International Journal of Engineering Sciences, 2(5) May 2013, Pages: 191-203

TI Journals
ISSN
2306-6474

International Journal of Engineering Sciences

www.waprogramming.com

PID Controllers and Algorithms:

Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics
Systems Design - Part II
Farhan A. Salem 1, Albaradi A. Rashed 2
1

Mechatronics Sec. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Taif University, 888, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Alpha Center for Engineering Studies and Technology Researches, Amman, Jordan.
2
Mechatronics Sec. Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Taif University, 888, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
1

AR TIC LE INF O

AB STR AC T

Keywords:

Mechatronics systems are supposed to operate with exceptional high levels of accuracy and speed
despite adverse effects of system nonlinearities and uncertainties, therefore the most critical
decision in the Mechatronics design process is the selection, design and integration in overall
system, of two directly related to each other sub-systems; control unit and control algorithm, there
are many controllers, algorithms and design techniques that can be applied in mechatronic system
design, each has its advantages and disadvantages, Choosing a specific controller for a specific
application is often based on the designer's past experience and sometimes intuition, and it entails
as much art as it does science, engineering practice usually dictates that one chooses the simplest
controller that meets all the design specifications, taking into account that the final aim is to obtain
the best cost/benefit ratio and therefore the simplest controller capable to obtain a satisfactory
performance should be preferred, This paper extends previous work [1] and shows some new
conclusions, also proposes new and simple PID design based on plant's damping ratio and
undamped natural frequency.

Mechatronics
PID Controller
Control Algorithm
Controller Design

2013 Int. j. eng. sci. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

1.

Introduction

The modern advances in information technology and decision making, as well as the synergetic integration of different fundamental
engineering domains caused the engineering problems to get harder, broader, and deeper. Problems are multidisciplinary and require a
multidisciplinary engineering systems approach to solve them, such approach is called mechatronics approach, and such modern
multidisciplinary systems are called mechatronics systems. Mechatronics is defined as multidisciplinary concept, it is synergistic
integration of precision engineering mechanical engineering, electric engineering, electronic systems, information technology, intelligent
control system, and computer hardware and software to manage complexity, uncertainty, and communication through the design and
manufacture of products and processes from the very start of the design process, thus enabling complex decision making , exceptional
levels of accuracy and speed of high-tech equipment including ability to perform complicated and precise movements of high quality.
Mechatronics systems are supposed to operate with high accuracy and speed despite adverse effects of system nonlinearities and
uncertainties, since achieving and verifying accuracy in Mechatronics systems' performance is of concern, the most critical decision in the
Mechatronics design process is the selection and design of two directly related to each other sub-systems; control unit (physical controller)
and control algorithm. There are many control strategies options that may be more or less appropriate to a specific type of application each
has its advantages and disadvantages. The designer must select the best one for specific application, most are introduced, discussed and
tested in many texts including [1-16]. Controllers' options including but not limited to: Microcontroller/microprocessor (e.g. PICmicrocontroller), Programmable logic controller (PLC), computer control, desktop/laptop, Digital Signal Processing (DSP) integrated
circuits. Also, algorithms options including but not limited to: ON-OFF control, P, PI, PD and PID control, lead, lag, intelligent control,
Fuzzy control, adaptive control, Neural network control. In part(I)[1] introduced main structures, properties, implementation and design
procedures of P, D, I, PI, PD and PID control, lead, lag, and lead-lag controllers. This paper extends previous work [1] and shows some
new conclusions concerning PID controllers, also proposes new and simple PID design based on plant's damping ratio and undamped
natural frequency.
The accuracy control system design (accuracy of selected gains, poles and zeros) to meet all desired specifications, depends on many
factors including; the accuracy of derived mathematical model, the accuracy and limitations of applied design methodology, tools, and
designer's skills and experience, in the following discussion assuming the mathematical model in terms of transfer function is accurate
enough to processed to control design process. The following three primarily graphical methods are available to the control system analysis
and design: (1) The root-locus method, (2) Bode- plot representations, (3) Nyquist diagrams [1].

* Corresponding author.
Email address: salem_farh@yahoo.com

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

192

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

2.

Control system strategies, selection & design methodologies

The control system strategies available for control-system design are bounded only by one's imagination, there are many control strategies
that may be more or less appropriate to a specific type of application, each has its advantages and disadvantages; the designer must select
the best one for specific application, the choice of the controller type is an integral part of the overall controller design,. Choosing a specific
controller for a specific application is often based on the designer's past experience and sometimes intuition, and it entails as much art as it
does science, engineering practice usually dictates that one chooses the simplest controller that meets all the design specifications, taking
into account that the final aim is to obtain the best cost/benefit ratio and therefore the simplest controller capable to obtain a satisfactory
performance should be preferred, in most cases, the more complex a controller is, the more it costs, the less reliable it is, and the more
difficult it is to design. The main factors that might influence the decision on selecting certain control unit and algorithm include;
simplicity, space and integration, processing power, environment (e.g. industrial, soft.. ), precision, robustness, unit cost, cost of final
product, programming language, safety criticality of the application, required time to market, reliability, number of products to be produced
and designer's past experience and sometimes intuition. Based on all mentioned, the following simplified guide for control algorithm
selection, can be suggested; (1) for processes that can operate with continuous cycling, the relatively inexpensive two position controller is
adequate.(2) For processes that cannot tolerate continuous cycling, a P-controller is often employed. (3) For processes that can tolerate
neither continuous cycling nor offset error, a PI controller can be used. (4) For processes that need improved stability and can tolerate an
offset error, a PD-controller is employed. (5) However, there are some processes that cannot tolerate offset error, yet need good stability,
the logical solution is to use a control mode that combines the advantages of the three controllers' action [1].

3.

PID-Controller & design procedures

Based on [1], combining all three controllers (P, I, and D-controllers), results in the PID controller, the output of PID controller is equal to
the sum of three signals: The signal obtained by multiplying the error signal by a constant gain K P, and The signal obtained by
differentiating and multiplying the error signal by KD and The signal obtained by integrating and multiplying the error signal by K I, and
given by Eq.(1), taking Laplace transform, and solving for transfer function , gives ideal PID transfer function given by Eq.(2)

u (t ) K P e (t ) K D

de (t )
1
K I e (t )dt U (s ) K P E (s ) K D E (s )s K I E (s )
dt
s

(1)

U (s ) E (s ) K P I K D s
s

(2)

The PID- controller remains the most popular in industry; studies even indicate that approximately 90% of all industrial controllers are of
the PID-type [27]. Reasons for this are the simplicity of its control law and the few tuning parameters. Hundreds of tools, methods and
theories are available for this purpose. However, finding appropriate parameters for the PID controller is still a difficult task, so in practice
control engineers still often use trial and error for the tuning process [28]. Not all manufactures produce PIDs that conform to the ideal
'textbook' structure, so before commencing tuning controller (controller setting) is important to know the configuration of the PID
algorithm. There are three different types of PID algorithm; (see table 1); (1) Ideal (2) Series (also called "series" or "interacting"
or "analog" or "classical") (3) Parallel (also called "non-interacting", "independent" and "gain independent), The difference
between these algorithms is how the P, I and D gains affect each other. The only way to Figure out which PID algorithm is used, is
to look at the transfer function equation for the given PID Controller. In [1] the derivations of transfer function of these forms are
introduced. PID controller design can be determined by a number of alternative techniques, including but not limited to the following: (1)
Direct Synthesis (DS) method, (2) Internal Model Control (IMC) method, (3) Controller tuning relations, (4) Computer simulation.
Based on table's 1 equations, for converting the parameters between the parallel and the series form of the PID controller the following
relationships are used:

KP _series

4.

KP _ paralle 1 14TD _ parallel /TI

2

,T

I _series

TI _ paralle 1 14TD_ parallel /TI

TI _ paralle 1 14TD _ parallel /TI

,TD_series
2
2

PID Control with Derivative in the Feedback Loop, PI-D controller Design for reducing derivative kick.

Derivative kick is very similar in origin to proportional kick, where any change in setpoint causes an instantaneous change in error, this
number is fed into the PID equation which results in an undesirable kick in the output. Since there is always a jump (Kick) in the error
signal, when system is subjected to step input, the derivative term in PID-controller may not be desirable in cascade with controlled system,
and is preferred to remove the D-term negative effect to be in the feedback path with controlled system, where PID controller is restructure,
by placing the derivative term, D-Controller, into the feedback path, two configurations are proposed shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

193

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

Table:1. Types of PID algorithm

Type
Parallel PID
or
noninteracting

Ideal
PID

Series
or
Interacting
PID

Time domain

Laplace domain

de (t )
dt
1
de (t )
u (t ) K P e (t )
e
(
t
)
dt

T
D
TI
dt

Block diagram 2 representations

KI
KDs
s
1
G PID (s ) K P
T D s
TI s

u (t ) K P e (t ) K I e (t )dt K D

G PID (s ) K P

1
de (t )
u (t ) K P e (t )
e (t )dt K D

K
dt

1
U s K P 1
T D s
TI s

1
de (t )
u (t ) K P e (t )
e (t )dt 1 K D
KI
dt

1
1
1 T D s
TI s
U s K P
T s
1 D
KD

For configuration shown in Figure xxx, PI terms is applied on error, while D terms is applied on controlled variable, this is therefore a
standard feature of most commercial controllers, this controller is called PI-D controller, the simplified transfer function is given by:
u (t ) K P e (t ) K I e (t )dt K D

dc (t )
1
dc (t )
u (t ) K P e (t ) e (t )dt T D

dt
T
dt

This can be rewritten as follows:

K s
U (s ) K P I E ( s ) D C ( s )
s

Ts 1
The PI transfer function in terms of integral time is given by Eq.(4) , The D-controller transfer function in terms of derivative time is given
is given by Eq.(3):

G D (s )

Td s
1 Td s / N

G PI (s ) K P

KI
K
1
K P (1 I ) K P (1
)
s
KPs
TI s

(3)
(4)

The controller and feedback transfer functions can be equivalently written as next; moving inner a summing junction in Figure 19(a), to the
left, gives two feedback loops the equivalent to inner loop is given by:
Td s
Td s
*

1
1 T d s / N

1 Td s
K P (1
)
K P 1
1
TI s
T
N

I s
1

Further simplification gives, the following in the feedback [24], (see Figure 19(b)):
TD

Kp
2
s KP)
1
T I T D s K P T I
N
N

Feedback , H (s )
T s

K P T I s 1 D 1
N

(5)

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

194

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

For configuration shown in Figure 2, PI terms is applied on error, while D terms is applied on controlled variable the closed loop transfer
function is given by
C (s )
1
1
R (s ) T I s

K P G plant (s )

1
1 1
T D s K P G plant (s )

T
s

Figure 1. PI-D controller, PI term is applied on error, while D terms is applied on controlled variable

Figure 2. PI-D Controller,

5.

PID Control with Proportional and Derivative in the Feedback Loop, I-PD controller

The configurations are shown in Figure 3, the advantages of this configuration is Control signal has less sharp changes than with other
structures, the transfer function is given by:
U (s ) K P

1
1
R (s ) K P 1
T D s B (s )
TI s
T
s

The closed loop transfer function is given by:

K P G plant (s )
C (s )

R (s )

TI s

1
1 K P G plant (s ) 1
TD s
T
s

Figure 3

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

195

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

6.

Equivalent design of PID in forward path and PI-D controller

If a PID controller, with derivative action in a forward path, is designed, then an equivalent PID controller with the derivative action in the
feedback path (PI-D controller) can be obtained by finding the roots (solving) algebraic equation given by Eq.(6):

x 2 T I x T I T D 0, x 1,2

T I T I T I 4T D

(6)

Based on table 1 equations, a desirable design when Eq.(6) have real roots ( when TI 4TD, that is when poles and zeros of the parallel
form are rea) , and the equivalent parameters of PI-D controller's parameters T I ,T D ,K P can be calculated by Eq.( 7) :

T I

T I T I T I 4T D
2

,T D

T I T I T I 4T D
2

,K P

2T I K P

(7)

T I T I T I 4T D

The parameters of PID controller in forward path, can be obtained from PI-D controller's parameters by next equations :

T I T I T D ,T D

T
T I *T D
,K P K P 1 DI
T I T D
T I

6.1 The setpoint weighted PID, (Controller with filters)

The methods proposed by Astrom and Hagglund [30], it is common for the closed-loop system to track a constant reference input. In this
case, the reference input value is called a setpoint. When U(s) is the control signal and E(s) is the control error (E(s) = R(s) C(s)). The
reference value is also called the setpoint. Setpoint weighting uses different multipliers (weights, parameters) for the error depending on
which element of the controller it is used in. The setpoint weighted PID is a generalization of the PID, its configuration is shown in Figure
4 , where parameters (FD , FI ,FP ) are as yet undetermined, the control signal is given by:

u (t ) K P e P (t ) K I e I (t )dt K D

de D (t )
dt

The error in the integral term must be the true control error to avoid steady-state control errors. These parameters do not affect the response
to load disturbances and measurement noise. Set-point weighting is applied to reduce the overshoot, steady state error, in the output
following step changes in the set point.
Tuning The PID controller with set-point weighting is tuned in the following steps:
a) Controller parameters (KP, KI KD) are tuned for good regulation.
b) Weights (FD , FI ,FP) are adjusted in order to set zeros of the closed-loop transfer function and thus to improve the tracking
behavior of the control system Usually the values of weights FD , FI ,FP is between 0 and 1.
c) In some PID controller implementations, in order to avoid derivative and proportional kicks, weights are set to FD = 0 and FP = 0

Figure 4. setpoint weighted PID

7.

PID-controller design applying root locus

Equation (2) can be manipulated to result in the following form

K
K s 2 K Ps K I
G PID (s ) K P I K D s D

s
s

K
K
K D s 2 P s I
KD
KD

(9)

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

196

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

Equation (9) is second order system, with two zeros and one pole at origin, and can be expressed to have the following form:

G PID

K D s Z PI

s Z PD

K D s Z PI

s Z PD
s

G PD (s )G PI (s )

(10)

Which indicates that PID transfer function is the product of transfer functions PI and PD, Implementing these two controllers jointly and
independently will take care of both controller design requirements, the design algorithm for a PID controller is obtained by combining the
design algorithms for PD and PI controllers
a) First of all, it is important to obtain the uncompensated open loop response of the system, to evaluate and Check the transient
response and steady state performance characteristics of the original system and determine what to improve.
b) Construct an accurate root-locus plot, (or, simply plot pole-zero diagram of the open-loop plant transfer function)
c) Design a PD controller to meet the transient response specifications e.g. the overshoot, to improve the rise time as explained in
[1]
d) Design a PI controller to meet the steady-state specifications without appreciably affecting the transient response (e.g. eliminate
the steady-state error), as explained in [1].
e) Find the proportional gain KP , applying angle criterion .
f) Check that the compensated system has the desired specifications

8.

Straight forward design of PID controller

a) Constructing the controller transfer function of the form of K(s) ,as explained in [1]
b) If the system is type zero, add a pole at s=0, (add an Integrator resulting in PI controller).
c) If you are allowed one zero, cancel the slowest stable pole . (add an differentiator, resulting in PD controller). added PD one zero
d)
e)

cancels this stable pole and move it further left (faster) at 10* Z , the root locus plot would shift to the left, in result the system
response gets speeded up .
If you are allowed two zeros, cancel the two slowest stable poles. (add PID controller), added PID two zero cancels these two
slowest stable pole and move it further left (faster)
Find gain K applying angle criterion.

For example , for the zero system given by the below transfer function,
5
G (s )
(s 1)(s 2)(s 5)
a) IF it is required to improve ( reduce ) state error,
Since it is type zero the we add pole at s = 0 and gain K, resulting in PI controller, to find gain K we apply magnitude criterion. The PI
transfer function will be given by:

G s K/s
b) IF it is required to improve transient specification, This means designer is allowed one zeros by adding PD controller
Cancel the slowest stable pole; the slowest pole is at -1 and move it to 10*1 = 10. The PD transfer function will be given by:
G(s) = K( s+10)
Then find gain K applying angle criterion.
c) IF it is required to improve transient as well steady state specification, this means designer is allowed two zeros by
adding PID controller
Cancel the two slowest stable poles; the slowest two poles are -1 and -2 The PID transfer function will be given by:
K (s Z 1 )(s Z 2 ) K (s 1)(s 2)
G PID (s )

s
s
d) Find gain K applying angle criterion.

9.

Internal Model Control (IMC) design approach

It is comprehensive model-based design method, it was developed by Morari and coworkers [ 29]. The internal model principle states that
the control can be achieved only if the control system encapsulates, either implicitly or explicitly, some representation of the process to be
controlled, the internal model control, IMC, relies on this principle. Applying IMC will result in improving system response, mainly
reducing overshoot, rise time and settling time and disturbance rejection. The general block diagram structure of internal model control is
shown in Figure 5(a), where controller, Gc(s) is used to control the actual process Gp(s), and the process model Gpm(s), and D(s) is
unknown disturbance affecting the process. Designing of IMC controller is simple and easy; first by factoring process model Gpm(s) into
two terms invertible and noninvertible, where the noninvertible terms are those terms of Gpm(s) that if inverted will lead to instability and
reliability, gives:
inv
non inv
G pm (s ) G pm
(s ) *G pm
(s )

By setting controller transfer function, Gc(s) to be the inverse of the invertible term of process model, we have:

(11)

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

197

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

Gc (s )=

1
inv
G pm
(s )

To obtain a practical IMC controller, Gc(s) is set to be in series with a transfer function of the low pass filter, Gfilter(s) , and the practical
IMC controller is given by multiplication to give:

G IMC (s )= G c (s ) * G filter (s )

G filter (s )
inv
G pm
(s )

The simplest form of the filter is given by (28), where n is the order of the filter and is chosen to result in proper and stable G IMC(s), and
is the filter parameter that has an inverse relationship with the speed of the close loop response, also low pass filter will help to minimize
the discrepancies between the process and model at high frequency:

G filter (s )=

s 1

(12)

The structure shown in Figure 5(a) can be simplified and reduced to conventional closed loop structure shown in Figure. 5(b)(c), therefore
used to generate settings for PID controller, given by:
G PID (s )=

G IMC (s )

1 G IMC (s )G pm (s )

(13)

G filter (s )
inv
non _ inv
G pm
(s ) 1 G pm
(s )G filter (s )

1
K p 1
Td s
Ti s

Substitute plant motor model equation in Eq.(12), the IMC- PID tuning parameters KP, KI, and KD are obtained.
D(s)

D(s)

+
R(s)

Controller
Gc(s)

U(s)

+
Process
Gp(s)

C(s)

R(s)

Controller
G c(s)

U(s)

+
Process
Gp (s)

C(s)

+
Process Model
Gpm (s)

Process Model
Gpm(s)

Figure 5(a) Basic structure of internal model controller.

R(s)

+
-

Controller
GPID(s)

U(s)

Figure 5(b) Equivalent simplification.

C(s)
Process
Gp (s)

Figure 5(c) IMC tuned PID design.

Figure 5(d) Response for IMC compared with PID

10. ZieglerNichols Tuning Formula (rules) for PID controller design

Two important PID controller gain tuning methods were published in 1942 by John G. Ziegler and Nathaniel B. Nichols intended, based on
the transient response specifications of a given plant, to achieve a fast closed-loop step response without excessive oscillations and
excellent disturbance rejection. The two approaches are classified under the general heading of Ziegler-Nichols tuning methods. ZieglerNicols suggested rules that can be used to determine the values of proportional gain KP , the derivative time TD and integral time TI,
mainly based on the value of proportional gain KP that results in undamped response ( marginary stable system) [26].The first approach is
based on closed-loop concepts requiring the computation of the ultimate gain and ultimate period. The second approach is based on open
loop concepts relying on reaction curves. The Ziegler-Nichols tuning methods are based on assumed forms of the models of the process,
but the models do not have to be precisely known. Both methods are aimed to obtain 25% maximum overshoot in step response and
acceptable settling time.

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

198

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

Here it is important to consider the following:

a) The PID controller designed using Ziegler-Nicols, will result in 10% to 60% maximum overshoot in step response, if the
b)

overshoot is excessive, it is always possible to make fine tuning so that the closed loop system will exhibits satisfactory transient
response.
Controllers tuned using these procedures are tuned for control, not tracking. Thus, controllers with parameters tuned according to
Ziegler-Nichols recommendation will perform well in disturbance rejection, but it will perform poor in tracking reference
changes.

10.1. First Ziegler-Nicols PID tuning method-rules: the s- shape curve rules (also called reaction curve)
This method is applied only if and only if the step response of the plant exhibits an s-shape curve (reaction curve) with no overshoot shown
in Figure 6(a), and is applied to plants with no integrators (1/s) , and no dominant complex poles. The s-shaped curve is characterized by
two constants ; the delay time L, and time constant T, these two constants can be determined by drawing a tangent line at the inflection
point of the s-shaped curve, and finding the intersection of the tangent line with time axis and steady state level K, (see Figure 6), then the
transfer function of these-shaped curve can be approximated by first order system with transport lag and given by:

C (s ) Ke Ls

R (s ) Ts 1
Ziegler-Nicols suggested that designer can set the values of PID controller gains (KP, K I, and K D) using two parameters ;( (see Figure 6) the
delay time L, and time constant T, according to formula shown in the Table 2(b) below, here notice that two tables are shown to obtain PID
controller transfer function in terms of KP ,T and L or in terms of KP, KI , and KD. The transfer function of PID control designed (tuned) by
first Ziegler-Nicols PID tuning rules, can be rewritten to have the forms:

1
G PID K P 1
T D s K P
TI s

T
G PID 1.2
L
TI s

1 2Ls 0.5 Ls

G PID

s
L

0.6T
s

Notice that this form of PID transfer function has one pole at origin and two zeros at -1/L . Where K is the proportional gain. TD : is the
derivative time. TI : is the integral time K D : derivative gain KP : proportional gain KI : integral gain
the PID transfer function can be rewritten to have the form:

G PID

K D s Z PI s Z PD
s

Where :Z PI PIcontrollerzero

KI
K
,and ZPD PD controller zero P
KP
KD

Figure 6. s-shaped curve with terminology [7] [31]

Table 2(b) PID parameters tuning rules based on KP ,T and L( see Figure 6)

Controller type

KP

TI

TD

T/L

PI

0.9 T/L

L/0.3

PID

1.2 T/L

2L

0.5L

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

199

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

Table 2(b) PID parameters tuning rules based on KP ,T and L

Controller type

KP

KI

T/L

PI

0.9 T/L

0.27 T/L

PID

1.2 T/L

0.6 T/L2

KD
0
2

0
0.6T

10.2 Second Ziegler-Nicols PID tuning method-rules:

This method is based on the value of proportional gain K P that results in undamped response ( marginary stable system), that is sustained
oscillation( if the output does not exhibit oscillation for any value of proportional gain Kp , then this method does not apply ),the steps for
designing PID controller are:

a) Add proportional controller with Kp , to the plant.

b) Obtain closed loop transfer function T(s).
c) Increase the value of proportional gain Kp from zero to critical value Kcri , where the output first exhibits sustained oscillation
(see Figure 7).
Apply Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion, to determine the value of proportional gain K p that will result in undamped response. The
value of proportional gain K p, that will result in oscillation, is the critical proportional gain value Kcri , that will result in a row of zeros
in Routh table
d) Determine the period Pcri of the sustained oscillation at Kcri, the relation between wave period and frequency of oscillation is
given by:
2 2
Pcr

5
The frequency of oscillation can be obtained using Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion.

Figure 7. sustained oscillation with period Pci [7]

e)

Set the values of PID parameters ; Kp , TI and TD according to formula in table 2(c).The transfer function of PID control
designed (tuned) by second Ziegler-Nicols PID tuning rules, can be rewritten to have the following forms:

1
T T s 2 T I s 1
G PID K P 1
T D s K P I D
TI s
TI s

1
G PID 0.6K CT 1
0.125Pcr s
0.5
P
s

cr

f)
g)

G PID

G PID

K D s Z PI s Z PD
s

4
s

P
cr
0.075K cr Pcr
s

Substitute values in PID transfer function; evaluate the closed loop system performance specifications, particularly maximum
overshoot and settling time.
Tune PID controller parameters KP, KI, and KD to meet desired performance specifications ( 25% overshoot ) a fine tuning of KP,
TI , and TD , to change the locations of PID controller two zeros and one pole to meet design specifications , increasing the value
of the zeros can result in decreasing overshoot.

11. Cohein-Hrones-Reswick (CHR) Method

It is a modification of the Ziegler-Nichols method, emphasizes the set-point regulation or disturbance rejection. Compared with the
traditional ZieglerNichols tuning formula, the CHR method uses the time constant parameter TP , of the plant explicitly. In process
industry controller parameters are often tuned according to CHR recommendations, Where: TP is the time constant and is the dead time,(
see Figure 6). The CHR PID controller tuning formulas based on time parameters of open loop step reference change response are
summarized in Table 4 for set-point regulation and disturbance response in Table 5.. The more heavily damped closed-loop response,

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

200

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

which ensures, for the ideal plant model, the quickest response without overshoot is labeled with 0% overshoot, and the quickest
response with 20% overshoot is labeled with 20% overshoot, [ 31]. Chien, Hrones and Reswick gave also recommendation for the
choice of the type of the controller. Controller type is chosen, according to parameter R, from Table 3

Table 2. PID parameters tuning rules based on Kcri, and Pcri

Controller type

KP

TI

TD

0.5 Kcri

PI

0.45 Kcri

Pcri /1.2

PID

0.6 Kcri

(0.5) Pcri

0.125 Pcri

PID some overshoot

0.33 Kcri

2K/ Pcri

Pcri K/ 3

PID no overshoot

0.2 Kcri

2K / Pcri

Pcri K/ 3

Table 3. CHR recommendations for choice of controller type.

Parameter R ,

Controller type
P
PI
PID Parallel
Higher order

TP
1

R > 10
7.5 < R < 10
3< R < 7.5
R< 3

Table 4. CHR tuning formulae for set-point regulation ( for aperiodic response) TP is the time constant and is the dead time ( for parameter a , see Figure
6), notice that two expressions for calculating K are introduced

Controller type
P
PI
PID

With 0% overshoot
K
TI
0.3R/KP
0.3/a
0.35R/KP
1.2TP
0.35/a
0.6R/KP
TP
0.6/a

TD
0.5

With 20% overshoot

K
TI
0.7R/KP
0.7/a
0.6R/KP

0.6/a
0.95R/KP
1.35
0.95/a

Table 5. CHR tuning formulae for disturbance ( for aperiodic response)

Controller type
P
PI
PID

With 0% overshoot
K
TI
0.3R/KP
0.3/a
0.6R/KP
4TP
0.6/a
0.95R/KP
2.4TP
0.95/a

TD
0.42

TP is the time constant and

With 20% overshoot

K
TI
0.7R/KP
0.7/a
0.7R/KP
2.3
0.7/a
1.2 R/KP
2
1.2 /a

TD
0.47

is the dead time

TD
0.42

12. WangJuangChan Tuning Formula

Based on the optimum ITAE criterion (minimizing integral of time-weighted absolute error), the tuning algorithm proposed by Wang,
Juang, and Chan is a simple and efficient method for selecting the PID parameters. If plant parameters are known; TP is the time constant
and is the dead time, and steady state level K, (see Figure 6), the PID controller parameters are given by:
0.5307T P

0.7303
T P 0.5

KP
K (T P )

T I T P 0.5

TD

0.5T P
T P 0.5

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

201

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

13. PID controller design based of plant damping ratio and undamped natural frequency
Since PID transfer function is a second order system, it can be expressed in terms of damping ratio and undamped natural frequency to have
the following form:

K
K
K D s 2 P s I
K D s 2 2n s n2
K
K
KI
KDs 2 KPs KI

D
D
G PID (s ) K P
K Ds

s
s
s
s
By comparison, we have:
K D s 2 2n s n2
KI
KDs
s
s
KP
Where: 2 K I and
2n
n
KD
KD
G PID (s ) K P

Based on plant's damping ratio and undamped natural frequency, PID parameters can be chosen. The proposed procedure was derived as
follows, The KP gain can be assigned initial value of unity, then based on correlations obtained and given in Table 6 , the other two
parameters are calculated, and tuned for better performance, including to reduce, (remove) the overshoot in the system, tuning process is
accomplished by multiplying the three gains by proper factor.
Table 6

Plant

Selected PID parameters

KP
KI
KD
KP
K P n
1
2n
2

The simulink model shown in Figure 8(a), shows three second order system with different plant parameters and correspondingly different
plant's damping ratio and undamped natural frequency, the step response of these three systems when subjected to step input with original
calculated gains with initial value of KP =1 are shown in Figure 8(b), the step response of these three systems when subjected to step input
with gains multiplied by tuning factor equal to 0.1 are shown in Figure 8(c), the response curves show elimination of overshoots, but
slowing the system response.
To speed up response , based on trial and error the tuning factor is chosen to be different for each PID gain as follows; 0.5*KP , 0.5*KI and
0.58*KD the step response of these three systems when subjected to step input with gains are shown in Figure 8(d), response curves show
an improved system response without overshoot, to remove oscillation, in system (3) response, only the derivative gain KD can be tuned by
multiplication by factor between 0.5 to 1.5. For system (3) , Multiplying KD by factor of 1.5, will result in response shown in Figure 8(e).
Calculated values of parameters; , n , K P, KI and KD , multiplied by factor 0.5*KP , 0.5*KI and 0.58*KD are shown in Table 7. Based on
all this, The proposed PID design, based on system parameters, are summarized in Table 8
Table 7

Plant

Selected parameters

Sys (1)

0.5

Sys (2)

1.3416

2.234

Sys (3)

0.1768

1.4142

KP

KI

KD

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.5
0.1

0.5
0.0833

0.58
0.0167

0.5

0.4163

0.0968

0.1

0.39995

0.2000

0.5000

1.9997

3.1596

Table 8. PID gains calculations based on plant's damping ratio and undamped natural frequency

Plant

Selected PID parameters

KP
KI
0.5n
0.5
2

For soft tuning

n
0.1: 2
2

KD
0.5
2n

1
, 0.58 1.58
2n

Farhan A. Salem and Albaradi A. Rashed

202

Inter nat ional Journal of Engineer ing Sci ences, 2(5) May 2013

1
s2 +s+1

Kp

Ki
astep=10

output

sys (1)

'
Kd

s2 +6s+5

''

sys (2)

du/dt

.1

-'1

1
2s2+s+4

.'

sys.mat

1
s

sys (3)
1
feedback

Figure 8(a) Simulink model for testing proposed PID method

Sys (3) response

Sys (2) response

20
40
Time (seconds)

60

15

Magnitude

10

Sys (1) response

10

Magnitude

Magnitude

15

10

20
40
Time (seconds)

60

20
40
Time (seconds)

60

Figure 8(b) step response of three systems applying proposed PID design, without multiplication factor

Sys (1) response

Sys (2) response

50
Time (seconds)

100

10
Magnitude

Sys (3) response

10

Magnitude

Magnitude

10

200
400
Time (seconds)

600

50
Time (seconds)

100

Figure 8(c) step response of three systems applying proposed PID design, with multiplication factor of 0.1

50
Time (seconds)

100

Magnitude

Magnitude

10

5
10
15
Time (seconds)

20

10

5
10
15
Time (seconds)

Figure 8(d) applying proposed PID design, with multiplication factor of 0.5*KP , 0.5*KI and 0.58*KD
Sys (3) response
15

Magnitude

Magnitude

15

15

Sys (1) response

Sys (3) response

Sys (2) response

10

10

5
Time (seconds)

10

Figure 8(e) tuned response applying proposed PID controller design

20

PID Controllers and Algorithms: Selection and Design Techniques Applied in Mechatronics Systems Design - Part II

203

Internat ional Jour nal of Engineeri ng Science s, 2(5) May 2013

14. Manual PID Tuning

Usually choosing appropriate gains require trial and error processes. The best way to attack this tedious process is to adjust one variable
(KP, KD, or KI ) at a time and observe how changing one variable influences the system output.
a) set to zero both the I- and D-terms
b) The P-term is increased until the system oscillates, The P-term is increased slowly to increase the system response (to obtain a
desired fast response), but it must not become unstable.
c) The I-term term is increased to stop the oscillations. This will reduce the steady state error but may increase the overshoot. Here
notice that, faster system response may require some amount of overshoot.
When I-term is set to desired amount of overshoot and minimal state error,
d) The D-term is set until the system achieves an acceptable quick loop to its set-point. Increasing the D-term term will result in
decreasing the overshoot and yields higher gain with stability, but it may cause the system to be very sensitive to noise.

15. Conclusion
This paper extends previous work [1] that provided simple and user friendly controllers, algorithms and design guide that illustrates the
basics of controllers and control algorithms, their elements, effects, selection and main design techniques, this paper extends previous work
and shows some new conclusions, also proposes new and simple PID design procedure based on controlled process damping ratio and
undamped natural frequency to achieve response with acceptable stability, medium fastness smooth and without overshoot response

References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]

Farhan A. Salem , Controllers and control algorithms; selection and time domain design techniques applied in mechatronics systems design; Review,
and Research (I) , submitted to International Journal of Engineering Sciences, 2013
Robert H. Bishop (2006), Mechatronics an introduction , Taylor & Francis.
Devdas Shetty, Richard A. Kolk (1997), Mechatronics systems design, second edition, SI 2011, Cengage Learning.
De Silva, Clarence W., (2005) ,'Mechatronics : An Integrated Approach , CRC Press.
Godfrey C. Onwubolu, (2005), Mechatronics Principles and Applications'', Elsevier.
Ashish Tewari (2002), Modern Control Design with MATLAB and SIMULINK, John Wiley and sons, LTD, England.
Katsuhiko Ogata (1997), Modern control engineering'', third edition, Prentice hall.
Farid Golnaraghi, Benjamin C.Kuo, (2010), ''Automatic Control Systems'', John Wiley and sons INC .
Norman S. Nise, (2011), ''Control system engineering'', Sixth Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gene F. Franklin, J. David Powell, and Abbas Emami-Naeini, (2002) Feedback Control of Dynamic Systems'', 4th ed., Prentice Hall.
Bill Goodwine (2011), Engineering Differential Equations Theory and Applications, Springer.
Dale E. Seborg, Thomas F. Edgar, Duncan A. Mellichamp (2004), Process dynamics and control, second edition, Wiley.
Robert H. Bishop (2008), The Mechatronics handbook'' , second edition, CRC press.
Farhan A. Salem (2013), Precise analytical expressions for mechatronics systems time domain performance specifications and verification using
MATLAB / SIMULINK''' International Journal of Information Technology, Control and Automation ,Vol.3, No.1, January
Farhan A. Salem, Ahmad A. Mahfouz, Modeling and controller design for electric motor, using different control strategies and verification using
MATLAB/Simulink , Submitted and accepted , to I.J. Intelligent Systems and Applications, Submission ID 124 , 2012.
Hedaya Alasooly, Control of DC motor using different control strategies, global journal of technology and optimization 2011 .
D'Azzo, John Joachim, Houpis, Constantine H, Linear control system analysis and design: conventional and modern, 1988..
Farhan A. Salem, ' Precise analytical expressions for mechatronics systems time domain performance specifications and verification using '
International Journal of Information Technology, Control and Automation ,Vol.3, No.1, January 2013.
Farid Golnaraghi , Benjamin C. Kuo, Automatic control systems, John wiley &sons, 2000.
Douglas J. Cooper , '' practical process control' http://www. controlguru. com/wp/ p69.html
Richard M. Phelan, Automatic Control Systems, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1977 .
Mike Borrello, '' Controls, Modeling and Simulation '' http://www. Stablesimu lations .com
Zoran Gajic's, personal Home Page , www. ece.rutgers. edu/~gajic/ psfiles/ chap8.pdf
http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~murray/amwiki/index.php/PID_Control
Dingyu Xue, YangQuan Chen, and Derek P , '' Linear Feedback Control" Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 2007.
R.C. Dorf and R.H. Bishop, Modern Control Systems,10th Edition, Prentice Hall, 2008,
M. Lelic, A Reference Guide to PID Controllers in the Nineties, In Proceedings of IFAC Workshop: Past, Present and Future of PID Control. 2000.
Van der Zalm, tuning PID-type controllers: literature review , technical university of Eidhoven, 2004
Garcia, C. E.; Morari, M. Internal Model Controls1. A Unifying Review and Some New Results. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1982, 21, 308.
Astrom and Hagglund , IFAC Adaptive Control of Chemical Processes, Pergamon Press, New York, 1985, pp. 205210
Dingyu Xue, YangQuan Chen, and Derek P. Atherton "Linear Feedback Control : Analysis and Design with MATLAB " . 2000,