers

Received: 30 June 2004 / Accepted: 28 September 2004 / Published online: 4 March 2005 Ó Springer-Verlag 2005

Abstract Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controllers are still extensively used in industrial systems. In the literature, many publications can be found considering PID controller design for processes with resonances, integrators and unstable transfer functions. However, due to structural limitations of PID controllers, generally, a good closed-loop performance cannot be achieved with a PID, for controlling the aforementioned processes, and usually a step response with a high overshoot and oscillation is obtained. PIPD controllers provide very satisfactory closed-loop performances in the case of controlling processes with resonances, integrators and unstable transfer functions. This paper introduces a simple approach to get parameters of a PI-PD controller from parameters of a PID controller so that a good closed-loop system performance can be realized. Extensive simulation examples are given to illustrate the value of the approach proposed. Keywords PID controller Æ PI-PD controller Æ Unstable process Æ Integrating process Æ Disturbance rejection

1 Introduction

Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controllers are still widely used in industrial systems, despite signiﬁcant developments in control theory and technology during recent years. The controller has three parameters to be adjusted. Appropriate values for these parameters can be found using many theoretical approaches if a plant transfer function is given or by one of several tuning rules, which can be found in the literature, based on typical process models. Often the PID controller is taken to have the error as its input to the closed-loop system, which produces an undesirable ‘derivative kick’ at its output for a step input to the feedback loop even when the D term has a ﬁlter. Also, it is well known that it is diﬃcult to get good closed-loop step responses for processes with resonances, integrators and unstable plant transfer functions. Some recent publications addressing the control of unstable processes from diﬀerent points of view can be found in Poulin and Pomerleau [1], Park et al. [2], Visioli [3] and Ho and Xu [4] and for integrating processes can be found in Poulin and Pomerleau [1], Wang and Cluett [5] and Kwak et al. [6]. However, as will be shown later by examples, all usually result in an excessive overshoot. The PI-PD controller has been shown to give improved performance in controlling unstable [7, 8], and integrating processes [8], for both set-point tracking and disturbance rejection. Papers have also been written describing the use of PI-PD controllers for controlling unstable and integrating processes in a Smith predictor conﬁguration [9, 10], but this will not be discussed further here. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how the performance of a PID controller can simply be improved by using its parameter values to choose the parameters for a replacement PI-PD controller. This simpliﬁes the problem of selecting the four tuning parameters of the PI-PD controller. The given approach can be applied to any existing PID design method for controlling

I. Kaya (&) Æ N. Tan Faculty of Engineering, Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Inonu University, 44280 Malatya, Turkey E-mail: ikaya@inonu.edu.tr Tel.: +90-422-3410010 Fax: +90-422-3410046 E-mail: ntan@inonu.edu.tr D. P. Atherton School of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QT, UK E-mail: d.p.atherton@sussex.ac.uk Tel.: +44-1273-678046 Fax: +44-1273-678399

2. thus acting on the error between the set-point and closed-loop response. GPID=GPI + GPD. D. is not a totally new concept. substituting Eqs. integrators and unstable transfer functions. namely the derivative kick. the structure may result in a derivative kick. The PD controller used in the inner feedback loop can be used to convert it to an open-loop stable plant transfer function for the PI controller used in the forward loop. Benouarets [11] was the ﬁrst to mention the PI-PD controller structure. The modiﬁcation in the last two terms of the denominator of Eq. Kwak et al. 3. its true potential was not recognized there as it was used to control plants with simple stable real pole transfer functions where its advantages are relatively minor. is clear. respectively. has been proposed. The more common structure used for a PID controller in the literature is 1 Ã GPID ðsÞ ¼ Kc 1 þ Ã þ TdÃ s ð5Þ Ti s Since. Extensive simulation examples are provided to show the use of the suggested design approach. which uses an inner feedback loop. 2 and a general plant transfer function of G ðsÞ ¼ bm sm þ bmÀ1 smÀ1 þ Á Á Á þ b1 s þ b0 : an sn þ anÀ1 snÀ1 þ Á Á Á þ a1 s þ a0 ð3Þ 2 PI-PD control structure In the conventional PID control algorithm. 1. with the simultaneous use of Kf and Td rather than a gain-only parameter Kf. integrating or a resonant plant transfer function. this not only converts the open-loop unstable or integrating processes to open-loop stable processes but also guarantees more suitable pole locations. 1 The PI-PD control structure Fig. which have the following ideal forms: 1 GPI ðsÞ ¼ Kp 1 þ ð1Þ Ti s GPD ðsÞ ¼ Kf ð1 þ Td sÞ: ð2Þ The closed-loop transfer function for the inner loop. Also.216 processes with resonances. in the forward path. the proportional. Another point. due to the insertion of the PD controller used in the feedback loop. is Gil ðsÞ ¼ bm sm þ bmÀ1 smÀ1 þÁÁÁþ b1 s þ b0 n n À an s þ anÀ1 s 1 þÁÁÁþða1 þ Kf b1 þ Kf Td b0 Þs þða0 þ Kf b0 Þ This structure. consider the PD controller of the form given by Eq. This PID controller implementation may lead to an undesirable phenomenon. Later. [6] and Park et al. Therefore. In this structure. 3 an unstable. 1 and 2 and rearranging results in Fig. integral and derivative parts are implemented in the forward loop. with G(s) given by Eq. 4. by moving the PD part into an inner feedback loop. which can then be used for a more satisfactory closed-loop performance. G(s) is the plant transfer function and GPI(s) and GPD(s) are the PI and PD controller transfer functions. one can easily obtain the block diagram given in Fig. 1. they use a gainonly controller to alter the open-loop unstable or integrating processes to open-loop stable processes and then use the PID controller for an eﬀective control of the overall system. Unfortunately. the control structure shown in Fig. as provided that n>m+2. is that the use of the PI-PD controller gives more ﬂexibility than a PID-P controller to locate the poles of open-loop plant transfer function Gil(s) in more desired locations. [2] used a PID-P control structure for controlling integrating and unstable processes. To clarify this better. an unstable or integrating process can be stabilized and then controlled more eﬀectively by the PI controller in the forward path. which should be pointed out. However. Also. respectively. Let us assume that the coeﬃcients a0 and a1 take suitable values to make the plant transfer function given in Eq. which is known as a PI-PD control structure. 2 Equivalent PID structure of a PI-PD control structure . 3 Obtaining PI-PD parameters from PID parameters Using a block diagram reduction for the PI-PD controller structure given in Fig. as they still use the derivative term. It is better to use an inner feedback loop with a PD controller rather than a P-only controller.

the relation Kp=b Kf can be used. G2(s) and G3(s) and the corresponding root locations are given in Figs. it is worthwhile to illustrate how the value of b aﬀects the root locations of a plant transfer function and the performance of the overall system.103 1. comparing Eq.896 0. 8. Fig.6 1.362 1.263 0.040 1. It is clear from the ﬁgures that using a PD in the inner feedback loop helps to locate the poles of the closed inner feedback loop. G2(s) and G3(s) Plant b Kp Ti Kf Td G1(s) 1.979 4. This is done for G1(s). Ti *=4.688 1.090 G3(s) 1.811 0. 4 and 5. Ti =5.885 0.190 1.448 for G1(s).468 0.248.917 2. 9. a right-half plane pole and complex poles: G 1 ðsÞ ¼ 1 sðs þ 1Þðs þ 2Þðs þ 3Þ From this.624 2.905.0 0.468 0. which contain the respective features of integration. 3. 10 are given in Table 1.066 4. which includes an integrating.871 and * * * Td=2.2 1.0 4.521 G2(s) 1.208 0. For this. 3 Root locations for original G1(s) (left) and with the PD used in the inner feedback loop (right) .05 0.671 3.202 3.943 for G2(s) and Kc =1. consider the following three transfer functions.217 Table 1 PI-PD controller parameters for G1(s).211 9.059 0.639 0.6 3. Hence.531 0.624 1.358 0.05 0.839 2. respectively.132 for G3(s).833.936 2.814 0.425 * * and T* d=1.169 and T* d=1.05 0.708 0. the PI-PD controller parameters in terms of the PID settings are easily found to be Kp ¼ Kf ¼ Ti ¼ Ã bK c 1þb Ã Kc 1þb ð7Þ ð8Þ ð9Þ ð10Þ bTiÃ 1þb It is assumed that all three processes are controlled by a PID controller with its parameters found from minimization of the integral of squared time-weighted error (ISTE) (Zhuang and Atherton [12]).317 0.188 GPID ðsÞ ¼ Kp þ Kf À Á ! Kp Kf 1 Á þÀ Á Td s : 1þÀ Kp þ Kf Ti s Kp þ Kf ð6Þ G 2 ðsÞ ¼ G 3 ðsÞ ¼ 1 ð5s À 1Þð2s þ 1Þðs þ 1Þð0:5s þ 1Þ ðs2 1 þ s þ 1Þð2s þ 1Þð0:5s þ 1Þ To obtain the four parameters of the PI-PD controller from the three parameters of the PID controller. 7. using the * values of K* c and Td found from the ISTE optimization and given in Table 1.2 0.146 2.818 0.0 2. The corresponding PIPD controller parameters found from Eqs.738 0.365 1.213 4. Kc =4.453 5.917 2.737 8.088 3. one can plot the roots as a function of beta for each of the three G(s) transfer functions.780 1.660 6.194 1.085 0.6 0.280 4. The resulting PID controller parameters are Kc *=9. 5. The closed-loop transfer function for the inner loop can be shown to have the characteristic equation 1 þ GðsÞ Ã Kc ½1 þ ð1 þ bÞTdÃ s ¼ 0 1þb Td ¼ ð1 þ bÞTdÃ ð11Þ Before proceeding to some simulation examples to illustrate the value of the approach presented.234 0.2 0.453 2. respectively. 6 with Eq. Ti =2.

685. Ti =8. for both design methods.139 * and Td=1. the roots are always far away from the imaginary axis. Fig. For the unstable plant transfer function.357. with roughly the same settling time but less overshoot. examples. 8. the maximum value that b can take for the system not to be unstable is 3. G2(s) and G3(s) unstable is 8. For example.2 provides less improvement in the closed-loop system’s performance.446. In all the examples.2 value is used. can be obtained. The closed-loop system performances.230 and Td =1. integrating or resonance transfer functions. With the PD in the inner feedback loop. the maximum gain required to make G1(s). the b=0. It is also seen that with the smaller b values. respectively. * The suggested PID settings were K* c =2. which have been proposed for controlling processes with unstable. G2(s) and G3(s). Kf = 2. the closed-loop roots for G1(s) and G3(s) are always on the left-hand plane.5s)/(2s À 1)(s+1) is considered.268. 7 and 8 step responses to a unity set-point change are illustrated for G1(s).017 and 2. throughout the paper. in more appropriate locations. b has been chosen equal to 0. 2. respectively. to a unity set-point change are shown in . it is also seen that a b value smaller than 0. 7. In Figs. Ti =1. It should be noted that in the ﬁgures the responses for disturbance rejection are not given as disturbance rejection of the PID and the proposed PI-PD structures are the same. is used for comparison. 10 are Kp=0. which is based on gain and phase-margin speciﬁcations. The design method of Ho and Xu [4]. It is seen that smaller b values result in closed-loop performances with smaller overshoots. 5 Root locations for original G3(s) (left) and with the PD used in inner feedback loop (right) 4 Simulation examples In this section. integrating or resonance transfer functions. 9. However.000.200. This can be shown easily by working out the transfer functions between the output and the disturbance for both conﬁgurations. which are taken from diﬀerent publications considering the PID controller design for processes with unstable. The corresponding PI-PD controller parameters calculated from Eqs. an unstable process transfer function G(s)=exp(À0.218 Fig. are given to illustrate that with the proposed approach an improved closed-loop performance. 4 Root locations for original G2(s) (left) and with the PD used in inner feedback loop (right) unstable or a resonant plant transfer function. 6. implying a larger margin before the system becomes unstable.2 to obtain the PI-PD controller parameters from the PID controller parameters. Example 1 Here.539. Hence.676.

7 Step responses for G2(s) with a PID.2. d PI-PD. ±20% change in the time delay plus gain have been assumed and the simulations were re-performed. 6 Step responses for G1(s) with a PID. Ti=3. Certainly. e PI-PD. b=0. In order to ﬁnd the PI-PD controller parameters. [6] for controlling integrating processes. which yield the PI-PD controller parameters of Kp=0.05 Fig.6. c PIPD. The results are given in Fig. to a unity step set-point change are shown in Fig. e PI-PD.260.925. To illustrate the sensitivity to plant parameter changes. for both design methods. b=0. 8 Step responses for G3(s) with a PID. the PI-PD conﬁguration gives more satisfactory results. For a PID controller designed based on the ISTE criterion. Example 3 This example is given to compare the performance of the PI-PD controller design method presented with the performance of the PID-P controller design suggested by Kwak et al. b=0.497. the parameters of a PID controller must be known.760. b=0. 3. 9 Step responses for example 1 Fig. Example 2 Here. The PID controller parameters * * suggested were K* c =2.311.2. b PI-PD.954 and Kf=0. Td=2. b=1. the .05 Fig. d PI-PD. the example which was used by Wang and Cluett [5] is considered. b PI-PD. e PI-PD.2.2s)/s(s+1)3 and their corresponding PID-P controller parameters were Kc=0.05 Fig. b=0. Kf=2. b=0. c PIPD. as in Sect.219 Fig. The plant transfer function which was used is G(s)=exp(À0. b=0. b=1. Ti =15. b PI-PD. 9.658 and Td=1. The process has a pure integrating plus dead time transfer function of G(s)=0.485 and Td=2. b=0. 11.982.0506 exp(À6s)/s. The responses.198. which clearly shows the reduced overshoot of the PI-PD design.610.6. b=1. Ti=2.6. c PIPD. d PI-PD. b=0. 10.

978. Their controller parameters were Kc=0. they often have a poor performance .522 and Td=1.357. Ti =9.296 and Kf=0. G(s)=4 exp(À2s)/(4s À 1).885. Td=4. Note that the disturbance responses of the PID and PI-PD are the same as explained above and better than the disturbance rejection of the PID-P. À20% change in the time delay and gain Fig. Ti =8. 12 Responses for example 3 Fig.798.108. The PI-PD controller has a smaller overshoot. [2] for controlling unstable processes is compared with a PI-PD controller using their suggested unstable plant transfer function of 5 Conclusions Although PID controllers are still widely used in industrial practice.332. Ti =1. The PID-P and PID designs based on the ISTE have very similar response characteristics. the disturbance rejection of the PID and PI-PD is the same and better than the disturbance rejection of the PID-P structure. 13 Responses for example 4 Fig.508. 10 Step responses for example 1: a PI-PD.105. A PID controller designed using the ISTE criterion gives * * parameters K* c =0. Ti=1. 12.627. +20% change in the time delay and gain d Ho and Xu [4]. +20% change in the time delay and gain b PI-PD.350. Again. 11 Step responses for example 2 * * parameters are K* c =0. and the corresponding PI-PD controller parameters are Kp=0. Kf =0.540 and Td =2.5 introduced at time t=50 s.068. which yield PI-PD parameters of Kp=0.143 and Td=0. Ti=1. Kf=0. 13 for a unity step set-point change and disturbance with a magnitude of À0.5 introduced at time t=50 s are shown in Fig.648. the performance of a PID-P controller suggested by Park et al.220 Fig. À20% change in the time delay and gain c Ho and Xu [4]. whereas the PI-PD design gives almost no overshoot.050 and Td =2. The closed-loop performances with these controllers are shown in Fig. The closed-loop performances to a unity step set-point change and a disturbance with a magnitude of À0. Example 4 Here.174.

Visioli A (2001) Optimal tuning of PID controllers for integral and unstable processes. Poulin E. Sung SW. September (1998) Swansea. Several examples have been given to illustrate the use of the approach and responses compared with those using PID and PID-P controllers. IEE Proc Control Theory Appl 145(5):392–396 5. pp131–144 . Wang L. Peter Peregrinus. Cluett WR (1997) Tuning PID controllers for integrating processes. IEE Proc Control Theory Appl 144(5):385– 392 6. Kwak HJ. References 1. Zhuang M. Atherton DP (1993) Tuning PID controllers with integral performance criteria. a resonance or an unstable pole in their transfer functions. Ind Eng Chem Res 36:5329–5338 7. IEE Proc Control Theory Appl 148(2):180–184 4. IEE Proc Control Theory Appl 143(5):429– 435 2. Ho WK. ISA Trans 42(1):101–110 10. so a simple procedure has been presented in this paper to obtain the parameters of a PI-PD controller from those of a PID controller to achieve a smaller overshoot. Matlab toolboxes and applications. ISA Trans 42(1):111–121 9. Another important virtue of PI-PD controllers is their lower sensitivity to modelling errors and parameter changes due to operating conditions than to PID controllers. Boz AF (1998) Using standard forms for controller design. Many PID controllers can easily be changed to provide two P terms. University of Sussex 12. Atherton DP. Xu W (1998) PID tuning for unstable processes based on gain and phase-margin speciﬁcations. Lee IB (1998) An enhanced PID control strategy for unstable processes. Sung SW. Automatica 34(6):751–756 3.221 in giving a high overshoot to set-point changes when controlling processes including elements such as an integrator. Benouarets M (1993) Some design methods for linear and nonlinear controllers. Pomerleau A (1996) PID tuning for integrating and unstable processes. Kaya I (2003) A PI-PD controller design for control of unstable and integrating processes. London. Lee IB (1997) On-line process identiﬁcation and autotuning for integrating processes. PhD Thesis. pp 1066–1071 8. J Process Control 13(5):465– 472 11. Kaya I (2003) A new Smith predictor and controller for control of processes with long dead time. Kaya I (2003) Obtaining controller parameters for a new PI-PD Smith predictor using autotuning. Park JH. In: Proceedings of Control’98. chap 8.

- UK market of small wind turbine system
- Wind Turbine Manufacturer-Eu- CATALOGUE V223 40.pdf
- LIVE:RIGA TOP 15
- Future_ship_powering_options_report.pdf
- Deﬁnitions and nomenclature in exergy.pdf
- Third Generation Photovoltaic
- Alternator Working Principle
- Effect of Organic Dyes on the Performance of ZnO Based DyeSensitized Solar Cells
- Design & Implementation of a Dual Axis Solar Tracking System
- Sensitization of Nanocrystalline Titanium dioxide Solar Cells using Natural Dyes
- Simulation of a current-mode controlled DC–DC boost converter in chaotic regime evaluating different simulation methods
- MPPT
- Modeling and Simulation of a Single Phase Grid Connected Photovoltaic System

Non linear control system

Non linear control system

- en_ca_BREP_2009
- 10.1.1.179.500.pdf
- ADC_DAC
- Speech Encryption
- Megger FREJA 306
- 5989-6014EN
- PID Servo
- Introduction to Behavioral Modeling
- papr vs carriers
- FREJA 300 English
- 018083
- 5.Another Format Paper 2
- Modeling and Implementation of Wireless Embedded Robot Arm for Object Sorting
- EPE2005-Harmonic Calculation Software for Industrial Applications With ASD
- 06730658
- 6111_chap01
- Documentation
- FPGA implementation on SVPWM MLI
- msm-hbt
- ESSCIRC_2009
- 07029651
- CNT 85 Manual
- Enhancing the Pcm Fm Link Without the Math
- CBD-EC-4-2004
- 05655365
- Channel Coding for Underwater Acoustic Communication System
- Pulse Code Modulation
- High Resolution Time to Digital Converter
- control system
- Implementation and Study of Universal Filtered Multi Carrier under Carrier Frequency Offset For 5 G

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd