Dimensional analysis approach to dominant three-pole placement in delayed PID control loops

Abstract PID control loops with time delay are characterized by infinite number of poles but the pole assignment technique for adjusting the controller parameters can be applied to placing three poles only. The dominance of these poles is therefore an essential condition for this application. A novel approach to this problem involves applying dimensional analysis theory to obtain a generalized model of the control loop and then to perform a parameter tuning for its dimensionless representation. A one-row dimensional matrix results from the assumption of the usual dimensionless interpretation of both control error and actuating signals of the controller. Dimensionless similarity numbers of the so-called swingability and laggardness are introduced to specify the plant dynamics in the controller synthesis. A trio of numbers is assigned to become the dominant zeros of the characteristic quasi-polynomial of the control loop and the corresponding PID parameter adjustment is derived in the form of uniform formulae. The tuning of the proper damping and the real pole position ratios is provided by means of an IAE optimization technique. A dominance degree notion is introduced and an argument increment criterion is proposed to check the dominance of any of the pole placement cases. The quality of the disturbance rejection response is taken as the general criterion in the design of the time delay plant control.

[1]  Thomas Szirte,et al.  Applied dimensional analysis and modeling , 1997 .

[2]  Aidan O'Dwyer,et al.  Handbook of PI and PID controller tuning rules , 2003 .

[3]  Shyh Hong Hwang,et al.  ADAPTIVE DOMINANT POLE DESIGN OF PID CONTROLLERS BASED ON A SINGLE CLOSED-LOOP TEST , 1993 .

[4]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  Guaranteed dominant pole placement with PID controllers , 2009 .

[5]  Tomás Vyhlídal,et al.  Mapping Based Algorithm for Large-Scale Computation of Quasi-Polynomial Zeros , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[6]  Andrew G. Alleyne,et al.  Robust Scalable Vehicle Control via Non-Dimensional Vehicle Dynamics , 2001 .

[7]  Shyh Hong Hwang,et al.  CLOSED-LOOP TUNING METHOD BASED ON DOMINANT POLE PLACEMENT , 1995 .

[8]  Asier Ibeas,et al.  Controller parameters dependence on model information through dimensional analysis , 2009, Proceedings of the 48h IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) held jointly with 2009 28th Chinese Control Conference.

[9]  Hsueh-Chia Chang,et al.  A theoretical examination of closed-loop properties and tuning methods of single-loop PI controllers , 1987 .

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

[11]  Sabine Mondié,et al.  Tuning of Proportional Retarded Controllers: Theory and Experiments , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[12]  W. Michiels,et al.  Control design for time-delay systems based on quasi-direct pole placement , 2010 .

[13]  Pavel Zítek,et al.  Ultimate-frequency based dominant pole placement , 2010 .

[14]  Pavel Zítek,et al.  Frequency-domain synthesis of hereditary control systems via anisochronic state space , 1997 .

[15]  Wei Tang,et al.  PID Tuning for Dominant Poles and Phase Margin , 2006, 2006 9th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision.

[16]  Karl Johan Åström,et al.  DOMINANT POLE DESIGN - A UNIFIED VIEW OF PID CONTROLLER TUNING , 1993 .

[17]  Tomás Vyhlídal,et al.  Modification of Mikhaylov Criterion for Neutral Time-Delay Systems , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[18]  P. Balaguer,et al.  Second order inverse response process identification from transient step response. , 2011, ISA transactions.

[19]  Tomás Vyhlídal,et al.  Ultimate-Frequency Based Three-Pole Dominant Placement in Delayed PID Control Loop , 2012, TDS.