Presented by

Khizir Mahmud

Team Members
Khizir Mahmud
Zhang Man
Husan Ali
Wu Zhenyan

Northwestern Polytechnial University, P.R. China

 Outline
Introduction to Model-Based Control
Practical Open-Loop Controller Design
Generalization of the Open-Loop Control Design
Procedure
Model Uncertainty and Disturbances
Development of the IMC Structure
IMC Background
The IMC Structure
The IMC Design Procedure
Effect of Model Uncertainty and Disturbances
Improving Disturbance Rejection Design
Manipulated Variable Saturation
Summary
2
 Introduction to Model-Based
Control
In the previous discussion, we focused on techniques to tune PID
controllers. The closed-loop oscillation technique developed by
Ziegler and Nichols did not require a model of the process. Direct
synthesis, however, was based the use of a process model and a
desired closed-loop response to synthesize a control law; often this
resulted in a controller with a PID structure.
Here we develop a model-based procedure, where a process
model is "embedded" in the controller. By explicitly using process
knowledge, by virtue of the process model, improved performance
can be obtained.

3
 Contd

Figure 8-1. Stirred-tank heater.

Consider the stirred-tank heater control problem shown in Figure 8-1. We can use a model
of the process to decide the heat flow (Q) that needs to be added to the process to obtain a
desired temperature (T) trajectory, specified by the setpoint (Tsp). A simple steady-state
energy balance provides the steady-state heat flow needed to obtain a new steady-state
temperature, for example. By using a dynamic model, we can also find the time-dependent
heat profile needed to yield a particular time-dependent temperature profile.
4
Assume that the chemical process is represented by a linear
transfer function model, and that it is open-loop stable. The input-
output relationship is shown in Figure 8-2, where u is the input
variable (heat flow) and y is the output variable (temperature).

Figure 8-2. Open-loop process system.

When the process is at steady state, and there are no disturbances, then the inputs
and outputs are zero Consider a desired change in the output y; we refer to the desired
value of y as the setpoint, which is represented by r. We wish to design an open-loop
controller, q(s), so that the relationship between r(s) and y(s) has desirable dynamic
characteristics .
5
We use q(s) to represent the open-loop controller transfer function, to emphasize that
it is a different type of controller than the feedback controllers of Chapters 5 and 6.

Figure 8-3. Open-loop model-based control system.

6
Static Control Law

7
Contd...

8
Contd...

9
Contd...

10
Contd...

11
Static Control Law Dynamic Control Law

12
Consider a first-order progress, a step setpoint change, of
magnitude R, here are two control method

Static Control Law Dynamic Control Law

13
Note : The speed of response is the same as the time constant of the
open-loop process when we use a static control law. In order to
"speed up" the response, we must use a dynamic control law.

14
Physical Realizability
For a controller to be physically realizable, the order of the
denominator of the controller transfer function [q(s)] must be at
least as great as the order of the numerator.

Definition
A transfer function that satisfies this condition is proper.
If the order of the denominator is greater than the order of the
numerator, then the transfer function is strictly proper.
If the order of the numerator is equal to the order of the
denominator, then the transfer function is often called semiproper.

15
Practical Open-Loop Controller
Design

16
17
Response of Manipulated and Output Variables
to Step
Set point Changes

18
Figure 8-4. Response to step setpoint change, as a function of , for a
first-order process with a time constant of 10 minutes.

19
Issues in Dynamic Controller
Design

20
Notice that the zeros of the process model become the poles of
the controller, when the model inverse is used for control-
system design. This creates an unstable controller and the
possibility of unbounded, manipulated variable action.
Therefore, if a process has a RHP zero, this zero must be
factored out before using the model inverse for the controller
design.

Answer: The process model cannot simply be inverted to form the

controller. It must be factored so that the resulting controller is stable
and realizable.

21
22
Example : Numerical Example of an Inverse Response System

23
Generalization of the Open-Loop
Control Design Procedure

24
25
 Que: Is dead time
The reader invertible?
should verify that dead time is not invertible. If there is dead time in
the process, it cannot be removed by any physically realizable controller. Our
controller design will consist of inverting the invertible part of the process model
and cascading this with a filter that is of high enough order to make the controller
proper.

What is Dead Time?

Dead timeis the time after each event during which the system is not able to record another event.
An everyday life example of this is what happens when someone takes a photo using a flash - another
picture cannot be taken immediately afterward because the flash needs a few seconds to recharge

26
 Controller Factorization

Factorization Technique

27
(Contd...)

28
Contd...

29
Model Uncertainty and
Disturbances

30
31
 Figure 8-7. Comparison of open-loop controller responses.

Some form of feedback is needed to correct for model uncertainty (as well as any disturbances
entering the process). The method that we develop to account for model uncertainty and
disturbances is known as internal model control (IMC). In the next section, we begin to develop
the IMC structure.
32
Development of the IMC
Structure
We now consider a process model that receives the same manipulated
variable signal as the actual process (Figure 8-8). We can now subtract
the difference between the process output (actually measured) and
the process model output (model predicted) to determine the model
error. This is shown in Figure 8-9. We must also realize that
disturbances can enter the system, as shown in Figure 8-10.

Figure 8-8. Process model in parallel with the actual process.

33
 Figure 8-9.
Calculating model
error.

34
 Figure 8-10. Incorporating the process disturbance.

Notice that Figure 8-10 shows the calculation of model uncertainty (which includes
unmeasured disturbances). This information can now be used by the controller, to
compensate for the model uncertainty. This creates a feedback system, as shown in Figure
8-11.

35
 Figure 8-11. Feedback structure derived from the open-loop
structure

Figure 8-11 is also known as the IMC structure, which is discussed in

depth in the next sections.

36
 IMC Background
The main advantage to IMC is that it provides a transparent framework for control-
system design and tuning. As we show in this chapter, the IMC control structure can
be formulated in the standard feedback control structure. For many processes, this
standard feedback control structure will result in a PID controller .This is pleasing
because we can use standard equipment and algorithms to implement an
"advanced" control concept.
The IMC design procedure is exactly that of the open-loop "control" design procedure
developed in Section 8.3. Remember that a factorization of the process model was
performed so that the resulting controller would be stable. If the controller is stable
and the process is stable, then the overall controlled system is stable. This is true
simply because if two transfer functions are stable, then the transfer functions
cascaded together are stable. This is a nice result because in a standard feedback
control formulation, the controller and the process can each be stable, yet the
feedback system may be unstable.
37
Although the IMC design procedure is identical to
the open-loop "control" design procedure, the
implementation of IMC results in a feedback
system. Thus, IMC is able to compensate for
disturbances and model uncertainty, while open-
loop "control" is not. Note that the internal model
controller must be detuned to assure stability if
there is model uncertainty.

38
 IMC Structure
The IMC structure is shown in Figure 8-12. The distinguishing characteristic of this structure is the
process model, which is in parallel with the actual process (plant). Note that (~) is generally used
to represent signals associated with the model. Other literature sources may use a subscript (such
as m) to represent the model. Figure 8-13 illustrates that both the controller and model exist as
computer computations; it is convenient to treat them separately for design and analysis.

Figure 8-12. The internal model control structure.

39
 Figure : The IMC strategy. The dotted line indicates the
calculations performed by the model-based controller

A list of transfer function variables shown in the IMC block

diagram are given below.

40
41
Recapitulating, the reasons for feedback control include the following:
Unmeasured disturbances
Model uncertainty
Faster response than the open-loop system (with a static controller)
Closed-loop stability of open-loop unstable system

The primary disadvantage of IMC is that it does not guarantee

stability of open-loop unstable systems. The procedure detailed in
Chapter 9 handles these systems

42
Perfect Model,
Disturbance Effect

43
IMC Design Procedure

44
45
Adjust the filter-tuning parameter to vary
the speed of response of the closed-loop
system. If the l is "small," the closed loop
system is "fast," if l is "large," the closed-
loop system is more robust (insensitive to
model error).

46
Effect of Model Uncertainty and
Disturbances

47
48
 Figure 8-16. Setpoint response for Example 8.7, with l = 2 min.
Disturbance rejection results are shown in Figure 8-17. Notice that there is a very slow response to
the step load disturbance. This result is perhaps the greatest criticism of the standard IMC design
procedure; it tends to lead to slow responses to load disturbances that occur at the process input.

49
Figure 8-17. Disturbance response for Example 8.7, with l
= 2 min.

50
51
In the case of a perfect model, this results in

The controller, using the new filter form, is

so the output response is

Although it is hard to tell from this general expression, g should be selected to cancel the slow
time constant associated with gd(s). This is shown by way of an example for a first-order
process.

52
First-Order Process, Improved Disturbance
Rejection Design
For a first-order process model,

The IMC controller, using the proposed filter design, is

Assuming a perfect model and load disturbance transfer function equal to the
process transfer function,

53
If we select 2/(2- ) to cancel the process model time constant, ,we find

Numerical Example
Here we consider again the first-order process model transfer function from
Example 8.7

and assume that the disturbance transfer function is equal to the process transfer
function .

which leads to the closed-loop results for a unit step disturbance, shown in Figure 8-
18.

54
 Figure 8-18. Improved disturbance response for Example 8.8, with l =
2 min. A comparison with the standard IMC filter design.

It should be noted that the improved disturbance rejection design does

not lead to detrimental performance for setpoint changes. In Figure 8-19,
the new filter design also leads to faster performing setpoint responses

55
Figure 8-19. Setpoint response for Example 8.8, with l = 2 min. A
comparison of design for improved disturbance rejection with the
standard IMC filter design.

56
 Manipulated Variable
Saturation
The reader should note that if the actual manipulated variable signal is used by the
model, then manipulated variable saturation is not a problem because the system
becomes open-loop and the model prediction is the same as the process. In
conventional PID controllers, special precautions must be taken to prevent reset or
integral windup from occurring when manipulated variables hit constraints. This
phenomenon is discussed more fully in Chapter 11.
The IMC block diagram for the case where the actual manipulated variable value that
is implemented on the process is also used by the model is shown in Figure 8-20.
Integral "wind-up will not be a problem with this implementation. Figure 8-21 shows
an IMC implementation where the manipulated variable value implemented on the
process is constrained, while the process model uses the unconstrained value. Integral
wind-up may be a problem in this case. It is very important when implementing IMC to
use the actual manipulated input to the model in the control law.

57
 Figure 8-20. The
actual manipulated
variable value is
"measured" and
used by the process
model. (Correct
implementation)

58
Figure 8-21. The manipulated variable value used by the process
model is different from the value actually implemented on the
process.
(Undesirable implementation)

59
 Summary
The IMC design procedure is exactly the same as the open-loop control design
procedure. Unlike open-loop control, the IMC structure compensates for disturbances
and model uncertainty. The IMC tuning (filter) factor, l, is used to detune for model
uncertainty. It should be noted that the standard IMC design procedure is focused on
setpoint responses, but good setpoint responses do not guarantee good disturbance
rejection, particularly for disturbances that occur at process inputs. A modification of
the IMC design procedure was developed to improve input disturbance rejection.
Tolerance of model uncertainty is called robustness and was discussed in more detail
inChapter 7.
Like open-loop control, the disadvantage compared with standard feedback control is
that IMC does not handle integrating or open-loop unstable systems. In Chapter 9, we
develop a procedure, based on IMC, to form a standard feedback control system that
can handle open-loop unstable systems. We call this IMC-based PID.

60
 Summary of Internal Model
Control System Design Procedure
1. Develop a process model.
2. Factor the process model into invertible (good) and
noninvertible (bad) portions, usually using an all-pass factorization.
3.Invert the invertible portion of the process model (the good stuff)
and cascade with a filter that makes the controller q(s) proper.
4.Implement in the form of Figure 8-20 to handle constraints on
the manipulated input.

61
Thanks

62