Chapter 9

PID Tuning Methods

 Overall Course Objectives
• Develop the skills necessary to function as an
industrial process control engineer.
– Skills
• Tuning loops
• Control loop design
• Control loop troubleshooting
• Command of the terminology
– Fundamental understanding
• Process dynamics
• Feedback control
 Controller Tuning

• Involves selection of the proper values of

Kc, I, and D.
• Affects control performance.
• Affects controller reliability
• Therefore, controller tuning is, in many
cases, a compromise between performance
and reliability.
 Tuning Criteria
• Specific criteria
– Decay ratio
– Minimize settling time
• General criteria
– Minimize variability
– Remain stable for the worst disturbance upset (i.e.,
reliability)
– Avoid excessive variation in the manipulated variable
Decay Ratio for Non-Symmetric
Oscillations

B
C

Decay Ratio = C/B

Time
 Performance Assessment

• Performance statistics (IAE, ISE, etc.) which

can be used in simulation studies.
• Standard deviation from setpoint which is a
measure of the variability in the controlled
variable.
• SPC charts which plot product composition
analysis along with its upper and lower
limits.
 Example of an SPC Chart

Upper Limit
Product Composition

Lower Limit

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (days)
 Classical Tuning Methods

• Examples: Cohen and Coon method, Ziegler-

Nichols tuning, Cianione and Marlin tuning, and
many others.
• Usually based on having a model of the process
(e.g., a FOPDT model) and in most cases in the
time that it takes to develop the model, the
controller could have been tuned several times
over using other techniques.
• Also, they are based on a preset tuning criterion
(e.g., QAD)
 Controller Tuning by Pole
Placement
• Based on model of the process
• Select the closed-loop dynamic response
and calculate the corresponding tuning
parameters.
• Application of pole placement shows that
the closed-loop damping factor and time
constant are not independent.
• Therefore, the decay ratio is a reasonable
tuning criterion.
 Controller Design by Pole
Placement
• A generalized controller (i.e., not PID) can
be derived by using pole placement.
• Generalized controllers are not generally
used in industry because
– Process models are not usually available
– PID control is a standard function built into
DCSs.
 IMC-Based Tuning
• A process model is required (Table 9.4
contain the PID settings for several types of
models based on IMC tuning).
• Although a process model is required, IMC
tuning allows for adjusting the
aggressiveness of the controller online
using a single tuning parameter, f.
 Controller Reliability

• The ability of a controller to remain in

stable operation with acceptable
performance in the face of the worst
disturbances that the controller is expected
to handle.
 Controller Reliability
• Analysis of the closed
d3 loop transfer function
d2
for a disturbance
d3 > d2 > d1
d1
shows that the type of
y

dynamic response (i.e.,

decay ratio) is
unaffected by the
Time
magnitude to the
disturbance.
 Controller Reliability
• We know from industrial experience that
certain large magnitude disturbance can
cause control loops to become unstable.
• The explanation of this apparent
contradiction is that disturbances can cause
significant changes in Kp, p, and p which a
linear analysis does not consider.
Controller Reliability Example:
CSTR with CA0 Upsets

 CA0=-0.5
2
T' (K)

 CA0=0.5
-2
0 40 80 120 160
Time (seconds)
 Controller Reliability
• Is determined by the combination of the following
factors
– Process nonlinearity
– Disturbance type
– Disturbance magnitude and duration
• If process nonlinearity is high but disturbance
magnitude is low, reliability is good.
• If disturbance magnitude is high but process
nonlinearity is low, reliability is good.
Tuning Criterion Selection

LC

L
Plug Flow Reactor
D
 Tuning Criterion Selection

Product
Feed
LC

Product

Product

Product
Tuning Criterion Selection Procedure
• First, based on overall process objectives,
evaluate controller performance for the loop
in question.
• If the control loop should be detuned based
on the overall process objectives, the tuning
criterion is set.
• If the control loop should be tuned
aggressively based on the overall process
objectives, the tuning criterion is selected
based on a compromise between
performance and reliability.
 Selecting the Tuning Criterion
based on a Compromise between
Performance and Reliability

• Select the tuning criterion (typically from

critically damped to 1/6 decay ratio) based
on the process characteristics:
– Process nonlinearity
– Disturbance types and magnitudes
 Effect of Tuning Criterion on
Control Performance
2.3
Critically Damped
• The more aggressive
2.2 the control criterion,
DR=1/10
the better the control
Level

2.1
performance, but the
2 more likely the
DR=1/6
1.9 controller can go
0 50 100 150 200 unstable.
Time (seconds)
 Filtering the Sensor Reading
• For most sensor readings, a filter time
constant of 3 to 5 s is more than adequate
and does not slow down the closed-loop
dynamics.
• For a noisy sensor, sensor filtering usually
slows the closed-loop dynamics. To
evaluate compare the filter time constant
with the time constants for the acutator,
process and sensor.
Recommended Tuning Approach

• Select the tuning criterion for the control

loop.
• Apply filtering to the sensor reading
• Determine if the control system is fast or
slow responding.
– For fast responding, field tune (trail-and-error)
– For slow responding, apply ATV-based tuning
 Field Tuning Approach
• Turn off integral and derivative action.
• Make initial estimate of Kc based on process knowledge.
• Using setpoint changes, increase Kc until tuning criterion
is met

c
ys

b
a

Time
 Field Tuning Approach
• Decrease Kc by 10%.
• Make initial estimate of I (i.e.,I=5p).
• Reduce I until offset is eliminated
• Check that proper amount of Kc and I are used.

c
b
ys

Time
 An Example of Inadequate
Integral Action

Time

• Oscillations not centered about setpoint and slow

offset removal indicate inadequate integral action.
Demonstration: Visual Basic
Simulator
Field Tuning Example
 ATV Identification and Online
Tuning
• Perform ATV test and determine ultimate
gain and ultimate period.
• Select tuning method (i.e., ZN or TL settings).
• Adjust tuning factor, FT, to meet tuning
criterion online using setpoint changes or
observing process performance:
• Kc=KcZN/FT I=ZN×FT
 ATV Test
• Select h so that process is
not unduly upset but an
ys Pu accurate a results.
a
y0 • Controller output is
switched when ys crosses y0
c
• It usually take 3-4 cycles
c0 before standing is
h established and a and Pu can
Time be measured.
 Applying the ATV Results
4h • Calculate Ku from
Ku 
 a ATV results.

ZN ZN
K c  0.45 K u  I  Pu / 1.2 • ZN settings

K cTL  0.31 K u  ITL  Pu / 0.45 • TL settings

 Comparison of ZN and TL
Settings
• ZN settings are too aggressive in many cases
while TL settings tend to be too conservative.
• TL settings use much less integral action
compared to the proportional action than ZN
settings. As a result, in certain cases when
using TL settings, additional integral action is
required to remove offset in a timely fashion.
 Advantages of ATV Identification
2.3

2.2
Mole Percent
Open Loop Test
2.1
ATV Test
2

1.9
0 20 40 60
Time (hours)

• Much faster than open loop test.

• As a result, it is less susceptible to disturbances
• Does not unduly upset the process.
 Online Tuning
3
Mole Percent FT=0.8

1
FT=1.6 FT=0.4

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Time (minutes)

• Provides simple one-dimensional tuning which

can be applied using setpoint changes or observing
controller performance over a period of time.
 ATV Test Applied to
Composition Mixer
1
Concentration (gmoles/l)

0.9
0.8

0.7
0.6
0.5
0 50 100 150 200
Time (minutes)
CST Composition Mixer
Example

• Calculate Ku
• Calculate ZN settings
• Apply online tuning
 Online Tuning for CST
Composition Mixer Example
Concentration 0.76

0.72
• FT=0.75
0.68
0 100 200
Time (minutes)
0.76
Concentration

0.72

0.68 • FT=0.5
0.64
0 100 200
Time (minutes)
Control Performance for Tuned
Controller
0.78
Concentration (gmoles/l)

0.76

0.74
0 50 100 150 200
Time (minutes)
 Critically Damped Tuning for
CST Composition Mixer
0.76
Concentration

0.72

0.68
0 100 200
Time (minutes)
Comparison Between 1/6 Decay
Ratio and Critically Damped
Tuning
0.78
Concentration (gmoles/l)

Critically
Damped

0.76

0.74
0 50 100 150 200
Time (minutes)
Demonstration: Visual Basic
Simulator
ATV based tuning
 PID Tuning Procedure
• Tune PI controller using field tuning or ATV
identification with online tuning.
• Increase D until minimum response time is
obtained. Initially set D=Pu/8.
• Increase D and Kc by the same factor until
desired response is obtained.
• Check response to ensure that proper amount of
integral action is being used.
Comparison between PI and PID
for the Heat Exchanger Model

120
Temperature (ºF)

115

110

105

100
0 50 100
Time (seconds)
 Comparison of PI and PID
PID

PI

Time
• The derivative action allows for larger Kc which in
turn results in better disturbance rejection for
certain processes.
Demonstration: Visual Basic
Simulator
PID Tuning Example
 Initial Settings for Level
Controllers for P-only Control
• Based on critically damped

 FMAX response.
Kc  • FMAX is largest expected

LMAX change in feed rate.
• LMAX is the desired level
change under feedback control.
• Useful as initial estimates for
slow responding level control
systems.
 Initial Settings for Level
Controllers for PI Control
• Ac is cross-sectional area to

 0.736 FMAX tank and  is liquid density.
Kc 

LMAX • FMAX is largest expected
change in feed rate.
4 Ac 
I  • LMAX is the desired level
 Kc change under feedback control.
• Useful as initial estimates for
slow responding level control
systems.
 Initial Settings for Level
Controllers
• Use online tuning adjusting Kc and I with
FT to obtain final tuning.
• Remember that Kc is expressed as
(flow rate/%); therefore, height difference
between 0% and 100% is required to
calculate I.
 In-Class Example
• Calculate the initial PI controller settings
for a level controller with a critically
damped response for a 10 ft diameter tank
(i.e., a cylinder placed on its end) with a
measured height of 10 ft that normally
handles a feed rate of 1000 lb/h. Assume
that it is desired to have a maximum level
change of 5% for a 20% feed rate change
and that the liquid has a density
corresponding to that of water.
 Control Interval, t
• t is usually 0.5 to 1.0 seconds for regulatory loops
and 30 to 120 seconds for supervisory loops for
DCS’s.
• In order to adequately approach continuous
performance, select the control interval such that:
t < 0.05(p+p)
• For certain processes, t is set by the timing of
analyzer updates and the previous formula can be
used to assess the effect on control performance
 Effect of Control Interval on
Control Performance
• p =0.5
continuous
• When the controller
settings for continuous
control are used with
t=0.5, instability results.
y

• Results shown here are

based on retuning the
 t=0.5
system for t=0.5 resulting
in a 60% reduction in Kc.
Time
 Overview

• Controller tuning is many times a

compromise between performance and
reliability.
• Reliability is determined by process
nonlinearity and the disturbance type and
magnitude.
• The controller tuning criterion should be
based on controller reliability and the process
objectives.
 Overview

• Classical tuning methods, pole placement

and IMC tuning are not recommended
because they are based on a preset tuning
criterion and they usually require a process
model.
• Tune fast loops should be tuned using field
tuning and slow loops using ATV
identification with online tuning.