System Modeling Coursework

Class 24-26: PID controllers and Robust design

P.R. VENKATESWARAN
Faculty, Instrumentation and Control Engineering,
Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal
Karnataka 576 104 INDIA
Ph: 0820 2925154, 2925152
Fax: 0820 2571071
Email: pr.venkat@manipal.edu, prv_i@yahoo.com
Web address: http://www.esnips.com/web/SystemModelingClassNotes
 WARNING!

• I claim no originality in all these notes. These are the

compilation from various sources for the purpose of
delivering lectures. I humbly acknowledge the wonderful
help provided by the original sources in this compilation.
• For best results, it is always suggested you read the source
material.
• The numerical and the Robustness of P,I, D values are
discussed elaborately in the class. They will be missing in
these notes. Beware!

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 2

 Contents

• Concept of closed loop control using error

• P control
• I control
• D control
• Combinations of P,I,D control

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 3

 The generalized control problem

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 4

 Liquid level system – an illustration

• In this example, we monitor the

liquid level in a vessel and use
the information to adjust the
opening of an effluent valve to
keep the liquid level at some
user specified value (the set
point or reference).
• In this case, the liquid level is
both the measured variable
and the controlled variable—
they are the same in a single-
input single-output (SISO)
system.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 5

 Control requirements

• Let's say we want to keep the liquid level at the set point, hs,
but a sudden surge in the inlet flow rate qi (the disturbance
or load) increases h such that there is a deviation h' = h – hs
> 0.
• The deviation can be rectified if we open up the valve (or
we can think in terms of lowering the flow resistance R).
• Here, we assume that the level controller will send out an
appropriate signal to the valve to accomplish the task. It is
logical to think that the signal from the controller, p(t),
should be a function of the deviation.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 6

 Visualizing the control loop
• However, since we are to
implement negative feedback, we
base our decision on the error
defined as
e(t) = hs(t) – h(t)
which is the negative of the
deviation (
• The actual controller output is
p(t) = ps + f[e(t)] = ps + f[hs – h(t)]
where f is some function of e(t),
and ps is the actuating signal at
steady state when the deviation
is h' = 0

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 7

 Proportional control action

• The simplest idea is that the compensation signal

(actual controller output) is proportional to the error
e(t):
p(t) = ps + Kce(t) = ps + Kc[hs – h(t)]
where Kc is the proportional gain of the controller.
• It is obvious that the value of Kc determines the
controller "sensitivity"—how much compensation
to enact for a given change in error.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 8

 Value for Kc

• For all commercial devices, the proportional gain is a positive

quantity.
• Because we use negative feedback, the controller output
moves in the reverse direction of the controlled variable.
• In the liquid level control example, if the inlet flow is
disturbed such that h rises above hs, then e < 0, and that
leads to p < ps, i.e., the controller output is decreased.
• In this case, we of course will have to select or purchase a
valve such that a lowered signal means opening the valve
(decreasing flow resistance). Mathematically, this valve has a
negative steady state gain (–Kv).

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 9

 What if our valve has a positive gain?

• This means increasing the signal and Increased

signal means opening the valve.
• Commercial devices provide such a “switch” on the
controller box to invert the signal.
• Mathematically, we have changed the sign of the
compensation term to: p = ps – Kce.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 10

 Value of controller output at e=0

• By the definition of a control problem, there should

be no error at t = 0, i.e., es = 0, and the deviation
variable of the error is simply the error itself:
e'(t) = e(t) – es = e(t)
• This is a relation between the deviation variables of
the error and the controller output:
p(t) – ps = Kc [e(t) – es] , or p'(t) = Kce'(t)
and the transfer function of a proportional
controller is simply Gc(s) =P(s)/E(s)= Kc
July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 11
 Proportional Band

• Generally, the proportional gain is dimensionless

• Many controller manufacturers use the percent
proportional band, which is defined as
PB = 100/Kc
• A high proportional gain is equivalent to a narrow
PB, and a low gain is wide PB. We can interpret PB
as the range over which the error must change to
drive the controller output over its full range.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 12

 Note!

1. The terms reverse and direct acting are extremely confusing. Some
authors consider the action between the controller output and the
controlled variable, and thus a negative feedback loop with a positive
Kc is considered reverse-acting. However, most commercial vendors
consider otherwise. The important point is to select the proper signs
for all the steady state gains.
2. Take note that from the mass balance of the tank, the process gain
associated with the outlet flow rate is also negative. A simple-minded
check is that in a negative feedback system, there can only be one net
negative sign—at the feedback summing point. If one unit in the
system has a negative steady state gain, we know something else must
have a negative steady state gain too.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 13

 What to expect of proportional control action?

• A proportional controller will improve or accelerate the

response of a process.
• There are physical limits to a control mechanism. At these
limits, the control system is saturated.
• A system with only a proportional controller is to have a
steady state error (or an offset).
• To suggest a solution to a problem, consider a simple
proportional controller first. If the response is adequately
fast with little offset then the controller is fine.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 14

 Proportional controller for a first order plant

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 15

 Response of system for various gains

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 16

 Note again!

• In some commercial devices, the proportional gain

is defined as the ratio of the percent controller
output to the percent controlled variable change
[%/%].
• Typical ranges of device outputs are 0–10 V, 0–1 V,
4–20 mA, and 3–15 psi.
• The exception is when a process contains
integrating action, i.e., 1/s in the transfer function.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 17

 P control: Example 1

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 18

 P control: Example 2

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 19

 Proportional Integral control
• To eliminate offset, we can introduce integral action in the controller.
In other words, we use a compensation that is related to the history of
the error:

where τI is the integral time constant (reset time, or minutes per

repeat).
• Commercial devices may also use 1/τI which is called the reset rate
(repeats per minute).
• The integral action is such that we accumulate the error from t = 0 to
the present. Thus the integral is not necessarily zero even if the
current error is zero.
• An integral action forces the system to overcompensate and leads to
oscillatory behavior.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 20

 Features of PI controller

• The time-domain equation and the transfer function of a PI controller

are:

• If the error cannot be eliminated within a reasonable period, the

integral term can become so large that the controller is saturated—a
situation referred to as integral or reset windup.
• The integration of the error allows us to detect and eliminate very
small errors.
• That is, as time progresses, the integral term takes on a final nonzero
value, thus permitting the steady state error to stay at zero.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 21

 Note!

• Roughly, the reset time is the time that it takes the

controller to repeat the proportional action. This is easy to
see if we take the error to be a constant in the integral.
• Another strategy is to implement the PI algorithm in the so-
called reset feedback configuration. The basis of internal
reset feedback is to rearrange and implement the PI transfer
function as
• Now, the “internal state” of the controller, whether it be
electronics or a computer algorithm for integration, will
have an upper limit. External reset feedback, on the other
hand, makes use of measurements of the manipulated
variable.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 22

 General features of PI control

• PI control can eliminate offset. We must use a PI controller in our

design if the offset is unacceptably large.
• The elimination of the offset is usually at the expense of a more under
damped system response. The oscillatory response may have a short
rise time, but is penalized by excessive overshoot or exceedingly long
settling time. Some texts use the term "sluggish" here without further
qualification. The sluggishness in this case refers to the long settling
time, not the initial response.
• Because of the inherent under damped behavior, we must be careful
with the choice of the proportional gain. In fact, we usually lower the
proportional gain (or detune the controller) when we add integral
control.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 23

 Response of first order system for PI controller

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 24

 Proportional Derivative (PD) Controller

• We certainly want to respond very differently if the

temperature of a chemical reactor is changing at a
rate of 100°C/s as opposed to 1°C/s.
• In a way, we want to "project" the error and make
corrections accordingly. In contrast, proportional
and integral controls are based on the present and
the past.
• Derivative controller action is based on how fast the
error is changing with time (rate action control).

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 25

 Derivative control action

where τD is the derivative time constant (sometimes just rate time).

• Here, the controller output is zero as long as the error stays
constant. That is, even if the error is not zero.
• Because of the proportionality to the rate of change, the controller
response is very sensitive to noise. If there is a sudden change in
error, especially when we are just changing the set point, the
controller response can be unreasonably large—leading to what is
called a derivative kick.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 26

 TF of PD controller

• Derivative action is never used by itself. The simplest implementation

is a proportional derivative (PD) controller. The time-domain
equation and the transfer function of an "ideal" PD controller are:

• In practice, we cannot build a pneumatic device or a passive circuit

which provides ideal derivative action. Commercial (real!) PD
controllers are designed on the basis of a lead-lag element:

where α is a small number, typically 0.05 ≤ α ≤ 0.2.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 27

 Remarks on PD controllers
• In effect, we are adding a very
large real pole to the derivative
transfer function.
• To reduce derivative kick (the
sudden jolt in response to set
point changes), the derivative
action can be based on the rate
of change of the measured
(controlled) variable instead of
the rate of change of the error.
• This way, the derivative control
action ignores changes in the
reference and just tries to keep
the measured variable constant.

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 28

 General Features of PD control

• PD control is not useful for systems with large dead time or

noisy signals.
• The sign of the rate of change in the error could be opposite
that of the proportional or integral terms. Thus adding derivative
action to PI control may counteract the overcompensation of
the integrating action. PD control may improve system response
while reducing oscillations and overshoot.
• If simple proportional control works fine (in the sense of
acceptable offset), we may try PD control. Similarly, we may try
PID on top of PI control. The additional stabilizing action
allows us to use a larger proportional gain and obtain a faster
system response.
July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 29
 PID controller

• We can put all the components together to make a

PID (or 3-mode) controller. The time domain
equation and the transfer function of an “ideal” PID
controller are:

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 30

 Robust design

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 31

 Robust design of values

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 32

 References

• Chemical Process Control – A first course with

Matlab – P.C. Chau
• Advanced Control Engineering – Ronald Burns
• Instrumentation and Control Systems – W. Bolton

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 33

 And, before we break…

• Happiness pursued, eludes; happiness given returns.

Thanks for listening…

July – December 2008 prv/System Modeling Coursework/MIT-Manipal 34