IMC-PID controller design based on loop shaping via LMI approach

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2017.06.007Get rights and content

Highlights

  • LMI formulation for designing IMC-PID controller is proposed.

  • The parameters of controller are tuned by open-loop shaping.

  • Gain crossover frequency and phase margin can be adjusted to the desired values.

  • The method is successfully applied to various well-known processes.

Abstract

This paper presents a new approach to designing a PID controller based on internal model control (IMC). For this purpose, the parameters of PID controller in the standard structure of IMC are calculated such that the gain crossover frequency, phase margin, and phase and amplitude of the open-loop system at various frequencies are separately adjusted to the desired values. This loop shaping procedure is wholly formulated as a linear matrix inequality (LMI) generalized eigenvalue problem (GEVP). Hence, using this approach, one can combine the advantages of PID, IMC, and LMI. Unlike the traditional methods, here the LMIs are derived directly in the frequency domain without using state-space models. The proposed method was applied to various widely used process models to verify its efficiency, and the results were compared with competing methods.

Introduction

PID controllers have been utilized for many purposes due to their simple structure, acceptable performance, and satisfactory robustness (Åström and Hägglund, 1995). The literature shows a variety of approaches to tuning PID controllers. A few examples are the internal model control (IMC) method (Skogestad, 2003, Grimholt and Skogestad, 2012, Shamsuzzoha, 2016, Kumar and Sree, 2016, Tan et al., 2003, Vu and Lee, 2013, Vuppu et al., 2015, Jin and Liu, 2014a, Jin and Liu, 2014b), the loop shaping method (Grassi et al., 2001, Hara et al., 2006, Saeki, 2009), and methods based on linear matrix inequality (LMI) (Huang and Huang, 2004; Wang et al., 2007; Wu et al., 2011; Boyd et al., 2016; Souza et al., 2016). The most interesting approaches to IMC are Skogestad IMC (SIMC), which was proposed by Skogestad (2003), and improved SIMC (Grimholt and Skogestad, 2012). To enhance disturbance rejection, Shamsuzzoha (2016) developed a closed-loop tuning method for the IMC-PID controller using the set-point step test. In a recent paper by Kumar and Sree (2016), a set-point filter was designed to enhance the servo response of the controller. A set-point filter was employed in many studies (Tan et al., 2003, Vu and Lee, 2013, Vuppu et al., 2015) to improve the servo response of the closed-loop system. IMC-PID tuning rules based on model matching approach and closed-loop shaping was presented by Jin and Liu, 2014a, Jin and Liu, 2014b.

The method proposed by Grassi et al. (2001) drew upon the principles of loop shaping and integrated system identification and PID controller tuning. Hara et al. (2006) introduced a method for designing PID controllers with the purpose of fulfilling multiple frequency domain inequalities in the open-loop transfer function in finite and semi-infinite frequency ranges. In Saeki (2009), a method was proposed for tuning multi-loop PID controllers based on loop shaping.

Huang and Huang (2004) designed the multi-loop or decentralized PID controller based on generalized covariance constraints and propounded an iterative LMI approach to solve the problem. Wang et al. (2007) determined the parameter ranges for multi-loop PID controllers. In so doing, they developed an efficient computational design by recasting the problem under study as a quasi-LMI problem. Wu et al. (2011) developed algorithms on the basis of LMIs to design multivariable PID controllers for discrete-time systems. Boyd et al. (2016) formulated MIMO PID controller design as an optimization problem that entails nonconvex quadratic matrix inequalities and introduced a simple method in order to replace the nonconvex matrix inequalities with an LMI constraint. Souza et al. (2016) obtained LMI conditions for the design of PID controllers and used a Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional to substantiate closed-loop stability in the presence of time-varying delays, network-caused delays, and packet dropouts.

This paper formulates IMC-PID controller design as an optimization problem via combining loop shaping and LMI approaches. In this problem, obtaining desired bandwidth and phase margin are considered as the main objectives of the optimization, and the control objectives such as disturbance rejection, noise attenuation, and robustness to variations in the gain of the process are regarded as the corresponding constraints. Moreover, stability conditions are formulated as LMI constraints using the Routh–Hurwitz criterion. This optimization problem can be stated in the form of a generalized eigenvalue problem (GEVP).

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 outlines the problem statement. IMC-PID controller design is introduced in Section 3. The proposed IMC-PID tuning rules and their relationship to the LMI approach are discussed in Section 4. Simulation results are given in Section 5. Finally, the conclusion is reported in Section 6.

Section snippets

Problem statement

In some controllers, a linear relationship exists between the controller and its variables. Hence, the structure of the controller can be considered C(s) = W(s)X, where X is a vector of control variables and W(s) is a vector of functions in s. The vectors X and W(s) are specified according to the type of the controller. For example, a PID controller has a transfer function like (1)C(s)=KP+KIs+KDs.Design parameters in PID controller are KP, KI, and KD. Thus, the vectors W(s) and X are considered

IMC-PID controller design

The standard IMC structure is shown in Fig. 4, where P(s) is the process to be controlled, M(s) is the process model, and Q(s) is the IMC controller. The standard IMC structure can be reduced to the equivalent classic feedback system shown in Fig. 1, where C(s) is in the form of a PID controller. Utilizing the IMC design approach (Wang et al., 2001), the process model is decomposed into invertible M(s) and non-invertible M+(s) portions, where M+(s) typically includes time delay and RHP zeros

First-order plus time delay (FOPTD)

The process transfer function of the FOPTD system is stated as follows:P(s)=KeLsτs+1.If first-order Pade approximation is used for approximating the time delay term (i.e., eLs = (1  0.5Ls)/(1 + 0.5Ls)), the IMC controller is obtained as follows:Q(s)=(τs+1)(1+0.5Ls)K(1+λs).Therefore, the feedback controller C(s) is obtained as follows:C(s)=0.5τLs2+(τ+0.5L)s+1K(λ+0.5L)s,which can be rewritten as a PID controller:C(s)=(τ+0.5L)K(λ+0.5L)+1K(λ+0.5L)s+0.5τLK(λ+0.5L)s.Hence, we haveKP=(τ+0.5L)KI,KD=(0.5τL)

Simulation results and discussions

This section presents the results of simulations performed on several types of processes with time delay. The proposed method is compared, by means of four examples, to a few similar approaches recently introduced. In order to measure the performance and robustness of the control system, the integral square error (ISE), overshoot (OS), total variation (TV) and phase margin are considered as the quantitative indices. To make the comparison fair, the same maximum magnitude of sensitivity function

Conclusions

Using open-loop shaping approach, the IMC-PID controller was tuned so that desired frequency domain specifications such as bandwidth and phase margin could be met. The control objectives which were satisfied by open-loop shaping were recast as LMIs, which were then easily solved on the MATLAB software. Also, the stability conditions were formulated as an LMI constraint. The proposed method and some other similar approaches in the recent literature were applied to time-delay processes. In order

Cited by (18)

  • IMC-based PID control of servo motors with extended state observer

    2019, Mechatronics
    Citation Excerpt :

    To deal with this drawback, an enhanced IMC strategy applying a 2-degree-of-freedom (2DOF) structure has been developed for both the servo and the regulator requirements [19]. Based on this 2DOF-IMC structure, lots of advanced control techniques are applied to pursue good load disturbance rejection while ensuring the desired set-point tracking, such as fuzzy adaptive law [20,21], neural network inverse scheme [22,23], immune algorithm [24] and loop shaping via LMI approach [25]. However, those advanced methods increase the complexity of the controller design.

  • An iterative LMI approach for H<inf>∞</inf> synthesis of multivariable PI/PD controllers for stable and unstable processes

    2018, Chemical Engineering Research and Design
    Citation Excerpt :

    Some of the recently developed methods for SISO PID tuning are IMC-based PID tuning (Kumar and Sree, 2016), combination of IMC and model matching approach for closed-loop shaping (Jin and Liu, 2014), frequency loop-shaping (Grassi et al., 2001), generalized Kalman–Yakubovich–Popov (KYP) synthesis (Hara et al., 2006), optimization via multiobjective performance criterion (Sahib and Ahmed, 2016), and discrete-time fractional-order PID tuning based on meta-heuristic optimization (Merrikh-Bayat et al., 2015). Also, tuning SISO PID and fractional-order PID via LMI approach based on the frequency sampling method are discussed in Najafizadegan et al. (2017) and Merrikh-Bayat (2017), respectively, and SISO PID tuning based on convex–concave optimization is studied in Hast (Åström et al., 2013). See also Vilanova and Visioli (2006) and Vilanova and Visioli (2012) for some classical SISO PID tuning methods.

  • Design of time-delay robust cascade PI controller for turboshaft engine

    2023, Beijing Hangkong Hangtian Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text