Anatomy Of A Feedback Control System

Here is the classic block diagram of a process under PID Control.

Whats going on this diagram?

The Setpoint (SP) is the value that we want the process to be.
For example, the temperature control system in our house may have a SP of 22C. This means
that
we want the heating and cooling process in our house to achieve a steady temperature of as
close to 22C as possible
The PID controller looks at the setpoint and compares it with the actual value of the Process
Variable (PV). Back in our house, the box of electronics that is the PID controller in our
Heating and Cooling system looks at the value of the temperature sensor in the room and sees
how close it is to 22C.
If the SP and the PV are the same then the controller is a very happy little box. It doesnt have
to do anything, it will set its output to zero.
However, if there is a disparity between the SP and the PV we have an error and corrective
action is needed. In our house this will either be cooling or heating depending on whether the PV
is higher or lower than the SP respectively.
Lets imagine the temperature PV in our house is higher than the SP. It is too hot. The air-con is
switched on and the temperature drops.
The sensor picks up the lower temperature, feeds that back to the controller, the controller sees
that the temperature error is not as great because the PV (temperature) has dropped and the air
con is turned down a little.

This process is repeated until the house has cooled down to 22C and there is no error.
Then a disturbance hits the system and the controller has to kick in again.
In our house the disturbance may be the sun beating down on the roof, raising the temperature of
the air inside.
So thats a really, really basic overview of a simple feedback control system. Sounds dead simple
eh?

Understanding the controller

Unfortunately, in the real world we need a controller that is a bit more complicated than the one
described above, if we want top performance form our loops. To understand why, we will be
doing some thought experiments where we are the controller.
When we have gone through these thought experiments we will appreciate why a PID algorithm
is needed and why/how it works to control the process.
We will be using the analogy of changing lanes on a freeway on a windy day. We are the driver,
and therefore the controller of the process of changing the cars position.
Heres the Block Diagram we used before, with the labels changed to represent the car-onwindy-freeway control loop.

Notice how important closing the feedback loop is. If we removed the feedback loop we would
be in open loop control, and would have to control the cars position with our eyes closed!
Thankfully we are under Closed loop control -using our eyes for position feedback.
As we saw in the house-temperature example the controller takes the both the PV and SP signals,
which it then puts through a black box to calculate a controller output. That controller output is
sent to an actuator which moves to actually control the process.

We are interested here in what the black box actually does, which is that it applies 1, 2 or 3
calculations to the SP and Measured PV signals. These calculations, called the Modes of
Control include:

Proportional (P)

Integral (I)

Derivative (D)

Under The Hood Of The PID Controller

Heres a simplified block diagram of what the PID controller does:

It is really very simple in operation. The PV is subtracted from the SP to create the Error. The
error is simply multiplied by one, two or all of the calculated P, I and D actions (depending
which ones are turned on). Then the resulting error x control actions are added together and
sent to the controller output.
These 3 modes are used in different combinations:
P Sometimes used

PI - Most often used

PID Sometimes used
PD rare as hens teeth but can be useful for controlling servomotors.

Derivatives
Go into the control room of a process plant and ask the operator:
Whats the derivative of reactor 4s pressure?
And the response will typically be:
Bugger off smart arse!
However go in and ask:
Whats the rate of change of reactor 4s pressure?
And the operator will examine the pressure trend and say something like:
About 5 PSI every 10 minutes
Hes just performed calculus on the pressure trend! (dont tell him though or hell want a pay
raise)
So derivative is just a mathematical term meaning rate-of-change. Thats all there is to it.

Integrals without the Math

Is it any wonder that so many people run scared from the concept of integrals and integration,
when this is a typical definition?

What the!?!?
If you understood that you are a smarter person than me.
Heres a plain English definition:
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.
So if you are to plot your signal on a trend and your signal is sampled every second, and lets say
you are measuring temperature. If you were to superimpose the integral of the signal over the
first 5 seconds it would look like this:

The green line is your temperature, the red circles are where your control system has sampled the
temperature and the blue area is the integral of the temperature signal. It is the sum of the 5
temperature values over the time period that you are interested in. In numerical terms it is the
sum of the areas of each of the blue rectangles:
(13 x 1)+(14x1)+(13x1)+(12x1)+(11x1) = 63 C s
The curious units (degrees Celsius x seconds) are because we have to multiply a temperature by
a time but the units arent important.
As you can probably remember from school the integral turns out to be the area under the
curve. When we have real world systems, we actually get an approximation to the area under the
curve, which as you can see from the diagram gets better, the faster we sample.

Proportional control
Heres a diagram of the controller when we have enabled only P control:

In Proportional Only mode, the controller simply multiplies the Error by the Proportional Gain
(Kp) to get the controller output.
The Proportional Gain is the setting that we tune to get our desired performance from a P only
controller.

A match made in heaven: The P + I Controller

If we put Proportional and Integral Action together, we get the humble PI controller. The
Diagram below shows how the algorithm in a PI controller is calculated.

The tricky thing about Integral Action is that it will really screw up your process unless you
know exactly how much Integral action to apply.
A good PID Tuning technique will calculate exactly how much Integral to apply for your
specific process - but how is the Integral Action adjusted in the first place?

Adjusting the Integral Action

The way to adjust how much Integral Action you have is by adjusting a term called minutes per
repeat. Not a very intuitive name is it?
So where does this strange name come from? It is a measure of how long it will take for the
Integral Action to match the Proportional Action.
In other words, if the output of the proportional box on the diagram above is 20%, the repeat
time is the time it will take for the output of the Integral box to get to 20% too.
And the important point to note is that the bigger integral action, the quicker it will get this
20% value. That is, it will take fewer minutes to get there, so the minutes per repeat value will
be smaller.

In other words the smaller the minutes per repeat is the bigger the integral action.
To make things a bit more intuitive, a lot of controllers use an alternative unit of repeats per
minute which is obviously the inverse of minutes per repeat.
The nice thing about repeats per minute is that the bigger it is - the bigger the resulting Integral
action is.

Derivative Action predicting the future

OK, so the combination of P and I action seems to cover all the bases and do a pretty good job of
controlling our system. That is the reason that PI controllers are the most prevalent. They do the
job well enough and keep things simple. Great.
But engineers being engineers are always looking to tweak performance.
They do this in a PID loop by adding the final ingredient: Derivative Action.
So adding derivative action can allow you to have bigger P and I gains and still keep the loop
stable, giving you a faster response and better loop performance.
If you think about it, 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.
The units used for derivative action describe how far into the future you want to look. i.e. If
derivative action is 20 seconds, the derivative term will project the current rate of change 20
seconds into the future.
The big problem with D control is that if you have noise on your signal (which looks like a
bunch of spikes with steep sides) this confuses the hell out of the algorithm. It looks at the slope
of the noise-spike and thinks:
Holy crap! This process is changing quickly, lets pile on the D Action!!!
And your control output jumps all over the place, messing up your control.
Of course you can try and filter the noise out, but my advice is that, unless PI control is really
slow, dont worry about switching D on.

Another note from Jim: "Whether learning about PID and how the parameters affect
performance, or trying to tune a process, simulation is an important tool for getting PID right.
Finn Peacock has a simulation tool available that runs in Microsoft Excel. Over the years, I have
written a lot of different simulation programs while developing PID algorithms for everything
from industrial process controls to scientific research apparatus on the NASA Space Shuttle. If
this spread sheet had been available then, it would have saved me a lot of time. You can get a
copy of this simulation tool (screen shot below) as part of the Pro package available from Finn
Peacock atwww.pidtuning.net. Again, I don't make a dime off this. I just found it valuable and
wanted to pass it along."

--

eedback Control
Feedback (or closed loop) control is where control theory really
starts to get interesting. ? What do we mean by feedback?
Feedback is information fed back into the control
system providing information about the current
status of what it is trying to control. Let's clarify
with an example.
You are driving a car along a straight and level road. You press
the accelerator until the speed reaches 30mph. You then ease
off on the accelerator a touch to maintain that constant speed. You are now
participating in a closed loop control system. The objective, or target, of
control here is the desired speed of the car. The input to the
control loop is the reading of speed seen by you on the
speedometer and the output is the control of the accelerator
pedal. The intelligence at work here (I use the phrase in the
most general sense !) is you, the driver. As you drive along
the road there is a dynamic interaction between the
speedometer reading and the position of the pedal. As you
detect an error in the target speed of 30mph you apply a correcting action
using the pedal. In terms of feedback, you are feeding back the detected error
in the target speed and applying it to the pedal. (For the moment we will
ignore the mathematics that would dictate constants of proportionality etc
and focus on the fundamental characteristics).
So, all is well. We have the car under control, with our personal feedback loop and are
wondering what all the fuss is about feedback control is easy. Before we get too confident
let's make some changes to this control system, and see where it takes us. Some of the
changes may seem a little strange but stay with me, because they will lead to a better
understanding further down the line.
Let's replace the accelerator pedal with a switch. "On" gives
maximum acceleration and "off" gives none at all. Crazy?, of course
it is but imagine your attempts at trying to maintain a steady speed.
You would probably find that your speed would oscillate above and
below your target of 30mph, probably quite significantly. You could
perhaps achieve a better control with higher speed shorter pulses of
the switch but you would then be facing the problem of speed of response of the engine. The
engine will not deliver power instantly (well at least not the cars I drive). Without a
significant duration of switch-on time you may not see any change in speed.

This scenario is called "Bang-Bang" control and the

oscillations about the target speed are called "Hunting".
Bang-bang control is the most basic form of feedback
control. In its favour we have to say that it is normally the least expensive to implement
but against it is the quality and accuracy of achieving the target. Generally we can say
that it is more suitable for control systems with slow changing targets. Choosing the
switching points more carefully can make some improvements. In the case of the car,
the accelerator could be switched on when the speed drops to 28 mph and switched off
when 32mph. This allows time for the engine to respond and reduces the amount of
switching but sacrifices the accuracy of control. i.e. the range of hunting is, at best, 28 32 mph. Another common example of bang-bang control is the central heating
thermostat. If you set 20 degrees on the dial, it will normally switch on when the
temperature falls to 18 and off when at 22. This gap between on and off is called
"Hysterisis".
Now ask yourself this question; why was it easier to control the speed using the
accelerator pedal rather than the switch ? (read on).

Proportional
Control
Without realizing it you were applying proportional control
to the car speed. In other words the corrective action you took
in response to an incorrect speed was in proportion to the
amount of error. A large drop in speed caused you to floor the
accelerator and, as your speed came up, you gradually eased off the pedal
until achieving the target of 30mph. So much easier than the switch, but more
complex control. With the switch control, your input (reading the
speedometer), only had to decide above or below the target. Now you have to
know how much above or below. Your output was a simple on-off, now its a
pedal position. Is it worth it for controlling the car? Of course it is. Would you
use it for central heating control? Probably not. Knowing where it is
appropriate to apply specific control techniques is as important as knowing
how to apply them.

Lets adjust our car control environment a little more to examine a limitation in

proportional control. We are driving along a flat road with our proportional control of
the pedal responding to changes in the speedometer reading when suddenly we start to
climb a steep hill. The speed drops very quickly and we match the drop by a carefully
proportioned depression of the accelerator. The net result is that eventually we get back
up to 30mph but only after we have dropped right down to about 10. We could see the
speed dropping quickly but we constrained ourselves to only apply a fixed proportion of
accelerator based on the difference between actual speed and target speed. What we
feel we needed to do is produce a lot more accelerator power than we actually needed
for a short duration to counteract the sudden decrease in speed followed by a more
proportioned response. How do we relate this gut feeling to control theory? The
answer is derivative control.

erivative
Control
Derivative control quantifies this need to apply more
correction by linking the amount of accelerator pedal to the
rate of change of speed. In other words the faster the
speed is dropping the more acceleration we apply. A sudden
drop in speed requires a large and equally quick depression of the accelerator
pedal. Do not confuse this with the amount of speed drop. It is quite
independent. It is also important to realize that on its own derivative control
is not sufficient to restore the speed to 30mph. Consider if the change in
speed is very slow. For example the speed may be dropping at a rate of 1mph
per minute. This would produce an insignificant amount of accelerator pedal
depression and even if (after 25 minutes) the speed dropped to 5mph the
amount of pedal depression would still be insignificant. We conclude that we
need proportions of both elements to properly control the speed; derivative
control to cope with sudden fluctuations and proportional to bring it back
from large errors.

We have a very reasonable control system now which can

maintain the target speed 30mph within certain limits
regardless of flat or hilly roads. What we now need to examine
is how close to the target are we capable of controlling the
speed. Using the car example in this case is probably a little unfair in that the accuracy
of the speedometer and a requirement to travel at an almost exact speed of 30mph are
just not sensible. However, lets assume that is exactly what we are trying to achieve. So,
what is wrong with our current accuracy? If I were to estimate what were possible
within the current control system I would say that we could hold the speed within the
limits of 28 32 mph. So how can we improve that.. Before I answer that lets examine
the nature of the speed error.
If we have a large difference in target and actual speed our proportional control
applies a correction. If we have a sudden change in speed the derivative control helps

out. However, if we only have a small fixed error the proportional element is so small
that it is ineffective and because there is no change in speed the derivative contribution
is zero. So the small error persists indefinitely. What we need here is something that
increases in its contribution the longer the error , however small, exists. This is called
Integral Control.

Integral Control
Consider integral control as a constant summation function. That
is, it is constantly adding up the error from the target speed and
providing feedback proportional to the total rather than the error.
So in our example, the constant error of even a fraction of a mph will
accumulate until at some point the total will be enough to cause
effective corrective action. Once again I have to emphasize that integral control on
its own will not be enough to control speed within the example already described. Proportional and
derivative are still essential ingredients in the mix.

PID Control
In the previous sections we have seen how something like the speed of a car
can be controlled by making adjustments to the control (accelerator) based on
an observed error in the required speed. We have considered simple bang
bang control where the accelerator is used like a switch which is either fully
applied or fully off. We have seen that applying the accelerator in proportion to the speed
difference helps increase accuracy of achieving the required speed (proportional control) and
that adding up all of the small errors over time to adjust the accelerator helps
reduce gradual drift in the speed. It was also noted how effective applying a
quick jolt of power during sharp slowdown periods helped smooth out
fluctuations (derivative control). Each of these techniques are important in
their own way in a control system of error analysis and adjustment for
achieving the objective of accurate control of the target, which, in our example case was the
speed of a car.
Having seen the benefits and limitations of each technique, which do you choose for your
own control system ? Do you use just one, or perhaps two, or perhaps all ?? While it is true
that there are a great many control systems that use one or two of these techniques and
function perfectly well within their scope of requirements, the most useful way to use these
techniques is within the scope of a three term controller i.e.
proportional, integral and derivative control. This is more commonly
known as PID control. We will now examine how a single control
system can make use of all three techniques to achieve the required
control of the target (eg speed). This topic is notoriously
mathematical in most of the rigorous explanations of the subject
which can exclude a great many practical engineers who were not
born again mathematicians. We feel that this can be avoided,
especially initially, in favour of a feel for what is going on. If
maths is your forte then perhaps later sections will be of more
interest. For the purposes of simplicity we will stay with the car speed control system example

where the accelerator pedal is the control input and the car speed is the target output.
When we say PID controller we are in fact saying that there is a single controlled quantity
(eg speed) which can be adjusted in such a way as to minimise the observed error between
required and measured values, using feedback proportional to each of the three PID
elements.
The above statement contains a lot of concepts !!. By feedback we are saying that some
function of the output (speed) error is used to correct the input (accelerator) control. i.e. a part
of the output is fed back to the input. Because this feedback is intended to reduce the error in
the output we call it negative feedback. This should be obvious when you consider what would
happed if positive feedback was used. i.e. to correct a slight increase in speed, you pressed the
accelerator further..in no time you would be going rather fast. In fact we will see
later that the accidental occurrence of positive feedback constitutes a loss of
control, or instability, of the system. In the above statement we also note that there
are proportional elements of each of the P,I and D elements. Put simply there are
three constants that determine how much of each type are added together to give a
resulting correction to the accelerator pedal. The bigger the constant , the more the control
pedal reacts to a change of that nature in the speed. For example a large number multiplying
the derivative part of the feedback will make the car speed very responsive to
sudden changes in speed. This may help control the speed but you might find the
ride a bit jumpy. A small number for this will mean that other elements, like
proportional feedback, may become more needed to correct speed fluctuations.
Sudden drops in speed may take a bit longer to correct in this case, but the ride
should be a bit smoother ! What we need is an optimum choice for these constants in order for
the speed to be controlled accurately enough for our purposes without other aspects of the
system being adversely affected. This process of choosing the numbers is referred to as tuning
the PID control system.
Within this process of tuning you can see that the three term control we have chosen to
focus on, can be reduced to two ,or even one, term simply by making the appropriate constants
zero (or just very small). So, what happens if we get these constants
wrong. At best you will have poor control of speed. The difference
between target and actual speed may be quite significant for long periods
of time and there may be large delays between recognising a speed
difference and it being corrected. At worst you may suffer instability. Instability can create
wildly varying accelerator positions and speeds, quite capable of wrecking any car. Lets focus
on the more dangerous case of instability. What is it and how is it caused ?
In an ideal control system, any observed changes in the output will
result in an instantaneous adjustment to the control input using the
calculated proportions of P,I and D. In the real world there are always
finite delays between observation and corrective action. If these delays
become significant then they alone can cause instability. Consider a
garden swing. When it comes towards you, you give it a push at the top
of its travel in order to make it swing higher. To slow down you apply
your force somewhere nearer the lower point of the travel. In other words, timing is crucial. In
a control system applying the corrective response at the wrong time can turn negative feedback
into positive This in turn would reinforce the observed variations making them bigger and
bigger. Although timing is the most obvious and easy to comprehend way in which a control
system can end up having positive feedback and instability ,it is by no means the only way. In
general, it is possible for any feedback control system to exhibit instability due to a particular
combination of control constants, feedback timing and input stimuli (changes in accelerator
pedal).
So, where do you start in deciding the constants to apply ?. One empirical approach is to
start with just proportional control (i.e. I and D constants zero) and increase the P constant
until the system just starts to oscillate (i.e. continuously overshooting and undershooting the
target speed) then turn up the Integral constant until the oscillations stop. This should provide
smooth but relatively slow control of speed. Now turn up the derivative control until the
response is just fast enough to be acceptable for the given application. Using this technique

your control system will be fairly well tuned. About 90% of control systems in operation
around the world are fairly well tuned. The rigorous way accurate tuning is tackled is to
delve into the mathematics of transfer functions that describe the relationship of output to input
and find the poles of instability in these functions. For the moment this is beyond our current
scope. We can leave the topic of instability here with the following warnings..
1. Be aware that your control system can suddenly become unstable due to a particular
choice of PID constants
2. A stable control system with one set of input stimuli may be unstable with others. (i.e.
input range and fluctuations)

Understanding: On/Off, Floating, Modulating/Proportional Control

MARCH 2, 2010 BY BILL
First, to understand these types of control you must have the elements of control. The
elements of control are the sensor (senses the medium being controlled), the controller
(device either preset or programmed to react to the sensor), and the final controlled
device such as a damper or a control valve (receives input signals from controller to
affect change in controlled medium). These elements are considered the control loop.
On/Off control is the basic type of control in a control loop. With On/Off control, the
sensor senses the controlled medium and sends a signal back to the controller, which
processes the signal. For ease of understanding, our example will be a heating
application. The set point (the desired control point) in this case is 68 degrees with a
temperature differential of 2 degrees for the controller. When the sensors signal to the
controller reports a temperature of less than the controllers set point, the controller
sends a signal to the final control device (hot water valve) to position to fully open until
set point is achieved. When the controller receives a signal from the sensor that the set
point has been achieved, the controller then sends a signal to the valve to position to
fully closed. The problem with On/Off control is over-shoot temperature of the desired
system set point because of reaction time between sensor, controller, and final control
device. Review: With On/Off, the controller asks Is there an error? The controller
compares the actual value of the controlled medium to the set point through the sensor.
As the controlled medium deviates from set point, the controllers output cycles the final
controlled device on, and when the set point is reached the controllers output cycles the
final control device off.
Floating control is a variation of On/Off control that requires a fast responding sensor
and a slow-moving actuator connected to the final controlled device (valve or damper).
Using the same example as the On/Off example above, when the sensed temperature
drops below the set point of 68 degrees by the controlled mediums sensor, the
controller sends a signal to activate the actuator on the final control device. The actuator
starts to slowly drive open the hot water valve, increasing the heat in the controlled
medium. When set point is reached the actuator stops opening the final control device

(hot water valve) and tries to hold at set point. If set point starts to be over-shot, the
controller sends a signal to the actuator to start to drive close the valve. Review: Set
point control is achieved when the sensor signal (from the controlled medium) starts to
deviate from the controller set point. The controller sends a signal to the actuator of the
final control device (valve or damper) to slowly drive open. As the set point is
approached the controller sends a signal to the actuator, then the actuator stops and
tries to maintain set point. If set point is passed the controller sends signal to the
actuator to drive the final control device to a closed position.
Modulating/Proportional represents the higher end of control positioning. In
modulating/proportional control the output varies continuously and is not limited to being
fully open or fully closed. Proportional means that the size of the output is related to the
size of the error detected by the controller. The key phrase for modulating/proportional
control is Continuous Control Action. The sensor, controller, and final control device
act as one unit to maintain constant precise control over the controlled medium.
Continuing with the previous example, when a modulating system senses a deviation
from the set point of 68 degrees, the controller calculates the amount of the error (1
degree less than set point) and sends a signal to the actuator, which will drive open the
final control device (valve or damper) by a certain percentage of the controlled
mediums set point deviation (1/2 degree) to maintain set point without over-shoot. The
controller calculates how much the final control device needs to open without over-shoot
and will start reversing the actuator to close the final control device to a percentage of
the closed position to maintain set point.
Popular modulating control signals include 4-20 ma and 0-10 volts. If you were to look
into a control panel like a Hoffman Enclosure you might see controls like a Honeywell
UDC3200 that could be taking a 4-20 ma signal from a device like a Hawkeye 908
current transmitter and based on the control input signal from the Hawkeye 908 ( which
would most likely be a 4-20 ma signal) the UDC 3200 controller would respond with a 420 ma output signal to a device like a Honeywell Variable Frequency Drive which would
control either a fan or a pump. This is an example of how a proportional signal like a 420ma signal is used in modern HVAC controls.
If you are in Georgia or Florida,the control pros at Stromquist & Company can answer
your control questions.

--

==

Understand Control Signal Jargon

Posted on Mon,Oct 24, 2011 @ 10:00 AM

Tweet

"On/Off", "Open/closed", "3 Point", "Tri-state", 'proportional modulation", phase cut", "PWM" or "MFT" - what it
all means.
On/Off or Open-Close: The actuator is able to drive either to its full open position, or to its full closed
position. The same indication is used for spring return type actuators. Where the actuator will drive to its full
open position and spring return to its zero position. This can also be reversed.
3-point, Tri-State, Floating Point: The actuator has both clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW)
control inputs. One drives the actuator to its open, the other to its close position. If there is no signal (Null point)
on either input the actuator simply stays in its last position.
Proportional Control: The actuator drives proportional to its control input and modulates throughout its angle
of rotation. This control type is usually a variation of VDC. Common values are:
0-10 VDC

2-10 VDC

It is common to also have a 0-20/4-20 mA output from a controller. This can be very easily converted to 0-10
VDC or 2-10 VDC with a 500 resistor.
Pulse Width Modulation (PWM): The actuator drives to a specified position according to a pulse duration, the
length of signal. The pulse can originate from a dry contact closure or a triac sink or source controller. An
example of PWM control:
Time base: 0 to 10 seconds
Output pulse: 5 seconds
Actuator position: 50%

Phasecut: An actuator drives depending on the power result of a remaining wave. This signal type cuts the
amplitude of the wave and the actuator recognizes this signal as a proportional movement.

Multi-Functional Technology (MFT): This technology was developed by Belimo for incorporation into our
damper and valve actuator. MFT provides the ability to program characteristics of the actuator. Some of the
key characteristics to change are:
CONTROL INPUT
selectable On/Off, VDC, PWM or Floating point
MOTION VALVES
selectable Running time adjustment
FEEDBACK
selectable feedback values

Belimo actuators are compatible with many control inputs and all direct digital control (DDC) systems. There
are many signals to select from with todays controllers.