Matlab
Matlab
Matlab
: 5
Roll No.: B210195CH Date: 12-02-2024
AIM
To study the effect of gain, integral time and derivative time of PID Controller on the closed
loop performance.
Theory:
The most commonly used controller in industry is PID controller. Here three tuning parameters
are available in hand. The controller gain kc which will increase the closed loop response, τi,
which will eliminates the offset and τd which will makes the performance robust.
TRANSFER FUNCTION:
1. First, note whether the required proportional control gain is positive or negative. To do
so, step the input u up (increased) a little, under manual control, to see if the resulting
steady state value of the process output has also moved up (increased). If so, then the
steady-state process gain is positive and the required Proportional control gain, Kc, has
to be positive as well.
2. Turn the controller to P-only mode, i.e. turn both the Integral and Derivative modes off.
3. Turn the controller gain, Kc, up slowly (more positive if Kc was decided to be so in
step 1, otherwise more negative if Kc was found to be negative in step 1) and observe
the output response. Note that this requires changing Kc in step incremen
and waiting for a steady state in the output, before another change in Kc is implemented.
4. When a value of Kc results in a sustained periodic oscillation in the output (or close to
it), mark this critical value of Kc as Ku, the ultimate gain. Also, measure the period of
oscillation, Pu, referred to as the ultimate period. ( Hint: for the system A in the PID
simulator, Ku should be around 0.7 and 0.8 )
If M is the amplitude ratio of the system response at the cross over frequency ωco,
5. Using the values of the ultimate gain, Ku, and the ultimate period, Pu, Ziegler and
Nichols prescribes the following values for Kc, tI and tD, depending on which type of
controller is desired:
Step 6: Evaluate the performance of P, PI and PID controllers and compare the
closed loop responses (Servo regulatory).
As an alternative to the table above, another set of tuning values have been determined
by Tyreus and Luyblen for PI and PID, often called the TLC tuning rules. These values tend to
reduce oscillatory effects and improves robustness.
Step 5: Evaluate control parameters as prescribed by Tyreus and Luyben (Table 2).
Step 6: Evaluate the performance of P, PI and PID controllers and compare the closed loop
responses (Servo regulatory).
5. Based on the parameters K, t and tDEL, the controller parameters Kc, tI and tD can
be calculated.
Step 4: Evaluate the performance of P, PI and PID controllers and compare the closed loop
responses.
Results :
1)Ziegler-Nicholos Method:
Ku Pu(sec)
143.5 3.971
Kc Ti Td
P 71.75
PI 65.2272 3.0917
PID 84.4118 1.9855 0.4964
2)Tyreus-Luyben Method:
Ku Pu(sec)
143.5 3.971
Kc Ti Td
PI 44.84375 8.7362
PID 84.4118 1.9855 0.4964
3)Cohen-Coon Method:
B B/2 0.632B A
0.67135 0.335675 0.4342932 1
t0 t2 t3
0 35.328 50.007
t1 T Tdel K r
2.169733 47.8372 2.1697 0.67135 0.04536
Kc Ti Td
P 33.3371
PI 29.68065 6.60002
PID 44.1598 5.24004 0.78254
Inference:
Tuning rules work quite well when we have an analog controller, a system that is linear
monotonic and sluggish and a response that is dominated by single pole exponential lag.
• The tuning obtained can’t be used as it is. Some fine tuning is required to get
appropriate output.
• Because of the parameter setting, which are aggressive, large overshoots and
oscillations are obtained.
• When done for closed loops, it is very sensitive to parameter variation.
• If there are predominant delays, then even after tuning, performance might be
poor.
Cohen Coon Tuning:
This works for open loops and is a 3 parameter setting method. The main design criterion is load
disturbance rejection. This method attempts to achieve a decay ratio that is quarter of position closed
loop poles. PI and PID controllers sets at expected values and P controller shows some offset.
Advantages: