Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TRANSACTIONS
ISA Transactions 44 2005 8191
Abstract
In this work, a globally linearized controller GLC for a first-order nonlinear system with dead time is proposed.
This is similar to the GLC proposed by Ogunnalke Ind. Eng. Chem. Process. Des. Dev. 25, 241248 1986 for
nonlinear systems without dead time. Two methods are proposed. One is based on the Smith prediction from the model
in the transformed domain and the other is based on Newtons extrapolation method. The simulation study is made on
the conical tank level process and the results are compared with those obtained using a conventional PI controller and
the Smith PI controller based on the transfer function model about the operating point 39%. Finally, experimental
results on the laboratory conical tank level process are also given. 2005 ISAThe Instrumentation, Systems, and
Automation Society.
Keywords: Nonlinear control; GLC; Conical tank
1. Introduction
Time delays occur in many control applications,
typically as a result of transporting material or energy. When the time delay is significantly greater
than the process dominant time constant, serious
degradation of the closed-loop performance can be
expected with traditional controllers. For instance,
the traditional PI controller results in very sluggish
closed-loop response 1. Faster reference tracking
and disturbance rejection can be achieved by the
Smith predictor. However, its main weakness,
compared to the PI controller, is a lack of robustness to variations in process parameters 2,3.
The traditional and easiest approach to the controller design problem for nonlinear systems in*Corresponding
author.
annandanatarajan@yahoo.com
address:
0019-0578/2005/$ - see front matter 2005 ISAThe Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society.
82
present paper, it is shown that how transformations may be found which transform the nonlinear
system with dead time into one that is ideally linear. The approach is based on the hypothesis that a
system which is nonlinear with dead time in its
original variables is linear in some transformation
of the predicted future original variables. Constructive methods for finding the appropriate transformations are presented. The design of a controller for the linear transformed system may then be
carried out with a great deal of facility. The resulting controller will of course be nonlinear when
recast in terms of the original system variables. In
the present work, the specific problem of a conical
tank level process system having dead time is used
to illustrate the potentials of this approach. An example simulation and real time implementation of
the controller on a conical tank laboratory level
process are presented.
dz dg dx
.
dt dx dt
From Eqs. 1 and 2
dx
c 1 f 1 x c 2 f 2 x,u tT d .
dt
Fx,u tT d c 1 f 1 x c 2 f 2 x,u tT d ,
2
where f 1 ( x ) is a function of x alone and
f 2 x,u ( tT d) is a function of both x and
u ( tT d) . Both f 1 and f 2 are taken to be nonlinear. c 1 and c 2 are constants.
zg x
dz
ab v ,
dt
dx
Fx,u tT d ,
dt
dz
dg
dg
c 1 f 1
c 2 f 2
.
dt
dx
dx
Let
c 1 f 1 x
dg
a
dx
and
c 2 f 2 x,u tT d
dg
b v .
dx
dz
ab v .
dt
10
g x
c1
f dx x .
1
11
83
u t
c 1 f 1 b v tT d
.
c 2 a f 2 x tT d
f ph f p h f p higher-order terms,
13
12
Let
u t q ,
where v ( tT d) is the predicted manipulated variable and f 2 x ( tT d) is the predicted function of
state variable. In deriving Eq. 12, the specific
case of f 2 ( x ) u ( tt d) is considered than
f 2 x,u ( tt d) . In general case u has to be solved
numerically.
Thus a nonlinear controller u ( t ) is designed
based on a variable transformation for the firstorder nonlinear process with dead time. The controller performance is tested by simulation of the
conical tank level process. The proposed controller is expected to be highly robust when the operating point of the process is shifted over the entire
span of the tank. q ( ) is the transformation which
transforms the linear controller output in the transformed domain into the nonlinear controller output in the original domain.
A PI controller is designed and interfaced with
the pseudolinear system shown in Fig. 2. This is
made possible by the use of the transformations
g ( x ) and u ( t ) . x * is the set point and z * is the set
point in the transformed domain. Thus the entire
design procedure boils down to the determination
of g ( x ) to compute the corresponding u ( t ) by using Eq. 12.
84
Fig. 3. Block diagram representation of the variable transformation predictor. The PI controller is designed for the
linear system Eq. 10.
dh u tT d u d tT d c h
,
dt
R2 2
2h
H
14
where H, R, c are total height, top radius, and outflow valve coefficient of the conical tank, respectively. h, u, and u d are liquid level, inflow rate, and
disturbance of the conical tank level process, respectively. The transformation g ( h ) transforms
the nonlinear system represented by Eq. 14 into
a linear system. The transformed system is a
pseudolinear system, whose mathematical model
is
dz
ab v .
dt
G s b/s.
16
The forward path transfer function of the closedloop system with a PI controller is
G f s bK c 1T is /T is 2 .
17
T i and K c can be obtained by assuming a closedloop time constant and damping factor 9. Interestingly, the tuning parameters are independent of
local time constant and local gain of the process.
The transformation which transforms the present
process in to a linear system is
g h
2aR 2
5H 2 c
h 5/2.
18
4. Tuning of controllers
15
Table 1
ISE of Regulatory responses for 15% decrease in load.
Table 2
ISE of Regulatory responses for 15% increase in load.
Operating
point
39%
24%
54%
ZN
PI
Smith
PI
GLC
Operating
point
1285
2324
1224
3269
2762
3740
928
1492
518
39%
24%
54%
ZN
PI
Smith
PI
GLC
1236
1780
1221
3367
2991
3779
807
2162
448
85
Table 3
ISE of servo responses for 20% increase in set point.
Operating
point
39%
24%
54%
ZN
PI
Smith
PI
GLC
23670
19260
32030
35480
27530
47660
16090
15780
16260
a better response 26% lesser ISE than the conventional Smith predictor. The ZN-PI controller
gives an oscillatory response. Regulatory responses for a 15% decrease in load at 54% operating point but tuned at 39% refer to Fig. 9 show
that the proposed controller gives an improved
performance 58% lesser ISE while the conventional Smith predictor 205% higher ISE provides
a poorer performance than the ZN-PI controller.
Table 4
ISE of servo responses for 20% decrease in set point.
Operating
point
39%
24%
54%
ZN
PI
Smith
PI
GLC
46920
18918
28980
28900
14260
36270
20030
10930
18420
86
proved response 31% lesser ISE than the conventional Smith predictor. The ZN-PI controller
provides an oscillatory response. Servo responses
for a 20% increase in the set point at nominal operating point 39% refer to Fig. 12 show that the
proposed controller improves the response 32%
lesser ISE while the conventional Smith predictor
50% higher ISE gives a poorer performance than
the ZN-PI controller.
87
88
89
Fig. 18. Experimental servo responses of conical tank level process for set point changes at nominal operating point 39%
using GLC VTP.
Fig. 19. Experimental regulatory responses of conical tank level process for increase in load changes at nominal operating
point 39% using GLC VTP.
90
Fig. 20. Experimental regulatory responses of conical tank level process for decrease in load changes at nominal operating
point 39% using GLC VTP.
1 Meyer, C., Seborg, D. E., and Wood, R. K., A comparison of the Smith predictor and conventional feedback control. Chem. Eng. Sci. 31, 775778 1976.
2 Hagglund, T., A predictive PI controller for processes
with long dead times. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 12 1,
57 60 1992.
3 Tan, K. K., Lee, T. H., and Leu, F. M., Predictive PI
versus Smith control for dead-time compensation. ISA
Trans. 40, 1729 2001.
4 Schneider, D. M., Control of process with time delays.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 24 2, 186 191 1988.
5 Ray, W. H., Advanced Process Control. McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1981.
R.
Anandanatarajan obtained his B.Sc. Mathematics
from Madras University in
1984, Bachelor degree in Electrical from the Institution of
Engineers India in 1989,
M.Sc. Mathematics and M.E.
Process control and Instrumentation from Annamalai
University in 1994 and 1998,
respectively, Ph.D. from Anna
University in 2003. Presently
he is assistant professor of the
Department of Instrumentation
Engineering, Pondicherry Engineering College. He has authored two
books titled Signals & Systems and Computer Peripherals and Interfacing.
91
M. Chidambaram obtained
his B.E. Chemical from Annamalai University, M.E.
Chemical and Ph.D. from Indian Institute of Science in
1977 and 1984, respectively.
He was faculty member in IITBombay during 1984 to 1991.
Since September 1991 he has
been a faculty member in IITMadras. He had been head of
the Department of Chemical
Engineering during the period
October 2000 to October 2003.
He has authored three books: Nonlinear Process Control. John Wiley,
1996; Applied Process Control. Allied Publishers, 1998; Computer
Control of Processes. Narosa Publishers, 2002. He has published 135
research publications in journals and 45 papers in conferences proceedings. His areas of interest in process control are PID control, relay
tuning, and nonlinear control.