Scribd
Upload
225 views

The Improved SIMC Method For PI Controller Tuning

1. The document compares the SIMC tuning method for PI controllers to the optimal PI controller for various process models. 2. It finds that the SIMC method provides performance close to optimal, except for processes with significant time delays, where it can be improved. 3. A small modification to the SIMC method, replacing the process time constant with the time constant plus one-third of the time delay, provides near-optimal performance also for time delay processes.

Uploaded by

Anonymous WkbmWCa8M
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
225 views

The Improved SIMC Method For PI Controller Tuning

1. The document compares the SIMC tuning method for PI controllers to the optimal PI controller for various process models. 2. It finds that the SIMC method provides performance close to optimal, except for processes with significant time delays, where it can be improved. 3. A small modification to the SIMC method, replacing the process time constant with the time constant plus one-third of the time delay, provides near-optimal performance also for time delay processes.

Uploaded by

Anonymous WkbmWCa8M
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 25

1

The improved SIMC method


for PI controller tuning
Chriss Grimholt
Sigurd Skogestad
NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
Reference: C. Grimholt and S. Skogestad, The improved SIMC method for PI controller tuning,
IFAC-conference PID12, Brescia, Italy, March 2012
2
SIMC PI tuning rule
Look at initial part of step response, Initial slope: k = k/
1
One tuning rule! Easily memorized
Reference: S. Skogestad, Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID controller design, J.Proc.Control, Vol. 13, 291-309, 2003 (Also reprinted in MIC)
(*) Probably the best simple PID tuning rule in the world

c
- : Desired closed-loop response time (tuning parameter)
For robustness select:
c

Questions:
1. How good is really this rule?
2. Can it be improved?
Step response
*
3
1. How good is really the SIMC rule?
Need to compare with:
Optimal PI-controller
for class of first-order with delay processes
4
Optimal controller
Tradeoff between
Output performance
Robustness
Input usage
Noise sensitivity
High controller gain (tight control)
Low controller gain (smooth control)
Quantification
Output performance:
Frequency domain: weighted sensitivity ||W
p
S||
Time domain: IAE or ISE for setpoint/disturbance
Robustness: M
s
, GM, PM, Delay margin
Input usage: ||KSG
d
||, ISE or TV for step response
Noise sensitivity: ||KS||, etc.
M
s
= peak sensitivity
J = avg. IAE for
setpoint/disturbance
Our choice:
5
IAE = Integrated absolute error = |y-y
s
|dt, for step change in y
s
or d
Cost J is independent of:
1. process gain k
2. disturbance magnitude
3. unit for time
Output performance (J)
6
Optimal PI-controller:
Minimize J for given M
s
7
M
s
=2
M
s
=1.2
M
s
=1.59
|S|
frequency
8
M
s
=2
Optimal PI-controller
Setpoint change at t=0, Input disturbance at t=20,
g(s)=k e
-s
/(
1
s+1), Time delay =1
9
M
s
=1.59
Optimal PI-controller
Setpoint change at t=0, Input disturbance at t=20,
g(s)=k e
-s
/(
1
s+1), Time delay =1
10
M
s
=1.2
Optimal PI-controller
Setpoint change at t=0, Input disturbance at t=20,
g(s)=k e
-s
/(
1
s+1), Time delay =1
11
Optimal performance (J) vs. M
s
Optimal PI-controller
12
Input usage (TV) increases with M
s
TV
ys
TV
d
Optimal PI-controller
13
Setpoint / disturbance tradeoff
Pure time delay process: J=1, No tradeoff
(since setpoint and disturbance the same)
Optimal controller:
Emphasis on disturbance d
Optimal PI-controller
14
Setpoint / disturbance tradeoff
Optimal setpoint:
No integral action
Optimal PI-controller
15
Comparison with SIMC
16
Comparison of J vs. M
s
for optimal and SIMC for 4 processes
17
Conclusion (so far):
How good is really the SIMC rule?
Varying
C
gives (almost) Pareto-optimal tradeoff
between performance (J) and robustness (M
s
)

C
= is a good default choice
Not possible to do much better with any other PI-
controller!
Exception: Time delay process
18
2. Can the SIMC-rule be improved?
Yes, possibly for time delay process
19
Optimal PI-settings
Optimal PI-controller
20
Optimal PI-settings (small
1
)
Time-delay process
SIMC:
I
=
1
=0
0.33
Optimal PI-controller
21
Improved SIMC-rule: Replace
1
by
1
+/3
22
Step response for time delay process
Time delay process: Setpoint and disturbance response same
=1
23
Comparison of J vs. Ms for optimal and SIMC for 4 processes
24
Conclusion
Questions:
1. How good is really the SIMC-rule?
Answer: Pretty close to optimal, except for time delay process
2. Can it be improved?
Yes, to improve for time delay process: Replace
1
by
1
+/3 in rule
to get Improved-SIMC
Not possible to do much better with any other PI-
controller!
Reference: C. Grimholt and S. Skogestad, The improved SIMC method for PI controller tuning,
IFAC-conference PID12, Brescia, Italy, March 2012
25
Model from closed-loop
response with P-controller
Kc0=1.5
ys=1
yu=0.54
yp=0.79
tp=4.4
dyinf = 0.45*(dyp + dyu)
Mo =(dyp -dyinf)/dyinf
b=dyinf/dys
A = 1.152*Mo^2 - 1.607*Mo + 1.0
r = 2*A*abs(b/(1-b))
k = (1/Kc0) * abs(b/(1-b))
theta = tp*[0.309 + 0.209*exp(-0.61*r)]
tau = theta*r
Example: Get k=0.99, theta =1.68, tau=3.03
Ref: Shamssuzzoha and Skogestad (JPC, 2010)
+ modification by C. Grimholt (Project, NTNU, 2010; see also new from PID-book 2011)
y

You might also like