Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract This paper presents the speed control for a motor- a function of a single parameter Q [5] - [8]. For single input-
generator system using an internal model control based controller. output systems (SISO) represented by transfer functions, when
Initially, the internal model control technique is presented, which applying the IMC methodology, it is possible to obtain a set of
is compared with a pole placement based PID controller. Then, a tuning rules based on a parameter that fit into the model of a
linear model of the motor-generator system is identified employing PID controller. The selection of specifies the closed loop
the captured data from a data acquisition card and the matlab response speed and has a direct relationship with the robustness
identification toolbox. Subsequently, the internal model control of the system [9].
based controller and the pole placement PID controller are
designed based on the identified linear model. Controllers This paper presents the identification, design, and
implementation are performed using Matlab Stateflow toolbox in implementation of a speed control for a motor-generator system
conjunction with a data acquisition card. The performance of the using an IMC controller. Initially, the response of the motor-
controllers is evaluated in presence of external disturbances for generator system against a stepped reference signal is captured.
tracking tasks and is quantified through performance indices. From the captured information, a linear model of the system is
Results show that employing the internal model control based obtained using the Matlab identification toolbox. Then, an IMC
controller, the motor-generator system has a better performance controller based on the PID structure is tuned. After that, a PID
for tracking tasks than the pole placement PID controller. controller is designed using the pole assignment methodology to
contrast with the performance of the IMC controller.
KeywordsInternal model control, PID controller by pole
placement, motor-generator system, Matlab Stateflow Toolbox,
Subsequently, controllers are implemented using the Matlab
performance indices. Stateflow toolbox in conjunction with a data acquisition card.
Then, the IMC and PID controllers performance for tracking
task is evaluated in presence of external disturbances as well as
I. INTRODUCTION the presence of random noise in the feedback loop. To quantify
The dynamic behavior of a system is influenced by external the performance of the controllers, performance indices for the
and internal factors that impact the system performance. To systems temporal response and the control action are employed.
reduce the influence of these factors, control system is designed
The main contributions of this paper are the practical
to ensure the system operation under desired operating
implementation of a IMC controller based on the PID structure
conditions.
and the quantitative performance analysis of the IMC and PID
In the industry, most of the control systems use PID by pole placement controllers.
controllers due to its high reliability and cost/benefit ratio, as
This article is structured as follows. Initially the concept of
well as its simplicity for design and implementation [1].
IMC control and the design methodology of an IMC controller
For the PID controllers tuning, there are different based on the PID structure are presented. Then, the pole
methodologies that allow to find the constants of the controller. placement methodology used in the design of a PID controller is
Some of the design methodologies are empirical and are based presented. Subsequently, the study case is presented which
on the graphical analysis of the system response to different corresponds to the design of a speed control for a motor-
input signals [1] - [3]. The main limitation for the application of generator system using an IMC controller and a PID controller
these methodologies is that it depends on a stable open loop by pole placement, as well as the performance analysis of the
response of the system to obtain the controller constants. controllers for tracking tasks in the presence of external
disturbances. Finally, conclusions are presented.
Other methodologies employ an analytical model of the
process, which can be obtained through identification
techniques or by applying the physical laws that govern the II. IMC CONTROL
behavior of the system. These methodologies ensure close-loop Internal model control structure given by [1], [9] is based on
compliance of a set of desired operating specifications of the the internal model principle which proposes that a precise
control system [2] - [4]. control of a system can be reached only if the control system
Internal model control (IMC) is a methodology for the consider the model of the process to be controlled. A closed
controller design based on the Q parameterization technique, loop control system is given by Fig.1, where is the system
which describes all possible controllers that stabilize a system as output, is the desired input of the system, is the error
1
= (5)
This means that to achieve a perfect control action which Fig. 3. Generalized IMC control scheme
ensure that = , the controller model must be the inverse
From Fig.3, the control action for the IMC controller is
of the system , considering ideal. However, in most cases
defined by (10).
is not ideal, so that an approximated model of the system
( ) is employed. For the disturbance , it is possible to find ( )
an estimated model given by (6), subtracting and the ( )= ( ) (10)
1 ( )
estimate model of the process.
Replacing (6) on (3), the control action of the system depends ( )= (11)
of the reference signal and the disturbance as shown in (7). ( + 1)( + 1)
( + 1)( + 1) (12)
From (6), Fig.2 shows the block representation of a IMC ( )=
controller. As can be observed, the plant effect is eliminated
considering only the disturbance effect for the desired operating
point.
Adjusting (12), the IMC controller transfer function (13) 1 1 1
+ + + + + + =0 (18)
resembles a PID controller which is given by (14).
1+ ( ) ( )=0 (16)
( +2 + )=0 (17)
Fig. 4. Motor-Generator System
Finally, comparing the coefficients of (16) and (17), results
an equations system whose solution allows to find the constants A. System Identification
of the controller. For the motor-generator system identification, the system is
Applying the pole placement methodology for a second order excited with a stepped speed profile shown in Fig.5. This profile
system with real poles and a PID controller given by (11) and allows to observe the dynamical behavior of the system for
(14) respectively, the closed loop characteristic equation of the different operating points in both turn senses. As output signal
system applying (16) is:
for the identification process the tachogenerator voltage M3 is data acquisition card capture the tachogenerator signal to
employed. generate a new control action by the controller implemented in
Matlab Stateflow.
10
V. PERFORMANCE TEST
Output (v)
5
0
To analyze the performance of the IMC controller and the
-5 PID controller by pole placement, four tests for tracking task
-10
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 are performed. The first test evaluates the system performance
Time (s) in nominal operating conditions, it means without consider any
10 external disturbance. In the second test, the system is submitted
5 to an external disturbance in the control action. The third test
Input (v)
3000 8
0.62 PID controller 7 PID controller
( )= (21)
2000 IMC controller IMC controller
(21.725 + 1)(5.12 + 1)
6
Speed (RPM)
1000 5
Output (v)
4
0
3
-1000 2
B. Controllers tuning -2000
1
0
From (21), the IMC controller and the PID controller by -3000 -1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
pole placement are tuned. For the PID controller by pole Time (s) Time (s)
0.04 rad / s are required. For the IMC controller, is the only 1000
placement. Using (15) and (20), the constants of the IMC and -2000
1000 5
Output (v)
0
4 controllers performance, impeding reach the maximum speed
3
-1000 2 of the system. The error signal exhibit a better performance for
-2000
1 the IMC controller than PID controller by pole placement with
-3000
0
-1
a lower amplitude.
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (s) Time (s)
3000 8
a) b) PID controller 7 PID controller
3000 2000 IMC controller IMC controller
PID controller 6
Speed (RPM)
2000 IMC controller 1000 5
Output (v)
Speed error (RPM)
4
1000 0
3
-1000 2
0
-2000 1
-1000 0
-3000 -1
-2000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (s) Time (s)
-3000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 a) b)
Time (s) 3000
c) PID controller
2000 IMC controller
Fig. 7. Tracking response for the motor-generator system against external
signal. 0
-1000
The time response, the control action, and the error signal for
-2000
the IMC and PID by pole placement controllers for the third test
against the presence of random noise in the feedback loop is -3000
0 1000 2000 3000
Time (s)
4000 5000
1000 5
Output (v)
4
0
1
3
-1000 2
1
= ( ( )) (22)
-2000
0
-3000 -1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (s) Time (s)
a) b) where n is the total number of samples and ( ) is the error
3000
PID controller signal. The RMS value for the control action is defined by (23).
2000 IMC controller
Speed error (RPM)
1000
1
(23)
0
= ()
-1000
-2000
where u( ) is the control action of the IMC and PID by pole
-3000
0 1000 2000 3000
Time (s)
4000 5000
placement controllers.
c) Table II shows the performance indices for the four tests in
Fig. 8. Tracking response for the motor-generator system against uniform tracking tasks. As can be observed, the RMSE value is less
random noise in the feedback loop a) time response b) control action and c)error when using the IMC controller with respect to the PID by pole
signal. placement controller for all the tests. Also, as the improvement
percentage shows that the IMC controller has a better
For the fourth test, Fig.9 shows the time response, the control
performance especially against the presence of random noise in
action, and the error signal of the motor-generator system for
the feedback loop. For the control action, there is no exist a
significate difference between the IMC and the PID by pole control action, there is not a significate difference between the
placement controllers. IMC and PID by pole placement controllers.