CEB2083 PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL

MAY 2020 SEMESTER

Chapter 8:
Feedback Controllers

BY
Assoc. Prof. Dr Marappagounder Ramasamy / Dr Serene Lock /
Dr Mohd Hilmi Noh / Dr Nurul Aini Amran

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS (UTP)

Chapter Objectives

End of this chapter, you should be able to:

1. Explain the concept of feedback control
2. Explain P, I and D controllers
Course learning outcomes

CLO1
Develop dynamic models of chemical processes

CLO2
Design feedback control systems using modern IT tools

CLO3
Select appropriate instruments for control systems
Introduction

Consider the following blending process (Fig. 8.1).

Control system

Control objective: To keep the tank exit composition x at the

01
desired setpoint by adjusting w2.

02 Measurement: Composition Analyzer-Transmitter (AT)

03 Feedback controller (AC): Automatic Controller

04 Final control element: Pneumatic control valve

05 Current-to-pneumatic (I/P) transducer

Historical Perspective:
5

1980s
4 Use of digital hardware.

3
1960s
Computer applications.

2 1950s
Electronic counterparts in the market.

1 1940s
Widespread acceptance of pneumatic PID controllers.
1930s
Commercial Three-mode controllers with proportional,
integral and derivative (PID) feedback control action.
A Simple Example of Feedback Control

Figs. 8.2 & 8.3: Flow control system/loop (top) and its block diagram (bottom).
Feedback Control Error

In feedback control, the objective is

to reduce the error signal to zero.

Define an error signal, e, by

e(t )  y SP (t )  y m (t ) (6.1)

where y sp = set point

y m = measured value of the controlled variable
(or equivalent signal from transmitter)
Proportional, Integral and Derivative

Three Mode Controller

Proportional Control

For proportional control, the controller

output is proportional to the error signal,

p(t)  p  K c e(t) (6.2)

where
p(t) = controller output
p = bias value (adjustable, manual reset)
Kc = controller gain (dimensionless, adjustable, tuning)
Proportional Band, PB:

100% (6.3)
01 Definition : PB 
Kc

02 Applies when Kc is dimensionless

03 Small (narrow) PB corresponds to large Kc

04 Large (wide) PB corresponds to small Kc

Proportional controller

In order to derive the transfer function for an ideal

proportional controller, define a deviation variable as

p (t )  p(t )  p (6.4)

Then (6.2) can be written as

p (t )  K c e(t ) (6.5)

Taking Laplace transform of (6.5) and rearranging we

get
P ( s )
 Kc (6.6)
E ( s)
Typical Response of Proportional Control
Remarks

An inherent limitation of proportional controller is that a

steady-state error (offset) occurs after a set-point change
or a sustained disturbance.

Offset can be eliminated by manually resetting either the

set-point or bias after an offset occurs – impractical.
Ideal vs. actual

Ideal controller does not

include physical limits

A controller saturates when its

output reaches a physical limit,
either pmax or pmin.
Reverse or Direct Acting Controller
Kc can be made positive or negative

 Reverse-Acting (Kc > 0)

 Controller output (p) increases as
input signal, ym(t), decreases

p  p  K c e  p  K c ( ySP  ym )

 Direct-Acting (Kc < 0)

 Controller output (p) increases as
input signal, ym(t), increases
Integral Control
(reset control, floating control)

For integral action, the controller output depends on the

integral of the error signal over time,
1
 e(t)dt
t
p(t)  p  (6.7)
I 0

where τ1 is an adjustable parameter and referred to as the

integral time constant or reset time, has units of time.

The transfer function: P (s) 1 (6.8)


E(s)  I s
Integral Control

01 An important practical advantage: Eliminates offset.

For the process being controlled to be at steady state, the controller

02 output p must be constant so that the manipulated variable is also
constant.

03 Eq. (6.7) implies that p changes with time unless e(t) = 0.

This desirable situation occurs unless the controller output or the final
04 control element saturates.

The control action by the integral controller is very little until the error
05 signal has persisted for sometime.

On the other hand, proportional controller takes immediate corrective

06 action as soon as an error is detected.
Integral Control
PI Controller

Integral control is used in conjunction with proportional

control as the proportional-integral (PI) controller:

 1
t

p(t )  p  K c e(t )   e(t )dt  (6.9)
 I 0 

The corresponding transfer function is:

P(s)  1 
 K c 1   (6.10)
E(s)  Is 
PI Controller

The response of the PI controller to a unit step change

in e(t) is shown in Fig.

Figure 8.6 Response of proportional-integral controller to unit step change in e(t).

1/τ1 – repeats per minute, aka, reset rate.

PI Controller - Disadvantages

Produces oscillatory
response – reduces the
stability of the feedback
control system
Reset windup

When a sustained error occurs, the integral term becomes

quite large and the controller output eventually saturates –
reset windup or integral windup.

Antireset windup : Temporarily halting the integral

action whenever the control output saturates.
Reset windup

SP =setpoint
PV =process
variable to
control

Valve
movement
Anti windup
Derivative control
(Rate action, pre-act, anticipatory control )

Anticipate the future error by considering its rate of

change.

For ideal derivative action,

de(t ) (6.11)
p(t )  p   D
dt
where τD is the derivative time, and has units of time.

As long as the error is constant de/dt = 0, the

controller output is equal to p .
Derivative control

Derivative action is never used alone.

Always used in conjunction with P or PI control.

PD controller has the transfer function

P (s)
 K c 1   D s  (6.12)
E(s)
The derivative control action tends to stabilize the
controlled process.
PID Controller

PID control algorithm is given by

 t
de(t ) 
1 (6.13)
p (t )  p  K c e(t ) 
 I  e(t )dt    D
0
dt 


Transfer function of an ideal controller (parallel form)

P (s)  1 
 K c 1    D s  (6.14)
E(s)  Is 

Transfer function – actual (Series form)

P(s)   s  1   D s  1 
 K c  I   (6.15)
E(s)   I s   D s  1 

 = [0.05 … 0.2] Derivative filter

ON-OFF controllers
(“two-position” or “bang-bang” controllers)

More practical controller

Ideal controller (Dead band)

 Special case of proportional controller with very

high gain.
Typical responses of Feedback control systems
 Consider response of a controlled system after a sustained
disturbance occurs (e.g. step change in load variable)

No control
New steady state is reached

P control
Offset reduced

PI control
Offset eliminated
Oscillatory response

PID control
Oscillations reduced
Response time reduced
 Too small a value of Kc
Sluggish response
Larger deviation

 Too large a value of Kc

Exhibit oscillatory or unstable behavior

 Intermediate values of Kc is desirable

 Increasing τD tends to improve the

response by reducing the maximum
deviation, response time, and degree
of oscillation

 If τD is too large, measurement noise is

amplified and the response may
become oscillatory.
 Increasing tI makes the controller more sluggish.
 Offset will be eliminated for all values of tI.
 For large values of tI, it takes very long time to
return to the set-point.
Summary

Inexpensive
Two Position
01
(On-Off):
Extremely simple

Simple

Inherently stable when properly tuned

02 Proportional:
Experiences offset at steady state

Easy to tune
Summary

No offset

Proportional Better dynamic response than reset

03
+ Integral: alone

Possibilities exist for instability due to

lag introduced

Stable

Proportional Less offset than proportional alone

04 + Derivative: (use of higher gain possible).

Faster response time.

Summary

Proportional + Integral + Derivative :

Best control
Most Rapid Difficult to
No offset if properly
complex response tune
tuned
Conclusion

You have been introduced to the:

01 Concept of feedback control

P, I, D controller modes
02 - ON-OFF as a special case of P-controller

03 Advantages and disadvantages

04 Motivation for additional modes