A Dynamical Discontinuous Control Approach for
Inverse Response Chemical Processes
Estefanía Asimbaya1, Henry Cabrera1, Oscar Camacho1,2 Danilo Chávez1, Paulo Leica1
1 Departamento de Automatización y Control Industrial, Escuela Politécnica Nacional, Quito — ECUADOR
2Escuela de Ingeniería Eléctrica Universidad de los Andes Núcleo La Hechicera, Mérida, 5101 VENEZUELA
{estefania.asimbaya, henry.cabrera, oscar.camacho,danilo.chavez,paulo.leica} @epn.edu.ee
Abstract—In this work it is proposed a dynamical control
scheme combining concepts of Linoya’s compensator and sliding
mode control for inverse response process. This paper shows the
design of dynamical controller which is used for a linear system
and a nonlinear process that is found in a Continuous Stirred
Tank Reactor (CSTR) by simulations. The performance of the
proposed approach is compared against a PID controller and
Linoya’s compensator with PID.
Index Terms—Dynamical Controller, Linoya’s Compensator,
Sliding Mode Control
I. I n t r o d u c t io n
A process with inverse response occurs when the direction
of response is opposed at the final steady state value. In
some chemical processes, it appears the inverse response
effect, such as reactors drums, boilers, reboilers, etc [1]. The
presence of an inverse response causes limitations in the gain
and a tight control is required at low and high frequencies,
therefore the bandwidth is limited [2].
In [3] the authors show a way to design a Sliding Mode
Control (SMC) for processes with inverse response. In that
paper, the controller was designed from a First Order Plus
Dead Time (FOPDT). The controller was applied to difference
inverse response processes with good performance.
In recent years, a special attention has been taken to the
Dynamical Sliding Mode Control (DSMC), with different
techniques like: adding a compensator (extra dynamics) [4],
using a low pass integrators [5], and including functions
that reduce chattering as the hyperbolic function within the
discontinuous function [6]; all of these controllers operate in
linear functions. Other way to design the DSMC is proposed
in [7]that combined the backstepping technique and SMC for
trajectory tracking of underactuated unmanned underwater
vehicles.
In order to work with the SMC, it is necessary an
approximation of model process due to this is used the
estimation proposed by Alfaro [8]; this approach method can
be used in nonlinear processes and higher order systems with
inverse response behavior. The combination of Linoya’s ideas
and the Sliding Mode Control result in a Dynamic Sliding
2017 IEEE 3rd Colombian Conference on Automatic Control (CCAC)
978-l-5386-0398-7/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE
Mode Control. This proposed new control technique reduces
the presence of the chattering in the final control element.
The paper is organized as follows: section II makes a brief
description about the method to obtain a transfer function with
inverse response, the IMC structure and the SMC, section
HI explains the development of DSMC controller, section
IV shows the simulations for linear and nonlinear system
with inverse response, section V compares the performance
of controllers to finally presents conclusions.
II. B a s ic C o n c e p t s
A. Inverse Response System Identification
As it is known, for control purpose design it is better
to have simple models of systems, for this reason in this
paper the general model for systems with inverse response is
represented by a second order transfer function with right-half-
plane (RHP) zero (1), being A'=gain, r]=zero time constant,
Ti=principal time constant, T2=secondary time constant.
G(a) (TlSK +(—r¡s + 1)
l)(T2S + l) ( 1)
This section describes all algorithms proposed by [8], The
approximation is made from the reaction curve, where
t% represents time when the system output reaches a
certain percentage (y%). Hence, three points the curve are
selected: (¿47%! 2/47%)» (¿90%»2/90%) and {tP,yP%), being
fp=time when it occurs peak inverse and yp%= magnitude
of inverse peak in percentage. All these variables are
necessary to build the transfer function because these points
have main characteristics of inverse response curve. The
main points to make the approximation are shown in Fig.l [8],
The transfer function is obtained by next equations:
Gain:
K = ^_
Ar ( 2)
The term A y is defined as the system ouput variation (y(t))
and A r as the system input variation (r(t)).
The minimum relative error is between the points
(¿47%! 2/47%) and (t90%,y90%), this means insensibility to
errors in the step response of the system [8]. The slow time
 Fig. 1: Inverse Response System Identification curve. [8]

constant approximation is represented by T\, and the zero time Fig. 2: Linoya’s compensator and its modified scheme [10]
constant by 77.
Ti = 0.6(tgo% —£47%) (3) C. Sliding Mode Control Methodology
The SMC is named this way because the trajectory of the
rj - 1- yP% A
tP% / I (4) system is limited by a specific space, this is called sliding
surface. The choice of the surface is very important because
The last term T2 depends on the relations given by T2/X1 and the closed-loop dynamics of the system depends of the sliding
77/ti, and the variation of relative normalized time (t' = t/T{), surface.This control method is an effective tool when it is
as demonstrated in [8]. Thus, it has the following expression necessary to control the processes exposed to disturbances
for T2. and in which the exact model system is not available.
/ ¿47% —n \ y This control technique is formed by two parts: the first one
V m ) 1 (5)
is the slidding mode control law which is responsible to main­
Where m y n are constants for the proposed identification tain the system dynamic on the sliding surface (continuous
algorithm, the values are shown in [8]. function), uc(t); the second one is the reaching mode control
law which permits to reach the desired surface as the state
The relation between fast and slow time constants (T2/X1) trajectories change (discontinuous function), ur(t) [11].
is limited by values between [0.1, 0.9] due to inverse response è(t)
exists, and the relation between the zero time constant and the
slow time constant (77/Ti) is limited by values between [0.1,4].

B. Linoya’s Compensator
The Internal Model Control (IMC) is used for the control
of the systems with difficult dynamic. There are some
applications for this kind of controller as the Smith Predictor
and the Linoya’s compensator [9]. The disadvantage of using
these controllers is that the controller performance depends of
the accuracy of the process model. The Linoya’s compensator
uses a configuration based on Smith Predictor Fig. 2 to
reduce the effects of a non-minimum phase system (inverse Fig. 3: SMC functioning scheme [11]
response),it introduces a transfer function (G'(s)) which
improves the performance of process.
u(t) = uc(t) + ur(t) (6)
Where: R(s)= reference or set-point, Y (s)= system output, 1) Continuous function- Sliding mode: In this part of the
D(s)= disturbances, G(s)= process, G'(s)= new transfer control
function introduced, Gc(s)= controller, E(s)= error, F*(s)= this onelaw, will
it is necessary to choose a sliding surface because
define the limits in which the process must stay.
new system output in modified scheme. The principal sliding surfaces, S(t), are the derivative surface
The Linoya’s compensator makes the controller observes and the integral surface. In this work, it is used an integral
surface acting on the tracking error (7) [12].
the process like a system without inverse response, allowing Integral Surface:
a better control; this is because the gain is not restricted and
the controller shows a better performance when it is compared
with conventional closed loop scheme [9].
Where e(i) is the difference between the reference value, r(f), G'(s) {TlS + Kl){T2s \s
+ l) (14)
and the output measurement, y(t). a is a tuning parameter
that is defined by the surface and the system, n is the system The A value is given in accordance with the development of
order [11]. the scheme depicted in Fig. 2.
In order to ensure the error and its variation are always equal G*{s) = G{s) + G'{s) (15)
to zero (e(f) = 0 and e(f) = 0),it is necessary the following G*(s) = K (-r]S + l) KXs
condition, which is called sliding condition: (Tis + l)(T2s + 1) + (Tis + 1)(T2s + 1) (16)
dS{t) 0 A rj)s + 1]
dt ( 8) G*(s) = (TK[{is + 1)(T 2 s + 1)
(17)
The continuous part is obtained by combining the process Using (17), three conditions are obtained three conditions for
model and sliding condition. A value. If A < r], the zero moves at right of the its initial
2) Discontinuous Junction-Reaching Mode: The sliding position; if A = rj, positive zero is cancelled; If A > r), the
mode emerges from the effects of the relay systems with their zero is on half left plane ” s”. The third condition is used for
switching characteristic at a high frequency (i.e. chattering); controller design due to eliminates the inverse response from
the control function is defined as (9). the feedback loop, but while the A is bigger, it is produced
r(f) = K]jsignS{t) (9) aaccording
slower control loop [9]. It is proposed a initial A value
to several tests minimizing the Integral Squared
The aggressiveness to reach the sliding surface depends on Error (ISE). It is expresed by (18).
the control gain, but this action increases the chattering. The A = 2rj
expression (9) arises from Lyapunov function when the system (18)
has reached to surface S(t) in a finite time smaller. Replacing (18) in (17), the expression (19) is obtained.
III. C o n t r o l l e r D e v e l o p m e n t G*(s) = ___ K (vs + 1)___ (19)
The general system model used in this work is represented {> (TiS + 1)(T2s + 1)
by (1). In classical feedback, the system output, which is The new transfer function observed by controller is:
seen by controller, contains a Right-Half-Plane zero (10), that
makes the controller takes wrong initial corrective actions. y*(s) = (TisK{rjs + 1)
+ 1)(T2s + 1)-Ms) ( 20)

Y(s) = (TlSK +( l)(T2s7]S + 1) M s )

+ l) ( 10)
From this transfer function, the controller design is started.
Knowing that F*(s) depends on G (s), and this one depends
The dynamic controller in this work stems from the existing of the modeling errors, it is proposed to use sliding mode
zero in the system model approximation and the SMC, but if control (SMC) due to its performance does not depend on
only the DSMC is in a feedback loop with the inverse response these errors. The SMC is designed from Y*(s) (n = 2) and
system, the control is limited. The Linoya’s compensator Fig. it’s chosen an integral sliding surface (7), resulting in a surface
2 gets a new zero ubication in the plane ”s”. It can do that the of the PID form (21).
controller observes the output without the positive zero. For
this reason, the scheme DSMC is presented as a combination S(t) = 2ae(t) + a 2 f e(t)dt + de(t) dt (21)
Jo
of the Linoya’s compensator with the SMC for an inverse If the error is defined as the difference between the reference
response system.
The function that reduces the positive zero effects is called itandhasthethenew output (22), and using the sliding condition (8),
expression
G'(s) and it is designed by separating the process model
in two parts (11). The first one contains the zero that is on e(t) = r(t) - y*(t) ( 22)
the right side of the plane ”s” and the second one,G0(s),
contains the gain and poles of the model (12). The last one dS(t) _ d?e(t) , 2ad e ^ + = Q (23)
is going to be part of the designed transfer function. dt dt2 dt
Derivating (22):
G(s) = G0(s)(l —r}s) (ID de(t) dr(t) dy*(t) (24)
K
G0(s) = (TlS + l)(T2s + l) dt dt dt
( 12)
It is assumed that steady state reference changes do not exist:
The transfer function G'(s) is defined in (13), where A dr{t) = 0 (25)
represent a parameter that makes that controller observes a dt
system without inverse response. Replacing equations (24) and (25), in (21), it results:
G'(s) = G0(s)Xs (13) <*V(t) = _ 2ads?M + a M t) (26)
dt2 dt
The parameter a eliminates dy*(t)/dt and its value depends Replacing (35) in (29) is obtained a condition describes as:
on the model studied, in general: dS(t) = K yK Dsign(S(t))
y*(s)(Tis + 1)(T2s + 1) = K(T]S + 1)U(s) (27) dt T±T2 1
y * (s )(T !T 2s 2 + (T x + T 2) s + 1) = K r)sU (s) + K U ( s )
To demonstrate the system stability (40) is introduced in (38)
(28) and it is obtained:
Kr]K£)S{t)sign{S{t)) (41)
, /rr , T )dy* , TS„dUtf) , TS„.U\ T \T 2
T lT lS f i - + i-Tl + T l)l t +V W = K ’I - S - + K<‘® Kr]KD |5 (i)|< 0
(29) (42)
Solving it: T\T2
Finally, the condition (42) is necesary to ensure the stability
Ti T2 ( - 2 dt+ a 2e(t)^ + (Tx + T2) ^ dt^ + y*(t) K yK o > 0 (43)
T1T2
= K r , ^ + Ku(t)
(30) IV. S im u l a t io n s
In this section, the performance of DSMC is compared with
dy*(t) (Ti + T2—2aT2Ti) + a 2T2Tie(t) + y*(t) = a classical PDD controller and Linoya’s compensator (it has a
dt (31) PID controller in its scheme).

An a equal to equation (32) is chosen, then dy*(t)/dt = 0. A. Linear System

It consists in a system with inverse response used to
a = T1+ T2
2T2T x (32) develop the controller from the transfer function [9].
Replacing 32 in 31: 2(1 - 4s)
Y(a) (2s + l)(5s + l) U(s) (44)
Ti+ T 2\ T2Tie(i) + y*(i) = Kr)d ^ l + Ku{t) (33) For this system, three controllers are designed: PID con­
2T2Ti dt troller, DSMC and Linoya’s compensator. The PID controller
u(t) becomes uc(t) because this part of controller uses the parameters are obtained through Dahlin tuning rules [13];
system and sliding condition. the DSMC is tuned taking in consideration ISE results, and
duc(t) (Ti + T2)2-e(f)
, . + y*(t) uc(t) finally Linoya’s compensator uses as part of its scheme the
dt AKr]T2Ti ATr? (34) PID controller before mentioned. All parameters are shown in
Table I.
The discontinuous part is given by (9), so the dynamic Controller PID DSMC Linoya
controller has the form: Parameter Kp Ti t d kd a A
du(t) _ (T i+ T 2) \ (t) + y ^ _ u M + K B tig n { m Linear 0.29 5.6 2.41 1.5 0.35 8
dt AKr]T2Ti ' Krj TABLE I: Controller Parameters
(35)
Finally, the control law is given by: The PID controller, DSMC, and Linoya’s compensator con­
(Ti + T2f y*{t) uc(t) trollers are tested before setpoint changes, disturbances and
“ (*) = Jf 0 AKrjT2Ti e(i)+ Krj r] -Jo/ K Dsign{s(t)) noise.
(36) Comparing the applied controllers to the system, it can be
observed how the DSMC has the best performance, in a such
A. Stability analysis way, the reverse peak decreases for the reference changes. It is
It is from Lyapunov’s function described in (37) and stabil­ the
or
fastest to recover its reference value when setpoint changes
when there are disturbances; and its performance does not
ity condition described in (38) [12]. decrease with noise presence like the other controllers.
no = ® > o (37)
B. NonLinear System
^ ( ‘) =S(t)^ ) <0 (38) The Van de Vusse reaction (inverse response) produced in
dt dt a CSTR is commonly seen in chemical processes, as shown
V(t) is a differentiable function and dS(t)/dt is defined from [14]:
(23) as:
>B ¿2, c
dS(t) = 2ady*(t) a 2e(t) d?y*(t) (39) fea. D (45)
dt a dt dt 2 A
 1. 2 -
1- a percentage where the steady stable conditions are yo% =
70% y u0 = 60%.
y(*)% = ( d l n X & M ) (48)
, .634.17. , , (49)
time [sec] F (t) = ( 100 M t)%
The process approach the nonlinear plant to a second-order
system with inverse response is based on the method described
in section II-A.
Process reaction curve: At a signal u(t) from 60% to 70%
and 60% to 50%, the open loop response of the nonlinear sys­
tems presents the following parameters: K i =0.32, K 2 =0.428
, *90=1-891 seg, ¿47=0.95 seg, Ti=0.5646, 6=0.8,a=0.9586.
The transfer function for a positive step change is the following
expression:
0.32(—0.3692s + i) (50)
^ ~~ (0.54s+ l)(0.4363s + l)
The transfer function for a negative step change:
0.428(—0.3692s + 1) (51)
^ ~~ (0.54s + l)(0.4363s + l)
It can be obtained the average of the transfer function:

'Hi -DSMC
PID+LUNTOYA
I P 1D
250
time [seg]
Fig. 5: Noise presence in linear system

The equations that describes a reaction mass balance are:

= -*icu(t) - hcA\t) + ^(cAf(t) - cA(t))

(46)
Fig. 6: Reaction curves for linear and nonlinear system
dC^ = h C A(t) - k2CB(t) - ^ (C B(t)) (47) 0.374( 0.3692s + i)
^ ~~ (0.54s + l)(0.4363s + l) (52)
Where F represents the input feed of product A\ V is the The Table II contains the tuning parameters of the three
reactor volume which is constant; k\, k2, k% are the reaction controllers of nonlinear system. In this case, the controllers
rates for the three reactions; CA(t) and CB(t) are the reactant
concentrations present in the reactor, so the controlled variable Controller PID DSMC Linoya
is CB(t), F is manipulated variable of the process, CAf(t) Parameter K p Tt t d k d a A
is the initial concentration of A, this one is considered as Linear 1.98 0.66 0.26 72.80 2.07 0.7384
disturbance. TABLE II: Controller Parameters
The values for the variables are V=700 liters, CAf(t) =
10mol.l-1, ki = 5/6 m in-1, k2 = 5/3 m in-1, k% = 1/6 have a good performance but the DSMC is the fastest to
l.mol-1 .min-1. At the beginning, steady-state conditions are get reference value for each case and it is evident how the
(7^0=2.9175 mol.I-1 y CBo=1.1 mol.l-1 and the maximum use of Linoya’s compensator improves the performance of
flow of the valve used in the process is 634.17 mold-1.The controllers.
valve and transmitter equations are expressed in (48) and In both cases when the noise is applied at the systems
(49) respectively. The signals u and y will be expressed as with the PID controller or Linoya’s compensator are produced
 Type Controller Setpoint Disturbances Noise
PID 18.92 36.52 18.94
PID+Linoya 25.13 65.92 25.14
DSMC 17.69 22.36 17.71
TABLE IV: ISE comparison for nonlinear system

observed that the dynamical sliding mode control has a better

performance than other controllers with lower ISE value.
V I. C o n c l u s io n s
In this paper, it is shown a dynamic sliding mode control in
processes with inverse response. In the examples presented,
the results of the controller, in presence of different type
of disturbances, have a better ISE performance; this is in
comparison to the classical schemes, and in the controller
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
time [min]
Fig. 7: Set-Point changes in nonlinear system output the chattering is reduced.
78r DSMC reduces the effects of the inverse response due to
76 the combination of Linoya’s compensator and Sliding Mode
T Control.
[p -------DSMC The next step will be get equations for tuning K D and a
-------PID parameters.
-------Reference
VII. A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s
Oscar Camacho thanks PROMETEO project of
50 60 70
time [min]
SENESCYT, Republic of Ecuador for its support in the
realization of this work. Authors thank to PU-15-17 Project
of Escuela Politecnica Nacional for its sponsorship for the
realization of this work.
References
[1] O. Camacho, “Sliding mode control in process industry,” Process
time [min] Control and Optimization, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 351-359, 2005.
[2] T. E. Skogestad and P. I„ Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis and
Fig. 8: Noise in nonlinear system Design. Wiley, 2001.
[3] R. Rojas, W. Garcia-Gabin, and O. Camacho, “On sliding-mode control
for inverse response processes,” I FAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 38,
no. 1, p. 525530, 2005.
peaks in the control signal, which are observed in green line [4] A. Koshkouei, K. Burnham, and A. Zinober, “Dynamic sliding mode
in Fig.5 and Fig. 8 control design,” IEE Proceedings - Control Theory and Applications,
vol. 152, no. 4, p. 392396, Jan 2005.
[5] J.-L. Chang, “Dynamic sliding mode controller design for reducing
V. R e s u l t s chattering,” Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, vol. 37, no. 1,
p. 7178, 2012.
To evaluate the results of the simulations, the DSMC is [6] P. Lesniewski and A. Bartoszewicz, “Hyperbolic tangent based switching
compared with both PID controller and Linoyas compensator, reaching law for discrete time sliding mode control of dynamical
systems,” 2015 International Workshop on Recent Advances in Sliding
the last one uses a PID controller in its scheme. The com­ Modes (RASM), 2015.
parisons were made in the following cases: set point changes [7] J. Xu, M. Wang, and L. Qiao, “Dynamical sliding mode control for
(linear system= 0% to 20% and 20% to 100%, and nonlinear the trajectory tracking of underactuated unmanned underwater vehicles,”
Ocean Engineering, vol. 105, p. 5463, 2015.
system = 70% to 73% and 73% to 76%), disturbances (linear [8] P. Balaguer, V. Alfaro, and O. Arrieta, “Second order inverse response
system= ± 10% and nonlinear system= ± 10% of C ^ (t)) and process identification from transient step response,” ISA Transactions,
noise (linear system=5% and nonlinear system= 5%). vol. 50, no. 2, p. 231238, 2011.
[9] B. Ogunnaike and W. H. Ray, Process dynamics, modeling and control.
Furthermore, to compare the controllers the average value Oxford University Press, 1995.
of the performance index ISE. This value was obtained in [10] K. Linoya and R. Alpeter, “Inverse response in process control,” Ind.
the simulations and are presented in Table III and Table IV. Eng. Chem, vol. 54, p. 3949, 1962.
[11] O. Camacho and C. A. Smith, “Sliding mode control: an approach to
Type Controller Setpoint Disturbances Noise regulate nonlinear chemical processes,” ISA Transactions, vol. 39, no. 2,
PID 4.922 p. 205218, 2000.
0.176 4.919 [12] J.-J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied nonlinear control. Pearson Education
PID+Linoya 6.452 0.229 6.45 Taiwan, 2005.
DSMC 4.163 0.174 4.609 [13] C. A. Smith and A. B. Corripio, Control automatico de procesos: teoria
TABLE HI: ISE comparison for linear system y practica. Limusa, 2001.
[14] V. Alfaro, P. Balaguer, and O. Arrieta, “Robustness considerations on
pid tuning for regulatory control of inverse response processes,” I FAC
In the comparison of ISE results, in the three tests it can be Conference on Advances in PID Control, vol. 45, no. 3, p. 193198, 2012.