Note On Fractional-Order Proportional - Integral - Differential Controller Design
Note On Fractional-Order Proportional - Integral - Differential Controller Design
org
Published in IET Control Theory and Applications
Received on 19th December 2010
Revised on 2nd May 2011
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2010.0746
ISSN 1751-8644
Abstract: This study deals with the design of fractional-order proportional integral differential (PID) controllers. Two design
techniques are presented for tuning the parameters of the controller. The rst method uses the idea of the Ziegler Nichols and the
strom Hagglund methods. In order to achieve required performances, two non-linear equations are derived and solved to obtain
A
the fractional orders of the integral term and the derivative term of the fractional-order PID controller. Then, an optimisation
strategy is applied to obtain new values of the controller parameters, which give improved step response. The second method
is related with the robust fractional-order PID controllers. A design procedure is given using the Bode envelopes of the
control systems with parametric uncertainty. Five non-linear equations are derived using the worst-case values obtained from
the Bode envelopes. Robust fractional-order PID controller is designed from the solution of these equations. Simulation
examples are provided to show the benets of the methods presented.
Introduction
achieve better results, there are still needs for new methods
to obtain the parameters of PIlDm controllers.
On the other hand, it is known that the parameters of
physical systems cannot be expressed precisely and contain
uncertainty due to the tolerance values of elements, nonlinear effects or environmental conditions. Therefore the
parameter uncertainty is inevitable in the systems [5]. In
general, system uncertainties are analysed in two groups
such as parameter uncertainty and model uncertainty. In
control theory, robust control methods have been developed
for the analysis and design of uncertain systems. These
issues are addressed under robust control [29]. The
computation of the frequency responses of uncertain
transfer functions plays an important role in the application
of frequency-domain methods for the analysis and design of
robust control systems [30, 31]. Many studies on the
computation of the frequency responses of the integer order
control systems with parameter uncertainty structure can be
found in the literature [29, 32, 33]. However, in order to
apply classical controller design method to FOCSs with
parameter uncertainty structure, it is necessary to compute
the frequency responses of a given fractional-order interval
transfer function (FOITF). The procedures for the
computation of the Bode and Nyquist envelopes of FOITF
can be found in [6, 34]. The structures of PIlDm controller
have been widely used in recent papers. However, there is
no enough study for parameter uncertainty and robust
control design issues [13, 28]. Therefore the results
obtained in this study provide an important contribution to
this eld.
In this paper, two methods have been proposed for tuning
of the PIlDmcontroller. In the rst method, a tuning technique
IET Control Theory Appl., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 17, pp. 19781989
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2010.0746
www.ietdl.org
for a PIlDm controller, which is inspired from the classical
strom Hagglund tuning methods, is
Ziegler Nichols and A
introduced. The proposed method uses the classical
Ziegler Nichols tuning rules to obtain the values of kp and
strom Hagglund
ki . The value of kd is obtained using the A
method. In order to achieve specied phase margin, two
non-linear equations have been obtained using the idea of
strom Hagglund tuning method. The values of l and
the A
m are obtained from these two equations. In the second
method, a tuning strategy, which is based on the Bode
envelopes of the FOITF, is introduced for robust PIlDm
controller to control the rst-order and rst-order plus dead
time (FOPDT) systems with the parametric uncertainty
structure. In this method, the Bode envelopes of the system
are successfully combined with ve design criteria, which
Monje Vinagre et al. have used in their papers [13, 21,
28], to obtain new robust PIlDm controller that make the
given plant robust under parameter uncertainties. Thus, the
novelty of the results obtained in this paper is the
development of a new tuning method for PIlDm controller
and the presentation of a new method to design a robust
PIlDm controller. The method presented for the robust
PIlDm controller is an extension of the Monje Vinagre
et al. method, which is given in Section 4.1. The
improvement over those in [13, 21, 28] is that the parameter
uncertainty has been considered. Then an improved robust
method is obtained. Examples are provided to illustrate the
results.
The paper is organised as follows: Mathematical
background of fractional-order representation is given in
Section 2. In Section 3, a tuning method for PIlDm
controller is introduced. Design of robust PIlDm controllers
for rst-order and FOPDT systems with parametric
uncertainty structure is provided in Section 4. Section 5
includes concluding remarks.
r
a Dt f
(t) = lim h
[ta/h]
h0
j=0
r
f (t jh)
(1)
j
j
= 1,
c(r)
j
1 + r (r)
cj1
= 1
j
(2)
1
dn
(t) =
G(n r) dt n
t
f ( t)
dt
rn+1
a (t t)
(3)
f (n) (t)
dt
rn+1
a (t t)
(4)
1
G(m) =
eu um1 du
(5)
(6)
t=0
(7)
an
dan y(t)
dan1 y(t)
da0 y(t)
+ an1
+ + a0
a
a
dt n
dt n1
dt a0
bm
bm1
d x(t)
d
x(t)
db0 x(t)
= bm
+
b
+
+
b
m1
0
dt bm
dt bm1
dt b0
(8)
(1)
r
where (1)j
are the binomial coefcients c(r)
j , ( j 0,
j
1, . . .). Following expressions can be used to obtain the
coefcients [36]
c(r)
0
t
Mathematical background
1
G(r n)
(9)
p
p
(jv)m = vm cos m + j sin m
2
2
(10)
1979
www.ietdl.org
3
ki
+ kd sm
sl
(11)
(12)
p
l
l + kd vmcp cos
m
f1 (l, m) = kp + ki v
cp cos
2
2
kc ( cos fpm )
=0
(16)
p
l
l + kd vmcp sin m
f2 (l, m) = ki v
cp sin
2
2
kc ( sin fpm )
=0
(17)
(13)
p
l
m
C(jvcp ) = kp + ki v
cos
l
v
cos
m
+
k
cp
d cp
2
2p
p
l
(15)
+ j ki v
l + kd vmcp sin m
cp sin
2
2
1
e jfpm = kc cos fpm + jkc sin fpm (14)
|G(jvcp )|
G1 (s) =
1
s(s + 3)(s + 4)
(18)
55.60
+ 10.96 s
s
(19)
www.ietdl.org
phase margins which are shown in Table 1. Let C1AH(s)
strom
shows the PID controller obtained from the A
Hagglund method for fpm 308, which can be written
from Table 1 as
72.7461
C1AH (s) = 72.7461 +
+ 18.1865 s
s
(20)
55.6
+ 22 s0.8564
s0.7569
(21)
87.2733
+ 53.1352s0.9623
s0.5030
(22)
fpm
308
408
508
608
kp
ki
kd
72.7461
64.3477
53.9942
42.0000
72.7461
51.9716
34.0387
19.4923
18.1865
19.9177
21.4122
22.6244
Table 3
Initial values
form Table 2
for fpm 308
for fpm 408
for fpm 508
for fpm 608
ki
kd
42.4580
41.2422
41.0156
41.7490
87.2733
89.5344
95.4288
88.8996
53.1352
54.6636
55.3521
53.8169
0.5030
0.5003
0.4975
0.4975
0.9623
0.9570
0.9639
0.9623
C1AH(s), C1(s) and C1opt (s), have been designed for the
given plant as follows:
Parameters of C1ZN(s) are calculated using the Ziegler
Nichols method, such as kp 50.40, ki 55.60 and
kd 10.96 for all specied phase margin.
strom
Parameters of C1AH(s) are calculated using the A
Hagglund method, for specied phase margins as shown in
Table 1.
Parameters of C1(s) are obtained using the proposed
method for the specied phase margins as shown in Table 2.
Optimisation model has been used to obtain better step
response for the controller C1(s). The controller C1opt (s) is
obtained with the new optimised values of kp , ki , kd , l and
m as given in Table 3.
It is known that the step response of a system gives
valuable information, such as maximum overshoot, rise
time, peak time and settling time. The step responses of the
system for the controllers C1ZN(s), C1AH(s), C1(s) and
C1opt (s) in (19) (22) are obtained using the nintblocks of
MATLAB, which is developed by Duarte Valerio [39] as
shown in Fig. 2. The performance specications for these
controllers are given in Table 4. One can conclude from
Fig. 2 and Table 4 that the performance specications of
the proposed method are much better than the Ziegler
strom Hagglund tuning methods.
Nichols and A
Bode plots and Nyquist plots of the system for the C1(s) for
phase margins fpm 308, 408, 508, 608 and Nyquist plot of
the system for C1opt (s) are given in Figs. 3 5, respectively.
Looking at the Figs. 3 and 4, it can be observed that the
system satises each of the specied phase margin for
C1(s). Fig. 5 shows that the values of the gain and phase
margins of the system for C1opt (s) are suitable.
Table 2
Proposed method
fpm
308
408
508
608
kp
ki
kd
50.4
50.4
50.4
50.4
55.6
55.6
55.6
55.6
22.000
24.000
24.050
23.935
0.7569
0.9714
0.9762
0.9208
0.8564
0.8823
0.9766
1.0744
IET Control Theory Appl., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 17, pp. 1978 1989
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2010.0746
Fig. 2 Step responses of the system for C1ZN(s), C1AH(s), C1(s) and
C1opt (s)
1981
www.ietdl.org
Table 4
Step response
specifications
max. overshoot, %
peak time, s
rise time, s
settling time (%5)
settling time (%2)
Ziegler Nichols
PID
AstromHagglund
PID
Proposed
fractional PID
Proposed fractional
PID with optimised values
73.5
2.35
1.73
6.02
7.30
59.0
2.10
1.65
3.20
4.25
52.5
1.83
1.47
3.75
3.98
31.5
1.47
1.31
2.60
2.83
Fig. 3 Bode plots of the system controlled with C1(s) for the phase
margins fpm 308, 408, 508 and 608
Fig. 5 Nyquist plot of the system for C1opt (s)
Fig. 4 Nyquist plots of the system controlled with C1(s) for the
phase margins fpm 308, 408, 508 and 608
k
eLs
ts + a
(23)
t [ [t, t],
L [ [L, L]
(24)
www.ietdl.org
the given interval system. Preliminary study of this section
has been presented in the conference [41].
4.1
(25)
(26)
(27)
(28)
k
ts+ 1
(30)
43.0382
+ 0.0637s0.9899
s0.3776
(31)
[k, k]
e[L,L]s
[t, t]s + 1
(32)
dB
(29)
GR1 (s) =
k
eLs
ts + 1
and
GR2 (s) =
k
eLs
ts + 1
(33)
Time delay L does not have any effect on the gain plot of the
plant. Similarly, minimum and maximum plots of phase are
obtained by the following transfer functions, respectively.
GR3 (s) =
k
eLs
ts + 1
and
GR4 (s) =
k
eLs
ts + 1
(34)
dB
www.ietdl.org
(35)
(36)
www.ietdl.org
d(Arg(C(jv)GR4 (jv)))
=0
dv
v=vcg
(37)
T (jv) = C(jv) GR1 (jv) A dB
1 + C(jv) G (jv)
(38)
R1
dB
1
S(jv) =
B dB
1 + C(jv) GR2 (jv)dB
(39)
k
(r)2 + (s)2 = 0 dB
2
((t vcg ) + 1)
a tan
s
r
(40)
(41)
1
(su r s ru)
t
L = 0 (42)
2
2
1 + (s/r)
(r)
1 + (t vcg )2
2
2
k (rt) + (st)
20 dB (43)
(1 + k rt)2 + (t vt + k st)2
dB
2
(t v s ) + 1
20 dB
(1 + k rs)2 + (t vs + k ss)2
dB
(44)
dB
where
p
l
r = kp + ki v
l + kd vmcg cos m
cg cos
2
2
p
l
l + kd vmcg sin m
s = ki v
cg sin
2
2
p
l1
cos l + kd mvmcg1 cos m
ru = ki lvcg
2
2
p
l1
m1
su = ki lvcg sin l + kd mvcg sin m
2
2
p
l
l + kd vmt cos m
rt = kp + ki v
t cos
2
2
p
l
l + kd vmt sin m
st = ki v
t sin
2
2
p
l
m
rs = kp + ki vs cos l + kd vs cos m
2
2
p
l
l + kd vms sin m
ss = ki v
s sin
2
2
Equations (40) (44) with ve unknown parameters (kp , ki ,
kd , l and m) can be solved to obtain the parameters of
PIlDm for the robust stability of the given plant.
The following procedure can be applied to design robust
PIlDm controller for FOPDT system:
Specify the plant with parametric uncertainty in (23).
Find the transfer functions, which will give the gain and
phase extremums of the Bode envelopes.
Obtain Bode envelopes of system using (33) and (34).
IET Control Theory Appl., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 17, pp. 1978 1989
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2010.0746
[k, k]
[t, t]s + 1
(45)
2
80 s + 1
and
G22 (s) =
4
60 s + 1
(46)
G23 (s) =
4
60 s + 1
and
G24 (s) =
2
80 s + 1
(47)
27.7461
+ 0.0063s0.7874
s0.1461
(48)
www.ietdl.org
that the controller satises the robust performance of the
system.
G3 (s) =
[k, k]
e[L,L]s
[t, t]s + 1
(49)
2
e1s
80 s + 1
G33 (s) =
and
4
e0.5s
60 s + 1
G32 (s) =
and
4
e1s (50)
60 s + 1
G34 (s) =
2
e1s
80 s + 1
(51)
0.0956
+ 1.2878 s0.9721
s0.8483
(52)
www.ietdl.org
phase extremums of the plant given in (53) as follows
G41 (s) =
2.7
e55s ,
443 s + 1
G42 (s) =
3.5
e55s (54)
423 s + 1
G43 (s) =
3.5
e45s ,
423 s + 1
G44 (s) =
2.7
e55s (55)
443 s + 1
0.0047
+ 4.3865s0.5253
s0.9733
(56)
G4 (s) =
k
3.13
eLs =
e50s
ts+ 1
433.33 s + 1
(53)
www.ietdl.org
Conclusions
References
www.ietdl.org
23 Petras, I., Hypiusova, M.: Design of fractional-order controllers
via H1 norm minimization, Sel. Top. Model. Control, 2002, 3,
pp. 5054
24 Xue, D., Chen, Y.Q.: A comparative introduction of four fractional
order controllers. Proc. Fourth World Congress, Intelligent Control
and Auto, 2002, vol. 4, pp. 32283235
25 Hamamci, S.E.: An algorithm for stabilization of fractional-order time
delay systems using fractional-order PID controllers, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control, 2007, 52, pp. 1964 1969
26 Barbosa, R.S., Machado, J.A.T., Ferreira, I.M.: Tuning of PID
controllers based Bodes ideal transfer function, Nonlinear Dyn.,
2004, 38, pp. 305321
27 Maione, G., Lino, P.: New tuning rules for fractional PIa controllers,
Nonlinear Dyn., 2007, 49, (12), pp. 251257
28 Monje, C.A., Calderon, A.J., Vinagre, B.M., Chen, Y.Q., Feliu, V.: On
fractional PIl controllers: some tuning rules for robustness to plant
uncertainties, Nonlinear Dyn., 2004, 38, pp. 369 381
29 Bhattacharyya, S.P., Chapellat, H., Keel, L.H.: Robust control: the
parametric approach (Prentice-Hall, 1995)
30 Kharitonov, V.L.: Asymptotic stability of an equilibrium position of a
family of systems of linear differential equations, Diff. Eqns., 1979,
14, pp. 14831485
31 Bartlett, A.C., Hollot, C.V., Lin, H.: Root location of an entire polytope
of polynomials: it sufces to check the edges, Math. Controls, Signals
Syst., 1988, 1, pp. 6171
32 Hollot, C.V., Tempo, R.: On the Nyquist envelope of an interval plant
family, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1994, 39, pp. 391396
33 Tan, N., Atherton, D.P.: Frequency response of uncertain systems:
a 2q-convex parpolygonal approach, IEE Proc. Control Theory Appl.,
2000, 147, (5), pp. 547 555
IET Control Theory Appl., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 17, pp. 1978 1989
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2010.0746
1989