To Design Fuzzy Model Based PID Controller For Level Process

Ashwini More, Maithilee Kulkarni, Pradeep Laghule, Aniket Digrase, Siddhesh Dani1

Abstract Water level control is highly important in indus- II. PID C ONTROLLER T UNING
trial applications such as boilers in nuclear plants. The fuzzy
logic controller is based on Mamdani type Fuzzy Inference Ziegler-Nichols formulas for specifying the controllers are
System. The fuzzy controller has two inputs, error in level based on plant step responses. The rst method is applied to
and rate of change of error and one output, valve position. plants with step responses of the form displayed in Figure
The fuzzzy controller is implemented in MATLAB and then This type of response is typical of a rst order system with
simulated in simulink to test the behaviour of the system when
inputs change. The response of the fuzzy controller is then transportation delay, such as that induced by uid ow from a
compared with a conventional PID controller. The results are tank along a pipe line. It is also typical of a plant made up of
shown sequentially and the effectiveness of the controller is a series of rst order systems. The response is characterized
illustrated. by two parameters, L the delay time and T the time constant.
These are found by drawing a tangent to the step response at
I. I NTRODUCTION its point of inection and noting its intersections with the time
axis and the steady state value. The plant model is therefore:
In many industrial processes, control of liquid level is
required. It was reported that about 25 percent of emer- keLs
G(s) = (1)
gency shutdowns in the nuclear power plant are caused Ts + 1
by poor control of the steam generator water level. Such
where, k = 0.2075,L = 5,T = 81.9 Therefore the plant is
shutdowns greatly decrease the plant availability and must
be minimized. Water level control system is a very complex 0.2075e5s
system, because of the nonlinearities and uncertainties of G(s) = (2)
81.9s + 1
a system. Currently, constant gain PI controllers are used
in nuclear organizations for boiler water level control at Ziegler and Nichols derived the following control tuning
high power operations. However, at low power operations, PI parameters for PID controller:
controllers can not maintain water level properly. A need for (1, 2)(T )
performance improvement in existing water level regulators K(p) = (3)
L
is therefore needed.
1
K(i) = (4)
A. Types Of Fuzzy Logic Systems (2)(T )

There are two major types of control rules in fuzzy control: 1

K(d) = (5)
1) Mamdani System This method is widely accepted for (0.5)(T )
capturing expert knowledge. It allows us to describe the
expertise in more intuitive, more human-like manner. How- Substituting the parameters of the model in the given
ever, Mamdani-type FIS entails a substantial computational
burden.
2) Takagi-Sugeno: This method is computationally effi- 50

cient and works well with optimization and adaptive tech- 100

niques, which makes it very attractive in control problems, 150

particularly for dynamic non-linear systems. These adap- 200

250
tive techniques can be used to customize the membership
300
functions so that fuzzy system best models the data. The
350
most fundamental difference between Mamdani-type FIS and
400

Sugeno-type FIS is the way the crisp output is generated

450

from the fuzzy inputs. While Mamdani-type FIS uses the 500

technique of defuzzification of a fuzzy output, Sugeno-type 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

FIS uses weighted average to compute the crisp output.

1 Ashwini More, Maithilee Kulkarni, Pradeep Laghule, Aniket Digrase,
Siddhesh Dani are students of the department of Instrumentation and
Control, College of Engineering, Pune - 411 005, Maharashtra, India
ashu.more1823@gmail.com
Fig. 1. Zeigler-Nichols method 1
equations to find the tuning parameters of PID controller,
we get following results Kp = 19.65; Ki = 0.10; Kd =0.40.
III. DESIGNING OF FUZZY LOGIC CONTROLLER
50

A. The FIS Editor

We have defined two Inputs for the Fuzzy Controller. 100

One is Level of the liquid in the Tank denoted as level

150

and the other one is rate of change of liquid in the Tank

denoted as rate. Both these Inputs are applied to the Rule 200

Editor. According to the Rules written in the Rule Editor the

controller takes the action and governs the opening of the 250

Valve which is the Output of the controller and is denoted 300

by valve.
350
B. The Rule Editor 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Constructing rules using the graphical Rule Editor in-
terface is fairly self-evident. Based on the descriptions of
the input and output variables defined with the FIS Editor,
the Rule Editor allows to construct the rule statements
automatically, by clicking on and selecting one item in
each input variable box, one item in each output box, and
one connection item.Choosing none as one of the variable
qualities will exclude that variable from a given rule.
1) Rule 1: If (level is okay) then(valve is nochange)
2) Rule 2: If (level is low) then(valve is openfast)
3) Rule 3: If (level is high) then(valve is closefast)
4) Rule 4: If (level is okay) then(valve is nochange)
5) Rule 5: If (level is okay) and(rate is positive)then(valve
is closeslow)
6) Rule 6: If (level is okay) and(rate is nega-
tive)then(valve is openslow)
7) Rule 7: If (level is okay) and(rate is zero)then(valve is
nochange)
8) Rule 8: If (level is low) and(rate is zero)then(valve is
openfast)
9) Rule 9: If (level is high) and(rate is zero)then(valve is
closefast)
C. Comparison
Shows the comparison of fuzzy and PID controller tran-
sient response for desired level. We can use fuzzy controller
for rapid control (coarse adjustment) and then use PID
controller for accurate control (fine tune). . The result of
the simulation shows that as far as no balance and complex
mathematical models, such a fuzzy control is similar to
the human way of thinking. And it is suitable for coarse
control at the beginning of the operation to rapidly control.
And in order to get better control accuracy, PID control
program used as a fine tune. On the other hand, the fuzzy
and PID control program presented has a wide practical value
because of the fuzzy control program does not rely on the
mathematical model. It can be tried with a fuzzy controller
which generates the rule base based on the PID scheme.
An optimized FLC by tuning the fuzzy parameters may be
employed to get the better accuracy.
IV. R ESULTS AND C ONCLUSION
Overall the projects feasibility lies in the simplicity of its
implementation. The advantages of a fuzzy based controller
over a PID controller are derived from results. Better control
Fig. 2. Simulink Block Model
performance, robustness and overall stability can be expected
from the fuzzy controller. Fuzzy controllers have better
stability, small overshoot, and fast response. From the results
the following parameters can be observed. Hence, fuzzy
logic controller is introduced for controlling fluid levels.
1) Even though, the PID controller produces the response
with lower delay time and rise time compared with fuzzy
logic controller, but it offers very high settling time due
to the oscillatory behavior in transient period. It has severe
oscillations with a very high peak overshoot of 162) The
proposed Fuzzy logic controller can effectively eliminate
these dangerous oscillations and provides smooth operation
in transient period. Hence, it is concluded that the PID
controller could not be used for the control of non-linear
processes like fluid levels. So, the proposed fuzzy logic based
controller design can be a preferable choice for this.
A. Future Scope
As a future scope of this work the FLC can be imple-
mented in a microcontroller with additional set of rules for
more accurate control and can be used in various applications
in industry and household. The controller can also be tested
with periodically varying liquid level tracking applications.
R EFERENCES
[1] www.ni.com(technical support,Examples).
[2] www.google.com(SCCT Development Team).
[3] Fuzzy logic with Engineering Applications-Timothy J.ROSS