'Th'tiiThird Factor in PID

Y*l

The use of derivative action in PID control can be beneficial, but it has
to be used in the right situ
n the right amounts, cautions
Peter Welander.
, +, -. . -

ou've probably heard ,the e

pplications can run
"a little knowledge is dang
certainly applies to PID @roportional- Nichols tuning produces the traditional curve where
integral-derivn;tiw# loops, especially the process variable oscillates briefly but settles onto
when you try to dabble d t h the derivative factor. the line with each cycle reducing amplitude by 75
'
This element of the control strategy can
rcent. For applications that require the fastest
performance, but mdq ,k &!qtight situati
ssible response, seeing that kind of action after
t) setpoint change would be hugely rewarding to a
when applied properly. Understanding
bsk jeview d I&w mntrol engneer.
situations begins with a
PID operates.
But let's say the process in your case is a tank of
;
Proportional control a p p l i w
uid product that you're trying to heat If the process
to how far you are from the setpoiat. Its
able (temperature) goes above the setpoint, the
drawback is that the closer you get to the s e t p o i ~ ~ ~ ~may
d u be
c t ruined or catch on fire. So, how
the less it pushes. Eventually it doesn't push
you get the process variable to move, but not
gnough to move the variable, so the process can overshoot the setpoint excessively? One answer is
*&I
continuously close@ the &point, but not q+
introducing a derivative factor.
there.
Derivative acts as a brake or dampener on the
Integral control tries to even out the difference control effort. The more the controller tries to change
of the time spent on both sides of the line. If you've
the %due, the more it counteracts the effort. In
spent a minute running at 98 percent, it will try to our example, the variable rises in response to the
push you over to 102 percent for similar amount
setpoint change, but not as violently. As it approaches
of time. This action compensates for P's inability to the setpoint, it settles in nlcely with a minimum of
make that last effort.
overshoot. It doesn't move as quickly as the PI-only
effort. but without the oscillations. the rieht
" amount
of derivative action can stabilize the process variable
at the setpoint sooner.
Bob Rice, director of solutions engineering for
Control Station, sums up the three elements: "The
proportional termlooksat where my valueiscurrently;
integral looks at where I've been over time; and
derivative tries to predict where I'm going. Derivative
tries to work opposite of where proportional and
integral are trying to drive the process.
"P and I are trying to drive one way, and D is
trying to counteract that. Derivative has its largest
effect when the process is changing rapidly in one
direction. The P and I terms are saying, 'Keep going'.
The derivative catches it and says, 'You're going too
fast. You need to slow down."'

*,

C-".

Derivative action at work

John Ziegler and Nathaniel Nichols, the fathers of
PID loop tuning, recognized as far back as 1942
that derivative action dampens the control effort.
They discovered through trial and error that setting
the derivative time to at. least half of the process
r.

26

CONTROL ENGWEERINO

March 2010

deadtime would slow the controlled response to a step change in

the setpoint.
In Figure 1, the top trend chart shows a typical first-order p r w m
responding to a setpoint change under the influence of a full, threeterm PID controller tuned according to the Zeigler-Nichols rules.
As the process variable passes the "cliff" formed by the setpoint
change, suddenly the proportional error is huge, although integral
and derivative actions are effectively zero. The controller begins to
raise the variable responding to the proportional action. As it moves,
the P action declines as it gets closer to the setpoint, but the integral
action grows as long as the variable is below the line. As the curve
suddenly turns up, derivative wakes up in response to the sudden
h f t and begins to counteract what's happening with P and I.
'"As the variable approaches the se'tpoint, proportional action
almost zero but integral has increased. The derivative braking
tion continues. Once the variable crosses the line, it changes. P
gins to increase its effort in the other dire
e line. Integral begins to relax now that
beginning to decline and relaxes as well.
tion brings it around, the variable heads
and all the actions are reversed.
shows the same response with the brakes
that is, with derivative action disabled. The rate at which the
s variable climbs after the setpoint change and tfre &gnx by
it overshoots the setpoint have both increased. ,:
ronically, overshoot can be eliminated entirel@k6Y'kaviq
e derivative action disabled, decreasing the pr
d increasing & e g r a l time. The bottom tre

I I

'FProcess verlable

Ove&oot

setpoint

I
I

PI Eontrol w3lh ZtsgfeF.Nichofs tunlng minus detivdlva action.

Process variable

Pi controlwlih &at

damping tunlng.

Figuw 1: What happens with Bnd wriout derivative amba

.#

-&sponse under the influence of a PI-only

tuned according to the critical damping rules that call
smaller proportional gain and an integral time
factor equal to the process gain. No derivative
action is the strongest when the distance from
the setpoint the greatest. Integral increases its effort with every
moment that passes with the variable on just one side of the line.
Derivative makes no effort when the line is flat, even if it is nowhere
dape to the setpoint. D will not move the line itself, it can only
counteract P and I efforts. So a D controller, if such exists, would be
stable and easy to tune, but not particularly effective.
The art of loop tuning is determining the optimum values for
each of those actions so that they balance e a c h q w - v d move the
specific loop in a way that is best for that process? : '

-PI0 m t r o l with Ziegler-hlichds tuning including moderate derhra)vs rcgorr

Where's the value?

So if the main purpose is slowing the control effort of the other
factors, what's D good for? Fast-acting loops, such as flow. and
ops, don't really need it. If a loop can change in a
Q
I a minute or two, making it respond 10 percent f
q .
of an improvement. As already mentioned, the best uses
are f&rdow movlng loops where overshoot is undesirable.
"With a slow loop, the future's pretty easy to predict
wit's going to keep going for 20 to 30 minutes. But if
p u t c v & m e t h l n g l i k e a flow loop where in two or three samples,
can be in a completely different direction, derivative is
provide any benefit.
"But if you've got processes that tend to overshoot and are very
ere your benefit's going to come: one-way batch
you can only heat but you can't cool, or you can
can't heat. Overshoot is completely unacceptable
cause if you go past your setpoint, you don't have
n .to bring it back. You use derivative to be sure
you don't."
So you don't need D in most cases? Probably not, Rice adds,
"About 90 percent of the loops out there are probably PI control. It's
going to get you good enough control for most of your applications,
and it's simpler. A well tuned PI controller is going to beat a
moderately tuned PID controller every ome.
"Adding the extra tuning parameter adds complexity, which
can confuse a lot of people. It's only in those remaining percentage
points where you've got a really slow loop but you can't afford MPC
or other advanced controls, then you can add some derivative to

E N S E D E PROCES8C

take the edge off so it doesn't overshoot and tend to oscillate as

much."
George Buckbee, vice president of marketing and product
development for ExperTune, warns that some traditional loop
tuning beliefs should not be considered as universal. "That ZieglerNichols quarter amplitude damping thing is a bit of a fallacy for a lot
of loops," he advises. "The criteria for what is 'good performance'
really do change from one loop to the next, but usually it's faster
movement toward the setpoint with less risk of overshoot. You
have to choose those criteria wisely, and define them for control
performance on a per-loop basis".
As Figure 1 shows, there are approaches that can achieve the
effect of derivative control without using it at all. However, as
Buckbee points out, each loop has to be approached individually
using the right tuning for a given situation.

D for dangerous
This all sounds very positive, so where does the problem come in?
Buckbee compares using derivative to learning to drive: "Derivative
is like trying to drive your car with one foot on the gas and one foot
on the brake. To my 16-year-old son who's just learning, that was
the first thing he wanted to do." Such an approach might work
for a skilled race car driver,. but most loops don't need that kind of
immediate and violent action.
It is derivative's tendency to act quickly that introduces most of
the problems. Anytime it sees the process variable head up or down,
it's going to respond even if the change is really nothing but noise.
Buckbee adds, "Derivative is looking at fast, short-term changes
in the process variable, and that's all that noise is. It goes up by one
percent, and the next sample it's down by one percent. Derivative
looks at that and says, 'Wow, a one percent change in one second
- that's pretty fast, something's going on, I better make a change'.
The controller is going to try and compensate for that kind of
movement, and you're going to beat up the valve."
So the main negative result from derivative action is excessive
wear on equipment. If you drive your car by alternately flooring the
gas and slammingon the brakes, or worse, drivingwith both pressed
at the same time, it will wear out quickly.
One solution, at least in some cases, is using a filter on the process
variable to reduce noise. But this can introduce its own problems.
"You need to coordinate the amount of derivative action with the
amount of filtering that you do," Buckbee suggests. "If you over
filter, you might as well not have derivative at all. You shouldn't
find the fltering value and the derivative value independently of
each other."
Rice also cautions, "A lot of controllers that use derivative have
internal filtering. You have four parameters, P, I, D, and derivative
lag filter. A lot of controUm implement this derivative filtering
concept and don't always td.you what they're doing. Some don't
do a very good job of it. You get into a very complicated algorithm
where there aren't just one or two PID forms, there are 10 or 12 or
15 variations that can really muck up the tuning process."

a pretty large proportional and integral effect in there to get the

process to even move, and the derivative sits there and fights it all
day long.
"Ifyou've got a system h e r e there's an upset, you want to be able
to recover from that upset qmckly, but dmivative's dampening effect
Lage derivative action tends to
is going to hamper that ~~qxhnse.
destabhe a loap because it doesn't aIkmr it $achange. The rule of
thumb is that ifyour ckrhthet h e is
than the reset time of
your conb'ok, you've got issues. That M d never, ever occur."
U1-,
the use of dmivahe irction ean be beneficial, but
. and In the right amounts.
it has to be used in & right
Your s x h g assumption should be to see if the process will run
satisfactorilyon PZ control abwlfor the reasons already mentioned.

George Buckbee of ExperTune /[kens derivative to driving a car

with one foot on the gas and one foot on the brake - but most
loops don't need that kind of immediate and violent action.

If you have a system like

a really slow temperature
loop, users tend to put a
lot of derivative in there
because they don't like
the overs hoof.^^

..r-

D for deatabllirimEven in situations where l o o p move slowly and fit the description
for appropriate derivative ctieplayment, you ham to be careful how
much you use. Rice suggests-thatifthe h y s e n i n g action is too high,
you have to turn. up the P and I w$on to compensate, like trying to
k brake,
accelerate your car with a foot on t
"If you have a system We a really slow temperature loop, users
tend to put a lot of derhitfvc in there because they don't like the
overshoot," he says. '%at ends up happening is you have to put
.a

Careful tuning of P and I factorscso

nwch of the same noovershoot benefit in certain conditions, sm that is probably a better
approach to begin with.
Adding derivative should be done cautiously and with appropriate
filtration. Like cooking with hot sauce, in the right context and
be remarkable. But if it's used
in skilled hands, the result
inappropriately, it's a recipe for disaster.
Peter Welander is Process Industries Editor, Control Engineering.