Chapter 6

Process Instrumentation and Control

4/22/2019 1
Dr Lemma Dendena
 Chapter Objectives
End of this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Explain the concept of feedback controllers
2. Explain P, I and D controllers
3. Explain closed-loop control systems
4. Develop block diagrams
5. Derive closed-loop transfer functions
6. Determine dynamic behavior of closed-loop systems

Process dynamics and Control

2
 Introduction
Consider the continuous blending process, shown below
IP
Electrical Signal
Pneumatic signal AC xsp

x 1 , w1 x 2 , w2

xm
AT
x, V

x, w

Process dynamics and Control

3
 Control system
Control objective:
To keep the tank exit composition x at the
desired set-point by adjusting w2.
Measurement : Composition Analyzer-Transmitter (AT)
• measures the exit composition and transmits it as an electronic signal to the electronic
feedback controller(AC)
Feedback controller: AC Composition Controller,
• The controller output signal p is an electronic signal that is sent to a current-to-
pressure transducer(I/P), where it is converted to an equivalent pneumatic signal that
is compatible with the control valve.
Final control element: Pneumatic control valve
Current-to-pneumatic transducer: I/P

Process dynamics and Control

4
 Basic Control Modes
• The three basic control modes are: Proportional, Integral
and Derivative
Proportional Control
In feedback control, the objective is to reduce the error signal to
zero.

Define an error signal, e, by

e(t)  y S P (t)  y m (t) (6.1)

where y = set point

sp

ym = measured value of the controlled variable

(or equivalent signal from transmitter)
Process dynamics and Control
5
 Basic Control Modes
• For proportional control, the controller output is
proportional to the error signal

p(t)  p  (6.2)
Kce(t)

Where
p(t) = controller output

p(t) = bias (steady-state) value

K c = controller gain (usually dimensionless)

Process dynamics and Control

6
 Proportional Band, PB:

• Some controllers have a proportional band setting

instead of a controller gain. The proportional band
PB (in %) is defined as

100%
PB (6.3)
 Kc

• Applies when Kc is dimensionless

• Small (narrow) PB corresponds to large Kc
• Large (wide) PB corresponds to small Kc

Process dynamics and Control

7
 Ideal vs. actual
p
Ideal controller does not include
p physical limits

0 e
Proportional controller: ideal behavior
p
pmax

p A controller saturates when its

output reaches a physical limit,
pmin either pmax or pmin.
e
0
Proportional controller: actual behavior
Process dynamics and Control
8
Proportional controller transfer function
In order to derive the transfer function for an ideal
proportional controller, define a deviation variable as

p (t )  p (t )  p (6.4)

Then (6.2) can be written as

p(t)  K c e(t) (6.5)

Taking Laplace transform of (6.5) and rearranging we get
P(s)
E(s)  (6.6)
K Process dynamics and Control
9
c
 Proportional controller limitation
• An inherent limitation of proportional controller is that a
steady-state error (offset) occurs after a set-point change
or a sustained disturbance.

Process dynamics and Control

10
 Integral Control
Integral control (reset control, floating control)
For integral control action, the controller output depends
on the integral of the error signal over time,

(6.7)

where I is an adjustable parameter and referred to as

the integral time constant or reset time, has units of
time.
The transfer function: P(s)  s1 (6.8)
E(s)  I
Process dynamics and Control
11
 Integral Control
• An important practical advantage: Eliminates offset.

• Eq. (6.7) implies that p changes with time unless e(t) = 0.

• This desirable situation occurs unless the controller output or

the final control element saturates.

• The control action by the integral controller is very little until

the error signal has persisted for sometime.

• On the other hand, proportional controller takes immediate

corrective action as soon as an error is detected.

Process dynamics and Control

12
 PI Controller
Integral control is used in conjunction with proportional
control as the proportional-integral (PI) controller:
t
 1 
p(t)  p  Kc  e(t)  e(t )dt 
I 0   (6.9)
 

The corresponding transfer function is:

P(s  Kc  1  (6.10)
)E(s) 1  I 
s

Process dynamics and Control

13
 PI Controller
The response of the PI controller to a unit step change in
e(t) is shown in Fig.
Kc
slope  
I

Kc
0 0
0 t 0 t

1/ I - repeats per minute

Process dynamics and Control

14
 PI Controller
• Disadvantages:
– Produces oscillatory response
– Reset windup

When a sustained error occurs, the integral term becomes quite large and the
controller output eventually saturates – reset windup or integral windup.

Anti reset windup: Temporarily halting the integral action

whenever the control output saturates.
Process dynamics and Control
15
 Reset windup explained
When the output of the controller becomes limited because
process conditions cause it to be fully open or fully closed,
and the PV is still not at the setpoint value, the reset
remainder term continues to increase by the remaining
error. When the process conditions change to allow the
control valve to once again do its work, the reset remainder
term is so large that even when the sign of the error
changes, the output may not respond until all of the reset
remainder term is "used up." The normal solution (anti
reset windup) is to stop accumulating reset remainder
when the output is limit-stopped. Other solutions cause the
controller to go into Manual then reinitialize when the
limit-stop conditions change.

Process dynamics and Control

16
 Derivative control
Rate action, pre-act, anticipatory control
• Anticipate the future error by considering its rate of change.
• For ideal derivative action,

de(t)
p(t)  p D
(6.11)
 dt

is the derivative time, and has units of time.


where D
As long as the error is constant de/dt = 0, the controller
output is equal to p .

Process dynamics and Control

17
 Derivative control
• Derivative action is never used alone.
• Always used in conjunction with P or PI control.

PD controller has the transfer function

P(s)
 Kc 1  D s (6.12)
E(s)

The derivative control action tends to stabilize the controlled

process.

Process dynamics and Control

18
 PID Controller
PID control algorithm is given by

(6.13)

Transfer function of an ideal controller (parallel form)

 1 
P(s)  Kc  1  D s  (6.14)
E(s)    I s 
Transfer function – actual (Series form)

P(s)  c
  I s 1 
   D s 1  (6.15)
E(s) K  I  D 

s  s 1
lead / lag units
Process dynamics and Control
19
 ON-OFF controllers
Synonyms: “two-position” or “bang-bang” controllers.

Ideal controller More practical controller

(Dead band)
• Special case of proportional controller with very high gain.
Process dynamics and Control
20
 Typical responses of Feedback control
systems
Consider response of a controlled system after a sustained
disturbance occurs (e.g. step change in load variable)
No control
New steady state is

reached
P control
Offset reduced
PI control
Offset eliminated
Oscillatory response
PID control
Oscillations reduced
No offset

Process dynamics and Control

21
Effect of controller parameters
-Too small a value of Kc
Sluggish response
Larger deviation
-Too large a value of Kc
Exhibit oscillatory or unstable
behavior
-Intermediate values of Kc is
desirable
-Increasing  D tends to improve the
response by reducing the maximum
deviation, response time, and degree of
oscillation
-If  D is too large, measurement
noise is amplified and the response
may
Process dynamics become oscillatory.
and Control
22
 Effect of controller parameters

• Increasing the integral time makes the controller more

sluggish.
• Offset will be eliminated for all values I
• For large values of  I , it takes very long time to return to
the set-point.

Process dynamics and Control

23
Summary of the Characteristics of the Most
Commonly Used Controller Modes
1. Two Position (ON-OFF):
• Inexpensive
• Extremely simple
• Cause continual cycling of the CV
• Produces excessive wear on the control valve
2. Proportional:
• Simple
• Inherently stable when properly tuned
• Easy to tune
• Experiences offset at steady state

Process dynamics and Control

24
3. Proportional plus reset (PI):
• No offset
• Better dynamic response than reset alone
• Possibilities exist for instability due to lag introduced

4. Proportional plus rate(PD):

• Stable
• Less offset than proportional alone (use of higher gain
possible).
• Reduces lags, i.e., more rapid response.

Process dynamics and Control

25
5. Proportional plus reset plus rate (PID):
• Most complex
• Rapid response
• No offset
• Difficult to tune
• Best control if properly tuned.

Process dynamics and Control

26
Reverse or Direct Acting
Controller

• Reverse-Acting (Kc > 0)

• “output increases as input
decreases (measured value)"

• Direct-Acting (Kc < 0)

• “controller output increases as
input increases (measured value)"

Process dynamics and Control

27
 Conclusion!
• Concept of feedback control
• P, I, D controller actions
• Advantages and disadvantages
• Motivation for additional modes

Process dynamics and Control

28
Process dynamics and Control
29
Schematic diagram of blending system

Electrical IP
Signal
Pneumatic signal
AC
xsp
x 1, w1
x 2, w 2

AT
xm
x, V

x, w

Process dynamics and Control

30
 Consider the blending process

•The dynamic model of a stirred-tank blending process

was developed as

(8.1)

w here w
V
 q , K1  w1 , and
1x
K2  w (8.2)

Process dynamics and Control

31
 Block diagram development

• Figure below provides a block diagram representation

of information in (8.1) and (8.2).

X
K1
(s)
1
s  1
X d
(s)
+
W2(s) K2 +
X (s)
s  1 X u
(s)

Process dynamics and Control

32
 Sensor dynamics
• Composition Sensor-Transmitter (Analyzer)
The dynamic behavior of the analyzer can be approximated by


X m (s)  K m
  (8.3)
X (s)  m  
s

1
Km
X (s) X m
 ms  1
(s)

A useful approximation:  m 0 since  m   .

Process dynamics and Control
33
 Controller

Suppose an electronic proportional plus integral controller

is used. The controller transfer function is

P (s)  1 
 Kc 1   (8.4)
E(s)  Is

~ E(s) P'(s)
X sp X 'sp (s) +
' Km
Mass [mA - [mA [mA ]
fraction ] ]

X 'm (s)
[mA ]

Process dynamics and Control

34
The error signal is expressed as
e(t)  ~sp (t)  x (t) (8.5)
x m
or after taking the Laplace transforms,
~
E(s)   (s)  X  (s)
X sp m (8.6)

denotes the internal set-point expressed as an

equivalent electrical current signal.

It is related to the actual composition set-point by the

composition-transmitter gain K :
m

(8.7)

Process dynamics and Control

35
 I/P Converter (Transducer)
~
Thus X sp (s) (8.8)
  Km
X sp
(s) the subtraction operation is called a
The symbol that represents
comparator.

Transducer transfer function consists of a steady-state gain KIP:

Pt(s) (8.9)
 K IP
P (s
)
P'(s) P't (s)
[mA K IP [psi]
]
Process dynamics and Control
36
 Control Valve

A first-order transfer function provides an adequate model for

control valves. Thus

 
W2(s) Kv (8.10)

P (s)
t
v s  1


Pt' (s) Kv W2'(s)

[psi]
v s  1 [kg/min]

Process dynamics and Control

37
Block diagram for the control system

Process dynamics and Control

38
Closed-loop Transfer Functions
The standard notations are:

Y = controlled variable
U = manipulated
variable D =
disturbance variable P =
controller output
E = error signal
Ym = measured value of Y
Y~sp
= set-point
Ysp = internal set-point
(used by the controller)
Gc = controller transfer
function
Gv = transfer function for
final control element
Gp = process transfer
function Process dynamics and Control
39
Gd = disturbance transfer
Standard block diagram
Forward path
Closed loop

For simplifying the notation, prime and s dependence have been dropped.

Feedback
path

Process dynamics and Control

40
 Standard block diagram
Ysp and D are the independent input signals for the controlled process
because they are not affected by the operation of the control loop.

To evaluate the performance of the control system, we need to

know how the controlled process responds to changes in Ysp and D.

We derive expressions for the closed-loop transfer

functions Y (s) / Ysp (s) andY (s) / D(s) .

Process dynamics and Control

41
 Closed-loop Transfer functions

Derivation of Closed loop Equation

Y  G c G v G p E(s)  Gd D

E  KmYsp  GmY

Y  G c G v G p (KmYsp  GmY )  Gd D

Km Gc Gv Gp Gd
Y Ysp D Closed loop equation (8.11)
 1 Gc Gv Gp m 1 Gc Gv Gp m
G G
Servo problem T.F. Regulator problem T.F.
Km Gc Gv Gp Gd
Gsp   (8.12) Y (s)
Gload (s) D(s) (8.13)
Ysp 1 Gc Gv Gp m
1 Gc Gv Gp Gm
YG 

Process dynamics and Control

42
 Closed-loop Transfer functions

• Comparison of (8.12) and (8.13) indicates that both

closed-loop transfer functions have the same
denominator,
1+ GpGvGcGm.
• The roots the denominator determines the nature of
the closed loop response ,
1+ GpGvGcGm=0. Characteristic Equation

• The denominator is often written as 1+GOL where GOL is

the open-loop transfer function,
• GOL = GpGvGcGm.
Process dynamics and Control
43
General Expression for Feedback Control Systems

•Closed-loop transfer functions for more complicated block

diagrams can be written in the general form: (For negative
feedback only)
Z f (8.22)

Zi 1
l variable or any internal variable
where Z = the output
within the control loop.
Zi = an input variable
 = product of transfer functions in the forward
f

path from Zi to Z.
 = product of every transfer function in the
l

feedback loop

Process dynamics and Control

44
 Example

•Find the closed-loop transfer function C/R for the

complex control system shown in fig.

Process dynamics and Control

45
 Closed-loop Response

PART II
Closed-loop Response of Simple Control Systems

Process dynamics and Control

46
 Closed-loop Response

Effect of P- controller on closed-loop response

1. Offset

Desired steady _ Attained steady state

Offset = state response response

Servo problem

Km Gc Gv Gp
Y (s) Ysp (s)
 1 Gc Gv Gp m
G

Process dynamics and Control

47
 Closed-loop Response

Consider a step change in Ysp of magnitude A

Desired steady state response = A

Closed-loop response
Km Gc Gv Gp A
Y (s)
 1 G c G v G p G m s

After the closed-loop response reaches steady state

Km Kc Gv Gp AK m K c G v (0)G p
y(t  ) A
 1 K c G v G p G m s  s
(0) 1 K c G v (0)G p (0)G m (0)
 s0

Process dynamics and Control

48
 Closed-loop Response

AK m K c K v K p
y(t  )
 1 K m K c K v K p
AK m K c K v K p
Attained steadystateresponse
 1 K m K c K v K p
AK m K c K v K p
Offset  A  1 K m K c K v K p

Offset for servo Problem with P-Controller

A
Offset
 1 Km Kc Kv K p
100
Offset %
 1 K m K c K v K p

Process dynamics and Control

49
 Closed-loop Response

Regulator problem
The effect of disturbance should be removed therefore, the
desired steady state response = 0 for regulator problem

Closed-loop response for regulator problem

Gd
Y (s) Dsp (s)
 1 Gc Gv G pG m
Gd A
Y (s)
 1 G c G v G p G m s
Gd AG d (0)
y(t  ) A
 1 K c G v G p G m s  s 1 K c G v (0)G p (0)G m (0)
 s0

Process dynamics and Control

50
 AK d
y(t  )
 1 K m K c K v K p

AK d
offset  0
 1 K m K c K v K p

Offset for Regulator Problem for with P-Controller

AK d
offset 
 1 K m K c K v K p
100K d
offset  %
 1 K m K c K v K p

Process dynamics and Control

51
 Effect of Proportional Controller

2. Effect of P- controller on the order and speed of closed-loop

response
The nature of the closed-loop response depends on characteristics
equation:
1 G c G v G p G m  0

For proportional controller

1 K c G v G p G m  0

The order of the closed loop response is not affected by

Proportional controller.

Process dynamics and Control

52
 Effect on the speed of the response

Consider a second order GvGpGm with proportional controller

K
1 K 
c
 2 s 2  2s 0
1
 2 s 2  2s  1 KK c 
0
 '2 s 2  2 ' s 1
0 

 '  '
1 KK c 1 KK c

Increasing proportional controller gain, Kc, can cause much

oscillation by reducing the damping coefficient.
Process dynamics and Control
53
 Closed-loop Response

Effect of integral action on closed-loop response

1. Offset
Servo problem
- Generalize the I,PI and PID controllers
Kc
Gc I
 Is

Gc  Kc  1     I s 1 N (s)
Is  K c PI Gc 
1   Is   Is
 1    I Ds 2   I s 1 
G c  Kc  1   D s   Kc  
PID
  Is    Is 
Process dynamics and Control
54
 Closed-loop Response

Consider a step change in Ysp of magnitude A

Desired steady state response = A

Closed-loop response with N
Gc  I s
(s)
K m N (s) Gv G p
 s A
Y (s)  I
s
N (s) v p m
1  s G G G
I

Rearranging

Y (s) K m N (s)Gv G p A
  I s  N (s)Gv G p Gm s
Process dynamics and Control
55
 Closed-loop Response

Attained steady state

K m N (s)G v G p AK m N (0)K v K p
y(t  ) A 
  I s  N (s)G v G p G m s  ss  0  N (0)K v K p A
 0 Km
Offset  A  A 
0
Integral action eliminates offset for servo problem

Process dynamics and Control

56
Regulator problem
desired steady state response = 0 for regulator problem

Closed-loop response for regulator problem

Gd
Y (s) Dsp (s)
 1 Gc Gv Gp G m
Gd A
Y (s)
 N (s) v p m
s
1  s G G G
I

 I sGd A
Y (s)
  I s  N (s)G v G p G m s

Process dynamics and Control

57
 Closed-loop Response

Attained steady state

( I s)G d A 0
y(t  )  
 s
 I 0  N (s)G v G p G m 0
0
s 
Offset  0  I0s 
 N (s)G v G p G m s
0
Integral action eliminates offset for regulator problem

Conclusion
Integral action eliminates offset for both for regulator and
servo problem

Process dynamics and Control

58
 Closed-loop Response
2. Effect of integral action on the order of the closed loop response

Kv K N p (s) Kc
Gv (s) G p (s) Gc (s)
v s 
G (s)  s
m D p (s) I s
 m  
1 m
1
Where Dp(s) is the denominator of the process transfer function

The characteristic equation

1 G c G v G p G m  0
Introducing the transfer functions in the characteristic equation

Kv Np Nm
K 
1  Ics ( v s 1) D p ( p s
0
1)
Process dynamics and Control
59
 Closed-loop Response

Rearranging
Order increases by one

 I s( v s 1)( m s 1)D p  K c K v K m N p

0

The order increases by one due to integral controller. Therefore

integral controller can make the closed-loop response sluggish.

Process dynamics and Control

60
 Effect of PD controller

Effect of PD controller on closed-loop response

1. Offset
Servo problem
Gc Gv Gp K m
Y (s)  Ysp (1)
1 Gc Gv Gp Gm
TF of PD controller
Gc  K c (1  (2)
D s)
Using (2) in (1) and introducing a step change of magnitude A in
set point
K c (1  D s)G v G p K m
Y (s) (3)

A Process dynamics and Control
61
 Effect of PD controller

Applying the final value theorem to find the steady state value

K c (1  D s)G v G p K m AK c K v K p K m
y(t  ) A
 1 K c (1  D s)G v G p G m s  s 1 K c K v K p K m
 s0
AK m K c K v K p
Attained steadystateresponse
 1 K m K c K v K p

AK K K K
Offset  A  1 Kmm Kc c Kv v Kp p

Process dynamics and Control

62
 Effect of PD controller

Offset for Servo Problem with Derivative Action

A
Offset
1 Km Kc Kv K p
 The same as P
100 controller
Offset %
 1 Km Kc Kv K p

A similar analysis for regulator problem leads to

Offset for Regulator Problem with Derivative Action
AK d
offset 
 1 K m K c K v K p The same as
P controller
100K
offset   1 K m K c K v K p d

%
Process dynamics and Control
63
 Effect of PD controller

Effect of derivative action on the order of closed-loop

response
TF of derivative action
G c  Kc  D s

Using the derivative action in the Characteristic Equation

1 Kc  D sG v G p G m  0

The order of closed-loop response is not affected by derivative

action

Process dynamics and Control

64
The effect of derivative action: damping

Consider the characteristics equation when GmGv Gp is second

order with derivative action
K
1  K c D s 
 2 s 2  2s 0
Rearranging 1

 2

s 2  2s 1  KK
c D
s
0 2 s 2  (2  KKc D )s 1 
 0
The damping coefficient increases with Kc. Therefore, derivative
action enables to increase the controller gain Kc without
increasing the oscillations.

Process dynamics and Control

65
Thank You For Your Attention!!!

Process dynamics and Control

66