See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/3723332

P-I and I-P controllers in a closed loop for DC motor drives

Conference Paper · September 1997

DOI: 10.1109/PCCON.1997.638255 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

28 1,177

4 authors, including:

Ahmed Alaa Mahfouz

Qassim University
43 PUBLICATIONS   260 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Shunt Active Power Filter (SAPF) View project

Optimizing the Performance of a Dual-Controlled Wind-Driven Induction Generator Using Cycloconverter in the Stator and Varying Resistor in the Rotor View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed Alaa Mahfouz on 24 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 -
P - I and I P Controllers In A Closed Loop
For DC Motor Drives

F. I. Ahmed A. M. El-Tobshy
Professor of Power Electronics Professor of Power Electronics, Faculty of
Faculty of Engineering, and Vice-president of Engineering, Cairo University
Cairo University, Cairo, EGYPT Cairo, EGYPT

A. A. Mahfouz M. M. S . Ibrahim
Assistant Professor of Power Eiectronics Ph.D. Candidate of Power Electronics
Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Engineering
Cairo University Cairo University
Cairo, EGYPT Cairo, EGYPT
Fax: +202-5723486, Phone: +202-5613 156 Fax: +202-3608453, Phone: +202-3483986
E-mail: elkousy @ Cairo. eun.eg

Abstract-The traditional Proportional-Integral ( P I ) - Takahashi, Harashima and Kondo [6] suggested a new
controller, which has been widely used for the speed control of method of control called integral-proportional ( I - P ) as a
dc motor drives, has been compared with the relatively new trial to solve the main problems of ( P - I ) controllers. This
Integral-Proportional ( I - P ) controller which first discussed paper discusses the two controllers theoretically and
in the year of 1978. This paper presents some improvements in
experimentally as applied in speed control of dc motor of
this important field of industries. Theoretical studies for ( P- 0.5 kW, and it finds some improvements in this field.
-
I ) and ( I P ) controllers in the S-domain are presented, and
the transfer functions for both are derived. Simulation results Experimental work has been carried out to verify the
due to step response in S-domain and Z-domain are presented theoretical results.
for both controllers. Experimental studies are discussed in
detail. The performance of the two controllers due to step 11. MATHEMATICAL
MODELS
input reference and their behavior to sudden change in
reference speed and sudden change in load are discussed. The The ( P - I ) controller has a proportional as well as an
simulation and the experimental results indicate the integral term in the forward path, the block diagram with a
- -
superiority of ( I P ) controller over ( P I ) controller.
( P - I ) controller for a dc motor drive is shown in Fig. 1.
I. INTRODUCTION The integral controller has the property of making the
steady-state error zero for a step change, although a ( P - I )
A variety of engineering applications, such as: material controller makes the steady-state error zero, it may take a
conveyors, paper mills, transportation systems etc., require considerable amount of time to accomplish this. Fig. 2
very accurate speed tracking, fast response and high shows ( I - P ) controller along with a dc motor drive, where
precision. For many years, dc motor drives have been the proportional term is moved to the feedback path and it
widely used in such applications, and in spite of the fact acts like a feedback compensation. The analysis in S-
domain is discussed in this section to study the transient
that ac motors are rugged, cheaper and lighter, dc motor
and the steady-state behavior for both controllers.
controlled by a thyristor converter is still a very popular
choice in particular applications. In spite of the fuzzy logic
is getting emphasis in process control applications [ 11, [2],
the conventional controllers [3] - [5] are an option in
applications where low cost is the primary concern. The
proportional-integra1 ( P - I ) is one of the conventional
controllers and it has been widely used for the speed +
control of dc motor drives. The major features of the ( P - I)
controller are its ability to maintain a zero steady-state error
to a step change in reference and its simple and straight-
forward microprocessor implementation. On the other hand
( P - I ) controller has some disadvantuges: the undesirable
speed overshoot, the sluggish response due to sudden
change in load torque and the sensitivity to controller gains
K, and K,.
Fig. I . Block diagram with P - 1 controller

0-7803-3823-5/97/$10.000 1997 IEEE 613 PCC-Nagaoka '97

 From (1) and (3), (P - I ) and ( I - P ) controllers have the
same characteristic equations, and it can be seen that the
zerb introduced by the (P - I ) controller is absent in the
case of the ( I - P ) controller. Therefore the overshoot in
the speed, for a step change in the input reference R (S), is
expected to be smaller for the ( I - P ) control. Equations
(2) and (4) are exactly the same, therefore, the response to a
load disturbance is expected to be very similar for both ( P -
I ) and ( I - P ) controllers.

111. SIMULATION
RESULTS
Fig. 2. Block diagram with I - P controller

Simulation studies are made due to step input reference

A. P - I Controller
The closed loop transfer function between the output
C(S) and the input R(S) is given in (1).
in the S-domain and Z-domain. Appendix I shows the
parameters of the motor used for the simulation studies.
Fig. 3 shows ( P - I ) and ( I - P ) controllers due to step
input reference at 5 < 1: the overshoot for ( P - I ) controller
is equal to 34.8%, while for ( I - P ) controller is 27.2%.
The settling time for ( P - I ) is 0.375 s, while for ( I - P) is
0.455 s. It is clear that ( I - P ) has longer delay time. Table
I summerizes the results for the two controllers in digital

Where Ki and K, are the integral and the proportinnal

gains of ( P - I ) or ( I - P ) controller, T, is the mechanical
time constant of motor, and K, is the motor gain constant. A+ P-I I
The transfer function between the output C(S) and the
load torque disturbance TL(S) is given in (2).

0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Time(s)
B. I - P Controller
Fig. 3. P - I and I - P controllers step response
( < I , K p = 1.5, KI = 30.
The closed loop transfer function between the output
C (S) and the input R (S) is given in (3). TABLEI
PERCENTAGE OVERSHOOT AND SETTLING TIMEUSING
DIFFERENT
GAINFACTORS

,
Gain
..... .. ......... ....................................................% Overshoot Settling time (s) ......
.................................................................................................................
.
Ks Kn P-I I-P P-I I-P
1 2.36 20.45 4.55 0.36 0.5
0.5 3 3.4 0 0.36 0.6 1
0.3 3.5 0 0 0.18 1.07
The transfer function between the output C(S) and the 5 3 40.3 26.3 0.13 0.13
torque disturbance T L (S) is given in (4). 1.5 3 48 5.77 0.25 0.25
K,a 2.04 0 0 0.035 0.03

'K, = 0.714 for ( P - I ) and 2.5 for ( I - P ), these are optimal values,
which depend on the closed loop transfer functions [8].

614
 1V. EXPERIMENTAL
WORK start J

A. System Description
Firing angle (a)= 52 O
Average armature voltage = 60 V
For the experimental work a closed-loop system is built
which consists of : 0.5 kW dc motor-generator separately
excited, the parameters of the motor are in AppendixI, 1
1. Choose controller type.
tacho-generator 0.06 Vlrlmin as a feedback voltage, a
powerful data acquisition instrument 12 bit resolution, and
a personal computer AT 80286. A fully-controlled
thyristors bridge is also built where the firing angle is
+
2. Select K, and K,.

I . Using A B , read the error

and the reference values.
controlled using Relative Firing Angle Method, with this 2. Calculate the output speed in volts,
method the firing angle is controlled by lenghtening or and the integral part of the controllers,.
shortening the interval between two successive thyristors 3 . Calculate the instantaneous
triggerings [7]. Fig. 4 shows the schematic diagram of and the average current using motor

%
equations.
experimental set up.

B. Program and Flowchart t

1. Calculate the controllers
outputs.
The main program is written in C language and is 2. Using curve fitting, get cos a
linked with the assembly program which controls the firing and from look-up table find a
angle a . The program can be described using the following in degree.
steps: 3 . Using the assembly program
read the new value of a.

1. P - I or I - P controller is selected using a menu, then I

the coefficients K, and Ki are entered via the
keyboard.

2. The program starts to read using the analog to

digital card, the reference and the error values.

3. Depending on the controller type, the output voltage

from controller is calculated.
v
Save the current screen to a data file.
4. Cos c1 is calculated using an interpolating,
polynomial, and from the look-up table the angle c1
is known and using a programmable peripheral Fig. 5. Main flowchart
interface, the assembly program reads the value.

Fig. 5 shows the main flowchart of the program.

Limitation of current using dc motor

equations

AD-ADDA- 12 \
1
Card. ontroller Program elative Firing Scheme
12-Bit D/A and using “C”- Language using Assembly
AID Language
angle
t
Tachometer
feedback
voltage

Fig. 4.Schematic diagram of experimental set up.

615
C. Experimental Results

Theoretical studies as a primarily step are made to choose

the suitable coefficients K, and K, [8]. The sampling rate T
affects the time response because it depends upon the
execution time of program and the speed of computer used.
Using the same conditions for both controllers: e.g. , gain 83I I
3

coefficients, reference voltage and required output speed,

the performance of both controllers are studied. Fig. 6 and
Fig. 7 show the speed time response for ( P - I ) and ( I - P )
controllers due to step response, Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 show the
instantaneous current time response of both controllers ( P -
I) and (I - P). Table I1 summerizes the differences
between the two controllers at required speed equal 600.79
dmin, where (I - P ) controller has smaller overshoot and a
very fast response and thus the starting current is limited.
The performance of sudden change in reference speed and Fig. 7. I - P Speed response
K, = 3 , K, = 5
sudden change in load are tested experimentally for both
controllers. Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 show the instantaneous
current time response due to sudden change in reference
speed, ( P - I ) controller has a fast response and a large
overshoot in current occurs. Fig. 12 and Fig. 13 show the
speed response due to sudden change in load, for ( P - I )
controller, the time to reach the steady state condition is
8.9 s and the settling time T, is 7.4 s [9], while for ( I - P )
5
Y
controller the time to reach the steady-state condition is 0.4
5.36 s and the settling time T, is 4.63 s. 0.2

TABLEI1
COMPARISON BETWEENP - I A N D 1 - P CONTROLLERS DUE
Time ( S )
TO STEP RESPONSE

.......Performance characteristics
.......................................................................................... ..., , ....... ..................... P -.........
I ,,,, ..,I,...........
,,,,,,
- P ...........,.
Starting current at rated voltage 13OV 1.2 A 0.8 A
Fig. 8. P - I Instanteneous current response.
Steady-state speed 488.33 r/inin 558.33 r/min
K,= 3 , K, = 5
Percent maximum overshoot 34. I 3 21.79
Settling time 1 1.23 s 0.729 s

Time (S)
Time (St

Fig. 6 P - I Speed response. Fig. 9. I - P Instanteneous current response

K,= 3 , K , = 5 K, = 3 , K, = 5

616
 Fig. 10. P - I Instanteneous current response
due to sudden change in reference speed.
K, = 3 , K, = 1.5 Fig. 13. I - P Speed response
due to sudden change in load
Kp = 3.5 , K, = 0.3

1.8 T
1.6
1.4 V. CONCLUSIONS
3 1.2
- 1
E 0.8
The project is intended to demonstrate ,the successful
6 0.6 application of ( I - P ) controller to a phase-controlled
converter dc separately excited motor-generator system. ( I -
P ) controller's performance was compared with that of
conventional ( P - I ) system. ( I - P ) controllers show some
important advantages: the overshoot in speed is limited, thus
the starting current overshoot is reduced. Also, using the
Time (S) suitable coefficient gains, ( I - P ) controllers offer a good
load recovery characteristics. Analysis in S-domain and Z-
Fig. 1 1. I - P Instanteneous current response domain shows the advantages of ( I - P ) controller. Thus ( I -
due to sudden change in reference speed. P ) can be implemented using analog components. Analog
K, = 3 , Ki = 1.5 ciruits are still required where: the low cost is required, the
experience for high technology is not necessary, or where the
replacement for modern control is difficult. Moreover, the
simulation and experimental studies clearly indicate the
superior performance of ( I - P ) controller, becauseit is
inherently adaptive in nature. From the above derivation ( I -
P ) controllers can replace ( P - I ) for the speed control of dc
motor drives.

VI. FUTURERECOMMENDATIONS

0 g $ : g w g p The wide advances of computers and software languages

m
N a
O Q
0 q
0 E L 8 will make the controllers' algorithm much easier to
a - - - "
m - - N N % G implement, the sampling timt: and the execution time can be
"e6) reduced. Using ( I - P ) controller as a current feedback loop
may give good controlling results. The experimental set up
can be used to test the ( I - P ) self-tuning adaptive
Fig. 12. P - I Speed response
due to sudden change in load. controller and the ( I - P ) adaptive variable gain controller.
K, = 3.5 , K, = 0.3 Also ( I - P ) impulse response can be tested experimentally.
To prove the simplicity of ( I - P ) controller, a
comparatively study is already started between ( I - P ) and
fuzzy controller.

617
 VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the staff of
Power Electronics Laboratory, Faculty of Engineering,
Cairo University, Egypt, for their encouragement and
assistance in the laboratory work.
[2] N. Manaresi, R. Rovatti, E. Franchi, R. Guerrieri, and G. Baccarani,
"Automatic synthesis of analog fuzzy controllers: a hardware and
software approach," IEEE Truns. Industrial Electrorzics. vol. IE-43,
no. I , February 1996, pp. 217-225.
[31 R. Moffat, Paresh C. Sen, R. Younker, and Mohamed M. Bayoumi,
"Digital phase-locked loop for induction motor speed control,"
IEEE Trans. Industry Applicutions. vol. IA- 15, no. 2, MarcMApril
1979, pp. 176-182.

[4] KiyosHi OHishi, Masato Nakao, Kouhei Ohnishi, and Kunio

VIII. APPENDIXI Miyachi, "Microprocessor-controlled dc motor for load-insensitive
position servo system," IEEE Truns. Industrial Electronics, vol. IE-
34, no. I , February 1987, pp. 44-49
Motor's Parameters
[5] M. OKyay Kaynak, Fumio Harashima and Seiji Kondo,
The motor used in this experiment is dc separately "Microprocessor controlled position servo system with a sliding
excited, rating 0.5 kW at rated voltage 220 V, Bnd the mode," in Proceedings of the 1982 Microelectronics in Power
Electronics und Electric Drives Conference, ETZ, Darmstadt, West
motor's parameters are as follows: Germany, pp. 273-279.

Armature resistance = 7.72 R [6] 0. Kaynak. A. D. Abbaszadeh and S. Nazlibilek,"Digital speed

Armature inductance
Back e.m.f constant
Mechanical inertia
Friction coefficient
Rated armature current
Speed
= 0.16273 H control system with integral-proportional control," IFAC Conrrol in
Power Electronics and Elecrrical Drives, Lausanne, Switzerland,
= 1.25 Vlradls 1983, pp. 501-506.
= 0.0236 Kg ' mz
= 0.003 N ' m/rad/s [7] Guy Olivier, Victor R. Stefanovic, and Georges-Emile April,
= 2.7 A "Microprocessor controller for thyristor converter with an improved
power factor, '' IEEE Trans. Industrial Electronics und Confro1
= 1500dmin Instrurnentution, vol IECI-28, no. 3, August 1981, pp. 188.194.

[8] Fang L. Luo and Roland J. Hill, "Fast response and optimum
IX. REFERENCES regulation in digitally controlled thyristor converters," IEEE Truns
Indusrrv
. Applicafions,
.. vol. IA-22, no. 1, January/ February 1986,
pp. 10-17.
[l] Gilbert0 C. D. Sousa, and Birnal K. Bose, "A fuzzy set theory based
control of a phase-controlled converter dc machine drive," IEEE
[9] Benjamin C. Kuo, Aurornutic Control Systenzs, New Delhi:
Truns. Industrj Applicafions, vol. U-30, no. 1, January/February
Prentice- Hall, 1983, p. 327.
1994, pp. 34-43.

618

View publication stats