0 views

Uploaded by BodoShow

© All Rights Reserved

- Basico_PIDMotor.pdf
- 36140919-STEP-7-PID-Temperature-Control
- PID Tuning Guide V_1
- Tuning Control Loops
- A Force-controlled Planar Haptic Device for Movement Control
- Ramin_Shamshiri_Control_Project_Motor_Speed
- ASHRAE PAPER Example
- ENGD3038 - Rectilinear 2.0
- 10
- Special Section_ Know when to look outside the PID tuning - ISA.pdf
- Model Based Tuning
- 2013_SysTol_v3
- DesignofElectronicThrottleValvePositionControlSystemUsingNonlinearPIDController
- Anarghya Murthy
- Poignet
- PID Controller
- Temprature control of heat exchanger.
- 1-s2.0-S0019057813000037-main
- 01a_104
- A Comparison of Adaptive PID Methodologies Controlling a DC MotorWith a Varying Load

You are on page 1of 4

Peter Ťapák and Mikuláš Huba

Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava

Ilkovičova 3, 812 19 Bratislava, Slovakia

Email: peter.tapak, mikulas.huba@stuba.sk

Abstract—The first order process model altogether with the II. D EAD T IME TO P ROCESS T IME C ONSTANT R ATIO

proportional-integral (PI) controllers represent the most popular I NFLUENCE A NALYSIS

setting for controller design applied in practice. The paper

compares the performance of two disturbance observer based PI Let us consider linear FOPDT plant with transfer function

controllers, one designed using a FOPDT model combined with

a loop linearization based on inverse input-output steady-state

Ks −Td s

G(s) = e (1)

characteristic and the second using an IPDT model identified in s+a

several working points by a relay experiment. Both approaches

Td being a dead time and T = 1/ |a| being a plant time

are compared by means of a nonlinear laboratory plant model.

constant. The influence of the dead time to process time

constant ratio aTd on IPDT approximation

I. I NTRODUCTION

Ks −Td s

G(s) = e (2)

Numerous papers investigate the transition point when the s

designer should choose to use more complex models - the First has been firstly investigated by simulation. Fig. 1 shows

Order Plus Dead Time (FOPDT) representing one of the most the parameters of the model (2) with Ks = 0.5, a = 0.5

frequently chosen starting models [1], [2], [3]. Nevertheless, obtained by the IPDT relay feedback experiment based on

already the most popular approach by Ziegler and Nichols [4], [8] for the system (1) with dead time varying on interval

[5] based on an approximation of the process reaction curve Td ∈ [0.01, 10]. The method can be used for plants with

by a tangent showed that for a relatively low ratio of the dead unknown load disturbances without additional controller (see

time and the plant time constant it is enough to use the Integral e.g. [9]). There is not necessary to bias the relay reference

Plus Dead Time (IPDT) approximations also for dealing with value to compensate the static disturbance, which does not

stable nearly first order processes with a monotonic setpoint have to be known in advance (see e.g. [10], [11], [12]). The

step response treated in this paper. proposed method uses a curve fitting approach. The FOPDT

However, when using the IPDT approximation for the system output compared to its IPDT approximation is shown

FOPDT process, one meets several problems. The first one in Figs. 2-3. There is obvious that with an increasing aTd the

appears already in the plant identification. The plant feedback approximation fitting decreases. Nevertheless the quality of

that is around an operating point equivalent to a load distur- control using either of the models will be investigated further

bance, will lead to asymmetrical behavior also in the case in the paper.

without an additional load and with symmetrical relay. Hence,

with respect to the precision of the whole approximation, in the A. PI1 - Controller

relay identification this oscillation asymmetry is an important The simplest PI1 - controller (sometime denoted as DO-PI

issue and usually requires to look for alternative approaches controller) employs disturbance observer as the I-action. For

to the describing function method. an IPDT plant and the dead time neglected in the disturbance

The second important problem in the control design for the observer the simplified controller structure consisting of P-

considered plant is represented by its strongly nonlinear input- action and DO is presented in Fig. 4. Index ”1” used in its title

output steady-state characteristic that may either be tackled has to be related to one saturated pulse of the control variable

by an robust approach with a tuning chosen usually to get an that can occur in accomplishing large reference signal steps.

acceptable performance in the worst situations, or by an active In this way it should be distinguished from the PI0 - controller

nonlinearity compensation based on an inverse nonlinearity. reacting to a reference step by a monotonic transient of the

To illustrate pros and cons of both mentioned approaches, manipulated variable. More complex structures with a static

the laboratory plant model will be extended by an additional feed forward and a dead time compensation in the disturbance

dead time with a chosen length. Such a loop will be controlled observer are treated in [6], [7]. To achieve in a closed loop the

by the predictive disturbance observer based filtered PI con- fastest possible transients without overshooting, a controller

troller [6], [7] and evaluated by the time and shape related tuning may be derived by using the performance portrait

performance measures introduced in [6]. method [7]. In following simulations the FOPDT system (1) is

IPDT Model Parameters Dependancy

on FOPDT Plant Dead Time to Process Time Constant Ratio

0.6 6

0.4 4

IPDT Model Parameters

0.2 2

IPDT Process Gain

Real Process Gain

Real Dead Time

IPDT Dead time

0 0

0 1 2 3 4 5

30

Deadtime to Process Time constant Ratio

29

28

Figure 1. Approximation parameters dependency on dead time to process

time constant ratio aTd 27

System output

26

25

Dead Time to Process Time Constant Ratio= 0.005

40.3 23 Setpoint

IPDT based control

40.25 22 FOPDT based control

IPDT Approximation

40.2 21

Measured Data − FOPDT Model Output

40.15 20

Process Variable

40.1 Time [s]

40.05

39.95

39.9

39.85 controlled. Small, medium and large aTd was used. For very

39.8 low dead time with aTd < 0.1 the performance of controllers

5 5.05 5.1 5.15 5.2 5.25 5.3

Time [s] using particular models was similar (Fig. 5). In Fig. 6 where

the dead time is set to one half of the process time constant

Figure 2. Model vs Real System Comparison - aTd = 0.005, Td = 0.01 one can see that the controller using relay identification based

on an IPDT model yields slower transients.

Dead Time to Process Time Constant Ratio= 5

100 30

90 29

IPDT Approximation

80 Measured Data − FOPDT Model Output 28

70 27

Process Variable

60 Setpoint

System output

26

IPDT based control

50 25 FOPDT based control

40 24

30 23

20 22

10 21

0

20

140 160 180 200 220 240

Time [s] 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145

Time [s]

Figure 6. Control Performance - aTd = 0.5

Input−output characteristic y=f(u)

80

30

70

29

28 60

27

50

System output

−−−> y

Linear interpolation of IO characteristics

40

25

24 Setpoint 30

IPDT based control

23

FOPDT based control

20

22

21 10

20 0

1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 0 20 40 60 80 100

Time [s] −−−> u

Figure 7. Control Performance - aTd = 5 Figure 8. Input-to-output characteristic of the light channel

System Output

III. R EAL E XPERIMENT - L IGHT I NTENSITY 70

Light Intensity

65

out by using the laboratory thermo-optical plant [13]. The light

Setpoint

channel consist of the light bulb which acts as a light source, 60

FOPDT

the system input is the bulb voltage[0-100 %], the output is 55

IPDT

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

the value from the light intensity sensor filtered with the first Time [s]

order low pass filter with the time constant set to 2 seconds, 80

Control Signal

Bulb Power

60 FOPDT

followed by a dominant first-order filter dynamics IPDT

50

dy/dt = f (uc + di ) − ay (3) 0 1 2 3 4 5

Time [s]

6 7 8 9

and uc being an input disturbance and a plant input and y being Figure 9. Control performance - setpoint step response - no additional delay

- linearized system

a plant output. After linearization by an inverse nonlinearity

uc = f −1 (ur ) (4)

the plant may be characterized by the transfer function measured data similar deviations. The first experiment was

made without any additional delay in the control loop. The

Y (s) Ks Ks 1 IPDT model parameters were

P (s) = ≈ ; = 1 ; T1 = (5)

Ur (s) di =0 s+a a a

After such a nonlinearity compensation, ideally, it should hold Ks1 −Td1 s 0.3718 −0.3035s

e =G1 (s) = e (6)

K = Ks /a = 1. But, due to different imperfections, as e.g. s s

the fluctuations of the plant parameters due to the temperature The FOPDT model parameters were

changes, equivalent input disturbances occur that will be

Ks2 −Td2 s 1.6771 −0.0812s

included within the identified value of an input disturbance di . G2 (s) = e = e (7)

By adding to the relatively short plant dead time an additional s+a s + 0.4993

software dead time Td , one gets typical first order plus dead The second experiment was made by using an additional

time plant. delay 200 ms.

e =G1 (s) = e (8)

s s

The results from an IPDT relay feedback experiment based

on [8] and the FOPDT model approximation using setpoint The FOPDT model parameters were

step responses processed by the Matlab ident toolbox are Ks2 −Td2 s 1.6771 −0.2861s

compared in Figs 9-12. For both models and loops with, G2 (s) = e = e (9)

s+a s + 0.4993

or without the nonlinearity compensation, one can from the

IV. C ONCLUSION

System Output

75

The simulation showed expected results: the control perfor-

mance is better if one uses the FOPDT model to control the

Light Intensity

70

Setpoint

60 FOPDT

the non-linearity compensation, the IPDT model performed

IPDT better. The performance of the control loop with the IPDT

55

0 1 2 3 4

Time [s]

5 6 7 8 9 model was slower in all examined cases, both in simulations

Control Signal and real experiments. However, this made the loop more

80

FOPDT

robust, it yielded transients without an overshooting with or

60

without the non-linearity compensation. This altogether with

Bulb Power

IPDT

40 many closed loop identification methods can make it a safe

20 choice for a practical application.

0 The second important advantage of the relay experiments

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Time [s] is that they may also be used for identification of unstable

processes, where the alternative setpoint step responses may

Figure 10. Control performance - setpoint step response - no additional delay not be mostly applied.

- nonlinear system The third inteeresting point is that the IPDT based relay

experiments may also be used for identification of the internal

feedback parameter a.

System Output

70 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This work has been partially supported by the grants APVV-

Light Intensity

65

0343-12 Computer aided robust nonlinear control design and

60 Setpoint

FOPDT

VEGA 1/0937/14 Advanced methods for nonlinear modeling

IPDT and control of mechatronic systems.

55

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time [s] R EFERENCES

Control Signal

80

[1] A. O’Dwyer, Handbook of PI and PID controller tuning rules. 3rd Ed.

Imperial College Press, 2009.

Bulb Power

70 [2] S. Skogestad, “Simple analytic rules for model reduction and {PID}

controller tuning,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 291 –

60 FOPDT 309, 2003.

IPDT [3] R. Jones and M. Tham, “Gain and phase margin controller tuning: Foptd

50 or ipdt model-based methods?” in SICE 2004 Annual Conference, vol. 2,

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time [s] Aug 2004, pp. 1139–1143 vol. 2.

[4] J. G. Ziegler and N. B. Nichols, “Optimum settings for automatic

controllers,” Trans. ASME, pp. 759–768, 1942.

Figure 11. Control performance - setpoint step response - 200 ms additional [5] Y. Takahashi, C. Chan, and D. Auslander, “Parametereinstellung bei

delay - linearized system linearen DDC-Algorithmen,” rt, vol. 19, No.6, pp. 237–244, 1971.

[6] M. Huba, “Performance measures, performance limits and optimal PI

control for the IPDT plant,” Journal of Process Control, vol. 23, 4, pp.

500–515, 2013.

System Output [7] M. Huba, “Performance Portrait Method: a new CAD Tool,” in 10th

70 Symposium on Advances in Control Education (ACE). Sheffield, UK:

IFAC, 2013.

Light Intensity

nonsymmetrical oscillations, ser. Lecture Notes in Computer Science

60 Setpoint (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture

FOPDT

Notes in Bioinformatics), 2012, vol. 6928 LNCS, no. PART 2.

IPDT

55 [9] S. W. Sung and J. Lee, “Relay feedback method under large static

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 disturbances,” Automatica, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 353 – 356, 2006.

Time [s]

Control Signal [10] C. Hang, K. Astrom, and W. Ho, “Relay auto-tuning in the presence

40 of static load disturbance,” Automatica, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 563 – 564,

FOPDT 1993.

Bulb Power

30 IPDT [11] J. H. Park, S. W. Sung, and I.-B. Lee, “Improved relay auto-tuning with

static load disturbance,” Automatica, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 711 – 715, 1997.

20 [12] S.-H. Shen, J.-S. Wu, and C.-C. Yu, “Autotune identification under load

disturbance,” Industrial & engineering chemistry research, vol. 35, no. 5,

10 pp. 1642–1651, 1996.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 [13] T. Huba, M. Huba, P. Ťapák, and P. Bisták, “New Thermo-Optical Plants

Time [s]

for Laboratory Experiments,” in IFAC World Congress, Cape Town,

South Africa, 2014.

Figure 12. Control performance - setpoint step response - 200 ms additional

delay - nonlinear system

- Basico_PIDMotor.pdfUploaded byOscar Vazquez Espinosa
- 36140919-STEP-7-PID-Temperature-ControlUploaded bysbarizo
- PID Tuning Guide V_1Uploaded byibubu23
- Tuning Control LoopsUploaded byNurgul Shuakbayeva
- A Force-controlled Planar Haptic Device for Movement ControlUploaded byFabioSilvaMachado
- Ramin_Shamshiri_Control_Project_Motor_SpeedUploaded byRaminShamshiri
- ASHRAE PAPER ExampleUploaded byvicens68
- ENGD3038 - Rectilinear 2.0Uploaded byLegendaryN
- 10Uploaded byapi-19660864
- Special Section_ Know when to look outside the PID tuning - ISA.pdfUploaded bykumar_chemical
- Model Based TuningUploaded byDeepak Ghodke
- 2013_SysTol_v3Uploaded byEduardo Sanchez Fontes
- DesignofElectronicThrottleValvePositionControlSystemUsingNonlinearPIDControllerUploaded byDaniel Velázquez
- Anarghya MurthyUploaded bysubramanya1982
- PoignetUploaded byFlorin Albu
- PID ControllerUploaded byVikash Tiwari
- Temprature control of heat exchanger.Uploaded byAkash verma
- 1-s2.0-S0019057813000037-mainUploaded bydebasishmee5808
- 01a_104Uploaded byMiguelÁngelHernándezOsorio
- A Comparison of Adaptive PID Methodologies Controlling a DC MotorWith a Varying LoadUploaded byPatrik Arvhult
- 11-15nonlinear-controller1-20141-Gotovo-m.pdfUploaded byTobirama Senju
- Mat Lab PresentationUploaded byShivam
- 250269Uploaded byAnonymous WkbmWCa8M
- PDC lab 8Uploaded byMustafa Barwaniwala
- 1-Mistake-When-Purchasing-PID-Tuning-Software.pdfUploaded bySyed Mian Fahim Kakakhail
- Latest Resume Anonymized.docxUploaded byAnonymous LmXWlM2
- energies-10-02014Uploaded byramihey
- controlTheory_12Uploaded byJason Lee
- Command&Data DictionaryUploaded byMiguel Valdebenito
- Control of a Jib-Type Crane Mounted on a Flexible StructureUploaded byoscar201140

- Elsaco_corporate_brochure_EN.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 805-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 784-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 803-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 759-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 885-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 751-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 733-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 739-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 569-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 726-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 731-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 750-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 738-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 720-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 715_AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 654-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 554-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 585-AIAU.pdfUploaded byBodoShow
- 526-AIAUUploaded byBodoShow
- C Programming for Embedded System ApplicationsUploaded byBodoShow
- Programacion en C Para MicrocontroladoresUploaded byromulofcarrera
- C Programming for Embedded System ApplicationsUploaded byLadit Kévin
- ESP8266 Wipe and ReinstallUploaded byBodoShow
- 48017147 ITI EX SM 03 4 Intrerupatoare Oleopneumatice de 110 400kV Si Dispozitiv M O PUploaded byBodoShow
- 00 Full Grid Code i5r21Uploaded byBogdan Vicol
- Asterisk GsmUploaded byBodoShow
- Micom Protection RelaysUploaded byBogdan Vicol

- mathapril11 1Uploaded byapi-301961986
- LarCalc10_ch01_sec2Uploaded byZachary
- DSE 2018 P1 EngUploaded byKan Samuel
- Math Worksheet-FunctionsUploaded byEducareLab
- Exploration and Mapping Using the VFM Motion PlannerUploaded bymmertikk
- Optimization of a Triangular Fin With Variable Fin Base ThicknessUploaded bysaran
- hw7sol.pdfUploaded byPei Jing
- jabartosz.pdfUploaded byJinho Jung
- 管數講義_全(eng)Uploaded byapi-26360835
- 17) Math InstructionUploaded byupendra35
- PDF - Non Linear Dynamics 1 - Chaos MIT - IndexUploaded byHarsh
- algebra 2 lesson plan 5 1-5 4Uploaded byapi-336571715
- Cushing-An Introduction to Structured Population DynamicsUploaded byMarluci Galindo
- lecture_24Uploaded byserdaryumlu
- Sergey SmirnovUploaded bySunil Saini
- Network Models _ Operations ResearchUploaded byneerubanda
- ffe925e50a919120e1753d6ecf7de6dbd57546c8Uploaded byontt
- 2d TransformationUploaded byNivedhaSekar
- Geometric Series Exam QuestionsUploaded byAnonymous X7hAeV90rm
- Newton RAphson MethodeUploaded byAga Sanity Sains
- Problem Solving and Proofs 27 30.PDF [SHARED]Uploaded byjuanmompotes
- test3reviewUploaded byBreanna Harrill
- taxi-circlesUploaded byapi-255059274
- 2006furmath1-wUploaded byapi-254501788
- 2.Central Tendency and Dispersion (1)Uploaded byMohi Sharma
- Simpson RuleUploaded byGovind Shriram Chhawsaria
- Digital Image FilteringUploaded bykarthikarajaratna
- Bourbaki DocUploaded bymaxtuno
- maths05scUploaded byapi-3721555
- PresentationUploaded byJose Luis Condori