6/13/2018 | Plant Engineering

Learning PID loop tuning from an expert

Soon after graduating from college, I got a job at a chemical plant as an electrical
and instrumentation technician. Being a young guy with little experience, my
supervisor paired me up with a grizzled veteran named Tim. Of the many things I
learned from Tim, one of the most valuable was a simple process for tuning a
proportional, integral, and derivative (PID) control loop. I learned about basic
control systems and how they worked as part of my education. Unfortunately, all
of my experience with PID loops had been in textbooks. I never had the firsthand
experience of tuning a PID control loop in the field.

My first chance at tuning a PID loop came during a trip with Tim to the ethylene
production area on the west side of the chemical plant. An operator in the
ethylene control room had placed a trouble call for a 500 gal chemical tank that
was not maintaining an accurate level (see Figure 1). Tim reminded me that PID
control loops can be found in a variety of applications that require constant control of liquid level, pressure, flow, temperature,
or tension, to name a few. In this case, the operator was trying to keep a constant level in a 500 gal chemical additive tank that
was a part of a chemical line process, but it was not working properly (see Figure 2).

First things first

The first thing Tim taught me about PID control systems was the basic components. "The first thing you need is a setpoint
signal," he said. In our situation, the setpoint signal was a 0-10 Vdc signal from a potentiometer in the control room that the
operator used to set the level he wanted to maintain in the tank. "The second thing you need in your system is a feedback
signal," said Tim. The feedback device in this case was a liquid level transducer that provided a 4-20 mA signal based on the
level of the liquid in the tank. Tim explained that the last item required in the system is the actual PID controller.

Although it has been quite a few years since I graduated from college, at that
time, the controller was a self-standing module that received the setpoint and
feedback signals and performed the PID number crunching. It provided a 4-20
mA output signal that controlled a valve that fed the tank. It also had a built-in
small strip chart recorder that showed the liquid level over long periods of time.
You can still purchase stand-alone PID control modules today, but the software
can also be found in VFDs, and most commonly in PLCs and building control
systems (see Figure 3). PID control loop software can be found inside of the PLC
that runs an entire control room and provides a sophisticated graphical look of
the entire control system on a variety of monitors and control desks. Even though
today's PID graphics look much better than that old strip chart recorder, the PID
control method used today is basically the same.

The proof is in the testing

When we got to the job site, the first thing we did was test the liquid level sensor,
which provided feedback to the controller. After a few minutes, we determined
the sensor was in good working order because it provided 4 mA at low level and 20 mA at high level. The next thing we
checked was the setpoint signal. Tim stood in the control room and adjusted the potentiometer from minimum to maximum
while I measured the signal where it connected to the PID module. The potentiometer was functioning properly and measured
0 Vdc at minimum and 10 Vdc at maximum. The last thing we checked was the valve itself. We connected a small variable
milliamp supply that provided 4-20 mA to the valve and watched it open and close without a problem. So the culprit in our
nonfunctioning PID control system appeared to be the PID module itself. A quick trip to the parts depot provided us with an
identical replacement module and we headed back to the ethylene control room. I figured we would swap the module; adjust
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies. This may include personalization of content and ads, and traffic analytics. Review our Privacy Policy for more information.

https://www.plantengineering.com/single-article/learning-pid-loop-tuning-from-an-expert.html?tx_ttnews%5BsViewPointer%5D=1&print=1 1/3
6/13/2018 | Plant Engineering

the proportional, integral, and derivative selector switches to the

The PID module we used had three selector switches on the side:
one for the proportional gain setting, one for the integral time
setting, and one for the derivative time setting. In most cases, we
would have set the selector switches on the new module to the
identical settings of the old module and called it a day. But Tim
thought we could improve on the performance of the control loop
and saw a chance to teach me some of the finer points of PID loop
tuning.

PID optimization experiments

In our experiment to obtain the optimum settings for the PID control
loop, we set the integral and derivative times to zero. The factory setting of the proportional gain selector switch was 1.0, with a
maximum of 2.0, a minimum of 0.0, and adjustment points broken into 0.25 increments. We adjusted the proportional gain
selector switch to its lowest nonzero setting of 0.25. The proportional gain is a simple multiplier with higher settings increasing
the response and lower settings reducing it. By adjusting the integral time and the derivative time to zero, we took the integral
and derivative effects out of the control loop and would see only the effect of the proportional gain setting. Tim's first lesson for
me was to work on only one adjustment at a time. "If you start making changes to all three controls at once, you can easily get
disoriented," he said.

We started the system with the tank empty and a setpoint of 50% full. We watched the liquid level indication move slowly
toward the 50% setpoint on the strip chart as the tank filled. It took a little more than 10 min for the liquid level to reach the 48%
mark and maintain that level. We felt that the result of our first experiment was not acceptable. While the liquid level never
overshot the setpoint, which was a good thing, the gain was set so low that it took a very long time to fill the tank to its setpoint.
Also, the liquid level came close to the setpoint, but it never really reached it. Tim explained that it is typical to have some error
—2% in this case—when running a control loop with only proportional control. This error is called offset.

Next, we adjusted the proportional gain setting to 0.50 and ran the experiment again. This time, the liquid level reached the
50% setpoint in a little more than 2 min, but the level shot right past the setpoint and reached 55% before it corrected itself and
headed back down toward 50%. As I watched the strip chart, the liquid level signal oscillated back and forth between 52% and
48% for the next 2 min, reducing the overshoot with each cycle, and then settled just below the setpoint at about 48%. We
were happy that it took only 2 min for the level to reach the setpoint, but were disappointed with the overshoot and the
oscillations.

For our next experiment, we adjusted the proportional gain to 0.75. This time the liquid level reached the 50% setpoint in a little
less than 1 min, but the overshoot reached 70% and then oscillated between 60% and 40% for 4 min, reducing the overshoot
with each cycle, and then settled just below the setpoint at about 48%. It appeared that this adjustment was taking us in the
wrong direction, so we changed the proportional gain setting back to 0.50. Tim's second lesson for me was: the proportional
gain controls how quickly the process races toward the setpoint. "If you set a very high gain, expect to reach your setpoint
quickly but be prepared for the possibility of drastic overshoot and oscillations," he said. "If you set a very low gain, you can
prevent the overshoot, but it may take a long time to reach your setpoint. Start with the integral time, derivative time, and
proportional gain all at zero. Then increase the proportional gain value in small increments until oscillations occur, then reduce
the setting."

The next thing we did was to add some integral time into the control loop. Tim explained to me that integral time was like an
"error eater" and would go to work on eliminating some of the oscillation we had experienced. He also said that adding some
integral time would get our system to actually track the setpoint and eliminate the offset we had experienced earlier. The factory
setting of the integral time selector switch was 50 sec, with a maximum of 100 sec and a minimum of 0 sec, and adjustment
points divided into 10 sec increments. Hoping to improve on the performance, we adjusted the integral time selector switch to
10 sec and ran the experiment again. This time the liquid level reached the setpoint in about 2 min, but continued to increase to
about 70% before correcting itself; then it continuously oscillated between 60% and 40% and never stopped. The overshoot
had stayed the same, but we had picked up a ringing oscillation, which meant the short integral time was making the system
unstable.

We adjusted the integral time selector switch to provide 30 sec of integral time for our next experiment. We ran the system
again and the liquid level reached the setpoint in about 2 min, but continued to increase to 55% before correcting itself. The
liquid level signal oscillated between 54% and 46%, reducing the overshoot with each cycle, and then settled at the setpoint of
50% within 1 min. While the loop performance was much better than our last experiment, the biggest difference was the time it
took for the system to stabilize. Earlier, when we used proportional only control, the system had stabilized in 2 min with an
offset error. In this experiment, the oscillation was gone in about a minute without an offset error.

We ran the experiment again with the integral time set at 50 sec and watched as the liquid level reached the setpoint in about 2
min and overshot to only 52% before correcting itself. The liquid level signal oscillated between 52% and 48%, reducing the
overshoot with each cycle for about 10 sec, and then settled at the setpoint of 50%. This adjustment had produced some very
good results, we were happy with the progress that we had made, and I realized we would be back at the shop before lunch
after all. Tim's third lesson for me was that the integral time acts like an error eater. It can help reduce the oscillation time and
remove the offset, but mis-adjustment can cause an increase in overshoot as well as lead to the system having oscillations.
Increase the integral time value in small increments until the oscillations and the offset have been eliminated.

The last adjustment was for the derivative time. Tim explained that the derivative time acts somewhat like a braking system to
help prevent overshoot. However, if derivative is misadjusted, it could severely reduce the responsiveness of the system. We
thought for a second about the experiments we had run that morning and how we had systematically improved the control
loop's performance. In many PID loops, such as HVAC systems, the derivative control is not used because a little overshoot
typically would not produce detrimental effects. But in situations where overshoot could be dangerous, derivative control can be
useful.

With our last experiment showing only a 2% overshoot and oscillating for only about 10 sec, we thought we had done a pretty
good job of tuning the PID loop. But we thought we should try one last experiment to see if we could do even better. The
factory setting of the derivative time selector switch was at the minimum, 0 sec (disabled) with a maximum of 5 sec and
adjustment pointsBydivided into 0.5
using this website, yousec increments.
agree I adjusted
to our use of cookies. This maythe derivative
include timeof to
personalization the and
content 0.5ads,
secandsetting on theReview
traffic analytics. selector switch
our Privacy Policy for more information.
and we ran the experiment again We watched as the liquid level reached the setpoint in about 2 min smoothly rolled into the
https://www.plantengineering.com/single-article/learning-pid-loop-tuning-from-an-expert.html?tx_ttnews%5BsViewPointer%5D=1&print=1 2/3
6/13/2018 | Plant Engineering
and we ran the experiment again. We watched as the liquid level reached the setpoint in about 2 min, smoothly rolled into the
50% setpoint with only a hair of overshoot, showed one small dip below the 50% mark, and then tracked the setpoint perfectly.
This was by far the best performance we had seen from the liquid level PID control loop that morning. I adjusted the liquid level
setpoint to 60% and watched the system correct and track accurately. Then I reduced the setpoint to 40% and saw the same
results. Tim's fourth lesson for me was that the derivative time provides a braking action to the control loop and is not required
in most applications where a little overshoot is allowable. If it is needed, derivative control can reduce overshoots but could
also lead to a lack of responsiveness. Increase the derivative time value until the response to process changes is optimized.

Happy with the performance of the PID control loop, Tim and I packed our gear and headed to lunch. It has been a number of
years since I worked with Tim, but this experience is one I have always remembered. Using the basic techniques he taught me
has helped me tune PID control loops in a number of applications.

Tim's PID control loop rules of thumb

1. Work on only one adjustment at a time. If you start making changes to all three controls at the same time, you can easily
get disoriented.
2. Proportional gain controls how quickly the process races toward the setpoint. If you set a very high gain, expect to reach
your setpoint quickly but be prepared for the possibility of drastic overshoot and oscillations. If you set a very low gain,
you can prevent the overshoot, but it may take a long time to reach your setpoint. Start with the integral time, derivative
time, and proportional gain all at zero. Increase the proportional gain value in small increments until oscillations occur,
and then reduce the setting.
3. The integral time acts like an error eater. It can help reduce the oscillation time and remove the offset, but improper
adjustment can cause an increase in overshoot as well as lead to the system having oscillations. Increase the integral
time value in small increments until the oscillations and the offset have been eliminated.
4. The derivative time provides a braking action to the control loop and is not required in most applications where a little
overshoot is allowable. If it is needed, derivative control can reduce overshoots but could also lead to a lack of
responsiveness. Increase the derivative time value until the response to process changes is optimized.

John A. Autero is the manager of technical training services at Yaskawa America Inc. He has been involved with industrial
automation for more than 28 years, 25 of which have been with Yaskawa. He developed the Yaskawa Engineering Summer
Intern and Co-Op Program, and advanced Yaskawa's Technical Training Services into an IACET Authorized Provider to offer
CEUs for its students. He holds a BS in industrial engineering technology from Southern Illinois University.

This article appears in the Applied Automation supplement for Control Engineering and Plant Engineering.

- See other articles from the supplement below.

Related News:
Efficient controls require feedback - 21.01.2015 01:48
Technology from future past - 11.12.2014 05:00
Making mowers in America with robotics - 09.12.2014 05:26
Selecting inductive proximity switches - 03.12.2014 15:45

Post a comment

Log in or create an account to submit your comment for this article.

By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies. This may include personalization of content and ads, and traffic analytics. Review our Privacy Policy for more information.

https://www.plantengineering.com/single-article/learning-pid-loop-tuning-from-an-expert.html?tx_ttnews%5BsViewPointer%5D=1&print=1 3/3