CHEE 434/821

Process Control II
Some Review Material

Winter 2006

Instructor:
M.Guay

TA:
V. Adetola
 Introduction

In the chemical industry,

the design of a control system is essential to

ensure:
 Good Process Operation
 Process Safety
 Product Quality
 Minimization of Environmental Impact
 Introduction

 What is the purpose of a control system?

“To maintain important process characteristics at

desired targets despite the effects of external
perturbations.”

Perturbations Processing
Plant objectives

Market Safety
Economy Make $$$
Climate Environment...
Upsets...

Control
 Introduction

What constitutes a control system?

Control

Combination of process
sensors, actuators and
computer systems
designed and tuned
to orchestrate
safe and profitable
operation.

Plant
 Introduction

 Process Dynamics:

 Study of the transient behavior of processes

 Process Control

 the use of process dynamics for the

improvement of process operation and
performance

or

 the use of process dynamics to alleviate the

effect of undesirable (unstable) process
behaviors
 Introduction

What do we mean by process?

A process, P, is an operation that takes an INPUT or a

DISTURBANCE and gives an OUTPUT

u
y
P
d

Information Flow
INPUT: (u) Something that you can manipulate
DISTURBANCE: (d) Something that comes as a result of
some outside phenomenon
OUTPUT: (y) An observable quantity that we want to
regulate
 Examples

 Stirred tank heater

M
Tin, w

T, w
Q

Inputs Output
Tin
w Process T
Q
 Examples

 The speed of an automobile

Friction Force of
Engine

Inputs Output
Friction
Process Speed
Engine
 Examples

e.g. Landing on Mars

 Examples

e.g. Millirobotics

Laparoscopic Manipulators
 Introduction

 Process

A process, P, is an operation that takes an INPUT or a

DISTURBANCE and gives an OUTPUT

u
y
P
d

Information Flow

INPUT: (u) Something that you can manipulate

DISTURBANCE: (d) Something that comes as a result of
some outside phenomenon
OUTPUT: (y) An observable quantity that we want to
regulate
 Control

What is control?

 To regulate of a process output despite the effect of

disturbances e.g.
 Driving a car
 Controlling the temperature of a chemical
reactor
 Reducing vibrations in a flexible structure

 To stabilize unstable processes e.g.

 Riding a bike
 Flight of an airplane
 Operation of a nuclear plant
 Benefits of Control

 Economic Benefits
 Quality (waste reduction)
 Variance reduction (consistency)
 Savings in energy, materials, manpower

 Operability, safety (stability)

 Performance
 Efficiency
 Accuracy
 robotics

 Reliability
 Stabilizability
 bicycle

 aircraft

 nuclear reactor
 Control

What is a controller?

Process

Controller

 A controller is a system designed to regulate a given

process
 Process typically obeys physical and chemical
conservation laws
 Controller obeys laws of mathematics and logic
(sometimes intelligent)

e.g. - Riding a bike (human controller)

- Driving a car
- Automatic control (computer
programmed to control)
 Block representations
 Block diagrams are models of the physical systems

Input variables Output variables

Process

System Physical
Boundary
Transfer of
fundamental Physical
quantities
Mass, Energy and Momentum

Abstract
Operation
 Control
 A controlled process is a system which is
comprised of two interacting systems:

e.g. Most controlled systems are feedback controlled

systems

Disturbances Outputs
Process

Action Observation
intervene Controller monitor

The controller is designed to provide regulation of

process outputs in the presence of disturbances
 Introduction

What is required for the development of a

control system?
1. The Plant (e.g. SPP of Nylon)

Nylon

Gas Make-up

Reheater
Vent
Relief
Dehumidifier Pot

Steam

Heater Blower

Water
 Introduction

What is required?

1. Process Understanding
Required measurements
Required actuators
Understand design limitations
2. Process Instrumentation
Appropriate sensor and actuator selection
Integration in control system
Communication and computer architecture
3. Process Control
Appropriate control strategy
 Example

 Cruise Control

Friction
Process Speed
Engine

Controller

Human or Computer
 Classical Control
 Control is meant to provide regulation of process
outputs about a reference, r, despite inherent
disturbances

r + e u y
Controller Process
-

Classical Feedback Control System

 The deviation of the plant output, e=(r-y), from its

intended reference is used to make appropriate
adjustments in the plant input, u
 Control
 Process is a combination of sensors and actuators

 Controller is a computer (or operator) that performs

the required manipulations

e.g. Classical feedback control loop

d
Computer Actuator
r+ e y
C A P
-
Process

Sensor
 Examples

 Driving an automobile

Driver Steering
r + e y
C A P
-
Automobile
M

Visual and tactile measurement

Actual trajectory
Desired trajectory y
r
 Examples

 Stirred-Tank Heater

Tin, w

Heater
Q T, w
TC
Thermocouple
Tin, w
Controller Heater
TR e y
+ C A P
-
Tank
M

Thermocouple
 Examples
 Measure T, adjust Q

Tin, w
Controller Heater
e T
+ C A P
TR -
Tank
M

Thermocouple

Feedback control

Controller: Q=K(TR-T)+Qnominal
where Qnominal=wC(T-Tin)

Q: Is this positive or negative feedback?

 Examples
 Measure Ti, adjust Q

Ti
M

C A P

+ DQ
Qi + Q

Feedforward Control
 Control Nomenclature

 Identification of all process variables

 Inputs (affect process)

 Outputs (result of process)

 Inputs

 Disturbance variables
Variables affecting process that are due to
external forces
 Manipulated variables
Things that we can directly affect
 Control Nomenclature

 Outputs
 Measured
speed of a car
 Unmeasured
acceleration of a car
 Control variables
important observable quantities that we
want to regulate
can be measured or unmeasured

Disturbances Other

Manipulated Process Control

Controller
 Example

wi, Ti

Pc L

wc, Tci h T

wc, Tco
Po
wo, To

Variables T

• wi, wo: Tank inlet and outlet mass flows

• Ti, To: Tank inlet and outlet temperatures
• wc: Cooling jacket mass flow
• Pc: Position of cooling jacket inlet valve
• Po : Position of tank outlet valve
• Tci, Tco: Cooling jacket inlet and outlet
temperatures
• h: Tank liquid level
 Example

Variables Inputs Outputs

Disturbances Manipulated Measured Unmeasured Control

wi
Ti
Tci
wc
h
wo
To
Pc
Po

Task: Classify the variables

 Process Control and Modeling

 In designing a controller, we must

 Define control objectives
 Develop a process model
 Design controller based on model
 Test through simulation
 Implement to real process
 Tune and monitor

d
r e u y
Controller Process

Model

Design
Implementation
 Control System Development

Control development is usually carried out following these

important steps
Define Objectives

Develop a process
model

Design controller
based on model

Test by
Simulation

Implement and Tune

Monitor
Performance

Often an iterative process, based on performance we may

decide to retune, redesign or remodel a given control system
 Control System Development

 Objectives
 “What are we trying to control?”

 Process modeling
 “What do we need?”
Mechanistic and/or empirical

 Controller design
 “How do we use the knowledge of process
behavior to reach our process control
objectives?”
 What variables should we measure?
 What variables should we control?
 What are the best manipulated variables?
 What is the best controller structure?
 Control System Development

 Implement and tune the controlled process

 Test by simulation
 incorporate control strategy to the process
hardware
 theory rarely transcends to reality
 tune and re-tune

 Monitor performance
 periodic retuning and redesign is often
necessary based on sensitivity of process or
market demands
 statistical methods can be used to monitor
performance
 Process Modeling

 Motivation:

 Develop understanding of process

a mathematical hypothesis of process
mechanisms
 Match observed process behavior
useful in design, optimization and control
of process

 Control:

 Interested in description of process dynamics

Dynamic model is used to predict how
process responds to given input
Tells us how to react
 Process Modeling

What kind of model do we need?

 Dynamic vs. Steady-state

 Steady-state
Variables not a function of time
useful for design calculation
 Dynamic
Variables are a function of time
Control requires dynamic model
 Process Modeling

What kind of model do we need?

 Experimental vs Theoretical

 Experimental
Derived from tests performed on actual
process
Simpler model forms
Easier to manipulate
 Theoretical
Application of fundamental laws of physics
and chemistry
more complex but provides understanding
Required in design stages
 Process Modeling

 Dynamic vs. Steady-state

65

Steady-State 1
60

55
Output

Steady-State 2
50

45

40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time

 Step change in input to observe

 Starting at steady-state, we made a step change
 The system oscillates and finds a new steady-
state
 Dynamics describe the transitory behavior
 Process Modeling

 Empirical vs. Mechanistic models

 Empirical Models
only local representation of the process
(no extrapolation)
model only as good as the data
 Mechanistic Models
Rely on our understanding of a process
Derived from first principles
Observing laws of conservation of
 Mass

 Energy

 Momentum

Useful for simulation and exploration of

new operating conditions
May contain unknown constants that must
be estimated
 Process Modeling

 Empirical vs Mechanistic models

 Empirical models
do not rely on underlying mechanisms
Fit specific function to match process
Mathematical French curve
1.3

1.2

1.1

0.9
Output

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time
 Process Modeling

 Linear vs Nonlinear
 Linear
basis for most industrial control
simpler model form, easy to identify
easy to design controller
poor prediction, adequate control
 Nonlinear
reality
more complex and difficult to identify
need state-of-the-art controller design
techniques to do the job
better prediction and control
 In existing processes, we really on
 Dynamic models obtained from experiments
 Usually of an empirical nature
 Linear
 In new applications (or difficult problems)
 Focus on mechanistic modeling
 Dynamic models derived from theory
 Nonlinear
 Process Modeling
 General modeling procedure

 Identify modeling objectives

end use of model (e.g. control)

 Identify fundamental quantities of interest

Mass, Energy and/or Momentum

 Identify boundaries

 Apply fundamental physical and chemical laws

Mass, Energy and/or Momentum balances

 Make appropriate assumptions (Simplify)

ideality (e.g. isothermal, adiabatic, ideal
gas, no friction, incompressible flow,
etc,…)

 Write down energy, mass and momentum

balances (develop the model equations)
 Process Modeling
 Modeling procedure

 Check model consistency

do we have more unknowns than equations

 Determine unknown constants

e.g. friction coefficients, fluid density and
viscosity

 Solve model equations

typically nonlinear ordinary (or partial)
differential equations
initial value problems

 Check the validity of the model

compare to process behavior
 Process Modeling
 For control applications:

 Modeling objectives is to describe process

dynamics based on the laws of conservation of
mass, energy and momentum

 The balance equation

Rate of Accumulation Flow Flow

= -
of fundamental quantity In Out

Rate of
+ Production

1. Mass Balance (Stirred tank)

2. Energy Balance (Stirred tank heater)
3. Momentum Balance (Car speed)
 Process Modeling

 Application of a mass balance

Holding Tank
Fin

 Modeling objective: Control of tank level

 Fundamental quantity: Mass

 Assumptions: Incompressible flow

 Process Modeling

Total mass in system = rV = rAh

Flow in = rFin
Flow out = rF

Total mass at time t = rAh(t)

Total mass at time t+Dt = rAh(t+Dt)
Accumulation
rAh(t+Dt) - rAh(t) = Dt(rFin-rF ),

rAh(t + tD ) - rAh(t )
 r ( Fin - F ),
Dt

rAh(t + tD ) - rAh(t )
lim  r ( Fin - F ),
Dt 0 Dt

dh
rA  r ( Fin - F ).
dt
 Process Modeling

Model consistency
“Can we solve this equation?”

Variables: h, r, Fin, F, A 5

Constants: r, A 2

Inputs: Fin, F 2

Unknowns: h 1

Equations 1

Degrees of freedom 0

There exists a solution for each value of the

inputs Fin, F
 Process Modeling

Solve equation

 Specify initial conditions h(0)=h0 and integrate

t  Fin ( ) - F ( ) 
h( t )  h(0) + 0   d
 A 

1.5 Fin
flow

1 F

0.5

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

1.3

1.2

1.1
h

0.9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
 Process Modeling

 Energy balance

M
Tin, w

T, w
Q

Objective: Control tank temperature

Fundamental quantity: Energy
Assumptions: Incompressible flow
Constant hold-up
 Process Modeling

 Under constant hold-up and constant mean

pressure (small pressure changes)
 Balance equation can be written in terms of the
enthalpies of the various streams

dH 
 Hin - H out + Q + Ws
dt
 Typically work done on system by external
forces is negligible

dH 
 Hin - H out + Q
dt
 Assume that the heat capacities are constant
such that

H  r CPV (T - Tref )
H in  r C P w(Tin - Tref )
H out  r C P w(T - Tref )
 Process Modeling

After substitution,

d ( rCPV (T - Tref ))
 rCP w(Tin - Tref ) - rCP w(T - Tref ) + Q
dt

Since Tref is fixed and we assume constant r

,Cp

d (T - Tref )
rCPV  rCP w(Tin - Tref ) - rCP w(T - Tref ) + Q
dt
Divide by r CpV

dT w Q
 (Tin - T ) +
dt V rCPV
 Process Modeling

Resulting equation:

dT F Q
 (Tin - T ) +
dt V rVC P

Model Consistency

Variables: T, F, V, Tin, Q, Cp, r 7

Constants: V, Cp, r 3
Inputs: F, Tin, Q 3
Unknown: T 1

Equations 1

There exists a unique solution

 Process Modeling

Assume F is fixed

+  e( - t )/ (Tin ( ) + Q( )

t
- t /
T (t )  T (0)e
0
 rC pV )d
where V/F is the tank residence time (or
time constant)

If F changes with time then the differential

equation does not have a closed form
solution.

dT (t ) F (t ) Q(t )
 (Tin (t ) - T (t )) +
dt V rVC P
Product F(t)T(t) makes this differential
equation nonlinear.

Solution will need numerical integration.

 Process Modeling

A simple momentum balance

Rate of Momentum Momentum

= -
Accumulation In Out

+ Sum of forces
acting on system

Speed (v)

Friction Force of
Engine (u)

Objective: Control car speed

Quantity: Momentum
Assumption: Friction proportional to speed
 Process Modeling

Forces are: Force of the engine = u

Friction = bv

Balance:

Total momentum = Mv

d ( Mv (t )) dv(t )
M  u(t ) - bv(t )
dt dt

Model consistency

Variables: M, v, b, u 4
Constants: M, b 2
Inputs: u 1
Unknowns v 1
 Process Modeling

 Gravity tank

Fo

h
F

Objectives: height of liquid in tank L

Fundamental quantity: Mass, momentum
Assumptions:
 Outlet flow is driven by head of liquid in the
tank
 Incompressible flow
 Plug flow in outlet pipe
 Turbulent flow
 Process Modeling

From mass and momentum balances,

dh Fo AP v
 -
dt A A
dv hg K F v 2
 -
dt L rAP

A system of simultaneous ordinary differential

equations results

Linear or nonlinear?
 Process Modeling

Model consistency

Variables Fo, A, Ap, v, h, g, L, KF, r 9

Constants A, Ap, g, L, KF, r 6

Inputs Fo 1

Unknowns h, v 2

Equations 2

Model is consistent
 Solution of ODEs

 Mechanistic modeling results in nonlinear

sets of ordinary differential equations

 Solution requires numerical integration

 To get solution, we must first:

 specify all constants (densities, heat capacities,
etc, …)
 specify all initial conditions
 specify types of perturbations of the input
variables

For the heated stirred tank,

dT F Q
 (Tin - T ) +
dt V rVC P
 specify r, CP, and V
 specify T(0)
 specify Q(t) and F(t)
 Input Specifications

 Study of control system dynamics

 Observe the time response of a process
output in response to input changes

 Focus on specific inputs

1. Step input signals

2. Ramp input signals
3. Pulse and impulse signals
4. Sinusoidal signals
5. Random (noisy) signals
 Common Input Signals

1. Step Input Signal: a sustained

instantaneous change

e.g. Unit step input introduced at time 1

1.5

1
Input

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Common Input Signals

2. Ramp Input: A sustained constant rate of

change
e.g.

5
Input

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time

4
Output

-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time
 Common Input Signals

3. Pulse: An instantaneous temporary change

e.g. Fast pulse (unit impulse)

100

90

80

70

60
Input

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25
Output

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time
 Common Input Signals

3. Pulses:

e.g. Rectangular Pulse

1.5

1
Input

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time

1.2

0.8

0.6
Output

0.4

0.2

-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time
 Common Input Signals

4. Sinusoidal input

1.5

0.5
Input

-0.5

-1

-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
Output

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time
 Common Input Signals

5. Random Input

1.5

0.5
Input

-0.5

-1

-1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
Output

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time
Solution of ODEs using Laplace
Transforms

Process Dynamics and Control

 Linear ODEs

 For linear ODEs, we can solve without

integrating by using Laplace transforms


- st
F ( s)  [ f (t )]   f (t )e dt
t 0
 Integrate out time and transform to
Laplace domain

dy (t )
 ay (t ) + bu(t )
dt
y (0) c
Integration

Multiplication

Y(s) = G(s)U(s)
 Common Transforms

Useful Laplace Transforms

1. Exponential
f (t )  e - bt

 
- bt - bt - st
[e ] e e dt   e - ( s+ b) t dt
0 0
- ( s+ b) t  
- bt e 1
[e ] -  
s + b  s+b
0

2. Cosine

e - jt + e jt
f (t )  cos(t ) 
2
1  - ( s- j ) t 
- ( s + j ) t 
[cos(t )]    e dt +  e dt 
2 0 0 
1 1 1  s
  +  2
2  s - j s + j  s +  2
 Common Transforms

Useful Laplace Transforms

3. Sine
e jt - e - jt
f (t )  sin(t ) 
2j

1  - ( s- j ) t 
- ( s + j ) t 
[sin(t )]    e dt -  e dt 
2 j 0 0 
1  1 1  
  -  2
2 j  s - j s + j  s +  2
 Common Transforms

Operators
1. Derivative of a function f(t)

df (t )
dt
du  df

v  e - st


df   

[ ]  uv  0 -  udv  f (t )e - st -  ( - sf (t )e - st )dt
dt 0 0 0
df 
[ ]  s  f (t )e - st dt - f (0)  sF ( s) - f (0)
dt 0

2. Integral of a function f(t)

t   - st t F ( s)
  f ( )d    e (  f ( )d )dt 
0  0 0 s
 Common Transforms

Operators
3. Delayed function f(t-)

 0 t 
g (t )  
 f (t -  ) t  
 
- st
 g (t )   e (0)dt +  e - st f (t -  )dt
0 

 g (t )  e - s F ( s)
 Common Transforms

Input Signals
1. Constant f (t )  a

 - st
- st
[a ]   ae dt  ( - ae ) 0  a
s s
0

0 t  0
2. Step f (t )  
a t  0
 - st
- st
[ f (t )]   ae dt  ( - ae ) 0  a
s s
0

0 t 0
3. Ramp function f (t )  
at t  0

 - st  
e at  ae - st a
 f (t )   ate - st dt  -  + dt  2
0
s 0 0 s s
 Common Transforms

Input Signals
4. Rectangular Pulse

0 t0

f ( t )  a 0  t  t w
0 t  tw

tw
 f (t )   ae - st dt  (1 - e - t w s )
a
0 s

5. Unit impulse

(1 - e - t w s )
1
 (t )  lim
tw 0 tws

se - t w s
 (t )  lim 1
tw  0 s
 Laplace Transforms

Final Value Theorem

lim  y (t )  lim  sY ( s)

t  s 0

Limitations:

y (t )  C1 ,
lim  sY ( s) exists s Re( s)  0
s 0

Initial Value Theorem

y (0)  lim  sY ( s)

s
 Solution of ODEs

We can continue taking Laplace transforms

and generate a catalogue of Laplace
domain functions. See SEM Table 3.1

The final aim is the solution of ordinary

differential equations.

Example
Using Laplace Transform, solve

dy
5 + 4y  2 , y (0)  1
dt
Result

y (t )  0.5 + 0.5e -0.8t

 Solution of Linear ODEs

Stirred-tank heater (with constant F)

dT F Q
 (Tin - T ) +
dt V rVC P
T (0)  T0
taking Laplace

V  dT  1
  Tin (t ) - T (t ) + Q(t )
F  dt  r FCP
 (T ( s) - T (0))  Tin ( s) - T ( s) + K P Q( s)
 1 K
T ( s)  T (0) + Tin ( s) + P Q( s)
s + 1 s + 1 s + 1
To get back to time domain, we must
 Specify Laplace domain functions Q(s), Tin(s)
 Take Inverse Laplace
 Linear ODEs

Notes:
 The expression
 1 K
T ( s)  T (0) + Tin ( s) + P Q( s)
s + 1 s + 1 s + 1

describes the dynamic behavior of the process

explicitly

 The Laplace domain functions multiplying T(0),

Tin(s) and Q(s) are transfer functions

Tin(s) 1
s + 1
+ T(s)
Q(s)
KP +

s + 1 +


T(0)
s + 1
 Laplace Transform

Assume Tin(t) = sin(t) then the transfer

function gives directly

1 
Tin ( s)  2
s + 1 ( s +  2 )(s + 1)
Cannot invert explicitly, but if we can find A
and B such that

A B 
+
2 s + 1
 2
s +
2
( s +  2 )(s + 1)
we can invert using tables.

Need Partial Fraction Expansion to deal with

such functions
 Linear ODEs

We deal with rational functions of the form

r(s)=p(s)/q(s) where degree of q > degree
of p

q(s) is called the characteristic polynomial of

the function r(s)

Theorem:
Every polynomial q(s) with real
coefficients can be factored into the
product of only two types of factors
 powers of linear terms (x-a)n and/or
 powers of irreducible quadratic terms,
(x2+bx+c)m
 Partial fraction Expansions

1. q(s) has real and distinct factors

n
q ( s)   ( s + bi )
i 1
expand as

n i
r ( s)  
i 1s + bi
2. q(s) has real but repeated factor

q ( s)  ( s + b) n
expanded

1 2 n
r ( s)  + ++
s + b ( s + b) 2
( s + b) n
 Partial Fraction Expansion

Heaviside expansion

For a rational function of the form

p( s) p( s) n 
r ( s)   n   i
q ( s)  ( s + bi )
 ( s + bi ) i 1
i 1
Constants are given by

p( s) 
 i  ( s + bi )
q ( s)  s-b
i

Note: Most applicable to q(s) with real and

distinct roots. It can be applied to more
specific cases.
 Partial Fraction Expansions

3. Q(s) has irreducible quadratic factors of the

form

q ( s)  ( s2 + d1s + d 0 ) n

where d 2
 d0
4
Algorithm for Solution of ODEs

 Take Laplace Transform of both sides of ODE

 Solve for Y(s)=p(s)/q(s)
 Factor the characteristic polynomial q(s)
 Perform partial fraction expansion
 Inverse Laplace using Tables of Laplace
Transforms
Transfer Function Models
of Dynamical Processe

Process Dynamics and Control

 Transfer Function

 Heated stirred tank example

 1 KP
T ( s)  T (0) + T ( s) + Q( s)
s + 1 s + 1 in s + 1

Tin(s) 1
s + 1
+ T(s)
Q(s)
KP +

s + 1 +


T(0)
s + 1
e.g. The block KP
s + 1
is called the transfer function relating Q(s)
to T(s)
 Process Control

Time Domain Laplace Domain

Process Modeling, Transfer function

Experimentation and Modeling, Controller
Implementation Design and Analysis

Ability to understand dynamics in Laplace and

time domains is extremely important in the
study of process control
 Transfer function

 Order of underlying ODE is given by

degree of characteristic polynomial
e.g. First order processes
KP
Y ( s)  U ( s)
s + 1
Second order processes
KP
Y ( s)  2 2 U ( s)
 s + 2s + 1
 Steady-state value obtained directly
e.g. First order response to unit step function
Kp
Y ( s) 
s(s + 1)
Final value theorem
lim sY ( s)  limG ( s)  K P
s 0 s 0

 Transfer functions are additive and

multiplicative
 Transfer function

 Effect of many transfer functions on a

variable is additive

 1 KP
T ( s)  T (0) + T ( s) + Q( s)
s + 1 s + 1 in s + 1

Tin(s) 1
s + 1
+ T(s)
Q(s)
KP +

s + 1 +


T(0)
s + 1
 Transfer Function

 Effect of consecutive processes in series in

multiplicative

U(s) KP Y1(s) KP Y2(s)

s + 1 s + 1
 Transfer Function

KP
Y1 ( s)  U ( s)
s + 1
K
Y 2( s)  P Y1 ( s)
s + 1

Y1 ( s)  
KP   KP 
  U ( s)
 s + 1  s + 1
 Deviation Variables

 To remove dependence on initial condition

e.g.
 1 KP
T ( s)  T (0) + T ( s) + Q( s)
s + 1 s + 1 in s + 1

Remove dependency on T(0)

1 KP
T  ( s)  T  ( s) + Q ( s)
s + 1 in s + 1
Transfer functions express extent of deviation
from a given steady-state

 Procedure
 Find steady-state
 Write steady-state equation
 Subtract from linear ODE
 Define deviation variables and their derivatives
if required
 Substitute to re-express ODE in terms of
deviation variables
 Example

 Jacketed heated stirred tank

F, Tin

Fc, Tcin h
Fc, Tc

F, T
Assumptions:
 Constant hold-up in tank and jacket
 Constant heat capacities and densities
 Incompressible flow
Model

dT F hc Ac
 (Tin - T ) + (Tc - T )
dt V rC PV
dTc Fc h A
 (Tcin - Tc ) - c c (Tc - T )
dt Vc rcC PcVc
 Nonlinear ODEs

Q: If the model of the process is nonlinear,

how do we express it in terms of a transfer
function?

A: We have to approximate it by a linear one

(i.e.Linearize) in order to take the Laplace.

f(x)

f(x0) f
( x0 )
x

x0
x
 Nonlinear systems

 First order Taylor series expansion

1. Function of one variable

 f ( xs )
f ( x )  f ( xs ) + ( x - xs )
x

2. Function of two variables

 f ( xs ,us )  f ( xs ,us )
f ( x, u)  f ( xs , us ) + ( x - xs ) + (u - us )
x u
3. ODEs

 f ( xs )
x  f ( x)  f ( xs ) + ( x - xs )
x
 Transfer function

 Procedure to obtain transfer function from

nonlinear process models
 Find steady-state of process
 Linearize about the steady-state
 Express in terms of deviations variables about
the steady-state
 Take Laplace transform
 Isolate outputs in Laplace domain
 Express effect of inputs in terms of transfer
functions

Y ( s)
 G1 ( s)
U1 ( s)
Y ( s)
 G2 ( s)
U 2 ( s)
 First order Processes

Examples, Liquid storage

Fi

dh
rA  rFi - rF  rFi -  h
dt
rA dh r
 Fi - h
 dt 
dh
 + h  K p Fi
dt
dh 
 + h   K p Fi 
dt
 First Order Processes

Examples: Speed of a Car

dv 
M  u - bv 
dt
M dv  1 v  ( s) Kp
 u - v  
b dt b u ( s)  s + 1
dv 
  K pu - v 
dt
Stirred-tank heater

dT 
rC pV  - rC p FT  + Q
dt
V dT  1 T  ( s) Kp
 Q - T  
F dt rC p F Q ( s)  s + 1
dT 
  K pQ - T 
dt
Note:
Tin (t )  0
 First Order Processes

Kp 

Liquid Storage Tank r/ rA/

Speed of a car M/b 1/b

Stirred-tank heater 1/rCpF V/F

First order processes are characterized by:

1. Their capacity to store material, momentum

and energy
2. The resistance associated with the flow of
mass, momentum or energy in reaching their
capacity
 First order processes

Liquid storage:
 Capacity to store mass : rA
 Resistance to flow : 1/

Car:
 Capacity to store momentum: M
 Resistance to momentum transfer : 1/b

Stirred-tank heater
 Capacity to store energy: rCpV
 Resistance to energy transfer : 1/ rCpF

Time Constant =  = (Storage capacitance)*

(Resistance to flow)
 First order process

 Step response of first order process

Kp M
Y ( s) 
s + 1 s

Step input signal of magnitude M

0.9

0.8

0.7
0.632
0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
t/
 First order process

 What do we look for?

 Process Gain: Steady-State Response

 Kp  Overall Change in y Dy
lim    Kp  
s 0s + 1 Overall Change in u Du

 Process Time Constant:

 = Time Required to Reach

63.2% of final value

 What do we need?

 Process at steady-state
 Step input of magnitude M
 Measure process gain from new steady-state
 Measure time constant
 First order process

Ramp response:

Kp a
Y ( s) 
s + 1 s2
Ramp input of slope a

4.5

4 
y(t)/Kpa

3.5

2.5
a
2

1.5

0.5

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
t/
 First order Process

Sinusoidal response KP A
Y ( s) 
s + 1 s2 +  2

lim 
t 
 Y ( s) 
-1
1+  
KP A
2 2
sin(t + f )

Sinusoidal input Asin(t)

1.5

0.5
AR

-0.5

-1 f
-1.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
t/
 First order Processes

Bode Plots
0
10
High Frequency
Asymptote
Corner Frequency
AR/Kp

-1
10

-2
10
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
p
0

-20

-40
f

-60

-80

-100
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
p

Amplitude Ratio Phase Shift

K
AR  f  - tan-1( )
1 +  2 2
 Integrating Processes

Example: Liquid storage tank

Fi

dh
rA  rFi - rF Fi   Fi - Fis , F   F - Fs
dt
dh
dh
A  Fi - F A  Fi  - F 
dt dt

H  ( s) 1/ A H  ( s) 1 / A
- 
F  ( s) s 
F ( s) s
i
Process acts as a pure integrator
 Process Modeling

 Step input of magnitude M

K M KM
Y ( s)   2
s s s

Slope = KM

Time Time

 0 t0
y (t )  
 KMt t0
 Integrating processes

 Unit impulse response

K KM
Y ( s)  M 
s s

KM

Time Time

 0 t0
y (t )  
 KM t0
 Integrating Processes

 Rectangular pulse response

KM - tws KM
Y ( s)  (1 - e )  2 (1 - e- tws )
s s s

Time Time

 KMt t  tw
y (t )  
 KMt w t  tw
 Second Order Processes

Three types of second order process:

1. Multicapacity processes: processes that

consist of two or more capacities in series
e.g. Two heated stirred-tanks in series

2. Inherently second order processes: Fluid

or solid mechanic processes possessing
inertia and subjected to some acceleration
e.g. A pneumatic valve

3. Processing system with a controller:

Presence of a controller induces oscillatory
behavior
e.g. Feedback control system
 Second order Processes

 Multicapacity Second Order Processes

 Naturally arise from two first order processes in
series

K P1 K P2
U(s) Y(s)
 1s + 1  2s + 1

U(s)
K P1 K P 2 Y(s)
( 1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)
 By multiplicative property of transfer functions

K P1 K P 2
Y ( s)  U ( s)
( 1 s + 1)( 2 s + 1)
 Second Order Processes

 Inherently second order process:

e.g. Pneumatic Valve

Momentum Balance

d dx dx
M  pA - Kx - C
dt dt dt
M d 2 x C dx A
+ +x p
K dt K dt K
A
x  ( s) K

p ( s) M s2 + C s + 1
K K
 Second order Processes

 Second order process:

 Assume the general form

KP
Y (S )  2 2 U ( s)
 s + 2s + 1
where KP = Process steady-state gain
 = Process time constant
 = Damping Coefficient

 Three families of processes

1 Underdamped
=1 Critically Damped
>1 Overdamped

 Note: Chemical processes are typically

overdamped or critically damped
 Second Order Processes

 Roots of the characteristic polynomial

-2  4 2 2 - 4 2
2 2
 1 2
-   -1
 

Case 1) >1: Two distinct real roots

System has an exponential
behavior

Case 2) =1: One multiple real root

Exponential behavior

Case 3) 1: Two complex roots

System has an oscillatory
behavior
 Second order Processes

 Step response of magnitude M

KP M
Y (S )  2 2
 s + 2s + 1 s

2
0
1.8

1.6 0.2
1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6
2
0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Second order process

Observations

 Responses exhibit overshoot (y(t)/KM >1)

when <1

 Large  yield a slow sluggish response

 Systems with =1 yield the fastest response

without overshoot

 As  (with 1) becomes smaller system

becomes more oscillatory

 If 0, system oscillates without bounds

(unstable)
 Second order processes

 Example - Two Stirred tanks in series

M
Tin, w
Response of T2 to
Tin is an example of an
overdamped second
order process

Q
M
T1, w

T2, w
Q
 Second order Processes

Characteristics of underdamped second order

process

1. Rise time, tr
2. Time to first peak, tp
3. Settling time, ts
4. Overshoot:

a   
OS   exp -  
b  1-  
2

5. Decay ratio:

c  2 
DR   exp - 
b  1-  
2
 Second order Processes

1.8

1.6
P
1.4

1.2
b
+5%
c
1

-5%
0.8

0.6
a
0.4

0.2
tp
0
0 tr 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
ts
 Second Order Process

 Sinusoidal Response

Kp A
Y ( s) 
 2 s2 + 2s + 1 s2 +  2

Kp A
y (t )  sin(t + f )

1 - ( ) 
2 2
+ (2 )2

where - 1  2 
f  - tan  
2
1 - ( ) 

1
ARn 

1 - ( ) 
2 2
+ (2 )2
 Second Order Processes

 Bode Plots

1
10
0.1

0
10

=1
-1
10
-1 0 1
10 10 10

-50

-100 =1

-150
0.1
-1 0 1
10 10 10
 More Complicated processes

Transfer function typically written as rational

function of polynomials

+ ++ r
r ( s) a0 a1s a r s
G( s)  
q ( s) b0 + b1s++b s

where r(s) and q(s) can be factored as

q ( s)  b0 (1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)( s + 1)
r ( s)  a0 ( a1s + 1)( a 2 s + 1)( a s + 1)

s.t.
( a1 s + 1) ( ar s + 1)
G ( s)  K
(1s + 1) ( s + 1)
 Poles and zeroes

Definitions:
 the roots of r(s) are called the zeros of G(s)
1 1
z1  - , , zr  -
 a1  ar
 the roots of q(s) are called the poles of G(s)
1 1
p1  - ,, p  -
1 

Poles: Directly related to the underlying

differential equation

If Re(pi)<0, then there are terms of the

form e-pit in y(t) - y(t) vanishes to a unique
point

If any Re(pi)>0 then there is at least one

term of the form epit - y(t) does not vanish
 Poles

e.g. A transfer function of the form

K
s(1s + 1)( 2 s2 + 2 2 s + 1)

with 0    1 can factored to a sum of

 A constant term from s

 A e-t/ from the term (1s+1)
 A function that includes terms of the form

- t
e  2 sin( 1 -  2 t
2)
- t
e  2 cos( 1 -  2 t
2)

Poles can help us to describe the qualitative

behavior of a complex system (degree>2)
The sign of the poles gives an idea of the
stability of the system
 Poles

 Calculation performed easily in MATLAB

 Function ROOTS
e.g.
q( s)  s3 + s2 + s + 1

» ROOTS([1 1 1 1])
ans =

-1.0000
0.0000 + 1.0000i
0.0000 - 1.0000i
» MATLAB
 Poles

Plotting poles in the complex plane

0.8

0.6

0.4
Imaginary axis

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1
-1.2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2
Real axis

q( s)  s3 + s2 + s + 1
Roots: -1.0, 1.0j, -1.0j
 Poles

Process Behavior with purely complex poles

Unit Step Response

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1
y(t)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
t
 Poles

0.8

0.6

0.4
Imaginary axis

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Real axis

2s3 + 2.5s2 + 3s + 1

Roots: -0.4368, -0.4066+0.9897j,

-0.4066-0.9897j
 Poles

Process behavior with mixed real and

complex poles

Unit Step Response

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
y(t)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
t
 Poles

1.5

0.5
Imaginary axis

-0.5

-1

-1.5
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Real axis

2s4 + 2.5s3 + 3s2 + s - 05

.

Roots: -0.7441, -0.3805+1.0830j,

-0.3805-1.0830j, 0.2550
 Poles

Process behavior with unstable pole

Unit Step Response

160

140

120

100

80
y(t)

60

40

20

-20
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
t
 Zeros

Transfer function:

K p ( a s + 1)
G ( s) 
(1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)

  - - t  -  - t 
y ( t )  K p M  1 + a 1 e 1 + a 2 e  2 
 1 -  2  -  
 1 2 

Let 3 1 is the dominant time constant

1 >  2
16
2.5

8
1.5
y(t)/KM

4
1
2
1
0.5 0
-1
-2
0

-0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time
 Zeros

Observations:

 Adding a zero to an overdamped second order

process yields overshoot and inverse response

 Inverse response is observed when the zeros lie

in right half complex plane, Re(z)>0

 Overshoot is observed when the zero is

dominant ( a > 1)

 Pole-zero cancellation yields a first order

process behavior

 In physical systems, overshoot and inverse

response are a result of two process with
different time constants, acting in opposite
directions
 Zeros

Can result from two processes in parallel

K1
1s + 1
U(s) Y(s)

K2
 2s + 1

( a s + 1)
G ( s)  K
(1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)
K  + K21
K  K1 + K2 a  1 2
K1 + K2

If gains are of opposite signs and time

constants are different then a right half
plane zero occurs
 Dead Time

Fi

Control loop

Time required for the

fluid to reach the valve
usually approximated as
dead time

Manipulation of valve does not lead to immediate

change in level
 Dead time

Delayed transfer functions

U(s) - d s G ( s) Y(s)
e

Y ( s)  e - d sG ( s)U ( s)

e.g. First order plus dead-time

e - d s K p
G ( s) 
 s+1
Second order plus dead-time

e - d s K P
G( s) 
 2 s2 + 2s + 1
 Dead time
 Dead time (delay)
G ( s)  e - d s
 Most processes will display some type of lag
time
 Dead time is the moment that lapses between
input changes and process response

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
y/KM

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 D 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5
t/tau
Step response of a first order plus dead time process
 Dead Time

 Problem
 use of the dead time approximation makes
analysis (poles and zeros) more difficult

e - d s K p
G ( s) 
 s+1
 Approximate dead-time by a rational
(polynomial) function
 Most common is Pade approximation


1- s
e - s  G1( s)  2

1+ s
2
 2
1 - s + s2
e -s  G2 ( s)  2 12
 2

1 + s + s2
2 12
 Pade Approximations

 In general Pade approximations do not

approximate dead-time very well

 Pade approximations are better when one

approximates a first order plus dead time
process

- s

e 1- s K
Kp 2 p
G ( s)  
 s + 1 1 +  s s + 1
2
 Pade approximations introduce inverse
response (right half plane zeros) in the
transfer function

 Limited practical use

 Process Approximation

 Dead time
 First order plus dead time model is often used
for the approximation of complex processes

 Step response of an overdamped second

order process

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
- First Order plus dead time
0.5
o Second Order
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
 Process Approximation

 Second order overdamped or first order

plus dead time?

1.2

0.8

0.6 -- First order plus dead time

- Second order overdamped
0.4
o Actual process
0.2

-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

 Second order process model may be more

difficult to identify
 Process Approximation

 Transfer Function of a delay system

 First order processes

KPe-  s
D

Y ( s)  U ( s)
s + 1

 Second order processes

KP e-  s
D

Y (S )  2 2 U ( s)
 s + 2s + 1

U(s) Y(s)
e-  Ds
G(s)
 Process Approximation

 More complicated processes

 Higher order processes (e.g. N tanks in series)

U(s) K P1K P 2 K PN Y(s)

(1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)( N s + 1)

 For two dominant time constants 1 and 2

process well approximated by

e -s K p N
G ( s)     i
(1s + 1)( 2 s + 1) i 3

 For one dominant time constant 1, process well

approximated by

e -s K p N
G ( s)     i
(1s + 1) i 2
 Process Approximation

 Example

1
G ( s) 
(10s + 1)(25s + 1)( s + 1)2

1.2

0.8

0.6

e -12 s
G1( s) 
0.4

25s + 1
e -2 s
0.2

G2 ( s) 
0
(10s + 1)(25s + 1)
-0.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
 Empirical Modeling

Objective:

 To identify low-order process dynamics (i.e.,

first and second order transfer function models)
 Estimate process parameters (i.e., Kp,  and )

Methodologies:

1. Least Squares Estimation

more systematic statistical approach
2. Process Reaction Curve Methods
quick and easy
based on engineering heuristics
 Empirical Modeling

Least Squares Estimation:

Simplest model form

E[ y ]  0 + 1x
Process Description

y  0 + 1x + 
where
y vector of process measurement
x vector of process inputs
1 , 0 process parameters

Problem:
Find 1, 0 that minimize the sum of squared
residuals (SSR)

n
SSR   ( yi - 0 - 1xi ) 2
i 1
 Empirical Modeling

Solution
Differentiate SSR with respect to parameters

 SSR n
 -2  ( yi - 0 - 1xi )  0
 0 i 1
 SSR n
 -2  xi ( yi - 0 - 1xi )  0
 1 i 1

These are called the normal equations.

Solving for parameters gives:

0  y - 1x
n
 xi yi - nxy
1  i n1
2 2
 xi - nx
i 1
where
n x n y
x   i , y   i
i 1 n i 1 n
 Empirical Modeling

Compact form
Define
 y1  1 x1 
y  1 x2  0 

Y   2 , X   ,  
 
    1
y  1 xn 
 n 
Then

 y1 - 0 - 1x1 
y -  -  x 
E 2 0 1 2
 Y - X
  
y -  -  x 
 n 0 1 n
Problem
find value of  that minimize SSR

SSR  E T E
 Empirical Modeling

Solution in Compact Form

Normal Equations can be written as

 ET E
0

which can be shown to give

X T X  X T Y
or

( )
-1
  X T X X TY

In practice
 Manipulations are VERY easy to perform in
MATLAB
 Extends to general linear model (GLM)
E[ y ]  0 + 1x1 ++  p x p
 Polynomial model
E[ y ]  0 + 1x1 + 11x12
 Empirical Modeling

Control Implementation:
 previous technique applicable to process model
that are linear in the parameters (GLM,
polynomials in x, etc…)

 ei
i.e. such that, for all i, the derivatives are not
a function of  

 typical process step responses

first order
E[ y (t )]  K p M (1 - e - t / )
Nonlinear in Kp and 
overdamped second order
 1e - t /1 -  2e - t / 2 
E[ y (t )]  K p M  1 - 
 1 -  2 
Nonlinear in Kp, 1 and 2

 nonlinear optimization is required to find the

optimum parameters
 Empirical Modeling

Nonlinear Least Squares required for control

applications
 system output is generally discretized

y(t )  [ y(t1), y(t2 ),, y(tn )]

or, simply

y(t )  [ y1, y2 ,, yn ]

First Order process (step response)
E[ yi ]  K p M (1 - e - ti / )

Least squares problem becomes the minimization

of
n
SSR   ( yi - K p M (1 - e - ti / )) 2
i 1

This yields an iterative problem solution best

handled by software packages: SAS, Splus,
MATLAB (function leastsq)
 Empirical Modeling

Example

Nonlinear Least Squares Fit of a first order process

from step response data

E[ y (t )]  3.0 K p (1 - e - t / )
Model

Data
Step Response
4.5

3.5

2.5
y(t)

1.5

0.5

-0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
t
 Empirical Modeling

Results:
Using MATLAB function “leastsq” obtained

K p  13432
. ,   118962
.
Resulting Fit

Step Response
4.5

3.5

2.5
y(t)

1.5

0.5

-0.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
t
 Empirical Modeling

Approximation using delayed transfer

functions
 For first order plus delay processes

 0 0 t 
E[ yi ]   - (ti - )/
K
 p M (1 - e ) t 
Difficulty
 Discontinuity at  makes nonlinear least
squares difficult to apply

Solution
1. Arbitrarily fix delay or estimate using
alternative methods
2. Estimate remaining parameters
3. Readjust delay repeat step 2 until best value of
SSR is obtained
 Empirical Modeling

Example 2
Underlying “True” Process

1
G ( s) 
(10s + 1)(25s + 1)( s + 1)2

Data

3.5

2.5

2
y(t)

1.5

0.5

-0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
t
 Empirical Modeling

Fit of a first order plus dead time

10000
. e -11s
G1( s) 
(27.3899 s + 1)
Second order plus dead time
0.9946e -2 s
G2 ( s) 
(24.9058s + 1)(101229
. s + 1)

3.5

2.5

2
y(t)

1.5

0.5

-0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
t
 Empirical Modeling

Process reaction curve method:

 based on approximation of process using first
order plus delay model

M/s D(s)

Y*(s)
Gc Gp
U(s) Y(s)

Gs

Ym(s)
Manual Control

1. Step in U is introduced
2. Observe behavior ym(t)
3. Fit a first order plus dead time model

KMe -s
Ym ( s) 
s( s + 1)
 Empirical Modeling

First order plus dead-time approximations

1.2

0.8

0.6
KM
0.4

0.2


-0.2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

 Estimation of steady-state gain is easy

 Estimation of time constant and dead-time is
more difficult
 Empirical Modeling

Estimation of time constant and dead-time

from process reaction curves
 find times at which process reaches 35.3% and
85.3%

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6
y(t)

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
t1 t2 t

 Estimate

  13
. t1 - 0.29t2
  0.67(t2 - t1)
 Empirical Process

Example
For third order process

1
G ( s) 
(10s + 1)(25s + 1)( s + 1)2
Estimates:

t1  23, t2  62.5
   1178
. ,   26.46

Compare:
Least Squares Fit Reaction Curve

10000
. e -11s . e -11.78s
100
G1( s)  G1( s) 
(27.3899 s + 1) (26.46s + 1)
 Empirical Modeling

Process Reaction Curve Method

 based on graphical interpretation

 very sensitive to process noise
 use of step responses is troublesome in normal
plant operations
frequent unmeasurable disturbances
difficulty to perform instantaneous step
changes
maybe impossible for slow processes
 restricted to first order models due to reliability
 quick and easy

Least Squares
 systematic approach
 computationally intensive
 can handle any type of dynamics and input
signals
 can handle nonlinear control processes
 reliable
 Feedback Control

 Steam heated stirred tank

Fin,Tin TT TC

IP
LT
Ps
Steam

Condensate
LC IP
F,T
Feedback control system: Valve is manipulated to
increase flow of steam to control tank temperature

Closed-loop process: Controller and process are

interconnected
 Feedback Control

Control Objective:
 maintain a certain outlet temperature and tank
level

Feedback Control:

 temperature is measured using a thermocouple

 level is measured using differential pressure
probes
 undesirable temperature triggers a change in
supply steam pressure
 fluctuations in level trigger a change in outlet
flow

Note:
 level and temperature information is measured
at outlet of process/ changes result from inlet
flow or temperature disturbances
 inlet flow changes MUST affect process before
an adjustment is made
 Examples
Feedback Control:
 requires sensors and actuators

e.g. Temperature Control Loop

Tin, F
Controller Valve
e T
+ C A P
TR -
Tank
M
Thermocouple
Controller:
 software component implements math
 hardware component provides calibrated signal for
actuator
Actuator:
 physical (with dynamics) process triggered by
controller
 directly affects process
Sensor:
 monitors some property of system and transmits
signal back to controller
 Closed-loop Processes
 Study of process dynamics focused on uncontrolled
or Open-loop processes

 Observe process behavior as a result of specific input

signals

U(s) Y(s)
Gp

 In process control, we are concerned with the

dynamic behavior of a controlled or Closed-loop
process D(s)
controller actuator process
R(s)+ + Y(s)
Gc Gv Gp +
-

sensor

Gm

 Controller is dynamic system that interacts with the

process and the process hardware to yield a specific
behaviour
 Closed-Loop Transfer Function

Block Diagram of Closed-Loop Process

D(s)

controller actuator process

R(s)+ + Y(s)
Gc Gv Gp +
-

sensor

Gm

Gp(s) - Process Transfer Function

Gc(s) - Controller Transfer Function

Gm(s) - Sensor Transfer Function

Gv(s) - Actuator Transfer Function

 Closed-Loop Transfer Function

For control, we need to identify closed-loop

dynamics due to:
- Setpoint changes Servo
- Disturbances Regulatory

1. Closed-Loop Servo Response

 transfer function relating Y(s) and R(s) when
D(s)=0

Y ( s)  G p ( s)V ( s)
Y ( s)  G p ( s)Gv ( s)U ( s)
Y ( s)  G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s) E ( s)
Y ( s)  G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc( s)  R( s) - Ym ( s)
Y ( S )  G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s) R( s) - Gm ( s)Y ( s)
 Isolate Y(s)
G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)
Y ( s)  R( s)
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)Gm ( s)
 Closed-Loop Transfer Function

2. Closed-loop Regulatory Response

 Transfer Function relating D(s) to Y(s) at

R(s)=0

Y ( s)  D( s) + G p ( s)V ( s)
Y ( s)  D( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)U ( s)
Y ( s)  D( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s) E ( s)
Y ( s)  D( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)0 - Ym ( s)
Y ( s)  D( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)0 - Gm ( s)Y ( s)

 Isolating Y(s)

1
Y ( s)  D( s)
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)Gm ( s)
 Closed-loop Transfer Function

2. Regulatory Response with Disturbance

Dynamics

Gd ( s)
Y ( s)  D( s)
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)Gm ( s)

Gd(s) Disturbance (or load) transfer

function

3. Overall Closed-Loop Transfer Function

Servo

G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)
Y ( s)  R( s) +
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)Gm ( s)
Gd ( s)
D( s)
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s)Gc ( s)Gm ( s)

Regulatory
 PID Controllers

The acronym PID stands for:

P - Proportional
I - Integral
D - Derivative

PID Controllers:
greater than 90% of all control
implementations
dates back to the 1930s
very well studied and understood
optimal structure for first and second order
processes (given some assumptions)
always first choice when designing a
control system

PID controller equation:

 1 t de 
u(t )  Kc e(t ) +  e( )d +  D  + uR
 I 0 dt 
 PID Control

PID Control Equation

Proportional Derivative
Action Action

 1 t de 
u(t )  Kc e(t ) +  e( )d +  D  + uR
 I 0 dt 

Integral Controller
Action Bias

PID Controller Parameters

Kc Proportional gain
I Integral Time Constant
D Derivative Time Constant
uR Controller Bias
 PID Control

PID Controller Transfer Function

 1 
u(t ) - uR   U  ( s)  Kc  1 + +  D s E ( s)
 Is 
or:

U  ( s)   P + + Ds E ( s)
I
 s 

Note:

 numerator of PID transfer function cancels

second order dynamics
 denominator provides integration to remove
possibility of steady-state errors
 PID Control

Controller Transfer Function:

 1 
Gc ( s)  Kc  1 + +  D s
 Is 
or,

Gc ( s)   P + + Ds
 I
 s 

Note:

Many variations of this controller exist

Easily implemented in SIMULINK
each mode (or action) of controller is better
studied individually
 Proportional Feedback

Form:

u(t ) - uR  Kce(t )
Transfer function:

or, U '( s)  Kc E ( s)

Gc ( s)  Kc
Closed-loop form:

G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc
Y ( s)  R( s) +
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) KcGm ( s)
1
D( s)
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) KcGm ( s)
 Proportional Feedback

Example:
Given first order process:

Kp
G p ( s)  , Gv ( s)  1, Gm ( s)  1
s + 1
for P-only feedback closed-loop dynamics:

K p Kc
1 + K p Kc
Y(s)  R(s)
  
  s + 1
 1 + K p Kc 
   1
  s +
 1 + K p Kc  1 + K p Kc
+ D(s)
  
  s + 1
 1 + K p Kc 

Closed-Loop
Time Constant
 Proportional Feedback

Final response:
K p Kc 1
lim yservo ( t )  , lim y reg ( t ) 
t  1 + K p Kc t  1 + K p Kc

Note:
 for “zero offset response” we require

lim yservo (t )  1, lim yreg (t )  0

t  t 
Tracking Error Disturbance rejection

 Possible to eliminate offset with P-only

feedback (requires infinite controller gain)

 Need different control action to eliminate offset

(integral)
 Proportional Feedback

Servo dynamics of a first order process under

proportional feedback

1
10.0
0.9

0.8 5.0

0.7
y(t)/KM

0.6
1.0
0.5

0.4 0.5

0.3

0.2

0.1 Kc
0.01
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

t/
- increasing controller gain eliminates off-set
 Proportional Feedback

High-order process
e.g. second order underdamped process

1.5

1
y(t)/KM

5.0

2.5

1.0
0.5

0.5

0.01
0
0 5 10 15 20 25

 increasing controller gain reduces offset, speeds

response and increases oscillation
 Proportional Feedback

Important points:
 proportional feedback does not change the order
of the system
started with a first order process
closed-loop process also first order
order of characteristic polynomial is
invariant under proportional feedback

 speed of response of closed-loop process is

directly affected by controller gain
increasing controller gain reduces the
closed-loop time constant

 in general, proportional feedback

reduces (does not eliminate) offset
speeds up response
for oscillatory processes, makes closed-
loop process more oscillatory
 Integral Control

Integrator is included to eliminate offset

 provides reset action

 usually added to a proportional controller to
produce a PI controller
PID controller with derivative action turned
off
PI is the most widely used controller in
industry
optimal structure for first order processes

PI controller form

 1 t 
u(t )  Kc e(t ) +  e( )d  + uR
 I 0 
Transfer function model
 1 
U  ( s)  Kc  1 +  E ( s)
  I s
 PI Feedback

Closed-loop response

  s + 1
G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc  I 
 Is 
Y ( s)  R( s) +
  I s + 1
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc   Gm ( s)
 Is 
1
D( s)
  s + 1
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc  I  Gm ( s)
 Is 

 more complex expression

 degree of denominator is increased by one
 PI Feedback

Example
PI control of a first order process
Kp
G p ( s)  , Gv ( s)  1, Gm ( s)  1
s + 1

Closed-loop response
Is+1
Y ( s)  R ( s) +
  I   2  1 + Kc K p 
 s +  I s + 1
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
  I  2   I 
 s + s
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
D( s)
  I   2  1 + Kc K p 
 s +  I s + 1
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
Note:
offset is removed
closed-loop is second order
 PI Feedback

Example (contd)
effect of integral time constant and controller gain
on closed-loop dynamics

natural period of oscillation

 I
 cl 
Kc K p
damping coefficient

1 K p  Kc K p + 1
 Kc I  
2   Kc K p 

 integral time constant and controller gain can

induce oscillation and change the period of
oscillation
 PI Feedback

Effect of integral time constant on servo

dynamics

1.8
0.01 Kc=1
1.6

1.4
0.1
1.2
0.5
y(t)/KM

1
1.0
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 PI Feedback

Effect of controller gain

1
10.0
5.0
0.9
1.0
0.8 0.5
0.7
y(t)/KM

0.6
0.1
0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1
I=1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 affects speed of response

 increasing gain eliminates offset quicker
 PI Feedback

Effect of integral action of regulatory

response
0.4

0.35

0.3

0.25

0.2
y(t)/KM

0.15

0.1

0.05

-0.05

-0.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 reducing integral time constant removes effect

of disturbances
 makes behavior more oscillatory
 PI Feedback

Important points:

 integral action increases order of the system in

closed-loop

 PI controller has two tuning parameters that can

independently affect
speed of response
final response (offset)

 integral action eliminates offset

 integral action
should be small compared to proportional
action
tuned to slowly eliminate offset
can increase or cause oscillation
can be de-stabilizing
 Derivative Action

Derivative of error signal

 Used to compensate for trends in output
measure of speed of error signal change
provides predictive or anticipatory action
 P and I modes only response to past and current
errors
 Derivative mode has the form

D de
 D
Kc dt
if error is increasing, decrease control
action
if error is decreasing, decrease control
action

 Always implemented in PID form

 1 t de 
u(t )  Kc e(t ) +  e( )d +  D  + uR
 I 0 dt 
 PID Feedback

Transfer Function

 1 
U  ( s)  Kc  1 + +  D s E ( s)
 Is 
Closed-loop Transfer Function

  D I s2 +  I s + 1
G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc  
 Is 
Y ( s)  R( s) +
  D I s +  I s + 1
2
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc   Gm ( s)
 Is 
1
D( s)
  D I s2 +  I s + 1
1 + G p ( s)Gv ( s) Kc   Gm ( s)
 Is 

 Slightly more complicated than PI form

 PID Feedback

Example:
PID Control of a first order process

Kp
G p ( s)  , Gv ( s)  1, Gm ( s)  1
s + 1
Closed-loop transfer function

 D I s2 +  I s + 1
Y ( s)  R( s) +
  I  2  1 + Kc K p 
 +  D I  s +    I s + 1
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
  I  2   I 
  s +   s
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
D ( s)
  I  2  1 + Kc K p 
 +  D I  s +    I s + 1
 Kc K p   Kc K p 
 PID Feedback

Effect of derivative action on servo dynamics

1.6

1.4

1.2

1
y(t)/KM

0.1
0.8
0.5
1.0 2.0
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 PID Feedback

Effect of derivative action on regulatory

response

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

1.0 2.0
0.05 0.5
0.1
0

-0.05

-0.1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

 increasing derivative action reduces impact of

disturbances on control variable
 slows down servo response and affects
oscillation of process
 Derivative Action

Important Points:

 Characteristic polynomial is similar to PI

 derivative action does not increase the order of
the system
 adding derivative action affects the period of
oscillation of the process
good for disturbance rejection
poor for tracking

 the PID controller has three tuning parameters

and can independently affect,
speed of response
final response (offset)
servo and regulatory response
 derivative action
should be small compared to integral action
has a stabilizing influence
difficult to use for noisy signals
usually modified in practical
implementation
 Closed-loop Stability

Every control problem involves a

consideration of closed-loop stability

General concepts:

BIBO Stability:

“ An (unconstrained) linear system is said to

be stable if the output response is bounded
for all bounded inputs. Otherwise it is
unstable.”

Comments:
Stability is much easier to prove than
unstability
This is just one type of stability
 Closed-loop Stability

Closed-loop dynamics

GcGv G p 1
Y ( s)  Y * ( s) + D( s)
1 + GcGv G pGm 1 + GcGv G pGm

GOL

 if GOL is a rational function then the closed-loop

transfer functions are rational functions and
take the form

+ ++ r
r ( s) a0 a1s a r s
G( s)  
q ( s) b0 + b1s++b s
and factor as

( a1 s + 1) ( ar s + 1)
G ( s)  K
(1s + 1) ( s + 1)
 Closed-loop stability

General Stability criterion:

“ A closed-loop feedback control system is stable

if and only if all roots of the characteristic
polynomial are negative or have negative real
parts. Otherwise, the system is unstable.”

 Unstable region is the right half plane of the

complex plane.

 Valid for any linear systems.

 Underlying system is almost always nonlinear

so stability holds only locally. Moving away
from the point of linearization may cause
instability.
 Closed-loop Stability

Problem reduces to finding roots of a

polynomial

Easy (1990s) way : MATLAB function ROOTS

Traditional:
1. Routh array:
 Test for positivity of roots of a

polynomial
2. Direct substitution
 Complex axis separates stable and

unstable regions
 Find controller gain that yields purely

complex roots
3. Root locus diagram
 Vary location of poles as controller

gain is varied
 Of limited use
 Closed-loop stability

Routh array for a polynomial equation

an sn + an-1sn-1++ a1s + a0  0
is

1 an an - 2 an - 4 
2 an - 1 an - 3 an - 5 
3 b1 b2 b3 
4 c1 c2 
 
n+1 z1

where
a a -a a a a -a a
b1  n -1 n - 2 n - 3 n , b2  n -1 n - 4 n -5 n ,
an -1 an -1
ba -b a ba -b a
c1  1 n - 3 2 n -1 , c2  1 n -5 3 n -1 ,
b1 b1

Elements of left column must be positive to

have roots with negative real parts
 Example: Routh Array

Characteristic polynomial

2.36s5 + 149
. s4 - 0.58s3 + 121
. s2 + 0.42 s + 0.78  0

Polynomial Coefficients
a5  2.36, a4  149
. , a3  -058
. , a2  121
. , a1  0.42, a0  0.78

Routh Array

a5 (2.36) a3 ( -0.58) a1(0.42)

a4 (149
. ) a2 (121. ) a0 (0.78)
b1( -2.50) b2 ( -0.82) b3 (0)
c1(0.72) c2 (0.78)
d1(189
. ) d2 (0)
e1(0.78)

 Closed-loop system is unstable

 Direct Substitution
 Technique to find gain value that de-stabilizes the
system.

 Observation:
Process becomes unstable when poles appear on
right half plane

Find value of Kc that yields purely complex

poles

 Strategy:
 Start with characteristic polynomial
r ( s)
1 + KcGv ( s)G p ( s)Gm ( s)  1 + Kc
q ( s)
 Write characteristic equation:

q ( s) + Kcr ( s)  0
 Substitute for complex pole (s=j)

q ( j ) + Kcr ( j )  0
 Solve for Kc and 
 Example: Direct Substitution

Characteristic equation
s+1
1 + Kc 0
s3 + 0.5s2 - 0.5s - 0.75
s3 + 0.5s2 - 0.5s - 0.75 + Kc s + Kc  0
s3 + 0.5s2 + ( Kc - 0.5) s + ( Kc - 0.75)  0

Substitution for s=j

( j ) 3 + 0.5( j ) 2 + ( Kc - 0.5) j + ( Kc - 0.75)  0
- j 3 - 0.5 2 + ( Kc - 0.5) j + ( Kc - 0.75)  0

Real Part Complex Part

-0.5 2 + Kc - 0.75  0 ( Kc - 0.5) -  3  0

 Kc  0.5 2 + 0.75  (0.5 2 + 0.75 - 0.5) -  3  0

 -0.5 2 + 0.25  0
    2 / 2, Kc  1

 System is unstable if Kc > 1

 Root Locus Diagram
Old method that consists in plotting poles of
characteristic polynomial as controller gain is
changed

e.g.

s3 + 0.5s2 + ( Kc - 0.5) s + ( Kc - 0.75)  0

1.5

Kc-0
1
0.5
Imaginary Axis

-0.5

Kc-0
-1

-1.5
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Real Axis
 Stability and Performance
 Given plant model, we assume a stable closed-loop
system can be designed

 Once stability is achieved - need to consider

performance of closed-loop process - stability is not
enough

 All poles of closed-loop transfer function have

negative real parts - can we place these poles to get
a “good” performance

C
Space of all
Controllers S

S: Stabilizing Controllers for a given plant

P: Controllers that meet performance
 Controller Tuning

Can be achieved by
 Direct synthesis : Specify servo transfer
function required and calculate required
controller - assume plant = model

 Internal Model Control: Morari et al. (86)

Similar to direct synthesis except that plant and
plant model are concerned

 Tuning relations:
Cohen-Coon - 1/4 decay ratio
designs based on ISE, IAE and ITAE

 Frequency response techniques

Bode criterion
Nyquist criterion

 Field tuning and re-tuning

 Direct Synthesis

From closed-loop transfer function

C GcG p

R 1 + GcG p

Isolate Gc
1  C R 

Gc 
G p  1 - C 
R

For a desired trajectory (C/R)d and plant

model Gpm, controller is given by

Gc 
1 
 C ( )
Rd 


 ( )
G pm  1 - C 
R d

 not necessarily PID form

 inverse of process model to yield pole-zero
cancellation (often inexact because of process
approximation)
 used with care with unstable process or
processes with RHP zeroes
 Direct Synthesis

1. Perfect Control
 C  1
 
 R d
 cannot be achieved, requires infinite gain

2. Closed-loop process with finite settling

time
 C  1
 
 R d  cs + 1

 For 1st order Gp, it leads to PI control

 For 2nd order, get PID control

3. Processes with delay 

 C e - c s
  
 R d  cs + 1

 requires c  
 again, 1st order leads to PI control
 2nd order leads to PID control
 IMC Controller Tuning

D
R + C
+
Gc* Gp
+
-

+
-
Gpm

Closed-loop transfer function

Gc*G p 1 - Gc*G p
C R+ D
1 + Gc* (G p - G pm ) 1 + Gc* (G p - G pm )

In terms of implemented controller, Gc

Gc*
Gc 
1 - Gc*G pm
 IMC Controller Tuning

1. Process model factored into two parts

+ G-
G pm  G pm pm
where + contains dead-time and RHP
G pm
zeros, steady-state gain scaled to 1.

2. Controller
1
Gc*  f
G -pm
where f is the IMC filter

1
f 
( c s + 1) r
 based on pole-zero cancellation
 not recommended for open-loop unstable
processes
 very similar to direct synthesis
 Example

PID Design using IMC and Direct synthesis

for the process

e -9 s 0.3
G p ( s) 
30s + 1

Process parameters: K=0.3, 30, 9

1. IMC Design: Kc=6.97, I=34.5, d=3.93

 Filter
1
f 
12 s + 1
2. Direct Synthesis: Kc=4.76, I=30
 Servo Transfer function

-9 s
 C  e
 
 R  d 12 s + 1
 Example

Result: Servo Response

 IMC and direct synthesis give roughly same
results

25

IMC
20
Direct
Synthesis
15

y(t)
10

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

t
 IMC not as good due to Pade approximation
 Example

Result: Regulatory response

40

35

30

y(t)
25
Direct Synthesis

20

IMC
15
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

t
 Direct synthesis rejects disturbance more
rapidly (marginally)
 Tuning Relations

Process reaction curve method:

 based on approximation of process using first
order plus delay model

1/s D(s)

Y*(s)
Gc Gp
U(s) Y(s)

Gs

Ym(s)
Manuel Control
1. Step in U is introduced
2. Observe behavior ym(t)
3. Fit a first order plus dead time model

Ke - s
Ym ( s) 
 s+1
 Tuning Relations

Process response

1.2

0.8

0.6
KM
0.4

0.2


-0.2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

4. Obtain tuning from tuning correlations

Ziegler-Nichols
Cohen-Coon
ISE, IAE or ITAE optimal tuning relations
 Ziegler-Nichols Tunings

Controller Kc Ti Td
P-only (1 / K p )( /  )
PI (0.9 / K p )( /  ) 3.3
PID (1.2 / K p )( /  ) 2.0 0.5

- Note presence of inverse of process gain in controller

gain
- Introduction of integral action requires reduction in
controller gain
- Increase gain when derivation action is introduced

Example:
e -9 s 0.3
G p ( s) 
30s + 1

PI: Kc= 10 I=29.97

PID: Kc= 13.33 I=18
I=4.5
 Example

Ziegler-Nichols Tunings: Servo response

50
Z-N PI

45
Z-N PID

40

y(t) 35
Direct Synthesis

30

25

20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

t
 Example

Regulatory Response

40

35

30 Direct Synthesis

25
Z-N PI

20

Z-N PID
15

10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Z-N tuning
 Oscillatory with considerable overshoot
 Tends to be conservative
 Cohen-Coon Tuning Relations

Designed to achieve 1/4 decay ratio

 fast decrease in amplitude of oscillation

Controller Kc Ti Td
P-only (1 / K p )( /  )[1 +  / 3 ]
PI (1 / K p )( /  )[ 0.9 +  / 12 ]  [30 + 3( /  )]
9 + 20( /  )
PID 3 + 16  [32 + 6( /  )] 4
(1 / K p )( /  )[ ]
12 13 + 8( /  ) 11 + 2( /  )

Example:

PI: Kc=10.27 I=18.54

Kc=15.64 I=19.75
d=3.10
 Tuning relations

Cohen-coon: Servo

55

50

45 C-C PID

40

35
C-C PI

30

25

20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

 More aggressive/ Higher controller gains

 Undesirable response for most cases
 Tuning Relations

Cohen-Coon: Regulatory

40

35

30

C-C PI
25

y(t) 20

15 C-C PID

10

5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

 Highly oscillatory t
 Very aggressive
 Integral Error Relations

1. Integral of absolute error (IAE)


IAE   e(t ) dt
0

2. Integral of squared error (ISE)


ISE   e(t ) 2 dt
penalizes large errors
0
3. Integral of time-weighted absolute error
(ITAE)

ITAE   t e(t ) dt
0
penalizes errors that persist

 ITAE is most conservative

 ITAE is preferred
 ITAE Relations

Choose Kc, I and d that minimize the ITAE:

 For a first order plus dead time model, solve

for:

 ITAE  ITAE  ITAE

 0,  0, 0
 Kc  I  d
 Design for Load and Setpoint changes yield
different ITAE optimum

Type of Type of Mode A B

Input Controller
Load PI P 0.859 -0.977
I 0.674 -0.680
Load PID P 1.357 -0.947
I 0.842 -0.738
D 0.381 0.995
Set point PI P 0.586 -0.916
I 1.03 -0.165
Set point PID P 0.965 -0.85
I 0.796 -0.1465
D 0.308 0.929
 ITAE Relations

From table, we get

Load Settings:

( )
Y  A 
B
 KKc      d 
I
Setpoint Settings:

( )
Y  A 
B
 KKc   d  , 
I  A + B( )



Example

0.3e -9 s
Gs  , GL  1
30s + 1
 ITAE Relations

Example (contd)
Setpoint Settings
- 0.85
( )
KKc  0.965 9 30  2.6852
Kc  2.6852 K  2.6852 0.3  8.95

I  0.796 - 01465
. 9( )
30  0.7520

 I   0.7520  30 0.7520  39.89

 ( )
 d  0.308 9 0.929  01006
30 .
 d  01006
.   3.0194
Load Settings:
- 0.947
KKc  1357
. 9
30( )  4.2437
Kc  4.2437  4.2437  14.15
K 0.3
- 0.738

I  0.842( )
9
30  2.0474

 I   2.0474  30 2.0474  14.65

 ( )
 d  0.381 9 0.995  01150
30 .
 d  01150
.   3.4497
 ITAE Relations

Servo Response

60

55 ITAE(Load)

50

45

40

35 ITAE(Setpoint)

30

25

20
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

 design for load changes yields large overshoots

for set-point changes
 ITAE Relations

Regulatory response

40

35

30

ITAE(Setpoint)
25

20

15

10

5 ITAE(Load)

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300

 Tuning relations are based GL=Gp

 Method does not apply to the process
 Set-point design has a good performance for
this case
 Tuning Relations
 In all correlations, controller gain should be
inversely proportional to process gain

 Controller gain is reduced when derivative action is

introduced

 Controller gain is reduced as   increases

 Integral time constant and derivative constant

should increase as   increases


 In general, d   0.25
I

 Ziegler-Nichols and Cohen-Coon tuning relations

yield aggressive control with oscillatory response
(requires detuning)

 ITAE provides conservative performance (not

aggressive)
 CHE 446
Process Dynamics and Control

Frequency Response of
Linear Control Systems
 First order Process

Response to a sinusoidal input signal

lim 
t 
 Y ( s) 
-1 KP A
1+   2 2
sin(t + f )

1.5

0.5
AR

-0.5

-1 f
-1.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

t/

Recall: Sinusoidal input Asin(t) yields

sinusoidal output caharacterized by AR and
f
 First order Processes

Bode Plots
0
10
High Frequency
Asymptote
Corner Frequency
AR/Kp

-1
10

-2
10
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
p
0

-20

-40
f

-60

-80

-100
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
p

Amplitude Ratio Phase Shift

K
AR  f  - tan-1( )
1 +  2 2
 Second Order Process

 Sinusoidal Response

Kp A
Y ( s) 
 2 s2 + 2s + 1 s2 +  2

Kp A
y (t )  sin(t + f )

1 - ( ) 
2 2
+ (2 )2

where - 1  2 
f  - tan  
2
1 - ( ) 

1
ARn 

1 - ( ) 
2 2
+ (2 )2
 Second Order Processes

Bode Plot
1
10

0.1
Amplitude reaches
a maximum at
AR

0
10 resonance frequency

=1
-1
10
-1 0 1
10 10 10

-50

=1
f

-100

-150
0.1
-1 0 1
10 10 10


 Frequency Response

Q: Do we “have to” take the Laplace inverse

to compute the AR and phase shift of a 1st
or 2nd order process?

No

Q: Does this generalize to all transfer function

models?

Yes

Study of transfer function model response to

sinusoidal inputs is called “Frequency
Domain Response” of linear processes.
 Frequency Response

Some facts for complex number theory:

i) For a complex number:

w  a + bj
a  Re( w), b  Im( w)

Im

b w


a Re

It follows that where

a  w cos( ), b  w sin( )
 Im( w) 
w Re( w) 2 + Im( w) 2   arg( w)  tan -1 
 Re( w) 
such that
w  w e j
 Frequency Response

Some facts:
ii) Let z=a-bj and w= a+bj then
w  z and arg( z)  - arg( w)

iii) For a first order process

Kp
G ( s) 
 s+1
Let s=j
Kp (1 -  j ) Kp K p
G( j )   - j
 j + 1 (1 -  j ) 1 +   1 +  
2 2 2 2
such that
Kp
G ( j )  (  AR)
1 +  2 2
arg(G ( j ))  - tan -1 ( )(  Phase Lag)
 Frequency Response

Main Result:

The response of any linear process G(s) to

a sinusoidal input is a sinusoidal.

The amplitude ratio of the resulting signal

is given by the Modulus of the transfer
function model expressed in the frequency
domain, G(i).

The Phase Shift is given by the argument of

the transfer function model in the
frequency domain.
i.e.

AR  G ( j )  Re(G ( j )) 2 + Im(G ( j )) 2
-1 Im(G ( j )) 
Phase Angle    tan  
 Re(G ( j )) 
 Frequency Response

For a general transfer function

r ( s) e - s ( s - z1)( s - zm )
G ( s)  
q ( s) ( s - p1)( s - pn )

Frequency Response summarized by

G ( j )  G ( j ) e j

where is the modulus of G(j) and 

( j )
is theGargument of G(j)

Note: Substitute for s=j in the transfer

function.
 Frequency Response

The facts:

For any linear process we can calculate the

amplitude ratio and phase shift by:

i) Letting s=j in the transfer functionG(s)

ii) G(j) is a complex number. Its modulus is the

amplitude ratio of the process and its argument
is the phase shift.

iii) As , the frequency, is varied that G(j) gives

a trace (or a curve) in the complex plane.

iv) The effect of the frequency, , on the process

is the frequency response of the process.
 Frequency Response

Examples:

1. Pure Capacitive Process G(s)=1/s

K  - j  K
G ( j )   - j
j  - j  
K -1  - K /   
AR  , f  tan  -
  0  2

2. Dead Time G(s)=e-s

G ( j )  e - j

AR  1, f  -
 Frequency Response

Examples:

3. n process in series

G( s)  G1( s)Gn ( s)

Frequency response of G(s)

G ( j )  G1 ( j ) Gn ( j )
 G1 ( j ) e jf1  Gn ( j ) e jfn
therefore

n
AR  G ( j )   Gi ( j )
i 1
n n
f  arg(G ( j ))   arg(Gi ( j ))   fi
i 1 i 1
 Frequency Response

Examples.

4. n first order processes in series

K1 Kn
G ( s)  
1s + 1  n s + 1
K1 Kn
AR  
1 + 12 2 1 +  n2 2
f  - tan -1(1)-- tan -1( n )
5. First order plus delay

K pe -s
G( s) 
 s+1
K p (1)
AR  , f  - tan -1( ) - 
1 +  2 2
 Frequency Response

 To study frequency response, we use two

types of graphical representations

1. The Bode Plot:

Plot of AR vs.  on loglog scale
Plot of f vs.  on semilog scale

2. The Nyquist Plot:

Plot of the trace of G(j) in the
complex plane

 Plots lead to effective stability criteria and

frequency-based design methods
 Bode Plot

Pure Capacitive Process

K 
AR  -
 2
2
10

1
AR

10

0
10
-2 -1 0
10 10 10

-89

-89.5
Phase Angle

-90

-90.5

-91
-2 -1 0
10 10 10
Frequency (rad/sec)
 Bode Plot

G( s)  G1( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)

1 1 1
G1( s)  , G2 ( s)  , G3 ( s) 
10s + 1 5s + 1 s+1
0
10

G3
10
-2 G2
G1

-4
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
G
10 10 10 10 10 10

-100

-200

-300
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10 10

1
G ( j ) 
(1 + 102  2 )(1 + 52  2 )(1 + 12  2 )
  - tan -1(10 ) - tan -1(5 ) - tan -1( )
 Bode Plot

G ( s)  e - s

G( j )  1,   - 
Example: Effect of dead-time

Gd ( s)  e -2 sG1( s)G2 ( s)G3 ( s)

0
10

-2
10

G=Gd
-4
10
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10 10

-100

-200

-300
Gd G
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10 10
 Nyquist Plot

Plot of G(j) in the complex plane as  is

varied

Relation to Bode plot

 AR is distance of G(j) for the origin

 Phase angle,  , is the angle from the Real
positive axis

Example First order process (K=1, =1)

G( j )
 Nyquist Plot

Dead-time

Second Order

1

1
 Nyquist Plot

Third Order

1
G ( s)  3
s + 3s2 + 3s + 1

Effect of dead-time (second order process)

, Gd ( s)  e -2 s
1
G( s) 
s2 + 3s + 1
Che 446: Process Dynamics and
Control

Frequency Domain
Controller Design
 PI Controller

1
AR  Kc +1
 I 2 2

  tan -1( -1 /  I )
3
10

2
10

AR101
0
10
-3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10

-20

-40
 -60
-80

-100
-3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10

 PID Controller

2
 1 
AR  Kc   D -  +1
  I 
-1  1 
  tan   D - 
  I 
3
10

2
10
AR
1
10

0
10
-3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10

100

50

 0

-50

-100
-3 -2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10


 Bode Stability Criterion

Consider open-loop control system

D(s)

R(s) + +
Gc Gp
- +
U(s) Y(s)

Gs

Ym(s)
Open-loop Response to R(s)
1. Introduce sinusoidal input in setpoint (D(s)=0)
and observe sinusoidal output
2. Fix gain such AR=1 and input frequency such
that f=-180
3. At same time, connect close the loop and set
R(s)=0

Q: What happens if AR>1?

 Bode Stability Criterion

“A closed-loop system is unstable if the

frequency of the response of the open-loop
GOL has an amplitude ratio greater than
one at the critical frequency. Otherwise it
is stable. “

Strategy:

1. Solve for  in

arg(GOL ( j ))  -
2. Calculate AR

AR  GOL ( j )
 Bode Stability Criterion

To check for stability:

1. Compute open-loop transfer function

2. Solve for  in f=-
3. Evaluate AR at 
4. If AR>1 then process is unstable

Find ultimate gain:

1. Compute open-loop transfer function

without controller gain
2. Solve for  in f=-
3. Evaluate AR at 
4. Let 1
Kcu 
AR
 Bode Criterion

Consider the transfer function and controller

5e - 01
.s
Gc ( s)  0.4 1 +
1 

G( s)   01
( s + 1)(0.5s + 1) . s

- Open-loop transfer function

5e -01.s
 1 
GOL ( s)  0.4 1 + 
( s + 1)(0.5s + 1)  01 . s

- Amplitude ratio and phase shift

5 1 1
AR  0.4 1 +
1+  2
1 + 0.25 2 0.01 2
-1 -1 -1  1 
f  -01
.  - tan ( ) - tan (0.5 ) - tan  
 01
. 
- At =1.4128, f=-, AR=6.746
 Ziegler-Nichols Tuning

Closed-loop tuning relation

 With P-only, vary controller gain until system

(initially stable) starts to oscillate.
 Frequency of oscillation is c,

 Ultimate gain, Ku, is 1/M where M is the

amplitude of the open-loop system
 Ultimate Period

2
Pu 
c
Ziegler-Nichols Tunings

P Ku/2
PI Ku/2.2 Pu/1.2
PID Ku/1.7 Pu/2 Pu/8
 Nyquist Stability Criterion

“If N is the number of times that the

Nyquist plot encircles the point (-1,0) in
the complex plane in the clockwise
direction, and P is the number of open-
loop poles of GOL that lie in the right-half
plane, then Z=N+P is the number of
unstable roots of the closed-loop
characteristic equation.”

Strategy

1. Substitute s=j in GOL(s)

2. Plot GOL(j) in the complex plane
3. Count encirclements of (-1,0) in the
clockwise direction
 Nyquist Criterion

Consider the transfer function

5e -0.1s
G( s) 
( s + 1)(0.5s + 1)
and the PI controller


Gc ( s)  0.4 1 +
1 

 01 . s
 Stability Considerations

 Control is about stability

 Considered exponential stability of

controlled processes using:
 Routh criterion
 Direct Substitution Polynomial
 Root Locus (no dead-time)
 Bode Criterion (Restriction on phse angle)
 Nyquist Criterion

 Nyquist is most general but sometimes

difficult to interpret

 Roots, Bode and Nyquist all in MATLAB

 MAPLE is recommended for some

applications.
 CHE 446
Process Dynamics and
Control

Advanced Control Techniques:

1. Feedforward Control
 Feedforward Control

Feedback control systems have the general

form:
D(s)
UR(s)
GD
R(s) +
Gc + + Gv Gp
+
+
U(s) Y(s)

Gs
Ym(s)

where UR(s) is an input bias term.

 Feedback controllers
 output of process must change before any action
is taken
 disturbances only compensated after they affect
the process
 Feedforward Control

 Assume that D(s)

 can be measured before it affects the process
 effect of disturbance on process can be
described with a model GD(s)
Feedforward Control is possible.

Feedforward
Controller
D(s)
Gf
GD
R(s) +
Gc + + Gv Gp
+
+
U(s) Y(s)

Gs
Ym(s)
Feedback/Feedforward Controller
Structure
 Feedforward Control

Heated Stirred Tank

F,Tin
TT

TT
TC1

Ps
Steam

Condensate
F,T
 Is this control configuration feedback or
feedforward?
 How can we use the inlet stream thermocouple
to regulate the inlet folow disturbances
 Will this become a feedforward or feedback
controller?
 Feedforward Control

A suggestion:

TT TC2

F,Tin +
TT +

TC1
Ps

Steam

Condensate
F,T
How do we design TC2?
 Feedforward Control

The feedforward controller:

D(s)
Gf
GD
UR(s)+ + +
Gv Gp
U(s) + Y(s)

Transfer Function

Y ( s)  GD ( s) D( s) + G P ( s)Gv ( s)U ( s)
Y ( s)  GD ( s) D( s) + G P ( s)Gv ( s)(U R ( s) + G f ( s) D( s))
Y ( s)  (GD ( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)G f ( s)) D( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)U R ( s)
Y ( s)  (GD ( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)G f ( s)) D( s) + YR ( s)
Tracking of YR requires that

GD ( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)G f ( s)  0
GD ( s)
 G f ( s)  -
G p ( s)Gv ( s)
 Feedforward Control

Ideal feedforward controller:

GD ( s)
G f ( s)  -
G p ( s)Gv ( s)
 Exact cancellation requires perfect plant and
perfect disturbance models.

GD ( s) + G p ( s)Gv ( s)G f ( s)  0

 Feedforward controllers:
very sensitive to modeling errors
cannot handle unmeasured disturbances
cannot implement setpoint changes

 Need feedback control to make control system

more robust
 Feedforward Control

Feedback/Feedforward Control

D(s)
Gf
GD
R(s) +
Gc + + Gv Gp
+
+
U(s) Y(s)

Gs
Ym(s)

What is the impact of Gf on the closed-loop

performance of the feedback control system?
 Feedforward Control

Regulatory transfer function of

feedforward/feedback loop

C( s) GD ( s) + G f ( s)Gv ( s)G p ( s)

D( s) 1 + Gc ( s)Gv ( s)G p ( s)Gm ( s)
Perfect control requires that (as above)

GD ( s)
G f ( s)  -
Gv ( s)G p ( s)
Note:
 Feedforward controllers do not affect closed-
loop stability
 Feedforward controllers based on plant models
can be unrealizable (dead-time or RHP zeroes)
 Can be approximated by a lead-lag unit or pure
gain (rare)

( 1s + 1) KD
G f ( s)  K f G f ( s)  -
( 2 s + 1) Kv K p
 Feedforward Control

Tuning: In absence of disturbance model

lead-lag approximation may be good

( 1s + 1)
G f ( s)  K f
( 2 s + 1)
 Kf obtained from open-loop data

KD
Kf  -
Kv K p
- 1 and 2
from open-loop data

1   p ,  2   D
from heuristics
1 1
 0.5  2.0
2 2
Trial-and-error

1 -  2  c
 Feedforward Control

Example:

Plant:

10
G p ( s) 
(10s + 1)(5s + 1)( s + 1)
1
GD ( s) 
(2.5s + 1)( s + 1)
Plant Model:

10e -6s e- s
G pm ( s)  GDm ( s) 
10s + 1 2.5s + 1
Feedback Design from plant model: IMC PID
tunings

Kc  0.26,  I  13,  D  2.31

 Feedforward Control

Possible Feedforward controllers:

1. From plant models:

e5s (10s + 1)
G f ( s)  -
10 (2.5s + 1)
Not realizable

2. Lead-lag unit

1  10,  2  2.5
1
Kf  -
3. Feedforward gain10
controller:

1
Kf  -
10
 Feedforward Control

For Controller 2 and 3

Disturbance Controller with Feedforward

1.2

0.8
.. - Gain Controller
0.6 -- - Lead-Lag Controller
- - No FF Controller
0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

 Some attenuation observed at first peak

 Difficult problem because disturbance dynamic
are much faster
 Feedforward Control

 Useful in manufacturing environments if

good models are available
 outdoor temperature dependencies can be
handle by gain feedforward controllers
 scheduling issues/ supply requirements can be
handled

 Benefits are directly related to model

accuracy
 rely mainly on feedback control

 Disturbances with different dynamics

always difficult to attenuate with PID
 may need advanced feedback control approach
(MPC, DMC, QDMC, H4-controllers, etc…)

 Use process knowledge (and intuition)

 CHE 446:
Process Dynamics and
Control

Advanced Control Techniques

2. Cascade Control
 Cascade Control

Jacketed Reactor:

TT

F,Tin TT
TC1

Ps
Steam
FT

Condensate
F,T
Conventional Feedback Loop:
 operate valve to control steam flow
 steam flow disturbances must propagate
through entire process to affect output
 does not take into account flow measurement
 Cascade Control

Consider cascade control structure:

TT

F,Tin TT
TC1 FC
FT

Ps
Steam

Condensate
F,T
Note:
 TC1 calculates setpoint cascaded to the flow
controller
 Flow controller attenuates the effect of steam
flow disturbances
 Cascade Control

Cascade systems contain two feedback loops:

 Primary Loop
regulates part of the process having slower
dynamics
calculates setpoint for the secondary loop
e.g. outlet temperature controller for the
jacketed reactor

 Secondary Loop
regulates part of process having faster
dynamics
maintain secondary variable at the desired
target given by primary controller
e.g. steam flow control for the jacketed
reactor example
 Block Diagram

D2 D1

+ + + +
Gc1 Gc2 Gv2 Gp2 Gp1
- -

Gm2

Gm1
Cascade Control
 Cascade Control

Closed-loop transfer function

1. Inner loop

C2 G p2Gv 2Gc2
  Gcl 2
R2 1 + G p2Gv 2Gc2Gm2
2. Outer loop

C1 G p1Gcl 2Gc1

R1 1 + G p1Gcl 2Gc1Gm1

Characteristic equation

1 + G p1Gcl 2Gc1Gm1  0
G p2Gv 2Gc2
1 + G p1 Gc1Gm1  0
1 + G p2Gv 2Gc2Gm2
1 + G p2Gv 2Gc2Gm2 + G p1G p2Gv 2Gc2Gc1Gm1  0
 Cascade Control

Stability of closed-loop process is governed by

1 + G p2Gv 2Gc2Gm2 + G p1G p2Gv 2Gc2Gc1Gm1  0

Example
K p1
G p1  , Gc1  Kc1, Gv1  Gm1  1
1s + 1
K p2
G p2  , Gc2  Kc2 , Gm2  1
 2s + 1

K p2 K p2 K p1
1 + Kc 2 + Kc1 0
 2s + 1  2 s + 1 1s + 1
(1s + 1)( 2 s + 1) + Kc2 K p2 (1s + 1) + Kc1K p2 K p1  0

1 2 s2 + (1 +  2 + Kc2 K p21) s + 1 + Kc2 K p2 +

Kc1K p2 K p1  0
 Cascade Control

Design a cascade controller for the following

system:

1. Primary:

e -0.1s
G p1( s)  , Gm1  1,
(0.5s + 1)( s + 1)
 1 
Gc1  Kc1 1 + 
  I s
2. Secondary:

1
G p2  , Gv 2  Gm2  1
. s+1
01
Gc2  Kc2
 Cascade Control

1. PI controller only

-0.1s
GOL1  Kc1 1 + 
1 1 e
 s 01 . s + 1 (0.5s + 1)( s + 1)

1 1 1 1
AR  Kc1 1 + 2
 0.01 2 + 1 0.25 2 + 1  2 + 1

-1 
1
  - tan   - tan -1(01
. )
 
- tan -1(0.5 ) - tan -1( ) - 01
.
Critical frequency

c  2.99, AR  0178
.
Maximum gain

Kc1  561
.
 Cascade Control

Bode Plots

AR




ln()
 Cascade Control

2. Cascade Control

 Secondary loop

1
GOl 2  Kc2
. s+1
01
no critical frequency gain can be large
Let Kc2=10.

 Primary loop
10
-0.1s
GOL1  Kc1 1 +  01 . s+1
1 e
 s 1 (0.5s + 1)( s + 1)
1 + 10
. s+1
01
10 e -0.1s
 Kc1
11 s(0.5s + 1)( 01
.
s + 1)
11
 Cascade Control

Closed-loop stability:

AR 10 1 1 1

Kc1 11  2
+  2
1 +    2
01
. 1 0.25
 11
 -1  01
. 
f  - - 01
.  - tan    - tan -1 (0.5 )
2  11 

 Bode

 c  413
. , AR  0.0958
Maximum gain Kc1=10.44
 Secondary loop stabilizes the primary loop.
 Cascade Control

Use cascade when:

 conventional feedback loop is too slow at
rejecting disturbances
 secondary measured variable is available which
responds to disturbances
has dynamics that are much faster than
those of the primary variable
can be affected by the manipulated variable

Implementation

 tune secondary loop first

 operation of two interacting controllers requires
more careful implementation
switching on and off
 CHE 446
Process Dynamics and Control

Advanced Control Techniques

3. Dead-time Compensation
 Dead-time Compensation

Consider feedback loop:

R C
Gc Gp e-s

 Dead-time has a de-stabilizing effect on closed-

loop system
 Presence of dead-time requires detuning of
controller
 Need a way to compensate for dead-time
explicitly
 Dead-time Compensation

Motivation

e - s
G ( s)  2 .    0.75
, 01
s + 3s + 2
Gc ( s)  4 1 + 
1
 s

0.75 0.5 0.25 0.1

 Dead-time Compensation

Use plant model to predict deviation from

setpoint
D

R C
Gc Gp e-s

Gpm

Result:
 Removes the de-stabilizing effect of dead-time
Problem:
 Cannot compensate for disturbances with just
feedback (possible offset)
 Need a very good plant model
 Dead-time Compensation

Closed-loop transfer function

- s
C( s) C( s) GcG p e
 1, 
D( s) R( s) 1 + GcG pm

Characteristic Equation becomes

1 + GcG pm  0

 Effect of dead-time on closed-loop

stability is removed
 Controller is tuned to stabilize
undelayed process model
 No disturbance rejection
 Dead-time Compensation
D
R C
4 1 + 
1 1
e-0.5s
 s 2
s + 3s + 2

1
s2 + 3s + 2

Servo Response
1.5

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Regulatory Response
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Dead-time Compensation

Include effect of disturbances using model

predictions

D ( s)  Y ( s) - Y ( s)
 - s -s
D( s)  G p e U ( s) - G pme U ( s)
Adding this to previous loop gives

R + C
Gc Gp e-s
+ - +

+
+
Gpm Gpm e-s -
+
 Dead-time Compensation

Closed-loop transfer function

- s - s
C ( s) 1 + (e -e )GcG pm

D( s) 1 + G G + G (G e - s - G e - s )
c pm c p pm

C ( s) GcG p e - s

R( s) 1 + G G + G (G e - s - G e - s )
c pm c p pm
Characteristic Equation

- s - s
1 + GcG pm + Gc (G pe - G pme )0

Fast Slow
Dynamics Dynamics
 Effect of dead-time on stability is
removed
 Disturbance rejection is achieved
 Controller tuned for undelayed
dynamics
 Dead-time Compensation

D
R 1 + C
4 1 + 
1
e-0.5s
+ -  s s2 + 3s + 2 +

+ 1 1 +
e-0.5s
+ s2 + 3s + 2 s2 + 3s + 2 -

D ( s)
Servo Response
1.5

0.5

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Regulatory Response
1

0.5

-0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 Dead-time Compensation

Alternative form
D

R + C
Gc Gp e-s
+ - +

+
Gpm(1-e-s)
+

Reduces to classical feedback control system

with

Gc ( s)
Gc* ( s) 
1 + G pm (1 - e -ms )

called a Smith-Predictor
 Dead-time compensation

Smith-Predictor Design

1. Determine delayed process model

Y ( s)  G pm ( s)e -ms
2. Tune controller Gc for the undelayed
transfer function model Gpm

3. Implement Smith-Predictor as

Gc ( s)
Gc* ( s) 
1 + G pm (1 - e -ms )
4. Perform simulation studies to tune
controller and estimate closed-loop
performance over a range of modeling
errors (Gpm and m)
 Dead-time Compensation

Effect of dead-time estimation errors:

D
R  1 1 + C
4 1 +  e-0.5s
+ -  s s2 + 3s + 2 +

+ 1 1 +
e-s
+ s2 + 3s + 2 s2 + 3s + 2 -

D ( s)