Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
something to contribute in the way of corrections or additions, please write me. I have nothing to sell by providing this page, except better control and hopefully less confusion. Presently there are three basic forms of the PID algorithm. These will be discussed in turn. After that there is a short discussion of other aspects of any algorithm which must be considered to write the digital program for one. A section on references and links is at the end. Expressed by their Laplace transforms the three forms are: First form: Kc(1 + 1/Tis)(1 + Tds)/(1 + Tds/Kd) Second form: Kc'(1 + 1/Ti's + Td's) Third form: Kc" + 1/Ti"s+Td"s where Kc, Kc' and Kc" relate to the P part of PID Ti, Ti' and Ti" relate to the I part of PID Td, Td' and Td" relate to the D part of PID s is the Laplace notation for derivative with respect to time Kd is the derivative gain I have deliberately not assigned a name to any of these forms yet. Also I have not given a name to the variables. Both will come later as each algorithm is discussed. The second and third forms can be made equivalent to the first form (provided derivative is handled appropriately), but the first form cannot duplicate all combinations available in the second and third forms. The second and third forms can be made equal to each other. For most practical purposes one algorithm is not better than another, just different.
corners associated with Ti' and Td'. Ti' is always larger than Ti and Td' is always smaller than Td, which recognizes the slight spreading of the "effective" corners of the Bode plot as they approach each other. This algorithm is also called the "ISA" algorithm. The ISA has no association with this algorithm. Apparently this attribution got started when someone working on the Fieldbus thought it would become "THE" algorithm. It didn't. Or hasn't. ANSI/ISA-S51.1-1979 (Rev. 1993) is a standard on Process Instrumentation Terminology. While this is a standard on terminology, not algorithms, it uses the first form of the algorithm for examples and in its Bode plot for a PID controller. Another term used to identify this algorithm is "ideal". Think of this word as one to identify the algorithm, not describe it. It is true that it can do everything the first form can do, and more, provided the gain for derivative is handled appropriately. But settings which produce complex roots should be used only by the very knowledgeable.
7.
8.
whether the derivative provided is doing a good job of achieving what could be achieved with derivative action. Integral/reset action with digital controllers is not perfect. There is a phenomenon related to quantizing error, sampling time and long integral/reset times and calculating precision which prevents integrating to zero error. Apparently with more digits in the A/D converter and in the computer's math, this is becoming less and less of a problem. There is the choice of having the algorithm be "velocity", sometimes called "incremental" (each calculation period a change in the output is calculated), or "position" (each calculation period the actual desired output is calculated). Apparently at one time there was a perception that the velocity algorithm did not have a reset windup problem, but this is not the case. The choice between the incremental and position algorithms seems to be a choice based on many considerations which are beyond the scope of this write-up. There are options on filtering noise, such as providing a dead zone or a zone of low gain around the setpoint. There are options to be considered in special cases, such as preventing reset windup in override and cascade situations. Provision needs to be made for manual bias. There must be other points to make to caution the novice. Does anyone want to suggest some?