57 views

Uploaded by Berapi Panas

it is about tune type

- STEP7 PID Self-Tuner.pdf
- Jet - Volume 4 - Issue 1 - Februar 2011 - Za Internet
- 110EE0583-12.pdf
- Unit1-MSH
- Adaptive Control 1
- Adaptive Control
- Comparative Analysis of Boiler Drumlevel Control Using Advanced Classical Approaches (2)
- Electronic PID Controller Design Report
- 2_060_paulusova.pdf
- "Simplified Fuzzy Logic Controller Design for Higher Order Processes"
- am06-pid_16Sep06
- Tuning_a_PID_Controller.pdf
- Process Control_11 April 2017
- [Åström, Karl J.; Hägglund, Tore] PID Controlle(BookZZ.org) 075
- Tuning Brochure Closed Loop Procedure
- Exercises 160912
- 108210036_s71500_pid_control_function_manual_enUS_en-US.pdf
- RWF40_N7865
- UIUC 451 Interim paper
- Control-2

You are on page 1of 5

The classic technique for tuning a PID loop has become even more popular with the advent of controllers capable of tuning themselves.

Vance VanDoren, Ph.D., P.E., Control Engineering, 10/1/2006 John “Zeke” Ziegler and Nathaniel Nichols may not have invented the proportionalintegral-derivative (PID) controller, but their famous loop tuning techniques helped make the PID algorithm the most popular of all feedback control strategies used in industrial applications. The Ziegler-Nichols tuning techniques, first published in 1942, are still widely used today. Then, as now, the point of “tuning” a PID loop is to adjust how aggressively the controller reacts to errors between the measured process variable and desired setpoint. If the controlled process happens to be relatively sluggish, the PID algorithm can be configured to take immediate and dramatic actions whenever a random disturbance changes the process variable or an operator changes the setpoint. Conversely, if the process is particularly sensitive to the actuators that the controller is using to manipulate the process variable, then the PID algorithm must apply more conservative corrective efforts over a longer period. The essence of loop tuning is identifying just how dramatically the process reacts to the controller’s efforts and how aggressive the PID algorithm can afford to be as it tries to eliminate errors. Ziegler and Nichols proposed a two-step method for tuning a loop. They devised a test for quantifying behavior of a process in terms of how fast and how much the process variable changes when the control effort changes. They also developed a set of empirical formulas for translating results of those tests into appropriate performance settings or tuning parameters for the controller. Ziegler and Nichols actually proposed two such techniques, both of which are described in “Loop Tuning Fundamentals,” Control Engineering, July 2003.

Auto-Tuning

For many years, Ziegler-Nichols tuning techniques were strictly manual operations executed whenever a new control loop was commissioned. An engineer would run a Ziegler-Nichols test, record the control effort and resulting process variable on a strip chart, divine the behavior of the process from trend line shapes, tune the loop to match the process, then start production with the new loop in automatic mode. It was tedious and repetitive work to commission every loop this way, and results weren’t always satisfactory. Several iterations were often necessary to generate tuning parameters that produced acceptable closed-loop performance.

the process’s response to such a step input may also demonstrate a . The amount by which the process variable subsequently changes and the time required for it to reach 63. respectively. Auto-tuning is also described as self-tuning by some vendors. In the 1970’s. Continuous self-tuning was ranked as the fifth most important feature in the Control Engineering survey. Automatic Sstep Tests One of the earliest auto-tuning controllers still on the market is the 53MC5000 Process Control Station from MicroMod Automation. the controller temporarily disables its PID algorithm and replaces it with an ON/OFF relay that forces the process variable to oscillate. It automatically executes a step test similar to the open-loop Ziegler-Nichols method that forces the controller to make an abrupt change in its control effort while sensor feedback is disabled. Those two numbers quantify the behavior of the process well enough to determine how the PID controller should be tuned to obtain the desired closed-loop performance. Today. If the sensor in the loop happens to be located some distance from the actuator. though self-tuning typically describes adaptive techniques that work not only at start-up. If the resulting closed-loop behavior proved unacceptable. It uses the Easy-Tune algorithm originally developed at Fischer & Porter (now part of ABB) in the early 1980s. but during normal process operations as well. A recent survey of Control Engineering subscribers who buy or specify loop controllers indicted that a user-initiated auto-tuning function is the most important feature of a PID controller behind the PID algorithm itself and the ability to communicate with external devices (CE.To identify the ultimate period Tu and ultimate gain Pu of the process. July 2005.2% of its final value indicate the steady-state gain and time constant of the process. as PID controllers evolved from electronic and pneumatic devices into fully digital microprocessors. the operator could simply push the button again. programmers automated the Ziegler-Nichols loop tuning techniques. Theoretically. such auto-tuning or pre-tuning functions are de rigueur on commercial PID loop controllers. even an operator unfamiliar with tuning theory fundamentals could press a button and let the controller conduct its own process behavior test and select tuning parameters accordingly. “Loop Controllers: Lone Logic is More Connected”).

See the “Relay Test” graphic. but without disabling sensor feedback. An . this technique excites the process to identify its behavior. time constant. allowing it to predict how the process will react to any corrective effort. a controller thus tuned will also tend to cause overshoot and oscillations in the process variable. Ziegler and Nichols theorized that these two parameters could be used instead of the steady-state gain. The time required to complete a single oscillation is known as the process’s ultimate period (Tu). and the relative amplitude of the two oscillations multiplied by 4/π gives the ultimate gain (Pu).deadtime between the instant that the step was applied and the instant that the process variable first began to react. The controller first applies a step input to the process and holds it at a user-defined value until the process variable passes the setpoint. so most auto-tuning controllers offer several sets of alternative tuning rules that make the controller less aggressive to varying degrees. not just step inputs. and deadtime to compute suitable tuning parameters according to their famous tuning equations or tuning rules shown in the equation on the left. Karl Åström and Tore Hägglund of the Lund (Sweden) Institute of Technology published an improved version of Ziegler and Nichols’ closed-loop tuning method. Repeating this procedure each time the process variable passes the setpoint in either direction forces the process variable to oscillate out of sync with the control effort. That in turn allows the Easy-Tune algorithm to compute tuning parameters to make the controller compatible with the process. Closed Loop Tests In 1984. They discovered empirically that these rules generally yield a controller that responds quickly to intentional changes in the setpoint as well as to random disturbances to the process variable. but at the same frequency. These three model parameters tell the Easy-Tune algorithm everything it needs to know about the behavior of a typical process. Some auto-tuning PID controlers can make do with just one isolation. Like the open-loop method. However. It then applies a negative step and waits for the process variable to drop back below the setpoint. The Åström-Hägglund method works by forcing the process variable into a series of sustained oscillations known as a limit cycle.

The controller can be made more or less aggressive by modifying the three tuning parameters – the controller gain P. Some auto-tuning PID controllers. distributed control systems. The accuracy of an auto-tuner’s results can also be limited if process behavior is not entirely predictable. a disturbance interrupts the test. No Panacea Unfortunately. and PC-based controllers. Critics of the technology claim that only the first digit of each .operator typically only has to select the required speed of response (slow. medium. Additional enhancements are required when the sensor’s measurements are corrupted by noise. the integral time TI and the derivative time TD. Commercial auto-tuners can be found in single-loop and multi-loop controllers. all of these controllers stimulate the process with a limit cycle comprised of several oscillations. though vendors rarely mention which technology they use. including Siemens’ Sipart DR19 and Ascon’s DeltaDue. Auto-tuners that use single or multi-oscillation versions of the Åström-Hägglund relay test are also available from Invensys Eurotherm and Red Lion Controls. can make do with just one oscillation. fast). programmable logic controllers. To obtain more accurate results. See the “Single Oscillation Method” sidebar.The PID algorithm (top) determines the control effort CO(t) from the process variable PV(t) and the error e(t) between the process variable and the setpoint. The Ziegler-Nichols tuning rules (bottom) can be used to compute modestly aggressive values for the tuning parameters according to the values of the process’s ultimate period Tu and ultimate gain Pu. Commercial Auto Tuners Variations on the relay method have become a de facto standard for commercial autotuning controllers. or process behavior varies according to the direction in which the process variable is moving. and the controller chooses appropriate rules automatically. even the highly successful Åström-Hägglund version of the ZieglerNichols closed loop tuning technique can’t solve all PID tuning problems. All Watlow controllers equipped with Tru-Tune perform the relay test with two complete oscillations. Tuning rules. All of Emerson Process Management’s auto-tuning controllers from the DPR900 single loop controller introduced by Fisher Controls in 1987 through the Intelligent Tuner of Fisher’s legacy distributed control system Provox and the present-day DeltaV Tuner use the Åström-Hägglund technique.

B. it computes a new set of tuning parameters then reactivates the PID algorithm.G. If the setpoint change is less than 5%. Nichols. It interrupts the controller’s initial reaction to the setpoint change to conduct a loop tuning test by the relay method. its original collection of articles on PID tuning techniques in three installments. depending upon customer preference.computed parameter is likely to be reliable. background on how pneumatic instruments gave birth to automatic control.” This second installment contains comparisons of controller tuning techniques and PID control algorithms. online. loop tuning is best accomplished by analyzing behavior of the process that is demonstrated by naturally-occurring disturbances and setpoint changes. The test itself poses a problem in applications where a limit cycle would disrupt the process to an unacceptable degree. . After one complete oscillation of the process variable. Read the complete 3 Part PID Guide • • Control Engineering Reference Guide to PID Tuning (Part 1) PID (proportional-integral-derivative) control has been the state of the controller art since the 1950s and is still the predominant method in use today. Control Engineering Reference Guide to PID Tuning (Part 2) The second in our 3-part installment reprinting Control Engineering’s “Reference Guide to PID Tuning. the controller will have been tuned to produce a quick response with minimal overshoot. only a single oscillation is required to identify the ultimate period T u and the ultimate gain Pu. Ascon’s DeltaDue temperature controller can perform a single-oscillation test whenever the operator requests a setpoint change greater than 5%. really? Control Engineering Reference Guide to PID Tuning (Part 3) The 3rd installment reprinting Control Engineering’s “Reference Guide to PID Tuning. how to do PID tuning without the math. Although the Åström-Hägglund method does allow the operator to limit amplitude of the control effort’s oscillations.' by J. and how to perform PID controller tuning using standard form optimization.” This final installment contains information about the tuning of PID controls for different structures. there are some situations where artificial disturbances of any kind would be undesirable. necessitating some manual fine tuning when the closed-loop performance is tightly specified. the DeltaDue controller will perform a multi-oscillation version of the Åström-Hägglund relay test. and helps answer the question: How good is that PID tuning. • Single Oscillation Method For some applications where the process behaves in a very consistent manner. 'Optimum Settings for Automatic Controllers. Both methods are available. Ziegler and N. Part 1 contains the original article. Control Engineering is republishing. By the time the process variable reaches the setpoint. In such cases.

- STEP7 PID Self-Tuner.pdfUploaded bydlario22
- Jet - Volume 4 - Issue 1 - Februar 2011 - Za InternetUploaded byVedran Prgomet
- 110EE0583-12.pdfUploaded byrijilpoothadi
- Unit1-MSHUploaded byPan Jiejie
- Adaptive Control 1Uploaded byBharath Kumar
- Adaptive ControlUploaded byatanu maiti
- Comparative Analysis of Boiler Drumlevel Control Using Advanced Classical Approaches (2)Uploaded byOmprakash Verma
- Electronic PID Controller Design ReportUploaded byRatoka Lekhema
- 2_060_paulusova.pdfUploaded byselvam
- "Simplified Fuzzy Logic Controller Design for Higher Order Processes"Uploaded byIjsrnet Editorial
- am06-pid_16Sep06Uploaded byRonny Aja
- Tuning_a_PID_Controller.pdfUploaded byDeepak Raina
- Process Control_11 April 2017Uploaded byMuhammad Arief Nugraha
- [Åström, Karl J.; Hägglund, Tore] PID Controlle(BookZZ.org) 075Uploaded byablbabybb
- Tuning Brochure Closed Loop ProcedureUploaded bySinggih Almasa
- Exercises 160912Uploaded bymartin
- 108210036_s71500_pid_control_function_manual_enUS_en-US.pdfUploaded bydamaya1701
- RWF40_N7865Uploaded bymiguel_alfonzo216314
- UIUC 451 Interim paperUploaded byanon_996725493
- Control-2Uploaded byDamla Süllü
- anssUploaded byHasin Haroon
- 2013_SysTol_v3Uploaded byEduardo Sanchez Fontes
- A Decade of Progress in Iterative Process Control Design - From Theory to Practice - Gevers 2002 JPCUploaded byjacobwatson
- Ratio ControlUploaded byJuan Gutiérrez C
- Theory LevelUploaded byDanialAzim
- Instrumentation and Control EXP - 3Uploaded byRashail Ashas
- control_simulation.pdfUploaded byNurshazwani syuhada bt al- badri
- Notes Osha (1)Uploaded byFatin Natasha Nazri
- hiUploaded byvndhilmech
- research paperUploaded byNitish Sehgal

- Background methanolhUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Www Malaysiakini ComUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Www Malaysiakini ComUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Methodology of PACUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Production InsulinUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Properties of Escherichia ColiUploaded byBerapi Panas
- 2011 102 PM ARAHAN PEPERIKSAAN UNTUK CALON.pdfUploaded bySyamsuddin Saido
- Hosts.umbrellaUploaded byFabsor Soral
- FELCRAUploaded byRedzuan Sumsudin
- BiodieselUploaded bymuddasser91
- Methodology of Wwt FixedUploaded byBerapi Panas
- Bkc3683 - Wastewater Treatment (e) 21112Uploaded byBerapi Panas
- Production PenicillinUploaded bySatuf Rakhul Firmana Zhoma
- job vancancyUploaded byBerapi Panas
- 1.1 Process Engineering EconomicsUploaded byBerapi Panas

- F001Uploaded byLeo Van
- MATSIM Simulink for Process ControlUploaded byEslamAbdEl-Ghany
- Functions of P.O.M..pptxUploaded byVanessa Houston
- Mes Pocket GuideUploaded bychandramohan murugan
- Design & Implementation of Motion Controller for Industrial Paper Cutting MachineUploaded byEditor IJRITCC
- Tutorial FisikaUploaded byWahyudi Hasan
- Multi Layer Feed-Forward Network LearningUploaded byBidkar Harshal S
- Pss Controller DesignUploaded byalfredo quiroga
- Sp14 Cs188 Lecture 9 -- Mdps IIUploaded bypandarean
- Levels of TestingUploaded byVimal Agrawal
- Manual Testing Interview QuestionsUploaded bymanoprabha
- Fundamentals of Lyapunov TheoryUploaded bygoitom01
- A Fuzzy Back Propagation AlgorithmUploaded byĐặng Sơn Tùng
- FamUploaded byarun@1984
- ME Quiz 2.docxUploaded bysjwalin
- Chapter 6 Part a SlidesUploaded byFahad Al-shammeri
- 3-3-6 Plan Quality and IVV PlanUploaded bygridech
- 4-Lyapunov Theory HandoutUploaded byTanNguyễn
- EJAET-2-3-84-89Uploaded byAlaa M El-adl
- hw01solUploaded byDao Yan
- Horizontal TankUploaded byCarlos Bellatin
- TUT 8 - Project Planning & CPM.docUploaded bysusan87
- Computing - Autumn 1 - Mid Term PlanUploaded byHexthorpe
- Tb Chapter12Uploaded bysmohanty20
- 10.1.1.128.9370Uploaded byRavi Verma
- r05321903-software-engineeringUploaded bySRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- Thermodynamics_0.pdfUploaded byRajeev Kaushik
- TQMUploaded bySaad Kaskar
- Lloyd Seth, Defining Complexity.pdfUploaded byFabrizio Li Vigni
- Principle of Software Engg (PSE)Uploaded byAnkit Goel