OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

Objective of this study is to determine the effect of PID’s parameters to the process
controllability. To study the effect of controller gain, effect of integral time, effect of derivative
time and effect of dead time on the control loop process.

TYPE OF PROCESSES

A process can be classified into self-regulating and non- self regulating processes depending
on how they respond to an input change. The self-regulating process has a typical response to
step change as shown in Figure 2.1. The process undergoes a finite change in output in response
to a bounded change in input. The output reaches a new operating point and remains there. That
is, the process regulates itself to a new operating condition. Self-regulating processes are
processes that are inherently self-regulating. Self-regulated processes have built-in feedback
characteristics that cause the process to tend towards self-regulation. An example of a self-
regulating process is a tank of water with an input of water entering the tank and an output of
water leaving the tank. Let’s say the water level in the tank is constant at 10 inches. Water
enters the tank at a rate of 20 gallons per minute and leaves the tank at a rate of 20 gallons per
minute. As long as this balance is maintained, water level in the tank will remain constant at
10 inches. Comparatively, A non- self regulating process is one where the process does not
tend towards self-regulation. These processes have no self-regulating feedback characteristics
and will tend towards being unstable if not controlled externally.

Take, for example, the initial scenario. The water level in the tank is constant at 10 inches.
Water enters and leaves the tank at a rate of 20 gallons per minute. In this process, instead of
having a discharge valve on the tank, a positive displacement pump is used to drain the water.
As long as the balance is maintained, water level in the tank will remain constant at 10 inches.
The figure above shown the differences between self regulating and the non – self regulating
type of processes.

.HISTORY OF PID CONTROLLER

PID also known as proportional–integral–derivative controller is a control feedback

mechanism. In early years, PID controller is used as automatic ship steering. It was
implemented as a mechanical device such a lever, spring and a mass and were often energized
by compressed air. The first PID controller was developed by Elmer Sperry in 1911 and
theoretical analysis first introduced by Russian American engineer Nicolas Minorsky,
(Minorsky 1922). The goal is stability, not general control, which simplified the problem
significantly. Proportional control provides stability against small disturbances while
derivative term was added to improve stability and control. In modern years, PID controllers
in industry are implemented in programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and applied in
industrial ovens, plastics injection machinery, hot stamping machines . It used the the
implementation of the PID algorithm.
PID controller theory and equation

𝜏𝑖(𝑠)
𝐺𝑐 (𝑃𝐼𝐷) = 𝐾𝑐 (1 + + 𝜏𝑑(𝑠) )
𝑠

Where 𝐾𝑐 is the PID control gain, 𝜏𝑖(𝑠) is the integral gain, 𝜏𝑑(𝑠) is the derivative gain

Proportional Action

Proportional (P) control has a function in determining the magnitude of the difference between
the set point and the process variable which is indicated as error. Then this proportional control
will applies appropriate proportional changes to the control variable to eliminate error. Many
control systems will, in fact, work quite well with only Proportional control due to it fast
response time and its ability to minimize fluctuation. However, it contains large offset. It is
an instantaneous response to the control error for improving the response of a stable system.

Integral Action

Integral (I) control usually examines the offset of set point and the process variable over time
and corrects it when and if necessary. This integral control has small offset and always return
to steady state but it leads to slow response time. Integral action drives the steady-state error
towards 0 but slows the response since the error must accumulate before a significant response
is output from the controller. Only controllers with integrators can wind-up where, through
actuator saturation, the loop is unable to comply with the control command and the error builds
until the situation is corrected.
Derivative Action

Derivative (D) control, monitored the rate of change of the process variable and consequently
makes changes to the output variable to provide unusual changes.
When there is a "process upset", meaning, when the process variable or the set point quickly
changes - the PID controller has to quickly change the output to get the process variable back
equal to the set point. Once the PID controller has the process variable equal to the set point, a
good PID controller will not vary the output. Thus, there are two responses occur such as fast
response (fast change in output) when there is a "process upset", but slow response (steady
output).

Controller gain

The proportional gain (Kc) determines the ratio of output response to the error signal. For
instance, if the error term has a magnitude of 10, a proportional gain of 5 would produce a
proportional response of 50. In general, increasing the proportional gain will increase the speed
of the control system response. However, if the proportional gain is too large, the process
variable will begin to oscillate. If Kc is increased further, the oscillations will become larger
and the system will become unstable and may even oscillate out of control.

Deadtime

Deadtime is a delay between when a process variable changes, and when that change can be
observed. For instance, if a temperature sensor is placed far away from a cold water fluid inlet
valve, it will not measure a change in temperature immediately if the valve is opened or closed.
Deadtime can also be caused by a system or output actuator that is slow to respond to the
control command, for instance, a valve that is slow to open or close. A common source of
deadtime in chemical plants is the delay caused by the flow of fluid through pipes.

Effect of increasing and decreasing value of P,I &D toward process response

When parameters of an existing controller have to be tuned, there will be a problem in the
identification of PID controller. Controller structure has to be determined since manufacturers
do not provide data on controller structure whether serial or parallel. Manual tuning of
controller parameters had to be done if they are changed with time. Other than that, manual
tuning of controller parameters also had to be done when change in process parameters
occurred. Manual parameter tuning can be done using trial and error and if rules shown in the
table below:

Parameter Speed of Response Stability Accuracy

Increasing K Increases Deteriorate Improves
Increasing Ki Decreases Deteriorate Improves
Increasing Kd increases Improves No effect

Settling time : The time at which the PV reaches ± 5% of the total change in the

process variable (ΔPV).

Overshoot : Most notably associated with P-only controllers, is the difference fromthe SP
to

where the PV settles out at a steady state value.

Decay ratio : The size of the second peak above the new steady state divided by thesize of
the

first peak above the same steady state level

CHAPTER 2 ( METHODOLOGY)

LAB 1: Effect of Controller Gain to Process Controllability

PROCEDURE:

1. Open matlab software then new model is opened by selecting file button.
2. Then, untitled window will appear.
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn , sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink
in the right order.
5s
4. Process transfer function is set as s  10 s , process set point=1
2

5. PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05, I1=0.01, D1=0.Set simulation

parameters to 600
6. Run the simulation
7. Plot PV vs time

>>plot(time,PV)

8. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.1, I2=0.01, D2=0 and next, plot the second
process response.

>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)

9. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.2, I3=0.01, D3=0 and then ,plot the third process
response.

>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)

10. View all the figure in figure palette.

11. Combine response of figure(2) and figure(3) into figure(1)
12. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, and PID3.
13. Show the SP at 1.
PFD FOR EFFECT OF CONTROLLER GAIN
CHAPTER 3 : RESULT AND DISCUSSION

LAB 1: Effect of Controller Gain to Process Controllability

Result

1.8

PID1
1.6
PID2

1.4
PID3

1.2

SP
1
PV

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
time
DISCUSSION

In the figure above shows 3 different graph plotted in order to observe the oscillations of each
graph plotted. The 3 different values of Proportional (P) are considered which are 0.05, 0.1,
and 0.2. Based on the graph, it can be concluded that the high proportional value will lead the
system to become unstable and oscillate. The proportionality is given by controller gain. For a
given change in time, the amount of output process value (PV) will be determined by the
controller gain. It is the best controller gain if the peak of the graph reaches the set point. From
the graph obtained, figure 3 has the best controller gain since the peak point of the graph is
nearest to the set point (SP=1). That’s why this condition will contribute to better processes.
Shown below is are the analysis obtained from the two figure above.

Graph Setting Overshoot Decay Number of Rise Time Time of the

time Ratio Oscillation First
Maximum
1 356.36 0.75 0.011 14.93 90 40
2 131.59 0.73 0.011 14.13 94.5 36.506
3 9.93 - 0.011 3.137 13.60 13.593