Scribd
Upload
566 views8 pages

PID Tuning Cohen Coon Example

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning Example Currently, more than half of the controllers used in industry are PID controllers. In the past, many of these controllers were analog; however, many of today's controllers use digital signals and computers. When a mathematical model of a system is available, the parameters of the controller can be explicitly determined. However, when a mathematical model is unavailable, the parameters must be determined experimentally. Controller tuning is the process of determining the controller parameters which produce the desired output. Controller tuning allows for optimization of a process and minimizes the error between the variable of the process and its set point. Types of controller tuning methods include the trial and error method, and process reaction curve methods. The most common classical controller tuning methods are the Ziegler-Nichols and Cohen-Coon methods. These methods are often used when the mathematical model of the system is not available. The Ziegler-Nichols method can be used for both closed and open loop systems, while Cohen-Coon is typically used for open loop systems. A closed-loop control system is a system which uses feedback control. In an open-loop system, the output is not compared to the input.

Uploaded by

gilangasp
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
566 views8 pages

PID Tuning Cohen Coon Example

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning Example Currently, more than half of the controllers used in industry are PID controllers. In the past, many of these controllers were analog; however, many of today's controllers use digital signals and computers. When a mathematical model of a system is available, the parameters of the controller can be explicitly determined. However, when a mathematical model is unavailable, the parameters must be determined experimentally. Controller tuning is the process of determining the controller parameters which produce the desired output. Controller tuning allows for optimization of a process and minimizes the error between the variable of the process and its set point. Types of controller tuning methods include the trial and error method, and process reaction curve methods. The most common classical controller tuning methods are the Ziegler-Nichols and Cohen-Coon methods. These methods are often used when the mathematical model of the system is not available. The Ziegler-Nichols method can be used for both closed and open loop systems, while Cohen-Coon is typically used for open loop systems. A closed-loop control system is a system which uses feedback control. In an open-loop system, the output is not compared to the input.

Uploaded by

gilangasp
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning Example


C =

M
s

U = 0

Gd

Ga

Gp

Gc

Ym

+
+

Gm

For the Cohen & Coon PRC response to an open step change:
GPRC = GaGpGm =

Y = MK 1 e

Ke s
MKe s
MKe s MKe s
Ym =
=

s ( s + 1 )
s
s + 1
s + 1

(t ) /

) S (t ) .

The suggested rules for finding this PRC from any step-change response curve is:

Draw a straight line tangent to the response curve at the point of inflection.

The apparent time delay is the point where this straight line intersects the
time axis.

The apparent time constant is obtained from the slope of this straight line, S ,
and the ultimate value of the response, Ym , . It is calculated as:
=

Ym ,
.
S

The apparent process gain is obtained from the ultimate value of the response,
ym , . It is calculated as:

K=

Ym ,
.
M

The controller settings were determined using the following performance criteria:

decay ratio.
Minimum offset.
Minimum integral of the square error (ISE).

The tuner settings are in the following table.

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-1-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


I

Kc

Controller
1
K

P
1
K

PI


0.9 +

12

4
+
3 4

1
K

PID

1 +

30 + 3( / )

9 + 20 ( / )
32 + 6 ( / )

13 + 8 ( / )

4
11 + 2( / )

General 2nd Order Overdamped System Example


As an example, let's assume we have a 2nd order overdamped system with negligible
dynamics in the final control & measurement elements. Then:
Gp ( s ) =

Kp

( 1 s + 1)( 2 s + 1)

Ga ( s ) = Gm ( s ) = 1
For the same step change, the response will be:

Y =

so:

MK p

s ( 1 s + 1 )( 2 s + 1)

MK p
s

MK p 12

MK p 22 1
1

+
1 2 1 s + 1 1 2 2 s + 1

1
2
Y = MK p 1
e t / 1 +
e t / 2 .
1 2
1 2

Since we will be needing the point of inflection and its slope, then we also need expressions
for the 1st and 2nd time derivatives:

dY
1
e t / 1
e t / 2
= MK p
dt
1 2
1 2

d 2Y
1
1
t / 1
t / 2
MK
e
e
=

.
p
( )
dt 2
2 ( 1 2 )
1 1 2

The point of inflection is at time t i and can be found from:

d Y
1
e ti / 1
= MK p
2
( )
dt t =t
1 1 2
2

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning


ln 1

1
e ti / 2 = 0 t i = 2
+

1 1
2 ( 1 2 )

2 1

-2-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


We can now find the PRC parameters. The ultimate value will be:

1
2
Y = lim MK p 1
e t / 1 +
e t / 2 = MK p
t
1 2
1 2

So:

K = Kp
=

Kp
S

/( )
/ ( )
MK p 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2

where: S = y ( t i ) =

1 2 1
1

Finally, we can find the dead time by putting a tangent line through the point of inflection.
Then:
Y (ti ) = S (ti ) = ti

Y (t i )
S

1 / ( 1 2 )
2 / ( 1 2 )

MK p
2
2
( 1 2 ) + 2

where: Y ( t i ) =
1
1 2
1
1

Specific 2nd Order Overdamped System Example


Let us take for example the process:

Gp ( s ) =

1
( s + 1)(5s + 1)

For a unit step change, the response will be:


1
5
Y = 1 + e t e t /5
4
4
dY
1
1
= e t + e t /5
dt
4
4
d 2Y 1 t 1 t /5
= e + e
20
dt 2 4
The point of inflection is:

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-3-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


1
ln
5
5
t i = = ln5 = 2.01118
1 1 4

5 1
1 1
then: S =
4 5

5/4

1/4

1

5

1
= 0.133748
=
1/4
5(5)

1
= 7.47674
S

1 1
Y ( t i ) = 4 +
4 5

5/4

t d = 2.01118

1/4

1
5
5

1
53/4

= 0.197512
=1+
1/4
4
20 (5)

0.197512
= 0.535053
0.133748

1.2
1.0
Exact

0.8

Approximate
Y'(t) 0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

The figure compares the exact response with this approximate response. Note that the
comparison is not very good, but what we really want is some approximate curve to
estimate what the controller settings ought to be.
The following will be the Cohen & Coon controller settings:

P control:

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-4-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


Kc =

1
0.535053
7.47674
1 + =
1 +
= 14.3
3 0.535053
3 7.47674
K

PI control:
Kc =

1
K

I =

0.535053

7.47674
0.9 +
=
0.9 +
= 12.7

12 0.535053
12 7.47674

30 + 3( / )

9 + 20 ( / )

= 0.535053

30 + 3( 0.535053/7.47674 )

9 + 20 ( 0.535053/7.47674 )

= 1.55

PID control:
Kc =

1
K

I =

4 7.47674 4 0.535053
+ =
+
= 18.9
3 4 0.535053 3 4 7.47674

32 + 6 ( / )

13 + 8 ( / )

D =

= 0.535053

32 + 6 ( 0.535053/7.47674 )

13 + 8 ( 0.535053/7.47674 )

= 1.28

4
4
= 0.535053
= 0.19
11 + 2( / )
11 + 2( 0.535053/7.47674 )

Non-Linear Fit to PRC Parameters


The use of the inflection point is fairly simple to match parameters for the PRC, but it does
not give a very good fit to the system's response. With today's proliferation of computers &
data manipulation software, it is almost as easy to fit the parameters using non-linear
regression. This can easily be done for the example 2nd order overdamped system using
Excel's Solver function. The parameters found are:
K = 1.00768
= 5.48522
= 0.727561

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-5-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


1.0
0.9
0.8
Exact
Inflection Point Rules
Non-Linear Fit

0.7
0.6
Y'(t) 0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0

10

15

20

25

30

This figure shows that these parameters give a much better fit to the actual response curve.
The following will be the Cohen & Coon controller settings:

P control:

Kc =

1
5.48522
0.727561

1 + =
1 +
= 7.81
K
3 1.00768 0.727561
3 5.48522

PI control:

Kc =

1

1
5.48522
0.727561

0.9 +
=
0.9 +
= 6.82
K
12 1.00768 0.727561
12 5.48522

I =

30 + 3( / )

9 + 20 ( / )

= 0.727561

30 + 3( 0.727561/5.48522)

9 + 20 ( 0.727561/5.48522)

= 1.90

PID control:

Kc =

1 4
1
5.48522 4 0.727561

+ =
+
= 10.2
K 3 4 1.00768 0.727561 3 4 5.48522

I =

32 + 6 ( / )

13 + 8 ( / )

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

= 0.727561

32 + 6 ( 0.727561/5.48522)

13 + 8 ( 0.727561/5.48522)

-6-

= 1.70

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


D =

4
4
= 0.727561
= 0.26
11 + 2( / )
11 + 2( 0.727561/5.48522)

Effect of values on Closed Loop System Response


The controller settings from the two PRCs are quite different. The next logical question is
how different are the responses when control is turned on. Let's look at a step change to
the load for PI control when the transfer function for the disturbance is the same as that for
the manipulated variable, i.e., Gd = Gp . The closed loop transfer function will be:

G(s) =

Gp
1 + Gc Gp

1
( s + 1)(5s + 1)

1
1
1 + Kc 1 +


I s ( s + 1)(5s + 1)

I s
K c + ( I + K c I ) s + 6I s 2 + 5I s3

and with a step change to the load, U = 1/ s then:


Y ( s ) =

I
K c + ( I + K c I ) s + 6I s 2 + 5I s3

The general solution for this can be quite messy (since there are real exponential terms if
overdamped and sine/cosine terms if underdamped). Let's only invert this for specific
cases of the controller variables. For the controller variables derived by fitting the PRC to
the inflection point:
Y ( t ) = 0.0800524e 0.686594t
+e 0.256703t 0.0226252sin (1.52104t ) 0.0800524cos (1.52104t )
For the controller variables derived by fitting the PRC using non-linear regression:
Y ( t ) = 0.16672e 0.596944t
+e 0.301528t 0.0466982sin (1.05468t ) 0.16672cos (1.05468t )

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-7-

December 21, 2008

Colorado School of Mines CHEN403


0.14
0.12

Inflection Point Fit

0.10

Non-Linear Fit

0.08
0.06
Y'(t)
0.04
0.02
0.00
-0.02
-0.04
0

10

15

20

This figure shows the response to this disturbance. Which set of controller settings gives
the best control depends upon your definition of best. The parameters derived from the
PRC fit to the inflection point produces a response with a smaller maximum offset, but the
parameters derived from the non-linear regression PRC fit produces a response with a
better decay ratio.

Cohen & Coon Controller Tuning

-8-

December 21, 2008

You might also like