Synthesis of Multivariable PID Controllers via Inter-
Communicative Decentralized Multi-Scale Control
for TITO Processes
Jobrun Nandong1, 2
1
Department of Chemical Engineering; 2 Curtin Sarawak Research Institute
Curtin University Sarawak
98009 Miri, Sarawak, MALAYSIA
jobrun.n@curtin.edu.my
Abstract—A new method of centralized PI/PID control system
synthesis for TITO processes using the non-conventional Inter-
Communicative Decentralized Multi-Scale Control (ICD-MSC)
scheme is presented. Explicit mathematical tuning equations are
constructed which are used to systematically convert the inter-
communicative multi-scale controllers into an industrial
implementable form of centralized PID controllers. An
illustrative example shows the effectiveness of the proposed
synthesis method which is easy to use and understand.
Keywords—multivariable PID control; decentralized PID
control; MIMO control design; multi-scale control
I. INTRODUCTION
Over the last few decades, various forms of advanced
control techniques have been developed, such as the linear-
quadratic control [1], generalized model predictive control [2]
and model predictive control (MPC) [3]. In spite of all the
advances in control theories, the PID control is still the most
widely used controller in industries [4]. In process industry,
most of the systems of interest are multi-input and multi-output
(MIMO) in nature where multi-loop (decentralized) PID
controllers are often adopted to control such systems. The main
challenge for designing effective decentralized PID controllers
for a MIMO process arises from the presence of process
interactions, which fairly often impose a limitation on control
performance. It has been recognized that even for single-input
and single-output (SISO) processes, the tuning of a PID
controller is often difficult without a systematic procedure [5].
The PID controller tuning for a MIMO process is even more
challenging because the number of tuning parameters increases
with the system dimension, i.e., an n × n MIMO system will
leads to 2n, 3n and 4n numbers of tuning parameters for
multi-loop PI, PID and PID with filter controllers, respectively.
In the fully centralized PID control system, there are 3n 2
number of controller parameters that need to be tuned. Hence,
it would be much more difficult to design the multivariable
PID control system than the decentralized one.
The existing methods for decentralized PID controller
tuning can be broadly categorized as in [6]: (1) the detuning,
(2) sequential loop closing, (3) iterative or trial-and-error, (4)
978-1-4799-7862-5/15/$31.00 © 2015 IEEE
simultaneous equation solving or optimization, and (5)
independent methods. The detuning method based on the BLT
[7] is probably among the most commonly used in process
industry because of its simplicity. But the BLT method often
leads to under satisfactory performance, i.e., can be either too
sluggish or too oscillatory. Another popular design approach is
based on the sequential tuning where the PID controllers are
designed sequentially one after another [8]. The main issue in
this approach is that one has to select the right order of the loop
closing sequence as the control performance is strongly
influenced by this order. In addition to the sequential and
detuning approaches, several researchers have developed PID
tuning methods based on the independent approach, e.g., see
[9], 10].
In process control, one common approach to improve the
performance of decentralized PID control is to augment the
control system with decouplers, which are used to mitigate the
adverse effect of process interactions. There are several forms
of decoupling methods, where the basic techniques can be
divided into 3 categories [11]: (a) the ideal, (b) simplified, and
(c) inverted decoupling methods. One of the major problems in
using the decoupling techniques is that the decouplers might
not be physically realizable, especially those that are based on
the ideal decoupling method. There are several methods of
decentralized PID control design which include the decoupling
controllers, e.g., see [12], [13], [14].
Note that, Nandong and Zang [15] have recently proposed
the Inter-Communicative Decentralized Multi-scale Control
(ICD-MSC) scheme as an alternative to traditional decoupling
approach for overcoming the performance limitation imposed
by the process interactions. The ICD-MSC is basically founded
on the more basic Multi-scale Control (MSC) scheme for SISO
nonminimum-phase processes; see [16], [17]. Additionally, the
same basic MSC scheme has recently been adopted in the
construction of several PID tuning relations; see [18], [19].
In the present work, the ICD-MSC scheme [15] and the
procedure for constructing some PID tuning relations in [18]
are combined together in order to synthesize a multivariable
PI/PID control system for the two-input and two-output (TITO)
processes. It is worth noting that the ICD-MSC scheme in [15]
represents a generalized approach for designing the multi-loop
multi-scale controllers together with the inter-communicative W11
controllers to overcome process interactions. The resulting R1 - C1 -
U1
controllers might not be equivalent to the conventional PID Fr1
+ E1
K11,0
+
K11,1
+
g11
+ Y1
+ +
controllers. In this regard, the main contribution in this work is
to devise a simple way by which, one can readily convert these I12 g12
ICD-MSC controllers into the standard multivariable PI/PID
controllers, hence permitting an industrial implementation of I21 g21
the ICD-MSC scheme. + +
R2 E2 C2 U2 Y2
+
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 Fr2
+
K22,0
+
K22,1
+
g11
-
presents the construction of mathematical tuning relations -
W21
based on the ICD-MSC scheme for TITO processes. Section 3
provides the proposed design procedure for multivariable
PI/PID control system. An illustrative example is given in Fig. 1. Block diagram of the Input-Input Structure of the ICD-MSC
scheme.
Section 4. Finally, Section 5 highlights some concluding
remarks and future research directions.

R1 -
II. CONSTRUCTION OF TUNING RELATIONS Fr1 K11,0
C1
h11
+ U1
g11
+ E1 + Y1
The details about the ICD-MSC scheme can be found in + +
[15] while the construction procedure of PID controller tuning h12 g12
formulas can be found in [18]. The basic idea of the ICD-MSC
scheme is to reduce the effect of MIMO process interactions h21 g21
via the inner-layer of a given multi-scale controller. The multi-
scale controller has two loops – a fast inner feedback loop and R2 E2 +
+
+
Y2
a relatively slow outermost feedback loop. The effect of the Fr1
+
K22,0
C2
h22
+ U2
g11
process interactions is treated as an input disturbance, which is -
to be removed by the fast feedback inner loop. In contrast to
this idea, in the conventional decoupling techniques, the loop Fig. 2. Simplified block diagram of the Input-Input Structure of the
interactions are mitigated via the conventional feedforward ICD-MSC scheme.
cancellation approach. In the ICD-MSC, the loop interactions
are removed or reduced by the fast feedback control action of
-
the given multi-scale controller – a feedback approach. R1
Fr1 Gc11
+ U1
g11
+ E1 + Y1
Fig. 1 shows the block diagram of an Input-Input structure + +
of ICD-MSC scheme. Other ICD-MSC structures are called the g12
Gc21
Input-Output and Output-Output structures [15]. In Fig. 1, gii
denotes the diagonal transfer function, gij the off-diagonal Gc12 g21
transfer function, Wii the multi-scale predictor, I ij the inter- + +
R2 E2 + Y2
communicative controller, K ii ,1 the inner sub- controller, K ii ,0 Fr1
+
Gc22
+ U2
g11
-
the outermost sub-controller and Fri the setpoint pre-filter; Ri
and Yi denote the setpoint and controlled signals, respectively. Fig. 3. Equivalent multivariable control block diagram of the Input-
Input Structure of the ICD-MSC scheme.
In this work, the Input-Input structure of ICD-MSC scheme
(Fig. 1) is adopted to synthesize a centralized PI/PID control
system for TITO processes.
g ii ( s ) = K pii exp( −θ ii s ) (τ ii s + 1) (2)
Let us consider a TITO process given as follows
First, the dead-time in (2) is approximated using the 1/1
ª g11 ( s ) g12 ( s ) º Padé formula. Then, the approximated model is decomposed
P( s) = « » (1) into a sum of an outermost mode ( mii ,0 ) and an inner-layer
¬« g 21 ( s ) g 22 ( s )¼» mode ( mii ,1 ) as given by

Here, we assume that the diagonal transfer functions can be

represented as the first-order plus deadtime (FOPDT) model: g ii ( s ) = k ii ,0 (τ ii s + 1) + k ii ,1 (α ii s + 1) (3)
  
 

mii ,0 mii ,1
where α ii = 0.5θii and it is assumed that α ii < τ ii . In (3), the β ij (τ cii,1s + 1)(τ cjj,1 s + 1)
I ij ( s ) = (14)
gains for the outermost and innermost modes are as (α ii s + 1)(α jj s + 1)
k ii ,0 = K pii (τ ii + 0.5θ ii ) ( τ ii − 0.5θ ii ) (4)
where βij denotes the IC controller gain.
After substituting (13) into (12), and then into (11)
k ii ,1 = K pii θ ii (0.5θ ii − τ ii ) (5)
hij ( s ) = β ijo k cjj ,1 (α ii s + 1) (τ cii ,1 s + 1)
o
(15)
Note that, Fig. 1 can be simplified to Fig. 2. Then, based on
Fig. 2 the inner-loop transfer function corresponding to each
Meanwhile, if the IC controller form in (14) is used, a static
diagonal element of (1) is written as in (6):
form of (11) is obtained as follows

hii ( s ) = U i ( s) Ci ( s ) = K ii,1 (1 + K ii,1Wii ( s ) ) (6)

h ij = β ijo k cjj
o
,1 (16)
Let the multi-scale predictor Wii = mii ,1 and the inner sub-
In (15) or (16), the overall inter-communicative controller
controller Kii,1 = kcii ,1 (a Proportional controller is chosen for
gain ( βijo ) is given in the form of
the innermost mode). Hence, (6) can be simplified to (7):

hii ( s ) = k o
(α ii s + 1) (τ cii,1s + 1) (7) ȕijo = ȕij (1 + k cii ,1k ii ,1 ) (17)
cii ,1

In (7), the overall sub-controller gain and the closed-loop Now, let us define an MSC parameter (see reference [18]),
time constant are respectively given by (8) and (9): which is a ratio of the open-loop time constant to that of the
closed-loop of the inner mode given as follows

,1 = k cii ,1 (1 + k cii ,1 k ii ,1 )
o
k cii (8) λii,1 = α ii τ cii ,1 = 1 + k cii ,1k ii,1 (18)

Upon rearrangement of (18), the sub-controller gain can be

τ cii,1 = α ii (1 + k cii,1k ii ,1 ) (9) calculated in term of the MSC ratio, i.e.:

Again referring to Fig. 2, the off-diagonal inner-loop

k cii ,1 = (λii ,1 − 1) k ii ,1 (19)
transfer function from C2 to U1 is given as follows

It follows from (19) that the overall sub-controller gain in

hij ( s ) = h jj ( s ) I ij ( s ) (1 + K ii,1Wii ( s ) ) (10) (8) can now be expressed in term of λii ,1 :

where I ij denotes Inter-Communicative (IC) controller. Next,

(10) can readily be simplified to (11) below: § λii ,1 − 1 · § θ ii − 2τ ii ·
o
k cii ,1 = ¨ ¸¨ ¸ (20)
¨ λ ¸¨ ¸
© ii ,1 ¹ © 2θ ii K pii ¹
I ijo ( s )k cjj ,1 (α ii s + 1)(α jj s + 1)
o
hij ( s ) = (11) By substituting (17) and (20) into (15), one can obtain (21)
(τ cii ,1 s + 1)(τ cjj,1 s + 1)
Here, in (11), the overall IC controller is defined as in (12) β ij § λ jj,1 − 1 · § θ jj − 2τ jj ·§ α ii s + 1 ·
¨ ¸¨ ¸¨
hij ( s ) =
λii,1 ¨© λ jj,1 ¸¹ ¨© 2θ jj K pjj ¸ τ s +1¸ (21)
¹© cii ¹
I ijo ( s ) = I ij ( s ) (1 + k cii ,1k ii ,1 ) (12)
Likewise, substituting (17) and (20) into (16) results in
Note that, one may choose a suitable form for the IC
controller, e.g., one of the forms is as follows: β ij § λ jj ,1 − 1 · § θ jj − 2τ jj ·
h ij = ¨ ¸¨ ¸ (22)
λii ,1 ¨© λ jj,1 ¸¹ ¨© 2θ jj K pjj ¸
¹
I ij ( s ) = β ij (τ cjj ,1 s + 1) (α jj s + 1) (13)
Let us consider that a PI controller is chosen to control the
Alternatively, the IC controller can be expressed in the form of outermost mode, i.e., the outermost sub-controller is given by
 K ii ,0 ( s ) = k cii,0 [1 + 1 (τ Iii,0 s )] (23) ª § ( 2τ jj − θ jj ) 2 · º
« ¨ ¸ »
§ β ij (λ jj ,0 − 1)( λ jj ,1 − 1) · « ¨© K pjj K pjj ¸¹ »
where the outermost sub-controller gain is K C ij = ¨¨ ¸¸ (33)
© 4γ jj λ jj ,1 λii ,1 ¹ « §¨ τ jj θ jj ( 2τ jj + θ jj ) ·¸ »
«¨ ¸»
k cii,0 = (λii,0 − 1) kii,0 : λii,0 > 1 (24) ¬ © 2γ jj τ jj + θ ii ¹ ¼

Note that, the MSC parameter λii ,0 is defined in a similar

τ Iij = γ jj τ jj + 0.5θ ii (34)
manner as that of λii ,1 in (18). Let us define another MSC
parameter γ ii as proposed in [18], i.e.:
τ D ij = γ jj τ jj θ ii (2γ jj τ jj + θ ii ) (35)
γ ii = τ I ii,0 τ ii : γ ii > 0 (25)

The overall diagonal controller can now be written as follows τ f ij = τ cii ,1 = θ ii (2λii ,1 ) (36)

Gcii ( s ) = K ii,0 ( s )hii ( s) S (k cii,1 )
where S (k cii ,1 ) denotes the sign of the inner sub-controller,
included to obtain the correct overall controller gain. It has
been shown in [19], [20] that the multi-scale controller (26)
can be converted into an equivalent PID controller in (27):
§ ·§
1 1
Gc ii ( s) = K C ii ¨¨1 + + τ D ii s ¸¸ ¨¨
© τ I ii s ¹ © τ f ii s + 1 ¹
In (27), the PID controller parameters are given in terms of
the model parameters and the MSC tuning parameters:
(26) If the IC controller is chosen to be in the form of (14), then
one obtains the following off-diagonal controller:
Gcij ( s ) = K jj,0 ( s )h ij (37)
Since the outermost sub-controller is in the form of a PI
controller and the off-diagonal inner-layer transfer function
· takes a static form, the overall off-diagonal controller is simply
¸
¸ (27) equivalent to a PI controller overall, i.e.:
Gcij ( s ) = K C ij (1 + 1 (τ I ij s )) (38)
The PI controller parameters in (38) are given as follows:

ª § ( 2τ ii − θ ii ) 2 · º
« ¨ ¸ » § β ij (λ jj ,0 − 1)(λ jj,1 − 1) ·§ ( 2τ jj − θ jj ) 2 ·
§ (λii ,0 − 1)(λii ,1 − 1) · « ¨© K pii K pii ¸¹ » K Cij = ¨¨ ¸¸¨¨ ¸¸ (39)
K Cii = ¨¨ ¸« (28) © 2λii,1λ jj ,1 ( 2τ jj + θ jj )θ jj ¹© K pjj K pjj ¹
© 4 γ ii λii ,1 ¸ § (2τ + θ )τ θ
¹« ¨ ·»
ii ii ii ii
¸»
« © 2γ iτ ii +θ ii ¹ »¼
¬
τ I ij = γ jj τ jj (40)

τ I ii = γ ii τ I ii + 0.5θ ii (29) Finally, the ICD-MSC structure in Fig. 1 can be converted

into an equivalent multivariable control structure shown in Fig.
3. The multivariable controller matrix for the 2x2 system is
τ D i = γ ii θ ii τ ii (2γ ii τ ii + θ ii ) (30)
ª G c11 ( s ) G c12 ( s ) º
G C (s) = « » (41)
τ f ii = τ cii ,1 = θ ii (2 λii ,1 ) (31) ¬«G c 21 ( s ) G c 22 ( s )¼»

where the vector of controlled outputs can be written as

Next, consider the off-diagonal controller which is given by
Y(s) = P(s)GC (s)E(s) (42)
Gcij ( s ) = K jj,0 ( s )hij ( s ) (32)
In Fig. 3, the multivariable controller matrix is given as
Again, (32) can be rearranged into (27). In the case where
the IC controller takes the form of (13), the off-diagonal PID
controller parameters are as in (33) – (36):
 ª h11 ( s ) h12 ( s ) º ª K11,0 ( s ) 0 º Step 2.3: The overall control system performance can be
Gc (s) = « »« » (43) refined (to meet the target performance) by adjusting the inter-
¬«h21 ( s ) h22 ( s )¼» ¬« 0 K 22,0 ( s )¼» communicative static gain, i.e. fine tuning using (48).
Step 2.4: Obtain the off-diagonal controller parameters
using (33) – (36) if I ij takes the form of (13), otherwise, if the
III. DESIGN PROCEDURE
form in (14) is selected, use (39) – (40) instead (i.e., a PI
A. Tuning of Inter-Communicative Controller controller). The entire control system design is completed.
Fig. 2, the interaction effect of C j on Yi assuming Ci = 0 Remark 1: These initial values often give stable response,
otherwise, choose other initial values.

Yi ( s ) = [h jj ( s ) g ij ( s ) + hij ( s ) g ii ( s )]C j ( s )
Let the overall interaction transfer function be in (45)
H ij ( s ) = h jj ( s ) g ij ( s ) + hij ( s ) g ii ( s )
A simple choice is to set (45) at the steady-state as follows
(44) Remark 2: The proposed design procedure is quite general
(it can be further refined in future study). A more rigorous
tuning procedure using the constructed tuning relations can be
performed via optimization techniques, e.g., genetic algorithm.
Remark 3: We propose robustness 14 dB ≤ GM * ≤ 16 dB
(45)
for gain margin range and 60 0 ≤ PM * ≤ 80 0 for phase margin
range. It is crucial to ensure sufficient robustness margins to
accommodate the effect of process uncertainties.

H ij (0) = h jj (0) g ij (0) + hij ( s ) g ii (0) (46) IV. ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE

Consider a TITO process given by
Hence, one obtains the IC controller gain in (47):
ª 1.2e −3s e −s º
β ij = −λii ,1 (K pij K pii ) (47) « 10 s + 1 20s 2
+ +
2s 1»
»
G( s) = « (49)
« (1 − s )e − s − 1.1e − 4 s »
The actual IC controller gain can be adjusted using a tuning « »
parameter f ij in the following manner ¬ (11s + 1)(5s + 1) 9s + 1 ¼

Note that, feasible decouplers cannot be obtained via the

conventional decoupling techniques, i.e., improper decoupler
β ij = f ij β ij : f ij > 0 (48)
transfer functions. Nevertheless, one can still use non-ideal
(i.e., static decouplers) decouplers for such a process. The
Here, f ij may be used as a tuning parameter, or use f ij = 1 . severity of the process interaction can be quantified using the
well-known Bristol’s Relative Gain Array (RGA) [20].
B. Tuning Algorithm for PI/PID Controller
A general two-step design procedure using the constructed ª0.569 0.431º
tuning relations (Section 2) is proposed. First, assume that the ȁ=« » (50)
desired GM and PM are GM * and PM * respectively. ¬« 0.431 0.569¼»
Step 1: Design the individual PID controller Gcii for the i- The RGA in (50) indicates that strong interactions exist
th control loop using (28) – (31). between the two loops, i.e. diagonal element closed to 0.5
indicates very severe loop interactions. Three different control
Step 1.1: Initial setting: λii ,0 = 1.2, λii ,1 = 10, γ ii = 0.8 .
strategies are designed: (a) completely decentralized PID
Step 1.2: If GM * and PM * are achieved, then the design controllers, (b) decentralized plus static decouplers, and (c)
is completed, otherwise, go to Step 1.3. proposed multivariable control scheme. Note that, for all
control strategies, we use similar diagonal PID plus filter
Step 1.3: Gradually increase λii ,0 until one approximately controllers.
achieves the specified gain/ phase margin criteria.
TABLE I. PI/PID CONTROLLER PARAMETERS
Step 2: Design the inter-communicative controller.
Controller KC τI τD τf
Step 2.1: Choose the form for the controller I ij , either in Gc11 0.777 9.5 1.263 0.15
the form of (13) or of (14). Gc22 -0.635 9.2 1.565 0.20
Gc12 0.414 7.2 - -
Step 2.2: Calculate the IC controller static gain β ij using Gc21 0.595 8.0 1.6 0.20

(47).
 [1] A. Bemporad, M. Morari, V. Dua and E. N. Pistikopoulos, "The explicit
2 linear quadratic regulator for constrained systems," Automatica, vol. 38,
pp. 3-20, 2002.

1
[2] D. W. Clarke, C. Mohtadi and P. S. Tuffs, "Generalized predictive
control - part 1. The basic algorithm," Automatica, vol. 23, pp. 137-148,
1987.
Y1

0 [3] S. J. Qin and T. A. Badgwell, "A survey of industrial model predictive

control technology," Control Eng. Pract., vol. 11, pp. 733-764, 2003.
-1 [4] K. J. Astrom and T. Hagglund, "Revisiting the Ziegler-Nichols step
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 response method for PID control," J. Process Control, vol. 14, pp. 635-
Time 650, 2004.
1.5 [5] S. Skogestad, "Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID
controller tuning," J. Process Control, vol. 13, pp. 291-309, 2003.
1
[6] H. P. Huang, J. C. Jeng, C. H. Chiang and W. Pan, "A direct method for
multi-loop PI/PID controller design," J. Process Control, vol. 13, pp.
Y2

0.5 769-786, 2003.

0
-0.5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time
Proposed: IAE = 32
Decentralized: IAE = 58
Decentralized-Decoupler: IAE = 45
Fig. 4. Closed-loop responses under the nominal condition.
Table 1 shows the PI/PID controller parameters. The PID
controllers are obtained using the relations given in (28) to (31)
where λ11,0 = 1.5 , λ11,1 = λ22,1 = 10 , γ 11 = γ 22 = 0.8 , and
λ22,0 = 1.6 . These settings lead to gain and phase margins
within the ranges given in Remark 3. Fig. 4 shows the closed-
loop responses for the 3 different control strategies when
subjected to sequential setpoint changes of 1 unit each in Y1
and Y2; the proposed method leads to improved response.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A new method for the synthesis of multivariable PI/PID
controllers for TITO processes has been presented. The method
essentially converts the inter-communicative multi-loop multi-
scale controllers in [15] to equivalent multivariable PI/PID
controllers. The proposed method showed improvement over
the purely decentralized PID controllers without and with static
decouplers. Some possible future research directions include:
(a) tuning of the MSC parameters using some optimization
algorithms, and (b) synthesis of the multivariable PID
controllers using other structures of the ICD-MSC scheme.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work had been conducted under the Intelligent
System, Design & Control (ISDCON) Research Area at Curtin
University Sarawak, and partly supported by FRGS funding
(JPT.S Jld.13(28)) of MOHE and CSRI grant.
REFERENCES
[7] W. L. Luyben, "Simple method for tuning SISO controllers in
multivariable systems," Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dec., vol. 25, pp.
654-660, 1986.
[8] S. J. Shiu and S. H. Hwang, "Sequential design method for multivariable
decoupling and multiloop controllers," Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 37,
pp. 107-119, 1998.
[9] T. N. L. Vu and M. Lee, "Independent design of multi-loop PI/PID
controllers for interatcting multivariable processes," J. Process Control,
vol. 20, pp. 922-933, 2010.
[10] S. Tavakoli, I. Griffin and P. J. Fleming, "Tuning of decentralized PI
(PID) controllers for TITO processes," Control Eng. Pract., vol. 14, pp.
1069-1080, 2006.
[11] W. J. Cai, W. Ni, M. J. He and C. Y. Ni, "Normalized decoupling - a
new approach for MIMO process control system design," Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res., vol. 47, pp. 7347-7356, 2008.
[12] Q. B. Jin and Q. Liu, "Decoupling Proportional-Integral-Derivative
controller design for multivariable processes with time delays," Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 53, pp. 765-777, 2014.
[13] C. Rajapandiyan and M. Chidambaram, "Controller design for MIMO
processes based on simple decoupled equivalent transfer functions and
simplified decoupler," Ind. Eng. Che. Res., vol. 51, pp. 12398-12410,
2012.
[14] F. Y. Lin, J. C. Jeng and H. P. Huang, "Multivariable control with
generalized decoupling for disturbance rejection," Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
vol. 48, pp. 9175-9185, 2009.
[15] J. Nandong and Z. Zang, "Inter-communicative decentralized multi-
scale control (ICD-MSC) scheme: a new approach to overcome MIMO
process interaction," Chemical Product Process Modeling, vol. 9, pp.
2194-6159, 2014.
[16] J. Nandong and Z. Zang, "Novel multiscale control scheme for
nonminimum-phase processes," Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 52, pp. 8248-
8259, 2013.
[17] J. Nandong and Z. Zang, "High-performance multi-scale control scheme
for stable, integrating and unstable time-delay processes," J. Process
Control, vol. 23, pp. 1333-1343, 2013.
[18] J. Nandong and Z. Zang, "Multi-loop design of multi-scale controllers
for multivariable processes," J. Process Control, vol. 24, pp. 600-612,
2014.
[19] B. Ugon, J. Nandong and Z. Zang, "Advanced PID controller synthesis
using multiscale control scheme," in IEEE 9th Conference on Industrial
Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), Hangzhou, China, 2014.
[20] C. R. Johnson and H. M. Shapiro, "Mathematical aspects of the relative
gain array AoA^-T," SIAM J. on Algebraic Discrete Methods, vol. 7,
pp. 627-644, 1986.