0% found this document useful (0 votes)
198 views27 pages

Pidpso2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Vishnuboy Vishnu
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
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
198 views27 pages

Pidpso2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Vishnuboy Vishnu
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/ 27

PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF PID TUNING BY USING

ZIEGLER-NICHOLS AND PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION


APPROACHES IN A WATER CONTROL SYSTEM
1
Zahratul Laily Edaris & 2Syariza Abdul-Rahman
1
Department Mechanical Engineering Polytechnic Sultan Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah,
Jitra, 06000, Kedah, Malaysia
2
Department of Decision Sciences, Faculty of Quantitative Sciences Universiti Utara
Malaysia, Sintok, 06010, Kedah, Malaysia
[email protected]; [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Tuning the gain of Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller in a process control

system is exceptionally paramount since correct tuning would help a control process

response without steady state error and overshoot. As the conventional gain tuning of PID

controller, Ziegler-Nichols (ZN) approach generally delivers an enormous overshoot,

therefore current heuristics approach namely Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is utilized.

A tuning problem of a single tank water level dynamic control system is presented. The best

PID controller parameters are determined by using the ZN and PSO approaches.

Comparisons of process time performance and the performance measurement of the system

are made in order to evaluate both approaches in terms of their step response through the

MATLAB/Simulink platform. The results demonstrate that the PSO approach produces

promising results with lower overshoot compared to the ZN approach. It is found that the

PSO approach would be advantageous for the industries related with single tank water

control system for a better PID gain tuning.

Keywords: Particle Swarm Optimization, PID Controller, Ziegler-Nichols, single tank

water level.

1
INTRODUCTION

Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) control is the three basic control modes

widely used in various applications nowadays especially in plants and industrial

processes. Examples of this type of processes are in power plants, food and

beverage, pharmaceutical, manufacturing and packaging applications (Mehta &

Reddy, 2015). The PID controller comprises three-term controls: the proportional

(P), the integral (I) and the derivative (D) values. Each PID value can be interpreted

as present error, accumulation of past errors, and prediction of future errors,

respectively based on current rate of change. A number of applications related to

controllers existed such as in industry which involved with temperature regulation,

pressure, flow rate, chemical composition, speed and other applications for which

controller measurement exists.

The main issue in PID process control is related with tuning. Tuning a control loop is

related with the adjustment of the three control parameters (proportional band,

integral, derivative) to the ideal qualities for the sought control response. In an

automated industry and plant, water control system is very important especially in

industrial process control to monitor water/fluid level in a tank according to the

desired level. Without water level control, the output of the water level will varies

thus producing various outputs that affect the process.

Most of the valves of water tanks are built with the electrical components which

allow the process to be monitored automatically with controller elements. Therefore,

tuning is required in this process, to ensure that the water height of the tank gives a

2
desired value by adjusting the gain of the process control of PID element. The

measures of process performances in a process control are the steady state error,

stability and overshoot. Adjusting the gain of PID in a process is very important

because it produces either desired or undesired process performances. It is critical to

ensure that the process control is in control and stable without the steady state error

and overshoot. It is necessary to ensure that certain parameters of a controller in a

process control system be tuned correctly in order to achieve process optimization

and stability.

Among the conventional PID tuning approaches, the Ziegler- Nichols (ZN) approach

is the most well-known one (Ogata, 1987). Studies found that the ZN approach is the

most favored by process control practitioners (Pillay & Govender, 2007). Pillay and

Govender (2007) believed that most of the practitioners were reluctant to apply other

approaches in the system because they had to learn new things which were

complicated, time consuming and laborious to implement. This tuning approach

works quite well on extensive variety of practical processes. Nevertheless, typically

it does not provide good tuning and most of the time it has tendency to create an

enormous overshoot (Solihin, Tack, & Kean, 2011). Recently, the novel Particle

Swarm Optimization (PSO) introduced by Kennedy and Eberhart (Kennedy &

Eberhart, 1995), has opened a new path of optimal findings in process control. It is

featured by its huge capacity for addressing continuous non-linear optimization

problems, shorter calculation and simulation time compared to other stochastic

approaches (Ebrahim, El-Metwally, Bendary, & Mansour, 2012; Das, Chakraborty,

Ray, Bhattacharjee, & Neogi, 2012).

3
This paper attempts to extend our previous research (Edaris & Abdul-Rahman, 2014)

by developing a PID tuning utilizing PSO approach to obtain stability of the tuning

process for a single tank water system. In addition, the PSO approach is compared

with the ZN approach to check the validity of the results and the dynamic of process

performances for both approaches. The results of this study show the process

performance and effectiveness of PSO-PID as a tuning approach for single tank

water level control system. Simulation results considerably clarify the effectiveness

of the proposed approach PSO-PID approach and its flexibility towards improving

the dynamic behavior and stability of single tank water level control.

A description on the plant dynamic model of a single tank water system is presented

in the second section. The third section discusses the tuning process of ZN approach

and PSO approaches, respectively. It is followed by the discussion on the simulation

results in the following section for both approaches. Finally, the conclusion is

provided with some future directions.

LITERATURE REVIEW

There are a number of tuning techniques proposed in the literature. Several

traditional heuristics techniques that have been proposed for tuning the PID are by

Ziegler and Nichols, (1942); and Cohen and Coon, (1953). These techniques are still

having a placed due to its simplicity when compared with other modern tuning

techniques.

Other tuning techniques proposed in the literature are fuzzy logic, performance

index based technique, genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization. A fuzzy

4
logic control provides a formal method of translating subjective and imprecise

human knowledge into control strategies which facilitate a better system

performance through the exploitation and application of knowledge (Malhotra, Singh

and Singh, 2010). A study by Rahmat and Ghazaly, (2006) investigated the time

specification performance comparison between conventional controller and fuzzy

logic controller in the position control system of a DC motor. The result shows that

the PID controller performs better compared with fuzzy logic in terms of percentage

overshoot. Tunyasrirut, and Wangnipparnto (2007) carried out a study on the Fuzzy–

PID cascade controller in controlling the water level of horizontal tank. The results

of this study showed that the speed of responses of the level control system with and

without load interrupt in the tank are fast with the fuzzy logic controller and the PID

controller with the smallest state error.

A performance index is defined as a quantitative measure to depict the system

performance of the designed PID controller. By applying this technique, a good

system can be designed and the PID parameters in the system could be adjusted to

meet the requirement specification. Solihin et al. (2011) applied these performance

indexes as the objective function in their study. The performance indexes were

categorized into four criteria to depict the system performance.

Awouda and Mamat (2010) found an efficient tuning method of the PID controller

by using the optimization rule of ITAE performance criteria. The method implies an

analytical calculation of the gain of the controller for PID controlled systems. The

objective function is selected so as to minimize the ITAE performance index. The

study shows that the ITAE tuning setting from the authors gives a small rise time.

5
The genetic algorithm (GA) uses a direct analogy of such natural evolution to do

global optimization in order to solve highly complex problems (Goldberg, 1989). It

presumes that the potential solution of a problem is an individual and can be

represented by a set of parameters (Kim et al., 2008). Korkmaz, Aydogdu and Dogan

(2012) compared the performance of nonlinear PID and GA based PID. The result

shows the effectiveness of the approaches for tuning the PID controller. In a

comparison study of various intelligent techniques for temperature control of water

bath system, Saini and Rani (2012) found that the use of advanced techniques such

as Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) and GA with the conventional Fuzzy Logic

Control offers encouraging advantages.

Current studies on tuning PID controller focuses on the new approach of particle

swarm optimization. For example, Tandan and Swarnkar (2015) introduced modified

particle swarm optimization (MPSO) which is a simple and fast approach for

optimizing PID controller. This approach able to improve closed-loop performance

over the PSO based optimized PID controller parameters. In a study by Asifa and

Vaishnav (2010), PSO was proposed to improve the step response of a third order

system. Comparison with other conventional approaches shows that the PSO based

PID controller produced superior results especially on the stability convergence and

computational efficiency. The advantages of PSO approach has attract our attention

to apply this approach for solving a single water control system in this study.

PLANT DYNAMIC MODEL

The water level control system (SE-403) in the control laboratory of Sultan Abdul

Halim Muadzam Shah Polytechnic, situated in Jitra, Kedah, Malaysia is a piece of

6
equipment specifically built for engineering education. The water level control

system illustrates the dynamics of water from the sump tank to a process control

tank. The dynamic feature of water tank system is due to its flow of the water in and

out through time. The water level in a process tank can be monitored automatically

from the PID controller. The filling process of the water is carried out until it reaches

the set point value or the desired value of level control specified by the user.

The schematic drawing in Figure 1 represents the model. This system consists of two

tanks, the sump tank, TN 1 and the process tank, TN 2 with the controller valve or

the final elements and level sensors, LS at the bottom of the sump tank, a differential

pressure transmitter of diaphragm seal type, a pump and number of hand valves, HV.

The sump tank, TN 1 at the bottom in the system design has a diameter of 40.5 cm

and the process tank, TN 2 has a diameter of 150 mm. The pump provides in feed

from the sump tank, TN 1 to the outflow of process tank, TN 2. Water from the

sump tank, TN 1 which acts as the water reservoir, will flow into the process tank,

TN 2. Liquid is withdrawn from the base through an outflow orifice (outlet). The

outlet pressure is atmospheric pressure. The water level in the process tank is

measured utilizing a pressure sensitive sensor located at the base of the tank.

Furthermore, a vertical scale in centimeters is also placed beside each tank for visual

feedback concerning the water level in each tank also known as Level Gauge, LG to

measure the level measurement for local indication.

7
Control Valve Process Tank
TN 2
HV: Hand valve

LG: Level Gauge

LC: Level Controller

LT: Level Transmitter


Rotameter HV

HV Sump
Tank TN 1

Rotational
Pump

Figure 1. Model of water level control system

Dynamic and mathematical model of water tank systems

Based on the environment case study, the dynamic equations for the liquid level are

derived as follows. For the process tank or TN 2 and the sump tank or TN 1 in Figure

1, the time rate of change of liquid level is given by,

dLi
= 1/Ai [Fin(t)-Fout(t)] cm/sec i=1,2 (1)
dt

where, Li(t) are the liquid levels, A is the tank cross sectional area, Fin is the inflow

rate for the process tank, Fout is the outflow rate for the process and sump tank and i

is the number of tanks in the water level system . The inflow rate of the water into

the process tank, TN 2 is given by,

Fin (t) = Kp Vp cm3/sec (2)

where, Kp is the pump constant (cm3/volt-sec) and Vp is the voltage applied to the

pump. Then, the velocity outflow for process tank is derived for flow through the

small orifice is given by,

8
Vout (t )  2 gL cm/sec (3)

where, Vout is the velocity outflow for the process tank, g is the gravitational force

acceleration and L is the liquid level for the process tank. Thus, the outflow rate for

the process tank is,

Fout (t )  a2 2 gL cm3/sec (4)

where, a2 is the cross sectional area of the outflow orifice at the bottom of process

tank.

From Equation 1 to Equation 4, the dynamic equations for the water level in the

process tank is given by,

dL a Kp
 2 2 gL(t )  V p (t ) (5)
dt A2 A2

where A2 is the tank cross sectional area. Next, the steady state pump voltage, VPSS

that produces the desired steady state constant level in the tank is constructed.

dL
Specifically, setting  0 in Equation 5, yields
dt

a 2 gLSS
VPSS  (6)
Kp

The steady state level, LSS can be computed as,


2
a 
LSS   2  (7)
 a1 
where, a2 is the cross sectional area of the outflow orifice at the bottom of process

tank and a1 is the cross sectional area of the outflow orifice at the bottom of sump

tank. Equations 6 and 7 can be used to regulate the water level in the process tank.

However, external disturbances, system parameter uncertainty or variation are


9
necessary for a feedback controller to improve the level control system performance.

By designing a set of variable l2(t) as an output and u(t) as an input in water level

system,

l 2 (t )   L2 (t )  Lss (8)
dV p
u (t )   V pss
dt (9)

where  L2(t) is water level that changes dynamically with time in process tank, Lss is

dV p
water level in steady state, is voltage applied to the pump that changes
dt

dynamically with time and VPSS is voltage in steady state. The dynamic Equation 5

can be rewritten as,

dL
  2 2 g l 2 (t )  Lss  
a Kp
u(t )  V pss  (10)
dt A2 A2

Linearizing the Equations 10 ( l2=0, u=0), yields,

dL
 l (t )  u (t ) (11)
dt
where,
a2 g Kp
  ,   (12)
A2 2 Lss A2

Finally, a transfer function model was developed for the system by taking the

Laplace transform from Equation 11.

l 2 ( s) 
G( s)   (13)
u ( s) s  

10
The numerical values of the parameters for the process control system are presented

in Table 1. The values and units from Table 1 were collected based on the actual data

from the environment case study of water level control system (SE-403). The

methods used in data collection were done through the registration system and the

experimental study.

Table 1. Physical quantity and symbol in water level control system

Physical Quantity Symbol Numerical value Units


Sump tank and process tank D1 and D2 40.5 and 15 cm
diameters
Sump tank and process tank d1 and d2 1.9 and 1.9 cm
orifice diameters

Pump constant Kp 6.1 cm3


Volts-sec
Gravitational constant g 980 cm/sec2
Steady state level Lss 1 cm

The sump tank and process tank diameters, sump tank and process tank orifice

diameters and the pump constant are collected through a registration system from the

manual or the handbook of the environment case study. The experimental study of

the environment case was carried out to obtain the specific information regarding the

case environment workflow to achieve a correct mathematical model. Besides that,

interviews with individuals in the laboratory such as the laboratory technicians and

the person in charge of the control laboratory were carried out. The interviewees

explained the mechanics and the workings of the environment case in-depth and

background theories of the control system.

11
The block diagram shown in Figure 2 is simplified with the closed loop system of a

PID controller in the direct path with the transfer function of the plant or

environment case G(s) in which R(s) represents the desired input signal, F(s) is the

feedback signal, E(s) is the error signal of E(s)=R(s)-F(s), I(s) is the input signal for

the transfer function of plant G(s), Y(s) is the output signal for the whole control

system and Gc(s) is the transfer function of the PID controller. The transfer function

is defined as the ratio of Laplace transform of the output to the Laplace transform of

the input (Ogata, 1987).

E(s) Output
Setpoint PID u(s) PLANT
F(s) Gc(s) G(s)
R(s) l2(s)

Figure 2. Block Diagram of PID controller design

Substitution of Equation 12 to Equation 13, results Equation 14 with:

Kp
A2
G(s) 
a2 g (14)
s  ( )
A2 2 Lss

A2 is the cross sectional area of process control tank, TN 2 which

 ( D2 ) 2
A2  =176.738cm2, while a2 is the cross sectional area of the outflow orifice
4

 (d 2 ) 2
at the bottom of process tank, TN 2 which is a 2   2.836cm 2 . Hence
4

12
substituting the values from Table 1 into Equation 14, the single water level tank

model as the first order system is written as:

0.035
G(s) 
s  0.355 (15)

The objective function used in this study is to minimize the performance index of

Integrated Square of Error (ISE).


ISE   e 2 (t )dt
0 (16)

By applying ISE as the objective function in this study, it has the capability to seek

for a set of PID parameters such that the feedback control system with least settling

time and able to penalize large overshoot.

METHODOLOGY

The gains of PID affect the process control system. For example, a proportional

control (Kp) can have the effect of reducing the rise time but never eliminate the

steady state error, an integral control (Ki) can have the effect of eliminating the

steady state error, but it may take the transient response to worsen and a derivative

control (Kd) can have the effect of increasing the stability of the system, reducing the

overshoot and able to improve the transient response. Thus, tuning the correct PID

could lead to a good performance of water control system.

Tuning of PID using ZN

The flowchart of PID tuning for ZN Close Loop Control is presented in Figure 3. To

do so, PID controller was tuned by setting the P only mode and the gain is adjusted

13
in order to keep the control system in continuous oscillation. Then the controlled

variable of the period oscillation and the amplitude of the step response are measured

to determine the stability margins.

START

Input close loop


transfer function Gc(s)

Calculate the total number of input


coefficients in the characteristics equation

Stability checking

Display the step response of


the close loop system Gc(s)

Determine the close loop gain of Gc(s)

Define variable of ZN-PID design tool


[k,ku,pu]=znPIDtuning(G,2)

Verify Ku and Pu using step response in 5


periods

Get the step response of oscillation curve


vars= [K,L,T,N]

Determine Ku and Pu

Display step response


of three systems using P,
PI and PID controller

END

Figure 3. Flowchart of PID controller for ZN (Ogata, 1987)

In this approach, applying proportional control and increasing the controller gain are

essential until the process output reaches a sustained oscillation. The PID parameters
14
are computed using the calculation given in Table 2, where Tu denotes as the period

of the oscillation and Ku denotes as the regulator gain yielding it.

Table 2. The ZN calculation for Closed-Loop

Controller Kp Ti Td

P 0.5Ku
PI 0.4Ku 0.8Tu
PID 0.6Ku 0.5Tu 0.125Tu

Tuning of PID using PSO Optimization

Population-based search methodology such as genetic algorithm (Ibrahim,

Shamsuddin & Qasem, 2015) and ant colony algorithm (Alobaedy & Ku-Mahamud,

2015) have successful solved optimization problem. The Particle Swarm

Optimization is also considered as a population-based search methodology. The

searching of this approach is through improvement of individuals by utilizing

population cooperation and competition. This approach mimics the simulation of

simplified social models, such as bird, fish and the swarming theory (Pan et al.,

2006) and utilizes population based stochastic optimization approach. PSO involves

set of particles that fly around in a multidimensional search space by adjusting their

directions and positions in searching for a better solution. A particle and that of its

neighbors with best position toward an optimal solution are known as pbest while

gbest is a global best of all particles. The current velocity and the distance from

Pbesti, to gbest are employed to calculate the modified velocity and position of each

particle. This is shown in the following equations:

vi(,tm1)  w, vi(,tm)  c1 * rand () * ( Pbest i ,m  xi(,tm) )  c2 * rand () * ( gbest m  xi(,tm) ) (16)

15
xi(,tm1)  xi(,tm)  vi(,tm1) ; i  1,2,...n; m  1,2,..., d (17)

where ;

n: Number of particles in the group

d: Dimension

t : Pointer of iterations (generations)

vit,m : Velocity of particle i at iteration t, vdmin  vit, d  vdmax

w: Inertia weight factor

c1, c2 : Acceleration constant

rand(): Random number between 0 and 1

xit, d : Current position of particle i at iterations

Figure 4 shows the flowchart of PID-PSO approach in water level control system of

the environment case study. At first, initial swarm of particles in search space are

randomly produced. Each particle is considered as a candidate solution for PID

parameters. The values were set in the range of 0 to 50. This study involves three

dimensional problems, where the set of parameters Kp, Ki and Kd are represented by

matrices with a dimension of 3x swarm size. The swarm size is 50 and the number of

iteration for this study is also set to 50. The following parameters of PSO were

chosen with inertia weight, w=0.7968 and acceleration constants, c1 = c2 = 1.4962.

The parameters of w, c1 and c2 are weight parameters and are determined based on

their performance from the initial test.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

PSO and Ziegler and Nichols tuning is implemented offline. MATLAB® system

identification toolbox was used to develop plant model for water level control
16
system, while tuning was implemented under simulated conditions within the

MATLAB® Simulink environment.

START

Random initialization of
individuals ofSTAR
population
T
including searching points,
velocities, pbest and gbest.

Model run for the water level control


for each set of parameters

Parameter calculations: Kp, Ki and Kd

Fitness function calculation

Fitness identification of best


individuals and global best and update the
corresponding position for each particle.

Set new position and new velocity if


new particle flies beyond the boundary

Velocity and the position updates

Stopping
condition

Return gbest

END

Figure 4. Flowchart of PID controller for PID-PSO

The performance of the proposed approaches in this study was measured in terms of

process time performance or system response and performance measurements such

17
as the rise time, settling time, overshoot and steady state error. Results of this study

are presented in two forms, as table and plots for the figures. The table contains the

performance measurements of the system for the PID controller. The figure plots

amplitude of height for the water level into the x-axis and time in seconds into the y-

axis and the plot represents the process time performance for the system.

Step response of PID-ZN Close Loop tuning

This approach is based on frequency response features. Process data is obtained by

connecting a feedback loop with proportional control. The gain of the controller is

increased until the system reaches the stability boundary; the gain of the controller,

Ku and the period of the oscillation, Pu are observed. A simulated oscillation is

shown in Figure 5.

From Figure 5, the amplitude for the oscillations was the value of the Ultimate Gain,

Gm of 1.94. The Ultimate Period from the simulated results in Figure 5 can be

calculated by finding the differences between one peak and another peak from the

four peaks obtained. The three peak to peak time differences were then averaged and

this resulted in the value of 1.24 seconds for the Ultimate Period, wcg. The

parameters of Ultimate gain, Gm (1.94) and Ultimate Period, wcg (1.24) obtained

from the simulated oscillation in Figure 5 are able to contribute the findings of the

gain of the controller, Ku and period of the oscillation, Pu. It can be done by applying

the rules of equation ZN as shown below:

Ku=10Gm/20 (18)

Pu=2/cg (19)

18
Substituting the values of Ultimate gain, Gm (1.94) and Ultimate Period, wcg (1.24)

into Equation 18 and 19 yields the value of Ku and Pu as listed in Table 3.

Figure 5. Oscillation for the PID-ZN Close Loop tuning approach

Applying the values of Ku and Pu in Table 3 into the calculation of ZN Closed Loop

tuning (as presented in Table 2) gives the value of Kp, Ti and Td as shown in Table 4.

Table 3. Ku and Pu of ZN tuning Close Loop

Gain of Controller, Ku 1.25

Period of the oscillation, Pu 5.07

Table 4. Gain of Kp, Ti and Td for ZN Tuning Close Loop


Controller Kp Ti Td
P 0.625
PI 0.500 4.05
PID 0.750 0.3950 0.633

From the PID gains obtained in Table 4, the step response for ZN Closed Loop

tuning approach was simulated. The gain values of Kp, Ti and Td for the ZN approach

19
presented in Table 4 indicate the values of the Proportional (P), Proportional and

Integral (PI) and Proportional, Integral and Derivative (PID) for the proposed water

level control system. The gain values of Kp=0.750, Ti= 0.3950 and Td=0.633 for the

Proportional, Integral and Derivative (PID) control resulting process control with the

integral time, Ti that was set to slow, which behave the process that will not return to

the set point quickly enough. Besides that the derivative time, Td which was too

small, results a process control which was unable to reduce the amount of possible

measurement deviation and overshoot on process upset. Figure 6 shows that the

system behaves in a good manner. The response of the system has a small rise time

of 0.308 seconds and is able to minimize the steady state error by approaching the set

point value at 3.59 seconds. However, the process response had a high overshoot of

55.1%.

Figure 6. Step response for the PID-ZN Close Loop tuning

PID-PSO tuning

The results of PID-PSO Tuning for model control system are presented in Figure 7.

It shows that the process output increases responding to the speed and direction of

20
change of the process variable. The step response of PID-PSO Tuning does not show

any time lag or dead time occur in the process.

Figure 7. Step response of first test PID-PSO Tuning

Figure 8 (a) shows the contour plot of the local best position for the first test of PID-

PSO Tuning. The plot shows that the particles move randomly from the first iteration

until the end of iteration while searching for the best local position of the system. It

shows that the PSO approach for the process control has large searches of search

space in determination for the best local position. The test illustrates that the PSO

approach has the diversity of swarms for the controller gain determination. In Figure

8 (b), the 3-D contour plot shows the velocity of the model system. From the figure,

it is clearly seen that each particle moves freely and randomly in the search space.

Each different color in the 3-D represents different velocity of data from the first

iteration to the fiftieth iteration. It shows that a particle from the global best position

and its local best position is near, hence, the nearer or smaller of change in velocity

to move the particle back toward is the best solution. PSO leads to dynamic tuning

21
due to its ability to find the best optimal solution through time by searching best

possible solution in a short time.

(a)

(b)
Figure 8. (a) Contour plot for the local best position of PID-PSO Tuning, (b) 3-D contour plot for
the velocity of PID-PSO Tuning.

22
Comparison

In the ZN tuned PID controller, the environment case plant response produced high

overshoot while, the PID-PSO tuning show a better performance with reduced

amplitude peak of overshoot. The results of Kp, Ki and Kd obtained for both tuning

are shown in Table 5. The values of Kp, Ti and Td for the PID-PSO approach test

indicate that the integral time has been set from slow to fast, which resulting the

controller valve to move a bit faster than the measurement value. The derivative

time, Td has been increased to a value of 20.1525 that able to reduce the amount of

possible measurement deviation and overshoot in the process.

Table 5. PID gains for both approaches

Tuning approach Kp Ti Td

ZN 0.7500 0.3950 0.6330

PID-PSO first test 9.4619 0.0018 20.1525

Details of the results for process performances using both tuning approaches are

shown in Table 6 that was obtained from the data simulated by MATLAB prompt.

The transient response shows that the system has a subsequent change compared

with the ZN approach with overshoot at 0% in the process and zero steady state.

Based on the given values in Table 6, it is proved that the PID-PSO tuning approach

is able to eliminate 100% error in the single tank water level control system. The

transient response for both approaches proved that the PSO-PID tuning system was

in stability with less amplitude of steady state error and percentages of overshoot

were reduced. Therefore, the process response of PID-PSO shows a better positive

reaction compared to that of the Ziegler and Nichols tuning approach.

23
Dynamic behavior ZN-PID PSO-PID
Rise Time 0.308s 6.3s
Overshoot 1.16s NAN
55.1% A 0% A
Steady state amplitude 5s 10s
1%A 1%A

Table 6. Performance measurements of both tuning approach (s = time in seconds, A= amplitude)

From the results and discussions presented in this section, it revealed that the PID-

PSO approach can give a good performance for solving single tank water level

control system. The experiments have shown that this approach can be easily

employed especially for the first single order tank water level control system.

Moreover, this study has shown that the PID-PSO gives a better performance than

the ZN tuning approach due to its capability to stabilize the system and to improve

its dynamic behavior. Since the ability of dynamic tuning of PSO to find best

solution through time, thus better performance is obtained compared with the Ziegler

and Nichols tuning approach.

This study shows that both PSO and Ziegler and Nichols approaches can be applied

in process plant for process optimization. However, it is proven that PSO approach

gives a better step response and performance compared to ZN approach. The PID-

PSO controller is able to reduce overshooting effectively due to the objective

function applied in the PSO approach which can minimize large overshooting in a

process plant. Inertia weight in PSO approach has a great effect in system

performance of the approach itself. Inertia weight determines the velocity and

optimal particles position in the search space. The particles in the search space

oscillated and the determination for the best position is challenging if a high value of

24
inertia weight is applied to the approach. Whereas if the inertia weight used was too

low, it tends to create the fast convergence speed (premature convergence) and local

minima.

CONCLUSION

This study presents a tuning problem of a single tank water level dynamic control

system by tuning the gain of Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controller in a

process control system. The tuning of water control system is important because the

incorrect tuning could lead to a control process response with steady state error and

overshoot. This study proposed the tuning approaches based on PSO and ZN

approaches. The result of the study shows that the conventional gain tuning of PID

controller, ZN approach generally delivers an enormous overshoot. Nevertheless,

comparison between PSO and ZN approaches prove that PSO approach gives a

better step response and performance compared to ZN approach. The PID-PSO

controller is able to reduce overshooting effectively due to the objective function

applied in the PSO approach which can minimize large overshooting in a process

plant. Inertia weight in PSO approach has a great effect in system performance of the

approach itself which determines the velocity and optimal particles position in the

search space. Thus, PSO leads to dynamic tuning due to its ability to find the best

solution through time. This study is implemented by applying PSO and ZN

approaches within offline mode. It is suggested that this study can be improved by

exploring the offline and online (real-time) with the process plant. It is also

suggested that an improvement can be done to this study by considering a complex

problem of water control system of multi-objective optimization.

25
REFERENCES
Alobaedy, M. M., & Ku-Mahamud, K. R. (2015). Strategic Oscillation for Exploitation and
Exploration of ACS Algorithm for Job Scheduling in Static Grid Computing. In the
proceedings of The Second International Conference on Computing Technology and
Information Management, Johor; 04/2015.
Asifa, H. M., and Vaishnav, S. R. (2010). Particle Swarm Optimisation Algorithm Based
PID Controller. In the proceedings of The 3rd International Conference on
Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology (ICETET), pages 628 – 631.
Das S., Chakraborty A., Ray J.K., Bhattacharjee S., & Neogi B. (2012, August). Study on
Different Tuning Approach with Incorporation of Simulation Aspect for Z-N
(Ziegler-Nichols) Rules. International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications (IJSRP), 3(8).
Ebrahim M.A., El-Metwally K.A., Bendary F.M., & Mansour W.M. (2012). Optimization of
Proportional-Integral-Differential Controller for Wind Power Plant Using Particle
Swarm Optimization Technique. International Journal of Electrical and Power
Engineering, 6, 32-37
Edaris, Z. L., & Abdul-Rahman, S. (2014). Optimizing proportional integral derivative water
control system tuning based on particle swarm optimization. In the Proceedings of
the 1st International Conference on the Analysis & Mathematical Applications in
Engineering (AMEAS2014), Curtin University Malaysia, Malaysia, January 19-22,
pages 265-271.
Goldberg, D.E. (1989). Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning.
Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc.
Ibrahim, A. O., Shamsuddin, S. M., & Qasem, S. N. (2015). Hybrid NSGA-II Optimization
for Improving the Three-Term Bp Network for Multiclass Classification Problems.
Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 14(1), 21-38.
Kennedy J., & Eberhart R. (1995). Particle swarm optimization. Proceeding of IEEE
International Conference on Networks (ICNN’95), 4, 1942-1948.
Korkmaz, M., Aydogdu, O., & Dogan, H. (2012). Design and performance comparison of
variable parameter nonlinear PID controller and genetic algorithm based PID
controller. In the Proceedings of the International Symposium on Innovations in
Intelligent Systems and Applications (INISTA), pages 1-5.
Kim, J. S., Kim, J. H., Park, J. M., Park, S. M., Choe, W. Y., & Heo, H. (2008). Auto tuning
PID controller based on improved genetic algorithm for reverse osmosis
plant. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 47, 384-389.
Malhotra, R., Singh, N. and Singh, Y. (2010). Design of Embedded Hybrid Fuzzy-GA
Control Strategy for Speed Control of DC Motor: A Servo Control Case
Study. International Journal of Computer Applications (0975–8887), 6(5), 37-46.
Mehta B., & Reddy Y., Industrial Process Automation Systems, 2015, Chapter 19-Advanced
process control systems, (pp. 547-557).
Ogata K., (1987). Modern Control Systems, University of Minnesota, Prentice Hall, 1987.
Pan, H., Wang, L., & Liu, B. (2006). Particle swarm optimization for function optimization
in noisy environment. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 908–919.

26
Pillay N., & Govender P. (2007). A Particle Swarm Optimization Approach for Model
Independent Tuning of PID Control Loop. IEEE Africon 2007, IEEE Catalog:
04CH37590C, ISBN: 0-7803-8606-X.
Rahmat M. F. and Ghazaly M. M. (2006). Performance Comparison between PID and Fuzzy
Logic Controller in Position Control System of DC Servomotor, Jurnal Teknologi
45(D), 1-17.
Saini, S., & Rani, S. (2012). Temperature Control Using Intelligent Techniques. In the
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Advanced Computing &
Communication Technologies (ACCT), pages 138-145.
Solihin M. I., Tack L. F., & Kean M. L. (2011). Tuning of PID Controller Using Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO). Proceeding of the International Conference on
Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology 2011, ISBN 978-983-
42366-4-9, 458-461.
Tandan, N., and Swarnkar, K. K. (2015). Tuning of PID Controller using Modified Particle
Swarm Optimization, International Journal of Electronics, Electrical and
Computational System, 4, 62-66.
Tunyasrirut S. and Wangnipparnto S. (2007). Level Control in Horizontal Tank by Fuzzy-
PID Cascade Controller, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,
pp.78-82.

27

You might also like