Control of

Time-Delay Systems

Time-Delay Element
Time-Delay
Element

x(t)

x(t - Tl)
Tl = Time-Delay

Time Response
x(t)
unit step

0
y(t)
1
0

Tl

Time-Delay Systems
Example 1

Temperature Measurement of Heat-Exchanger Output

b(t)
d

a(t)
Sensor
Heat
cold in

hot
out

Heat
cold in

v = velocity
d = distance
b(t) = a(t Tl )

hot
out

v
Sensor

Time-Delay Systems
Example 2
Thickness Measurement of Rolled Steel Plate
Thickness
gauge
+
Steel Plate

v
+

Time delay between

change in thickness
and measurement:

d
Tl
v

Difference Between Time-Lag and Time-Delay

(a)

(b)

(c)

e sT
In case (c), transfer function of the block = G s
1 sT
T = time lag, Tl = delay
l

Problem due to Presence of Time-Delay

in a Process Control Loop
Due to the presence of time-delay, any corrective action from
the controller cannot be immediately applied to the process.
Thus during that time, process may buildup a deviation,
sometimes quite large, due to any load disturbance or change
in set-point.

Transfer Function of Time-Delay Element

Time-Delay
Element

x(t)

y(t) = x(t - Tl)

Y s
sT
e
X s

Taking Laplace Transform:

Transfer Function of a Time-Delay Element

Now, e

sTl

12 sTl

1 sT
2 l

sTl

1
1 2 sTl

2!

2
1

2 sTl
1
1 2 sTl

2!
1
2

Using First-Order Pade Approximation:

sTl

1 12 sTl

1 12 sTl

Effect of Time-Delay on Process Loop Response

T.F. of a Process with Time-Delay:

sT

G s G s e

where G/(s) is the transfer function of the delay free part of the
process.

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay
process

controller
R(s)

e sTl
1 sT

Kp = Process Gain
T = Process Time Constant

C(s)

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay (contd )
process
controller

R(s)

e sTl
1 sT

The Characteristic Eqn. of the C.L. System:

C(s)

K p e sTl
1 sT

Using First-Order Pade Approximation:

1
1

K
T

l
p l
K p 1
2
2
2

0
s s
1
1

TT
TTl

2 l
2

1
K p 1 sTl
2

1
0
1 sT 1 1 sTl
2

The standard form:

s 2n s 0,
2

2
n

2 K p 1
TTl

The Natural Freq.

T T K T

2 K 1 T
1
2

1
2

p l
l

The Damping Ratio

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay (contd )
process
controller

R(s)

e sTl
1 sT

C(s)

2T Tl

Tl

The damping ratio becomes zero when:

K p

The system becomes unstable when:

K p

Conclusion:

2T Tl

Tl

Time-delay may cause instability even in

first-order system for large values of Kp.

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay (contd )
R(s)

Root Locus
Ke
Plot
Loop T.F. of the C. L. System:

process

controller

sTl

e
1 sT

C(s)

1 sT

Using First-Order Pade Approximation:

Case I:

sTl

Tl
2
K p =K

K p =0

j
c

1
T
K p =K

Kc: Critical Gain

s-plane

K p =0

2
Tl

K p
2
sT

K p 1 l

T
Tl
2

sTl

1 sT 1 s 1 s 2
2

T
Tl

2
Tl

2 T l
2
Kc
Tl

2T Tl

T
l

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay (contd )
R(s)

Root Locus
Ke
Plot
Loop T.F. of the C. L. System:

process

controller

sTl

e
1 sT

sTl

C(s)

1 sT

K p
2
sTl
K p 1
s
T
2

Tl

sT
1 sT 1 l s 1 s 2
2

T
Tl

Using First-Order Pade Approximation:

Case II: T

Tl
2

K p =K

K p =0

j
c

K p =0

2
Tl

1
T
K p =K

Kc: Critical Gain

s-plane

2
Tl

2 T l
2
Kc
Tl

2T Tl

T
l

Case Study: Proportional Control of a First-Order Process

with Time-Delay (contd )
process

controller
R(s)

e sTl
1 sT

Critical gain K

C(s)

1.67

1
0

The

2T

3T

Critical gain falls with increasing Tl.

Bode Plot

Case I: First Order System without Time-Delay

Kp
Open Loop Transfer Function: G s
1 sT

Kp
G j
1 j T

|G (j)|

1
T
20 log10Kp
odb

phase
0

- 90o

Conclusion: The phase plot never crosses 180 line, hence the system is always stable.

Bode Plot

Case II: First Order System with Time-Delay

K p e sT K p sT
Open Loop Transfer Function: G s

e G1 s G2 s
1 sT 1 sT
l

Frequency Response of Time-Delay Unit:

Phase

G2 j 1 Tl

Slope = - T

Bode Plot

Case II: First Order System with Time-Delay

K p e sT K p sT
Open Loop Transfer Function: G s

e G1 s G2 s
1 sT 1 sT
l

gain |G (j)|

increasing Kp
GM=0, System becomes oscillatory
Gain crossover freq. (GCF)

20 log10Kp
odb

For a particular gain Kp, for stability,

GM (gain margin)
with Tl = 0

1
T

GCF T

Tl

Phase
0
- 90

increasing Tl
o

Tl 0

(as

Tl

or
PM (phase margin) with Tl = 0

- 180o

Tl = 0

PM = 0, oscillatory system

PM

PM
GCF
is the phase of time-delay)

Smiths Principle for Control of

Time-Delay Systems
Process with
time-delay:

G(s) is the T.F. of the delay free part

of the process and Tl is the time-delay.

G s G s e sTl

y(t)

y(t) represents the unit step response of G(s) in

a unity feedback closed loop system.

y(t-T
0

l)

Smiths
Principle:
The unit step response desired
from the closed loop system
with the delay introduced in
series with G(s) is y (t Tl).

t
T

If response y(t) satisfies the design criteria

for the delay-free case, then the response to
be designed for the system with time-delay is
the same response but delayed by Tl.

Smiths Method
Let the controller in the delay free case be Gc(s).

process without
time-delay

controller
R(s)

G' c (s)

+ _

The closed loop transfer function:

G' (s)

Gc/ s G / s

1 G s G s
/
c

C(s)

with time response y(t).

The time response from a system with closed loop transfer function :

Gc/ s G / s

1 G s G s
/
c

e sTl

will be y (t Tl).

Smiths Method
Let the same response (i.e. y (t Tl)) be available from a controller Gc(s) and
the process with time-delay G(s) in a unity feedback closed loop system.
process with
time-delay

controller
R(s)

+ _

G c (s)

The closed loop transfer function:

C(s)

Gc s G s
with time response y (t Tl).
1 Gc s G s

Gc s G s
Gc/ s G / s e sTl

1 Gc s G s 1 Gc/ s G / s

According to Smiths Method

Substituting G s G s e

G (s)

sTl

Gc/ s
Gc s
1 Gc/ s G / s 1 e sTl

Gc s : T.F. of the required controller for the process with time-delay

Smiths Method

The Realization of the

Controller Gc(s)
G c (s)
E(s)
Error

G' c (s)

M(s)
Controller
output

_
G'(s)

1- e

-sT l

For the above realization of Gc(s), knowledge of G(s) and Tl is required.

In practice, model estimates of G(s) and Tl are used.

Model Estimates:

G s , model of G (s)

Tl

, model of Tl

Smiths Method

The Realization of the

Controller
G (s) Gc(s)
c

E(s)

G'

(s)

M(s)

_
G s

1 e sTl

Gc s : The Controller for Delay-Free Process G(s)

Realisation of the Closed Loop

System with Gc(s)
Scheme I:
Controller
(designed for G'(s)) Process with
time-delay
R(s)

+
_

G'C(s)

C(s)

G(s)

1 e

G s

sTl

Models
GC(s)

+
+

Realisation of the Closed Loop

Scheme II: System with Gc(s)
Controller (Process with time delay)
R(s)

+
+

G'C(s)

G(s)

C(s)

Model of process
with time-delay

sTl
G s e

Model of delay free

process
G s

_
+

+
+

Realisation of the Closed Loop

Scheme III: System with Gc(s)
R(s)

Controller

Process

G'C(s)

G(s)

C(s)

_
+
+

e sTl
Model delay

G s
Model of delay
free process

Smiths method assumes that models are exact, i.e. G s = G s and Tl Tl .

In practice, there is always some mismatch between the model and the actual
parameters, therefore, the closed-loop response may differ depending upon the
degree of mismatch.

Realisation of the Closed Loop

Scheme III: System with Gc(s)
R(s)

Controller

Process

G'C(s)

G(s)

C(s)

_
+
+

e sTl
Model delay

G s
Model of delay
free process

The model of delay free process provides an estimate of output from delay free
process for the controller. The estimate is, in fact, the prediction of the process
output. Thus the term Smiths Predictor is used for such controllers.