MODELINGSIMULATIONANDCONTROLOFFIRSTORDERSYSTEMS

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/341160056
MODELING &SIMULATION AND CONTROL OF FIRST ORDER SYSTEMS A Project

Submitted to the Tripoli of Engineering in Partial Fulﬁllment of the
Requirements for the Degree B.Sc
Technical Report · January 2012

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16710.91209
CITATION READS
1 1,789
1 author:
Ahmed F. Zrigan
University of Tripoli
4 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
MODELING &SIMULATION AND CONTROL OF FIRST ORDER SYSTEMS View project
comparison of fuzzification control \pid controller for distillation column View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed F. Zrigan on 05 May 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

University of Tripoli
Faculty of Engineering
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering
B.Sc. Project
MODELING &SIMULATION AND

CONTROL OF FIRST ORDER SYSTEMS
A Project Submitted to the Tripoli of Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree B.Sc
Prepared by:
Ahmed Farhat Zrigan
Supervisor:
Dr . Mahmud M Elfandi
Fall - 2012
Tripoli -Libya
B.Sc. Acknowledgment
Project
I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to my project advisor

Prof. Dr. Mahmud M Elfandi for his guidance, continuous encouragement and
support to complete this work.
Finally, I wish to express my appreciation to my family members for their
unlimited help and support during my study.
Eng . Ahmed .F. Mahmoud Zrigan

Abstract
Abstract
Modeling, simulation of first order systems and different tuning methods are
represented in this project. The first part of the project is concentrated on
modeling and simulation of different physical system with first order model.
Matlab simulation package is used to simulate and test different first order models.
Response of different first order systems with different parameters are given in
time domain and frequency domain.
The second part of the project is concentrated on PID controller. A summary of

different tuning rules for the PI and PID controller of single input single output
(SISO) are given. A bout 63 different rules of tuning are given. Thus rules are used
to design PI and PID controller of two industrial process with first order with time
delay.
These process are linear model of distillation column. Time domain and frequency
domain data comparison the rules are tabled. The simulation study is completed
using Matlab simulation package.
The simulation results shows the difference control system time domain and
frequency domain performance to find different PID tuning rules.
tuning using PID controller in industrial system has been carried out on flow
process model 3502. The PID controller is used to controller water flow rate of
single tank system.
i
List of Contents Page
Chapter 1
1.1 Review 1
1.2 Objectives 1
1.3 Motivations 1
1.4 Literature survey 2
1.5 Project Organization 2
Chapter 2 3
2.1 Introduction 4
2.2 First Order physical Systems 5
2.2.1 R-C circuit 5
2.2.2 Op Amp 7
2.2.3 Level system 9
2.2.4 Temperature system 13
2.2.5 Distillation column 15
Chapter 3 17
3.1 Time domain analysis of control systems 18
3.1.1 Mathematical description of First Order System 18
3.1.2 Time domain analysis of first order system 19
3.1.2.1 Step response 20
3.1.2.2 step with amplitude (A) 23
3.1.2.3 Impulse Response 25
3.1.2.4 Ramp-Function 26
3.1.3 First order systems with time delay 27
3.1.3.1 Simulation of First order system lead plus time delay 29
3.2 Frequency domain of first order systems 29
ii
Page
3.2.1 Frequency response of First Order Systems 30
3.2.1.1 Frequency response of First order system with 31
different system gain
different time constant
3.2.2 First Order Systems with time delay 31
different time delay
Chapter 4 35
4.1 Proportional control 36
4.2 Integral control 36
4.3 Derivative control 37
4.4 Proportional and derivative control 38
4.5 Proportional and Integral control 39
4.6 Proportional Integral Derivative control 40
4.7 Types of PID Controller 40
4.8 Time domain specification of close loop control 43
systems
4.9 Simulation Time response result of PI control for 44
distillation column model (1)
4.10 Simulation Frequency response of model (1) with PI 47
controller
4.11 Simulation Time response result of PID control for 50
distillation column model(1)
4.12 Simulation Frequency response of model(1) with PID 56
iii
Page
4.13 Simulation result of PI control for distillation column 61
model (2)
4.14 Frequency response of model (2) with PI controller 66
4.15 Time domain result of PID control for distillation 70
column model (2)
4.16 Frequency response of model (2) with PID controller 76
4.17 conclusion of results 81
Chapter 5 83
5.1 Introduction 84
5.2 Flow Process Proportional Plus Integral 84
Control
5.2.1 PROCEDURE 85
5.3 Process Proportional Plus Integral Plus Derivative 88
Control
5.3.1 CONTROLLER CONFIGURATION 88
5.3.2 PROCEDURE 88
Chapter 6 91
6.1 Conclusion 92
6.2 Future work 92
Appendices 93
A.1 PI tuning rules - FOLPD model 94
A.2 PID tuning rules - FOLPD model 95
A.3 List of symbols and abbreviations used 97
iv
# of Table List of Tables Page
Chapter 3
Table (3.1) FOLPD with step input 29
Table (3.2a) First Order System 31
Table (3.2b) First Order System 31
Table(3.3) First Order Systems with delay 33
Chapter 4
Table (4.1) Time domain parameter data of tuning method group 44
(1) model (1)
(2) model (1)
(3) model (1)
(4) model (1)
Table (4.5) Frequency domain parameter data of tuning method 48
group (1) model (1)
group (2) model (1)
group (3) model (1)
group (4) model (1)
(1) model (1)
(2) model (1)
(3) model (1)
(4) model (1)
(5) model (1)
(6) model (1)
v
# of Table Page
group (1) model (1)
group (2) model (1)
group (3) model (1)
group (4) model (1)
group (5) model (1)
group (6) model (1)
(1) model (2)
(2) model (2)
(3) model (2)
(4)model (2)
(5) model (2)
group (1) model (2)
group (2) model (2)
group (3) model (2)
group (4) model (2)
group (5) model (2)
(1) model (2)
(2) model (2)
(3) model (2)
vi
# of Table Page
(4) model (2)
(5) model (2)
(6) model (2)
group (1) model (2)
group (2) model (2)
group (3) model (2)
group (4) model (2)
group (5) model (2)
group (6) model (2)
vii
# of Figure List of Figures Page
Chapter 2
Figure(2.1) Simple R-C circuit 6
Figure(2.2) Symbol for operational amplifier 7
Figure(2.3) First order lag circuit using operational amplifier 8
Figure(2.4a) Liquid level system 10
Figure(2.4b) Head versus flow rate curve 10
Figure (2.5) (a) Thermal system; (b) Block diagram of the system 13
Chapter 3
Figure (3.1) First order system 18
Figure (3.2) Exponential response curve. 21
Figure (3.3) Step response of first order system 21
Figure(3.4a) Step response of first order system when K<1 22
Figure(3.4b) Step response of first order system when K=1 22
Figure(3.4c) Step response of first order system when K>1 23
Figure (3.5) Step with amplitude (A) 24
Figure (3.6) Step response of first order system when K=KA 24
Figure (3.7) Time response for three systems 25
Figure (3.8) Graphical representation an Impulse function 26
Figure (3.9) Impulse response for three systems 27
Figure(3.10) Ramp function 27
Figure(3.11) Ramp response for three systems 28
Figure(3.12) Time response for FOLPD 29
Figure(3.13) Bode Diagram for system 30
Figure(3.14a) Frequency response First Order System For table (3.2a) 32
Figure(3.14b) Frequency response First Order System For table (3.2b) 33
viii
# of Figure Page
Figure (3.15) First Order Systems with delay 34
Chapter 4
Figure (4.1) Closed-loop unity feedback system 36
Figure (4.2) Block diagrams: proportional control term 36
Figure (4.3) Block diagrams: integral control term 37
Figure (4.4) Block diagrams: derivative control term 38
Figure (4.5) Block diagrams: proportional and derivative control 39
Figure (4.6) Block diagrams proportional and integral control 40
Figure (4.7) Block diagrams proportional and integral and Derivative 40
Control
Figure (4.8) Industrial PID controller 41
Figure (4.9) Series PID controller 42
Figure (4.10) Parallel PID controller 42
Figure (4.11) Typical unit-step response of a control system 43
illustrating the time domain specification
Figure (4.12) Time response for three rules tuning method group (1) 44
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
Figure (4.16) Frequency response for three rules tuning method group 48
(1) model (1)
(2) model (1)
(3) model (1)
(4) model (1)
ix
# of Figure page
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
model (1)
(1) model (1)
(2) model (1)
(3) model (1)
(4) model (1)
(5) model (1)
(6) model (1)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
(1) model (2)
(2) model (2)
x
# of Figure Page
(3) model (2)
(4) model (2)
(5) model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
model (2)
(1) model (2)
(2) model (2)
(3) model (2)
(4) model (2)
(5) model (2)
(6) model (2)
Figure (5.1) Flow process station Model 3502 85
Figure (5.2) Loop Diagram 87
Figure(5.3) PI control using flow process station 87
Figure (5.4) Loop Diagram 90
Figure(5.5) PID control using flow process station 90
xi
xii
Chapter One
General Introduction
Chapter General introduction
One
1.1 Review
The ability of PI controller, “Proportional plus Integral " or PID controller
"Proportional plus Integral Plus Derivative" to compensate most practical
industrial processes has led to their wide acceptance in industrial application[1].
Its popularity comes from its applicability and robust performance in wide variety
of operating scenarios. Moreover, these is a wide conceptual understanding of the
effect of the three terms involved amongst non specialist plant operators that
makes manual tuning a relatively straight forward task.
In states that 98% of control loops in pulp and paper industrials are controller by
(Single Input Single Output) SISO PI controllers and that, in process control
application, more than 95% of the controllers are of PID type [2].
1.2 Objectives
The main objective of the project is modeling & simulation of first order systems.
Two linear industrial process models are used in this study. Different tuning rules
of PID controller will be used. The simulation study will be done by Matlab and
Simulink.
1.3 Motivations
To understand first order systems should be there adequate explaining for these
systems, design control system, and control to flow process station Lab Volt.
The first order systems is important in the education specially in undergraduate

level, to more understand for first order systems can operating flow process station
model 3502 and there some papers Part 1 PI controller tuning rules, part 2 PID
controller tuning rules First order lead plus time delay by Aidan O'Dwyer.
1
Chapter General introduction
One
this study is very important to more understanding first order systems.
1.4 Literature survey
Astrom, K.J. and Hagglund [12] process first order systems and showed rule This
rule used in PID tuning. Cheng, G.S. and Hung [18] studied first order systems and
showed rule this rule used in PID tuning.
1.5 Outlines of the project
This chapter has been organized into one volume and one supplement. The
volume is divided into 6 chapters as follows:
Chapter 2 describes modeling of different industrial systems that have first order
model. This include electrical circuit, operation amplified, liquid tank system and
distillation column.
Chapter3 presents time and frequency domain analysis of first order systems.
Simulation of different models of first order system with different system
parameters are given and compared.
Chapter 4 introduces types and equation of different PID structures. A bout rules
of tuning PI and PID controller are given. The rules are used to control two
different distillation column models. Performance the systems response with the
control are given in both time domain and frequency domain.
Chapter 5 the chapter include two experiment first experiment PI controller
second PID controller and results for two experiment.
Chapter 6 included conclusion and future work.
2
Chapter Two
Modeling of First Order Systems
3
Chapter
two
2.1 Introduction
A first order system is one whose output y (t) is method by a first order differential
equation. Thus in the case of linear (or linearized) system, we have[3].
𝑎1 𝑑𝑦 + 𝑎 0𝑦 = 𝑏𝑓(𝑡) (2.1)
𝑑𝑡
Where𝑓(𝑡) is the input (forcing function).If𝑎0 ≠ 0, then eq. (2.1) yields
𝑎1 𝑑𝑦 𝑏 𝑓(𝑡)
+𝑦=
𝑎0 𝑑𝑡 𝑎0
Define
𝑎1
𝜏 =
𝑎0
𝑏
𝐾𝑝 =
𝑎0
And take
𝜏 𝑑𝑦 + 𝑦 = 𝐾 𝑝𝑓(𝑡) (2.2)
𝑑𝑡
𝜏 is known as the time constant of the process and 𝐾𝑝is called the steady state
gain or static gain or simply the gain of the process. Their physical meaning will
become clear in the next three sections.
If 𝑦(𝑡) and 𝑓(𝑡) are in terms of deviation variables around a steady state, the initial
conditions are
𝑦(0) = 0 And 𝑓(0) = 0From eq. (2.2) it is easily found that that transfer
function of a first order process by taking Laplace transform is given by [3].
4
Chapter
two
𝐾𝑝
𝐺(𝑠) = (2.3)
𝜏𝑠+1
2.2 First Order physical Systems
there address modeling of electrical networks with simple passive elements such as
resistors, and capacitors. Next section, there address operational amplifiers, which
are active electrical elements. Next section, there address level system. Next
section thermal system, temperature system.
2.2.1 R-C circuit
The objective in this section the basic passive electrical elements: resistors, and
capacitors.
Resistors: Ohm's law states that the voltage drop, 𝑒𝑅 (𝑡), across a resistor R is
proportional to the current 𝑖(𝑡)going through the resistor. Thus,[4]
𝑒𝑅(𝑡) = 𝑖(𝑡)𝑅 (2.4)
Where:
R: is resistor in Ω
Capacitor: The voltage drop,𝑒𝑐(𝑡),across a capacitor C is proportional to the
integral current 𝑖(𝑡)going through the capacitor with respect to time. Therefore,
𝑖(𝑡)
𝑒𝑐(𝑡) = ∫ 𝑑𝑡 (2.5)
𝐶
Where:
C is capacitor in 𝐹
The classical way of writing equations of electric networks is based on the loop
method or the node method, both of which are formulated from the two laws of
Kirchhoff, which state:
5
Chapter
two
Figure (2.1): Simple R-C circuit
Current Law or Loop Method: The algebraic summation of all currents entering
a node is zero.
Voltage Law or Node Method: The algebraic sum of all voltage drops around a
complete closed loop is zero [4].
𝑒𝑖𝑛(𝑡) = 𝑒𝑅(𝑡) + 𝑒𝐶(𝑡) (2.6)
Where
𝑒𝑅 = 𝑖𝑅 (2.7)
And the voltage across the capacitor 𝑣𝐶(𝑡) is
1
𝑒𝐶(𝑡) = ∫ 𝑖𝑑𝑡 (2.8)
𝐶
But from Figure (2.1)

1
𝑒𝑜(𝑡) = ∫ 𝑖𝑑𝑡 = 𝑒𝐶(𝑡) (2.9)
𝐶
If we differentiate Eq. (2.9)

1 𝑑 𝑒𝑂(𝑡) (2.10)
=
𝐶 𝑑𝑡
Or
𝐶𝑒𝑂′ (𝑡) = 𝑖 (2.11)
This implies that Eq. (2.6) can be written in an input -output from
𝑒𝑖𝑛(𝑡) = 𝑅𝐶𝑒′ 𝑂(𝑡) + 𝑒𝑂(𝑡) (2.12)
In Laplace domain, we get the system transfer function as
6
Chapter
two
𝐸𝑂(𝑠) 1
= (2.13)
𝐸𝑖𝑛(𝑠) 𝑅𝐶𝑠 +1
Where the 𝜏 = 𝑅𝐶is also known as the time constant of the system. And the
initial conditions are assumed to be 𝑒𝑖𝑛(𝑡 = 0) = 𝑒′ (𝑡 𝑂= 0) = 0 [4].
2.2.2 Operational Amplifier
The operational amplifier or simply op amp, is the most versatile electronic

amplifier. It derives its name from the fact that it is capable of performing many
mathematical operations such as addition, multiplication, differentiation,
integration, analog-to-digital conversion or vice versa. It can also be used as a
comparator and electronic filter. It is also the basic block in analog computer
design. The internal construction of the popular 741 op amp. Its symbol is shown
in Figure (2.2) [5].
The goal here is to show how to implement first-order transfer functions with op-
amps.
In addition to adding and subtracting signals, op-amps can be used to implement
transfer functions of continuous-data systems. While many alternatives are
available, we will explore only those that use the inverting op-amp configuration
shown in Fig. (2.3). in the figure, Z1(s) and Z2(s) are impedances commonly
composed of resistors and capacitors. Inductors are not commonly used because
they tend to be bulkier and more expensive. Using ideal op-amp properties, the
input-output relationship, or transfer function, of the circuit shown in Fig. (2.3) can
be written in a number of ways, such as [6]
Figure (2.2). Symbol for operational amplifier
7
Chapter
two
𝐸𝑜(𝑠) 𝑍2(𝑠) (2.14)

𝐺(𝑠) = =−
𝐸𝑖(𝑠) 𝑍1(𝑠)
𝑍1(𝑠) = 𝑅1
1 𝑅2
𝑍2 (𝑠) = =
𝐶𝑠 + 1 𝑅2𝐶𝑠 + 1
𝑅2
𝐸𝑖(𝑠) = 𝑅1 𝐼(𝑠)
𝑅2
𝐸𝑜 (𝑠) = − 𝐼(𝑠)
𝑅2𝐶𝑠 + 1
𝐸𝑜(𝑠) 𝑅2 1
=−
𝐸𝑖(𝑠) 𝑅1 𝑅2𝐶𝑠 + 1
Which can be written as
𝐸𝑜(𝑠) 𝐾
= (2.15)
𝐸𝑖(𝑠) 𝜏𝑠+1
Where
𝐾 = − 𝑅2 and 𝝉 = 𝑅2 𝐶 (2.16)
𝑅1
Figure (2.3):First order lag circuit using operational amplifier
8
Chapter
two
2.2.3. Level system

Resistance and Capacitance of Liquid-Level Systems. Consider the flow through a
short pipe connecting two tanks. The resistance R for liquid flow in such a pipe or
restriction is defined as the change in the level difference (the difference of the
liquid levels of the two tanks) necessary to cause a unit change in flow rate; that is,
change in level difference,m
𝑅= (2.17)
change in �low rate,𝑚3 /sec
Since the relationship between the flow rate and level difference differs for the
laminar flow and turbulent flow, there consider the liquid-level system shown in
below Figure (2.4a). In this system the liquid spouts through the load valve in the
side of the tank. If the flow through this restriction is laminar, the relationship
between the steady-state flow rate and steady-state head at the level of the
restriction is given by [6]
𝑄 = 𝐾𝐻 (2.18)
Where:
Q= steady state liquid flow rate, 𝑚3/sec
K=coefficient, 𝑚2/sec
H=steady state head, m
For laminar flow, the resistance 𝑅𝑙is obtained as
𝑑𝐻 𝐻 (2.19)
𝑅𝑙 = =
𝑑𝑄 𝑄
The laminar flow resistance is constant and is analogous to the electrical resistance.
If the flow through the restriction is turbulent, the steady state flow rate is given by
𝑄 = 𝐾√𝐻 (2.20)
Where:
Q= steady state liquid flow rate, 𝑚3/sec
K=coefficient, 𝑚2.5/sec
9
Chapter
two
H=steady state head, m
Figure (2.4a):- Liquid level system
Figure (2.4b):- Head versus flow rate curve

The resistance 𝑅𝑡for turbulent flow is obtained from
𝑑𝐻
𝑅𝑡 = (2.21)
𝑑𝑄
Since Equation (2.18) we obtain
𝑑𝑄 = 𝐾 𝑑𝐻 (2.22)
2√𝐻
We have
𝑑𝐻 2√𝐻 2√𝐻√𝐻 2𝐻
= = = (2.23)
𝑑𝑄 𝐾 𝑄 𝑄
Thus
10
Chapter
two
2𝐻
𝑅𝑡 = (2.24)
𝑄
The value of the turbulent flow resistance 𝑅𝑡 depends on the flow rate and the
head. The value of 𝑅𝑡, however, may be considered constant if the changes in head
and flow rate are small. [6]
By use of the turbulent flow resistance, the relationship between Q and H can be
given by
2𝐻
𝑄 = (2.25)
𝑅𝑡
Such linearization is valid, provided that changes in the head and flow rate from
their respective steady state values are small. [6]
In many practical cases, the value of the coefficient K Equation (2.21), which
depends on the flow coefficient and the area of restriction, is not known. Then the
resistance may be determined by plotting the head versus flow rate curve based on
experimental data and measuring the slope of the curve at the operating condition.
An example of such a plot is shown in figure (2.4b). In the figure, point P is the
steady state operating point. The tangent line to the curve at point P intersects the
�⁄𝑄� .
� ). Thus, the slop of this tangent line is 2𝐻
ordinate at point (0, -𝐻
�⁄𝑄� , the resistance 𝑅𝑡
Since the resistance 𝑅𝑡 at the operating point P is given by2𝐻
is the slope of the curve at the operating point.[ 6]
�
𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡 𝑃 = ℎ = 2𝐻 = 𝑅 (2.26)
𝑞 𝑄� 𝑡
The linear approximation is based on the fact that the actual curve does not differ
much from its tangent line if the operating condition does not vary too much. The
capacitance C of a tank is defined to be the change in quantity of stored liquid
necessary to cause a unit change in the potential (head). [6]
change in liquid stored,𝑚3
𝐶= (2.27)
𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑,𝑚
11
Chapter
two
It should be noted that the capacity (𝑚3) and the capacitance (𝑚2) are different.
The capacitance of the tank is equal to its cross-sectional area. If this is constant,
the capacitance is constant for any head.
Liquid-Level Systems. Consider the system shown in Figure (4.la). The variables
are defined as follows
𝑄� = Steady-state flow rate (before any change has occurred), 𝑚3 /sec
𝑞𝑖 = Small deviation of inflow rate from its steady-state value, 𝑚3/sec
𝑞𝑜 = Small deviation of outflow rate from its steady-state value, 𝑚3/sec
� = Steady-state head (before any change has occurred), m
𝐻
h = Small deviation of head from its steady-state value, m
Obtained as follows: Since the inflow minus outflow during the small time interval
𝑑𝑡is equal to the additional amount stored in the tank, we see that
𝐶 𝑑ℎ = (𝑞𝑖 − 𝑞𝑜)𝑑𝑡 (2.28)
From the definition of resistance, the relationship between 𝑞𝑜and ℎ is given by
𝑞𝑜 = ℎ (2.29)
𝑅
The differential equation for this system for a constant value of R becomes
𝑅𝐶 𝑑ℎ + ℎ = 𝑅𝑞 𝑖 (2.30)
𝑑𝑡
Note that RC is the time constant of the system. Taking the Laplace transforms of
both side of Equation (2.22), assuming the zero initial condition, we obtain
(𝑅𝐶𝑠 + 1)𝐻(𝑠) = 𝑅𝑄(𝑠) (2.31)
Where
𝐻(𝑠) =L[h] and 𝑄(𝑠) =L[𝑞𝑖]
If 𝑞𝑖 is considered the input and ℎ the output transfer function of the system is
𝐻(𝑠) 𝑅
= (2.32)
𝑄𝑜(𝑠) 𝑅𝐶𝑠+1
12
Chapter
two
If, however, 𝑞𝑜 is taken as the output, the input being the same, then the transfer
function is
𝑄𝑜(𝑠) 1
= (2.33)
𝑄𝑖(𝑠) 𝑅𝐶𝑠+1
Where we have used the relationship

𝑄𝑜 (𝑠) = 1 𝐻(𝑠) (2.34)
𝑅
2.2.4. Temperature system
In the terminal systems if the tank is insulated to eliminate heat loss to the
surrounding air. It is also that there is no heat storage in the insulation and that the
liquid in the tank is perfectly mixed so that it is at a uniform temperature. Thus, a
single temperature is used to describe the temperature of the liquid in the tank and
of the out flowing liquid, shown below figure (2.5). [6]
Figure (2.5) :(a) Thermal system; (b) Block diagram of the system.
Where:
�𝚤 =Steady-state temperature of inflowing liquid,℃
𝛩
�𝛩
� o =steady-state temperature of out flowing liquid,℃
R
G = steady-state liquid flow rate, kg/sec

M= mass of liquid in tank, kg
c =specific heat of liquid, kcal/kg ℃
R = thermal resistance,℃ sec/kcal
C = thermal capacitance, kcal/℃
� = steady- state heat input rate, kcal/sec
𝐻
13
Chapter
two
The temperature of the inflowing liquid is kept constant and that the heat input rate
to the system (heat supplied by the heater) is suddenly changed from�𝐻
� to 𝐻
�+ℎ
𝑖
where ℎ𝑖represents a small change in the heat input rate. The heat outflow rate will
�to𝐻
then change gradually from 𝐻 � + ℎ𝑜 .
The temperature of the out flowing liquid will also be changed from �
𝛩to �
𝛩 + 𝜃.
For this case, ℎ𝑜, C, and R are obtained, respectively, as [6]
ℎ𝑜 = 𝐺𝑐𝜃 (2.35)
𝐶 = 𝑀𝑐 (2.36)
1
𝑅=𝜃 = (2.37)
ℎ𝑜 𝐺𝑐
The differential equation for this system is

𝐶 𝑑𝜃 = ℎ 𝑖 − ℎ 𝑜 (2.38)
𝑑𝑡
Which may be rewritten as

𝑅𝐶 𝑑𝜃 + 𝜃 = 𝑅ℎ 𝑖 (2.39)
𝑑𝑡
Where:
Time constant of the system is equal to RC or M/G seconds. The transfer function
relating 𝜃 and ℎ𝑖 is given by
𝛩(𝑠) 𝑅
= (2.40)
𝐻𝑖(𝑠) 𝑅𝐶𝑠+1
Where
𝛩(𝑠) = 𝔏[𝜃(𝑡)] And 𝐻𝑖(𝑠) = 𝔏[𝐻𝑖(𝑡)] (2.41)
In practice, the temperature of the inflowing liquid may fluctuate and may act as a
load disturbance. If the temperature of the inflowing liquid is suddenly changed
from 𝛩�𝑖 to 𝛩�𝑖 + 𝜃𝑖 while the heat input rate Hand the liquid flow rate G are kept
constant, then the heat outflow rate will be changed from�𝐻
� to 𝐻
� + ℎ𝑜 , and the
temperature of the out flowing liquid will be changed from 𝛩�𝑜 to𝛩�𝑜 + 𝜃 . The
differential equation for this case is
14
Chapter
two
𝐶 𝑑𝜃 = 𝐺𝑐𝜃 𝑖 − ℎ 𝑜 (2.42)
𝑑𝑡
Which may be rewritten

𝑅𝐶 𝑑𝜃 + 𝜃 = 𝜃 𝑖 (2.43)
𝑑𝑡
The transfer function relating 𝜃 and 𝜃𝑖 is given by

𝛩(𝑠) 1
= (2.44)
𝛩𝑖(𝑠) 𝑅𝐶𝑠+1
Where:
𝛩(𝑠) = 𝔏[𝜃(𝑡)] And 𝛩𝑖(𝑠) = 𝔏[𝜃𝑖(𝑡)].
If the present thermal system is subjected to changes in both the temperature of the
inflowing liquid and the heat input rate, while the liquid flow rate is kept constant,
The change 𝜃 in the temperature of the out flowing liquid can be given by the
following equation;[ 6]
𝑅𝐶 𝑑𝜃 + 𝜃 = 𝜃 𝑖 + 𝑅ℎ 𝑖 (2.45)
𝑑𝑡
2.2.5 Distillation column

Distillation is a process used for separating substances in the chemical industry. It
is used extensively in chemical industry applications for example, in an oil refinery
where crude oil can be separated into many fractions such as gas, oil, lubricating
oils, heavy fuels and asphalt.
The distillation column consists of two input two output systems with an
interaction which can be modeled by an approximation linear model of first order
system with time delay. We are not going into detail study of the physical system.
The complete physical, theoretical modeling, identification line arising, simulation
study and extensive bodies of literature discussions of this application can be found
in [7].
15
Chapter
two
The linear model of the distillation column is given in a frequency transfer function
given by as
Y1 ( j )  4.533e −0.5 j 41.344e −0.5 j  U1 ( j )

   7 j +−0.5
1 j 4.5 j + 1   
 = 0.1086e  
0.844e −0.5 j (2.46)
      
Y2 ( j )  7 j + 1 4.5 j + 1  U 2 ( j )
Where
Y1= the overhead product composition.
Y2= the bottom product composition.
U1= the reflex flow rate.
U2= Vapor flow rate b.
Consider the well-known Wood/Berry binary distillation column plant model [8].
Y1 ( j )   12.8e− j −18.9e−3 j  U1 ( j ) 

  16.7 j + 1 21 j + 1  
−3 j
 
  = 6.6e−7 j −19.4e (2.47)
    
Y2 ( j ) 10.9 j + 1   
14.4 j + 1  U 2 ( j ) 
16
Chapter three
Analysis Of First Order System
17
Chapter Analysis Of First Order System
Three
3.1 Time domain analysis of control systems

Because time is used as independent variable in most control system, it is usually
of interest to evaluate the state and output responses with respect to time or,
simply, the time response. In the analysis problem, a reference input signal is
applied to a system, and the performance of the system is evaluated by studying the
system response in the time domain[3].
For instance, if the objective of the control system is to have the output variable
track the input signal, starting at some initial time and initial condition, it is
necessary to compare the input and output responses as functions of time.
Therefore, in most control system problems, the final evaluation of the
performance of the system is based on the time response[4].
3.1.1 Mathematical description of First Order System

First order models are very often used to describe the behaviour of many physcial
systems. Even if the system is not first order type response it can be approximated
by first order system.The general form of the differntial equation describing first
order system is[3]:
𝑎1 𝑑𝑦 + 𝑎 0𝑦(𝑡) = 𝑏 0𝑢(𝑡) (3.1)

𝑑𝑡
Where u and y are input and output of the system respactivly shown figure (3.1).
Figure (3.1): First order system
18
Three
This gives a transfer function
𝑌(𝑠) 𝑏0
=
𝑈(𝑠) 𝑎1𝑠 + 𝑎0
𝑏0
𝑌(𝑠) 𝑎0
= 𝑎1
𝑠+1
(3.2)
𝑈(𝑠)
𝑎0
Consider 𝐾 = 𝑏0
𝑎0
𝑎1
𝜏 =
𝑎0
𝑌(𝑠) 𝐾
= (3.3)
𝑈(𝑠) 𝜏𝑠+1
Equation (3.3) is general form of the transfer function described first order system.
Where 'K' gives gain of the system and '𝜏' gives the time constant of the system.
𝜏 is the time required to reach the output 63.3% from the final value.
3.1.2 Time domain analysis of first order system

Unlike electric networks and communication systems, the inputs to many practical
control systems are not exactly known ahead of time. In many cases, the actual
inputs of a control system may vary in random fashion with respect to time. For
instance, in a radar-tracking system for antiaircraft missiles, the position and speed
of the target to be tracked may vary in an unpredictable manner, so that they
cannot be predetermined. This poses a problem for the designer, because it is
difficult to design a control system so that it will perform satisfactorily to all
possible forms of input signals. For the purpose of analysis and design, it is
19
Three
necessary to assume some basic types of test inputs so that the performance of a
system can be evaluated. By selecting these basic test signals properly, not only is
the mathematical treatment of the problem systematized, but the response due to
these inputs allows the prediction of the system's performance to other more
complex inputs. In the design problem, performance criteria may be specified with
respect to these test signals so that the system may be designed to meet the criteria.
This approach is particularly useful for linear systems, since the response to
complex signals can be determined by superposing those due to simple test signals
[4].
3.1.2.1 Step response
The step-function input represents an instantaneous change in the reference input.
For example, if the input is an angular position of a mechanical shaft, a step input
represents the sudden rotation of the shaft. The mathematical representation of a
step function or magnitude 1is
0𝑡<0
𝑢(𝑡) � (3.4)
1𝑡≥0
From equation (3.3)
𝐾
𝑌(𝑠) = 𝑈(𝑠)
𝝉𝑠 + 1
𝐾
𝑌(𝑠) = 1 𝐾
=
𝜏𝑠 + 1 𝑠 𝑠(𝜏𝑠 + 1)
∝1 ∝2
𝑌(s) = +
𝑠 𝝉𝑠+1
𝐾
∝ = 𝑠⌉ =𝐾
1 𝑠=0
𝑠(𝜏𝑠 + 1)
𝐾 𝐾
∝ =
2 (𝜏𝑠 + 1)⌉𝑠=−1�𝜏 = 1
𝑠(𝜏𝑠 + 1) −𝜏
∝2= −𝐾𝝉
20
Three
𝐾 𝝉
𝑌(s) = − 𝐾
𝑠 𝝉𝑠+1
Using Laplace inverse to find:
𝑡
−
𝑦(𝑡) = 𝐾(1 − 𝑒 𝜏 ) (3.5)
Figure (3.2): Exponential response curve.
Shown below Figures (3.3) and (3.4) step response of first order system with
different values of K.
Figure (3.3): Step response of first order system
Case 1:
21
Three
K<1 the case to explain steady state error and time constant from final value.
Figure (3.4a): Step response of first order system when K<1
Case2:
K=1 the case to explain angle 𝜣 from time constant and time
Figure (3.4b): Step response of first order system when K=1
22
Three
Case3:
K>1 the case to explain different between input and system response and to know
time constant from final value
Figure (3.4c): Step response of first order system when K>1
3.1.2.2 Step with amplitude (A)

The step-function input represents an instantaneous change in the reference input.
For example, if the input is an angular position of a mechanical shaft, a step input
represents the sudden rotation of the shaft. The mathematical representation of a
step function or magnitude A is[4]
0𝑡<0
𝑢(𝑡) � (3.6)
𝐴𝑡≥0
From equation (3.3)
𝐾
𝑌(𝑠) = 𝑈(𝑠)
𝝉𝑠 + 1
𝐾
𝑌(𝑠) = 𝐴 𝐴𝐾
=
𝜏𝑠 + 1 𝑠 𝑠(𝝉𝑠 + 1)
∝1 ∝2
𝑌(s) = +
𝑠 𝝉𝑠+1
23
Three
𝐾𝐴
∝1 = 𝑠⌉ = 𝐾𝐴
𝑠(𝜏𝑠 + 1) 𝑠=0
∝2 =
𝐾𝐴 (𝜏𝑠 + 1)⌉ 1 = 𝐾𝐴
𝑠=− 1
𝑠(𝜏𝑠 + 1) 𝜏 −
𝜏
∝2= −𝐾𝐴𝜏
𝐾𝐴 𝐾𝐴𝜏
𝑌(s)= −
𝑠 𝜏𝑠+1
Using Laplace inverse to find:
𝑡
𝑦(𝑡) = 𝐾𝐴(1 − 𝑒 − 𝜏) (3.7)
Figure (3.5): Step with amplitude (A)
Figure (3.6): Step response of first order system when K=KA
24
Three
Step response of first order system with constant time constant and different gain.
1
G1=
𝑠+1
1.5
G2=
𝑠+1
0.5
G3=
𝑠+1
Using MATLAB program to plot G1,G2,and G3 shown in Figure (3.7).
3.1.2.3 Impulse Response
Consider that a linear time-invariant system has the input u(t) and output y(t). As
shown in Fig. (3.8), a rectangular pulse function u(t) of a very large magnitude
𝑢�/2𝜀becomesan impulse function for very small durations as 𝜀 → 0. The equation
representing Fig. (3.8) is
0t≤τ−ε
�
� τ − ε < 𝑡 < τ+ ε
𝑢 (3.8)
2𝜀
0𝑡≥τ+ε
For u� = 1 , u(t) = δ(t)is also known as unit impulse or Dirac delta function.
For t = 0 in Eq. (3.6).
Figure (3.7): Time response for three systems
25
Three
The important point here is that the response of any system can be characterized by
its impulse response g (t), which is defined as the output when the input is a unit-
impulse functionδ(t). Once the impulse response of a linear system is known, the
output of the system y (t), with any input, u (t), can be found by using the transfer
function. to define
ℓ(𝑦(𝑡)) 𝑌(𝑠)
𝐺(𝑠) = = (3.9)
ℓ(𝑢(𝑡)) 𝐹(𝑠)
Impulse response of first order system with constant time constant and different
gain shown figure (3.9).
1
G1=
𝑠+1
1.5
G2=
𝑠+1
0.5
G3=
𝑠+1
Figure (3.8): Graphical representation an

Impulse function.
3.1.2.4 Ramp-Function
The ramp function is a signal that changes constantly with time. Mathematically, a
ramp function is represented by
𝑢(𝑡) = 𝑅 ∗ 𝑡 (3.10)
Where R is a real constant. The ramp function is shown in Fig. (3.10).
26
Three
Figure (3.9): Impulse response for three systems

If the input variable represents the angular displacement of a shaft, the ramp input
denotes the constant-speed
Figure (3.10): Ramp function

Ramp response of first order system with constant time constant and different gain
shown figure (3.11).
1
G1=
𝑠+1
1.5
G2=
𝑠+1
0.5
G3=
𝑠+1
3.1.3 First order systems with time delay
In general transfer function of first order systems with time delay is given by
27
Three
𝐺(𝑠) = 𝐾
𝑒−𝛼𝑡 (3.11)
𝜏𝑠+1
Where
𝛼 Is system output delay.
The exponential is approximated by Pade' below Eq. which known by
Pade' approximation of first order as
𝛼
1− 𝑠
𝑒 − 𝛼 𝑠 ≈ 𝛼2
1+ 𝑠
2
Or by second order
𝛼 𝛼 2 2
1− 𝑠 1− 𝑠+ 𝛼 𝑠
𝑒 −𝛼𝑠 ≈ 2
𝛼 𝑒 −𝛼𝑠 ≈ 2
𝛼
12
2 2
1+ 𝑠 1+ 𝑠+ 𝛼 𝑠
2 2 12
Figure (3.11): Ramp response for three systems
The first order system of Eq. (3.9) with the Pade' approximation is given by
𝛼
𝑘 1− 𝑠
2
𝐺(𝑠) = 𝛼 (3.12)
𝜏𝑠+1 1+ 𝑠
2
28
Three
3.1.3.1 Simulation of First Order System Lead Plus Time Delay (FOLPD)
Equation (3.9) is used for three experiment. The system gain and time constant
were tankan the same value but delay time was changed as given in table (3.1).
The simulation results are given in Fig.(3.12).
Table (3.1): FOLPD with step input
System 𝑲 𝝉 𝜶
G1 1 1 0.1
G2 1 1 1
G3 1 1 5
Figure (3.12): Time response for FOLPD
3.2 Frequency domain of first order systems

Since signals can be substituted by the sums of their sinusoidal components, and in
linear links, the signal components do not interfere (i.e., the superposition principle
Applies), linear links are fully characterized by their frequency responses. The
formulas for the Fourier method are often derived with the Laplace transform using
complex variable 𝑠 = 𝜎 + 𝑗𝜔 .The Laplace transform is also used to make
conversions between the time domain and the frequency domain responses[5].
29
Three
3.2.1 Frequency response of First Order Systems
Consider the general form model of first order system given by Eq.(3.3) as
𝐺(𝑠) = 𝐾
(3.13)
𝜏𝑠+1
By writing the function G (j𝜔) as
𝐺(𝑗𝜔) = 𝐾
(3.14)
𝜏𝑗𝜔+1
By writing the magnitude as
|𝐺(𝑗𝜔)| = 20𝑙𝑜𝑔| 𝐾
| (3.15)
𝜏𝑗𝜔+1
|𝐺(𝑗𝜔) |𝑑𝐵 = 20𝑙𝑜𝑔𝐾 ∗ −20𝑙𝑜𝑔�(𝜏𝜔)^2 + 1 (3.16)
By writing the phase as

𝜏𝜔
𝜑 = − tan−1 (3.17)
1
The Bode plot of first order system is given in Fig.(3.13)
Figure (3.13): Bode Diagram for system
30
Three
3.2.1.1 Frequency response of first order system with different system gain
We consider the first order system given by Eq. (3.20) with constant time constant
and different system gain as in table (3.2a).
The bode plot of these system are given in Fig. (3.14a).
Table (3.2a): First Order System
Parameters G1 G2 G3 G4
𝐾1 0.1 1 10 100
𝜏1 1 1 1 1
3.2.1.2 Frequency response of First order system with different time constant
We consider the first order system given by Eq. (3.20) with constant gain and
different system time constant as in table (3.2b).
The bode plot of these system are given in Fig. (3.14b).
Table (3.2b): First Order System
Parameters G1 G2 G3 G4
𝐾2 10 10 10 10
𝜏2 0.1 1 5 10
In the figure (3.2a) for four system the different between magnitude system but
phase system no different for them
3.2.2 First Order Systems with time delay
𝐺(𝑠) = 𝐾
𝑒−𝛼𝑠 (3.18)
𝜏𝑠+1
31
Three
Figure (3.14a): Frequency response First Order System For table (3.2a)
𝑠 = 𝑗𝜔
𝛼
𝐾 1− 𝑠
2
𝐺(𝑠) = In the Laplace domain
𝜏𝑠+1 1+𝛼𝑠
2
𝑒−𝛼𝑗𝜔 = (sin(𝛼𝜔) + jcos(𝛼𝜔))
𝐺(𝑗𝜔) = 𝐾
∗ (sin(𝛼𝜔) + jcos(𝛼𝜔)) In the frequency domain
𝜏𝑗𝜔+1
|𝐾|
|𝐺(𝑗𝜔)| = ∗ |(sin(𝛼𝜔))2 + (cos(𝛼𝜔))2|
√𝜏2𝜔2 + 1
(sin(𝛼𝜔))2 + (cos(𝛼𝜔))2 = 1
˪𝐺(𝑗𝜔) = 20 log(𝑘) + 20𝑙𝑜𝑔�(sin(𝛼𝜔))2 + (cos(𝛼𝜔))2 − 20𝑙𝑜𝑔�(𝜏𝜔)2 + 1
32
Three
Figure (3.14b): Frequency response First Order System For table (3.2b)
3.2.2.1 Frequency response of First order system with different time delay
We consider the first order system given by Eq.(3.25) with constant gain and
constant time constant and different delay system as in table (3.3).
The bode plot of these system are given in Fig. (3.15).
Table (3.3): First Order Systems with delay
parameters G G1 G2 G3 G4
K 10 10 10 10 10
𝜏 1 1 1 1 1
𝛼 0.01 0.1 0.5 1 5
33
Three
Figure (3.15): First Order Systems with delay
34
Chapter Four
PID Controller
35
Chapter
four PID Controller
PID control is a name generally given to three-term control. The mnemonic PID
refers to the first letters of the names of the individual terms that make up the
standard three-term controller. These are P for the proportional term, I for the
integral term and D for the derivative term in the controller [4].
4.1 Proportional control
Proportional control is denoted by the P-term in the PID controller. It used when
the controller action is to be proportional to the size of the process error signal.
𝑒(𝑡) = 𝑅(𝑡) − 𝑦𝑚(𝑡) (4.1)
The time and Laplace domain representations for proportional control are given as:
𝑢𝑐(𝑡) = 𝑘𝑃𝑒(𝑡) Time domain
𝑈𝑐(𝑠) = 𝑘𝑃𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain
Figure (4.1): Closed-loop unity feedback system
Figure (4.2) Block diagrams: proportional control term.

Where the proportional gain is denoted 𝐾𝑝 . Figure (4.2) shows the block diagrams
R
for proportional control[9].

4.2 Integral control
Integral control is denoted by the I-term in the PID controller and is used when it
is required that the controller correct for any steady offset from a constant
36
Chapter
four PID Controller
reference signal value. Integral control overcomes the shortcoming of

proportional control by eliminating offset without the use of excessively large
controller gain. The time and Laplace domain representations for integral control
are given as:
𝑢𝑐(𝑡) = 𝐾𝐼 ∫ 𝑒(𝜏)𝑑𝜏 Time domain
𝑈𝑐 (𝑠) = �𝐾𝐼 � 𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain
𝑠
Where the integral controller gain is denoted 𝑘𝐼 . The time and Laplace block
diagrams are shown in Figure (4.3).
Figure (4.3): Block diagrams: integral control term.
4.3 Derivative control
If a controller can use the rate of change of an error signal as an input, then this
introduces an element of prediction into the control action. Derivative control uses
the rate of change of an error signal and is the D-term in the PID controller. The
time and Laplace domain representations for derivative control are given as:
𝑢𝑐 (𝑡) = 𝐾𝐷 𝑑𝑒 Time domain
𝑑𝑡
𝑈𝑐(𝑠) = [𝐾𝐷𝑠]𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain
Where the derivative control gain is denoted 𝑘𝐷 .This particular form is termed
pure derivative control, for which the block diagram representations are shown in
Figure(4.4).
To use derivative control more care is needed than when using proportional or
integral control. For example, in most real applications a pure derivative control
term cannot be implemented due to possible measurement noise amplification and
37
Chapter
four PID Controller
a modified term has to be used instead. However, derivative control has useful
design features and is an essential element of some real-world control applications:
For example, tachogenerator feedback in DC. Motor control is a form of derivative
control [9] .
Figure (4.4): Block diagrams: derivative control term.

The PID parameters affect system dynamics. The effects of increasing each of the
controller parameters KP,KI and KD can be summarized as[2]
Response Rise Time Overshoot Settling Time S-S Error

𝐾𝑃 Decrease Increase NT Decrease
𝐾𝐼 Decrease Increase Increase Eliminate
𝐾𝐷 NT Decrease Decrease NT
NT: No definite trend. Minor change.

4.4 Proportional and derivative control
A property of derivative control that should be noted arises when the controller
input error signal becomes constant but not necessarily zero, as might occur in
steady state process conditions. In these circumstances, the derivative of the
constant error signal is zero and the derivative controller produces no control
signal. Consequently, the controller is taking no action and is unable to correct for
steady state offsets, for example. To avoid the controller settling into
a somnambulant state, the derivative control term is always used in combination
with a proportional term. This combination is called proportional and derivative, or
PD, control. The formulae for simple PD controllers are given as:
38
Chapter
four PID Controller
𝑢𝑐(𝑡) = 𝑘𝑃(𝑡) + 𝑘𝐷 𝑑𝑒 Time domain

𝑑𝑡
𝑈𝑐(𝑠) = [𝑘𝑃 + 𝑘𝐷𝑠]𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain

where the proportional gain is 𝑘𝑃 and the derivative gain is 𝑘𝐷. The blockdiagrams
for simple PDcontrollers are given in Figure (4.5) [9].
Figure (4.5): Block diagrams: proportional and derivative control.
4.5 Proportional and Integral control

The integral part of the PID controller produces a signal that is proportional to the
time integral of the input of the controller. Fig. 4-6 illustrates the block diagram of
a prototype second-order system with a series PI controller. The transfer function
of the PI controller is[9]
𝑢𝑐(𝑡) = 𝑘𝑃(𝑡) + 𝑘𝐼 ∫ 𝑑𝑡 Time domain
𝑈𝑐(𝑠) = �𝑘𝑃 + 𝑘𝐼 1𝑠� 𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain
39
Chapter
four PID Controller
Figure (4.6): Block diagrams proportional and integral control.
4.6 Proportional Integral Derivative control

The PD controller could add damping to a system, but the steady-state response is
not affected. The PI controller could improve the relative stability and improve the
steady-state error at the same time, but the rise time is increased. This leads to the
motivation of using a PID controller so that the best features of each of the PI and
PD controllers are utilized[9].
𝑑𝑒
𝑢𝑐(𝑡) = 𝑘𝑃(𝑡) + 𝑇𝑖 ∫ 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑇𝑑 Time domain
𝑑𝑡
𝑈𝑐 (𝑠) = 𝑘𝑃 �1 + 1 + 𝑇𝑑𝑠� 𝐸(𝑠) Laplace domain

𝑇𝑖 𝑠
Figure (4.7): Block diagrams proportional and integral and Derivative control.
4.7 Types of PID Controller

The main types of PID controller are:
40
Chapter
four PID Controller
I. Industrial PID controller

II. Series PID controller
III. Parallel PID controller
i. Industrial PID controller
The industrial PID controller is more use in the effectively application. there
are two models, the controller is use for control tuning in model one and
model two industrial controller, can see different between PI controller and
PID controller in these systems shown figure (4.8).
Figure (4.8): Industrial PID controller
ii. series PID controller
Some early PID controllers used pneumatic hardware for which a series transfer
function representation was an appropriate mathematical description. To maintain
continuity in later analogue PID devices, some manufacturers retained this series
structure. However, current modern PID controllers are likely to be digital and in
parallel form, but these series PID formulae are still found in some industrial PID
controller manuals. A block diagram of the series PID structure is found in Figure
(4.9).
41
Chapter
four PID Controller
Figure (4.9): Series PID controller
iii. Parallel PID controller
The family of PID controllers is constructed from various combinations of the

proportional, integral and derivative terms as required to meet specific
performance requirements. The formula for the basic parallel PID controller is
This parallel or textbook formula is also known as a decoupled PID form. This is
because the PID controller has three decoupled parallel paths, as shown in Figure
(4.10).As can be seen from the figure, a numerical change in any individual
coefficient, 𝑘𝑃, 𝑘𝐼 or 𝑘𝐷, changes only the size of contribution in the path of the
term. For example, if the value of 𝑘𝐷 is changed, then only the size of the
derivative action changes, and this change is decoupled and independent from the
size of the proportional and integral terms. This decoupling of the three terms is a
consequence of the parallel architecture of the PID controller[9].
Figure (4.10): Parallel PID controller
42
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.8 Time domain specification of close loop control systems
Time domain specification parameters are depending on the application. Certain

application need fast response and law of over shoot other application. May need
specified settling time, and so on. The time domain specification parameters are
given in Fig (4.11) and defined as:
td:Is Delay time
ts:Is Settling time
tr:Is Rise time.
tmax:IsTime at peak response
%Mp:IsMaximum overshoot
S1G1M1
S: Is number of system (model)
G: Is number of group
M: is number of method
Figure (4.11): Typical unit-step response of a control system illustrating the time-domain
specification
43
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.9 Simulation Time response result of PI control for distillation column

model (1).
−3𝑠
Model (1) is a model of one channel distillation column model [ 0.7𝑒 ].and PI
18.5𝑠+1
controller is simulated by using MATLAB. Four tuning methods groups are used.
The first group are "Chien, et al.(1952)- servo", "Chien et al.(1952) –servo", "St.
Clair(1997)". The second group are 'Zhuang and Atherton (1993) –min. ISE1",
'Rovira, et al. (1969) –min. ITAE", and "Zhuang and Atherton (1993) –min.
ISTES2". The third group are "Schneider (1988)-1", "Hang, et al. (1993a, b)-2",
and "Hang, et al. (1993a, b)-continued-2". The fourth group are "Rivera, et al.
(1986)-2"," Chien(1988)", and "Fruehauf, et al. (1993)-2".
The time domain parameters and system responses of the model (1) with PI
controller are given in the following.
Table (4.1): Time domain parameter data of tuning method group (1) model (1)
Method Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝐦𝐚𝐱(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

No
Process reaction
S1G1M1 Chien, et 6.59 9.97 29.7 18.1 50.3
al.(1952)servo
S1G1M2 Chien et 4.57 2.84 96.6 11.6 123
al.(1952)servo
S1G1M3 St. Clair(1997) 6.69 6.48 33.8 19.1 51.1
Figure (4.12): Time response for three rules tuning method group (1) model (1)
44
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PI tuning to the first model, by using group (1) the overshoot form
proportional in the S1G1M3 and integral but the rise time is small
Method No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

Servo tuning
S1G2M1 Zhuang and 4.16 2.23 104 9.99 112
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISE1
S1G2M2 Rovira, et al. 5.13 3.65 70.2 12.8 70.1
(1969) –min.
ITAE
S1G2M3 Zhuang and 7.35 7.89 25.8 22 57.2
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISTES2
proportional and integral in the S1G2M1 but the rise time is small and S1G2M2
less than over shoot and more than rise time because the proportional controlled on
the increase overshoot.
45
Chapter
four PID Controller
Method No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

Direct synthesis
S1G3M1 Schneider(1988)- 6.24 5.59 40.5 16.4 59.4
1
S1G3M2 Hang, et al. 5.02 3.46 74.9 12.3 79
(1993a, b)-2
S1G3M3 Hang, et 6.98 7.07 30.2 20.6 54.1
al.(1993a, b)-
continued-2
Method Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

No
Robust
S1G4M1 Rivera, et 4.56 2.7 95.2 11.6 119
al.(1986)-2
S1G4M2 Chien(1988) 8.71 7.14 46.7 23.2 106
S1G4M3 Fruehauf, et al. 7.52 8.43 43.5 21.4 75.1
(1993)-2
46
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.10 Simulation Frequency response result of model (1) with PI controller.
Advantages of the Bode Plot. In the absence of a computer, a Bode diagram can
be sketched by approximating the magnitude and phase with straight line
segments. Gain crossover, phase crossover, gain margin, and phase margin are
more easily to measure.
Advantage of the Bode Plot. Absolute and relative stability of only minimum-
phase systems can be determined from the Bode plot[4].
In this section all simulation and time domain investigation given in pervious
section will investigate infrequency domain. The frequency domain parameters
and Bode plot are of model 1 with PI controller given in the following.
47
Chapter
four PID Controller
Table (4.5): Frequency domain parameter data of tuning method group (1) model (1)
Method Rule Gain Phase Gain cross Phase cross

No margin margin over(rad/sec) over(rad/sec)
(dB) (deg)
Process reaction
S1G1M1 Chien, et 11.6 68.1 0.574 0.223
al.(1952)servo
S1G1M2 Chienet -3.63 -9.45 0.403 0.465
al.(1952)servo
S1G1M3 St.Clair(1997) 11.7 61.8 0.556 0.226
Figure (4.16): Frequency response for three rules tuning method group (1) model (1)

(dB) (deg)
Servo tuning
S1G2M1 Zhuang and -7.27 20.3 0.441 0.575
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISE1
S1G2M2 Rovira, et al. 3.18 11.4 0.459 0.389
(1969)min.ITAE
S1G2M3 Zhuang and 13.6 77.8 0.58 0.183
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISTES2
48
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Direct synthesis
S1G3M1 Schneider(1988)1 10 49.9 0.537 0.262
S1G3M2 Hang, et al. 1.97 6.68 0.448 0.406
(1993a,b)2
S1G3M3 Hang, et al. 12.6 68.7 0.566 0.206
(1993a, b)-
continued-2
49
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Robust
S1G4M1 Rivera, et -4.29 -11.3 0.41 0.484
al.(1986)-2
S1G4M2 Chien(1988) 14.5 40.5 0.427 0.183
S1G4M3 Fruehauf, et al. 13 47.3 0.488 0.209
(1993)-2
4.11 Simulation Time response result of PID controller for distillation column
model (1).
Model (1) is a model of one channel distillation column model and PID controller
is simulated by using MATLAB. six tuning methods groups are used. The first
group are "Ziegler and Nichols", "Chien et al- Servo-1", and "Cohen and Coon".
The second group are "Minimum.IAE-Murrill", "Minimum. ITAE-Murrill". The
third group are 'Minimum IAE Rovira et al", "Minimum.ISE-Wang et.al", and
"Minimum ISE- Zhuang and Atherton". The fourth group are "Abbas", "Regulator
- min. ISE- Ho et al", and 'Servo - min. ISE -Ho et al". The fifth group are
"Brambilla et al", "Rivera et al", and "Fruehauf et al". The sixth group are
50
Chapter
four PID Controller
'Regulator - nearly minimum IAE"," ITAE -Hwang and Fang"," McMillan, Tan et
al". The time domain parameters and system responses of the model (1) with PI
controller are given in the following.
No
Process reaction
S1G1M1 Ziegler and 1.75 2.38 22.7 0 15.3
Nichols[11]
S1G1M2 Chien et al. 3.93 8.41 0.833 27.1 14.1
[14] - Servo-1
S1G1M3 Cohen and 1.97 2.38 29.6 5.93 1.04
Coon [16]
The PID tuning to the first model, by using group (1) the approximately zero
overshoot in the S1G1M2 the model under comment but the rise time is long and
S1G1M1&S1G1M3 more than twenty over shoot because the derivative controlled
on the decrease overshoot.
51
Chapter
four PID Controller
No
Regulator
S1G2M1 Minimum.IAE- 2.19 3.08 0 >250 83.9
Murrill [15]
S1G2M2 1.63 2.56 22.3 0 18.3
S1G2M3 Minimum.ITAE- 2.19 3.05 0 >250 85.9
Murrill [15]
The PID tuning to the first model, by using group (2) the zero overshoot in the
S1G2M1&S1G2M3 the model under comment but the rise time is short and
S1G2M1 more than twenty over shoot because the derivative controlled on the
decrease overshoot.
52
Chapter
four PID Controller
No
Servo
S1G3M1 Minimum IAE 3.14 5.4 0 >80 15.4
Rovira et
al.[20]
S1G3M2 Minimum.ISE- 2.81 5.21 0 >80 9.27
Wang etal.[21]
S1G3M3 Minimum ISE- 2.27 4.47 2.26 0 8.66
Zhuang and
Atherton [19]
S1G3M1&S1G3M2 the model under comment, but the S1G3M3 the over shoot is
2.26% and rise time less than S1G3M1&S1G3M2 because the derivative
controlled on the decrease overshoot.
53
Chapter
four PID Controller
No
Direct synthesis
S1G4M1 Abbas[24] 3.76 7.94 0 >25 14.1
S1G4M2 Regulator - 8.53 506 2.22e-014 2.5e+003 1.25e+003
min. ISE- Ho
et al.[25]
S1G4M3 Servo - min. 0.881 0.569 32.7 0 12.2
ISE -Ho et al.
[25]
The PID tuning to the first model, by using group (4) the approximately zero
overshoot in the S1G4M1&S1G4M2 the model under comment, but the S1G4M3
the over shoot is 32.7% and rise time less than S1G4M1&S1G4M2 because the
derivative controlled on the decrease overshoot.
54
Chapter
four PID Controller

No
Robust
S1G5M1 Brambilla et 1.945 2.97 2.22e-014 0 5.28
al. [26]
S1G5M2 Rivera et al. 2.83 5.28 0 >50 9.39
[27]
S1G5M3 Fruehauf et 4.17 8.57 3.94 22.2 1.03
al. [28]
S1G5M2 the model under comment and S1G5M1 approximately zero overshoot
but the rise time is long and S1G5M3 over shoot is 3.94% because the derivative
controlled on the decrease overshoot.
55
Chapter
four PID Controller
No
Ultimate cycle
S1G6M1 Regulator - 8.22 8.31 52.4 23.3 122
nearly
minimum
IAE, ITAE -
Hwang and
Fang [31]
S1G6M2 McMillan[32] 3.14 4.69 29.5 11.5 32.3
S1G6M3 Tan et al. [33] 21 42.1 3.65 81.4 107
The PID tuning to the first model, by using group (6) the 3.65% overshoot in the
S1G6M3 but long rise time and S1G6M1 52.4% overshoot but the rise time is long
and S1G6M3 over shoot is 3.65% because the derivative controlled on the decrease
overshoot.
4.12 Simulation Frequency response of model (1) with PID controller.
section will investigate in frequency domain. The frequency domain parameters
and Bode plot are of model 1 with PID controller given in the following Tables and
Figures.
56
Chapter
four PID Controller
(dB) (deg)
Process reaction
S1G1M1 Ziegler and -3.52 -180 Inf 0
Nichols[11]
S1G1M2 Chien et al. 7.36 170 Inf 0.034
[14] - Servo-1
S1G1M3 Cohen and 0.0578 6.87 Inf 7.62
Coon [16]
(dB) (deg)
Regulator
S1G2M1 Minimum.IAE- 1.15 32.8 Inf 1.76
Murrill [15]
S1G2M2 -6.6 88.1 Inf 0.988
S1G2M3 Minimum.ITAE- 0.912 31.5 Inf 1.9
Murrill [15]
57
Chapter
four PID Controller
(dB) (deg)
Servo
S1G3M1 Minimum IAE 5.44 -180 Inf 0
Rovira et
al.[20]
S1G3M2 Minimum.ISE- 3.97 -180 Inf 0
Wang et
al.[21]
S1G3M3 Minimum ISE- -0.728 40.4 Inf 2.28
Zhuang and
Atherton [19]
58
Chapter
four PID Controller
(dB) (deg)
Direct synthesis
S1G4M1 abbas[24] 7.63 -180 Inf 0
S1G4M2 Regulator - 17.8 -180 1.09 0
min. ISE- Ho
et al.[25]
S1G4M3 Servo - min. -15.7 -180 Inf 0
ISE -Ho et al.
[25]
59
Chapter
four PID Controller
(dB) (deg)
Robust
S1G5M1 Brambilla et -0.915 -180 Inf 0
al. [26]
S1G5M2 Rivera et al. 4.08 -180 Inf 0
[27]
S1G5M3 Fruehauf et 8.3 148 Inf 0.101
al. [28]
(dB) (deg)
Ultimate cycle
S1G6M1 Regulator - 17.7 33.9 0.535 0.194
nearlyminimumIAE,
ITAE -Hwang and
Fang [31]
S1G6M2 McMillan[32] 5.23 86.9 Inf 0.355
S1G6M3 Tan et al. [33] 24.3 -180 Inf 0
60
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.13 Simulation result of PI control for distillation column model (2).

−𝑠
Model (2) is model of one channel distillation column which given by [ 12.8𝑒 ].
16.75𝑠+1
Model (2) is a model of one channel distillation column model and PI controller is
simulated by using MATLAB. fife tuning methods groups are used. The first
group are "Ziegler and Nichols (1942)", "Chien, et al. (1952)regulator", "St.
Clair(1997)". The second group are "Murrill(1967) –min.ISE", "Zhuang
andAtherton(1993)min.ISTES1", and "Zhuang and Atherton(1993)min.ISTES2".
The third group are "Zhuang and Atherton(1993) –min. ISE1","Rovira, et al.
(1969) –min. ITAE", and "Zhuang and Atherton(1993) –min. ISTES2". The fourth
group are "Pemberton(1972) min.IAEregulator", "Smith and Corripio (1985) -5%
O.S Servo", and "Schneider(1988)1". The fifth group are "Rivera, et al.(1986)-2",
"Chien(1988)", and "Fruehauf, et al. (1993)-2".
The time domain parameters and system responses of the model (2) with PI
controller are given in the following .
61
Chapter
four PID Controller
Method Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) Mp% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

No
Process reaction
S2G1M1 Ziegler and 1.36 0.796 65.1 2.98 10.3
Nichols (1942)
S2G1M2 Chien, et al. 1.66 1.29 37.8 4.2 8.64
(1952)regulator
S2G1M3 St. Clair(1997) 2.54 4.16 0 >15 7.8
The PI tuning to the second model, by using group (1) the overshoot form
the increase overshoot

No
Regulator tuning
S2G2M1 Murrill(1967) –min.ISE 1.33 0.765 63.6 3.08 9.85
S2G2M2 Zhuang 1.37 0.863 45.4 3.02 10.3
andAtherton(1993)min.ISTES1
S2G2M3 Zhuang 2.17 2.47 13.4 7.05 18.7
andAtherton(1993)min.ISTES2
62
Chapter
four PID Controller
the increase overshoot

No
Servo tuning
S2G3M1 Zhuang and 1.46 2.32 12.5 3.27 8.83
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISE1
S2G3M2 Rovira, et al. 2.01 2.43 1.87 5.79 4.23
(1969) –min.
ITAE
S2G3M3 Zhuang and 3.49 8.01 0 >80 19.9
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISTES2
63
Chapter
four PID Controller
zero over shoot and more than rise time because the proportional controlled on the
increase overshoot
Table (4.24): Time domain parameter data of tuning method group (4)model (2)

No
Direct synthesis
S2G4M1 Pemberton(1972) 1.31 0.807 35.9 2.76 8.11
min.IAEregulator
S2G4M2 Smith and 1.92 2.15 3.07 5.09 6.1
Corripio (1985) -
5% O.S Servo
S2G4M3 Schneider(1988)1 2.36 3.54 0.00663 >12 6.5
64
Chapter
four PID Controller
approximately zero over shoot and more than rise time because the proportional
controlled on the increase overshoot

No
Robust
S2G5M1 Rivera, et 1.7 1.61 7.15 4.1 5.73
al.(1986)-2
S2G5M2 Chien(1988) 12.6 36.7 0 >120 66.3
S2G5M3 Fruehauf, et al. 1.92 2.15 3.07 5.09 6.1
(1993)-2
65
Chapter
four PID Controller
zero over shoot and more than rise time because the proportional controlled on the
increase overshoot
4.14 Simulation Frequency response of model (2) with PI controller.
and Bode plot are of model ( 2) with PI controller given in the following.

(dB) (deg)
Process reaction
S2G1M1 Ziegler and -0.806 -4.3 1.74 1.82
Nichols (1942)
S2G1M2 Chien, et al. 5.91 42.2 1.8 1.14
(1952)regulator
S2G1M3 St. Clair(1997) 14 -180 2 0
66
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Regulator tuning
S2G2M1 Murrill(1967)min.ISE -1.26 -6.8 1.78 1.91
S2G2M2 Zhuang and Atherton 0.796 5.08 1.88 1.79
(1993)min.ISTES1
S2G2M3 Zhuang and Atherton 11.6 109 1.92 0.478
(1993)min.ISTES2
67
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Servo tuning
S2G3M1 Zhuang and 5.08 47.9 2.02 1.32
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISE1
S2G3M2 Rovira et al. 10.4 167 2 0.107
(1969) min.
ITAE
S2G3M3 Zhuang and 17.9 -180 2.01 0
Atherton(1993)
–min. ISTES2

(dB) (deg)
Direct synthesis
S2G4M1 Pemberton(1972) 8.02e-015 0 2 2
min.IAE rgulator
S2G4M2 Smith and 9.54 -180 2 0
Corripio (1985) -
5% O.S Servo
S2G4M3 Schneider(1988)1 12.9 -180 2 0
68
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Robust
S2G5M1 Rivera, et 7.62 89.7 2 0.834
al.(1986)-2
S2G5M2 Chien(1988) 30.8 -180 2 0
S2G5M3 Fruehauf, et al. 9.54 -180 2 0
(1993)-2
69
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.15 Simulation Time domain result of PID controller for distillation column
model (2)
Model (2) is a model of one channel distillation column model and PID controller
is simulated by using MATLAB. six tuning methods groups are used. The first
group are "Ziegler and Nichols", "Chien et al. Servo-1", "Cohen and Coon". The
second group are "Minimum IAE -Murrill", and "Minimum ITAE -Murrill". The
third group are Minimum IAE - Rovira et al.,Minimum ISE - Wang et al., and
Minimum ISE - Zhuang and Atherton. The fourth group are "Regulator - min. IAE
-Smith and Corripio","Servo. min. IAE .Smith & Corripio", and "Servo 5%
overshoot Smith & Corripio". The fifth group are "Brambilla et al","Rivera et al.",
and "Fruehauf et al". The sixth group are " Servo - nearly minimum IAE, ITAE -
Hwang andFang", "Regulator - nearly minimum IAE, ITAE -Hwang and Fang",
and "McMillan"
The time domain parameters and system responses of the model (2) with PID
controller are given in the following .
Model No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑀𝑝% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)

Process reaction
S2G1M1 Ziegler and 0.589 0.759 -- -- 4.99
Nichols[11]
S2G1M2 Chien et al. 1.25 2.67 0.18 11.5 4.73
[14] -Servo-1
S2G1M3 Cohen and 0.659 0.781 37.7 1.91 4.45
Coon [16]
70
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (1) the overshoot form
less than over shoot and more than rise time because the derivative controlled on
the decrease overshoot
Model No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)
Regulator
S2G2M1 Minimum 0.752 1.06 0.86 1.95 31.5
IAE -
Murrill [15]
S2G2M2 0.667 1.71 4.44e-014 0 23.8
S2G2M3 Minimum 0.808 1.21 2.73 2.39 54.8
ITAE -
Murrill [15]
71
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (2) the overshoot form
less than over shoot and more than rise time because the derivative controlled on
the decrease overshoot
Model No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑 % 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)
Servo
S2G3M1 Minimum 1.11 1.96 0 >80 3.77
IAE - Rovira
et al. [20]
S2G3M2 Minimum 0.954 1.79 0 >5 3.18
ISE - Wang et
al. [21]
S2G3M3 Minimum 0.758 1.62 1.09 0 3.45
ISE -
Zhuang and
Atherton [19]
72
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (3) the best of tuning ,so the
zero overshoot in the S2G3M1,S2G3M2 because the derivative controlled on the
decrease overshoot
Model No Rule 𝒕𝒅(𝒔) 𝒕𝒓(𝒔) 𝑴𝒑% 𝒕𝒎𝒂𝒙(𝒔) 𝒕𝒔(𝒔)
Direct synthesis
S2G4M1 Regulator - 0.702 1.15 0.14 6.16 2.12
min. IAE -
Smith and
Corripio [22]
S2G4M2 Servo. min. 0.876 1.61 0.156 7.79 2.91
IAE .Smith
& Corripio
[22]
S2G4M3 Servo 5% 1.5 3.42 0.189 >12 6.01
overshoot
Smith &
Corripio [22]
73
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (4) the approximately
overshoot in the three method and rise time is small because the derivative
controlled on the decrease overshoot

Robust
S2G5M1 Brambilla et 0.649 0.989 0 0 1.76
al. [26]
S2G5M2 Rivera et al. 0.943 1.76 0 >25 3.13
[27]
S2G5M3 Fruehauf et 1.25 2.36 14.5 6.56 13.4

al. [28]
74
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (5) the zero overshoot in the
S2G5M1&S2G5M2 but the rise time is small and S2G5M3 14.5% over shoot
because the derivative controlled on the decrease overshoot
Ultimate cycle
S2G6M1 Servo - nearly 1.12 1.12 42.6 2.91 5.88
minimum
IAE, ITAE -
Hwang
andFang [31]
S2G6M2 Regulator - 0.562 0.697 18.7 0 5.58
nearly
minimum
IAE, ITAE -
Hwang and
Fang [31]
S2G6M3 McMillan 1.04 1.49 40 3.94 11.4
[32]
75
Chapter
four PID Controller
The PID tuning to the second model, by using group (6) the 42.6% overshoot in the
S2G6M1 but the rise time is larger and S2G6M2 18.7% over shoot but the rise
time is less than because the derivative controlled on the decrease overshoot
4.16 Simulation Frequency response of model (2) with PID controller.
and Bode plot are of model 2 with PID controller given in the following Tables and
Figures.
Model No Rule Gain Phase Gain cross Phase cross

margin margin over(rad/sec) over(rad/sec)
(dB) (deg)
Process reaction
S2G1M1 Ziegler and -3.52 -180 Inf 0
Nichols[11]
S2G1M2 Chien et al. 7.36 176 Inf 0.0404
[14] - Servo-
1
S2G1M3 Cohen and 0.0325 4.98 Inf 30.4
Coon [16]
76
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
regulator
S2G2M1 Minimum 1.69 41.3 Inf 4.08
IAE -
Murrill [15]
S2G2M2 -3.76 75.7 Inf 3.94
S2G2M3 Minimum 4.39 48 Inf 2.88
ITAE -
Murrill [15]
77
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
servo
S2G3M1 Minimum 6.04 -180 Inf 0
IAE -
Rovira et al.
[20]
S2G3M2 Minimum 4.22 -180 Inf 0
ISE -
Wang et al.
[21]
S2G3M3 Minimum -0.892 43.2 Inf 6.55
ISE -
Zhuang and
Atherton
[19]
78
Chapter
four PID Controller

(dB) (deg)
Direct synthesis
S2G4M1 Regulator - 0 0 Inf inf
min. IAE -
Smith and
Corripio
[22]
S2G4M2 Servo - min. 2.92 173 Inf 0.104
IAE -Smith
and Corripio
[22]
S2G4M3 Servo - 5% 9.54 180 Inf 0.000165
overshoot -
Smithand
Corripio
[22]
79
Chapter
four PID Controller
Model Rule Gain Phase Gain cross Phase cross

(dB) (deg)
Robust
S2G5M1 Brambilla.[26] -0.915 Inf Inf --
S2G5M2 Rivera. [27] 4.08 -180 Inf 0
S2G5M3 Fruehauf[28] 6.02 126 Inf 0.502

(dB) (deg)
Ultimate cycle
S2G6M1 Servo - 8.92 40.9 4.77 1.73
nearly
minimum
IAE, ITAE -
Hwang and
Fang [31]
S2G6M2 Regulator - -3.28 -180 Inf 0
nearly
minimum
IAE, ITAE -
Hwang and
Fang [31]
S2G6M3 McMillan 5.23 79.8 Inf 1.11
[32]
80
Chapter
four PID Controller
4.17 Conclusion of results
Form the PI tuning to the first model, by using the Zhuang and Atherton(1993)
–min. ISTES2 in servo tuning is the best rule to the controller. There over shoot
in this tuning about 25.8%. In generally the dead time, rise time, and settling
time is in the medium compared with the other rules.
From the PID tuning to the first model, by using the Minimum ITAE -
Murrill in the regulator tuning. There a minimum rise time about3.5sec, and NO
over shoot, so this rule is the best to the controller in this system.
Form the PI tuning to the second model, by using the Rovira, et al. (1969) –min.
ITAE in servo tuning is the best rule to the controller. There over shoot in this
tuning about 1.87%. The dead time is 2.01sec, rise time is 2.43sec, and settling
time is in the medium compared with other rules.
81
Chapter
four PID Controller
From the PID tuning to the second model, by using the Brambilla et al. In the
robust tuning. There a minimum rise time which is 0.989sec, and NO over
shoot, so this rule is the best to the controller in this system.
From the results above can make sure and take a decision that the PID
controller is the perfect choice to control the two models.
82
Chapter Fife
Flow Process station Model3502
83
Chapter
fife
Flow process station Model 3502
5.1 Introduction
The stations process control trainers are designed for hands-on training in the
measurement, control and troubleshooting of processes. The stations can operate
independently, or in certain combination configurations to simulate complex
processes. In stations instrumentation and process control system are patch
connected to permit alternate control schemes and adaptation of new technology in
the future. The flow station utilize water as the process media, shown figure(5.1).
The main parts of the Flow Process station are:

1. Electronic Differential Pressure Transmitter (FT)
2. Microprocessor Based Controller (FIC)
3. Chart Recorder (FR)
4. Paperless Recorder (From 35xx)
5. Variable Area Flow meter(FI)
6. Holding tank and pump
7. Valves and pipes
8. Venturi tube assembly (FE)
5.2 Flow Process Proportional Plus Integral Control
CONTROLLER CONFIGURATION
1. Auto/Manual=Manual
2. Set point=50%
3. modes=PI (proportional + Integral )
4. measurement: format =SQR(Square Root)
5. Output2= Process Measurement
84
Chapter
fife
Figure (5.1): Flow process station Model 3502
6. Gain=1 (prop.Band=100%)
7. Reset =10 rep/min.( 0.1 minutes integral time)
5.2.1 PROCEDURE
1. Set up and equipment as per the loop diagram.
2. Set the controller according to the instrument data.
3. Open V1,V2,V3, and V4. Vent the HP & LP sides of the flow transmitter.
85
Chapter
fife
4. Manually adjust the output until the measured variable equals the set point. Start
the recorder and place the controller in automatic.
5. Effect of original gain in response to setpoint changes:
a. Set the gain to 1, set reset to 10 rep/min.
b. Rapidly decrease the set point to 30%
c. Stop the recorder when the process stabilizes.
d. Adjust the set point to 50% and allow the process to stabilize.
6. Increasing gain in response to set point change.
a. adjust the gain to1(100% PB).
b. repeat step 5(b),(c) and (d).
7. Increasing integral action and original gain in response to set point change:
a. adjust the gain to1(100% PB), and increase the reset.
8. Increasing gain and increasing reset in response to set point change:
a. adjust the gain to1(100% PB), and adjust the reset to 0.5min/rep.
9. Stop recorder.
86
Chapter
fife
Figure (5.2) :Loop Diagram
Figure(5.3) PI control using flow process station
87
Chapter
fife
5.3 Flow Process Proportional Plus Integral Plus Derivative Control

5.3.1 CONTROLLER CONFIGURATION
1. Auto/Manual=Manual
2. Set point=50%
3. modes=PI (proportional + Integral )
4. measurement: format =SQR(Square Root)
5. Output2= Process Measurement
6. Gain=1 (prop.Band=100%)
7. Reset =10 rep/min.( 0.1 minutes integral time)
8. Derivative=0.05 min
5.3.2 PROCEDURE
1. Set up and equipment as per the loop diagram.
2. Set the controller according to the instrument data.
3. Open V1,V2,V3, and V4. Vent the HP & LP sides of the flow transmitter.
4. Manually adjust the output until the measured variable equals the set point. Start
the recorder and place the controller in automatic.
5. Effect of original gain in response to setpoint changes:
a. Set the gain to 1, set reset to 10 rep/min.
b. Rapidly decrease the set point to 30%
c. Stop the recorder when the process stabilizes.
d. Adjust the set point to 50% and allow the process to stabilize.
6. Increasing gain in response to set point change.
88
Chapter
fife
a. adjust the gain to1(100% PB).
7. Increasing integral action and original gain in response to set point change:
a. adjust the gain to0.3(333% PB), and increase the reset.
8. Increasing gain and increasing reset in response to set point change:
a. adjust the gain to1(100% PB), and adjust the reset to 0.5min/rep.
9. Stop recorder.
89
Chapter
fife
Figure (5.4) :Loop Diagram
Figure (5.5) PID control using flow process station
90
Chapter Six
Conclusion and Future work
91
chapter Conclusion and future work
Six
6.1 Conclusion
This project considered both the modeling analysis of first order systems and
tuning models of PI and PID controller. Modeling of different industrial systems
model by first order differential equation were given. Simulation of these models
by using Matlab with different models parameters were simulate.
In the second part of project different PI and PID tuning rules were presented. A
bout 63 different method of tuning PI and PID were given. These rules are used to
design PI and PID for two process models.
Transient response include Maximum peak, rise time, and stilling time between
different tuning rules are given. Frequency response parameters phase margin, gain
margin.
Simulation examples were used to demonstrate usefulness of tuning rules in the

two process models.
Industrial education process system (flow process station. Model 3502) at

department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering modification by Lab Volt is
used for test of PID controller.
6.2 Future work
➢ The system has been done on continues first order system, the work can be
extended for second order systems.
➢ The tuning methods are used for simulation model, it’s useful to apply the
methods in real system.
➢ To use simulation bused on GUI is (Graphic User Interface) a future work
give more easily to steady these methods.
92
Appendices
93
Rules
Appendix
A.1 PI tuning rules - FOLPD model

Rule 𝑲𝒄 𝑻𝒊 Comment
Controller 1
𝐺𝑐 (𝑠) = 𝑘 𝑐(1 + )
𝑇𝑖𝑠
Process reaction
Chien, et al.(1952) – 0.35𝑇𝑚 1.17𝑇𝑚 0% overshoot;
servo 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 0.11<𝜏𝑚 <1
𝑇𝑚
Chien et al.(1952) – 0.6𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 20% overshoot;
servo 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 0.11<𝜏𝑚 <1
𝑇𝑚
St. Clair(1997) 0.33𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
≤ 3.0
𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝜏𝑚
𝜏 𝑚
Ziegler and Nichols 0.9𝑇𝑚 3.33𝜏𝑚 ≤1
(1942) 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚
Chien, et al. 0.6𝑇𝑚 4𝜏𝑚 0% overshoot;
(1952)regulator 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 0.11<𝜏𝑚 <1
𝑇𝑚
Servo tuning
Zhuang and 0.980 𝑇𝑚 0.892 𝑇𝑚 0.1<𝜏𝑚 <1
Atherton(1993) –min. ( ) 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.690 − 0.155 𝜏𝑚
ISE1 𝑇𝑚
Rovira, et al. (1969) – 0.586 𝑇𝑚 0.916 𝑇𝑚 0.1<𝜏𝑚 <1

( ) 𝑇𝑚
min. ITAE 𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 1.030 − 0.165 𝜏𝑚
𝑇𝑚
Zhuang and 0.628 𝑇𝑚 0.583 𝑇𝑚 1.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2
Atherton(1993) –min. ( ) 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 1.007 − 0.167 𝜏𝑚
ISTES2 𝑇𝑚
Direct synthesis
Schneider(1988)-1 0.368𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 CL response
𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 ζ=1
Hang, et al. (1993a, 0.524𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝐴𝑚 = 3
b)-2 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝜙𝑚 = 60°
Hang, et al.(1993a, 0.314𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝐴𝑚 = 5
b)-continued-2 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝜙𝑚 = 72°
Pemberton(1972) 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 1.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤0.5
𝑇𝑚
min.IAE regulator 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚
Smith and Corripio 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
0.368
(1985) -5% O.S Servo 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚
94
Rules
Appendix
Rule 𝑲𝒄 𝑻𝒊 Comment
Robust
Rivera, et al.(1986)-2 2𝑇𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚 + 0.5𝜏𝑚 𝜆 ≥ 1.7𝜏𝑚
2𝜆𝐾𝑚 𝜆 > 0.1𝑇𝑚
Chien(1988) 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝜆 = 𝑇𝑚
(𝜆 + 𝜏𝑚)𝐾𝑚
𝜏𝑚
Fruehauf, et al. (1993)-2 0.5𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 ≥ 0.33
𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚
Regulator tuning
Murrill(1967) –min.ISE 0.984 𝑇𝑚 0.986 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤1.0
( ) ( )0.707 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.608 𝑇𝑚
Zhuang 1.021 𝑇𝑚 0.953 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤1.0
( ) ( )0.546 𝑇𝑚
andAtherton(1993)min.ISTES1 𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.629 𝑇𝑚
Zhuang 1.076 𝑇𝑚 0.648 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 1.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2.0
( ) ( )0.442 𝑇𝑚
andAtherton(1993)min.ISTES2 𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.650 𝑇𝑚
A.2 PID tuning rules - FOLPD model

Rule 𝑲𝒄 𝑻𝒊 𝑻𝒅 Comment
1
Ideal controller 𝐺𝑐(𝑠) = 𝐾 (1 + + 𝑇 𝑠)
𝑐 𝑑
𝑇𝑖𝑠
Process reaction
Ziegler and 1.2𝑇𝑚 2𝑇𝑚 2𝜏𝑚 0.5𝜏𝑚 Quarter
Nichols[1]
, decay ratio
𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚
Chien et al. [4] 0.6𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.5𝜏𝑚 0%

- Servo-1 𝐾 𝑚𝜏𝑚 overshoot;
0.11<𝜏𝑚 <1
𝑇𝑚
1 𝑇𝑚 2.5𝜏𝑚 𝜏𝑚 2
0.37𝜏𝑚
Cohen and (1.35 + 0.25) + 0.46( ) Quarter
Coon [6] 𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.2𝜏𝑚 decay ratio
𝑇𝑚( 0.61𝜏𝑚
) 1+
1+ 𝑇𝑚
𝑇𝑚
regulator
𝜏𝑚
Minimum.IAE 1.435 𝑇𝑚 0.921
𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.749 0.482𝑇 ( )1.137 0.1<𝜏𝑚 ≤1
-Murrill [5] ( ) ( ) 𝑚
𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.878 𝜏𝑚
𝜏𝑚
1.524 𝑇𝑚
0.735
𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.641 0.552𝑇 ( )0.851 1.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2
( ) ( ) 𝑚
𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 1.130 𝜏𝑚
95
Rules
Appendix
Servo 𝜏𝑚
Minimum IAE 1.086 𝑇𝑚
0.869 𝑇𝑚 0.348𝑇 )0.914 0.1<𝜏𝑚 ≤1
( ) 𝑚( 𝑇𝑚
Rovira et al. 𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 0.740 − 0.13 𝜏 𝑚 𝑇𝑚
[10] 𝑇𝑚
Minimum.ISE- �0.9155 + 0.7524� (𝑇 + 0.5𝜏 ) 𝑇𝑚 + 0.5𝜏𝑚 0.5𝑇𝑚𝜏𝑚 .05<𝜏𝑚 < 6

𝜏𝑚 𝑚 𝑚 𝑇𝑚
Wang et al. �𝑇
𝑚 𝑇𝑚 + 0.5𝜏𝑚
[11] 𝐾𝑚(𝑇𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚) 𝜏𝑚
Minimum ISE- 1.048 𝑇𝑚
0.897 𝑇𝑚 0.490𝑇 )0.708 1.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2
𝑚(
Zhuang and ( ) 1.195 − 0.368 𝜏 𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚
Atherton [9] 𝑇𝑚
Direct synthesis
𝜏
abbas[14] 0.177 + 0.348( 𝑚 )−1.002 𝑇𝑚 + 0.5𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚𝜏𝑚 V=fractional
𝑇𝑚
2𝑇𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚 Overshoot
0.531 − 0.359𝑉0.713
0≤ 𝑉 ≤0.2
0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤5
𝑇𝑚
Regulator - 1.0722 ∅𝑚−0.116 𝜏𝑚 1.2497𝑇𝑚∅𝑚 1.0082
0.4763𝑇𝑚∅𝑚−.328 𝐴𝑚 ∈ [2,5]
min. ISE- Ho 0.8432
( )−0.908 𝐴𝑚0.2099 𝐴𝑚0.0961 ∅𝑚
𝐾𝑚 𝐴𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝜏 𝜏𝑚 ∈ [30°, 60°]
et al.[15] *( 𝑚)0.3678 ∗ ( )1.0317
𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚
Direct synthesis
0.0821
Servo - min. 1.8578 ∅𝑚 𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑖(1)1 . 4899𝑇𝑚∅𝑚−.1475 𝐴𝑚 ∈ [2,5]
ISE -Ho et al. ( )−0.9471 𝐴𝑚0.0845
∅𝑚
[15]
𝐾𝑚 𝐴𝑚 0.9087 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 ∈ [30°, 60°]
∗ ( )1.0264
𝑇𝑚
Regulator - 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.5𝜏𝑚 0.1≤
𝜏𝑚
min. IAE - 𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚 ≤1.5
𝑇𝑚
Smith and
Corripio [12]
Servo - min. 5𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.5𝜏𝑚
IAE -Smith 6𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚
and Corripio
[12]
Servo - 5% 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 0.5𝜏𝑚
overshoot - 2𝐾𝑚𝜏𝑚
Smithand
Corripio [12]
Robust
Brambilla et al. 1 𝑇𝑚+0.5𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚 + 0.5𝜏𝑚 𝑇𝑚𝜏𝑚 𝜆 ≈ 0.35
( )
[16] 𝐾𝑚 𝜆𝜏𝑚 2𝑇𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚 0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤10
𝑇𝑚
96
Rules
Appendix
𝜏𝑚
Fruehauf et al. 5𝑇 𝑚 5𝜏𝑚 ≤ 0.5𝜏𝑚 < 0.33
[18] 9𝐾 𝑚 𝜏 𝑚 𝑇𝑚
𝜏𝑚 𝜏𝑚 Ultimate cycle
𝜏𝑚
Regulator - 𝐾 [𝑐 + 𝑐 + 𝑐 )2] [𝑐 + 𝑐 0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2
3(
7 8
𝑢 1 2 𝐾𝑐 𝑇 𝑇𝑚
nearly 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 𝑚𝐾𝑢
+ 𝑐 ( )2] Decay
minimum IAE, 𝑐1 = 0.802 , 𝑐2 = −0.0154 , 𝐾𝑢𝜔𝑢 �𝑐4 + 𝑐5 𝜏𝑚 + 𝑐6 9
𝑐3 = 0.046 �𝜏𝑚� 𝑇𝑚 𝐾𝑐𝜔𝑢 ratio=0.12
ITAE -Hwang 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝑐7 = .421 , 𝑐8
and Fang [21] 𝑐4 = 0.190 , 𝑐5 = .00915, 𝑐9
= 0.0532 , = −.00152
𝑐6 = −0.00509
McMillan[22] 1.415 𝑇𝑚 1 𝜏𝑚{1 0.25𝜏𝑚{1 Tuning rules
{ 𝑇𝑚 )0.65
𝐾𝑚 𝜏𝑚 1+( } 0.65 𝑇 0.65
𝑇 +� 𝑚 � } developed
𝑇𝑚+𝜏𝑚 +� 𝑚 � } 𝑇𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚 from
𝑇 𝑚 + 𝜏𝑚
𝐾𝑢, 𝑇𝑢
𝐾𝑢 tan ∅𝑚
Tan et al. [23] cos ∅ 𝜶𝑇𝑑 𝑇𝑢 a chosen
𝑚 4𝜋
𝐴𝑚 arbitrarily
�4 + 𝑡𝑎𝑛2∅𝑚
𝛼 ∅𝑚 = 45°
+ 𝑇𝑢 𝐴𝑚 = 2
4𝜋
𝜏𝑚 𝜏𝑚 𝜏𝑚
Servo - nearly 𝐾 [𝑐 + 𝑐 + 𝑐 )2] [𝑐 + 𝑐 0.1≤ 𝜏𝑚 ≤2
3(
7 8
𝑢 1 2 𝐾𝑐 𝑇 𝑇𝑚
minimum IAE, 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝜏𝑚 𝑚𝐾𝑢
+ 𝑐 ( )2] Decay
ITAE - Hwang 𝑐1 = 0.537 , 𝑐2 = −0.0165 , 𝐾𝑢𝜔𝑢 �𝑐4 + 𝑐5 𝜏𝑚 + 𝑐6 9
�𝜏𝑚� 𝑇𝑚 𝐾𝑐𝜔𝑢 ratio=0.03
andFang [21] 𝑐3 = 0.00173 𝑇𝑚 𝑇𝑚 𝑐7 = .35 , 𝑐8
𝑐4 = 0.0503 , 𝑐5 = −.0344, 𝑐9
= 0.163 , = .00644
𝑐6 = −0.0389
0.0211𝑇𝑚[1 + 0.3289𝐴𝑚 + 6.4572∅𝑚 + 25.1914 𝜏𝑚]

𝑇𝑚
𝑇𝑖(1)1 =
1 + 0.0625𝐴𝑚 − 0.8079∅𝑚 + 0.347 𝜏 𝑚
𝑇𝑚
A.3 List of symbols and abbreviations used

Symbol Meaning
Am gain margin
b setpoint weighting factor
E(s) Desired variable, R(s), minus controlled
variable, Y(s)
97
Rules
Appendix
Symbol Meaning
𝐾𝑓 Magnitude of the FOLPD process model at a
phase lag of f
𝐾𝑢 Ultimate gain
𝑀𝑠 Closed loop sensitivity
N Indication of the amount of filtering on the
derivative term
R(s) Desired variable
𝑇𝑑 Derivative time of the controller
𝑇𝑖 Integral time of the controller
𝑇𝑚 Time constant of the FOLPD process model
𝑇𝑢 Ultimate time constant
U(s) manipulated variable
Y(s) controlled variable
λ Parameter that determines robustness of
compensated system.
ζ damping factor of the compensated system
𝜙𝑚 phase margin
𝜏𝑚 time delay of the FOLPD process model,
𝜏 𝜏𝑚/(𝜏𝑚 + 𝑇𝑚)
𝜔𝑢 ultimate (angular) frequency, 𝜔∅ = angular
frequency at a phase lag of ∅
𝐺𝑐 (𝑠) PID controller transfer function
𝐺𝑝(𝑗𝜔) process transfer function at frequency ω
,|𝐺𝑝 (𝑗𝜔)| = magnitude of 𝐺𝑝 (𝑗𝜔)
IAE integral of absolute error
ISE integral of squared error
ISTES integral of squared time multiplied by error, all
to be squared
98
Rules
Appendix
Symbol Meaning
ISTSE integral of squared time multiplied by squared
error
ITAE integral of time multiplied by absolute error
𝐾𝑐 Proportional gain of the controller
𝐾𝑚 Gain of the FOLPD process model
99
references References
1. Aidan O'Dwyer, A summary of PI and PID controller tuning rules for

processes with time delay. Part 2:PID controller tuning rules, Dublin
Institute of Technology, Copyright ©2000 IFAC.
2. George Stephanopoulos,Chemical process control an introduction to theory
and practice, 4th ed, Prentice-Hall.
3. Dale E. Seborg& Thomas F. Edgar, Process Dynamics and Control, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc, second Edition.
4. Farid Golnaraghi& Benjamin C. Kuo ,Automatic Control Systems, 9ed
Edition, Wiley2009.
5. Steven T. Karris,Circuit Analysis with MATLAB application, Editor, 2004
Orchard Publications.
6. K. Ogata, Modern Control Engineering, 4th ed, Prentice-Hall, NJ, 2002.
processes with time delay. Part 1:PI controller tuning rules, Dublin Institute
of Technology, Copyright ©2000 IFAC.
processes with time delay. Part 2:PID controller tuning rules, Dublin
Institute of Technology, Copyright ©2000 IFAC.
9. Michael A. Johnson & Mohammad H. Moradi, PID control New
Identification and Design Methods, Editor, Springer 2005.
10.Wood, R.K. and Berry, M.W. (1973) Terminal composition control of a
binary distillation column. Chemical Engineering Science, 28, 1707–1717.
11.Ziegler, J.G. and Nichols, N.B.: ‘Optimum settings for automatic
controllers’, Transactions of the ASME, 1942, November, pp. 759-768.
100
12.Astrom, K.J. and Hagglund, T.: ‘PID Controllers: Theory, Design and
Tuning’, (Instrument Society of America, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, 2nd Edition, 1995).
13.Parr, E.A.: ‘Industrial Control Handbook’, Vol. 3 (BSP Professional Books,
1989).
14.Chien, K.-L., Hrones, J.A. and Reswick, J.B.: ‘On the automatic control of
generalised passive systems’, Transactions of the ASME, 1952, February,
pp. 175-185.
15.Murrill, P.W.: ‘Automatic control of processes’, (International Textbook
Co., 1967).
16.Cohen, G.H. and Coon, G.A.: ‘Theoretical considerations of retarded
control’, Transactions of the ASME, 1953, May, pp. 827- 834.
17.Sain, S.G. and Ozgen, C.: ‘Identification and tuning of processes with large
deadtime’, Control and Computers, 1992, 20(3), pp. 73-78.
18.Cheng, G.S. and Hung, J.C.: ‘A Least-Squares Based Self-Tuning of PID
Controller’, Proceedings of the IEEE South East Conference, Raleigh, North
Carolina, USA, 1985, pp. 325-332.
19.Zhuang, M. and Atherton, D.P.: ‘Automatic tuning of optimum PID
controllers’, IEE Proceedings, Part D, 1993, 140(3), pp. 216-224.
20.Rovira, A.A., Murrill, P.W. and Smith, C.L.: ‘Tuning controllers for setpoint
changes’, Instruments and Control Systems, 1969, 42, December, pp. 67-69.
21.Wang, F.-S., Juang, W.-S. and Chan, C.-T.: ‘Optimal tuning of PID
controllers for single and cascade control loops’, Chemical Engineering
Communications, 1995, 132, pp. 15-34.
22.Smith, C.A. and Corripio, A.B.: ‘Principles and practice of automatic
process control’, (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1985).
101
23.Suyama, K.: ‘A simple design method for sampled-data PID control systems
with adequate step responses’, Proceedings of the International Conference
on Industrial Electronics, Control, Instrumentation and Automation, 1992,
pp. 1117-1122.
24.Abbas, A.: ‘A new set of controller tuning relations’, ISA Transactions,
1997, 36(3), pp. 183-187.
25.Ho, W.K., Lim, K.W. and XU, W.: ‘Optimal gain and phase margin tuning
for PID controllers’, Automatica, 1998, 34(8), pp. 1009-1014.
26.Brambilla, A., CHEN, S. and SCALI, C.: ‘Robust tuning of conventional
controllers’, Hydrocarbon Processing, 1990, November, pp. 53-58.
27.Rivera, D.E., Morari, M. and Skogestad, S.: ‘Internal Model Control. 4. PID
controller design’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Process Design
and Development, 1986, 25(1), pp. 252-265.
28.Fruehauf, P.S., Chien, I.-L. and Lauritsen, M.D.: ‘Simplified IMC-PID
tuning rules’, Proceedings of the ISA/93 Advances in Instrumentation and
Control Conference, McCormick Place, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 1993, pp.
1745-1766.
29.Lee, Y., Park, S., Lee, M. and Brosilow, C.: ‘PID controller tuning for
desired closed-loop responses for SI/SO systems’, AIChE Journal, 1998,
44(1), pp. 106-115.
30.Pessen, D.W.: ‘A new look at PID-controller tuning’, Transactions of the
ASME. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, 1994, 116,
pp. 553-557.
31.Hwang, S.-H. and Fang, S.-M.: ‘Closed-loop tuning method based on
dominant pole placement’, Chemical Engineering Communications, 1995,
136, pp. 45-66.
102
32.McMillan, G.K.: ‘Control loop performance’. Proceedings of the ISA/84

International Conference and Exhibition. Advances in Instrumentation,
Houston, Texas, USA, 1984, 1, pp. 589-603.
33.Tan, K.K., Lee, T.H. and WANG, Q.G.: ‘Enhanced automatic tuning
procedure for process control of PI/PID controllers’, AIChE Journal, 1996,
42(9), pp. 2555-2562.
34.Hang, C.C., Lee, T.H. and HO, W.K.: ‘Adaptive Control’, (Instrument
Society of America, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1993).
103
View publication stats

MODELINGSIMULATIONANDCONTROLOFFIRSTORDERSYSTEMS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

MODELINGSIMULATIONANDCONTROLOFFIRSTORDERSYSTEMS

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MODELINGSIMULATIONANDCONTROLOFFIRSTORDERSYSTEMS

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

MODELING &SIMULATION AND CONTROL OF FIRST ORDER SYSTEMS A Project

Technical Report · January 2012

MODELING &SIMULATION AND CONTROL OF FIRST ORDER SYSTEMS View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MODELING &SIMULATION AND

A Project Submitted to the Tripoli of Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the

Ahmed Farhat Zrigan

I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to my project advisor

Eng . Ahmed .F. Mahmoud Zrigan

The second part of the project is concentrated on PID controller. A summary of

3.2 Frequency domain of first order systems 29

Figure(3.14b) Frequency response First Order System For table (3.2b) 33

The first order systems is important in the education specially in undergraduate

this study is very important to more understanding first order systems.

1.4 Literature survey

1.5 Outlines of the project

Where𝑓(𝑡) is the input (forcing function).If𝑎0 ≠ 0, then eq. (2.1) yields

2.2 First Order physical Systems

2.2.1 R-C circuit

Figure (2.1): Simple R-C circuit

But from Figure (2.1)

If we differentiate Eq. (2.9)

2.2.2 Operational Amplifier

The operational amplifier or simply op amp, is the most versatile electronic

Figure (2.2). Symbol for operational amplifier

𝐸𝑜(𝑠) 𝑍2(𝑠) (2.14)

Figure (2.3):First order lag circuit using operational amplifier

2.2.3. Level system

H=steady state head, m

Figure (2.4a):- Liquid level system

Figure (2.4b):- Head versus flow rate curve

Where we have used the relationship

G = steady-state liquid flow rate, kg/sec

The differential equation for this system is

Which may be rewritten as

Which may be rewritten

The transfer function relating 𝜃 and 𝜃𝑖 is given by

2.2.5 Distillation column

Y1 ( j )  4.533e −0.5 j 41.344e −0.5 j  U1 ( j )

Y1= the overhead product composition.

Y2= the bottom product composition.

U1= the reflex flow rate.

U2= Vapor flow rate b.

Y1 ( j )   12.8e− j −18.9e−3 j  U1 ( j ) 

3.1 Time domain analysis of control systems

3.1.1 Mathematical description of First Order System

𝑎1 𝑑𝑦 + 𝑎 0𝑦(𝑡) = 𝑏 0𝑢(𝑡) (3.1)

Figure (3.1): First order system

This gives a transfer function

3.1.2 Time domain analysis of first order system

Figure (3.2): Exponential response curve.

Figure (3.3): Step response of first order system

Figure (3.4a): Step response of first order system when K<1

Figure (3.4b): Step response of first order system when K=1

Figure (3.4c): Step response of first order system when K>1

3.1.2.2 Step with amplitude (A)

Figure (3.5): Step with amplitude (A)

Figure (3.6): Step response of first order system when K=KA