606

OPTIMUM CASCADE PID CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR SISO SYSTEMS

Minxia Zhuang, Derek P. Atherton

University of Sussex, U.K.

INTRODUCTION Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) controllers are still widely used in the process induStries even though more advanced control techniques have been developed. Many approaches have been used to determine PID controller parameters for a single input single output (SISO) system [l]. Some methods employ information about the open loop plant step response, for example, the CoonCohen reaction curve method, other methods use some knowledge of the Nyquist curve of the plant, nowadays often determined by auto-tuning, such as the ZieglerNichols, Astrom-Hagglund [I], and Zhuang-Atherton [2] frequency response methods. Other methods use optimisation of integral performance criteria, for example, tlie time moment weighted integral of error squared criterion, and provide good PID controller settings b u t require a kiiowkdge of the transfer function model of the plant[3]. C A S C A D E PID C O N T R O L

I&

m
Tr
TC

Distillation column

\
Reboiler

(a) Conventional single control

L......._

. . . . . . . . .J

I
column Reboiler

Figure 1: Diagram of a cascade control system

(b) Cascade contrd loop

I n some SlSO systems additional variables apart from t,lie process output are measurable, so that two controllers rather than a single PID cont.roller, are used i n cascade as illustrated iu Fig.]. The onter loop controller, G , I , is usually regarded as the main cont.rollcr and the inlier loop one a y tlie auxiliary cont.roller. Because there arc t.wo coutrollers to tune this often proves more diflicrilt thaii with a siugle coiltrollcr. Althougli lrinny algorit~llnsh a V C been developed to t uue PID controllers for SlSO systeiirs as mentioned above, few iiivcstigat.ious have been made 011 tuuiiig IIU coiltrollers for a cascade system. This paper reports on ail iiivestigat.ioii iuto t uuiiig cascade 1111 coiit.rollers nsiiig hotli optiniisatioii and aiit,o-tuiiiiig tecliniques. Several exainpIes are considered i n t lie paper arid comparisons of t lie performaiicc betweeii cascade conlrol and a single colitroller a r e given.

TT = t e m p e r a t u r e t r a n s m i t t e r TC = temperature c o n t r o l l e r FT = F l o w t r a n s m i t t e r FC = F l o w c o n t r o l l e r

Figure 2 : Distillatioii-colriiiiii-rel,oiler temperature cont.ro1 [I] Cascade

c o i i t r o l tccliiii<liieb

are Ireqiieiitly used i n pro-

cess coiitrol eugiiiceriiig becaiise better control perfor-

mance is i i w a l l y possil>le compared with a single coli(roller. For rxample, ca.+cadr coiit rol is very clfect.ive i i i reducing tlir effects of load dist iirlmnces wliicli occur i l l tlic inurr loop. Considu t I i r dis(illat.ioii-coluiriii-reboiler syst.cin [.I]sl~owii i i i I.ig.2, aiid siippose tliere is a dist.urImm affect.ing t l ~ e Row o f steam. M:lien a coiiventional single-loop tcrnpcratiire control is used \ v i l l i the output of

CONTROL94.21-24March 1994.Conference Publication No.389.01EE 1994

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

the temperature controller applied directly to the steam valve as shown in Fig.2(a), no correction will be made until its effect reaches the temperature measuring element. Thus there is a considerable lag in correcting for a flow disturbance. With a cascade control technique using a separate flow control as shown in Fig.2(b), any change in steam flow is corrected by the flow controller. Therefore the reboiler and the column are less affected by any disturbances arising in the flow loop. From Fig.1 the equivalent transfer function of the inner loop, denoted as G z , is given by

good system performance, the inner loop should include the major disturbance and be faster reacting than the outer loop, a condition which can usually be met in process control systems. To design a cascade control system, the parameters of two controllers have to be determined. In the following two sections, two methods for obtaining parameters for cascade PID controllers will be discussed.

OPTIMUM DESIGN PROCEDURE

A PID tuning method using integral performance criteria has been successfully applied to a system with a single controller [3]. In particular time-moment weighted integral performance criteria have been found to provide good step response results with a small overshoot and a relatively short settling time. The general form of this criterion is Jn(B) = l m { t n e ( B , t ) z d t
(5)

thus the closed loop transfer function of the system is

Y, ==

RI
1

+G~GclGpl

GzGc~Gpl

Gc1 GszGplGp~ GszGp~ +Gc~GczGplGpz

(2)

For a load disturbance, such as dz within the inner loop, with dl = 0, the transfer function to the output is

_ Y, D z
I

+ Gc2Gp2 + Gcl GczGpl Gpz

GP1

(3)

Without the inner feedback loop, and of course no controller Gcz, the transfer function between the same vari-

where B denotes the variable parameters which can be chosen to minimize Jn(B). This optimisation procedure can also be used to determine PID parameters for a c a s cade control system. It is often satisfactory to include a derivative term in the main controller only, since the dynamics of Gp2 are usually of low order and excessive derivative action may increase noise and cause derivative kicks. This is therefore the situation considered here so that the two controllers have the ideal transfer functions

The denominators of eqns.3 and4 are seen to be quite different. Therefore the response to a disturbance in the cascade control system will be different to that in the single loop system. In most cases, the magnitude of the change in the controlled variable y1 for a given change in dz is much reduced in a cascade control system when two appropriate controllers are chosen. Generally, a cascade control system has the following advantages over a system with a single controller [5] Disturbances arising in the inner loop are corrected by the auxiliary controller before they influence the controlled variable yt The correction is much better when the inner loop has a faster response than the outer loop.

Several different approaches can be used to apply optimisation techniques to the cascade control system. The easiest approach is to optimize the loops individually. For the inner loop, minimizing the performance criterion for the error e2 in response to a step input or the effect of the step disturbance dz on the output yz give the same results since

Ez(s)=
and

R2 +G czGp~

(8)

(9)

The speed of the system response is much improved if the resulting auxiliary control loop has a faster response than the process GPz. Because of the auxiliary feedback control, parameter variations in the process GPz can be corrected for within its own loop. Therefore, cascade control is a better choice when a process has measurable additional variables. To achieve a

Once the inner loop controller G,z is derived, the optimisation procedure can then be carried out to determine the main controller parameters for the resultant plant G I where

The transfer function E l ( s ) , of the error signal is then given by

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

608
which is used in the optimization criterion to find the three parameters of the main PID controller. Another approach is t o optimize all five parameters of both controllers together, that is to minimize an integral performance index which is a function of
4. The parameters of the main PID controller can then

be derived using the same tuning law as the one for the auxiliary controller. Although the tuning results using the above method may not provide quite as good a performance as the optimisation approach, the procedure provides an efficient way of tuning the two controllers when the transfer functions of the plant are unknown.

The resultant PID controller parameters using both procedures provide good system performances. But the latter one may result in a faster but more oscillatory closed loop response as illustrated in an example later.

EXAMPLES
Several examples have been considered to illustrate the tuning results using the two methods discussed above. Some of the examples are discussed in this section. The optimisation is carried out using the time weighted integral performance index given in eqn.5 with n = 1 and is carried out for the two controllers separately unless otherwise indicated. The formulae presented in Reference[2] are nsed in the auto-tuning procedure. A first order lag with time constant 0.01Tdl is added in the derivative term during the simulation since a pure derivative action cannot be implemented in the practical system.

AUTO-TUNING METHOD
The auto-tuning method has been used to determine PID control parameters for both SISO and two-input twooutput systems [6]. For the later case the design procedure used two relays to replace both controllers to obtain the critical frequency and critical gains of the system, from which the PID controller parameters were determined. The some approach may be used to determine PID parameters using the auto-tuning technique for a cascade control system.

I A third order process EXAMPLE

This example is given to show the advantages of using cascade cont,rol. The transfer functions of the process are given by
Gpl

= (10s

+ l ) ( 5 s + 1)
5e-0.2J

and Figure 3: Auto-tuning PID controllers The procedure is implemented as follows:

1. When the system is set to the tuning mode, two

Gp2 = ___

(7.5s+ 1 ) '

The PID controller paramet,ers using the optimisation Table 1: PID controller parameters for example 1

relay controllers are used to replace the two regulators as shown in Fig.3. The switching amplitude of the relay controller in the outer loop is set to zero. Measurements on the limit cycle in the inner loop enable the critical frequency wcz and critical gain Kc2 of that loop to be determined.
2. The parameters of the PI controller in the inner loop are then determined, using the formulae presented

PID Parameters
Method
cascade Gcz 4.460 10.689 single PID
0.503

in Ref. [2] or other methods mentioned in the introduction section, from wci and K C z .
3. The PI controller is then switched into the inner

I 14.97 I 3.23 I I 18.74 1 7.75 1

loop, and the critical frequency w c l and critical gain h',l of the system are obtained from the limit cycle of the loop with the relay output levels set at appropriate values.

procedure for a cascade control and a single controller are listed in Table 1. The corresponding step responses to set point change and a disturbance dz at t = 30 are shown in Fig.4. I t is seen from the step responses that the cascade control system responds to a set-point change

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

609

much faster than the single c o n t r o h system and is much kas sensitive to the disturbance occurring in the inner loop. In the figure, the magnitude of the change to the inner loop disturbance in the cascade control system is too small t o be seen. T h e figure also shows that the optimum controller settings for Ca.sc.de control result in a good system response with a small overshoot and small settling time.

the optimal PID parameters for a single controller. T h e corresponding step responses of the closed-loop systems are given in Fig.5 which also shows the responses to a unit step disturbance d? injected into the system a t 1 = 15. The optimisation procedure of tuning the five parameters together (optimisation 2) results in a fast but oscillatory response t o the set-point change and a smaller overshoot response t o the disturbance compared with the optimisation results with two controllers tuned separately. Although the individually tuning optimisation procedure results in a larger final cost function value JI as shown in Table 2, the resultant step response to a set-point change and disturbance change in the inner loop are a c ceptable with respects t o the overshoot and settling time. Compared with the single controller system, the cascade control strategy provides better closed loop performance, especially with respect t o the reduction of the overshoot caused by a disturbance in the inner loop.

Figure 4: Step responses for example 1

EXAMPLE 2 A fifth order process

The transfer functions in this example are given by

and

Gp2 =

4 (0.25s + 1)(0.5s

+ l)(s + 1)
Figure 5: Optimization results

Table 2: PID controller parameters for example 2

PID Parameters
Method optimisation 1 Gc2 cascade G,1 optimisation 2 Gcz cascade G 1 , opt. single PID
II

EXAMPLE 3 A second order with time delay process

51
This example is given to compare the auto-tuning method with the optimisation method The transfer functions of the process are given by

Kp
0.413 2.354

Ti
1.632 4.102 6.359
f

Td

1.069 1.64

1) 0.965
I

1
I

0.649 1.757

I
0.817 3.157

II

e-,

Gpl =
and

(20s

+ 1)

3.538 0.554

4.625 4.363

e-o.5,

Gpz =

(10s

+ 1)

In this example both the optimisation procedures proposed in section 3 are carried out to determine the PID controller parameters for a cascade control system. The optimal PID settings are listed in Table 2 together with

The PID controller parameters using the autotuning procedure and optimisation method for a cascade control are listed in Table 3 together with the optimum settings for a single PID controller. In the case of auto-tuning, the critical frequency and critical gain of the inner loop process

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

610

Table 3: PID controller parameters for example 3

The PID controller parameters using the autotuning prccednre and optimisation method for cascade control are listed in Table 4. In the case of auto-tuning, the critical frequency and critical gain of the inner loop process are 10.144 and 11.309 respectively, and those for the equivalent transfer function GI of the cascade control system are 1.691 and 5.291. The optimum single PID controller settings are also given in the table for comparison. The corresponding responses for a unit step set-point input at 1 = 0 and a unit step disturbance a t t = 10 are shown in Fig. 7 . From the figure it can be seen that the antc-tnning method provides reasonably good performance though the settling time is a little longer than that using the optimisation method. Table 4: PID controller parameters for example 4

are 3.204 and 32.055 respectively, and those for the equivalent transfer function GI of the cascade control system are 0.353 and 6.853. The corresponding step responses, in which a step disturbance is injected at time 30 seconds, are shown in Fig. 6. From the figure it can be seen that the anto-tuning method provides a reasonably good performance although the settling time is a little longer than that using the optimisation method. It is also seen that the cascade control provides a better response than a single PID controller t o a disturbance input.

PID Parameters Method

optimisation G,p cascade G,, autotuning G,n cascade G,1 opt. single PID

Kp
3.970 2.664 3.988 2.693 12.903

T,
0.274 1.620 0.276 1.869 1.636

Td

0.555

0.462 0.586

-__

-.-.?.umd&cU&

Figure 6: Step responses of example 3

, ,

, 4

.
6

.
IO

. ,
I2

. ,
I4

, 16

.,
I8

I
20

EXAMPLE 4 A third order with time delay process

This example is also given to compare the auto-tuning method with the optimisation method. The transfer functions of the process are given by
e-o.5s

Figure 7: S t e p responses of example 4 In Fig.], the main PID controller is implemented in the forward path, so that the controller output will have a large derivative kick in response to set point changes. This phenomenon can be overcome by applying the derivative term to the process output only. Table 5 lists the optimal PID settings for Gc1 and the mini-

Gpl = (s
and

+ l)(s + 2 )
e-o.2s
~

Gp2 =

s+5'

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

61 1

mum cost fnnction values for three cases, namely case(i) the ideal PID structure, (U) derivative action applied t o the process output and (iii) no derivative action. The optimal auxiliary PI controller settings are the same as those listed in Table 4. The corresponding step responses are given in Fig.8 from which it can be seen that when the derivative action is applied t o the process output, case (ii), the step response of the closed loop is slower than that of case (i) but still faster than PI control only, case@).

sults. The auto-tuning method can also provide good tuning when the PID controller parameters are tuned by the use of the formulae proposed by the authors in Ref erence [2]. The advantage of this approach is that it can be used when no mathematical model is available for the process.

References
[l] Astri;m, K J, 1988, Automatic Tuning of PID Regulators, Research Triangle Park, N. C. Instrument Society of America

Table

5: O p t i m a l PID settings for

G,1

[2] Zhuang, M. and Atherton, D.P., IEE proceedings-D, 140, No.3, 216-224 [3] Zhuang, M. and Atherton, D.P., Proceeding of Control91, 3, 481-486

1993, 1991,

[4] Luyben, W.L., 1973, Process modelling, simulation and control for Chemical Engineering, McGrawHill, New York

[SI Shinskey, F.G., 1967, Process-control systems, McGraw-Hill Book Company

1.2

[6] Zhuang, M. and Atherton, Proceedings of ACC93, 3176-3177

D.P.,

1993,

Figure 8: Step responses for optimisation results

CONCLUSIONS
The paper has presented two methods to determine cascade PID controller parameters for a SISO system. When the transfer function of a process is known, the optimization procedure can be used t o tune the cascade controller for the given process. From the examples considered, it can be seen that the method usually results in a good closed-loop performance with small overshoot and short settling time for both tuning methods. The performance obtained when determining the controller settings by individual optimisations for each loop is often not far from the true optimum and normally produces satisfactory re-

Authorized licensed use limited to: Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet. Downloaded on December 4, 2009 at 08:26 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.