CHME 624

Advance Process Dynamic Modelling & Control

12. Controller Tuning

A Motivational Example

Unit-step disturbance responses for the candidate controllers (FOPTD

model: K = 1, θ = 4, τ = 20). 2

1
PID Controller Design, Tuning, and Troubleshooting
• The function of a feedback control system is to ensure that the closed loop system
has desirable dynamic and steady-state response characteristics.
• the closed-loop system should satisfy the following:

1. The closed-loop system must be stable.

2. The effects of disturbances are minimized, providing good disturbance rejection.
3. Rapid, smooth responses to set-point changes are obtained, that is, good set-point
tracking.

4. Steady-state error (offset) is eliminated.

5. Excessive control action is avoided.
6. The control system is robust (insensitive to changes in process conditions and to
inaccuracies in the process model).
3

PID controller settings can be determined by a number of alternative

techniques:

1. Direct Synthesis (DS) method

2. Internal Model Control (IMC) method
3. Controller tuning relations
4. Frequency response techniques
5. Computer simulation
6. On-line tuning after the control system is installed.

2
Direct Synthesis Method
• The controller design is based on a process model and a desired closed-loop
transfer function.
• The latter is usually specified for set-point changes, but responses to disturbances
can also be utilized
• Although these feedback controllers do not always have a PID structure, the DS
method does produce PI or PID controllers for common process models.
• As a starting point for the analysis, consider the block diagram of a feedback
control system. The closed-loop transfer function for set-point changes was
derived as:

Y K mGcGvG p
= (12-1)
Ysp 1 + GcGvG p Gm

Block diagram for a standard feedback control system.

For simplicity, let G=GpGvGm and assume that Gm = Km. Then:

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 
6

3
 • This equation cannot be used for controller design because the closed-loop
transfer function Y/Ysp is not known.
• 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:

Gc =
 (
1  Y / Ysp d ) 

 (
G% 1 − Y / Ysp
d
) 


• The specification of (Y/Ysp)d is the key design decision.

• Note that the controller transfer function contains the inverse of the process model
owing to the 1/ G% term.
• This feature is a distinguishing characteristic of model-based control.
7

A. Desired Closed-Loop Transfer Function

For processes without time delays, the first-order model is a reasonable choice,
 Y  1
  = 1.0
(12-4)
 Ysp d τ c s + 1
• The model has a settling time of ~ 4τc, as y
0.5
shown y∞
• Because the steady-state gain is one, no
0
offset occurs for set-point changes. 0 1 2 3 4 5

• By substituting and solving for Gc, the t

controller design equation becomes: τ

 (
1  Y / Ysp d) 

1 1
Gc = ~
Gc =
 (
G% 1 − Y / Ysp
d
) 

G τ cs
8

4
• The 1/τcs term provides integral control action and thus eliminates offset.
• Design parameter τc provides a convenient controller tuning parameter that can be
used to make the controller more aggressive (small τc) or less aggressive (large τc).

• If the process transfer function contains a known time delay θ , a reasonable choice
for the desired closed-loop transfer function is:

 Y  e − θs
  = (12-6)
 Ysp d τc s + 1
• The time-delay term is essential because it is physically impossible for the controlled
variable to respond to a set-point change at t = 0, before t = θ.
• If the time delay is unknown, θ must be replaced by an estimate:

Gc =
 (
1  Y / Ysp d ) 
 Gc =
1 e − θs
(12-7)
 (
G% 1 − Y / Ysp
d
) 

G% τ c s + 1 − e−θs
9

• Although this controller is not in a standard PID form, it is physically realisable.

• For simple process models, this design equation can be used to derive PID controllers.
• The derivation is based on approximating the time-delay term in the denominator with
a truncated Taylor series expansion:
e − θs ≈ 1 − θ s (12-8)
Substituting into the denominator of and rearranging gives:

1 e − θs
Gc =
G% τ c s + 1 − e−θs

1 e −θs
Gc = ~
G (τ c + θ )s

10

5
 B. First-Order-plus-Time-Delay (FOPTD) Model
− θs
Consider the standard FOPTD model, G% ( s ) = Ke
τs + 1
1 e −θs
Gc = ~
G (τ c + θ )s

Substituting into the previous equation and rearranging gives a PI controller,

Gc = K c (1 + 1/ τ I s ) , with the following controller settings:

1 τ
Kc = , τI = τ (12-11)
K θ + τc 11

C. Second-Order-plus-Time-Delay (SOPTD) Model

Ke −θs
Consider a SOPTD model, G% ( s ) =
( τ1s + 1)( τ2 s + 1)
1 e −θs
Gc = ~
G (τ c + θ )s

Substitution and rearrangement gives a PID controller in parallel form,

 1 
Gc = K c 1 + + τDs  (12-13)
 τI s 
where:
1 τ1 + τ 2 ττ
Kc = , τ I = τ1 + τ 2 , τ D = 1 2 (12-14)
K τc + θ τ1 + τ 2 12

6
 Q3(a,b)
Tutorial 4: Use the Direct Synthesis (DS) design method to calculate PID controller
settings for the process:
2e − s
G=
(10s + 1)( 5s + 1)
Consider three values of the desired closed-loop time constant: τ 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:
a. The process model is perfect ( G% = G).
b. The model gain is K% = 0.9, instead of the actual value, K = 2.
Thus,
0.9e − s
G% =
(10s + 1)( 5s + 1)

13

1 e −θs
Gc = ~
G (τ c + θ )s

14

7
The controller settings for this example are:

τc = 1 τc = 3 τ c = 10
Kc ( K% = 2 ) 3.75 1.88 0.682
Kc ( K% = 0.9 ) 8.33 4.17 1.51
τI 15 15 15
τD 3.33 3.33 3.33

The values of Kc decrease as τ c increases, but the values of τ I and τ D do not change.

15

Simulation results for (b): incorrect

model gain.
Simulation results for (a): correct
model gain.
16

8
 On-Line Controller Tuning
1. Controller tuning inevitably involves a tradeoff between performance and robustness.
2. Controller settings do not have to be precisely determined. In general, a small change in a
controller setting from its best value (for example, ±10%) has little effect on closed-loop
responses.
3. For most plants, it is not feasible to manually tune each controller. Tuning is usually done by a
control specialist (engineer or technician) or by a plant operator. Because each person is typically
responsible for 300 to 1000 control loops, it is not feasible to tune every controller.
4. Diagnostic techniques for monitoring control system performance are available.
5. This tuning procedure is not applicable to integrating or open-loop unstable processes because
their control loops typically are unstable at both high and low values of Kc, while being stable for
intermediate values.
6. For first-order and second-order models without time delays, the ultimate gain does not exist
because the closed-loop system is stable for all values of Kc, providing that its sign is correct.
However, in practice, it is unusual for a control loop not to have an ultimate gain.

17

1. Ziegler-Nichols Step-Test Method OR Cohen-Coon Method

• An experimental procedure.
• After the process has reached steady state (at least approximately), the
controller is placed in the manual mode.
• Then a small step change in the controller output (e.g., 3 to 5%) is
introduced.
• The controller settings are based on the process reaction curve, the open-
loop step response.
• Consequently, this on-line tuning technique is referred to as the step test
method or the process reaction curve method.
• An appropriate transfer function model can be obtained from the step
response by using the parameter estimation methods 18

9
Typical process reaction curves:
(a) non-self-regulating process, (b) self-regulating
process. 19

• The chief advantage of the step test method is that only a single
experimental test is necessary.
• But the method does have some disadvantages:

 The experimental test is performed under open-loop conditions.

Thus, if a significant disturbance occurs during the test, no
corrective action is taken. Consequently, the process can be upset,
and the test results may be misleading.
 For a nonlinear process, the test results can be sensitive to the
magnitude and direction of the step change.
 The method is not applicable to open-loop unstable processes.

20

10
Q4
Tutorial 4: Consider the feedback control system for the stirred-tank blending
process and the following step test. The controller was placed in manual, and
then its output was suddenly changed from 30% to 43%. The resulting process
reaction curve is shown in the figure. Thus, after the step change occurred at t
= 0, the measured exit composition changed from 35% to 55% (expressed as a
percentage of the measurement span), which is equivalent to the mole fraction
changing from 0.10 to 0.30. Determine (a) an appropriate process model for
G=GIPGvGpGm (b) C-C settings, and (c) by placing the controller in automatic
mode, using the model developed in part a, also determine Z-N settings for a
PID controller.

21

Solution
(a) A block diagram for the closed-loop system is shown. A first-order-plus-time-delay model
can be developed from the process reaction curve in the Figure using the graphical method.
The tangent line through the inflection point intersects the horizontal lines for the initial and
final composition values at 1.07 min and 7.00 min, respectively.

Block diagram 22

11
The model parameters can be calculated as
Δxm 55% − 35%
Kp = = = 1.54 ( dimensionless )
Δp 43% − 30%
Td = 1.07 min
T = 7.00 − 1.07 min = 5.93 min

The apparent time delay of 1.07 min is subtracted

from the intercept value of 7.00 min for the τ
calculation.
The resulting empirical process model can be
expressed as
X m′ ( s ) 1.54e −1.07 s
= G (s) =
P′ ( s ) 5.93s + 1

23

(b) Use the Table to find C-C settings:

For a PID controller:

24

12
2. Ziegler-Nichols Continuous-Cycling Method

Based on the following trial-and-error procedure:

Step 1. After the process has reached steady state (at least approximately), eliminate
the integral and derivative control action by setting τD to zero and τI to the largest
possible value.
Step 2. Set Kc equal to a small value (e.g., 0.5) and place the controller in the automatic
mode.
Step 3. Introduce a small, momentary set-point change so that the controlled variable
moves away from the set point. Gradually increase Kc in small increments until
continuous cycling occurs (sustained oscillation with a constant amplitude). The
numerical value of Kc that produces continuous cycling (for proportional-only control)
is called the ultimate gain, Kcu. The period of the corresponding sustained oscillation is
referred to as the ultimate period, Pu

25

Step 4. Calculate the PID controller settings using the Ziegler-Nichols (Z-N) tuning
relations in the Table.
Step 5. Evaluate the Z-N controller settings by introducing a small set-point change
and observing the closed-loop response. Fine-tune the settings, if necessary.

The continuous cycling method, or a modified version of it, is frequently

recommended by control system vendors. Even so, the continuous cycling method has
several major disadvantages:

1. It can be quite time-consuming if several trials are required and the process
dynamics are slow.
2. The long experimental tests may result in reduced production or poor product
quality.

26

13
Experimental determination of the ultimate gain Kcu.

27

𝑋 𝑠 1.54𝑒 .
Continuing earlier example: Q2(c) 𝐺 𝑠
𝑃 𝑠 5.93𝑠 1

The characteristic equation using Gc=Kc would be:

1.54𝐾 𝑒 .
1 𝐺𝐺 0, ⇒ 1 0
5.93𝑠 1
𝜃
1 𝑠
𝑒 2 𝜃 = 1.07
Substituting the Pade approximation 𝜃
1 𝑠
1.54𝐾 1 0.535𝑠 2
1 0
5.93𝑠 1 1 0.535𝑠

Rearranging 3.1726 𝑠 6.465 0.8239𝐾 𝑠 1 1.54𝐾 )=0

3.1726𝜔 𝑗 6.465 0.8239𝐾 𝜔 1 1.54𝐾 0 𝑗0

1 1.54𝐾 3.1726𝜔 0, 6.465 0.8239𝐾 𝜔 0

𝜔 2.03 rad/min
2π
𝜔 Use Table for Z-N and T-L Settings 28

14
Tutorial 4: Use the Z-N and T-L methods to calculate PID controller settings for the Q1(a,b)

process: 2e − s
G=
(10s + 1)( 5s + 1)

Use Table for Z-N

and T-L Settings
yourself

29

Tutorial 4
If you use exact analysis without Pade approximation (using frequency response
analysis later)

30

15