Você está na página 1de 294

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

Plant

Processing
objectives

Safety
Make $$$
Environment...

Market
Economy
Climate
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

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
Tin
w
Q

Output
Process

Examples

The speed of an automobile

Force of
Engine

Friction

Inputs

Output

Friction
Process
Engine

Speed

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

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

System Physical
Boundary

Process

Output variables

Transfer of
fundamental
quantities

Physical

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

intervene

Observation

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
Relief
Pot

Dehumidifier

Steam

Heater

Blower
Water

Vent

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
Engine

Process

Controller
Human or Computer

Speed

Classical Control

Control is meant to provide regulation of process


outputs about a reference, r, despite inherent
disturbances

d
r +

e
-

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
r+

Computer

Actuator

e
-

P
Process

M
Sensor

Examples
Driving an automobile

r +

e
-

Driver

Steering

P
Automobile

M
Visual and tactile measurement

Actual trajectory
Desired trajectory

Examples

Stirred-Tank Heater

Tin, w

Heater

Q
TC

T, w
Thermocouple

Tin, w
TR

Controller

Heater

+
-

P
Tank

M
Thermocouple

Examples

Measure T, adjust Q

Tin, w
+

Controller

Heater

TR -

P
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

+ Q
Qi

Q
Feedforward Control

Control Nomenclature

Identification of all process variables


Inputs
Outputs

(affect process)
(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
Manipulated

Other
Process

Controller

Control

Example

wi, Ti
L

Pc
wc, Tci

T
wc, Tco

Po
Variables
wi , w o :
Ti, To:
wc:
P c:
Po:
Tci, Tco:
h:

wo, To
T

Tank inlet and outlet mass flows


Tank inlet and outlet temperatures
Cooling jacket mass flow
Position of cooling jacket inlet valve
Position of tank outlet valve
Cooling jacket inlet and outlet
temperatures
Tank liquid level

Example

Variables

Inputs
Disturbances

Outputs

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

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

60

Steady-State 1

Output

55

Steady-State 2
50

45

40
0

50

100

150
Time

200

250

300

Step change in input to observe


Starting at steady-state, we made a step change
The system oscillates and finds a new steadystate
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

Output

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4

50

100

150
Time

200

250

300

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
of fundamental quantity

Flow
In
+

Flow
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

h
F

Modeling objective: Control of tank level

Fundamental quantity: Mass

Assumptions: Incompressible flow

Process Modeling
Total mass in system = V = Ah
Flow in = Fin
Flow out = F
Total mass at time t = Ah(t)
Total mass at time t+t = Ah(tt
Accumulation
Ah(ttAh(t) = t(Fin-F ),
A h ( t t ) A h ( t )
( F in F ) ,
t
lim

t 0

A h ( t t ) A h ( t )
( F in F ) ,
t

dh
( F in F ) .
dt

Process Modeling
Model consistency
Can we solve this equation?
Variables: h, , Fin, F, A
Constants: , A

Inputs: Fin, F

Unknowns: h

Equations 1
Degrees of freedom

There exists a solution for each value of the


inputs Fin, F

Process Modeling
Solve equation
Specify initial conditions h(0)=h0 and integrate

h (t) h (0)

t
0

F in ( ) F (

2
Fin

fow

1.5

1
0.5
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1.3

1.2
1.1
1
0.9

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
H i n H
dt

out

Q W

Typically work done on system by external


forces is negligible

dH
H i n H
dt

out

Assume that the heat capacities are constant


such that

H C P V ( T T ref )
H i n C P w ( T i n T r e f )
H o u t C P w ( T T r e f )

Process Modeling
After substitution,
d ( C PV ( T T ref ) )
dt

C P w ( T in T r e f ) C P w ( T T r e f ) Q

Since Tref is fixed and we assume constant


,Cp
C PV

d ( T T ref )
C P w ( T in T r e f ) C P w ( T T r e f ) Q
dt

Divide by CpV
dT w
Q
( T in T )
dt V
C PV

Process Modeling
Resulting equation:

dT
F
Q
( T in T )
dt V
V C

Model Consistency
Variables: T, F, V, Tin, Q, Cp,
Constants: V, Cp,

Inputs: F, Tin, Q

Unknown: T 1
Equations

There exists a unique solution

Process Modeling
Assume F is fixed

T (t) T (0)e

t /

e ( t ) / ( T in ( ) Q ( )
)d

C
V
p
0

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.

d T (t) F (t)
Q (t)

( T in ( t ) T ( t ) )
dt
V
V C P
Product F(t)T(t) makes this differential
equation nonlinear.
Solution will need numerical integration.

Process Modeling
A simple momentum balance
Rate of
Accumulation

Momentum
In

Momentum
Out

Sum of forces
acting on system

Speed (v)

Friction

Force of
Engine (u)

Objective:
Control car speed
Quantity:
Momentum
Quantity
Assumption:
Assumption Friction proportional to speed

Process Modeling
Forces are: Force of the engine = u
Friction = bv
Balance:
Total momentum = Mv

d ( M v (t))
d v (t)
M
u (t) b v (t)
dt
dt
Model consistency
Variables:
Constants:
Inputs: u
Unknowns

M, v, b, u
M, b 2
1
v
1

Process Modeling

Gravity tank
Fo

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 A P v

dt
A
A
dv hg K F v2

dt
L
A P
A system of simultaneous ordinary
differential equations results
Linear or nonlinear?

Process Modeling
Model consistency
Variables

Fo, A, Ap, v, h, g, L, KF,

Constants

A, Ap, g, L, KF,

Inputs

Fo

Unknowns

h, v

Equations
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
( T in T )
t CP,V and V
V C
specifyd
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

Input

0.5

5
Time

10

10

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

Common Input Signals


2. Ramp Input: A sustained constant rate of
change
e.g.
9
8
7

Input

6
5
4
3
2
1
0

5
Time

10

8
7
6

Output

5
4
3
2
1
0
-1

5
Time

10

Common Input Signals


3. Pulse: An instantaneous temporary change
e.g. Fast pulse (unit impulse)
100
90
80
70

Input

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

5
Time

10

5
Time

10

0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3

Output

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05

Common Input Signals


3. Pulses:
e.g. Rectangular Pulse
1.5

Input

0.5

5
Time

10

5
Time

10

1.2
1

Output

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2

Common Input Signals


4. Sinusoidal input

1.5

Input

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

10

15
Time

20

25

30

10

15
Time

20

25

30

0.8
0.6
0.4

Output

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8

Common Input Signals


5. Random Input

1.5

Input

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5

10

15
Time

20

25

30

0.6
0.4

Output

0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8

10

15
Time

20

25

30

Solution of ODEs using Laplace


Transforms

Process Dynamics and Control

Linear ODEs

For linear ODEs, we can solve without


integrating by using Laplace transforms

F ( s ) [ f ( t )] f ( t ) e

st

t0

Integrate out time and transform to


Laplace domain

d y (t)
a y (t) b u (t)
dt
y ( 0 ) c
Integration
Multiplication

Y(s) = G(s)U(s)

dt

Common Transforms
Useful Laplace Transforms
1. Exponential
f (t) e bt
[ e

bt

] e

bt st

[ e

bt

d t e (sb )td t
0

(sb )t

sb

sb

2. Cosine
e j t e j t
f ( t ) c o s ( t )
2

1 ( s j ) t
( s j ) t
[c o s ( 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 ) s in ( t )
2 j

1 ( s j ) t
( s j ) t
[s in ( t )]
dt e
dt
e
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

st

df
[ ] u v
dt

u d v f (t)e
0

df
[ ] s f ( t ) e
dt
0

st

st
0

( sf (t)e

st

)d t

d t f (0) sF (s) f (0)

2. Integral of a function f(t)


t
f ( )d
0

st

F (s)
( f ( )d )d t
s
0

Common Transforms
Operators
3. Delayed function f(t-)

g (t)

f (t )

g ( t ) e
0

st

t
t

(0 )d t e st f (t )d t

g ( t ) e s F ( s )

Common Transforms
Input Signals
1. Constant

[ a ] a e

f (t) a
st

st

a
e
dt (

[ f ( t )] a e

st

st

a
e
dt (

f ( t )

a te
0

st

dt

st

) 0 a

t 0
t 0

0
3. Ramp function f ( t )
at

t 0
t 0

0
f (t)
a

2. Step

) 0 a

at

ae

st

dt

a
s2

Common Transforms
Input Signals
4. Rectangular Pulse
0

f (t) a
0

t 0
0 t tw
t tw

tw

a
f ( t ) a e st d t (1 e tw s )
s
0
5. Unit impulse

( t ) l i m

tw 0 tw

(1 e tw s )

se tw s
( t ) l i m
1
s
tw 0

Laplace Transforms
Final Value Theorem
lim

y (t)

lim s Y ( s )

s 0

Limitations:
y (t) C 1,

lim s Y ( s ) e x is ts s R e ( s ) 0

s 0

Initial Value Theorem


y ( 0 ) lim

sY

(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
4 y 2 ,
dt

y (0) 1

Result
y ( t ) 0 .5 0 .5 e 0 .8 t

Solution of Linear ODEs


Stirred-tank heater (with constant F)
dT
F
Q
( T in T )
dt V
V C P
T (0) T0
taking Laplace
V dT
1

T in ( t ) T ( t )
Q ( t )
F d t
FC P
( T ( s ) T ( 0 ) ) T in ( s ) T ( s ) K P Q ( s )

1
K P
T (s)
T (0)
T in ( s )
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

T (s)

1
K P
T (0)
T in ( s )
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)

Q(s)

T(0)

1
s 1
K P
s 1

s 1

+
+

T(s)

Laplace Transform
Assume Tin(t) = sin(t) then the transfer
function gives directly
1

T in ( s ) 2
s 1
( s 2 )(s 1 )
Cannot invert explicitly, but if we can find A
and B such that
B

2
2
2
s 1 ( s 2 )(s 1 )
s
A

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)
i1

expand as

i
r(s)
i1s bi
n

2. q(s) has real but repeated factor


q (s) (s b )n
expanded

1
2
n
r(s)


2
s b (s b)
(s b)n

Partial Fraction Expansion


Heaviside expansion
For a rational function of the form
n
p (s)
p (s)
i
r(s)
n

q (s)
(s bi)
i

1
(s bi )
i1

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
K P
T (s)
T (0)
T in ( s )
Q (s)
s 1
s 1
s 1
Tin(s)

Q(s)

T(0)

e.g. The block

1
s 1
K P
s 1

s 1
K P
s 1

T(s)

is called the transfer function relating Q(s)


to T(s)

Process Control
Time Domain

Laplace Domain

Process Modeling,
Experimentation and
Implementation

Transfer function
Modeling, Controller
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

K P
Y (s)
U (s)
s 1

Second order processes

K P
Y (s) 2 2
U (s)
s 2 s 1

Steady-state value obtained directly


e.g. First order response to unit step function

Y (s)
Final value theorem

s (s 1 )

lim s Y ( s ) lim G ( s ) K

s 0

s 0

Transfer functions are additive and


multiplicative

Transfer function

Effect of many transfer functions on a


variable is additive

1
K P
T (s)
T (0)
T in ( s )
Q (s)
s 1
s 1
s 1

Tin(s)

Q(s)

T(0)

1
s 1
K P
s 1

s 1

+
+

T(s)

Transfer Function

Effect of consecutive processes in series in


multiplicative

U(s)

K P
s 1

Y1(s)

K P
s 1

Transfer Function
K P
U (s)
s 1
K P
Y 2(s)
Y1 ( s )
s 1
K P K P

Y1 ( s )

U (s)
s 1 s 1
Y1 ( s )

Y2(s)

Deviation Variables
To remove dependence on initial condition
e.g.

1
K P
T (s)
T (0)
T in ( s )
Q (s)
s 1
s 1
s 1

Remove dependency on T(0)


1
K P
T ( s )
T i n ( s )
Q ( s )
s 1
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

Fc, Tc
F, T

Assumptions:
Assumptions
Constant hold-up in tank and jacket
Constant heat capacities and densities
Incompressible flow

Model
dT
F
hc Ac
( T in T )
(Tc T )
dt V
C PV
d Tc Fc
hc Ac

( T c in T c )
(Tc T )
dt
Vc
c C P cV c

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)
x

f(x0)

x0
x

Nonlinear systems

First order Taylor series expansion

1. Function of one variable


f (x) f (xs)

f (xs)
(x xs)
x

2. Function of two variables

f (x ,u ) f (xs ,u s )

f ( x s ,u s )
f ( x s ,u s )
(x xs)
(u us )
x
u

3. ODEs
x f ( x ) f ( x s )

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)
G 1(s)
U 1(s)
Y (s)
G 2 (s)
U 2 (s)

First order Processes


Examples,
Examples Liquid storage
Fi
h
F

dh
Fi F Fi h
dt
A d h
Fi h
dt
dh

h K p Fi
dt
dh

h K p Fi
dt

First Order Processes


Examples:
Examples Speed of a Car

dv
ubv
dt
M dv 1
u v
b dt
b
dv

K pu v
dt
Stirred-tank heater
M

dT
C pV
C p F T Q
dt
V dT
1

Q T
F dt
C p F

dT
K pQ T
dt
Note:
T i n ( t ) 0

K p
v ( s )

u ( s ) s 1

K p
T ( s )

Q ( s ) s 1

First Order Processes


Kp

A/

Speed of a car

M/b

1/b

Stirred-tank heater

1/CpF

V/F

Liquid Storage Tank

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 : A
Resistance to flow : 1/

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

Stirred-tank heater
Capacity to store energy: CpV
Resistance to energy transfer : 1/ CpF

Time Constant = = (Storage capacitance)*


(Resistance to flow)

First order process


Step response of first order process

Y (s)

M
s 1 s
p

Step input signal of magnitude M


1
0.9
0.8
0.7

y(t)/KpM

0.632

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

t/

First order process

What do we look for?


Process Gain: Steady-State Response

K p
lim
K

s 0 s 1

O v e ra ll C h a n g e in y y

O v e ra ll C h a n g e in u u

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:
K

Y (s)

s 1 s 2

Ramp input of slope a

5
4.5

y(t)/Kpa

4
3.5
3

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

t/

3.5

4.5

First order Process


Sinusoidal response
lim

K P
A
Y (s)
s 1 s 2

(s)

A
2

1
Sinusoidal input Asin(t)
t

s in ( t )

2
1.5
1

AR

y(t)/A

0.5
0
-0.5

-1
-1.5

10

t/

12

14

16

18

20

First order Processes


10

Bode Plots

AR/Kp

High Frequency
10

10

Asymptote

Corner Frequency

-1

-2

10

-2

-1

10

10

10

10

0
-20

-40
-60
-80
-100
-2
10

-1

10

Amplitude Ratio
K
AR
1 2 2

10

10

10

Phase Shift

ta n

( )

Integrating Processes
Example: Liquid storage tank

Fi

h
F

dh
Fi F
dt
dh
A
Fi F
dt

F i F i F is ,

F F Fs

dh
A
Fi F
dt

H ( s ) 1 / A
H ( s )
1/ A

s
Process
F ( acts
s ) as a spure integrator F i ( s )

Process Modeling

Step input of magnitude M

Input

Output

K M
KM
Y (s)
2
s s
s
Slope = KM

Time

Time

0
y (t)
KM t

t 0
t 0

Integrating processes

Unit impulse response

Input

Output

K
KM
Y (s)
M
s
s

Time

KM

Time

0
y (t)
KM

t 0
t 0

Integrating Processes

Rectangular pulse response


tw s

KM
) 2 (1 e
s

tw s

Input

Output

K M
Y (s)
(1 e
s s

Time

KM t
y (t)
K M tw

Time

t tw
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

U(s)

U(s)

K P1
1s 1

P 2

2s 1

K P1K P2
(1s 1)( 2s 1)

Y(s)

Y(s)

By multiplicative property of transfer functions

K P1K P2
Y (s)
U (s)
( 1s 1 )( 2s 1 )

Second Order Processes


Inherently second order process:
e.g. Pneumatic Valve

Momentum Balance
M

d dx
dx
pA K x C
dt dt
dt

M d 2x 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

K P
Y (S ) 2 2
U (s)
s 2 s 1
where P = Process steady-state gain
= Process time constant
= Damping Coefficient

Three families of processes

Underdamped
=1 Critically Damped
Overdamped

Note: Chemical processes are typically


overdamped or critically damped

Second Order Processes

Roots of the characteristic polynomial

4 2 2 4
22

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) : Two complex roots
System has an oscillatory behavior

Second order Processes

Step response of magnitude M


K P
M
Y (S ) 2 2
s 2 s 1 s

1.8
1.6

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6

0.4
0.2
0

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 ) becomes smaller system
becomes more oscillatory
If 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

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
O S exp
b

5. Decay ratio:
c
D R exp
b

2
2

Second order Processes

1.8
1.6

1.4

1.2

+5%

c
1

-5%

0.8
0.6

0.4
0.2
0

tp
0

tr

10

15

20

ts

25

30

35

40

45

50

Second Order Process

Sinusoidal Response
Y (s)

y (t)

K p

2 s 2 2 s 1 s 2 2

K p A
1

where

1
ta n

2 2

2 2

s in ( t )

2
1 ( )

ARn

2 2

2 2

Second Order Processes


Bode Plots

10

10

=1
-1

10

-1

10

10

10

0
-50

=1

-100
-150

-1

10

10

10

More Complicated processes


Transfer function typically written as rational
function of polynomials
a 0 a 1 s a s

r(s)
G (s)

q ( s) b 0 b1 s b s
where r(s) and q(s) can be factored as

q ( s ) b 0 ( 1 s 1 ) ( 2 s 1 ) ( s 1 )
r ( s ) a 0 ( a 1 s 1 ) ( a 2 s 1 ) ( a s 1 )
s.t.
( a 1 s 1 ) ( a s 1 )
G (s) K
( 1 s 1 ) ( s 1 )

Poles and zeroes


Definitions:
the roots of r(s) are called the zeros of G(s)

z1

a1

, , z

the roots of q(s) are called the poles of G(s)

p1

1
1
, , 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(1 s 1)( 2 s 2 2 2 s 1)
with

can factored to a sum of

0 1

A constant term from s


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

t
t

2 s in ( 1 2 t

2 co s( 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
1
0.8
0.6

Imaginary axis

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

-1

-0.8

-0.6
-0.4
Real axis

-0.2

q (s) s3 s2 s 1

Roots: -1.0, 1.0j, -1.0j

0.2

Poles
Process Behavior with purely complex poles

Unit Step Response

1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2

y(t)

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

10

15

20

25
t

30

35

40

45

50

Poles
1
0.8
0.6

Imaginary axis

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1
-0.5

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0
0.1
Real axis

0.2

0.3

2 s 3 2 .5 s 2 3 s 1

Roots: -0.4368, -0.4066+0.9897j,


-0.4066-0.9897j

0.4

0.5

Poles
Process behavior with mixed real and
complex poles
Unit Step Response

1
0.9
0.8
0.7

y(t)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

10
t

12

14

16

18

20

Poles
1.5

Imaginary axis

0.5

-0.5

-1

-1.5
-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2
0
Real axis

0.2

2 s 4 2 .5 s 3 3 s 2 s 0 .5

Roots: -0.7441, -0.3805+1.0830j,


-0.3805-1.0830j, 0.2550

0.4

0.6

Poles
Process behavior with unstable pole
Unit Step Response

160
140
120
100

y(t)

80
60
40
20
0
-20

10
t

12

14

16

18

20

Zeros
Transfer function:
K p ( a s 1)
G (s)
(1 s 1)( 2 s 1)

t
t

1 a
2
1 e
2 e
y (t) K p M 1 a

1
2
1
2

Let 3 is the dominant time constant


1
2
16

2.5

y(t)/KM

2
8

1.5

2
1

0.5

0
-1

-2

0
-0.5

10
Time

12

14

16

18

20

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
1 s 1
U(s)

Y(s)

K2
2 s 1
( a s 1)
G (s) K
(1 s 1)( 2 s 1)
K K1 K2

K 1 2 K 2 1
K1 K 2

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 d s G ( s )U ( s )
e.g. First order plus dead-time
e d s K p
G (s)
s1
Second order plus dead-time
e d s K P
G (s)
2 s 2 2 s 1

Y(s)

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

1
0.9
0.8
0.7

y/KM

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

D 0.5

1.5

2.5
3
t/tau

3.5

4.5

5.5

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)
s1

Approximate dead-time by a rational


(polynomial) function
Most common is Pade approximation

s
2
e s G 1 ( s)

1 s
2
1

2
1 s
2
12
e s G 2 ( s )

2
1 s
2
12

s2
s2

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

e
K p 1 2 s K p
G (s)

s 1
s1
1 s
2
s

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

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6

- First Order plus dead time


o Second Order

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0

Process Approximation

Second order overdamped or first order plus


dead time?

1.2
1
0.8

-- First order plus dead time


- Second order overdamped
o Actual process

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2

Second order process model may be more


difficult to identify

Process Approximation

Transfer Function of a delay system


First order processes

K Pe s
Y (s)
U (s)
s 1
D

Second order processes

K Pe s
Y (S ) 2 2
U (s)
s 2 s 1
D

U(s)

Y(s)

Ds

G(s)

Process Approximation

More complicated processes


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

U(s)

Y(s)

K P1K P 2 K PN
(1 s 1 ) ( 2 s 1 ) ( N s 1 )
For two dominant time constants and
process well approximated by

e s K p
G (s)
(1s 1)( 2 s 1)

N
i
i3

For one dominant time constant process well


approximated by
N
e s K p
G (s)
i
(1s 1)
i2

Process Approximation

Example
G (s)

1
(1 0 s 1 )( 2 5 s 1 )( s 1 ) 2

1.2
1
0.8
0.6

e 12 s
G 1(s)
25s 1

0.4

e 2 s
G 2 (s)
(1 0 s 1 )( 2 5 s 1 )

0.2
0
-0.2

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 1 x
Process Description

y 0 1 x
where
y
x
1, 0

vector of process measurement


vector of process inputs
process parameters

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

SSR

n
( yi
i1

0 1 x i ) 2

Empirical Modeling
Solution
Differentiate SSR with respect to parameters
n
SSR
2 ( y i 0 1 x i ) 0
0
i1
n
SSR
2 x i ( y i 0 1 x i ) 0
1
i1
These are called the normal equations.
Solving for parameters gives:

0 y 1 x
1
where

n
xiyi nxy
i1
n 2
2
xi nx
i1

n x
i
i1 n

i1

yi
n

Empirical Modeling
Compact form
Define

y1
1
y
1
Y 2 , X

y
1
n

x1
x2

xn

0

1

Then

y 1 0 1 x 1
y x
0
1 2
E 2

y x
n
0
1 n

Y X

Problem
find value of that minimize SSR
T

SSR E

Empirical Modeling
Solution in Compact Form
Normal Equations can be written as

E T E
0

which can be shown to give

X T X X T Y
or

1 T
X T X
X Y

In practice
Manipulations are VERY easy to perform in
MATLAB
Extends to general linear model (GLM)
E [ y ] 0 1 x 1 p x p
Polynomial model
E [ y ] 0 1 x 1 1 1 x 12

Empirical Modeling
Control Implementation:
previous technique applicable to process model that
are linear in the parameters (GLM, polynomials in
x, etc)
i.e. such that, for all i, the derivatives
function of

are
e i not a

typical process step responses


first order

E [ y ( t )] K p M (1 e t / )

Nonlinear in Kp and

overdamped second order

1 e t /1 2 e t / 2
E [ y ( t ) ] K p M 1
Nonlinear in K p, and 1 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 ( t 2 ) , , y ( t n ) ]
or, simply

y ( t ) [ y 1 , y 2 , , y n ]
First Order process (step response)

E [ y i ] K p M (1 e ti / )
Least squares problem becomes the minimization of

SSR

i1

( y i K p M (1 e ti / ) ) 2

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
Model

E [ y ( t ) ] 3 .0 K p ( 1 e t / )

Data
Step Response

4.5
4
3.5
3

y(t)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5

10

20

30

40
t

50

60

70

80

Empirical Modeling
Results:
Using MATLAB function leastsq obtained

K p 1 . 3 4 3 2 , 1 1 .8 9 6 2
Resulting Fit
Step Response

4.5
4
3.5
3

y(t)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5

10

20

30

40
t

50

60

70

80

Empirical Modeling
Approximation using delayed transfer
functions
For first order plus delay processes

0
E [ yi]
( ti ) /
K
M
(
1

e
)
p

0 t
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

G (s)

1
(1 0 s 1 )( 2 5 s 1 )( s 1 ) 2

Data
3.5
3
2.5

y(t)

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Empirical Modeling
Fit of a first order plus dead time
1 .0 0 0 0 e 1 1 s
G 1(s)
( 2 7 .3 8 9 9 s 1 )
Second order plus dead time
0 .9 9 4 6 e 2 s
G 2 (s)
( 2 4 . 9 0 5 8 s 1 ) ( 1 0 .1 2 2 9 s 1 )
3.5
3
2.5

y(t)

2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Empirical Modeling
Process reaction curve method:
based on approximation of process using first
order plus delay model
D(s)

M/s
Y*(s)

Gp

Gc
U(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

K M e s
Ym (s)
s( s 1)

Y(s)

Empirical Modeling
First order plus dead-time approximations
1.2
1
0.8
0.6

KM
0.4
0.2
0

-0.2
0

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

y(t)

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

20

t1

40

60

t2

80
t

100

Estimate

1 .3 t 1 0 .2 9 t 2
0 .6 7 ( t 2 t1 )

120

140

160

Empirical Process
Example
For third order process

G (s)
Estimates:

1
(1 0 s 1 )( 2 5 s 1 )( s 1 ) 2

t 1 2 3 , t 2 6 2 .5
1 1 .7 8 , 2 6 .4 6
Compare:
Least Squares Fit

1 .0 0 0 0 e 1 1 s
G 1(s)
( 2 7 .3 8 9 9 s 1 )

Reaction Curve

1 .0 0 e 1 1 .7 8 s
G 1(s)
( 2 6 .4 6 s 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

TC

TT

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

Controller

Valve

TR -

Tin, F
P
Tank

M
Controller:

Thermocouple

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)

Gp

Y(s)

In process control, we are concerned with the dynamic


behavior of a controlled or Closed-loop process

D(s)
controller

R(s)+
-

Gc

actuator
Gv

process
Gp

sensor
Controller is dynamic system
Gm that interacts with the
process and the process hardware to yield a specific
behaviour

+ Y(s)

Closed-Loop Transfer Function


Block Diagram of Closed-Loop Process
D(s)
controller

R(s)+
-

Gc

actuator
Gv

process
Gp

sensor
Gm

Gp(s)

- Process Transfer Function

Gc(s)

- Controller Transfer Function

Gm(s)

- Sensor Transfer Function

Gv(s)

- Actuator Transfer Function

+ Y(s)

Closed-Loop Transfer Function


For control, we need to identify closed-loop
dynamics due to:
- Setpoint changes
- Disturbances

Servo
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 ) G v ( s )U ( s )
Y (s) G p (s)G
Y (s) G p (s)G

(s)G c (s)E (s)

(s)G c(s)R (s) Ym (s)


Y ( S ) G p ( s )G v ( s )G c ( s )R ( s ) G m ( s )Y ( s )
v

Isolate Y(s)

G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)


Y (s)
R (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)G m (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 ) G v ( s )U ( s )
Y (s) D (s) G p (s)G
Y (s) D (s) G p (s)G

(s)G c (s)E (s)

( s ) G c ( s )0 Y m ( s )
Y ( s ) D ( s ) G p ( s ) G v ( s ) G c ( s )0 G m ( s )Y ( s )
v

Isolating Y(s)

Y (s)

1
D (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)G m (s)

Closed-loop Transfer Function


2. Regulatory Response with Disturbance
Dynamics
G d (s)
Y (s)
D (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)G m (s)
Gd(s)

Disturbance (or load) transfer


function

3. Overall Closed-Loop Transfer Function


Servo
G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)
Y (s)
R (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)G m (s)
G d (s)
D (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)G c (s)G m (s)
Regulatory

PID Controllers
The acronym PID stands for:
P
I
D

- Proportional
- Integral
- 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) K c e(t)
e ( ) d D
I 0
dt

uR

PID Control
PID Control Equation

Derivative
Action

Proportional
Action

1 t

de
u (t) K c e(t)
e ( ) d D
I 0
dt

Integral
Action

uR

Controller
Bias

PID Controller Parameters


Kc

Proportional gain

I
D
uR

Integral Time Constant


Derivative Time Constant
Controller Bias

PID Control
PID Controller Transfer Function

u ( t ) u R U ( s ) K c 1
D s E (s)

Is

or:
I

U ( s ) P D s E ( s )

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:

G c (s) K c 1
D s

Is

or,
I

G c ( s ) P D s

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) u R K ce(t)
Transfer function:
or,

U '( s) K c E ( s)
G c (s) K c

Closed-loop form:
G p (s)G v (s)K c
Y (s)
R (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)K cG m (s)
1
D (s)
1 G p (s)G v (s)K cG m (s)

Proportional Feedback
Example:
Given first order process:

K p
G p (s)
,
s 1

G v (s) 1,

G m (s) 1

for P-only feedback closed-loop dynamics:


K pK c
1 K pK c
Y (s)
R (s)

s 1
1 K pK c

1 K pK c

1 K pK c
Closed-Loop
Time Constant

1
1 K pK c
D (s)

s 1

Proportional Feedback
Final response:
K pK c
lim y s e rv o ( t)
,
1

K
K
t
p c

lim y re g ( t )
1 K pK c
t

Note:
for zero offset response we require

lim y serv o ( t ) 1 ,

Tracking Error

lim y re g ( t ) 0

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

5.0

0.8

y(t)/KM

0.7
0.6
1.0

0.5
0.4

0.5

0.3
0.2

Kc

0.1
0

t/

0.01
9

- increasing controller gain eliminates off-set

10

Proportional Feedback
High-order process
e.g. second order underdamped process
1.5

y(t)/KM

5.0
2.5
1.0

0.5

0.5

0.01
0

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 closedloop 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

u (t) K c e(t)
e
(

)
d

uR

I 0

1 t

Transfer function model

1
U ( s ) K c 1
E (s)

Is

PI Feedback
Closed-loop response

Y (s)

I s 1

Is
R (s)
I s 1
G m (s)
Is

G p (s)G v (s)K c

1 G p (s)G v (s)K c

1
Is
1 G p (s)G v (s)K c
Is

D (s)

G m (s)

more complex expression


degree of denominator is increased by one

PI Feedback
Example
PI control of a first order process

K p
G p (s)
,
s 1

G v (s) 1,

G m (s) 1

Closed-loop response

Is
Y (s)
I 2 1

s
K cK p
K

1
R (s)
K cK p
Is1
cK p

I 2 I

s
K cK p
K cK p
I 2 1 K cK p

K cK p
K cK p
Note:
offset is removed
closed-loop is second order

Is1

D (s)

PI Feedback
Example (contd)
effect of integral time constant and controller gain
on closed-loop dynamics
natural period of oscillation

cl

I
K cK p

damping coefficient

1

2

K p

K c K p 1

K c I
K cK 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

1.6
1.4

Kc=1

0.1

y(t)/KM

1.2

0.5

1.0

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

10

PI Feedback
Effect of controller gain
10.0
5.0

1
0.9

1.0

0.5

0.8

y(t)/KM

0.7
0.6

0.1

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

I=1

0.1
0

affects speed of response


increasing gain eliminates offset quicker

10

PI Feedback
Effect of integral action of regulatory
response
0.4
0.35
0.3

y(t)/KM

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.1

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) K c e(t)
e ( ) d D
I 0
dt

uR

PID Feedback
Transfer Function

U ( s ) K c 1
D s E (s)

Is
Closed-loop Transfer Function
D I s2 I s
G p ( s ) G v ( s ) K c
Is

Y (s)
D I s2 I s
1 G p ( s ) G v ( s ) K c
Is

R (s)

G m ( s )

1
D I s2 I s 1
G m ( s )
1 G p ( s ) G v ( s ) K c
Is

Slightly more complicated than PI form

D (s)

PID Feedback
Example:
PID Control of a first order process

K p
G p (s)
,
s 1

G v (s) 1,

G m (s) 1

Closed-loop transfer function

Y (s)

D I s2 I s 1
R (s)
2 1 KcK p
I
I s 1
D I s
KcK p

KcK p

2 I
s
s

KcK p
D (s)

1 KcK p
I
2

I s 1
DI s
KcK p

KcK p

KcK p

PID Feedback
Effect of derivative action on servo dynamics
1.6
1.4

y(t)/KM

1.2
1

0.1

0.8

0.5

0.6

1.0 2.0

0.4
0.2
0

10

PID Feedback
Effect of derivative action on regulatory
response

0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05

0.1

2.0
0.5 1.0

0
-0.05
-0.1

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
G cG vG p
1
*
Y (s)
Y (s)
D (s)
1 G cG vG pG m
1 G cG vG pG m
GOL
if GOL is a rational function then the closed-loop
transfer functions are rational functions and
take the form

a 0 a 1 s a s

r(s)
G (s)

q ( s) b 0 b1 s b s

and factor as

( a 1 s 1 ) ( a s 1 )
G (s) K
( 1 s 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

a n s n a n 1 s n 1 a 1 s a 0 0
is
1
2
3
4

n 1

an
a n 1
b1
c1

z1

an2
an3
b2
c2

an4
an5
b3

where
a n 1a n 2 a n 3a n
a
a
a n 5a n
, b 2 n 1 n 4
,
a n 1
a n 1
b a
b 2 a n 1
b a
b 3 a n 1
c1 1 n 3
, c2 1 n 5
,
b
b
1
Elements of left1 column must be
positive to
b1

roots with negative real parts

have

Example: Routh Array


Characteristic polynomial
2 . 3 6 s 5 1 . 4 9 s 4 0 .5 8 s 3 1 . 2 1 s 2 0 .4 2 s 0 . 7 8 0

Polynomial Coefficients
a 5 2 . 3 6 , a 4 1 . 4 9 , a 3 0 .5 8 , a 2 1 . 2 1 , a 1 0 . 4 2 , a 0 0 . 7 8

Routh Array
a 5 ( 2 .3 6 )
a 4 ( 1 .4 9 )
b 1 ( 2 .5 0 )
c 1 ( 0 .7 2 )
d 1 ( 1 .8 9 )
e 1 ( 0 .7 8 )

a 3 ( 0 .5 8 )
a 2 ( 1 .2 1 )
b 2 ( 0 .8 2 )
c 2 ( 0 .7 8 )
d 2 (0)

Closed-loop system is unstable

a 1 ( 0 .4 2 )
a 0 ( 0 .7 8 )
b3 (0)

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

1 K cG v (s)G p (s)G m (s) 1 K c


Write characteristic equation:
q (s) K r(s) 0

c (s=j)
Substitute for complex pole

j )
Solve for qKc( and

K c r ( j ) 0

r(s)
q s

Example: Direct Substitution


Characteristic equation
s 1

1 Kc
0
3
2
s 0 .5 s 0 .5 s 0 . 7 5
s 3 0 .5 s 2 0 .5 s 0 . 7 5 K c s K c 0
s 3 0 .5 s 2 ( K c 0 .5 ) s ( K c 0 . 7 5 ) 0

Substitution for s=j


( j ) 3 0 .5 ( j ) 2 ( K c 0 .5 ) j ( K c 0 . 7 5 ) 0
j 3 0 .5 2 ( K c 0 .5 ) j ( K c 0 . 7 5 ) 0

Real Part

Complex Part
( K c 0 .5 ) 3 0

0 .5 2 K c 0 . 7 5 0

K c 0 .5 2 0 . 7 5 ( 0 .5 2 0 . 7 5 0 .5 ) 3 0
0 .5 2 0 . 2 5 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.
s 3 0 .5 s 2 ( K c 0 .5 ) s ( K c 0 . 7 5 ) 0
1.5

Kc-0

Imaginary Axis

0.5

-0.5

Kc-0
-1

-1.5
-1.5

-1

-0.5

0
Real Axis

0.5

1.5

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
P

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
G cG p
C

R 1 G cG 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
G pm

R d

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


1
C

R d cs 1
For 1st order Gp, it leads to PI control
For 2nd order, get PID control

3. Processes with delay


e c s
C

R d cs 1
requires
again, 1st corder
leads to PI control
2nd order leads to PID control

IMC Controller Tuning

D
R
+

G c*

Gp

Gpm

Closed-loop transfer function


C

G c* G p
1 G c* ( G p G p m )

1 G c* G p
1 G c* ( G p G p m )

In terms of implemented controller, Gc


Gc

G c*

1 G c* G p m

IMC Controller Tuning


1. Process model factored into two parts
G p m G p m G p m

where contains dead-time and RHP zeros,


G pm
steady-state
gain scaled to 1.
2. Controller
G c*

1
G p m

where f is the IMC filter


f

1
( 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,

IMC Design: Kc=6.97, I=34.5, d=3.93


Filter
f

1
12s 1

2. Direct Synthesis: Kc=4.76, I=30


Servo Transfer function
9 s
C e

R d 12s 1

Example
Result: Servo Response
IMC and direct synthesis give roughly same
results
25

IMC
20

Direct
Synthesis

15

y(t)
10

50

100

150

200

250

t
IMC not as good due to Pade approximation

300

Example
Result: Regulatory response
40

35

30

y(t)
25

Direct Synthesis

20

IMC
15

50

100

150

200

250

t
Direct synthesis rejects disturbance more
rapidly (marginally)

300

Tuning Relations
Process reaction curve method:
based on approximation of process using first
order plus delay model

D(s)

1/s
Y*(s)

Gp

Gc
U(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


K e s
Ym (s)
s1

Y(s)

Tuning Relations
Process response
1.2
1
0.8
0.6

KM
0.4
0.2
0

-0.2
0

4. Obtain tuning from tuning correlations


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

Ziegler-Nichols Tunings
Controller
P-only

Kc

Ti

PI

(0.9 / K p )( / )

3.3

PID

(1.2 / K p )( / )

2.0

(1 / K p )( / )

Td

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:

PI:
PID:

e 9 s 0 .3
G p (s)
30s 1
Kc= 10
Kc= 13.33
I=4.5

I=29.97
I=18

Example

Ziegler-Nichols Tunings: Servo response


50

Z-N PI

45
Z-N PID
40

y(t)

35
Direct Synthesis
30

25

20

50

100

150

200

250

300

Example
Regulatory Response
40

35

30

Direct Synthesis

25

Z-N PI

20
Z-N PID

15

10

50

100

150

200

250

Z-N tuning
Oscillatory with considerable overshoot
Tends to be conservative

300

Cohen-Coon Tuning Relations


Designed to achieve 1/4 decay ratio
fast decrease in amplitude of oscillation
Controller
P-only

Kc

Ti

PI

(1 / K p )( / )[0.9 / 12 ]

[30 3( / )]
9 20( / )

PID

(1 / K p )( / )[1 / 3 ]

(1 / K p )( / )[

3 16
]
12

[32 6( / )]
13 8( / )

Example:
PI: Kc=10.27

I=18.54

Kc=15.64

I=19.75

d=3.10

Td

4
11 2( / )

Tuning relations
Cohen-coon: Servo
55
50
C-C PID

45
40
35

C-C PI

30
25
20

50

100

150

200

250

More aggressive/ Higher controller gains


Undesirable response for most cases

300

Tuning Relations
Cohen-Coon: Regulatory
40
35
30
C-C PI

25

y(t)

20
C-C PID

15
10
5

50

100

150

Highly oscillatory t
Very aggressive

200

250

300

Integral Error Relations


1. Integral of absolute error (IAE)

IA E e (t ) d t
0

2. Integral of squared error (ISE)

IS E e (t )2 d t
penalizes large errors
0

3. Integral of time-weighted absolute error


(ITAE)

IT A E t e (t ) d t
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:

IT A E
0,
Kc

IT A E
0,
I

IT A E
0
d

Design for Load and Setpoint changes yield


different ITAE optimum
Type of
Input
Load

Type of
Controller
PI

Load

PID

Set point

PI

Set point

PID

Mode

P
I
P
I
D
P
I
P
I
D

0.859
0.674
1.357
0.842
0.381
0.586
1.03
0.965
0.796
0.308

-0.977
-0.680
-0.947
-0.738
0.995
-0.916
-0.165
-0.85
-0.1465
0.929

ITAE Relations
From table, we get
Load Settings:

B
Y A
K K c d
I

Setpoint Settings:

Y A
K K c d ,

Example
0 .3 e 9 s
G s
,
30s 1

B
I

G L 1

ITAE Relations
Example (contd)
Setpoint Settings

0 .8 5
K K c 0 .9 6 5 9 3 0
2 .6 8 5 2
K c 2 .6 8 5 2 K 2 .6 8 5 2 0 .3 8 .9 5

0
.
7
9
6

0
.
1
4
6
5
3 0 0 .7 5 2 0

I 0 . 7 5 2 0 3 0 0 . 7 5 2 0 3 9 .8 9
0 .9 2 9
d
9
0 .1 0 0 6
0 .3 0 8 3 0
d 0 .1 0 0 6 3 . 0 1 9 4

Load Settings:
0 .9 4 7
9
K K c 1 .3 5 7 3 0
4 .2 4 3 7

K c 4 .2 4 3 7 4 .2 4 3 7
1 4 .1 5
K
0 .3

0 .7 3 8
9

0
.
8
4
2
2 .0 4 7 4
30
I
I 2 .0 4 7 4 3 0 2 .0 4 7 4 1 4 .6 5
0 .9 9 5
d
9
0 .1 1 5 0
0 .3 8 1 3 0
d 0 .1 1 5 0 3 . 4 4 9 7

ITAE Relations
Servo Response
60
55

ITAE(Load)

50
45
40
ITAE(Setpoint)

35
30
25
20

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
0

ITAE(Load)
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,

Ziegler-Nichols and Cohen-Coon tuning relations


yield aggressive control with oscillatory response
(requires detuning)

ITAE provides conservative performance (not


aggressive)

I 0 .2 5

CHE 446
Process Dynamics and Control

Frequency Response of
Linear Control Systems

First order Process


Response to a sinusoidal input signal

lim

(s)

A
2

10

14

s in ( t )

2
1.5
1

AR

y(t)/A

0.5
0
-0.5

-1
-1.5

t/

12

16

18

20

Recall: Sinusoidal input Asin(t) yields


sinusoidal output caharacterized by AR and

First order Processes

10

Bode Plots

AR/Kp

High Frequency
10

10

Asymptote

Corner Frequency

-1

-2

10

-2

-1

10

10

10

10

0
-20

-40
-60
-80
-100
-2
10

-1

10

Amplitude Ratio
K
AR
1 2 2

10

10

10

Phase Shift

ta n

( )

Second Order Process

Sinusoidal Response
Y (s)

y (t)

K p

2 s 2 2 s 1 s 2 2

K p A
1

where

1
ta n

2 2

2 2

s in ( t )

2
1 ( )

ARn

2 2

2 2

Second Order Processes


Bode Plot
1

10

AR

Amplitude reaches
a maximum at
resonance frequency

10

=1
-1

10

-1

10

10

10

-50

=1

-100
-150

-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:
a R e ( w ),

w a bj

b Im ( w )

Im
b

It follows that
w

where

a w c o s ( ),

R e ( w )2 Im ( w )2

such that

w w e j

Re

b w s in ( )

Im ( w )
a rg ( w ) ta n 1

R e(w )

Frequency Response
Some facts:
ii) Let z=a-bj and w= a+bj then
w z a n d a rg ( z ) a rg ( w )

iii) For a first order process


K p
G (s)
s1
Let s=j
K p (1 j )
K p
K p
G ( j )

j
2
2
2
2
j 1 (1 j ) 1
1
such that
K p
G ( j )
( A R )
1 2 2
a rg ( G ( j )) ta n 1 ( )( P h a s e L a g )

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.
A R G ( j )

R e ( G ( j )) 2 Im ( G ( j )) 2

P h a s e A n g le ta n

Im ( G ( j ))

R e ( G ( j ))

Frequency Response
For a general transfer function
r ( s ) e s ( s z1 ) ( s z m )
G (s)

q (s)
( s p 1 ) ( s p n )
Frequency Response summarized by
G ( j ) G ( j ) e j

where
is the modulus of G(j) and
G ( j )
is the argument 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

1 K /
A R , ta n

0
2
2. Dead Time G(s)=e-s
G ( j ) e j
A R 1,

Frequency Response
Examples:
3. n process in series
G ( s ) G 1 ( s ) G n ( s )
Frequency response of G(s)
G ( j ) G 1 ( j ) G n ( j )
therefore

G 1 ( j ) e j1 G n ( j ) e jn
n

A R G ( j ) G i ( j )
i1

i1

i1

a rg ( G ( j )) a rg ( G i ( j )) i

Frequency Response
Examples.
4. n first order processes in series
K1
K n
G (s)

1s 1 n s 1
AR

K1

1 12 2

K n
1 n2 2

t a n 1 1 t a n 1 n

5. First order plus delay


G (s)
AR

K p (1 )
1 2 2

K p e s

s1

, ta n 1 ( )

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 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
AR

AR

10

10

10
-2
10

-1

10

10

Phase Angle

-89
-89.5
-90
-90.5
-91
-2
10

-1

10
Frequency (rad/sec)

10

Bode Plot
G (s) G 1(s)G 2 (s)G 3 (s)
1
1
1
G 1(s)
, G 2 (s)
, G 3(s)
10s 1
5s 1
s1
0

10

-2

10

G3
G2

G1

-4

10

-4

10

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

0
-100
-200
-300
-4
10

G ( j )

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

10

1
(1 1 0 2 2 )(1 5 2 2 )(1 1 2 2 )

ta n 1 (1 0 ) ta n 1 (5 ) ta n 1 ( )

10

Bode Plot
G ( s ) e s
G ( j ) 1,

Example: Effect of dead-time


G d ( s) e 2 sG 1 ( s)G 2 ( s)G 3 ( s)
0

10

-2

10

G=Gd

-4

10

-4

10

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

0
-100
-200

Gd

-300
-4

10

-3

10

-2

10

-1

10

G
0

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)


G (s)

1
s2 3s 1

, G d (s) e 2 s

Che 446: Process Dynamics and


Control

Frequency Domain
Controller Design

PI Controller

AR K c

1
2

ta n 1 ( 1 / I )
3

10

10

AR101
0

10
-3
10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

0
-20
-40

-60
-80
-100
-3
10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

PID Controller
1
A R K c D

ta n

1
D

10

AR

10

10

10
-3
10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

100
50

0
-50
-100
-3
10

-2

10

-1

10

10

10

Bode Stability Criterion


Consider open-loop control system
D(s)
R(s)

+
-

Gp

Gc
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
=-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
a rg ( G O L ( j ))
2. Calculate AR
A R G O L ( j )

Bode Stability Criterion


To check for stability:
1. Compute open-loop transfer function
2. Solve for in =-
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 =-
3. Evaluate AR at
1
4. Let
K cu
AR

Bode Criterion
Consider the transfer function and controller
5 e 0 .1 s
G (s)
( s 1 ) ( 0 .5 s 1 )

1
G c ( s ) 0 . 4 1

0 .1 s

- Open-loop transfer function


5 e 0 .1 s
1

G O L (s)
0 .4 1

( s 1 ) ( 0 .5 s 1 )
0 .1 s

- Amplitude ratio and phase shift


A R

5
1

1
2

0 .1 t a n

1 0 .2 5
1

( ) ta n

0 .4 1
1

1
0 .0 1 2

( 0 .5 ) t a n

- At =1.4128, =-AR=6.746

0 .1

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 openloop system
Ultimate Period

Ziegler-Nichols Tunings
P

Ku/2

PI

Ku/2.2 Pu/1.2

PID

Ku/1.7 Pu/2

2
Pu
c

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 openloop 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
5 e 0 .1 s
G (s)
( s 1 ) ( 0 .5 s 1 )
and the PI controller
1

G c ( s ) 0 .4 1

0 .1 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)
R(s)

Gc

GD

+ +

Gv

Gp

U(s)

Ym(s)

+
Y(s)

Gs

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

U(s)

Ym(s)

Gp

Gs

Feedback/Feedforward Controller
Structure

+
Y(s)

Feedforward Control
Heated Stirred Tank
F,Tin

TT
TT
TC1

Ps
Steam

Condensate
Is this control configuration feedbackF,T
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:

TC2

TT
F,Tin

TT +

TC1

Ps
Steam

Condensate

How do we design TC2?

F,T

Feedforward Control
The feedforward controller:
D(s)

Gf
GD
UR(s) +

+
U(s)

Gv

Gp

+
Y(s)

Transfer Function
Y ( s ) G D ( s ) D ( s ) G P ( s ) G v ( s )U ( s )
Y ( s ) G D ( s ) D ( s ) G P ( s ) G v ( s )(U R ( s ) G f ( s ) D ( s ))
Y ( s ) ( G D ( s ) G p ( s ) G v ( s ) G f ( s )) D ( s ) G p ( s ) G v ( s )U R ( s )
Y (s) (G D ( s) G p (s)G v ( s)G f (s)) D (s) Y R (s)

Tracking of YR requires that

G D (s) G p (s)G v (s)G f (s) 0


G D (s)
G f (s)
G p (s)G v (s)

Feedforward Control
Ideal feedforward controller:
G f (s)

G D (s)
G p (s)G v (s)

Exact cancellation requires perfect plant and


perfect disturbance models.

G D (s) G p (s)G v (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

U(s)

Ym(s)

Gp

Gs

What is the impact of Gf on the closed-loop


performance of the feedback control system?

Y(s)

Feedforward Control
Regulatory transfer function of
feedforward/feedback loop
C (s) G D (s) G f (s)G v (s)G p (s)

D (s) 1 G c (s)G v (s)G p (s)G m (s)


Perfect control requires that (as above)
G D (s)
G f (s)
G v (s)G p (s)
Note:
Feedforward controllers do not affect closedloop 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)

G f (s) K f

(1s 1)
( 2 s 1)

K D
G f (s)
K vK 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

K D
K f
K vK p
1 and 2
from open-loop data

1 p ,

2 D

from heuristics

1
0 .5
2

Trial-and-error

1
2 .0
2

1 2 c

Feedforward Control
Example:
Plant:
10
(1 0 s 1 )(5 s 1 )( s 1 )
1
G D (s)
( 2 .5 s 1 ) ( s 1 )

G p (s)

Plant Model:
1 0 e 6 s
G pm (s)
10s 1

es
G D m (s)
2 .5 s 1

Feedback Design from plant model: IMC PID


tunings
K c 0 .2 6 , I 1 3 , D 2 .3 1

Feedforward Control
Possible Feedforward controllers:
1. From plant models:
e 5 s (1 0 s 1 )
G f (s)
1 0 ( 2 .5 s 1 )
Not realizable

2. Lead-lag unit

1 1 0 , 2 2 .5
1
K f
10
3. Feedforward gain controller:

K f

1
10

Feedforward Control
For Controller 2 and 3
Disturbance Controller with Feedforward

1.2
1
0.8

.. - Gain Controller

0.6

-- - Lead-Lag Controller
- - No FF Controller

0.4
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6

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, H-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

Conventional Feedback Loop:

F,T

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

Note:

F,T

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

Gc1

+
-

Block Diagram

Gc2

Gm1

Gm2

Gv2
Gp2

D2
Gp1

D1
+

Cascade Control

Cascade Control

Closed-loop transfer function


1. Inner loop

G p2G v2G c2
C2

G cl2
R 2 1 G p2G v2G c2G m 2
2. Outer loop
G p1G cl2 G c1
C1

R 1 1 G p1G cl2 G c1G m 1

Characteristic equation
1 G p1G cl2 G c1G m 1 0
G p2G v2G c2
1 G p1
G c1G m 1 0
1 G p2G v2G c2G m 2
1 G p 2 G v 2 G c2 G m 2 G p1G p 2 G v 2 G c2 G c1G m 1 0

Cascade Control
Stability of closed-loop process is governed by
1 G p 2 G v 2 G c2 G m 2 G p1G p 2 G v 2 G c2 G c1G m 1 0
Example
K p1
G p1
, G c1 K c1 , G v1 G m 1 1
1s 1
K p2
G p2
, G c2 K c2 , G m 2 1
2s 1
K p2
K p2 K p1
1 K c2
K c1
0
2s 1
2 s 1 1s 1
(1s 1)( 2 s 1) K c 2 K p 2 (1s 1) K c1 K p 2 K p1 0

1 2 s 2 (1 2 K c 2 K p 2 1 ) s 1 K c 2 K p 2
K c1 K p 2 K p1 0

Cascade Control
Design a cascade controller for the following
system:
1. Primary:
e 0 .1 s
G p1(s)
, G m 1 1,
( 0 .5 s 1 ) ( s 1 )

1
G c1 K c1 1

Is
2. Secondary:
1
,G v2 G m 2 1
0 .1 s 1
G c2 K c2
G p2

Cascade Control
1. PI controller only
0 .1 s
1
1
e
G O L 1 K c 1 1

s 0 .1 s 1 ( 0 . 5 s 1 ) ( s 1 )

A R K c1 1

ta n

0 .0 1 2 1

0 .2 5 2 1

1 t a n 1 ( 0 .1 )

t a n 1 ( 0 . 5 ) t a n 1 ( ) 0 .1
Critical frequency

c 2 .9 9 ,

A R 0 .1 7 8

Maximum gain
K c 1 5 .6 1

2 1

Cascade Control
Bode Plots

AR

ln()

Cascade Control
2. Cascade Control
Secondary loop

G O l2 K c2

1
0 .1 s 1

no critical frequency gain can be large


Let Kc2=10.

Primary loop

G O L 1 K c1 1

10
0 .1 s
e
0 .1 s 1
1
( 0 .5 s 1 ) ( s 1 )
110
0 .1 s 1

10
e 0 .1 s
K c1
1 1 s ( 0 . 5 s 1 ) ( 0 .1 s 1 )
11

Cascade Control
Closed-loop stability:
AR
10 1

K c1 1 1

2
0
.
1
2
1

11

1 0 .2 5 2

1 0 .1
0 .1 t a n
t a n 1 ( 0 .5 )
11
2
Bode

c 4 .1 3 ,

A R 0 .0 9 5 8

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:
D
R

Gc

Gp

-s

Dead-time has a de-stabilizing effect on closedloop 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 .1 0 . 7 5
s 3s 2
1
G c ( s ) 4 1

0.75

0.5 0.25 0.1

Dead-time Compensation
Use plant model to predict deviation from
setpoint
D
R

Gc

Gp

-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
C (s)
1,
D (s)

C (s) G cG

R (s) 1 G

s
e
p
cG pm

Characteristic Equation becomes


1 G cG 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

1
4 1

e-0.5s

s 3s 2

1
s2 3s 2
Servo Response

1.5
1
0.5
0

10

10

Regulatory Response

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

Dead-time Compensation
Include effect of disturbances using model
predictions
D ( s ) Y ( s ) Y ( s )
D ( s ) G p e s U ( s ) G p m e s U ( s )
Adding this to previous loop gives
D
R
+

Gc

Gpm

Gp

Gpm

+
e

-s

e-s

+
+
-

Dead-time Compensation
Closed-loop transfer function
s

1 (e
e
)G cG pm
C (s)

s
s
D (s) 1 G G
G pm e
)
c pm G c (G pe
G c G p e s
C (s)

s
s
R (s) 1 G G
G pm e
)
c pm G c (G pe
Characteristic Equation
1 G cG pm G c (G pe

G pm e

) 0

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

Dead-time Compensation
D
R
+ -

1
4 1

s 3s 2

+
2

s 3s 2

s 3s 2

+ C

-0.5s

+
+

-0.5s

D ( s )

Servo Response

1.5
1
0.5
0

10

10

Regulatory Response

1
0.5
0
-0.5

Dead-time Compensation
Alternative form

D
R
+

Gc

Gp

+
e

-s

Gpm(1-e-s)

Reduces to classical feedback control system


with
*
c

G (s)

G c (s)

1 G p m (1 e m s )

called a Smith-Predictor

Dead-time compensation
Smith-Predictor Design
1. Determine delayed process model
Y ( s ) G p m ( s ) e m s
2. Tune controller Gc for the undelayed
transfer function model Gpm

3. Implement Smith-Predictor as
*
c

G (s)

G c (s)

1 G p m (1 e m s )

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:
R
+ -

s 3s 2

+
+

4 1

s
2

s 3s 2

s 3s 2

-0.5s

D
+ C
+

-s

+
D ( s )