A comparison of software-based approaches to identifying FOPDT and SOPDT model parameters from process step response data

Abstract System identification is the experimental approach to deriving process models, which can take many forms depending upon their intended use. In the work described in this paper, the ultimate aim is to use them in the design of controllers for regulating engineering processes. Modelling always involves approximations since all real systems are to some extent non-linear, time-varying, and distributed. Thus, it is highly improbable that any set of models will contain the ‘true’ system structure. A more realistic aim is therefore to identify a model that provides an acceptable approximation, in the context of the application in which it is used. In controller design, a first step is often to determine the model using step and frequency response data. This paper compares different modern software approaches that exploit step response data, where the aim is to determine either a first- or second-order-plus-dead-time (FOPDT or SOPDT) transfer function. They include an integral equation method, an algorithm available in the MATLAB Optimization Toolbox, and recently developed in-house software that uses a particle swarm optimisation (PSO) approach.

[1]  J. G. Ziegler,et al.  Optimum Settings for Automatic Controllers , 1942, Journal of Fluids Engineering.

[2]  Y. Chen,et al.  A comparative introduction of four fractional order controllers , 2002, Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation (Cat. No.02EX527).

[3]  Sirish L. Shah,et al.  Novel identification method from step response , 2007 .

[4]  Biao Huang,et al.  Improved identification of continuous-time delay processes from piecewise step tests , 2007 .

[5]  H. L. Mason,et al.  The dynamics of automatic controls , 1948 .

[6]  Sirish L. Shah,et al.  Identification from step responses with transient initial conditions , 2008 .

[7]  Yong Zhang,et al.  Robust identification of continuous systems with dead-time from step responses , 2001, Autom..

[8]  Mohamed Benrejeb,et al.  Stabilizing PID Controllers for a Class of Time Delay Systems , 2012 .

[9]  H. Rake,et al.  Step response and frequency response methods , 1980, Autom..

[10]  Tao Liu,et al.  A tutorial review on process identification from step or relay feedback test , 2013 .

[11]  Chang-Chieh Hang,et al.  Robust identification of first-order plus dead-time model from step response , 1999 .

[12]  Suman Saha,et al.  On the Selection of Tuning Methodology of FOPID Controllers for the Control of Higher Order Processes , 2011, ISA transactions.

[13]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  PID Controllers: Theory, Design, and Tuning , 1995 .

[14]  Yuhua Chen,et al.  Indirect identification of continuous-time delay systems from step responses , 2011 .

[15]  David B. Fogel,et al.  Evolutionary Computation: Towards a New Philosophy of Machine Intelligence , 1995 .

[16]  Yoshikazu Nishikawa,et al.  A method for auto-tuning of PID control parameters , 1981, Autom..

[17]  Giuseppe Fedele A new method to estimate a first-order plus time delay model from step response , 2009, J. Frankl. Inst..