Process Control Notes (4th year)

Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering

ECEg4333

Chapter Three
Controller Design and Tuning
Introduction: Controller design and tuning mean designing gc(s) the controller type for selected
system. Example for PID controller a process of finding the values of proportional, integral, and
derivative gains of the controller to achieve desired performance and meet design
requirements. Controller tuning appears easy, to find the set of gains that ensures the best
performance of your control system.
1. Performance criteria for closed-loop systems
The function of a feedback control system is to ensure that the closed-loop system has desirable
dynamic and steady state response characteristics. Ideally, we would like the closed-loop system
to satisfy the following performance criteria:
1) The closed-loop system must be 4) Offset is eliminated.
stable. 5) Excessive control action is avoided.
2) The effects of disturbances are 6) The control system is robust (i.e.
minimized. insensitive for change in process
3) Rapid, smooth responses to set point condition).
changes are obtained.

Stability of closed system

The stability of closed loop system is stable for checkup we have to use the Routh array stability
checkup table.
In order to determine the values of controller gain for the system to be stable having two
methods.
a) Routh array Stability criteria
b) Direct substitution methods
a) Routh array Stability criteria
The necessary and sufficient conditions for tall roots of the characteristics equation having
negative real parts in that all the elements in the left column of the Routh array is positive.

1|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Routh (pronounced like truth) stability criterion is based on a polynomial equation that has the
following form:
𝑎𝑛𝑆 𝑛 + 𝑎𝑛 − 1𝑆 𝑛−1 + 𝑎1𝑠 + 𝑎𝑜

The routh array having n+1,rows where n is the charactersitics equation.

If all the coefficients in the first column of the Routh array are positive, then the sufficient
condition for stability is satisfied. If all the coefficients are not positive, then we can determine the
number of unstable (positive) roots by the number of changes in the sign of the coefficients as we
move down the first column. An example of the use of the Routh array to determine limits of a
tuning parameter for closed-loop stability.
a) Direct substitution methods
For the characteristics equation given on the imaginary axis real parts of the s is zero and
substitute s=jw to find Kc value directly without Routh array tabulation methods.
There are two type PID controller tuning
1) Classical methods (Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation Method, Ziegler-Nichols
Open-Loop Method and Tyreus-Luyben Suggested Tuning Parameters Based on the
Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation Tuning Method).
2) Model based design methods (Direct synthesis methods and Internal model control)
Closed-Loop Oscillation-Based Tuning
A PID controller has three tuning parameters. If these are adjusted in an ad hoc fashion, it may
take a while for satisfactory performance to be obtained. Also, each tuning technician will end up

2|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

with a different set of tuning parameters. There is plenty of motivation, then, to develop an
algorithmic approach to controller tuning. The first widely used method for PID tuning was
published by Ziegler and Nichols in 1942.
There are two type PID controller tuning
3) Classical methods (Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation Method, and Tyreus-Luyben
Suggested Tuning Parameters Based on the Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation
Tuning Method, Ziegler-Nichols Open-Loop Method, and Cohen-Coon open loop
Parameters).
4) Model based design methods (Direct synthesis methods and Internal model control)
Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Method
The Ziegler-Nichols closed-loop tuning technique was perhaps the first rigorous method to tune
PID controllers. The technique is not widely used today because the closed-loop behavior tends to
be oscillatory and sensitive to uncertainty. We study the technique for historical reasons, and
because it is similar to commonly used automatic tuning ("auto tune") techniques.
The closed-loop Ziegler-Nichols method consists of the following steps.
1) With P-only closed-loop control, increase the magnitude of the proportional gain until the
closed-loop is in a continuous oscillation. For slightly larger values of controller gain, the
closed-loop system is unstable, while for slightly lower values the system is stable.
2) The values of controller proportional gain that causes the continuous oscillation is called
the critical (or ultimate) gain, Kcu. The peak-to-peak period (time between successive
peaks in the continuously oscillating process output) is called the critical (or ultimate)
period, Pu.
3) Depending on the controller chosen, P, PI, or PID, use the values in Table 3.1 for the tuning
parameters, based on the critical gain and period.
The closed-loop responses for Ziegler-Nichols tuning for P, PI, and ideal PID controllers (based
on Table 3-1) are shown. Notice that a P-only controller has offset, as expected. Also, all the
responses are quite oscillatory; this is one of the major disadvantages to the Ziegler-Nichols tuning
method. It typically results in more oscillatory behavior than would be allowable in a typical
process plant. The tuning parameters are also not very robust, that is, they are very sensitive to

3|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

process uncertainty. If the process conditions change, then the control system may become
unstable.
Table 3. 1: Ziegler-Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation Method Tuning Parameters
Controller type kc I D
P-only 0.5 kcu — —
PI 0.45 kcu Pu/1.2 —
PID 0.6 kcu Pu/2 Pu/8

2𝜋
𝑃𝑢 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑤

Example 3.1: - Consider the third-order system used.

1
𝐺𝑝 (𝑠) =
6𝑆 3 + 11𝑆 2 + 6𝑠 + 1 + 𝑘𝑐
We must use the Routh stability criterion on the characteristic polynomial. The coefficients are
𝑎3 = 6, 𝑎2 = 11, 𝑎1 = 6, 𝑎0 = 1 + 𝑘𝑐

The Routh array is and Inserting our values into the Routh array

We see from the necessary condition that1 + 𝐾𝑐 > 0, or 𝐾𝑐 > 0. The sufficient condition that
must be checked is 𝑏1 > 0.

11∗6−6(1+kc)
b1 = ,
11

Which leads to Kc < 10 for stability. The range of tuning parameters for stability is then:

−1 < 𝐾𝑐 < 10

4|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

As kc is increased, the closed-loop response becomes more oscillatory. The closed-loop system
will lose stability at Kc = 10, see it in the Matlab response below:

Figure 3.1 :- Ziegler Nichols closed loop tuning Simulink model.

Figure 3.2:- Ziegler-Nichols closed-loop tuning

Illustration for the above simulation:-
Kp=5 is under damped with quarter decay beteween conscative oscilation.
Kp=10 is un damped, i.e beyoned this value system is unstable
Examples 3.2: - determine the Ziegler Nichols Tuning parameters for PID controllers with the
given transfer function assume that unites of the time constant is minutes.
10
𝐺𝑝 =
𝑆 2 + 6𝑠 + 6

5|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

The derivative controller gain and the integral gains were set at zero. The proportional gain was
varied, starting from Kc=-0.6 and above value until a relatively stable system was obtained at
Ku=8.5.
At this gain, the period of oscillation (Pu) is obtained as 0.7. From Ziegler-Nichols method, the
PID values are
Rull Name Tuning Parametres
Gain Kp Ki Kd
P-only 4.25 0 0
PI 3.825 14.6 0
PID 5.1 24.28 0.74375

Figure 3.3 Ziegler Nichols Tuning model for P Controllers

Figure 3.4: Ziegler Nichols tuning simulation result for P- controllers

6|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Figure 3.5: Ziegler Nichols tuning model for PI - Controllers

Figure 3.3: Ziegler Nichols tuning simulation result for PI - controllers

Figure 3.6: Ziegler Nichols tuning model for PID - Controllers

Figure 3.7: Ziegler Nichols tuning simulation result for PID -

Controllers
7|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Tyreus and Luyben have suggested tuning parameter rules that result in less oscillatory responses
and that are less sensitive to changes in the process condition. Their rules are shown in Table 3-2.
Table 3.2: Tyreus-Luyben Suggested Tuning Parameters Based on the Ziegler-
Nichols Closed-Loop Oscillation Tuning Method.

Controller type kc I D
PI kcu/3.2 2.2 Pu —
PID kcu/2.2 2.2 Pu Pu/6.3
The closed-loop responses for Tyreus-Luyben tuning for P (assumed to be the Ziegler-Nichols
value), PI, and PID controllers designed based on above table3.2. The Tyreus-Luyben parameters
result in less oscillatory responses and will be less sensitive to uncertainty.
From Example 3.2, let’s take to design Tyreus-Luyben based on the Ziegler-Nichols
Rull Name Tuning Parametres
Gain Kp Ki Kd
PI 2.656 1.54 0
PID 3.4 1.54 0.111

Figure 3.8: Tyreus-Luyben tuning based on the Ziegler-Nichols Method model for PI -
Controllers

Figure 3. 8: Tyreus-Luyben tuning based on the Ziegler-Nichols tuning Method

simulation for PI - Controllers

8|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Figure 3. 9: Tyreus-Luyben tuning based on the Ziegler-Nichols tuning Method

model for PID - Controllers

Figure 3.10: Tyreus-Luyben tuning based on the Ziegler-Nichols tuning

Method simulation for PID - Controllers

Examples 3.3: - determine the Ziegler Nichols Tuning parameters for PID controllers with the
given transfer function assume that unites of the time constant is minutes (Due it in Matlab for
5 1
checkup). 𝐺𝑣 = , and 𝐺𝑝 =
2𝑠+1 5𝑆 2 +6𝑠+1

gc(s) ∗ gp(s) ∗ 𝑔𝑚(𝑠) ∗ 𝐺𝑣(𝑠)

𝐺𝐶𝐿 = [ ]
[1 + gp(s) ∗ gc(s) ∗ 𝑔𝑚(𝑠) ∗ 𝐺𝑣(𝑠]
Here open loop characteristics equation,
5 1 (5s+1)(2s+1)+4Kc
1 + 𝐺𝑜𝐿 = (1 + ∗ ∗ 𝐾𝑐) = =0
2𝑠+1 5𝑆2 +6𝑠+1 (2s+1)(5𝑆2 +6𝑠+1)

(5𝑠 + 1)(2𝑠 + 1) + 4𝐾𝑐 = 10𝑆3 + 17𝑆2 + 8𝑠 + 1 + 4𝐾𝑐 = 0, 𝐿𝑒𝑡 𝑆 = 𝑗𝑤

9|Page
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

10(𝑗𝑤)3 + 17(𝑗𝑤)2 + 8(𝑗𝑤) + 1 + 4𝐾𝑐 = 0

−10𝑖𝑤 3 − 17𝑤 2 + 8𝑖𝑤 + 1 + 4𝐾𝑐 = 0
Real =−17𝑤 2 + 1 + 4𝐾𝑐 = 0
8
Imaginary = −10𝑖𝑤 3 + 8𝑖𝑤 = 0 = −10𝑖𝑤 3 = −8𝑖𝑤 = −10𝑤 2 = −8 = −10𝑤 2 = 𝑤 2 = 10 =
2
, 𝑤 = √2/5 = 0.894
5

−17(0.894)2 + 1 + 4Kc, Kc = 3.15

Kc 3.15 2𝜋
Kc = 0.6Kcu, Kcu = 0.6 = = 1.853, 𝑃𝑢 = = 7.03𝑚𝑖𝑛
0.6 𝑤
𝑃𝑢 7.03
𝑇𝑖 = = = 3.52𝑚𝑖𝑛
2 2
7.03
Td = = 0.879min
8

 From example 3.3 detremine Tyreus-Luyben Tuning Parameters for PID controller?
Kcu = 3.2*Kc = 3.2*3.15 = 10.08
Ti = 2.2*Pu = 2.2*7.03 = 15.466
Td = Pu/6.3 = 7.03/ 6.3 = 1.1158
Table 3.3: Ziegler-Nichols Open-Loop Method

Controller type kc I D
P-only 1 𝑇𝑝 — —
𝑜𝑟
𝐾𝛳 𝐾𝑝𝛳
PI 0.9 0.9𝑇𝑝 3.3𝛳 —
𝑜𝑟
𝐾𝛳 𝐾𝑝𝛳
PID 1/𝐾𝛳 2𝛳 0.5𝛳
Cohen-Coon Parameters
The method developed by Cohen and Coon (1953) is based on a first-order + time-delay process
model. A set of tuning parameters was empirically developed to yield a closed-loop response with
a decay ratio of 1/4 (similar to the Ziegler-Nichols methods). The tuning parameters as a function
of the model parameters are shown in Table 3-4. A major problem with the Cohen-Coon
parameters is that they tend not to be very robust; that is, a small change in the process parameters
can cause the closed-loop system to become unstable.

10 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Table 3. 4: Cohen-Coon Parameters Based on the Ziegler Nichols

Controller type kc I D
P-only 1 𝛳 — —
(1 + )
𝐾𝛳 3𝑇𝑝
PI 1 𝛳 3𝛳 —
(0.9 + ) 30+
𝐾𝛳 𝑇𝑝
12𝑇𝑝 𝛳 [ 20𝛳]
9+
𝑇𝑝

PID 1 4 𝛳 6𝛳
32 + 𝑇𝑝
( + ) 4𝛳
𝐾𝛳 3 4𝑇𝑝 𝛳[ ] [ ]
8𝛳 2𝛳
13 + 𝑇𝑝 11 + 𝑇𝑝

Tuning Rules for First-Order + Dead Time Processes

The previous tuning rules were based on tests that forced a process into a continuous oscillation.
Obvious disadvantages to the techniques are that the system is forced to the edge of instability,
and it may take a while to iteratively adjust the controller to obtain a continuous oscillation.
Ziegler-Nichols Open-Loop Method
Ziegler and Nichols also proposed tuning parameters for a process that has been identified as
integrator + time-delay based on an open-loop process step response.
𝐾𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 𝐾𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 2𝜋 𝑃𝑢
𝐺𝑝 = And 𝐺𝑝 = if 𝐾 = 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝛳 =
𝑠 Tp𝑠+1 𝐾𝑐𝑢𝑃𝑢 4

There are two types of approximations for time delay process (dead time)
 Taylor series approximation: 𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 = 1 − 𝛳𝑠
 Zero-order Padé approximation: 𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 = 1
1−0.5𝛳𝑠
 first-order Padé approximation: 𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 =
0.5𝛳𝑠+1

 Second order Padé approximation

𝛳2 2 𝛳
𝑠 − 2𝑠+1
𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 = 122
𝛳 2 𝛳
12 𝑠 + 2 𝑠 + 1

11 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

2. Model Based Design Methods

There two important model based design methods that are especially use full in process control.
Model based design methods also use full in feedforward controllers and advanced control
systems.th two methods are:-
1) Direct synthesis method (DS)
2) Internal model control method (IMC)
Consider the standard feedback block diagram shown in Figure 3-11. Recall that we could
determine the performance or stability of the closed-loop system from the closed-loop transfer
function.

Figure 3.11: The simplified control block diagram.

𝑦(𝑠) gc(s) ∗ gp(s)

= 𝐺𝐶𝐿 = [ ]
𝑟(𝑠) [1 + gp(s) ∗ gc(s)]

1) Direct synthesis method (DS)

Direct Synthesis (DS) method, the controller design is based on a process model and a desired
closed-loop transfer function. In the direct synthesis procedure, we select a desired closed-loop
response, gCL(s), and, based on the known process, gp(s), find the controller gc(s) that will yield
this response.
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠)
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = [ ]
𝑔𝑝(𝑠)[1−𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠)]

𝑔𝑐 (𝑠), is called as feedback controller.

By now you should be able to perform block diagram manipulations to find the relationship
between any external signal [such as a set point change, r(s)] and any other signal on the control
block diagram. For example, it is important to analyze the manipulated variable action required
for a set point change to make certain that it is not too rapid or that it does not violate constraints.
So, we can easily derive the effect of the set point change on the manipulated variable action,

12 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝑔𝑐 (𝑠)
U(s) = [ ] ∗ 𝑟(𝑠)
[1 + gp(s) ∗ gc(s)]
Generally the process transfer function can be classified in to two based on time delay and RHP
zero.
1) Minimum-Phase Process (the process does not have RHP zeros or time delays).
2) Non-minimum-Phase Process (the process having RHP zeros or time delays).

Direct Synthesis for Minimum-Phase Processes

It seems fairly natural to specify a desired closed-loop response that is first order, since we
understand the characteristics of a first-order response.
1
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) =
λs+1

For a specified first-order response, there is only one tuning parameter, λ , since we desire a closed-
loop gain of 1 (we want the process output to equal the set point as the closed-loop system goes to
a new steady state); small values of λ results in fast responses, while large values result in slow
responses. One could also argue for a desired closed-loop response that is second order and
underdamped, which would lead to specifying two parameters.
Example 3.4: - Consider a first-order process:-
𝐾𝑝
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) =
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1

Assume that a first-order closed-loop response is specified. If we desire a fast closed-loop

response, we make  small; for a slower (more "robust") response, we make  large. Solving for
gc(s)?
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠)
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = [ ]
𝑔𝑝(𝑠)[1−𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠)]

1
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = [ λs + 1 ]
𝐾𝑝 1
𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1 [1 − λs + 1]
Which can be written (by multiplying by Tp/Tp) to get:
𝑇𝑝 𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = [ ∗( )]
Kpλ 𝑇𝑝𝑠

13 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
Recall that the form of a PI controller is:- 𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑐 ( )
𝑇𝑝𝑠

So that our direct synthesis controller for a first-order process is simply a PI controller, where
𝑇𝑝
𝐾𝑐 = & 𝑇𝑖 = 𝑇𝑝
Kpλs

Notice that there was only one "tuning parameter" for this direct synthesis example. The desired
closed-loop time constant,, was the only adjustable parameter. Given the first-order transfer
function parameters (KP and Tp) and the desired closed-loop time constant (), we found that the
direct synthesis controller was PI, but that we only needed to "adjust" one PI parameter (Kc). This
is a nice result, because once we find the process time constant (Tp), we can set the integral time
(Ti) equal to the time constant, and tune kc on-line until we achieve a desired response. Tuning a
single controller parameter is much easier than tuning two or three.
Example 3.5:- Consider the following first-order process, with a time constant of 10 minutes and
2
a process gain of 2. (𝑖. 𝑒, 𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) = )
10s+1
1
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) =
λs+1
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) 10 10𝑠 + 1
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = [ ]= [ ∗( )]
𝑔𝑝(𝑠)[1 − 𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠)] 2λ 10𝑠
10
From this 𝐾𝑐 = 2λ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑇𝑖 = 𝑇𝑝 = 10

Notice that there was only one "tuning parameter the desired closed-loop time constant ()," for
this direct synthesis The output and manipulated variable responses for  = 1, 5, and 10, (I = 10;
kc = 5, 1, and 0.5, (Ki=0.5,0.1 and 0.05 respectively)
After generalization as design in figure below it is better performance for for,  = 1 (I = 10; kc =
5, (Ki=0.5 respectively)

14 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Figure 3. 12: First order+time delay Matlab model for different lamda (λ) value

Figure 3. 4: First Order +time delay Matlab response for different lamda (λ) value

Direct Synthesis for Non-minimum-Phase Processes

This section presents examples for non-minimum-phase processes, that is, processes that have time
delays or RHP zeros. The general technique remains the same for these processes; however, there
is a restriction on the type of closed-loop response that can be specified. The next example provides
the motivation for specifying different desired closed-loop responses for systems with time delays.
Example 3.6: First- Order + Dead Time Example Consider the following process transfer
function:

2𝑒 −3𝑠 1
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) = 𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) =
5s + 1 λs + 1

15 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

1) Determine the feedback controller?

2.5 [5𝑠 + 1] −3𝑠

𝑔𝐶 (𝑠) = ∗ ∗𝑒
λ 5𝑠
Which is a PI controller with an additional term,𝑒 −3𝑠 .
Example 3.7: Process with a RHP Zero Consider a process with the following transfer function,
where the time unit is minutes.

−9𝑠 + 1 1
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) = 𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) =
(15s + 1)(3s + 1) λs + 1
The direct synthesis procedure yields the controller (feedback controller) like shown below:-

(15s + 1)(3s + 1)
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) =
(−9𝑠 + 1) ∗ λs
Which is unstable because of the RHP pole. The RHP pole in the controller is due to the inversion
of the process zero. This inversion occurs because of the specification of a first-order closed-loop
Notice that the inverse response does not appear in the output variable but that the manipulated
variable is unbounded (unstable). This is often called internal instability.
Specifying a desired first-order closed-loop response for a system with a RHP zero resulted in an
unstable controller and unbounded manipulated variable action. A stable controller can be obtained
if the desired closed-loop response has the same RHP zero as the process.
Reformulation of the Desired Response
Including the right-half-plane zero desired closed-loop transfer function specified as:-
−9𝑠 + 1
𝑔𝐶𝐿 (𝑠) =
(λs + 1)2

18 (45s 2 + 18𝑠 + 1) 1
( )∗ ∗( )
2λ + 9 18𝑠 λ2
𝑠+1
2λ + 9
Which is an ideal PID controller cascaded with a first-order filter. The parameters are:-

18 λ2
𝐾𝑐 = 2λ+9 , Ti=18, Td =2.5 and 𝑇𝐹 = where 𝑇𝐹 =filter time constant.
2λ+9

16 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

2) Internal model control (IMC)

In the previous lesson we focused on techniques to tune PID controllers. The closed-loop
oscillation technique developed by Ziegler and Nichols did not require a model of the process.
Direct synthesis, however, was based the use of a process model and a desired closed-loop
response to synthesize a control law; often this resulted in a controller with a PID structure. IMC
is closely related to the direct synthesis approach. Like the DS method, the IMC method is based
on an assumed process model and relates the controller settings to the model parameters in a
straightforward manner.

Figure 3. 13: Open-loop model-based control system.

In IMC design of model-based procedure, where a process model is "embedded" in the controller.
By explicitly using process knowledge, by virtue of the process model, improved performance can
be obtained.
We wish to design an open-loop controller, q(s), so that the relationship between r(s) and y(s) has
desirable dynamic characteristics (fast response without much overshoot, no offset, etc.). The
open-loop control system is shown in figure3.14 (we may also wish to think of this as a feed-
forward controller, based on set point). We use q(s) to represent the open-loop controller transfer
function, to emphasize that it is a different type of controller than the feedback controllers.
Using block diagram analysis, we find the following relationship between the set point and the
output.

Figure 3. 14: Open-loop model-based control system

y(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠) ∗ 𝑞(𝑠) ∗ 𝑟(𝑠)

17 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Controller Tuning Relations

There two types of controller tuning relations for the given model of the plant.
1. Tuning Relation based on IMC
2. Tuning Relation based on Integral error criteria
To design IMC based controllers there are two types of methods which is:
1. Open loop model based controller design
2. Closed loop model based controller design
1. Open-Loop model based Control Design Procedure
The controller design procedure has been generalized to the following steps.
1. Factor the process model into invertible and noninvertible portions
ĝp(s) = ĝp + (s) ∗ ĝp − (s)
 Perfect Model means, ĝp(s) = gp(s)(i.e. there is no RHP zero and time delay )

o Method 1 uses a simple factorization

o Method 2 uses an all-pass formulation
2. Form the idealized IMC controller. The ideal internal model controller is the inverse of
the invertible portion of the process model ("good stuff").

q(s) = ĝp−1 − (𝑠)

3. Invert the invertible portion of the process model (the "good stuff") and cascade with a
filter that makes the controller q(s) proper.
q(s) = ĝp−1 − (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)
If it is most desirable to track step setpoint changes, the filter transfer function usually has
the form
1
𝑓(𝑠) =
(λs + 1)𝑛
and n is chosen to make the controller proper (or semi proper). If it is most desirable to
track set point then: Where n is chosen to make q(s) proper (usually semi-proper). For
systems having disturbance and RHP pole A value of 𝛾is found which satisfies the filter
requirement f (s= Pu) 1.

18 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝛾s + 1
𝑓(𝑠) =
(λs + 1)𝑛
4. Adjust the filter-tuning parameter to vary the speed of response of the closed-loop system.
If the  is "small," the closed loop system is "fast," if  is "large," the closed-loop system
is more robust (insensitive to model error).
 Static Control Law
The simplest controller will result if q(s) is a constant. Let Kq represent this constant. As an
example, consider a first-order process, then the relationship between r(s) and y(s) is
𝐾𝑝
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) =
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
𝐾𝑝𝐾𝑞
y(𝑠) = ∗ 𝑟(𝑠)
𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1
 Dynamic Control Law
Better control can be obtained if the controller, q(s), is dynamic rather than static. Indeed, we find
that if.
1
q(𝑠) =
𝑔𝑝(𝑠)

Then from input output relationship

1
y(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠) ∗ 𝑞(𝑠) ∗ 𝑟(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠) ∗ ∗ 𝑟(𝑠) = 𝑟(𝑠)
𝑔(𝑠)
That is, we have perfect control, since the output perfectly tracks the setpoint! For a first-order
process, the controller is
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
q(𝑠) =
𝐾𝑝

Note that
𝑀(𝑠)
For transfer function give [F(s) = 𝑁(𝑠) ], Let me take as M=degree of numerator and N= degree

denominator, Physical Realizability. For a controller to be physically realizable, the order of the
denominator of the controller transfer function must be at least as great as the order of the
numerator (N>M).
𝑁 ≥ 𝑀, 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟
𝑁 > 𝑀, 𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟

19 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝑁 = 𝑀, 𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑖 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟
𝑁 < 𝑀, 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟
Practical Open-Loop Controller Design
In order to design a physically realizable controller for the first-order process, there must be a
denominator polynomial in the controller. Define a first-order filter as the following transfer
function,
1
f(𝑠) =
λs + 1
Where  is a filter tuning parameter that has units of time. We see shortly that we can think of 
as a desired time constant for the output response; if a faster response is desired, then  is
decreased. Now, let the controller be designed in the following fashion to make q(s) proper.
f(𝑠)
q(s) = = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠)−1 ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)
𝑔𝑝(𝑠)
Which yields the following controller for a first-order process,
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1 1 1 𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
q(𝑠) = ( )* =( )∗
𝐾𝑝 λs+1 𝐾𝑝 λs+1

Since the order of the denominator is at least as great as the order of the numerator, the design is
physically realizable. The response of the output variable, y, is

y(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠) ∗ 𝑞(𝑠) ∗ 𝑟(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠) ∗ 𝑔𝑝(𝑠)−1 ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)𝑟(𝑠) = 𝑓(𝑠) ∗ 𝑟(𝑠)

1
= 𝑟(𝑠)
λs + 1
Remember: - As long as < Tp, the dynamic controller will have a faster response than the static
controller.
Example 3.3: Inverse Response System, Consider the following transfer function,
𝐾𝑝(−𝐵𝑠 + 1)
𝑔𝑝(𝑠) =
(𝑇𝑝1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠 + 1)
Where  is a positive real number, indicating a positive zero (yielding inverse response) in the
process transfer function. If we use the previous design procedure for a dynamic open-loop
controller, we find.

20 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

1 (𝑇𝑝1𝑠+1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠+1)
q(s) = gp−1 (𝑠)𝑓(𝑠) = ( ) (−𝐵𝑠+1)
𝑓(𝑠)
Kp

1
And if we let f(𝑠) = we obtain,
λs+1
1 (𝑇𝑝1𝑠+1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠+1)
q(s) = ( ) (−𝐵𝑠+1)(λs+1)
𝐾𝑝
If we simply take out the unstable pole, we have
1 (𝑇𝑝1𝑠+1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠+1)
q(s) = ( )
𝐾𝑝 λs+1
Notice that this is not acceptable, because q(s) is not proper. To make it proper, we can simply
increase the order of the filter. Where we have used a second-order filter, f(s) = 1/ (s + 1)2, for
the controller design. What kind of output response will be achieved?
1 (𝑇𝑝1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠 + 1)
q(s) = ( )
𝐾𝑝 (λs + 1)(λs + 1)

𝐾𝑝(−𝐵𝑠 + 1) 1 (𝑇𝑝1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠 + 1)

𝑦(𝑠) = 𝑔𝑝(𝑠)𝑞(𝑠)𝑟(𝑠) = ( )
(𝑇𝑝1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇𝑝2𝑠 + 1) 𝐾𝑝 (λs + 1)(λs + 1)
(−𝐵𝑠+1)
= (λs+1)(λs+1) r(s)

Example 3.4:- Consider the following transfer function, which has a RHP zero at 1/9 min-1:
−9𝑠 + 1
𝑔𝑝(𝑠) =
(15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)
1. Determine q(s), u(s) and y(s) under open-loop control, for the two methods and Tune it
using Matlab, (𝑓𝑜𝑟 λ = 10,8,5&3) mint:

 Method1 uses a simple factorization

1. Factor the process model into invertible and noninvertible portions

1
𝑞(𝑠) = ∗ (−9𝑠 + 1)
(15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)

2. Form idealized controller by invers of the invertible part

21 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝑞(𝑠) = (15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)

3. Add filter transfer function to make controller proper which is semi proper

(15𝑠+1)(3𝑠+1) 45s2 +18𝑠+1

q(s) = q(s) = =
(λs+1)(λs+1) λ2 s2 +λs+1
45s2 + 18𝑠 + 1 −9𝑠 + 1
𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑒 = 𝑌(𝑠) = ( 2 )∗( )
λ s + λs + 1 (15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)
45s2 +18𝑠+1
𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 𝑢(𝑠) = ∗ 𝑟(𝑠), 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
λ2 s+λs+1

Figure 3. 15: Open loop IMC Model

 As we
see
here
from

22 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

the simulation for smaller value of λ more robust (closed loop is "fast"),).
 Method 2 uses an all-pass formulation
a) Factor the process model into invertible and noninvertible portions
(9𝑠 + 1) (−9𝑠 + 1)
𝑞(𝑠) = ∗
(15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1) (9𝑠 + 1)

b) Form idealized controller by invers of the invertible part

(15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)
𝑞(𝑠) =
9𝑠 + 1

c) Add filter transfer function to make controller proper which is semi proper

(15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1) 45s2 + 18𝑠 + 1

𝑞(𝑠) = =
(9𝑠 + 1)(λs + 1) 9λs2 + (9 + λ)s + 1

45s2 + 18𝑠 + 1 −9𝑠 + 1

𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑒 = 𝑌(𝑠) = ( )∗( )
9λs2 + (9 + λ)s + 1 (15𝑠 + 1)(3𝑠 + 1)

45s2 + 18𝑠 + 1
𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 𝑢(𝑠) = ∗ 𝑟(𝑠), 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
9λs2 + (9 + λ)s + 1
 For the Open loop IMC design based on all pass factorization result the following
simulation that minimizes the integral squared error (ISE).

23 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Reading Assignment: - Model Uncertainty and Disturbances?

2. Closed loop model based controller design
The Equivalent Feedback Form to IMC
In this section we derive the standard feedback equivalence to IMC by using block- diagram
manipulation.

Figure 3.16: - IMC structure.

Figure 3.17: Change in direction IMC structure.

24 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Figure 3.18: Inner loop of the rearranged IMC structure

Figure 3.17: Rearrangement of IMC structure.

Figure 3.19: Standard feedback diagram illustrating the equivalence with IMC

 The feedback controller, gc(s), contains both the internal model; ĝp(s), and the internal
model controller, q(s).
The standard feedback controller which is equivalent to IMC is: -
𝑞 (𝑠 )
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = 1−ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
The IMC-Based PID Control Design Procedure

25 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

1. Find the IMC controller transfer function, q(s), which includes a filter, f(s), to make q(s)
semi proper or strictly proper to give it derivative action [the order of the numerator of
q(s) is one order greater that the denominator of q(s)]. Notice that this is a major difference
from the IMC procedure. Here, we may allow q(s) to be improper, in order to find an
equivalent PID controller. For integrating or unstable processes, or for better disturbance
rejection, a filter with the following form will often be used.to make q(s) semi proper. An
additional requirement is that the value of f(s) at s= pu (where pu is an unstable pole)
must be 1. That is
𝛾s + 1
𝑓(𝑠 = 𝑝𝑢)𝑓(𝑠) =
(λs + 1)𝑛
Where n is chosen to make q(s) proper (usually semi-proper). A value of 𝛾is found which
satisfies the filter requirement f (s= Pu) 1.
2. Find the equivalent standard feedback controller using the transformation
𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
Write this in the form of a ratio between two polynomials.
3. Show this in PID form and find kc, I, D. Sometimes this procedure results in an ideal PID
controller cascaded with a first-order filter, with a filter time constant (F):
𝑇𝑖𝑠+1+𝑇𝑖𝑇𝑑∗𝑠2 1
gc(s) = Kc ∗ [ ]∗
𝑇𝑖𝑠 𝑇𝑓𝑠+1
4. Perform closed-loop simulations for both the perfect model case and cases with model
mismatch. Adjust  considering a tradeoff between performance and robustness
(sensitivity to model error). Initial values for  will generally be around 1/3 to 1/2 the
dominant time constant.
The IMC-based PID design procedure for a first-order process has resulted in a PI control law
whereas second order process results PID control low.
Example 3.3: IMC-Based PID Design for a First-Order Process
𝐾𝑝
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) =
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1

Find the PID-equivalent to IMC for a first-order process

26 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

1. Find the IMC controller transfer function, q(s), which includes a filter to make q(s) semi
proper.
ĝp(s) = gp(s) Which is perfect model
q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠)
q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)
𝑇𝑝𝑠+1 1 1 𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
𝑞(𝑠) = *( ) = (𝐾𝑝) ( λs+1 )
𝐾𝑝 λs+1

2. Find the equivalent standard feedback controller using the transformation

𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
1 𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1
(𝐾𝑝) ( ) 𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1
λs + 1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) = =
𝐾𝑝 1 𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1 𝐾𝑝λs
1 − 𝑇𝑝𝑠 + 1 ∗ (𝐾𝑝) ( )
λs + 1
3. To find how the model parameters and  are related to the PI controller parameters.
Multiplying Equation by p/p,
𝑇𝑝 𝑇𝑝𝑠+1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) = ( ) , This is IMC based PI controller
𝐾𝑝λ 𝑇𝑝𝑠
𝑇𝑝
𝑇𝑝 = 𝑇𝑖, 𝐾𝑐 = 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
𝐾𝑝λ
Do it manipulated input, U(s) =?

27 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

4. Tune using Matlab for Tp=4 & KP = 3 having different values of λ to make it more robust
(fast response).

Figure 3.21: Closed loop IMC Based PI - Controller model

Example 3.3: IMC-Based PID Design for second-Order Process

𝐾𝑝
𝑔𝑝 (𝑠) =
(𝑇1𝑠+1)(𝑇2𝑠+1)

Find the PID-equivalent to IMC for a first-order process

1. Find the IMC controller transfer function, q(s)—here we allow q(s) to be improper because
we wish to end up with an ideal PID controller.
ĝp(s) = gp(s) Which is perfect model

28 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠)

q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)
(𝑇1𝑠+1)(𝑇2𝑠+1) 1 1 (𝑇1𝑠+1)(𝑇2𝑠+1)
𝑞 (𝑠) = *( ) = ( )( )
𝐾𝑝 λs+1 𝐾𝑝 λs+1
2. Find the equivalent standard feedback controller using the transformation
𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
1 (𝑇1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇2𝑠 + 1)
(𝐾𝑝) ( )
λs + 1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
𝐾𝑝 1 (𝑇1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇2𝑠 + 1)
1− ∗ (𝐾𝑝) ( )
(𝑇1𝑠 + 1)(𝑇2𝑠 + 1) λs + 1
𝑇1𝑇2𝑠 2 + (𝑇1 + 𝑇2)𝑠 + 1
= , 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
𝐾𝑝λs
3. To find how the model parameters and  are related to the PID controller parameters.
Multiplying by (1 + 2)/ (1 + 2),
𝑇1+𝑇2 𝑇1𝑇2𝑠2 +(𝑇1+𝑇2)𝑠+1
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = ( ) , This is IMC based PID controller
𝐾𝑝λ (𝑇1+𝑇2)𝑠
𝑇1𝑇2 𝑇1 + 𝑇2
𝑇𝑖 = 𝑇1, 𝑇𝑑 = 𝐾𝑐 = , 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
𝑇1 + 𝑇2 𝐾𝑝λ
Do it manipulated input, U(s) =?
4. Tune using Matlab for T1=4, T2=2 & KP = 3 having different values of λ to make it more
robust (fast response).

Figure 3.22:- IMC based PID controller Model

29 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

As we see the above simulation The IMC-based PID controller design procedure has
resulted in a PID controller, when the process is first-order + dead time. Remember that a
Padé approximation for dead time was used in this development, meaning that the filter
factor () cannot be made arbitrarily small; therefore, there will be performance limitations
to the IMC-based PID strategy that do not occur in the IMC strategy.
IMC-Based Feedback Design for Processes with a Time Delay
Example 3.4:- Find the PID controller which approximates IMC for a first-order + time-delay
process?
𝐾𝑝𝑒−𝛳𝑠
ĝp(s) = Tp𝑠+1
1. Use a first-order Padé approximation for dead time and factor into invertible and non-
invertible and Form the idealized controller

30 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝐾𝑝𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 1−0.5𝛳𝑠

ĝp(s) = = 𝐾𝑝 ((0.5𝛳𝑠+1)Tp𝑠+1)
Tp𝑠+1

ĝp(s) = ĝp + (s) ∗ ĝp − (s)

𝐾𝑝𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 𝐾𝑝
ĝp(s) = = (1 − 0.5𝛳𝑠) ( )
Tp𝑠 + 1 (0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1)Tp𝑠 + 1

(0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1)(Tp𝑠 + 1)
ĝp(s) =
𝐾𝑝
Add the filter - this time we will not make q(s) proper, because a PID controller will not
result. We use the “derivative” option, where we allow the numerator of q(s) to be one
order higher than the denominator [NOTE: this is only done so that we will obtain a PID
controller].
q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠)
(0.5𝛳𝑠+1)(Tp𝑠+1) 1
𝑞 (𝑠) = ∗
𝐾𝑝 λs+1

2. To find how the model parameters and  are related to the PID controller parameters find
gc(s).
𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
1 1
(𝐾𝑝) (0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1)(Tp𝑠 + 1) ∗
λs + 1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
𝐾𝑝(−0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1) 1 (0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1)(Tp𝑠 + 1)
1− ∗ ( )( )
(0.5𝛳𝑠 + 1)(Tp𝑠 + 1) 𝐾𝑝 λs + 1
1 0.5𝛳𝑇𝑝𝑠 2 + (0.5𝛳 + 𝑇𝑝)𝑠 + 1
=( ) , 𝐻𝑒𝑟𝑒 λ > 0
𝐾𝑝 (λ + 0.5𝛳)s
3. To find how the model parameters and  are related to the PID controller parameters.
Tp+0.5𝛳 0.5𝛳𝑇𝑝𝑠 2 +(0.5𝛳+𝑇𝑝)𝑠+1
𝑔𝑐 (𝑠) = (𝐾𝑝(λ+0.5𝛳)) ,
(0.5𝛳+𝑇𝑝)𝑠
This is IMC based PID controller.

31 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Tp+0.5𝛳 0.5𝛳Tp 𝛳Tp

Kc = Td = =
0.5𝛳 + 𝑇𝑝 𝛳 + 2𝑇𝑝
𝐾𝑝(λ+0.5𝛳)

Ti = Tp + 0.5𝛳
For the above Example 3.4 for theta (𝛳) value take as 4 mint, Tp=3 and KP=2 design in using

Matlab and simulate it. Here is limitation for lambda (λ) value which is λ > | − 0.5𝛳| > 2.

Figure 3.23: IMC Based PID+time delay –Controller

response

Exercise: - From example 3.4 Find the PI controller which approximates IMC for a first-order +
time-delay process?

32 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

 For this there is Taylor series approximation: 𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 = 1 − 𝛳𝑠

Example 3.5:- IMC-based PID Design for a First-Order Unstable Process
Find the IMC-based PID controller for a first-order unstable process
𝐾𝑝
Ĝp(s) =
−Ʈus+1

Where Ʈu is given a positive value. The pole, Pu is 1/Ʈu

1. Find the IMC controller transfer function, q(s)

𝐾𝑝 𝛾s + 1
q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠) = ∗
−Ʈus + 1 (λs + 1)2

Solving 𝛾 for we find

2. Find the equivalent standard feedback controller using the transformation

𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
After long term calculation we have the standard feedback controller.
This is in the form of a PI controller, where
OR (after some more algebra for Kc)

33 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

3. For numerical example 3.5 to see experimentally for:-

1
Ĝp(s) = , 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑃𝑢 = 1 = 1/Ʈu
−s+1

Figure 3.23: IMC-based PID Design for a First-Order Unstable Process

34 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Example 3.6:- For processes having Gain + Dead Time where the time delay is dominant, the step
response behavior can be approximated as gain + dead time, as characterized by the following
transfer function.
𝑔𝑝(𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝𝑒 −𝛳𝑠
Using a second-order Padé approximation for the time delay,
𝛳2 2 𝛳
𝑠 − 2𝑠+1
𝑒 −𝛳𝑠 = 122
𝛳 2 𝛳
12 𝑠 + 2 𝑠 + 1
1. Factor the process model into invertible and noninvertible portions
ĝp(s) = ĝp + (s) ∗ ĝp − (s)

𝐾𝑝 𝛳2 2 𝛳
ĝp(s) = ( 2 ) ( 𝑠 − 𝑠 + 1)
𝛳 2 𝛳 12 2
𝑠 + 𝑠 + 1
12 2

𝛳2 2 𝛳
𝑠 + 𝑠+1 1
12 2
q(s) = ĝp−1 (𝑠) ∗ 𝑓(𝑠) = ∗( )
𝐾𝑝 (λs + 1)2
2. Design the standard feedback controllers.
𝑞(𝑠)
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) =
1 − ĝp(s)𝑞(𝑠)
3. Find the related controller for IMC based type.

35 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

𝛳2 2 𝛳 𝛳2 2 𝛳
𝑠 + 𝑠 + 1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) = 12 2 1
=( )∗ 12 𝑠 + 2 𝑠 + 1
2
𝛳 2 𝛳 𝐾𝑝 2 𝛳2 2 𝛳
(λ𝑠)2 + 2λs − 𝑠 + 𝑠 (2λ − )𝑠 + ( 2λ +
12 2 6 2 )𝑠

𝛳2 2 𝛳
𝛳 𝑠 + 2𝑠+1 1
𝑔𝑐(𝑠) = ( ) ( 12 )∗
𝑘𝑝(4λ + 𝛳) 𝛳 2 𝛳2
( 2 𝑠) (2λ − 6 )
𝑆+1
4λ + 𝛳
𝛳
With condition that λ >
√12
From this Required PID + filter (PID + lag) controller results determined Parameters: -
𝛳 𝛳
𝐾𝑐 = 𝑇𝑑 =
𝑘𝑝(4λ + 𝛳) 6
𝛳 2 𝛳2
𝑇𝑝 = (2λ − 6 )
2 𝑇𝑓 =
4λ + 𝛳

Exercise: - For the give process transfer function give below with time delay
2𝑒 −3𝑠
𝐺𝑝 =
4𝑠 + 1
a) Design IMC based PID Controllers tuning and determine the related
parameters using
i) Taylor series approximation
ii) first-order Padé approximation

36 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Controllers with two degrees of freedom

The 2-DOF PID controller is a two-input, one output controller of the form C2(s), as shown in
the following figure. The transfer function from each input to the output is itself a PID controller.
Each of the components Cr(s) and Cy(s) is a PID controller, with different weights on the
proportional and derivative terms.

Figure 3.24: Controllers with two degrees of freedom

The relationship between the 2-DOF controllers’ output (u) and its two inputs (r and y) can be
represented in either parallel or standard form. The two forms differ in the parameters used to
express the proportional, integral, and derivative actions of the controller, as expressed in the
following table.
 Trade-off between set-point tracking and disturbance rejection
 Tuning for disturbance rejection is more aggressive.
 In general, disturbance rejection is more important. Thus, tune the controller for
satisfactory disturbance rejection.
 Controllers with two degrees of freedom (Goodwin et al., 2001)
 Strategies to adjust set-point tracking and disturbance rejection
independently.
From block diagram of 4.1 we have the following manipulated output:
𝐾𝑖
𝑈 = 𝐾𝑝(𝑏𝑟 − 𝑦) + (𝑟 − 𝑦) + 𝐾𝑑𝑠(𝐶𝑟 − 𝑦)
𝑠

Where, Kp = Proportional gain

Ki=integral gain

37 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

br =set point weight on proportional term

cr= set point weight on derivative term
r =set point
𝐾𝑖
𝐶𝑟(𝑠) = 𝑏𝑟𝐾𝑝 + 𝑟 + 𝑐𝑟𝐾𝑑𝑠
𝑠
𝐾𝑖
𝐶𝑦(𝑠) = −(𝐾𝑝 + + 𝐾𝑑𝑠)
𝑠

Tuning Relation Based on Integral Error Criteria

 ¼ decay ratio is too oscillatory Decay ratio concerns only two peak points of
the response
 It is alternative approach for closed loop tuning
 Controller tuning based on performance index
 Tuning relationship are ended to minimize the integral of the error
Three popular performance indices are
1. Integral of square error (ISE)
∞
𝐼𝑆𝐸 = ∫ [𝑒(𝑡)]2 𝑑𝑡
0
2. Integral of absolute value of error (IAE)
∞
𝐼𝐴𝐸 = ∫ |𝑒(𝑡)|2 𝑑𝑡
0
3. Time-weighted ITAE
∞
𝐼𝑇𝐴𝐸 = ∫0 𝑡|𝑒(𝑡)|2 𝑑𝑡
Design relation, 𝑌 = 𝐴(𝛳/𝑇)𝐵 where 𝑌 = 𝐾𝐾𝑐 for proportional mode, 𝑇/𝑇𝑖
for integral mode𝑇𝑑/𝑇.
𝑇
For set point changes the design relation for the integral mode is =𝐴+
𝑇𝑖

𝐵(𝛳/𝑇
Pick controller parameters to minimize integral.

38 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

 IAE will treat all errors in a uniform manner; thus, it allows larger deviation than

ISE. allows larger deviation than ISE (smaller overshoots)

 ISE longer settling time

 ITAE weights errors occurring later more heavily for error taking longer time
 Approximate optimum tuning parameters are correlated
With 𝐾, 𝜃 &𝑇𝑝
On-Line Controller Tuning
It involves plant testing based on trial and error bases this is tedious and time consuming methods
 Controller tuning inevitably involves a tradeoff between performance and robustness.
 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.
 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.
 Diagnostic techniques for monitoring control system performance are available.
Can be classified as:-
a) Continues Cyclic Method
b) Relay Auto Tuning
c) Step Test Method
a) Continues Cyclic Method [SEE IT IN (Z-N) TUNING]
Continuous cycling method Also called as loop tuning or ultimate gain method Increase
controller gain until sustained oscillation Find ultimate gain (Kcu) and ultimate period (PCU)
Ziegler-Nichols controller setting ¼ decay ratio (too much oscillatory) Even so, the continuous
cycling method has several major
 Advantages:
No a priori information on process required and Applicable to all stable processes.

39 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

 Dis advantages:
Time consuming, Loss of product quality and productivity during the tests, Continuous
cycling may cause the violation of process limitation and safety hazards, Not applicable
to open-loop unstable process and First-order and second-order process without time
delay will not oscillate even with very large controller gain.
b) Relay Auto Tuning
In recent years, a number of automated relay tuning methods have been developed. One of the
most notable is the Åström-Hägglund method as presented in 1984 (Åström and Hägglund, 1984a).
There are a number of benefits in the use of relay auto-tuning, the most notable being that
a) The method does not introduce a risk of loop instability like the Ziegler-Nichols cycling
method,
b) little a priori knowledge of the plant is necessary, and
c) The loop output can be kept close to the set-point throughout the test with correct selection
of relay parameters.
 Dis advantage for slow process it may not be acceptable to subject the process two to
four cycle of oscillation is required to complete the test. Find P CU and calculate KCU.
 Find P CU and calculate KCU.
𝐾𝑐𝑢 = 4𝑑/𝑎𝜋, Where d = relay amplitude set by user and a = is measured o/p of process
oscillation.

Figure 3.25: Relay Feedback Mode controller

40 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

Step Test Method

 Their classic paper, Ziegler and Nichols (1942) proposed a second on-line tuning
technique based on a single step test. The experimental procedure is quite simple.
1. After the process has reached steady state (at least approximately), the controller is placed in
the manual mode.
2. Then a small step change in the controller output (e.g., 3 to 5%) is introduced.
3. 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.
 The chief advantage of the step test method is that only a single experimental test
is necessary.
But the method does have four disadvantages:
a) 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.
b) For a nonlinear process, the test results can be sensitive to the magnitude and direction of
the step change. If the magnitude of the step change is too large, process nonlinearities can
influence the result. But if the step magnitude is too small, the step response may be
difficult to distinguish from the usual fluctuations due to noise and disturbances.
c) The method is not applicable to open-loop unstable processes.

41 | P a g e
Process Control Notes (4th year)
Prepared By: Meseret Adamu WKU University BSc In Electrical Engineering
ECEg4333

d) For analog controllers, the method tends to be sensitive to controller calibration errors. By
contrast, the continuous cycling method is less sensitive to calibration errors in Kc because
it is adjusted during the experimental test.

Figure 3. 26: General block diagram of Step Test Methods

As we see from above block after open loop test is achieved system block is reversed to closed
loop.

42 | P a g e