2016 International Conference on Automatic Control and Dynamic Optimization Techniques (ICACDOT)

International Institute of Information Technology (IIT), Pune

Design of a Smith Predictor based Fractional

Order PID Controllerfor a Coupled Tank System

Prajkta K. Bhamre. Chandrakant. B. Kadu.

Instrumentation and control department, Instrumentation and control department,
Pravara Rural College of Engineering, Pravara Rural College of Engineering,
Loni, Maharashtra, India. Loni, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: pkbhamre@gmail.com E-mail: chandrakant_kadu@yahoo.com

Abstract To represent an iterative optimization technique for The paper is sectioned as below. Section 2 presents the
designing a fractional order PID (FOPID) controller based on a fractional order calculus definitions. Section 3 includes the
smith predictor (SP) is the main objective of this paper. Here, the SP-FOPID designing methodology. Section 4 is dedicated for
long dead time compensating smith predictor based control the Couple Tank introduction and the comparison of
scheme is proposed. Withal, the difficulty of using FOPID
controller shoots up, as this controller hinges two extra terms i.e.
simulations results for designed SP-FOPID and that with
derivative order and integral order. FOMCON toolbox with conventional SP-PID controller. Paper concludes with section
MATLAB/Simulink is used to aim a controller for a coupled tank 5.
system. Furthermore to show usability of FOPID, the results of
fractional order controller based on the smith predictor (SP- II. FRACTIONAL ORDER PID CONTROLLER
FOPID) are compared with that of a PID controller based on the Fractional order systems are gaining much more attraction
smith predictor (SP-PID) designed in a same way. from last two decades, because of the fact that any real time
system can be accurately and precisely characterised using
Keywords- Smith Predictor control scheme, Fractional order
fractional order differential equations. A FO-integral with a
controller, PID controller, FOMCON toolbox, Coupled Tank sytem.
order can be defined as follows [8,9].
I. INTRODUCTION 1 t -1
(1)
0 It x t= t-
() 0
x d , R
Fractional calculus has gained a significant interest in the last
In (1), () is Eulers Gamma operator. It can be given
two decade. The usefulness of fractional calculus method is
famous in mathematical modeling, control systems, and that
recognition of a different range of energizing system. The L 0 It xt= s- Lxt (2)
concept of the fractional-order PID (FOPID) controllers was Where L {.} is the notation for the Laplace transform
proposed by Podlubny in 1997 [1]. Fractional-order calculus operator.
covers the derivatives and integrals from non integer orders A FO-derivative of order defined by Caputo is given by,
[2-3]. The additional two degree of freedom of the integration r+1-
and differentiation orders gives a tuning strategy which has c
I
0 t
, &r<<r+1, rN0.
D xt= dr
(3)
more suppleness to achieve control desires than the 0 t
, & =r.
r
conventional controllers [1, 4]. dt
There are so many industrial processes whose controlling Where is positive but not an integer number. When the
becomes difficult with classical PID controller because of the starting conditions are assumed to be zero, the Caputo
presence of long dead time. This can be overcome by using fractional derivatives Laplace transforms can be derived as,
c
fractional order controllers to achieve desired performance L{ 0D txt}=s Lxt, r<r+1. (4)
than traditional ones [5, 6]. Smith has suggested an efficient
dead time compensator which was capable of the processes A transfer function of FO system H(s) is represented by,
having long delay time and helps achieve good performance
bm sm +bm-1 s m-1 +--+b1 s 1 +b0 s0
Q(sk )
[7]. Hs= = (5)
P(sk ) an sn +an-1 s n-1 +--+a1 s 1 +a0 s0
Here, SP-FOPID is designed by an optimization method.
Matter of fact is we add degrees of freedom to SP-PID where (k=0,1,...,n ) and (k=0,1,...,m )coefficients are
controller by advantaging from FO-PID controller in the constant and (k=0,...,n )and (k=0,...,m )are arbitrary real
structure of Smith predictor. Effectiveness and simplexes are numbers [8]. As proposed in [1] the FOPID is a generality of
two main features of this method explained over here. Lastly, the standard PID controller whose order of integration is and
intended SP-FOPID controller is applied to a coupled tank order of differentiation is. The FOPID controller transfer
model and there results are compared by means of the SP-PID function is,
controller results in the same format.

978-1-5090-2080-5/16/$31.00 2016 IEEE 705

 ki frequency range (l, h) and of order N. Here, those are
Cs= kp + +kd s , 0< <2, 0 <<2. (6)
s
considered as = [0.0001, 10000] (rad / sec) and N=5
respectively. The system identification is ended through
III. SMITH PREDICTOR BASED FO-PID CONTROLLER giving step input and the couple tank system transfer function
matrix is obtained as,
0.43 0.172
e-5s e-10s
29s+1 40s+1
G(s) = 0.145 0.43 (7)
e-10s e-5s
35s+1 27s+1

Relative gain array (RGA) is to find an I/O coupling for the

de-centralized controller. The RGA matrix for (7) is obtained
as follows,

1.1559 -0.1559
=
-0.1559 1.559
Fig. 1. Smith Predictor Control Scheme.
According to (7), SISO systems are respectively obtained as,
A figure.1 below shows a schematic of smith predictor 0.43
structure.The structure contains a fractional order controller G11(s) = e-5s (8)
29s+1
and an internal model which is considered as a First Order And
plus Dead Time (FOPDT) transfer function.
Here all the designing work of a FO-PID controller is done G22(s) =
0.43
e-5s (9)
by FOMCON (Fractional-order Modelling and 27s+1
Control)toolbox for MATLAB R2014a.The outline of the
steps required to perform the optimization to obtain the First, for the transfer function (8), the following designing
controller parameters within the specified limits will found in specifications are considered for designing SP-FOPID,
[10].The overview and all the commands of this toolbox are Phase Margin (m )=59
mentioned in [11]. Gain crossover frequency(c )=0.125(rad/sec)
Robustness to uncertainties in the plant must be
fulfilled.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
A= -20 dB , B= -20 dB at 0.01rad/sec 10 rad/sec
Multivariable level control trainer Product (Code 327A) And using optimization method in [10], the SP-FOPID
(WIN7USB)is a system of two double tank systems combined controller is obtained as,
together, generally known as Quadruple Tank system shown
in fig 2.This trainer includes a supply water tank with two C FOPID1 s=7.4046+
0.2983
+1.2826 s0.4533 (10)
speed pumps with positive displacement which are used for s1.0102
water circulation, two process tanks connected with level
transmitters [12]. Similarly, the transfer function (9),
The approximation method in [13] gives a well Phase Margin (m )=59
approximation of the fractional operators within a particular Gain crossover frequency (c )=0.127(rad/sec)
Robustness to uncertainties in the plant must be
fulfilled.
A= -20 dB, B= -20 dB at 0.01rad/sec
rad/sec.

The SP-FOPID controller can be obtained as,

0.5091
C FOPID2 s=7.5506+ +10.13788 s0.5039 (11)
s1.0698

The classical PID controller is designed by using the

iopid_tune tool in FOMCON which approximates and
identifies integer order model. Then controller parameters for
both SP-PID controllers can be obtained as follows,

Fig. 2. Process flow diagram of Multivariable trainer. 0.40972

C PID1 s=6.53487+ +15.5337 s (12)
s

706
 TABLE I. COMPARISON OF SP-FOPID AND SP-PID BY
PERFORMANCE DYNAMICS

For Level Tank 1 For Level Tank 2

Performance
Dynamics
SP-FOPID SP-PID SP-FOPID SP-PID

Rise Time 19.95 18.93 25.04 21.10

Setlling Time 42.17 64.36 54.21 67.06

Overshoot 0 3.08 0.46 2.91

IAE 13.15 13.2 11.22 14.33

ITAE 164.9 194.8 204.6 217.3

Fig. 3. Compare of Unit Step Responses for Level tank 1

0.39911
C PID2 s=6.11628+ +14.4859 s (13)
s

The Fig.3 and Fig.4 shows the Comparative analysis of step

responses of both controllers (10), (11) for level tank 1.Here,
the system settles faster when controlled with SP-FOPID
controller than the SP-PID controller. Also it has less
overshoot compared to SP-PID.
Fig.5 and Fig.6 shows the disturbance rejection for both
level tanks by using SP-FOPID and SP-PID respectively.Fig.7
and Fig.8 shows set-point for both level tanks by using SP-
FOPID and SP-PID respectively. Fig.9 and Fig.10 shows the
controller efforts taken by SP-PID and SP-FOPID controllers
respectively. It can be seen that Controller efforts have been
reduced in case of SP-FOPID.
The results of both level tanks after applying SP-FOPID
(10),(11) and SP-PID (12),(13) are summarized in Table I. Fig. 5 Disturbance Rejection for level tank 1.

Fig. 6. Disturbance Rejection for level tank 2.

Fig. 4. Compare of Unit Step Responsesc for Level tank 2

707
 V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a method of optimization using FOMCON
toolbox is used to design a FOPID controller to achieve the
better set point tracking, disturbance rejection and high noise
reduction. Then these controllers are applied to multivariable
system and the obtained results of SP-FOPID are compared
with those of SP-PID controller. From the summery as shown
in Table I it can be noticed that SP-FOPID controller gives
improved performance than SP-PID controller. Along with the
use of smith predictor for long dead time compensation, the
designed method is efficient and simple one.

References
Fig.7. Set Point Tracking for Level tank 1
[1] I. Podlubny, "Fractional-order systems and PIDcontrollers," IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, 44(1),pp. 208-214, 1999.
[2] K. B. Oldham and J. Spanier, The fractional calculus, Academic Press,
New York, 1974.
[3] K. S. Miller and B. Ross, An introduction to the fractional calculus and
fractional differential equations, John Wiley and Sons, 1993.
[4] Kadu C.B. and Patil C.Y., "Performance assesment of IOPI and FOPI
controller for FOPDT system," Industrial Instrumentation and Control
(ICIC), 2015 International Conference,.pp.466,468.
[5] R. Desai, C. Kadu and B. Parvat, "Design of FOPI controller for time
delay system," International Conference on Energy Systems and
Applications, Pune, 2015, pp. 375-378.
[6] R. Desai, C. Kadu and B. Parvat, "Design of FO-PI controller for level
process," Annual IEEE India Conference (INDICON), New Delhi, 2015,
pp. 1-5.
[7] O. J. M. Smith, "A controller to overcome dead time," ISA Journal, 6,
pp. 28-33, 1959.
Fig.8. Set Point Tracking for Level tank 2 [8] I. Podlubny, Fractional differential equations: an introduction to
fractional derivatives, fractional differential equations, to methods of
their solution and some of their applications. San Diego: Academic
press,1998.
[9] Roohallah Azarmi, Ali Khaki Sedigh, Mahsan Tavakoli-Kakhki,Design
and implement smith predictor based fractional order PID controller on
MIMO flow level plant,23rd Iranian Conference on Electrical
Engineering (ICEE) 2015.
[10] Aleksei Tepljakov, Eduard Petlenkov1, Juri Belikov, and Miroslav
Hals,, Design and implementation of fractional order PID
controllersfor a Fluid Tank System, American Control Conference
(ACC) Washington, DC, USA,June 17-19,2012.
[11] A. Tepljakov, E. Petlenkov, and J. Belikov, FOMCON: a MATLAB
toolbox for fractional-order system identification and control,
International Journal of Microelectronics and Computer Science, vol. 2,
no. 2, pp. 5162, 2011.
Fig.9. Controller Efforts of SP-PID controllers for both level tanks [12] B.J.Parvat and B. M. Patre, Design of SMC with decoupler for
multivariable couple tank process, Annual IEEE India Conference,2014
[13] A. Oustaloup, F. Levron, B. Mathieu, and F. M. Nanot, Frequencyband
complex noninteger differentiator: characterization and
synthesis,vol.47, no. 1, pp. 2539, 2000.

Fig.11. Controller Efforts of SP-FOPID controllers for both level tanks

Fig.10. Controller Efforts of SP-FOPID controllers for both level tanks

708