ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

ISA Transactions
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/isatrans

Tuning of an optimal fuzzy PID controller with stochastic algorithms for networked control systems with random time delay
Indranil Pan a , Saptarshi Das a,b , Amitava Gupta a,b,
a b

Department of Power Engineering, Jadavpur University, Salt Lake Campus, LB-8, Sector 3, Kolkata-700098, India School of Nuclear Studies and Applications (SNSA), Jadavpur University, Salt Lake Campus, LB-8, Sector 3, Kolkata-700098, India

article

info

abstract
An optimal PID and an optimal fuzzy PID have been tuned by minimizing the Integral of Time multiplied Absolute Error (ITAE) and squared controller output for a networked control system (NCS). The tuning is attempted for a higher order and a time delay system using two stochastic algorithms viz. the Genetic Algorithm (GA) and two variants of Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) and the closed loop performances are compared. The paper shows that random variation in network delay can be handled efficiently with fuzzy logic based PID controllers over conventional PID controllers. 2010 ISA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 12 August 2010 Received in revised form 11 October 2010 Accepted 19 October 2010 Available online 11 November 2010 Keywords: Fuzzy PID controller Genetic Algorithm Networked control system Optimal tuning Particle Swarm Optimization Random network delay

1. Introduction Fuzzy logic controllers (FLC) have become more common in recent control applications to handle complex nonlinear processes [1,2]. It has been shown by many contemporary researchers that application of FLC enhances the closed loop performance of a PID controller in terms of handling change in an operating point for nonlinear processes by online updating the controller parameters [3,4]. FLCs generally work with a set of control rules, derived from experts knowledge. Various fuzzy logic controller structures which are analogous to the conventional PID controllers are analyzed by Mann et al. [5] and Golob [6] using single or multiple input conditions (viz. error, change of error and rate of change of error). The universal approximation property as in [2] states that there is a way to implement fuzzy controllers for almost all types of nonlinear processes but there is no mathematical formulation to decide what would be the appropriate choice of fuzzy parameters in implementing them. Hence empirical rules are used for the choice of various fuzzy parameters as discussed in [7]. The fuzzy tuning parameters may

Corresponding author at: Department of Power Engineering, Jadavpur University, Salt Lake Campus, LB-8, Sector 3, Kolkata-700098, India. Tel.: +91 9830489108, +91 33 2442 7700; fax: +91 33 2335 7254. E-mail addresses: indranil.jj@student.iitd.ac.in, indranil@pe.jusl.ac.in (I. Pan), saptarshi@pe.jusl.ac.in (S. Das), amitg@pe.jusl.ac.in (A. Gupta).

be the choice of inputs, scaling factors, membership functions (number or type or both), rule base, fuzzificationdefuzzification and inferencing techniques [7]. It has been shown in [24,8] that a change in inputoutput scaling factors (SF) affects the control performance of the FLC to a greater extent compared to the choice of the type of membership functions (MF). Also, the output SFs act like the controller gains and hence directly affect the stability of the closed loop system. So, the output SFs have greater importance than the input SFs on the closed loop performance of a process and hence should be chosen very carefully. The FLC tries to mimic the operators expertise by incorporating a nonlinear relationship between the error and the derivative of error and that of the output control signal [1,2]. Often, fixed SFs and predefined MFs become insufficient for achieving an optimal performance and need to be tuned online. It has been shown by Woo et al. [8] that a change in input and output scaling factors (SF) affects the control performance to a higher extent than variation in overlap of the fuzzy membership functions. Hence, in the present study, only inputoutput SFs are tuned to find out the optimal parameters of a FLC based PID controller to handle random variation in network delay. In recent past, fuzzy logic based PID controllers have become more common to handle complex dynamic processes. Diverse linear and nonlinear plants have been tuned by Mudi and Pal [3,4] and Bhattacharya et al. [9] with a fuzzy gain tuning mechanism and implemented along with a two input-one output FLC. Various improvements in conventional PID controllers using

0019-0578/$ see front matter 2010 ISA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.isatra.2010.10.005

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

29

Fig. 1. Optimal fuzzy PID structure with random network delays.

a fuzzy inferencing mechanism have been investigated in [1013]. Various tuning methods have also been proposed for tuning the fuzzy controller parameters as in [14] and others involving the Genetic Algorithm etc. [10,1416]. Mathematical quantification using non symmetrical fuzzy sets for a generalized class of controllers has been discussed by Mohan and Sinha [17] and the applicability of various types of fuzzy controllers from control perspective are analyzed. Performances of fuzzy PIDs are compared with normal PIDs and model predictive control in [18]. In [18] the fuzzy parameters are tuned using the NelderMead downhill simplex method. Also various performance indices [1820] for the cost function are compared in [18]. PID controller parameters have been tuned by a fuzzy system by Kazemian [21]. Fuzzy logic coupled with neural networks has also been used to tune PID parameters in [19]. Due to quantum leaps in communication systems, in recent years, it has become more normal to use a common communication channel like Ethernet or CAN bus etc. for transmission of the control signal and the measured output. This helps in reducing wiring costs and eliminates the necessity for maintaining dedicated communication channels for each control parameter [22,23]. However, this type of networked control system is not a panacea and has various unresolved issues like transmission delays and packet dropouts [24] which can degrade control performance. Hence these finer nuances over conventional control systems need to be delved into before actually implementing it in a real plant. In recent NCS applications, fuzzy logic based controllers have been proved to be efficient in handling packet drop-out [25,26] and network induced delays [23]. Various improvisations over existing protocols have been proposed using fuzzy logic in [2628] which help in congestion control and reduce delays and packet losses in the network. We, however intend to focus on existing transmission protocols and evaluate performances of various controllers for varying levels of transmission delays. Different models based on fuzzy logic have been proposed for the modelling of a NCS in [29,30]. Various nonlinear systems which can be represented by equivalent fuzzy models have been implemented over the network in [3140] and their performance with respect to delays and packet dropouts have been analyzed. A Matlab based co-simulation tool called TrueTime which helps in analyzing controller task execution in real time kernels along with network transmissions and continuous plant dynamics has been used in the analysis of fuzzy PID controllers implemented over the network in [4148]. Fuzzy logic controllers with their improvisations have been implemented to handle network induced delays and their performances over their conventional counterparts have been investigated in [4952]. A fuzzy PID controller has been implemented for a network based cascade control system in [53,54]. However no optimization of the fuzzy PID parameters has been done to check for the optimum values of these parameters. Also time domain error indices like ITAE, Integral of Absolute Error (IAE) etc. based optimization have not been included in the analysis, and the saturation of controller output for these controllers has not been investigated. In the

present work, we implement a fuzzy PID controller for a higher order plant and also a plant with time delay and optimize the fuzzy parameters with stochastic algorithms like the Genetic Algorithm and Particle Swarm Optimization, taking the random delays in the network into account. Also the effectiveness of the various stochastic algorithms and their variants for tuning are compared in the present study. Our cost function not only includes ITAE but also has the controller output taken into account to avoid controller saturation. A practical networked control loop generally consists of a deterministic inherent system delay and two stochastic delays [23] viz. the controller to actuator delay ( CA ) and the sensor to controller delay ( SC ) as shown in Fig. 1. Under these conditions, the process to be controlled over a network can be considered as randomly varying with time. It has been suggested by Mudi and Pal [3,4] that FLCs have a higher capability of enforcing optimal performance in a control loop over conventional optimal PIDs for nonlinear and time-varying systems. In this paper, an optimal fuzzy PID controller has been tuned by minimizing the sum of ITAE and squared value of control signal considering random variation in network delay and the performance is compared with a conventional optimal PID controller, tuned with the same criteria. The performance of the optimal controllers also depends on the choice of a suitable optimization algorithm, used for controller tuning. Many stochastic optimization algorithms have come up in control applications, especially in controller tuning [5557]. In this paper, a PID and fuzzy-PID controller have been tuned with two stochastic optimization algorithms, namely the Genetic Algorithm and Particle Swarm Optimization with its two variants viz. gbest and lbest PSO [58,59]. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the structure of the optimal fuzzy PID. A brief description of the two stochastic optimization methods used for controller tuning is discussed in Section 3. Section 4 presents the simulation results of two test plants with and without random network delay. The paper ends with the conclusion as Section 5 followed by the references. 2. Structure of the fuzzy PID controller and its optimal tuning 2.1. Fuzzy PID controller to handle random network delay The fuzzy PID structure (Fig. 1) used in this paper is a combination of fuzzy PI and fuzzy PD controllers with Ke , Kd as input SFs and , as output SFs as discussed by Woo et al. [8], Yesil et al. [60], Qiao and Mizumoto [61], Li et al. [62], Mohan and Sinha [63] and Mann et al. [64]. This uses two-dimensional linear rule base (Fig. 2) for error (e), error derivative ( ) and FLC e output (uFLC ) with standard triangular MFs (Fig. 3) and Mamdanitype inferencing. In Figs. 2 and 3, the fuzzy linguistic variables NL, NM, NS, ZR, PS, PM, PL represent Negative Large, Negative Medium, Negative Small, Zero, Positive Small, Positive Medium and Positive Large respectively. The FLC output (uFLC ) is determined by using the center of gravity method by defuzzification.

30

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

Fig. 2. Rule base for error, error derivative and FLC output.

Fig. 3. Membership functions for error, error derivative and FLC output.

2.2. Formulation of the objective function for time domain optimal tuning The controller output of a conventional PID is a weighted sum of error, its derivative and integral values, i.e. u(t ) = Kp [e(t )] + Ki

e(t )dt + Kd

de(t ) dt

(1)

The simple error minimization criteria can be modified by introducing a suitable time domain performance index like ITAE or Integral of Time multiplied Squared Error (ITSE) to have a better control action. Also for a sudden change in set-point, ITSE based tuning produces a larger controller output than ITAE, hence in the present study only ITAE has been considered as a suitable time domain performance index [55] and not other performance indices having higher powers of error and time. The objective function, used for controller tuning has been taken as a weighted sum of the ITAE and squared control signal similar to that of [56,57], i.e.

It has been seen that classical optimization problems often get trapped in local minima. This limitation can be overcome by the introduction of stochastic optimization methods like Particle Swarm Optimization or the Genetic Algorithm [5557]. But optimal performance cannot be guaranteed if there are random delays in the network, i.e. CA and SC (Fig. 1). To overcome the problem of random variation in network delay, the controller performance can be further enhanced by introducing a FLC based PID over a simple PID structure. Thus Fuzzy PIDs are expected to produce satisfactory closed loop response for random variation in system parameters i.e. network delays in this case. Thus our proposed scheme combines both the time domain optimality as well as required robustness against random delay variation in the closed loop system (due to the network in the loop) with an optimal Fuzzy PID controller. 3. Stochastic optimization algorithms used for controller tuning The tuning of the parameters of the Fuzzy PID controller (i.e. input and output SFs) has been carried out by two popular stochastic optimization methods, namely the GA and PSO which are described briefly in the following subsections. 3.1. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) In PSO the particles are initially distributed randomly in the search space. The particles move towards a global minima in each iteration depending on the best value found so far (global best or gbest) among all the particles and the individual particles best position (pbest). The objective function which is to be minimized is used to evaluate the fitness of the particle for a particular position. For each particle (i) the velocity in each dimension in the consecutive iteration is updated by the following velocity and position update equation, given by

J =
0

w1 t |e(t )| + w2 u2 (t ) dt .

(2)

It is worth mentioning that the weights w1 and w2 have been introduced in the objective function (2) with a provision of balancing the impact of the error and control signal. In the present simulation study we have considered equal weights for the two objectives to be met by the controller as such the minimization of the error index is as equally important as the control signal is. The objective function J in (2) is now minimized to find out the optimal set of controller parameters which simultaneously reduces the ITAE and control signal u(t ). The time multiplication term in error index ITAE minimizes the chance of oscillation at later stages, thus effectively reducing the settling time (ts ) of the closed loop system and the absolute value of error minimizes the percentage of overshoot (%Mp ). The minimization of the squared control signal reduces the chance of actuator saturation and also reduces the size of the actuator and thus the cost involved.

vi (t + 1) = vi (t ) + c1 1 (pi (t ) xi (t )) + c2 2 (pg (t ) xi (t )) (3) xi (t + 1) = xi (t ) + vi (t + 1).

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

31

Each particles position (xi ) in the next iteration depends on its velocity (vi ) in the present equation multiplied by an inertia factor () which is generally kept large so as to prevent random movement of the particles in the search space and to deviate the velocity of the particles by a smaller amount in each iteration. The other two positive constants c1 , c2 are the cognitive learning rate and the social learning rate respectively. The weights c1 , c2 represent the relative importance of the learning of the particles from its own best position (pi ) and the global best position (pg ), and both have been chosen as 1.49 for the present study, similar to [55]. In (3), {1 , 2 } [0, 1] are two uniformly distributed random numbers. The inertia factor () in our case has also been reduced linearly from 0.9 to 0.4 over the iterations [55]. This is an improvisation over the conventional PSO algorithm and incorporates a velocity control mechanism which ensures more effective searching at a fine grain [56]. A velocity clamping is also introduced in the algorithm and the maximum value of the velocity is set to 15% of the range in each dimension [65]. This ensures that the velocity does not explode to large values and helps in controlling the global exploration of the particles. However, a judicious choice of the PSO parameters should be made so as to reduce the computational effort and at the same time prevent pre-convergence of the optimum solutions. Maiti et al. [55] dealt with a similar kind of controller tuning and hence this has been chosen as a base case for the PSO parameter values. As a rule of thumb in the PSO algorithm, the minimum number of particles must be at least greater than the number of solution variables. Increasing the number of particles gives better results at the cost of an increase in computational time and complexity. Hence there is a tradeoff between the two. In our case 20 particles give satisfactory results in terms of the convergence criterion as well as the time taken. For the sake of effective comparison of both the gbest and lbest PSO algorithms the population is chosen as same. In the gbest PSO a star topology is considered for the social network as opposed to a ring topology in lbest PSO [58,59] and in both cases the number of particles has been considered to be 20. The same velocity and position update equations are used in both these PSO variants but in gbest PSO, Pg in (3) represents the global best of all the particles till the current iteration, whereas in lbest PSO it represents the neighbourhood best of the particles till the current iteration for each cluster. The lbest PSO has an overlapping neighbourhood, to facilitate information exchange. This is based on adjacent indices of the population array rather than on spatial positions to reduce computational complexity. In general, the gbest PSO converges faster than the lbest PSO due to larger particle interconnectivity. However lbest PSO has larger diversity and is less susceptible to being trapped in local minima. 3.2. Genetic Algorithm (GA) The genetic algorithm is another stochastic optimization process inspired by natural evolution and can be used to minimize a suitable objective function for tuning the controller parameters [57]. Initially, a population of solution vectors is created randomly over the whole solution domain. Each solution vector in the present population undergoes reproduction, crossover and mutation, in each iteration, to give rise to a better population of solution vectors in the next iteration. Reproduction implies that solution vectors with higher fitness values can produce more copies of themselves in the next generation. Usually a parameter called the elite count is used which represents the number of fittest individuals (solution vectors) that will definitely go to the next generation. Increasing the elite count may result in domination of the fitter individuals obtained earlier

in the simulation process and as such will result in less effective solutions. Hence this parameter is generally a small fraction of the total population size. In the present study, population size is considered to be 20 and elite count as 2. Crossover refers to information exchange based on probabilistic decisions between solution vectors. Here the child vector of the next generation is formed by combining the solution vectors of two parent individuals in the current population. The crossover fraction dictates how many children other than the elite children are formed by crossover. The remaining children are formed by mutation. In mutation a small randomly selected part of a solution vector is occasionally altered, with a very small probability of creating a child in the next generation. This way the solution is refined iteratively until the objective function is minimized below a certain tolerance level or the maximum number of iterations is exceeded. If we have a crossover fraction of 1, which implies that there is no mutation, then the genetic algorithm initially progresses to minimize the objective function until it forms the best individual from the available gene pool. After this the best individual is carried forward and replicated in successive generations and no new better individuals are obtained due to lack of mutation. Hence the problem stagnates and the program terminates with this fitness value after the maximum number of iterations is reached. However if we set crossover fraction as 0, implying that the whole population evolves through mutation, then it does not improve the fitness of the best individual at the first generation. It improves the fitness of the other individuals in the population, but since these are never combined with the genes of the best individual due to lack of crossover, the best fitness value levels off at a certain time and the program is terminated when the maximum number of iterations are reached. Hence, a judicious choice of the crossover and mutation fraction needs to be used. In our simulation we have used the crossover fraction to be 0.8 and mutation fraction to be 0.2 which has given satisfactory results for a wide variety of problems [66]. 4. Results and discussions The closed loop performance of some representative plants in Zhuang and Atherton [67] (with and without network delays) have been compared with a conventional PID and a Fuzzy PID, both of which have been tuned with three stochastic optimization methods, namely the GA, gbest PSO and lbest PSO. P1 (s) = P2 (s) = 1

(s + 1)5
2 (0.5s + 1) e0.1s

(4)

(s + 1) (4s + 1)

(5)

The performance of the above plants has been compared on the basis of optimal tracking for a unit change in set point as well as suppression of unit load disturbance [67]. Also, comparisons are made for control signals in each case which is a cause of actuator saturation [56,57]. 4.1. Simulation without network delay The stochastic optimization based tuning results for test plants (4) and (5) with conventional PID and Fuzzy PID are reported in Tables 1 and 2. Here, the controller parameters in Tables 1 and 2 are calculated with minimization of the objective function in (2) for unit change in set point. Additionally the load disturbance is compared later to evaluate the performance of the controllers, tuned via different intelligent optimization algorithms. The closed loop response for plant P1 and P2 and the respective controller outputs for unit change in set-point and load disturbance are shown in Figs. 48.

32 Table 1 Tuning results of PID controller without network delay. Plant P1 Optimization algorithm GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO Jmin 53.0824 52.6866 52.6866 14.46459 14.4294 14.43 Kp 0.96 1.1 1.101 1.423 1.799 1.715

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

Time Response of Plant P2 with Unit Set-Point Change & Load Disturbance

1.2

Ki 0.2273 0.2462 0.239 0.3162 0.4025 0.3816

Kd 1.0704 1.4367 1.4364 0.195 1.0026 0.4755

Amplitude

0.8

P2

0.6

0.4
Time Response of Plant P1 with Unit Set-Point Change & Load Disturbance

1.2 0.2 1 0 0.8 Amplitude 0 10 20 30 Time (sec) 40 50 60

0.6

Fig. 6. Output of plant P2 with step change in set-point & load disturbance.
Controller Output for Plant P2

0.4

2.4 2.2

0.2 2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Amplitude Time (sec) 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0 10 20 30 Time (sec) 40 50 60

Fig. 4. Output of plant P1 with step change in set-point & load disturbance.
Controller Output for Plant P2

2.2 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8

Amplitude

Fig. 7. Controller output for plant P2 .

Time Response of Plant P1 with Unit Set-Point Change & Load Disturbance Considering Random Network Delays

1.2

1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Amplitude

0.8

Time (sec)

Fig. 5. Controller output for plant P1 .

0.6

4.2. Simulations with network induced delay

0.4

Since FLC works on instantaneous values of e and e, rather than a predefined model structure, its performance is expected to be better over a simple PID for handling stochastic delays due to the network, and the tuning results for the test plants are reported in Tables 3 and 4. For the simulation of network delays in the forward and the feedback path in Fig. 1, a random number in the interval of [00.2] seconds is generated at each time step. The hybrid system comprising of the discrete time network and controller with Zero Order Hold (ZOH) along with the continuous time plant can be considered as a continuous time system with random delay if the sampling time (Ts ) is very small as shown by Tipsuwan and Chow [68] and Fang et al. [69]. In the present study Ts = 0.01 s has been considered. The corresponding closed loop response and controller outputs for plant P1 and P2 are shown in Figs. 811, considering network delays. It is evident from Figs. 8 and 10 that fuzzy PIDs have a nice capability to suppress the effect of random delay variation in a

0.2

0 0 10 20 30 Time (sec) 40 50 60

Fig. 8. Output of plant P1 with random network delay.

networked control system. Also, the load disturbance suppression is faster and deviation from the set-point is less with fuzzy PIDs compared to a conventional PID controller. The controller output becomes oscillatory with high amplitude in case of simple PID. The fuzzy PID controller outputs are also oscillatory but the amplitudes are less (Figs. 9, 11). To ensure that a large control signal does not saturate the actuator, the control signal u(t ) is also minimized as a part of the objective function (2), in the proposed technique. It is worth mentioning that the introduction of random network delays would lead to such a variation of controller

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836 Table 2 Tuning results of fuzzy PID controller without network delay. Plant P1 Optimization algorithm GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO Jmin 55.2846 55.3445 55.2535 14.5233 14.1719 14.1732 Ke 0.4506 0.4487 0.4369 0.8528 0.2947 0.3522 Kd 0.6335 0.6113 0.5525 0.5305 0.372 0.4726

33

1.4428 1.4952 1.5043 3.0839 4.1761 3.2474

0.6494 0.6512 0.6334 0.7747 10.487 7.9644

P2

Controller Output for Plant P1 Considering Random Network Delays

5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3

Table 3 Tuning results of PID with network delay. Plant P1 Optimization algorithm GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO Jmin 54.4237 54.4947 54.684 14.5265 14.677 14.6801 Kp 0.978 0.946 0.943 1.618 1.588 1.158 Ki 0.2217 0.2207 0.2267 0.3636 0.3059 0.3136 Kd 0.9524 0.9018 1.1464 0.1876 0.2344 0.4203

Amplitude

P2

10

20

30 Time (sec)

40

50

60

Fig. 9. Controller output for plant P1 with random network delay.

Time Response of Plant P2 with Unit Set-Point & Load Disturbance Considering Random Network Delays

1.2

0.8 Amplitude

0.6

output. Introducing network prediction schemes can ameliorate the adverse effects to a certain degree. Other alternative can be to design effective transmission protocols so that the random delays are handled adequately by the network protocol itself. Also, the presence of the control signal in the performance index effectively reduces the band of oscillation in the controller output. With only a simple error minimizing criteria, the band of oscillation in control signal would have been more. This is a particular problem introduced by the randomness of the communication network. Since the primary objective of the controller is to maintain time domain optimality which is evident from the time responses, the control signal suffers to some extent (as it has been optimized and not been allowed to be arbitrarily high) so as to suppress the effect of random delay in the time responses and yield a smooth closed loop dynamics. From the presented figures and tables, it is also evident that the PSO variants perform better than the GA for the optimization process. 4.3. Effect of gradual increase in random network delay The best tuned controllers of Tables 3 and 4 (having the lowest CA SC Jmin ) are now tested with increased network delay (max = max = {0.2, 0.4, 0.5}) to see how efficiently they handle relatively large random delays with the same tuning parameters. Simulated results of the system and controller outputs for plants (4)(5) are presented in Figs. 1215 respectively. It is clear from Figs. 13 and 15 that the controller output for the PID controller becomes larger than the Fuzzy PID when the network induced delay is increased, which may saturate the actuator in practical NCS applications. Also, Fuzzy PIDs give lower overshoot than simple PIDs for increased network delay (Figs. 12 and 14). It is also worth mentioning that all issues in networked control applications are not essentially process control delays (which might be large but are generally constant). Stochastic delays are much harder to deal with and even a small amount of random stochastic delay in each sampling time can result in system instability even if the system might be stable due to the same amount of constant time delay which is not stochastic in nature as shown by Hirai and Satoh [70]. This implies that a control system designed for the worst case scenario does not necessarily ensure system stability when the delay varies stochastically between the upper and lower bounds. The simulated Figs. 1215 show that the fuzzy logic controller has higher capability of suppressing random variation in network delay in the forward and feedback path.

0.4

0.2

10

20

30 Time (sec)

40

50

60

Fig. 10. Output of plant P2 with random network delay.

Controller Output for Plant P2 Considering Random Network Delays

3 2.5 2 1.5 Amplitude 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 10 20 30 Time (sec) 40 50 60

Fig. 11. Controller output for plant P2 with random network delay.

34 Table 4 Tuning results of fuzzy PID with network delay. Plant P1 Optimization algorithm GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO GA gbest-PSO lbest-PSO

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

Jmin 56.09 55.6603 56.325 14.92 14.6336 14.7689

Ke 0.4165 0.3487 0.5709 1.9299 0.6815 0.6049

Kd 0.3617 0.486 0.8484 1.08 1.0369 0.8688

1.6922 1.8778 1.1915 1.9199 0.9233 1.0554

0.6183 0.895 0.5034 0.7337 3.2445 4.6765

P2

Time Response of Plant P1 with Gradual Increase in Random Network Delay

Controller Output of Plant P2 with Gradual Increase in Random Network Delay

1.2

4 3 2

0.8 Amplitude Amplitude 1 0 1 0.2 2 3

0.6

0.4

10

20

30 Time (sec)

40

50

60

10

20

30 Time (sec)

40

50

60

Fig. 12. Output of plant P1 with gradual increase in random network delay.
Controller Output of Plant P1 with Gradual Increase in Random Network Delay

Fig. 15. Controller output for P2 with gradual increase in random network delay.

10 8 6 4 Amplitude 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 10 20 30 Time (sec) 40 50 60

the controller performance will deteriorate as the sampling time is increased, as it deviates from the continuous time case to a larger extent. In NCS applications however the sampling time is a design input variable based on the network conditions, since decreasing the sampling time would result in a large number of packets being sent through the network which would result in more network congestion and increase delays. Real time implementation of such controllers in NCS for process control applications has been reported in [23,71]. 5. Conclusion The effect of random delays in NCS has been handled in this paper by using fuzzy PID controllers. Tuning of controllers is done by minimizing ITAE and the squared control signal with three stochastic algorithms viz. the GA, gbest PSO and lbest PSO. Simulation results indicate that load disturbance suppression with Fuzzy PID tuned by gbest and lbest PSO is better than that with the GA. Also, to nullify the effect of random variation network delay in the controlled output, the control action with simple PIDs becomes much larger than that with Fuzzy PIDs. The random network induced delay is then gradually increased and the Fuzzy PID controller again shows better performance than a simple PID controller, especially in load disturbance suppression. Further works on the proposed scheme can be directed towards stability analysis of such controllers in NCS applications. Other future investigations may include a performance study of the fuzzy controller to handle nonlinear processes and considering sensor noise and packet drop-outs in the network. Acknowledgement This work has been supported by the Board of Research in Nuclear Sciences (BRNS) of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), India, sanction no. 2009/36/62-BRNS, dated November 2009.

Fig. 13. Controller output for P1 with gradual increase in random network delay.
Time Response of Plant P1 with Gradual Increase in Random Network Delay

1.2

0.8 Amplitude

0.6

0.4

0.2

10

20

30 Time (sec)

40

50

60

Fig. 14. Output of plant P2 with gradual increase in random network delay.

Also the controller tuning algorithm presented in this paper is offline and is independent of the choice of sampling time. However,

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836

35

References
[1] Driankov Dimiter, Hellendoorn Hans, Reinfrank Michael. An introduction to fuzzy control. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1993. [2] Passino Kevin M, Yurkovich Stephen. Fuzzy control. Reading, (MA): AddisonWesley Longman Inc.; 1998. [3] Mudi Rajani K, Pal Nikhil R. A robust self-tuning scheme for PI-and PD-type fuzzy controllers. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 1999;7(1):216. [4] Mudi Rajani K, Pal Nikhil R. A self-tuning fuzzy PI controller. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2000;115(2):32738. [5] Mann George KI, Hu Bao-Hang, Gosine Raymond G. Analysis of direct action fuzzy PID controller structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 1999;29(3):37188. [6] Golob Marjan. Decomposed fuzzy proportional-integral-derivative controllers. Applied Soft Computing 2001;1(3):20114. [7] Reznik Leonid, Ghanayem Omar, Bourmistrov Anna. PID plus fuzzy controller structures as a design base for industrial applications. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 2000;13(4):41930. [8] Woo Zhi-Wei, Chung Hung-Yuan, Lin Jin-Jye. A PID type fuzzy controller with self-tuning scaling factors. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2000;115(2):3216. [9] Bhattacharya S, Chatterjee A, Munshi S. A new self-tuned PID-type fuzzy controller as a combination of two-term controllers. ISA Transactions 2004; 43(3):41326. [10] Bandyopadhyay R, Chakraborty UK, Patranabis D. Autotuning a PID controller: a fuzzy-genetic approach. Journal of Systems Architecture 2001;47(7):66373. [11] Bandyopadhyay R, Patranabis D. A new autotuning algorithm for PID controllers using dead-beat format. ISA Transactions 2001;40(3):25566. [12] Bandyopadhyay R, Patranabis D. A fuzzy logic based PI autotuner. ISA Transactions 1998;37(3):22735. [13] Blanchett TP, Kember GC, Dubay R. PID gain scheduling using fuzzy logic. ISA Transactions 2000;39(3):31725. [14] Boubertakh Hamid, Tadjine Mohamed, Glorennec Pierre-Yves, Labiod Salim. Tuning fuzzy PD and PI controllers using reinforcement learning. ISA Transactions 2010;49(4):54351. [15] Hu Baogang, Mann George KI, Gosine Raymond G. New methodology for analytical and optimal design of fuzzy PID controllers. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 1999;7(5):52139. [16] Visioli A. Tuning of PID controllers with fuzzy logic. IEE ProceedingsControl Theory and Applications 2001;148(1):18. [17] Mohan BM, Sinha Arpita. Mathematical models of the simplest fuzzy PI/PD controllers with skewed input and output fuzzy sets. ISA Transactions 2008; 47(3):30010. [18] Mansour SE, Kember GC, Dubay R, Robertson B. Online optimization of fuzzyPID control of a thermal process. ISA Transactions 2005;44(2):30514. [19] Lee Ching-Hung, Teng Ching-Cheng. Calculation of PID controller parameters by using a fuzzy neural network. ISA Transactions 2003;42(3):391400. [20] Xu Jian-Xin, Liu Chen, Hang Chang Chieh. Tuning of fuzzy PI controllers based on gain/phase margin specifications and ITAE index. ISA Transactions 1996; 35(1):7991. [21] Kazemian Hassan B. Comparative study of a learning fuzzy PID controller and a self-tuning controller. ISA Transactions 2001;40(3):24553. [22] Das M, Banerjee A, Ghosh R, Goswami B, Balasubramanian R, Chandra AK, Gupta A. A study on multivariable process control using message passing across embedded controllers. ISA Transactions 2007;46(2):24753. [23] Das M, Ghosh R, Goswami B, Chandra AK, Balasubramanian R, Luksch P, Gupta A. Multi-loop networked process control: a synchronized approach. ISA Transactions 2009;48(1):12231. [24] Zhang Wei, Branicky Michael S, Phillips Stephen M. Stability of networked control system. IEEE Control Systems Magazine 2001;21(1):8499. [25] Dong Hongli, Wang Zidong, Gao Huijun. H fuzzy control for systems with repeated scalar nonlinearities and random packet losses. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2009;17(2):44050. [26] Li Jian Guo, Yuan Jing Qi, Lu Jun Guo. Observer-based H control for networked nonlinear systems with random packet losses. ISA Transactions 2010;49(1): 3946. [27] Jammeh Emmanuel A, Fleury Martin, Wagner Christian, Hagras Hani, Ghanbari Mohammed. Interval type-2 fuzzy logic congestion control for video streaming across IP networks. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2009;17(5): 112342. [28] Siripongwutikorn Peerapon, Banerjee Sujata, Tipper David. Fuzzy-based adaptive bandwidth control for loss guarantees. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 2005;16(5):114762. [29] Ren F-C, Chang C-J, Cheng R-G. QoS-guaranteed fuzzy transmission controller for dynamic TDMA protocol in multimedia communication systems. IEE ProceedingsCommunications 2002;149(56):2928. [30] Zheng Ying, Fang Huajing, Wang Hua O. TakagiSugeno fuzzy-model-based fault detection for networked control systems with Markov delays. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 2006; 36(4):9249. [31] Jiang Bin, Mao Zehui, Shi Peng. H -filter design for a class of networked control systems via TS fuzzy-model approach. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2010;18(1):2018. [32] Jia Xinchun, Zhang Dawei, Hao Xinghua, Zheng Nanning. Fuzzy H tracking control for nonlinear networked control systems in TS fuzzy model. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 2009; 39(4):10739.

[33] Zhang Huaguang, Yang Dedong, Chai Tianyou. Guaranteed cost networked control for TS fuzzy systems with time delays. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and CyberneticsPart C: Applications and Reviews 2007;37(2):16072. [34] Zhang Huaguang, Yang Jun, Su Chun-Yi. TS fuzzy-model-based robust H design for networked control systems with uncertainties. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 2007;3(4):289301. [35] Jiang Xiefu, Han Qing-Long. On designing fuzzy controllers for a class of nonlinear networked control systems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2008;16(4):105060. [36] Gao Huijun, Zhao Yan, Chen Tongwen. H fuzzy control of nonlinear systems under unreliable communication links. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2009;17(2):26578. [37] Peng Chen, Yang Tai Cheng. Communication-delay-distribution-dependent networked control for a class of TS fuzzy systems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 2010;18(2):32635. [38] Zhang Huaguang, Li Ming, Yang Jun, Yang Dedong. Fuzzy model-based robust networked control for a class of nonlinear systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A (Systems and Humans) 2009;39(2): 43747. [39] Yang De-Dong, Zhang Hua-Guang. Robust H networked control for uncertain fuzzy systems with time-delay. Acta Automatica Sinica 2007;33(7):72630. [40] Tian Engang, Yue Dong, Gu Zhou. Robust H control for nonlinear systems over network: a piecewise analysis method. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2010; 161(21):273145. [41] Zhang Wenjuan, Wang Lian-Ming, Deng Yufen, Zhang Hongwei. Studies on the fuzzy PID control method for networked control systems with random delays. In: 7th world congress on intelligent control and automation. WCICA 2008. 2008. p. 331620. [42] Dezong Zhao, Chunwen Li, Jun Ren. Fuzzy speed control and stability analysis of a networked induction motor system with time delays and packet dropouts. Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications 2011;12(1):27387. [43] Zhang Qian, Guo Xi-Jin, Wang Zhen, Tian Xi-Ian. Application of improved fuzzy controller in networked control systems. Journal of China University of Mining and Technology 2006;16(4):5004. [44] Huang Congzhi, Bai Yan, Liu Xingjie. Fuzzy PID control method for a class of networked cascade control systems. In: The 2nd international conference on computer and automation engineering. ICCAE, 2010. vol. 1. 2010. p. 1404. [45] Huang Congzhi, Bai Yan, Li Xinli. Simulation for a class of networked cascade control systems by PID control. In: International conference on networking, sensing and control. ICNSC 2010. 2010. p. 45863. [46] Zhang Wen-Juan, Deng Yu-Fen, Wang Lian-Ming, Zhang Hong-Wei. Fuzzy PID control method for networked control system with constant delays. In: International conference on machine learning and cybernetics, 2008. vol. 4. 2008. p. 196873. [47] Du F, Qian QQ. Fuzzy immune self-regulating PID control based on modified Smith predictor for networked control systems. In: IEEE international conference on networking, sensing and control. ICNSC 2008. 2008. p. 4248. [48] Du F, Qian QQ. Fuzzy immune self-regulating PID control for wireless networked control system. In: IET conference on wireless, mobile and sensor networks. CCWMSN07. 2007. p. 1081-4. [49] Lee Kyung Chang, Lee Suk, Lee Man Hyung. Remote fuzzy logic control of networked control system via profibus-DP. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 2003;50(4):78492. [50] Almutairi NaifB, Chow Mo-Yuen. PI parameterization using adaptive fuzzy modulation (AFM) for networked control systems-part I: partial adaptation. In: 28th annual conference of the industrial electronics society. IECON 02. vol. 4. 2002. p. 31527. [51] Almutairi NaifB, Chow Mo-Yuen. PI parameterization using adaptive fuzzy modulation (AFM) for networked control systems-part II: full adaptation. In: 28th annual conference of the industrial electronics society. IECON 02. vol. 4. 2002. p. 315863. [52] Almutairi NaifB, Chow Mo-Yuen, Tipsuwan Yodyium. Network-based controlled dc motor with fuzzy compensation. In: 27th annual conference of the industrial electronics society. IECON 01. vol. 3. 2001. p. 18449. [53] Fadaei A, Salahshoor K. Design and implementation of a new fuzzy PID controller for networked control systems. ISA Transactions 2008;47(4): 35161. [54] Fadaei A, Salahshoor K. Improving the control performance of networked control systems using a new fuzzy PID. In: IEEE international symposium on industrial electronics. ISIE 2008. 2008. p. 206671. [55] Maiti Deepyaman, Acharya Ayan, Chakraborty Mithun, Konar Amit, Janarthanan Ramdoss. Tuning PID and PI D controllers using the integral time absolute error criteria. In: 4th international conference on information and automation for sustainability. ICIAFS 2008. 2008. p. 45762. [56] Cao Jun-Yi, Cao Bing-Gang. Design of fractional order controllers based on particle swarm optimization. In: 1st IEEE industrial electronics and applications. 2006. p. 16. [57] Cao Jun-Yi, Liang Jin, Cao Bing-Gang. Optimization of fractional order PID controllers based on Genetic Algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on machine learning and cybernetics. vol. 9. p. 56869. [58] Kennedy James, Mandes Rui. Population structure and particle swarm performance. In: Proceedings of the 2002 congress on evolutionary computation. CEC02. vol. 2. p. 16716. [59] Ghosh Sayan, Kundu Debarati, Suresh Kaushik, Das Swagatam, Abraham Ajith, Panigrahi BijayaK, Snase Vaclav. On some properties of the lbest topology

36

I. Pan et al. / ISA Transactions 50 (2011) 2836 in particle swarm optimization. In: Ninth international conference on hybrid intelligent systems. HIS09. vol. 3. p. 3705. Yesil E, Guzelkaya M, Eksin I. Self tuning fuzzy PID type load and frequency controller. Energy Conversion and Management 2004;45(3):37790. Qiao Wu Zhi, Mizumoto Masaharu. PID type fuzzy controller and parameters adaptive method. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1996;78(1):2335. Li Han-Xiong, Zhang Lei, Cai Kai-Yuan, Chen Guanrong. An improved robust fuzzy PID controller with optimal fuzzy reasoning. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 2005;35(6):128394. Mohan BM, Sinha Arpita. Analytical structure and stability analysis of a fuzzy PID controller. Applied Soft Computing 2008;8(1):74958. Mann George KI, Hu Bao-Gang, Gosine RaymondG. Two-level tuning of fuzzy PID controllers. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 2001;31(2):2639. Liu Bo, Wang Ling, Jin Yi-Hui, Tang Fang, Huang De-Xian. Improved particle swarm optimization combined with chaos. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 2005; 25(5):126171. [66] Global optimization toolbox: users guide. Mathworks, Inc. 2010. [67] Zhuang M, Atherton DP. Automatic tuning of optimum PID controllers. IEE ProceedingsD: Control Theory and Applications 1993;140(3):21624. [68] Tipsuwan Yodyium, Chow Mo-Yuen. Control methodologies in networked control systems. Control Engineering Practice 2003;11(10):1099111. [69] Fang Laihua, Wu Zhongzhi, Wu Aiguo, Zheng Aihong. Fuzzy immune selfregulating PID control of networked control system. In: International conference on computational intelligence for modelling, control and automation, 2006 and international conference on intelligent agents, web technologies and internet commerce. CIMCA-IAWTIC06. 2006. p. 748. [70] Hirai Kazumasa, Satoh Yoshiaki. Stability of a system with variable time delay. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 1980;25(3):5524. [71] Das Monotosh, Ghosh Ratna, Goswami Bhaswati, Gupta Amitava, Tiwari AP, Balasubramanian R, Chandra AK. Network control system applied to a large pressurized heavy water reactor. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 2006; 53(5):294856.

[60] [61] [62]

[63] [64]

[65]