Y K mGcGvG p
=
Ysp 1 + GcGvG p Gm
For simplicity, let G Gv G pGm and assume that Gm = Km. Then Eq. 12-1
reduces to
Y GcG
= (12-2)
Ysp 1 + GcG
Rearranging and solving for Gc gives an expression for the feedback controller:
1 Y / Ysp
Gc = (12-3a)
G 1 Y / Ysp
Equation 12-3a cannot be used for controller design because the closed-loop
transfer function Y/Ysp is not known a priori.
Also, it is useful to distinguish between the actual process G and the model, G%
, that provides an approximation of the process behavior.
A practical design equation can be derived by replacing the unknown G by G% ,
and Y/Ysp by a desired closed-loop transfer function, (Y/Ysp)d:
Y 1
= (12-4)
Ysp d c s + 1 8
The model has a settling time of ~ 4 c
Because the steady-state gain is one, no offset occurs for set-point
changes.
By substituting (12-4) into (12-3b) and solving for Gc, the controller design
equation becomes:
1 1
Gc = (12-5)
G% c s
The 1/ c s term provides integral control action and thus eliminates offset.
Design parameter c provides a convenient controller tuning parameter that
can be used to make the controller more aggressive (small c ) or less
aggressive (large c ).
9
If the process transfer function contains a known time delay , a reasonable
choice for the desired closed-loop transfer function is:
Y e s
= (12-6)
Ysp d c s + 1
1 e s
Gc = (12-7)
G% c s + 1 es
( )
1 Y / Ysp d
Gc = (12-3b)
G% 1 Y / Ysp
( )
d
10
Although this controller is not in a standard PID form, it is physically
realizable.
Next, we show that the design equation in Eq. 12-7 can be used to derive PID
controllers for simple process models.
The following derivation is based on approximating the time-delay term in the
denominator of (12-7) with a truncated Taylor series expansion:
e s 1 s (12-8)
Substituting (12-8) into the denominator of Eq. 12-7 and rearranging gives
1 e s
Gc = s
(12-9)
G% ( c + ) S
11
First-Order-plus-Time-Delay (FOPTD) Model
Consider the standard FOPTD model,
s
Ke
G% ( s ) = (12-10)
s + 1
Substituting Eq. 12-10 into Eq. 12-9 and rearranging gives a PI controller,
with the following controller settings:
Gc = K c (1 + 1/ I s ) ,
1
Kc = , I = (12-11)
K + c
s
Ke
G% ( s ) = (12-12)
( 1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)
Substitution into Eq. 12-9 and rearrangement gives a PID controller in parallel
form,
1
Gc = K c 1 + + Ds (12-13)
where:
I s
1 1 + 2 1 2
Kc = , I = 1 + 2 , D = (12-14)
K c + 1 + 2
Use the DS design method to calculate PID controller settings for the process:
s
2e
G=
(10s + 1)( 5s + 1)
Consider three values of the desired closed-loop time constant:
c = 1, 3, and 10 . Evaluate the controllers for unit step changes in both the
set point and the disturbance, assuming that Gd = G. Repeat the evaluation for
two cases:
c = 1 c = 3 c = 10
Kc ( K% = 2 ) 3.75 1.88 0.682
Kc ( K% = 0.9 ) 8.33 4.17 1.51
I 15 15 15
D 3.33 3.33 3.33
19
Figure 12.6.
Feedback control
strategies
Chapter 12
Gc*
Gc = (12-16)
1 Gc*G%
Chapter 12
Gc*G 1 Gc*G%
Y= Ysp + D (12-17)
1 + Gc* ( G G% ) 1 + Gc* ( G G% )
21
For the special case of a perfect model, G% = G , (12-17) reduces to
(
Y = Gc*GYsp + 1 Gc*G D ) (12-18)
G% = G% + G% (12-19)
22
Step 2. The controller is specified as
1
Gc* = f (12-20)
%
G
23
(
For the ideal situation where the process model is perfect G% = G ,)
substituting Eq. 12-20 into (12-18) gives the closed-loop
expression
+ sp (
Y = G% fY + 1 fG% D
+ ) (12-22)
Thus, the closed-loop transfer function for set-point changes is
Chapter 12
Y
= G% + f (12-23)
Ysp
Selection of c
The choice of design parameter c is a key decision in both the
DS and IMC design methods.
In general, increasing c produces a more conservative
controller because Kc decreases while I increases.
24
Several IMC guidelines for c have been published for the
model in Eq. 12-10:
3. c = (Skogestad, 2003)
25
Chapter 12
12.2
26