Part-B Pic TKG Ss4 2011-Colour

PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL
Prepared and Compiled by Prof. T.K.Ghoshal & Prof. Smita Sadhu
2010
PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu
Part-B
2010
Proportional Control
Control Laws & Control Configurations
2010
Proportional Control
Simplest of all Control Laws Only a Proportional Controller

Whose output CO is proportional to its input e which is the error = SP-PV. CO = Kp e
2010
Proportional Control-II
CO
-em
saturation
Kp.em em
CO
-em
saturation
Kp.em em
The controller however is not perfect

Its output is limited, that is the output saturates at some value. Often, the output is one sided, that is to be compatible to 4-20 mA standard.
2010
Proportional Band
v=SP + Percentage change in controller input which would result in 100% change in controller output
e Kp
CO Gp(s)
y=PV
CO
-em
saturation
Kp.em em
Let Kp.em=100%
e
em= 100%/Kp
Proportional band
2010
Proportional Band-II
Vss =1+1/Kp e-sT/(1+s) ess =1/Kp
COss=1 yss=1
Higher gain= lower PB
+ Normalized Type 0 Plant -
Kp
Gp(s)
vss is the input required for producing an output y=1 ess= 1/Kp Percent steady state error 100/Kp. This is the Proportional band
Let Kp.em=100%
em= 100%/Kp
SS errors occur because the plant is Type Zero Proportional band
2010
Proportional Band-III
Error in the presence of Steady load Load (L) v + e Kp eKp + Gp(s) =e-sT/(1+s) + y Normally load is negative
ess=vss/(1+Kp) - Lss /(1+Kp) For v=0, ess= - Lss /(1+Kp) - Lss /Kp ess (100/ Kp)(- Lss /100)
Example: PB=5 % , L= - 30% ess = 1.5%
2010
SS errors occur because the ess % = PB% of (- Lss % ) plant is Type Zero PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu
Proportional Band-IV
Significance of Proportional Band
PB % = 100/Kp % PB % = maximum % error before the controller saturates PB = % age ss error with 100% step input* PB = (negative) % age ss error with 100% load*
* requires 100% CO produces 100% PV
SS errors occur because the plant is Type Zero
Exercise:
% ss error with 40% input=0.4 PB % ss error with -67% load =0.67 PB % ss error with 30% input & -10% load = (0.3+0.1)PB = 0.4 PB.
2010
Choosing Kp
Designers try to use as high Kp, that is as small PB as possible The incentives are improved closed loop performance
Smaller steady state error . Faster response. Lower sensitivity to parameter variation.
High Kp however, may lead to

oscillatory closed loop response, even instability Higher actuator bandwidth requirement Noisy output, controller saturation due to noise
Choosing Kp is always a compromise!

2010
10
Higher K => Faster Closed Loop response

SS Error=33%
0.7 0.65 0.6 0.55 0.5 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
K=2, 90% of Final
90%
K=1, 90% of final

K=1 K=1.5 K=2
SS Error=50%
K G p (s ) = s +1
2010
11
Sensitivity to parameter variation

Plant parameters may vary v + e K Gp(s) =1/(1+s) y
K 1 1 K 1 + s = = = Gcl (s ) = K K + 1 + s 1 + 1 + s 1 + 1 1+ 1 + s K KG p (s )
2010
As K increases, effect of plant parameters PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu decreases
12
Close Loop BW increases with K

Bode Diagram Magnitude (dB) 20 10 0 -10 -2 10 System: untitled1 0 Frequency (rad/sec): 1.27 10 10 Magnitude Frequency (rad/sec) (dB): -3.06 Bode Diagram
-1
K=1
10
1
Higher BW => Response speed Noise sensitivity
10
Magnitude (dB)
20 10 0 -10 -1 10 System: untitled1 0 Frequency (rad/sec): 4.87 10 Magnitude (dB): -3.18 Frequency (rad/sec) Bode Diagram 10
1
K=10
10
2
Magnitude (dB)
20 10 0 -10 -1 10 System: untitled1 1 10 Frequency (rad/sec):10 15.6 Magnitude (dB): Frequency (rad/sec) -3.14 PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu
0
K=100
10
2
2010
13
gcf increases with gain

10
1
When gcf=pcf, PM=GM=0
GM decreases with increase in gain
Bode Diagram
gcf=wg
Magnitude (abs)
0
10
Gain Margin
Phase (deg)
PM decreases with increase in gain
10
-1
0 -45 -90 -135 -180 10

0
pcf does not depend upon gain
Phase Margin
1 2
pcf=wp
10
10
2010
PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu Frequency (rad/sec)
14
Proportional Control: GCF

K pG p = K p e j T 1 + j = Kp 1 + 2 2 Kp 1+ g
2 2
When the plant has a gain K1, the term K1Kp should be used in place of Kp
At = g , M = K p = 1+ g 2
2 2
=1
Approximate relation
or , g = or , g Kp
K p 1 K p
2
[ for K p >> 1]
K p 1
2
Very handy but approximate
Exact relation
g =
2010
As Kp , wg , closed loop BW , and system becomes faster
15
Proportional Control: Gain Margin

but the final expression of GM remains the same
At = p ; M =
Kp 1 + p 2 2
2 2
1+ p 1 GM = = M ( p ) Kp GM dB = 20 log10 (GM )
GM
p g
2010
16
Proportional Control: Phase Crossover Frequency
K P GP = T tan 1 At = p pT tan p = or , pT + tan 1 p = 1 or , pT + tan p 2

1
For pT >> 1,
Quadratic equation
pT
Further approximation : 1 << pT ,
= pT 2
p
2T
17
2010
Finding PCF
Finding p Two Methods:
Using quadratic equation Approximation
pT
Problem:
Using exact equation and iterative method Let = 20 s, T = 3 s, find p Quadratic approximation gives p=0.553
2010
18
Finding PCF-II
Iterative Method
First value: 1.5 p 0.5 2T T
Using
1st iteration 1 1 1 p + tan ( ) 2T T 0 . 5 20 1 . 57 + 0 . 0333 = 0 . 5566 3 2nd iteration 1 . 57 1 1 1 + tan ( ) p 3 3 0 . 5566 20 0 . 553 3rd iteration : p 0 . 553
19
pT
+ tan (
2010
Finding PCF-III
Angle Check
K P GP = 0.553 3 tan
(0.553 20)
= 1.66 1.48 = 3.14

Comments
Truly PCF Both quadratic and iterative methods provide good approximation of PCF
2010
20
Critical (or ultimate) gain

When the proportional gain is gradually changed from a low enough value, a time comes when the closed loop systems starts oscillating. At this condition
GCF equals PCF => both the gain and phase margin become zero Oscillation occur at PCF
The corresponding proportional gain is called the critical gain or the Ultimate Gain. The ultimate gain can be determined either experimentally or analytically.
2010
21
Ultimate gain-II
Critical gain K is the value of KP such that g P is the same as p.
10
1
Bode Diagram Magnitude (abs)
KP
10
10
-1
g=p
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

0
10
10
2010
Frequency (rad/sec) PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu
22
Ultimate Gain-III
1 + 2 2 when g = p , KP 1 + p 2 2 =1 2 1+ 2T
1/ 2 2
K p GP =
KP
Can be used only after determining pcf
KP = 1+ p = 1+
2 2
2 2
4 T2
4 T2 1 + = 2 2 2T
Can be used if system parameters are known
2 T2 1 T 1 + + K P 1.5 2 T 2 2 2 T T
2010
23
Finding Gain Margin

KP By definition GM = KP K p GP = KP 1 + 2 2 KP 1 + g 2
2
GM = the factor by which gain may be enhanced without making the system unstable
=1 =1
You may convert GM to dB
When K P = K P , p = g ,
KP 1+ p 2
2
2 1+ p 2 p KP as before GM = = 2 KP 1 + g 2 g
2010
24
Finding Phase Margin

= T tan 1 PM = = +
g
All angles and the margin in Radian Dont forget to convert to degree
= gT
+ tan ( 1
gT +
Fairly accurate when g > 10
2010
25
Examples-1
Problems: (1) For a plant with K=1, = 10 s, T = 1 s, find the pcf of the system (2) For the above plant with a proportional controller of gain KP=7.5, find the gcf and PM.
2010
26
Solution to Example 1
1.57 Prob(1) : p 1.57rad / s 2T T
As T/ is small, the approximation is fair
1 Prob (1) : Itn1: p 1.57 + 1.63; 1.57 10 1 Itn2 : p 1.57 + 1.63 1.6310
2010
27
Prob(2) : 1 2 g = ( KK p ) 1 = 7 .5 1 = 0 .74 rad / s 10 1 1 ) = 0.964rad = 55.26 deg PM = g T + tan ( g 2 1 even with approx : g T + 2 g 1 = 1.57 0.74 + = 0.965rad 0.74 10
2
2010
28
Examples- 2
Problem: Let K=2, = 10 s, T = 1 s, and a proportional controller with gain KP=7.5/2=3.75 be used. Find the pcf, gcf and PM of the system
2010
29
1.57 p 1.57rad / s 2T T
Same as Example 1 Approximation is good
Exact p = 1.63
g =
KK
2 p
1 1 = 10
7 . 5 2 1 = 0 . 74 rad / s
PM =
gT +
= 55.3 deg
The combined effect of KKP is considered when the process has non-unity gain.
2010
30
Example-3
Problem: Let K=1, = 30 s, T = 10 s, find the pcf of the system Design a proportional controller to provide a gain margin of 6dB. Find the gcf and PM of the controlled process.
2010
31
Solution to Example-3
p
2T 1.57 0.157rad / s T
As T/ is not small, the approximations are not good
1 = 0.178; 0.157 30 10 1 Itn2 : p 0.157 + = 0.176 0.178 30 10 Itn1 : p 0.157 +
K P = 1 + p 2 2 1 + 0.176 2 30 2 = 5.37
KP KP 5.37 GM K P = = = 2.69 KP GM 1.995

2010
20 log10 GM = 6dB GM = 10 6 / 20 = 1.995
32
g =
1 = 30 1 K p 1
2 2
2 . 69 1 = 0 . 083 rad / s
2010
33
PM = g T tan g = 3.14 0.83 1.19 = 1.12rad = 64.2 deg
PM ( / 2) g T + (1 / g ) 1.14rad = 65.4
o
( )
2010
34
Proportional + Integral Control

(PI-Control)
2010
35
PI Control
Proportional gain in a P-control cannot be increased beyond a certain value due to PM and GM constraints Limited P control means
Steady state error Steady state error changing with load,
requires resetting the set point to get constant PV
Slow response Sensitivity to parameter variations
Steady state error (offset) may be completely eliminated by reset (PI) PI control. The I-action obviates the need for frequent manual reset and hence called auto reset or simply reset action
2010
36
Block representation of PI controller

K I dt
+ + CO
KP
CO ( s) = K P + K I dt KI KP 1 K K (s) = K P + = K P (1 + ); TI = s sTI KI
2010
Unit?
37
Reset Time
KI 1 + sTI 1 K K ( s) = K P + = K P (1 + ) = KP ( ) s sTI sTI KP = Reset Time TI = KI
The Reset time indicates the time after which the reset action becomes predominant It also provides an indication about the expected time when the offset can be said to be practically eliminated.
2010
38
Reset Time-II
e a CO aKit Time Time T1 aKP
The Reset time indicates the time after which the reset action becomes predominant At t =T1, the reset action output becomes equal to and just overtakes the proportional action output. T1=Ki/KP=Ti It also provides an indication about the expected time when the offset can be said to be practically eliminated.
2010
39
Reset Time-III
E ( s)[1 + K P ( 1 + sTI 1 ) ] = R(s ) sTI 1 + s sTI (1 + s ) sTI (1 + s ) E ( s) = = 2 R(s ) sTI (1 + s ) + K P (1 + sTI ) s + s (1 + K P ) + K P / TI (1 + K P ) (1 + K P ) 2 4K P / TI
This result is valid for only slow reset
1 (1 2K P /(TI (1 + K P ) 2 ) = s= 2 2 /(1 + K P ) 1 + K P K P /(1 + K P ) K /(1 + K P ) ( ), P TI TI
Consider a first order plant with just a time constant and a large reset time such that Ti~ . With large proportional gain, one of the closed loop pole is close to -1/Ti and the other is approx at Kp/ . The slower pole, with a time constant Ti is responsible for taking the steady state error to zero. The faster pole is the usual pole for proportional control.
2010
40
PI-Controller Frequency response

M
Kp 1/Ti Freq
1 K K ( j ) = K P (1 + ) = M (say) jTI M = KP 1+ 1 (TI ) 2 1 TI

41
= ( / 2) + tan 1 (TI ) = tan 1

2010
Why the steady state error should be zero with PI control Reductio Ad Absurdum Argument
Proof Outline:
Assume the system to be linear and the closed loop system is stable. Steady input and load are applied. Stability implies that in steady state all variables will remain constant. If the error is not zero (say a constant) its integrated value would keep on changing like a ramp which is impossible as it contradicts the steady state assumption.
Proof Limitation:
Not valid when the controller or actuator saturates, i.e. when the output reaches maximum value, because the linearity assumption is violated. Consequence: expect some steady state error at large load even with PI control.
2010
42
Why the steady state error should be zero with PI control TF and Final Value Theorem
Load (L) + Gp(s) + v + e eKk y
PI Controller
V 1 E ( s ) = V ( s ) Y ( s ) = K P (1 + )G p ( s ) E ( s ) L( s ) s sTI V L (V L)TI E (s) = = 1 + sTI s(1 + K P ( )G p ( s ) ( s + K P (1 + sTI ))G p ( s ) sTI
Steady SP and Load Expression for error E(s)

2010
43
Why the steady state error should be zero with PI control TF and Final Value Theorem-II
Load (L) + Gp(s) + v +
Final value theorem
e Kk(s) -
eKk
s (V L)TI ess = lt sE ( s ) = lt s 0 s 0 ( s + K (1 + sT ))G ( s ) P I p s (V L)TI = lt ; G p (0) 0 ; type zero or higher type s 0 K G ( 0) P p ess = 0; even if (V L) 0
Linearity assumption is implicit for Laplace Transform
For any steady SP and any steady Load, the steady state error would be zero.
2010
44
Exercise
Taking a standard plant transfer function
Ke sT G p (s ) = 1 + s
and a PI controller, use final value theorem to prove that the steady state error must be zero with constant set point and steady load. Repeat the above with frequency domain analysis by letting j0.
2010
45
PI control : points to ponder

Steady state error becomes zero whatever may be the value of integral gain (even if close to zero)
What is the catch? Why should we at all use a higher integral gain?
If the load disturbance is such that even the highest possible output from the FCE cannot compensate the deviation
will PI control still assure zero offset? If not, what would be the behaviour when such load is suddenly withdrawn?
2010
46
Freq Response: Plant with PI Controller

K K ( j )G p ( j ) = 1 Ke jT K P (1 + ) jTI 1 + j = M (say) KK P 1 M = (1 + ) 2 2 (TI ) 1 + ( )
Unit ve slope
double ve slope Unit ve slope Freq p
= T tan 1 ( ) + tan 1 (TI ) 2 1 1 = T + tan 1 tan 1 2 TI

KK P 1 + ( g ) 2 1 ( g TI ) 2 tan 1
1/
1/Ti
at GCF = g , M = 1 PM = + | = g =
(1 + 1
) =1
g T + tan 1
1 g TI
Extra phase lag
2010
47
Freq Response: Plant with PI Controller-II

~ Let g g ; It may be shown that ~~ M g is a better approximation of g ~ ~ where M = M | = g M The above relation can be used ~ iteratively with a seed g = g where g = GCF for P - only control g = ( KK P ) 1
2
Unit ve slope
double ve slope Unit ve slope Freq p
~ M
*
1/ 1/Ti
; wherefrom
2
~ g
g g (1 +
( g TI ) Typically g 1.25 g
at PCF ( p ), =
1 + tan = pT tan p pTI 2

1
2010
48
Computing PCF; PI control

Two methods:
Quadratic approx Iterative at PCF ( p ), =
pT tan 1
1 1
+ tan 1
1 = pTI 2
1 + : quadratic equation pT p pTI 2 iterative rule :{ p } { p }( k +1) =

2010
(0)
2T 1 1 tan 1 ] (k ) (k ) { p } { p } TI
49
2T
+ (1 / T )[ tan 1
Plant with PI Controller-Example Standard 1st order plant with delay , =1, T=0.1, Kp=8, Find pcf, GM, gcf, PM. Find the values of gcf, PM, pcf, GM, when an I-element with reset time Ti=0.3 s is added to the above P controller.
2010
50
Plant with PI Controller-Example

Standard 1st order plant with delay , =1, T=0.1, Kp=8. pcf=16.31 rad/s; PM=51.7 deg, gcf=7.9 rad/s, GM=2.06=6.3 dB
2010
51
Plant with PI Controller-Example

Standard 1st order plant with delay , =1, T=0.1, Kp=8. (pcf=16.31 rad/s; PM=51.7 deg, gcf=7.9 rad/s, GM=2.06=6.3 dB)
Find the values of gcf, PM, pcf, GM, when an I-element with reset time Ti=0.3 s is added to the above P controller.
9% increase in GCF
g = 7.9; g g (1+
) = 7.9x1.09= 8.61 (gTI )2 PM nearly ~ halved M at this freq =1.0017 1 1 1 1 PM= gT + tan tan = 26.12degree 2 g gTI
2010
52
Computing PCF; PI control-example

Standard 1st order plant with delay ,Tau=1, T=0.1, pcf=16.31 rad/s Kp=8, PM=51.7 deg, gcf=7.9 rad/s, Ti=0.3s First by quadratic equation
pT
1 1 1 2 = p T p + + =0 pTI 2 2 TI
gives p = 14.04, 1.66
Ignore the second value (why?) By iteration
2T { p }(1) = 14.3,{ p }( 2) = 14.11,{ p }(3) = 14.09

2010
{ p } =
( 0)
= 15.7
53
Effect of reset (PI) control

Adding reset element to a P control system
Provides PI control configuration
Which potentially eliminates steady state error (offset) in CL
Results in substantial loss of phase margin

Which would need correction to maintain stability margin
Results in minor increase in gcf

Minor decrease in rise time in CL
Results in minor decrease in pcf Results in higher overshoot in CL
To restore stability margin,

Gcf must be reduced by reducing Kp, thereby
Restoring Phase margin and reducing overshoot in CL Reducing BW, consequently increasing rise time in CL Increasing sensitivity
2010
54
Effect of reset control (2)

No change in gain at high frequency
10
1
Bode Diagram
10
Bode Diagram
wg~0.018 rad/s
Magnitude (abs) Phase (deg)
Magnitude (abs)
10
10
10
-1
10
-1
0
0
-45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
wp~0.6 rad/s
-45 -90 -135 -180 -3 0 10 10
Additional Phase lag
10
-2
10 Frequency (rad/sec)
-1
10
-2
-1
10
Nominal system response with proportional gain 2010
Additional phase lag for PI controller 55
Effect of reset control (3)

Standard 1st order plant with delay
Tau=1, T=0.1, Kp=8, PM=51.7 deg, gcf=7.9 rad/s, Rise time=0.095sec, SS error=11%
Control P only PI with Ti=1/2 PI with Ti=1/4 PI with Ti=1/6

2010
PM
(deg)
gcf
(rad/s)
Rise time
(s)
51.7 36.4 21.9 9.56
7.9 8.2 8.7 9.4
0.095 0.095 0.086 0.08

56
PI controller design trade off

Proportional gain should be high enough to ensure
High enough gcf and low enough rise time Acceptable sensitivity
Proportional gain should be low enough to reduce the gcf so that the additional phase lag due to reset action can be accommodated Integral gain should be high enough (reset time should be small enough) to ensure quick reduction of offset (steady state error)
With adequate damping, the offset becomes negligible after a period of 3Ti.
Integral gain should be low enough (Ti large enough) to ensure adequate phase margin and damping ratio Typically Ti>3.3T
2010
57
PI controller design approaches

Approaches
Empirical
(e.g. Ziegler Nichols)
Analytical
Phase budget
Gain reduction
2010
58
Analytical design of PI controller

Given PM, obtain appropriate values of Kp and Ti to ensure fast response Both the analytical methods (gain reduction and phase budget) start with designing a P controller with a specified gain margin In the gain reduction method, the proportional gain (equivalently the gcf) is reduced by a factor to enhance the PM. This additional phase is then allocated to compensate for the phase lag introduced by the reset. In the phase budget method, the phase lag introduced by the reset is budgeted. A proportional gain is chosen such that the PM is more than what is specified by the budgeted amount. Wait for the details..
2010
59
Steps for gain reduction method

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Choose GCF at g = 0.81 Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM.
2010
60

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control.
Choose GCF at g = 0.81 Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.Bode Diagram 1 Check GM. 10
Magnitude (abs)
10
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
1 Required PM
10
-2
-1
10
2010
61

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Bode Diagram Check GM. 1
10
Choose GCF at g = 0.81
Magnitude (abs)
10
g=0.81
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
Required PM
-2 -1 0
10
10
2010
62

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Choose GCF at g = 0.81
Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin .
Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.Bode Diagram 1 10 Check GM.
Magnitude (abs)
10
g=0.81
Phase angle of plant at g
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
1 Additional PM
Required PM
-1 0
10
-2
10
2010
63

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Choose GCF at g = 0.81 Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM.
10
1
Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))=

Bode Diagram
Magnitude (abs)
10
g=0.81
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
1 Additional PM
10
-2
-1
10
2010
64

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Choose GCF at g = 0.81 Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))=
Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.

Check GM.
at GCF = g , M = 1 1 KP = . K
KK P 1 + ( g ) 2
(1 +
1 ( g TI )
2
) =1
1 + ( g ) 2 1 (1 + ) 2 ( g TI )
2010
65

Obtain the frequency (1) at which the required PM is obtainable for P control. Choose GCF at g = 0.81 Determine the phase angle of the plant at g and the additional phase margin . Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.
Check GM.
GM = where
M p
( ) M ( p ) =
KK P 1 + ( p )
2
(1 +
1 ( pTI ) 2
2010
66
Gain reduction method: example

Standard 1st order plant with delay , =1, T=0.1. Required PM=45 . Choose PI controller parameters. Find freq 1 where PM=45 , 1=9.0. Choose g = 0.81=7.0 r/s (say) Phase margin of the plant at 7.0 r/s =58 =13 ;1/(g Ti)=tan (13)=0.23 => Ti=0.62s. Kp=6.9 Check GM (exercise)
2010
67
Steps for phase budget method

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+ Recheck phase Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM
2010
68

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action
Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+ Recheck phase Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM
e.g. Let =15 deg (say)
2010
69

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action
Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+
Recheck phase Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Bode Diagram Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. 1 10 Check GM
Magnitude (abs)
10
g
10
-1
Phase (deg)
Phase angle = + PM+
-45 -90 -135 -180
PM 2010
10
-3
10
-2
-1
10
70

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+
Recheck phase
Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))= Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM
= g T tan 1 ( g )
2010
71

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+ Recheck phase
Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))=

Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control. Check GM
Ti =1/(g tan() )
2010
72

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+ Recheck phase Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))=
Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.
Check GM
at GCF = g , M = 1 1 KP = . K
KK P 1 + ( g ) 2
(1 +
1 ( g TI )
2
) =1
1 + ( g ) 2 1 (1 + ) 2 ( g TI )
2010
73

Allocate a budget for phase lag due to the integral action Obtain the frequency (g) at which the plant phase angle is + PM+ Recheck phase Choose reset time Ti such that tan-1 (1/(g Ti ))=
Determine the proportional gain to satisfy the chosen GCF with PI control.
Check GM
GM = where
M p
( ) M ( p ) =
KK P 1 + ( p )
2
(1 +
1 ( pTI ) 2
2010
74
Phase Budget method: example

Standard 1st order plant with delay , =1, T=0.1. Required PM=45 . Choose PI controller parameters. Allocate =13 (say), find g such that the phase angle is + PM+ = -122 . From iterative method, g = 7.0 r/s Recheck phase
=13 ;1/(g Ti)=tan (13)=0.23 => Ti=0.62s. Kp=6.9 Check GM (exercise)

2010
75
Proportional + Derivative Control

(PD-Control)
2010
76
P-D Control
Some shortcomings of P-only control may be reduced by introducing derivative action. The derivative action imparts phase lead PD control may be used to improve damping and/or increased response speed.
Keeping the same proportional gain, D-Control may be used to improve phase margin, thereby increasing damping and reducing overshoots. (No Change of GCF or steady state error) D-Control allows increasing the proportional gain retaining the same phase margin, which improves speed of response (increasing GCF) and reducing ss error A mix of the above may also be used.
2010
77
PD control-II
Down side of D-Control
Excessive increase of GCF
may make the closed loop system noise-prone More actuator BW may be required
GM may be reduced the controller output tends to be peaky and noisy
PD control itself is not widely used except for slow systems like thermal systems. The D-element is used in conjunction with PI, making the popular PID controller.
2010
78
PD controller
+ + + + + +
& y (t ) = CO = K p e(t ) + K D e(t ) Y ( s) Controller TF = = K p [1 + ( K p / K D ) s] = K p (1 + TD s ) E (s) where TD is called the derivative time
2010
79
P-D Controller Ramp Response

Total output= Kp at+ Kd a
CO input at t Td t
P-action output= Kp at
D-action output= Kd a
Step response of PD Controller contains an impulse at t=0 and is difficult to represent graphically
We would show the step response with roll off pole later
The ramp response is more informative At t=Td, the proportional action output overtakes the output from Daction
2010
80
P-D Controller Frequency Response

Unit positive slope M
1/TD 45 90
Gain increases with frequency above = 1/TD Max phase lead =90 Lead at corner freq = 45
2010
81
P-D Controller with Roll-Off

A roll-off pole is often used with P-D controller to reduce the effect of noise Does not noticeably affect GCF and phase lead The time response in closed loop is only marginally affected by addition of roll off pole
Controller TF with roll off 1 + TD s Y (s) = = Kp E (s) 1 + TD s where D is a small number, typically 0.1 The roll off pole is at - 1/TD
2010
82
P-D Controller with Roll-Off-II

10 Magnitude (abs)
2
PD w Roll Off
1/TD
10
1
1/TD
60 Phase (deg)
30
Ratio =0.1 Max phase lead reduced, occurs at 1/ from corner. Phase lead at first corner nearly at 45 deg, Phase lead before first corner unaltered. Max magnitude limited, Kp(1/ ). Would limit noise
10
2
0 -1 10
Freq Response
2010
10 10 Frequency (rad/sec)
83
P-D Controller with Roll-Off-III

Step Response 100 90 80 70 Amplitude 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Time (sec) 0.8 1
Ramp Response 20
15 Amplitude
10
0 0
0.2
0.4 0.6 Time (sec)
0.8
Smoother response Step response peak=Kp/

2010
84
Choosing P-D Control Parameters

K1Kp
Frequency response of plant with PD controller
g
1/ 1/Td GM
Considerations:

2010
An important concern in PD Control is the GM With pure P-D control GM = 1/(Tdg) => Tdg =1/GM For a given GM, the obtainable phase lead at the GCF is arctan (Tdg) = arctan (1/GM)
85
Choosing P-D Control Parameters-II

Based on the considerations, the steps for choosing the parameters of P-D control are as follows:
1. 2. 3. 4. Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM) Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM - d]. 5. Obtain Td. 6. Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
2010
86

Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM
Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM) Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM - d]. Obtain Td. Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
K1Kp
g
1/ 1/Td
2010
As the slope at g is a unit negative slope, we have, g/(1/Td)=1/GM
GM
87

Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM
Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM)

Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM - d]. Obtain Td. Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
10
1
Bode Diagram
Magnitude (abs)
g
10
0
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
1/TD
-2 -1 0
45
88
90
Lead d
10
10
2010
PIC Lecture Sadhu Uncontrolled plant 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita PD controller

Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM)
Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM d].

Obtain Td. Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
10
1
Bode Diagram
Magnitude (abs)
10
10
-1
0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

-3
Chosen g
1/TD 45
90
Lead d
-+PM-d
10
-2
-1
10
89
2010
PIC Lecture Sadhu Uncontrolled plant 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita PD controller

Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM) Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM - d].
Obtain Td.
Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
Td=1/(GM.g)
2010
90

Given PM and GM Choose Tdg=1/GM Compute additional phase lead d= tan-1 (1/GM) Ignoring D-action determine g such that the phase g is [-+PM - d]. Obtain Td.
Find Kp to ensure the above GCF with PD control.
1 Kp = . K 1 + ( g TD ) 2
1 + ( g ) 2
2010
91
Choosing P-D Control Parameters-III

Example: Given =20, T=3, K= 1.5, desired PM=45 deg, desired GM=7dB Solution: PM= /4, GM=7dB=2.24 Td g =1/GM=1/2.24=0.447; d= tan-1 (1/GM)=24 deg = 0.42 rad Angle at g = [-+PM - d]= -(3/4) -0.42 = - 2.775 rad = -159 deg Solve for g using the following relation for phase angle, 1 gT + = 2.775 2 g
giving g = 0.44
Td =.447/.44=1.016, say 1.0 From the gain formula K1 Kp =8.1 => Kp =8.1/1.5 = 5.4
2010
92
Performance comparison: P vs PD control

1.5
P-control P-D control 1
0.5
Pade artifacts
(negative suppressed)
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Previous example, same plant and PM with only proportional control, the gain= 4.25 and GCF=0.315 are about 78% as obtained from PD Faster response, consistent with higher GCF, but higher overshoot in P-D. Marginally smaller SS error.
2010
93
Modified PD controller
KP
+ + CO
KDs
PV
Derivative of PV, instead of error

2010
94
Modified P-D Control-II

Ordinary PD : PV = K P (1 + sTD )( SP PV ) K P (1 + sTD ) PV K CL ( s ) = = SP 1 + K P (1 + sTD ) Modified PD : PV = K P ( SP PV ) K D (d / dt ) PV KP PV K CLm ( s ) = = SP 1 + K P (1 + sTD ) K CLm ( s ) 1 = K CL ( s ) 1 + sTD
The modified controller gives same controller poles But the closed loop response of modified D-Control does not have the numerator differentiator Result: Less overshoot
2010
95
PD & PDMod Time Response

1.5 Mod P-D PD Step Response 1
0.5
Same Parameters as before Noticeably Less overshoot, same as P Same settling time Marginally more rise time, but faster than P-only
35 40
10
15
20 25 Time----->
30
2010
96
PD control exercise
Why is it necessary to place the zero of the PD controller at a higher value compared to the prospective gcf? Why a roll off pole is recommended for a PD controller. Enumerate the advantages and disadvantages of PD control in comparison to P control. What is the typical value of the product gTD? Justify. What is the typical value of obtainable phase lead in a PD control? In which situations is PD control contra indicated?
2010
97
Proportional, Integral + Derivative Control

(PID-Control)
2010
98
PID Controller
2010
99
PID Controller-II
Most widely used Combines the good effects of PI and PD control SS error is zero Response is faster than P or PI controlled plant
Industrial PID Controller
2010
100
PID controller Transfer Function

The TF of the PID Controller may be obtained as follows:
Exact No roll off
K CO ( s ) = K p + I + Kd s E ( s) s TI Td s 2 + sTI + 1 1 = K p (1 + + Td s) = K p ( ) LL (I) sTI sTI Product sTI + 1 K k ( s) K p ( )(1 + sTd ) LLL (II) form sTI approx (II) is valid when Td << TI s (TI + Td ) sTI sTI + 1 1 + sTd K k ( s) = K p ( )( ) LLL (III) With sTI 1 + sTd K k ( s) =
Roll off Pole

101
2010
PID controller TF-II

P-I action
sTI + 1 K k ( s) K p ( )(1 + sTd ) LLL (II) sTI
P-D action
The TF II is convenient to apply for sketching asymptotic bode plot. This form was also popular in analog implementation, especially with roll-off pole, as shown in TF-III As the reset time is usually 5 to 8 times the derivative time, the error in approximation is not significant.
Roll off
sTI + 1 1 + sTd K k ( s) = K p ( )( ) LLL (III) sTI 1 + sTd

2010
102
PID controller TF-III

KP/
KP
1/(TI)
1/(Td)
1/(Td)
Bode Magnitude Plot At low frequency, the reset action prevails and at higher frequency the derivative action prevails. In the mid-frequency, the behaviour is like proportional control
2010
103
PID controller TF-IV

Roll off pole
Bode Diagram of PID Controller 10 Magnitude (abs)
2
10
D-Zero
10 90
0
At high frequency the controller contributes zero degree
Phase (deg)
45 0 -45 -90 -1 10
0 1 2 3
10
10
10
Phase & Magnitude Plots

2010
Lag due to Reset nullified by the Daction at this frequency

104
PID controller with the plant

Plant
1 + sTi 1 + sTD e sT K k ( s)G p ( s ) = K p ( )( )K sTi 1 + sTD 1 + s

g 1/ 1/Ti
Reset term Derivative term
1/Td
Bode Magnitude Plot

2010
105
PID controller with the plant-II

M g 1/ 1/Ti 1/Td
M =| K k ( j )G p ( j ) | = K p 1+ 1
2
(Ti ) 1 + (TD ) 2 1 + ( ) 2 = {K k ( j )G p ( j )} = (T tan 1 ) + ( / 2 + tan 1 Ti ) + (tan 1 TD tan 1 TD )
1 + (TD ) 2
K1
2010
106
PID controller with the plant-III

M g 1/ 1/Ti 1/Td
At GCF M = 1 Kp
1 + ( g TD ) 2 1 K1 1+ =1 2 2 2 ( g Ti ) 1 + ( g TD ) 1 + ( g )
( g ) = {K k ( j )G p ( j )}
= ( g T tan 1 g ) + ( / 2 + tan 1 g Ti ) + (tan 1 g TD tan 1 g TD ) = + (tan 1
2010
g T + tan 1 g Ti + tan 1 g TD tan 1 g TD )

107
PID controller with the plant-IV

~ Let g g ; It may be shown that ~~ M g is a better approximation of g ~ ~ where M = M | = g The above relation can be used ~ iteratively with a seed g = g where g = GCF for P - only control g = 1 + ( KK P ) 2
Using /2T as the seed, the following relation may be recursively applied to get the PCF. Usually, 3 iterations give acceptably good result. If the roll off pole is present, do not ignore the epsilon term.
At PCF, ( P ) =
; wherefrom ) 1 + ( g TD ) 2 1 + ( g TD ) 2
P =
2T 1 1 1 tan 1 (tan 1 T P PTi
g g (1 +
( g TI )
+ tan 1 PTD tan 1 PTD )
2010
108
Qualitative effect of adding D to PI
derivative mode on measurement
2010
109
Analytical Tuning of PID controller

Objective: Given plant M parameters, GM (default=6dB) and PM (default=45), determine PID gains. Background: 1= tan-1[ (gTd)] = Lead
g 1/ 1/Ti 1/TD
contribution of D element at GCF 1/GM gTd contribution of I element at GCF

2= tan-11/(gTi)]= Lag
2010
110
Analytical Tuning of PID controller-II

Background (contd.):
Net lead obtainable at GCF 3= 1- 2 From GM, the parameter gTd is determined and hence the total phase lead by the D-action. A portion of the lead needs to be allocated to the I-action.
M g 1/ 1/Ti 1/TD
2010
111
Analytical Tuning of PID controller-III

Steps
1. From GM, determine gTd 1/GM 2. Determine the obtainable phase lead given by the equation 1= tan-1[ (gTd)] 3. Apportion an amount 2 for nullifying the phase lag by the reset action. 4. Compute available additional phase lead 3= 1- 2 5. Determine g such that the lag of the plant is [-+PM - 3]. 6. From g and gTd determine Td 7. From 2= tan-11/(gTi)] , determine Ti 8. Determine Kp to ensure the above GCF
Note: If Roll off pole is used, 10% of lead would be lost due to the roll off. This should be accounted for in the design.
2010
112
Analytical Tuning of PID controller-IV

Example: Given =20, T=3, K1= 1.5, desired PM=45 deg, desired GM=7dB Solution: PM= /4, GM=7dB=2.24 Td g 1/GM=1/2.24=0.447; 1= tan-1[ (gTd)] =24 = 0.42 rad Allocate 2 =0.2 rad 12 ; 3= 1- 2 = 0.22 rad Angle at g = [-+PM - 3]= -(3/4) -0.42 = - 2.58 rad = 148 deg Solve for g using the relation for phase angle,
giving g = 0.38
1. 2.
3.
4. 5. 6.
7. Td =.447/.38=1.18s, say 1.2s; 8. tan (2 )=0.203 => TI= 1/(.447x.203)=11s 9. From the gain formula K1 Kp =8.1 => Kp =8.1/1.5 = 5.4
2010
113
Empirical Tuning
Approaches:
Ziegler Nichols Cohen-Coon Chien Auto-Tuning method
Controller settings parameterized by

Ultimate Gain & period of oscillation Plant parameters like T and , Combination of above
2010
114
Empirical Tuning-II
Plant parameters like T and , obtained from Process Reaction Curve,
In open loop.
The Ultimate Gain and the time period of oscillation are determined from
closed loop experiment. Called Continuous cycling method
Auto-Tuning method requires special onoff type controller

2010
115
Process Reaction Curve

Parameter Determination from Process Reaction Curve
1. Wait until the process reaches steady state. 2. Introduce a step change in the input. 3. Based on the output, obtain an approximate first order process with a time constant delayed by T units from when the input step was introduced
2010
116
Process Reaction Curve-II

Advantages of Process Reaction Curve Method
Plant is not operated at the stability limit. There is less chance of saturating control loop components Determination of process dead time and process time lag often provides insight into the process not otherwise obtained with a closed-loop test
Disadvantages
Since the test is conducted without controller feedback, any significant change in process load may provide erroneous results If the process is noisy, it may be difficult to determine which part of the reaction curve has the steepest slope so as to construct the tangent line. In such cases, multiple trials may be necessary. The graphical method is considered valid only if 0.1< T/ <0.5
2010
117
Continuous Cycling Method
A P- controller with independent bias control, PV transmitter and multi-channel recorder would be necessary. A portable field duty storage oscilloscope would also serve the purpose.
2010
118
Continuous Cycling Method-II

It may be necessary to measure the process gain by applying small step change in bias and measuring corresponding CO and PV in open loop Set the true plant under proportional control, with a very small gain. Adjust the bias to take the process at the operating point. Apply small impulsive input at the SP and note the PV and CO. Increase the gain until the loop starts oscillating.
2010
119
Continuous Cycling Method-III

Note that linear oscillation is required and that it should better be detected at the controller output. Linear oscillation would be sinusoidal and with more or less constant amplitude. Confirm that this indeed is the limiting stability condition by small changes of gain. A small negative change should make the oscillation decaying, a small positive change should make the oscillation growing Note this proportional gain as ultimate gain and the time period of oscillation as P. The oscillation generally occurs at the PCF. PCF (r/s)=2/P.
Sustained oscillation (almost)
2010
2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5
-0.5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
120
Ziegler Nichols Controller Tuning Rules

Most well known and widely used tuning rules. Two variants
Continuous cycling method Process Reaction Curve method
The tuning rules for Continuous Cycling method is shown below
Control Law P PI PID

2010
K1 Kp 0.5Ku 0.45Ku 0.6Ku
Ti -P/1.2 P/2
Td --P/8
121
Z-N Tuning-II
The Z-N tuning rules for Process Reaction Curve method is shown below Removes the difficulties associated with cycling
Longer experimental time Cycling may not be allowed for all plants
Method gives poorer results compared to continuous cycling.
2010
122
Exercise
Control Law P PI PID K1 Kp 0.5Ku 0.45Ku 0.6Ku Ti -P/1.2 P/2 Td --P/8
Rewrite the above table in terms of T and using the following:

K p = 1.5 T
2010
p=/2T, P=2/p P= 4T
123
Z-N Tuning-III
For P-Control Z-N rule provides:
GM = (Ku/KP)=2 6dB PM varies mildly with = /T For = 20 to 6, PM varies from 46 to 56.3 only. Corresponding damping ratios are approximately 0.46 to 0.56 The transient responses to step input do not differ greatly
2010
124
Z-N Tuning-III
For PI Control, Z-N rule provides:
GM = (Ku/KP)=2.2 6.8 dB PM varies mildly with = /T For = 20 to 6, PM varies moderately from 28 to 37.6 only. The corresponding closed loop damping ratios are misleading as the system is one order more than the P-control case and the TF has a zero. The transient responses to step input does not differ greatly compared to a P-controlled system with 45 phase margin.
2010
125
Z-N Tuning-IV
For PID Control, Z-N rule provides:
GM = (Ku/KP)=1/0.6=1.7 4.6 dB PM varies mildly with = /T For = 20 to 5, PM varies moderately from 34.8 to 44.1 only.
The ordinary PID shows a fast but more peaky closed loop step response when compared to PI controlled system.
See example
When the D-action is in the feed back loop, the peak is reduced.
2010
126
Z-N Tuning-V
Example: Given =20, T=3, K1= 10; Ku=11.1 ; P=11.4 s
Control Kp Law 0.5Ku=5.6 P PI PID

2010
Ti --
Td --P/8=1.4
127
0.45Ku=5 P/1.2=9.5 0.6Ku=6.2 P/2=5.7
Correcting GCF and PCF values

M1 = M2 = Kp 1 + g1 2 2 Kp
2 2
1 + g2 g 2 = g1 M 1 1 T 1 = p1 T p1 2 p 2 1 2 = = p2 T 2 1 2 = 1 = 1 + p1 T + p2 T = 1 1 p2 = p1 + = p1 + p1 T
2010
=1
g 1/ 1/Ti 1/Td
128
Example
Given T=2 s, =7 s.
Select Kp, Ti, TD using Z-N method. Calculate GCF, PCF, GM, PM.
2010
129
Soln:
Given T=2 s, t=7 s, Select Kp, Ti, TD using Z-N method. Calculate GCF, PCF, GM, PM.
At PCF, G ( j ) = = pT
2
1 or , p p = 0 2 7 p = 0.868rad / s
2010
130
Soln: (contd)
Given T=2 s, =7 s, Select Kp, Ti, TD using Z-N method. Calculate GCF, PCF, GM, PM.
Also, Kp
1 + p 2 Hence, K p = 0.6 K p = 0.6 6.1577 = 3.695 P = 2 / p = 7.24s TI = P / 2 = 3.62s TD = P / 8 = 0.905s

2010
( )
= 1 + (0.868 7 )2 = 6.1577 =1 K p
131
Soln: (contd2)
Now, Kp 1 + g 2 3.695
( )
=1 = 1 g1 = 0.5 = M1 = Kp 1 + g1 1+
(g 7)2 1+
K pG p M1 =
2010
= g1
1+
(g TI )2
1
1 + g1 TD
)2
3.695 1 + (0.5 7)
2
(0.5 3.62)2
1 + (0.5 0.905)2 = 1.26

132
Soln: (contd3)
Now, g 2 = g1 M 1 = 0.5 1.26 = 0.63 K pG p =

= g2
= M2 1+
Kp 1 + g 2
)2
(g TI )
2
1 + g 2 TD 1
M2 =
3.695
1 + (0.63 7)2 M 2 = 1.014

2010
1+
(0.63 3.62)
1 + (0.63 0.905)
133
Soln: (contd4)
1 = p1 T
1 + tan 1 p1 TD p1 p1 TI 2 1 1 1 1 = 0.868 2 1.57 + tan tan + tan 1 (0.868 0.905) 0.868 7 0.868 3.62 = 1.736 1.57 + 0.163 0.308 + 0.6658 = 2.78 1 = 1 + = 2.78 + = 0.356 1 p2 = p1 + T 0.356 = 0.868 + = 1.046rad / s 2 + tan 1 tan 1
Now, p1 = 0.868rad / s
2010
134
Soln: (contd5)
2 = p2 T
1 + tan 1 p2 TD 2 p2 p2 TI 1 1 = 1.04 2 1.57 + tan 1 tan 1 + tan 1 (1.04 0.905) 1.04 7 1.04 3.62 = 2.08 1.57 + 0.136 0.259 + 0.755 = 3.018 2 = 2 + = 3.018 + = 0.123 0.123 p3 = p2 + 2 = 1.04 + = 1.0461rad / s T 2 1 1 tan 1 + tan 1 p3 TD 3 = p3 T + tan 1 p3 p3 TI 2 1 1 = 1.1 2 1.57 + tan 1 tan 1 + tan 1 (1.1 0.905) 1.1 7 1.1 3.62 = 2.2 1.57 + 0.129 0.246 + 0.783 = 3.104 3 = 3 + = 3.104 + = 0.0375 0.0375 = 1.12rad / s p4 = p3 + 3 = 1.1 + T 2 + tan 1 tan 1
2010
135
Soln: (contd6)
GM=3.21 dB PM=370
2010
136
Z-N Tuning-VI
derivative action on fwd path Rise time for PID is expectedly faster compared to Z-N tuned P and PI controlled systems
Example: Comparative Responses

2010
137
Modified D in PID
derivative action on 1.6 feedback path
1.4 Closed Loop Response 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 5 10 15 20 Time 25 30 P PI PID-M
Peak overshoot reduced but so is 35 40 improvement in rise time.

138
2010
Cohen Coon Tuning Rule

In order to provide closed loop responses with a damping ratio of 25%, Cohen and Coon suggested the design equation for an FOPTD model. Similar to the Ziegler and Nichols methods, this technique sometimes brings about oscillatory responses.
2010
139
Cohen Coon Tuning Rule-II

Control Law P PI PID K1 Kp
0.5(1 + T )Ku 3
Ti --
Td ---
0.45(1 +
T ) K u + 0.1T P ) ( 11 + 2.22T 1.2
0.67(1 +
3T 0.74 P ) K u 1.25( + 0.2T ) P ( ) 16 + 0.6T 2 + 0.2T 8
Mixed empirical and plant parameter Results formatted for comparison with Z-N when >>T
For PID: 10% higher P- gain, 25% lower I-gain, 25% higher D-gain results in same gains as in ZN for P and PI
2010
140
Alternative Cohen Coon
Mixed empirical and plant parameter r= / T

2010
141
Chien Method
Both the ZN and CC methods result in oscillatory closed loop response though with quarter amplitude damping In some applications, overshoots are not desirable and the above two methods are considered too aggressive. The method proposed by Chien guarantees either 0% overshoot or 20% overshoot. This method requires perform an open loop test to determine the dead time and time lag. The Chien method is valid only if T/ < 0.11. Once you determine the process characteristics fall within this range, you can determine the controller settings as outlined in Table.
2010
142
Chien Method-II
Kp is the process gain
2010
143

Part-B Pic TKG Ss4 2011-Colour

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Part-B Pic TKG Ss4 2011-Colour

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PROCESS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL

Prepared and Compiled by Prof. T.K.Ghoshal & Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Simplest of all Control Laws Only a Proportional Controller

The controller however is not perfect

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Higher gain= lower PB

+ Normalized Type 0 Plant -

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Example: PB=5 % , L= - 30% ess = 1.5%

SS errors occur because the plant is Type Zero

High Kp however, may lead to

Choosing Kp is always a compromise!

Higher K => Faster Closed Loop response

K=2, 90% of Final

K=1, 90% of final

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Sensitivity to parameter variation

Close Loop BW increases with K

Higher BW => Response speed Noise sensitivity

gcf increases with gain

When gcf=pcf, PM=GM=0

GM decreases with increase in gain

PM decreases with increase in gain

0 -45 -90 -135 -180 10

pcf does not depend upon gain

Proportional Control: GCF

Very handy but approximate

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

As Kp , wg , closed loop BW , and system becomes faster

Proportional Control: Gain Margin

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Proportional Control: Phase Crossover Frequency

K P GP = T tan 1 At = p pT tan p = or , pT + tan 1 p = 1 or , pT + tan p 2

Further approximation : 1 << pT ,

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

= 1.66 1.48 = 3.14

Critical (or ultimate) gain

Bode Diagram Magnitude (abs)

0 -45 Phase (deg) -90 -135 -180 10

Can be used only after determining pcf

Can be used if system parameters are known

Finding Gain Margin

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Finding Phase Margin

Fairly accurate when g > 10

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

As T/ is small, the approximation is fair

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Same as Example 1 Approximation is good

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

1 = 0.178; 0.157 30 10 1 Itn2 : p 0.157 + = 0.176 0.178 30 10 Itn1 : p 0.157 +

KP KP 5.37 GM K P = = = 2.69 KP GM 1.995

20 log10 GM = 6dB GM = 10 6 / 20 = 1.995

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu

Proportional + Integral Control

PIC Lecture 2010 Prof. T.K.Ghoshal and Prof. Smita Sadhu