PID Controller Tuning

1. Introduction
2. Model-based PID tuning methods
3. Two degree of freedom controllers
4. On-line PID controller tuning
5. PID tuning guidelines and
troubleshooting
6. Simulink example
Introduction
PID control law


Transfer function


Controller tuning
Need to select PID parameters (K
c
, t
I
, t
D
) that yield
good closed-loop response to disturbances and
setpoint changes
Only know: KK
c
> 0, t
I
> 0, t
D
>0
Trial-and-error tuning difficult and time consuming
Need methods to determine good initial parameter
values
Refine parameter values by trial-and error fine tuning



(

+ + + =
}
t
D
I
c
dt
t de
dt t e t e K p t p
0
* *
) (
) (
1
) ( ) ( t
t
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ + = = s
s
K s G
s E
s P
D
I
c c
t
t
1
1 ) (
) (
) ( '
Impact of Controller Tuning
1 20
) ( ) (
4
+
= =

s
e
s G s G
s
d p
Closed-Loop Performance Criteria
1. Stability of closed-loop system
2. Minimization of disturbance effects
3. Rapid, smooth tracking of setpoint
changes
4. Elimination of steady-state offset
5. Avoidance of excessive control action
6. Robustness to changes in process
conditions
7. Robustness to errors in process model



Model-Based PID Controller Tuning
Typically based on first-order-
plus-time-delay model


Integral error criteria
1
) (
) (
) (
+
= =

s
Ke
s G
s U
s Y
s
t
u
}
}
}

=
=
=
0
0
2
0
| ) ( | error absolute weighted time of Integral
) ( error squared of Integral
| ) ( | error absolute of Integral
dt t e t ITAE
dt t e ISE
dt t e IAE
ITAE Tuning Rules
General Tuning Rules
The controller gain (K
c
) is inversely
proportional to the process gain (K).
K
c
decreases as the ratio of the time delay (u)
and the dominant process time (t) constant
increases.
Both the integral time (t
I
) and the derivative
time (t
D
) increase as u/t increases.
A reasonable initial guess for the derivative
mode is t
D
= 0.25t
I
.
K
c
decreases as integral control to a
proportional controller. K
c
increases as
derivative control is added to a PI controller.



ITAE Controller Tuning Example
Process model


ITAE tuning for disturbance (more aggressive)



ITAE tuning for setpoint (less aggressive)
1 93 . 5
54 . 1
) (
) (
) (
07 . 1
+
= =

s
e
s G
s U
s Y
s
75 . 2
) 93 . 5 07 . 1 ( 674 . 0
93 . 5
) (
97 . 2
93 . 5
07 . 1
859 . 0
54 . 1
1 1
680 . 0
977 . 0
= = =
=
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
.
|

\
|
=

B
I
B
c
A
A
K
K
t u
t
t
t
u
93 . 5
) (
83 . 1
1
=
+
=
=
|
.
|

\
|
=
t u
t
t
t
u
B A
A
K
K
I
B
c
Two Degree of Freedom Controllers
Seek to tune the setpoint tracking response
independent of the disturbance rejection
response
Setpoint filtering


Controller operates on Y
*
sp
instead of Y
sp
Tuning parameter t
f
determines speed of response
Setpoint weighting


Tuning parameter | determines speed of response
(

+ + =
}
t
m
D
I
c m sp c
dt
t dy
dt t e K t y t y K p t p
0
* *
) (
) (
1
)] ( ) ( [ ) ( t
t
|
1
1
) (
*
+
=
s Y
s Y
f sp
sp
t
On-Line PID Controller Tuning
Often a process model is not available for
controller tuning
Need to determine tuning parameters
directly from plant data
Continuous cycling method
Utilizing a proportional controller, find the K
c

value that produces sustained oscillations. This
is the ultimate gain K
cu
.
Determine the period of the sustained
oscillations. This is the ultimate period P
u
.
K
c
and P
u
can also be found from an available
transfer function model by direct substitution.
Tuning Rules Based on Ultimate Gain
Shortcomings of Continuous Cycling Method
Time consuming for processes with large
time constants
Process pushed to stability limit.
Ultimate gain does not exist for first- and
second-order systems without time delays
Generally not applicable to integrating and
open-loop unstable systems because stability
is achieved only for intermediate K
c
values.
First two shortcomings can be overcome
using relay autotuning method to determine
K
c
and P
u
(see text).


Step Test Method
Model structure


Calculation of u and t
Determine times when output has reached 35.3%
(t
35
) and 85.3% (t
85
) of its final value with the
time delay removed
Calculate u and t


Then use tuning method for FOTPD models
u
y
K s U
s
Ke
s Y
s
A
A
=
+
=

) (
1
) (
t
u
) ( 67 . 0 29 . 0 3 . 1
35 85 85 35
t t t t = = t u
Shortcomings of Step Test Method
Experimental test
performed under
open-loop conditions.
Method is not
applicable to open-
loop unstable
processes
Step response can be
sensitive to the
direction and
magnitude of the step
change if the process
is nonlinear.
Guidelines for Common Control Loops
Flow rate control aggressively tuned PI
controller due to fast dynamics and few
disturbances
Liquid level control conservatively tuned P
or PI controller depending on whether offset-
free performance is required
Gas pressure control moderately tuned PI
controller with little integral action due to
small time constants and stability concerns
Temperature control PID controllers with
application dependent tuning
Composition control PID or more advanced
controller due to sampling delay and
measurement noise
Troubleshooting Control Loops
Surveys indicate that as many as 35% of
industrial controllers are placed in manual
Must determine if control problem is
attributable to:
Transducer degradation or complete failure
Controller poor tuning or inadequate design
Final control element control valve stiction
Process change in operating condition
Troubleshooting procedure
Collect data on control system performance
Determine if operating conditions have changed
Check individual control system components
Retune or redesign the controller


Simulink Example
) 1 5 )( 1 10 (
2
) (
+ +
=

s s
e
s G
s
Transport
Delay
To Workspace1
input
To Workspace
output
System
2
50s +15s+1
2
Setpoint
PID Controller
PID
Add
Determining the Ultimate Gain
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
O
u
t
p
u
t
Time


Kc=7.50
Kc=7.88
Kc=8.00
PID Controller Tuning
K
c
= 7.88, P
u
= 11.66
Ziegler-Nichols tuning rules
45 . 1
8
83 . 5
2
73 . 4 6 . 0 = = = = = =
u
D
u
I cu c
P P
K K t t
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
O
u
t
p
u
t
Time
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
I
n
p
u
t
Time