UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGY MARA

FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

CHEMICAL PROCESS CONTROL
CPE562
LECTURERS NAME
MOHD AIZAD AHMAD

STUDENTS NAME
NUR SYAKIRAH BINTI ABD RAHIM
2013892774
EH2215A

DATE OF SUBMISSION
7 DECEMBER 2015

CHAPTER 1
History of PID controller
A proportionalintegralderivative controller (PID controller) is a control loop feedback
mechanism (controller) commonly used in industrial control systems. A PID controller
continuously calculates an error value as the difference between a measured process
variable and a desired set point. The controller attempts to minimize the error over time
by adjustment of a control variable, such as the position of a control valve, a damper, or
the power supplied to a heating element, to a new value determined by a weighted sum.
PID controllers have been around for many years and have historically been considered
to be the best controller.
Originally developed from a governor device, which was used to measure and regulate
the speed of a machine; it was subsequently developed and used within automatic ship
steering and then for use as a pneumatic controller. The first real PID-type controller was
developed by Elmer Sperry in 1911. The first theoretical analysis of a PID controller was
published by Nicolas Minorsky in 1922. His observations grew out of efforts to design
automatic steering systems for the U.S. Navy. Based his analysis on observations of a
helmsman, noting the helmsman controlled the ship based not only on the current error,
but also on past error as well as the current rate of change, this was then made
mathematical by Minorsky. His goal was stability, not general control, which simplified
the problem significantly. While proportional control provides stability against small
disturbances, it was insufficient for dealing with a steady disturbance, notably a stiff gale
(due to droop), which required adding the integral term. Finally, the derivative term was
added to improve stability and control. More recently PID controllers are now used within
a wide range of applications from industrial oven to packaging machines.
In the early history of automatic process control the PID controller was implemented as a
mechanical device. These mechanical controllers used a lever, spring and a mass and
were often energized by compressed air. These pneumatic controllers were once the
industry standard. Most modern PID controllers in industry are implemented in
programmable logic controllers (PLCs) or as a panel-mounted digital controller. Software
implementations have the advantages that they are relatively cheap and are flexible with
respect to the implementation of the PID algorithm.

PID controller theory and equation

A Proportional-Integral-Derivative controller (PID controller) is a generic controller widely
used in industrial control systems. The PID control equation involves three separate
parameters; the Proportional, the Integral and Derivative terms. The Proportional term
responds instantaneously to the current error (providing instantaneous response). The
Integral term responds to the accumulation of errors (providing a slow response that
drives the steady-state error towards 0). And the Derivative term responds to the rate at
which the error is changing (providing some anticipatory response). Their respective
weighting determines the controls response.
Proportional action provides an instantaneous response to the control error. This is
useful for improving the response of a stable system but cannot control an unstable
system by itself. Additionally, the gain is the same for all frequencies leaving the system
with a nonzero steady-state error.
Integral action drives the steady-state error towards 0 but slows the response since the
error must accumulate before a significant response is output from the controller. Since
an integrator introduces a system pole at the origin, an integrator can be detrimental to
loop stability.
Derivative action acts on the derivative or rate of change of the control error. This
provides a fast response, as opposed to the integral action, but cannot accommodate
constant errors. Derivatives have a phase of +90 degrees leading to an anticipatory or
predictive response. However, derivative control will produce large control signals in
response to high frequency control errors such as set point changes and measurement
of noise.
Proportional-Integral-Derivative or PID control combines proportional control, integral
control, and derivative control in parallel. The equation is:

C PID ( s )=K P k +

ki
+k s
s d

Where:

KP

is the PID controller gain

is a constant included for more flexibility

ki

is the integral gain

kd

is the derivative gain

Alternative equation for PID controller:

C PID ( s )=K P 1+

1 Td s
+
Tr s D s

The equation of PID can be changed to other equation by:

Set

T d=0

Set

k i=0 and Eqn. PID becomes equal to Eqn. PD

Set

k =0 and Eqn. PID becomes an integral-derivative controller

Set

k =0, k i=0

Set

k =0,T d =0 and Eqn. PID becomes equal to Eqn. I

and Eqn. PID becomes equal to Eqn. PI

and Eqn. PID becomes equal to Eqn. D

Controller gain, integral time, derivative time and dead time

Controller gain is defined as "change in process output" divided by "change in process
input". A process with high process gain reacts more to a change in the process input
than a process with low process gain. . More gain in a controller gives a faster loop
response - and a more oscillatory (unstable) process.

Gain=

100
Propor tional Band

Derivative time observes how fast the actual condition approaches the desired condition
and produces a control action based on this rate. The units used for derivative action
describe how far into the future you want to look. Derivative action improves the
controller action because it predicts what is yet to happen by projecting the current rate
of change into the future. This means that it is not using the current measured value, but
a future measured value. Derivative action observes how fast the actual condition
approaches the desired condition and produces a control action based on this rate. This
additional action anticipates the convergence of actual and desired conditions. In effect,
it counteracts the control signal produced by the proportional and integral terms. The
intended result is a reduction in overshoot. This additional action anticipates the
convergence of actual and desired conditions. In effect, it counteracts the control signal
produced by the proportional and integral terms. The intended result is a reduction in
overshoot.

The integral time is the time measurement for the process changed from set point. The
integral of a signal is the sum of all the instantaneous values that the signal has been,
from whenever you started counting until you stop counting. Integral term considers the
history of the error, or how long and how far the measured process variable has been
from the set point over time. Integration is a continual summing. Integration of error over
time means that we sum up the complete controller error history up to the present time,
starting from when the controller was first switched to automatic.

e (t)=SP PV
Dead time is the amount of time that it takes for your process variable to start changing
after your valve changes. If you were taking a shower, the dead time is the amount of
time it would take for you (the controller) to feel a change in temperature after you have
adjusted the hot or cold water. Pure dead time processes are usually found in plug flow
or solids transportation loops. Examples are paper machine and conveyor belt loops.
Dead time is also called delay. A controller cannot make the process variable respond
before the process dead time. To a controller, a process may appear to have more dead
time than what it actually has. That is, the controller cannot be tuned tight enough
(without going unstable) to make the process variable respond appreciably before an
equivalent dead time. More accurately, the characteristic time of the loop is determined
by equivalent dead time. Equivalent dead time consists of pure dead time plus process
components contributing more than 180 degrees of phase lag. The phase of dead time
increases proportionally with frequency. Any process having more than 180 degrees
phase lag has equivalent dead time.

Effect of increasing or decreasing value of P,I &D toward process response

When the variable approaches the set point, proportional action is almost zero but
integral has increased. The derivative braking action continues. Once the variable
crosses the line, it changes. P begins to increase its effort in the other direction as it
moves above the line. Integral begins to relax now that it has moved past the set point.
D sees the slope beginning to decline and relaxes as well. Soon the proportional action
brings it around, the variable heads toward the set point again and all the actions are
reversed.
Proportional action is the strongest when the distance from the set point is the greatest.
Integral increases its effort with every moment that passes with the variable on just one
side of the line. Derivative makes no effort when the line is flat, even if it is nowhere
close to the set point. D will not move the line itself, it can only counteract P and I efforts.
So a D controller, if such exists, would be stable and easy to tune, but not particularly
effective. The art of loop tuning is determining the optimum values for each of those
actions so that they balance each other and move the specific loop in a way that is best
for that process.
Proportional
Proportional value and proportional action is the strongest when the distance from the
set point is the greatest. Proportional control applies an effort in proportion to how far
you are from the set point. Its main drawback is that the closer you get to the set point,
the less it pushes. Eventually it doesnt push hard enough to move the variable, so the
process can run continuously close to the set point, but not quite there.
As with the P-Only controller, the proportional term of the PI controller, Kc:e(t), adds or
subtracts from CObias based on the size of controller error e(t) at each time t. As e (t)
grows or shrinks, the amount added to CObias grows or shrinks immediately and
proportionately. Its contribution to the CO is based on the size of e(t) only at time t. As
e(t) grows or shrinks, the influence of the proportional term grows or shrinks immediately
and proportionately.

The plot below (click for a large view) illustrates this idea for a set point response. The
error used in the proportional calculation is shown on the plot:

Integral
The integral term is continually summing e (t). Thus, even a small error, if it persists, will
have a sum total that grows over time and the influence of the integral term will similarly
grow. The integral component of a control loop has the effect of continuing to increase or
decrease the output as long as any offset or droop continues to exist. This action drives
the controller in the direction necessary to eliminate the error caused by the offset.
Integral, or reset, adjusts a controllers output in accordance with both the size of the
deviation from set point and the time it lasts. The total integral sum grows as long as e(t)
is positive and shrinks when it is negative. Integral increases its effort with every moment
that passes with the variable on just one side of the line.
Derivative
Derivative acts as a brake or dampener on the control effort. The more the controller
tries to change the value, the more it counteracts the effort. In our example, the variable
rises in response to the set point change, but not as violently. As it approaches the set
point, it settles in nicely with a minimum of overshoot. It doesnt move as quickly as the
PI-only effort, but without the oscillations, the right amount of derivative action can
stabilize the process variable at the set point sooner.
A rapidly changing PV has a steep slope and this yields a large derivative. This is true
regardless of whether a dynamic event has just begun or if it has been underway for
some time. In the plot below the derivative

dPV / dt

describes the slope or

steepness of PV during a process response. Early in the response, the slope is large
and positive when the PV trace is increasing rapidly. When PV is decreasing, the

derivative (slope) is negative. And when the PV goes through a peak or a trough, there is
a moment in time when the derivative is zero.

The effects of tuning parameter are as follows:

Proportional gain (P): Increasing P generally increase control signal. A large value of
P typically means faster response, since the larger the error the larger the feedback

to compensate. An excessively large proportional gain will lead to process instability.

Integral gain (I): Increase Integral effect will make slower the system .A large value of
I implies that steady-state errors are eliminated quicker. The trade-off is larger
overshoot: any negative error integrated during transient response must be

integrated away by positive error before reaching steady state.

Derivative gain (D): Increase derivative will increase the speed. A large D value
decreases but slows down transient response and may lead to instability.

Effect of changing control parameters (http://www.eee.metu.edu.tr/)

Settling time, overshoot, decay ratio, number of oscillations

There are some performance measurement criteria such as settling time, overshoot,
decay ratio and number of oscillation. The definition of settling time is the time required
for the response curve to reach and stay within a range of certain percentage (usually

5% or 2%) of the final value. The settling time of an amplifier or other output device is
the time elapsed from the application of an ideal instantaneous step input to the time at
which the amplifier output has entered and remained within a specified error band,
usually symmetrical about the final value. Settling time includes a very brief propagation
delay, plus the time required for the output to slew to the vicinity of the final value,
recover from the overload condition associated with slew, and finally settle to within the
specified error. Systems with energy storage cannot respond instantaneously and will
exhibit transient responses when they are subjected to inputs or disturbances.
Maximum overshoot is defined the maximum peak value of the response curve
measured from the desired response of the system. The overshoot is the occurrence of
a signal or function exceeding its target. It arises especially in the step response of band
limited systems such as low-pass filters. It is often followed by ringing, and at times
conflated with the latter. It can be calculated from
Decay Ratio is the ratio by which the oscillation is reduced during one complete cycle, or
the ratio of successive peak heights. A "one quarter" decay ratio is a traditional standard.
The ratio can be calculated from
Oscillation is the repetitive variation, typically in time, of some measure about a central
value (often a point of equilibrium) or between two or more different states. The term
'vibration' is precisely used to describe mechanical oscillation but used as a synonym of
'oscillation' too. Familiar examples include a swinging pendulum and alternating current
power. Oscillations occur not only in mechanical systems but also in dynamic systems in
virtually every area of science. They are many types of oscillation; simple harmonic
oscillator, damped and driven oscillation and coupled oscillations.
Objectives of the study
The objective of this study is to differentiate and investigate the effects of changing
parameters. Besides, the objective is to investigate the effect of controller gain, integral
time, derivative time and dead time (time delay) in PID controller.

CHAPTER 2
>>LAB 1: Effect of controller gain
1. Open Mat Lab software then new model was opened by selecting new file button.
2. Then, the untitled window will appear.
3. Click button Simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn, sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all Simulink in
the right order.
4. Process transfer function is set as

5s
s +10 s
2

,, process set point=1

5.
6.
7.
8.

PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05,I1=0.01,D1=0

Set simulation parameters to 600
Run the simulation by clicking the run button
Plot PV vs time
>>plot (time,PV)
9. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.1,I2=0.01, D2=0
10. Plot the second process response
>>figure (2), plot (time,PV)
11. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.2 I3=0.01, D3=0
12. Plot the third process response
>>figure (3), plot (time,PV)
13. View all the figures in figure palette.
14. Combine response of figure(2) and figure(3) into figure(1)
15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, and PID3.
16. Show the SP at 1.

Figure 1: PFD for effect of controller gain

>>LAB 2: Effect of integral time
1. Open Mat Lab software then new model is opened by selecting new file button.
2. Then, untitled window will appear.

3. Click button Simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn, sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink in
the right order.
4. Process transfer function is set as

5s
s +10 s
2

,, process set point=1

5.
6.
7.
8.

PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05,I1=0.01,D1=0

Set simulation parameters to 600
Run the simulation by clicking the run button
Plot PV vs time
>>plot(time,PV)
9. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.05 I2=0.02 D2=0
10. Plot the second process response
>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)
11. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.05 I3= 0.04, D3=0
12. Plot the third process response
>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)
13. View the figure in figure palette
14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure (1)
15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.
16. Show the SP at 1.

Figure 2: PFD of effect on integral time

>>LAB 3: Effect of derivative time
1. Open Mat Lab software then new model is opened by selecting new file button.
2. Then, untitled window will appear.
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn, sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink in
4.
5.
6.
7.

the right order.

Process transfer function is set as, process set point=1
PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05,I1=0.01,D1=0
Set simulation parameters to 600
Run the simulation

8. Plot PV vs time
>>plot(time,PV)
9. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.05 I2=,0.01, D2=0.01
10. Plot the second process response
>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)
11. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.05 I3=0.01, D3=0.02
12. Plot the third process response
>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)
13. View the figure in figure palette.
14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure(1)
15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.
16. Show the SP at 1.

Figure 3: PFD on effect of the derivative time

>>LAB 4: Effect of dead time

1. Open Mat Lab software then new model is opened by selecting new file button.
2. Then, untitled window will appear.
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn , variable time delay , sum, scope and display. Arrange and
connected all simulink in the right order.
4. Process transfer function is set as, process set point=1. Add transport delay and set
Time Delay to 5.
PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.2, I1=0.01,D1=0
Set simulation parameters to 600
Run the simulation
Plot PV versus time
>>plot(time,PV)
9. Run a second set of Time delay = 7
10. Plot the second process response
>>figure(2),plot (time,PV)
11. Run a third set of Time delay = 9
12. Plot the third process response
>>figure(3),plot (time,PV)
5.
6.
7.
8.

13. View the figure in figure palette.

14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure (1)
15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.
16. Show the SP at 1.

Figure 4: PFD on effect of dead time

CHAPTER 3
LAB 1: EFFECT OF CONTROLLER GAIN

1.8

1.6
PID1
1.4
PID2
PID3

1.2

SP

PV

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

100

200

300
time

400

500

600

PID1

PID2

PID3

SETTLING TIME (second)

350

200

190

PERIOD (second)

80

No 2 successive peak

No 3 successive peak

OVERSHOOT

1.6

1.4

1.2

UNDERSHOOT

0.70

0.85

0.88

20

19

18

RISE TIME

Figure 5: Response of effect of controller gain

LAB 2: EFFECT OF INTEGRAL TIME

1.8
PID2
1.6

PID1
PID3

1.4
1.2
SP

PV

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

100

200

300
time

400

500

600

Figure 6: Response on the effect of integral time

PID1

PID2

PID3

SETTLING TIME (second)

400

420

430

PERIOD (second)

90

60

50

OVERSHOOT

1.6

1.7

1.80

UNDERSHOOT

0.65

0.5

0.38

20

15

10

RISE TIME

LAB 3: EFFECT OF DERIVATIVE TIME

1.8
PID1

1.6

PID2

1.4

PID 3

1.2

SP

PV

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

100

200

300
time

400

500

Figure 7: Response of effect of derivative time

PID1

PID2

PID3

SETTLING TIME (second)

510

535

570

PERIOD (second)

100

120

135

OVERSHOOT

1.61

1.44

1.52

UNDERSHOOT

0.65

0.7

0.75

20

30

35

RISE TIME

LAB 4: EFFECT OF DEAD TIME

600

2.5

PID3

PID2
PID1

PV

1.5

SP

0.5

100

200

300
Time

400

500

600

Figure 8: Response of effect of dead time

PID1

PID2

PID3

100

135

400

No 1 successive peak

55

70

OVERSHOOT

1.5

1.8

2.35

UNDERSHOOT

0.95

0.75

0.20

15

15

15

SETTLING TIME (second)

PERIOD (second)

RISE TIME

Figure 5 shows the response of effect of controller gain to the process value. For this
experiment, the value of P is manipulated by the value of 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 while the value of I
and D is remain constant which at 0.01 and 0 respectively. For PID 1, the value of P is set to
0.05. The settling time is 350 second, period is 80 second, overshoot is 1.6, undershoot is 0.70
and rise time is 20 second. For PID 2, the value of P is set to 0.1. The settling time obtained is
200 seconds and the period is the second successive peak from the PID1 because there are no
other successive periods after it. The overshoot is 1.4 while the undershoot value is 0.85. The
rise time obtained is 19 second. For PID 3, the value of P is set to 0.2. The settling time is 190
second and the period is the third successive peak from the period in PID 1 and PID 2. The
overshoot value is 1.2 and the undershoot value is 0.88 while the rise time obtained is 18
second.
Figure 6 show the response of effect of integral time to the process value. In this experiment the
value of I which is the integrated time is being manipulated while value of D (derivative time), P
(proportional) and set point (SP) is being set as controlled variable. Figure 6 shows the effect
integral time. For this experiment, the value of D and P is being maintained at 0 0.05
respectively. The value of I in this experiment is being varied at 0.01, 0.02 and 0.04. The settling
time obtained is 400 second and period for this process is 90 second. The overshoot value is
1.6 while the undershoot value is 0.65. The rise time is at 20 second. For PID 2, the value of I is
set to 0.02. The settling time obtained is 420 second and the period is 60 second. The
overshoot value is 1.7 while the undershoot value is 0.5. The rise time obtained is 15 second.
For PID 3, the value of I is set to 0.04. The settling value is 430 and the period is 50 second.
The overshoot value is at 1.80 while the undershoot value 0.38. The rise time is 10 second for
this experiment.
Figure 7 show the response effect of derivative time. In this experiment the value of D is set as
manipulated variable while P value, I value and set point is maintain at the constant value. The
value of P and I is being set at 0.05 and 0.01 respectively. The value of D is being varied at 0,
0.01 and 0.02. For PID 1, the settling time 510 seconds and the period is 100 second. The
overshoot value is 1.61 while the undershoot value is at 0.65. The rise time obtained is 20
second. For PID 2, the value of D is set to 0.01. The settling time is 535 second while the period
is for 120 second. The overshoot value is at 1.44 and the undershoot value is 0.7. The rise time
is 25 seconds. The settling time is 570 second and period is 135 second. The overshoot value is
1.52 and the undershoot value is 0.75. The rise time is for 35 second.

Figure 8 shows the effect of dead time for the process. For this experiment, dead time value is
being manipulated while P,I and D are act as controlled variable. For PID 1, the dead time is set
to 5. The settling time is 100 second and the period is at the first succession peak because after
this point, there is no successive peak. The overshoot value is 1.5 and the undershoot value is
0.95. The rise time is 15 second. For PID 2, the dead time is set to 7. The settling time is 135
second and the period is for 55 second. The overshoot value is 1.8 and the undershoot value is
0.75. The rise time is 15 second. Lastly, the dead time is set to 9. The settling time is 400
second and the period is 70 second. The overshoot value is 2.35 and the undershoot value is
0.2. The rise time is 15 second.
From the experiment, the measurement criteria for all of the experiments show the equal value
of PID1 as shown in the graph. This is because the parameter that being used is same for the
experiments. The rise time for the experiment on the effect of integral time, derivative time and
controller gain for PID 1 is same which is 20 seconds while the rise time of PID1 for the effect of
dead time is reduce to 15. This is due to the 5 seconds delay time used in the experiment.
Based on the result from the experiment, the response can be divided to 2 which are the stable
effect and the unstable effect. The controller gain and the dead time can be considered as the
stable effect because it just needs a short time to be settled. The integral time and the derivative
time is the example of unstable time because it needed longer settling time to stabilize the
process. So, it can be said that, the settling time will affect the stability of the process. The
shorter the settling time, more stable the process.
The effect of controller gain is the most stable rather than the effect of dead time to the process.
It is because the value of overshoot of effect of controller gain is lower than the value of
overshoot for the effect of the dead time. Difference in the value of derivative time gives the
most unstable effect to the process. The process needs the longest time to stabilize the effect
occur in the process. The value of overshoot for the effect of derivative time also lower
compared to the value of overshoot of integral time.

CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Based on the result obtained from the experiment, the most stable response is the effect of
controller gain to the process while the least stable response is the effect of the derivative time.
The higher the parameter of P, the shorter the settling time needed based on the effect of the
controller. For the effect of derivative time, the lower the parameter of D, the shorter the settling
time needed to stabilize the process. The experiment was conducted successfully and the
objectives of the study have been achieved.
There are a few recommendation can be done to increase the effect of the control element to
the process. First, the method that being used to obtained the data should be right to obtain the
accurate result. Secondly, the line to connect from one block to another block should be
connected perfectly so that the simulation can run smoothly. Next, the data obtained from the
simulation should be differentiated correctly by using the different colour for each line. This to
ensure we read the accurate line and tabulate the correct data.