0% found this document useful (0 votes)
20 views

PID Controller

This document provides an overview of PID controllers. It explains that a PID controller forms its control action based on the proportional, integral and derivative of the error between the measured process variable and desired setpoint. It then discusses the effects of each term - the proportional term reduces error, the integral term eliminates steady-state error, and the derivative term adds damping to the closed-loop system. The document also analyzes the performance of P, PI and PD controllers and discusses how each affects steady-state error and the response of the closed-loop system.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
20 views

PID Controller

This document provides an overview of PID controllers. It explains that a PID controller forms its control action based on the proportional, integral and derivative of the error between the measured process variable and desired setpoint. It then discusses the effects of each term - the proportional term reduces error, the integral term eliminates steady-state error, and the derivative term adds damping to the closed-loop system. The document also analyzes the performance of P, PI and PD controllers and discusses how each affects steady-state error and the response of the closed-loop system.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 32

PID controller

Proportional +Integral+Derivative (PID) Controller

This controller forms its control action from:

u(t)=Kpe(t)+KDde/dt+KIe(t)dt
Control
• The term means to force a system to behave as we wish.

• This means, to keep the output variable as close as posible to the


input variable.

• Or: TO KEEP THE CLOSED LOOP ERROR=0


• The latter can happen in two basic situations:
• A) The system response is NOT unstable but we want to improve
performance.

• B) The system response is unstable or may be disturbed in such a way


that can become unstable (for instance, resonance)
Designing a PID controller
• Easy to:
• Undesrtand…
• Implement…
• Change…
• Design…

• But…
• Of limited action (it is a LINEAR controller) but very useful!
What is a controller?
What is a controller?
• First:
• It is a math model which MODIFIES the output of a closed loop
system in such a way that…
• The error signal is zero (or as small as possible) AND…
• A desired performance is satisfied (small overshoot, just a few small
oscillations or none, etc).
• Second:
• That math model can be implemented as an algorithm in a
computer…
• Or as a physical device (an electronic circuit, a hydraulic/pnemumatic
valve, an electro-hydraulic valve, etc.).
This is what we obtain; the output signal

This is what we wish;


what we feed to the system

They do not look the same!


Recomendations to design/study PIDs
Remain in open loop (*)

Feedback (control design)


P-controller: C(s)=n(s)/d(s)=Kp
• Assume that we have to control the level of a tank:
Analysis of performance (1)
• First: Let’s observe the location of the open loop pole: s=-1/.
y(s) 1 1
 
r ( s ) s  1 0.5s  1
How does the systen behave?

Notice that we are feeding


a step input with
AMPLITUDE=1 !!

Open loop system response


C(s)=n(s)/d(s)=Kp
• Second: We wonder, are we satisfied with this…? (Too slow
reponse,etc)
• If this is not the case, let’s reduce the closed loop system…
1
Kp Kp
y(s)  s  1
 
r (s) 1  K 1 s  1  K p
p
s  1

y(s) Kp

r ( s ) s  (1  K p )
y(s) Kp
  B( s) Closed loop pole
r (s) s  (1  K p )
    
Closed loop block  B(s)

y ( s)  B( s)r ( s)
Analysis of performance (2)
• We now obtain the STEADY STATE ERROR, ess as:

e(t  )  ess  lim se( s )   lim s (r ( s )  y ( s ) 


s 0 s 0

• In our example…
ess  lim se( s )   lim s (r ( s )  y ( s )  
s 0 s 0

  
  
  
  1 Kp 1 
 lim  s   y(s) Kp
s  (1  K p )   B( s)
s 0 
s s  r ( s ) s  (1  K p )
  Reference B(s)Closed
   
loop system
Reference  
              
  System output  y ( s)  B( s)r ( s)
  
  
  
  1 Kp 1 
 lim s  
s 0 
s s  (1  K p ) s 
  Reference B(s)Closed
   
loop system
Reference  
              
  System output 
 Kp  Kp 1

 lim 1    1   ess
s 0 s  (1  K )  (1  K p ) (1  K p )
 p 
1
 ess
This is what we want (1  K p )
This is the difference (error)
between them (as t)

This is what we get


QUESTION:
• Is it possible to force ess=0 with a P- controller…?

1
 ess
(1  K p )

• No. (Why?).
• As a consequence…
• There will always exist a NON-ZERO ess with a P-controller in any plant!
Advantages/disadvantaes of
a P controller:

1 - The simplest structure to improve


 ess the response of the system.
This is what we want (1  K p )
- But
This is the difference (error) - Too simple that ess0
between them (as t)

This is what we get


PI controller: C(s)=n(s)/d(s)=KI/s, 1/s

u(t)=e(t)dt
PI controller: C(s)=KI/s
• Proceeding as before, we obtain the closed loop system B(s):

KI 1 Closed loop poles :


y(s) KI
 s s  1  s 2  s  K I  0
r (s) K 1 s (s  1)  K I
1 I (Complex in general)
s s  1
Advantages:
• We obtain directly the ess as before: Ess=0

BUT
  It may introduce oscillations and

   overshoot (complex poles)
  
  1 KI 1 
 lim  s   
s 0
  s s (s  1)  K ) s  
      I
  Reference B(s)Closed loop systemReference  
             
  System output 
 KI  KI
 lim 1    1   0  ess
s 0
 s (s  1)  K I )  (0  K I )
0  ess
PD controller: C(s)=KDsu(t)=KDde/dt
r(s) y(s)

Open loop poles: s1,2=-j

NO DAMPING=
PURE OSCILATIONS
KDs
y(s) s 2
 1 KDs
  2 Overdamped, crit.damped, underdamped!
r (s) K s s  K s 1
1 2 D    D 
s  1 Closed loop system
ess (t )  e(t  )  lim s r ( s )  y ( s )  
s 0

 
 
 1 KDs 1
 lim s  2  
s 0
s s  KDs 1 s
 r ( s )        
 y(s) 
 0
 lim 1    1 Derivative-Action:
s 0 1 (Global performance not ok) DAMPING ADDED
TO THE SYSTEM

Before: S1,2=-j

NOW: s2+KDs+1; Over/crit./under damped system


Homework: Repeat the latter analysis for a
PID controller of the following form:

KI u (s)
C (s)  K p   KDs 
s e( s )
de(t )
u (t )  K p e(t )  K I  e(t )dt  K D
dt
Summing up
Proportional action: Kp Integral action: KI Derivative action: KD
Increasing this gain does It gets ess=0 but it may It adds damping to the
not improve ess. produce oscillations and closed loop system,
(This action alone, does overshoot hence, reduces
not achieve ess=0) overshoot and
undesirable oscillations
but it delays output
response
Resonance
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU57DJvbE3k
Clap, clap resonance…
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR1-3gYXsfE

You might also like