Control of open-loop unstable processes with time delay using PI/PID controllers specified using tuning rules: An outline survey

The ability of PI and PID controllers to compensate many practical processes has led to their wide acceptance in industrial applications. The requirement to choose two or three controller parameters is conveniently done using tuning rules. Starting with a general discussion of industrial practice, the paper provides a survey of tuning rules for continuous time PI and PID control of open-loop unstable time-delayed single-input, single-output (SISO) processes

PID control system analysis, design, and technology

Designing and tuning a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller appears to be conceptually intuitive, but can be hard in practice, if multiple (and often conflicting) objectives such as short transient and high stability are to be achieved. Usually, initial designs obtained by all means need to be adjusted repeatedly through computer simulations until the closed-loop system performs or compromises as desired. This stimulates the development of "intelligent" tools that can assist engineers to achieve the best overall PID control for the entire operating envelope. This development has further led to the incorporation of some advanced tuning algorithms into PID hardware modules. Corresponding to these developments, this paper presents a modern overview of functionalities and tuning methods in patents, software packages and commercial hardware modules. It is seen that many PID variants have been developed in order to improve transient performance, but standardising and modularising PID control are desired, although challenging. The inclusion of system identification and "intelligent" techniques in software based PID systems helps automate the entire design and tuning process to a useful degree. This should also assist future development of "plug-and-play" PID controllers that are widely applicable and can be set up easily and operate optimally for enhanced productivity, improved quality and reduced maintenance requirements

A classification of techniques for the compensation of time delayed processes. Part 2: Structurally optimised controllers

Following on from Part 1, Part 2 of the paper considers the use of structurally optimised controllers to compensate time delayed processes

Optimised control using proportional-integral-derivative controller tuned using internal model control

Time delays are generally unavoidable in the designing frameworks for mechanical and electrical systems and so on.. In both continuous and discrete schemes, the existence of delay creates undesirable impacts on the under-thought which forces exacting constraints on attainable execution.The presence of delay confounds the design structure procedure also. It makes continuous systems boundless dimensional and also extends the readings in discrete systems fundamentally. As the Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller based on internal model control is essential and strong to address the vulnerabilities and aggravations of the model. But for an real industry process, they are less susceptible to noise than the PID controller.It results in just one tuning parameter which is the time constant of the closed-loop system λ, the internal model control filter factor.It additionally gives a decent answer for the procedure with huge time delays. The design of the PID controller based on the internal model control, with approximation of time delay using Pade’ and Taylor’s series is depicted in this paper. The first order filter used in the design provides good set-point tracking along with disturbance rejection

Prediction for control

5th IFAC Conference on System Structure and Control 1998 (SSC'98), Nantes, France, 8-10 JulyThis paper shows that "optimal" controllers based on "optimal" predictor structures are not "optimal" in their closed loop behaviour and that predictors should be designed taking into account closed-loop considerations. This is first illustrated with a first order plant with delay. The ISE index is computed for two typical optimal controllers (minimum variance controller and generalized predictive controller) when a stochastic disturbance is considered. The results are compared to those obtained by the use of a non optimal PI controller that uses a non optimal Smith predictor and performs better than the optimal controllers for the illustrative example. A general structure for predictors is proposed. In order to illustrate the results, some simulation examples are shown.Ce papier montre que des lois de commandes "optimales" basees sur des structures predictives "optimales" ne sont pas "optimales" dans leur comportement en boucle fermee et que la synthese de predicteurs devrait prendre en compte des considerations de boucle fermee. Cela est d'abord illustre avec un systeme du premier ordre a retard. l'index ISE est calcule pour deux lois de commandes optimales typiques (loi de commande a variance minim ale et loi de commande predictive generalisee), quand une perturbation stochastique est consideree. Les resultats sont compares a. ceux obtenus avec un regulateur PI non optimal base sur un predicteur de Smith non optimal et sont, pour l'exemple illustratif, meilleurs que ceux obtenus avec un regulateur optimal. Vne structure generale de predicteur est proposee. Pour illustrer les resultats, des exemples de simulations sont montres

Robust PI Controller Design Satisfying Sensitivity and Uncertainty Specifications

This paper presents a control design method for determining proportional-integral-type controllers satisfying specifications on gain margin, phase margin, and an upper bound on the (complementary) sensitivity for a finite set of plants. The approach can be applied to plants that are stable or unstable, plants given by a model or measured data, and plants of any order, including plants with delays. The algorithm is efficient and fast, and as such can be used in near real-time to determine controller parameters (for online modification of the plant model including its uncertainty and/or the specifications). The method gives an optimal controller for a practical definition of optimality. Furthermore, it enables the graphical portrayal of design tradeoffs in a single plot, highlighting the effects of the gain margin, complementary sensitivity bound, low frequency sensitivity and high frequency sensor noise amplification

Performance Enhancement of SOPDT System with Numerically Optimized PID Controller

This paper presents a simple but effective method for designing robust PID controller. The robust PID controller design problem is solved by the maximization, on a finite interval of the shortest distance from the Nyquist curve of the open loop transfer function to the critical point -1+j0 i.e. from the knowledge of maximum sensitivity? M?_(s ). Simple formulae are derived to tune/design PID controllers to achieve the improved performance for the given process or system. From control theory we know that all the real time processes have inherent time delays and time constants associated with it. The PID tuning method elaborated in this paper is found to be superior as compared with basic PID tuning methods based on second-order plus delay-time (SOPDT) model of process. Two simulation examples are demonstrated to show the applicability and effectiveness of the given method. DOI: 10.17762/ijritcc2321-8169.160412

Robust PI Controller Design Satisfying Gain and Phase Margin Constraints

This paper presents a control design algorithm for determining PI-type controllers satisfying specifications on gain margin, phase margin, and an upper bound on the (complementary) sensitivity for a finite set of plants. Important properties of the algorithm are: (i) it can be applied to plants of any order including plants with delay, unstable plants, and plants given by measured data, (ii) it is efficient and fast, and as such can be used in near real-time to determine controller parameters (for on-line modification of the plant model including its uncertainty and/or the specifications), (iii) it can be used to identify the optimal controller for a practical definition of optimality, and (iv) it enables graphical portrayal of design tradeoffs in a single plot (highlighting tradeoffs among the gain margin, complementary sensitivity bound, low frequency sensitivity and high frequency sensor noise amplification)