J Control Autom Electr Syst

DOI 10.1007/s40313-015-01960

Robust Design of PID Controller Using IMC Technique

for Integrating Process Based on Maximum Sensitivity
Gopi Krishna Rao Panyam Vuppu1 Subramanyam Makam Venkata2
Satyaprasad Kodati3

Received: 3 February 2015 / Revised: 5 May 2015 / Accepted: 19 June 2015

Brazilian Society for AutomaticsSBA 2015

Abstract The aim of this work was to obtain a design for

the proportional integral derivative controller in series with
a second-order lead/lag filter for pure integrating process
with time delay based on internal model control principle
to achieve efficient disturbance rejection and robustness.
A setpoint filter is introduced to reduce the overshoot in
the setpoint response. Further, the robustness of the controller is examined by incorporating perturbations in the
time delay parameter for model mismatch. The proposed
method demonstrated good disturbance rejection and
robust- ness in comparison with recently developed
methods with the controller tuned to have same robustness
rank with the cal- culation of the peak of maximum
sensitivity (M S ).
Keywords Integrating process IMC Performance PID

Filter Robustness Disturbance rejection Sensitivity

Setpoint filter

1 Introduction
Vast majority of chemical processes like batch chemical
reactors and liquid-level systems are non-self-regulating
(integrating) in nature. Many of the chemical processes run
as batches because of possible formulation changes (Chien
and Fruehauf 1990; Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a). Design
of the

Gopi Krishna Rao Panyam Vuppu

gopikrishnarao@gmail.com

Department of EIE, RGM College of Engineering and

Technology, Nandyal, A.P., India

Department of ECE, Shantiram College of Engineering,

Nandyal, A.P., India

Department of ECE, JNT University Kakinada,

Kakinada, A.P., India

controllers for these processes to stabilise and incorporate

disturbance rejection is a cumbersome task (Shamsuzzoha
and Lee 2008a). Such processes can be modelled as
integrat- ing processes with delay time (IPDT) [Eq. (1)] for
the design of the controller (Chien and Fruehauf 1990;
Vanavil et al.
2013). An IPDT transfer function contains two parameters,
gain (K) and time delay ( ), and is considered sufficient
to model the dynamics of such processes.
G M (s) =

K e s

(1)

The simplicity of the proportional integral derivative (PID)

algorithm and assured satisfactory performance have made
the PID controller, as the versatile and extensively used
com- pensator in the process industries (Lee et al. 2008; Pai
et al.
2010). PID can compensate the effects of processes with
delay and no delay. A study has indicated that 97 % of the
controllers in the industry use PID algorithm for regulator
operation (Lee et al. 2008; Pai et al. 2010; Eris and
Kurtulan
2011; Gopi Krishna Rao et al. 2013; Desborough and
Miller
2002). The IFAC Conference on Advances in PID Control
held in Brescia (Italy) during 2830 March 2012
concluded that there is no perfect alternative to the PID
controller at least at the bottom layer in the process
industries (Alcntara et al. 2013; Shamsuzzoha 2014).
The internal model control (IMC) provides a simple
struc- ture for assessment and amalgamation of
performance of the control system (Saxena and Hote 2012;
Morari and Zafiriou
1989; Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2007, 2008b). The effectiveness of IMC tuning rules for setpoint and disturbance, and
the derived PID controller attracted the attention of the
control engineers and industries in the last decade
(Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2007, 2008b). The PID controller
tuned with IMC tuning rules provides a clear compromise
123
between robustness and

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Fig. 1 Feedback control
structure

L (s)
+
R
(s _
)

Feedback Controller

GP(s)

Process

+
Y(s)

IMC Tuning

performance to model mismatches, and it is accomplished

with only one tuning parameter (Lee et al. 2008; Saxena
and Hote 2012; Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2007, 2008b; Rivera
et al. 1986; Horn et al. 1996; Gopi Krishna Rao et al.
2014a).
The PID controller design for IPDT based on IMC principle was first proposed by Chien and Fruehauf (1990) for
closed-loop performance. Later many researchers, viz. Lee
et al. (2000), Tan et al. (2003), Arbogast and Cooper
(2007), Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a), Chia and Lefkowitz
(2010), Zhao et al. (2011a, b), Panda et al. (2011), Liu
and Gao (2011), Paul et al. (2012). Anusha and Rao
(2012), Sham- suzzoha et al. (2012), Vanavil et al. (2013),
Paul et al. (2013), Shamsuzzoha (2014), Jin and Liu
(2014), Simhacha- lam and Mudi (2014), made efforts in
enhancing the servo and regulator responses of the PID
controller for integrating processes.
In process control applications, load disturbance rejection is a prominent issue. Good servo (setpoint) operation is
achieved with PID controllers designed based on IMC
princi- ple, but they provide poor regulator (disturbance)
operation. The design of a controller, which has emphasis
of distur- bance rejection than servo operation, is an
important design feature (Morari and Zafiriou 1989;
Shamsuzzoha and Lee
2008b; Gopi Krishna Rao et al. 2014a; Paul et al. 2012;
Seborg et al. 2004). This can be accomplished by designing the controller for regulator (disturbance) response,
rather than setpoint tracking (Gopi Krishna Rao et al.
2014a). PID controller with a lead/lag filter was suggested
in the literature (Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a; Vanavil et
al. 2013; Morari and Zafiriou 1989; Shamsuzzoha and
Lee 2007, 2008b; Rivera et al. 1986; Horn et al. 1996;
Gopi Krishna Rao et al.
2014a, b; Lee et al. 1998; ODwyer 2006) for disturbance
rejection. The structure of IMC filter defines the effectiveness of the PID controller.

2 PID Controller Design

Garcia and Morari (1982) introduced the concept of IMC,

in
which the process model is inherently a fundamental
compo- nent of the controller. The plant model G M (s) is
factorised into invertible G M (s), non-invertible G M + (s)
components [Eq. (2)] (Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a, b, c;
Saxena and Hote

123

Lead-Lag
Filter

G C (s)

D(s)

++

Fig. 2 Basic IMC structure

2012; Rivera et al. 1986; Horn et al. 1996; Gopi Krishna

Rao et al. 2014a, b; Lee et al. 1998). The IMC controller
1
Q(s)
(3)] is [Eq.
the product of G 1
M (s) and G f (s), where G M (s)
is inverse of minimum phase component of plant model G M
(s). G f (s) is a low-pass filter used to make Q(s) proper or
semi- proper.
(2)
G (s) = G
(s)G M(s)
M

The IMC controller is

Q(s) = G 1M (s)G f (s)

(3)

The structure of the feedback controller [Fig. 1] is achieved

from the IMC controller [Fig. 2] with small changes, which
is mathematically represented as Eq. (4).
G C (s ) =

Q(s)
1 Q(s)G M(s)

(4)

For the realisation of IMC controller of Eq. (3), Rivera

et al. (1986) used the filter of the form 1/ (1 + s)n , which
was also adopted by Gopi Krishna Rao et al. (2013) which
provided good setpoint tracking with sluggish disturbance
rejection. Horn et al. (1996) proposed filter of the form
(1 + s) (1 + s)n for type-1 systems, and Shamsuzzoha
and Lee (2007) evaluated the optimal IMC filter structure
of the form (1 + s)r (1 + s)r +n for first-order models.
To improve the efficiency of the PID controller for the
disturbance rejection an IMC filter of the form, Eq. (5) is
pro- posed for the first-order process with time delay
(FOPDT).

J Control Autom Electr Syst

The optimal IMC filter [Eq. (6)] for the FOPDT is achieved
from Eq. (5) with n = 2. The enhanced performance of the
PID controller is achieved with higher-order filter in comparison with the lower-order filter.

G f (s ) =

( a s + 1)

(6)

Thus, the controller G C (s) is

1 - rG M + (s)(as + 1)

(s
2
+ 1)

(7)

The above procedure for obtaining closed-loop controller

as in Eq. (7) cannot be applied directly for integrating
process as a term vanishes at s = 0. According to Lee
et al. (2000), Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a), Shamsuzzoha et al. (2012) integrator can be considered as stable
or unstable pole near zero. The robust closed-loop operation of the controller can be achieved with a plant model
with stable pole near zero than the model with an integrator.
The commonly used estimated models of the processes
particularly chemical processes are the FOPDT (Gopi
Krishna Rao et al. 2014a, b). The plant model G M (s) of
the IPDT system [Eq. (1)] is modelled as FOPDT by considering a
stable pole near zero Eq. (8).
G M (s) =

Ke- s
s+P

(8)

P K e- s
G M (s) = Ps + 1

(9)

1 +

s 2(a s + 1 )
2s

- 1 - 2 s (as + 1)

(14)

The closed-loop controller of Eq. (14) lacks the structure of

PID controller; comparing it with that of a PID controller
with a lead/lag filter of Eq. (15), the PID controller
parameters are achieved as Eq. (16) and the coefficients of
the lead/lag filter are Eq. (17).
1
GC = K P 1 +

ds 2 + cs + 1

+ Td s
Ti s

2 +

KP =

(16b)

(16c)

+P

a=

+ - a
32+ 1.5
(3 + - 2a )

b=

c=

(16a)

(15)

bs 2 + as + 1

P K (3 + - 2a)

Ti = P +

The factorisation of the plant model G

1
+

s+1
PK

r
(s + 1)3 1 +

on grounds of Eq. (2); the time delay term becomes a

predic- tive term after inversion, and thus, it forms the noninvertible portion.
PK +

(10)
, G (Ms ) = eG M- (s ) =
s

(13)

1 + 2s

where P is a large arbitrary constant.

M (s) is carried out

-2 s

G C (s) =

Td =

Ps

(12)

Applying the 1/1 Pad approximate [Eq. (13)] (Gopi

Krishna
C
Eq.
Rao(14)
et al. 2015) to the delay term e- s results in G (s) as

e- s =

G M-1 - ( s ) ( a s + 1 ) 2 ( s + 1)
3

s+1
(as+1)2
r(s + 1)3 - (as +
PK
1)2 e- s

(5)

n+1
+ 1)

( as+
2
G f (s) = 1)
(s + 1)3

G C (s) =

G C (s) =

(s

The closed-loop feedback controller, equal to IMC

controller,
is

a2

(17b)

+ 1.52 + a
(3 + - 2a )
2

(17a)

(17c)

(3 + - 2a )
d = 2a

(17d)

IMC controller Q(s) is

The a provides additional degree of freedom, cancelling the
Q(s) =

Ps+1
PK

( a s + 1)
1)3
(s +

(11)

slow process pole s = -1 P, which has to satisfy the cons=-P

dition [1 - G M (s) Q(s)]

= 0; simplification yields

123

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Table 1 PID controller performance of case study 1
Tuning method

KP

Ti

Td

Ms

Disturbance
tr e

Proposed

Setpoint
Peak

IAE

IAE

Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a)

14.7
5.56

2.553
0.0956

103.7
4.933

3.568
1.85

1.9
1.9

47.222
52.9

0.416
0.484

9.235
12.9

14.74
9.431

Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008c)

11.3

0.531

24.533

2.467

1.9

49.734

0.487

12.32

24

Lee et al. (2000)

11

0.536

35.137

2.286

1.9

72.322

0.493

16.36

23.42

ChienFruehauf

15.28

0.526

37.96

3.339

1.9

80.216

0.464

18.02

23.65

Horn et al.

11.8

1.6

103.7

3.568

1.9

62.342

0.554

16.41

26.98

Rivera et al.

3.31

0.484

103.7

3.568

1.9

0.532

40.61

23.44

Paul et al.

15.12

0.531

37.64

3.336

1.9

>140
78.82

0.463

17.69

23.56

6.5

0.5083

103.7

3.568

1.9

>140

0.463

38.44

21.01

Gopi
Krishna
Rao et al.
(2013)
Fig. 3 Load disturbance
response nominal model case
study 1

r
a = P 1 -

1 -

(18)

Equation (18) gives a clear indication that only one tuning

variable is sufficient to achieve the performance from the
controller.

3 Setpoint Filter
The IMC-PID controllers described above are specifically
designed for disturbance rejection with the IMC filter
G f (s) = (as + 1)2 (s + 1)3 . The closed-loop transfer
function produces a lead term (as + 1) causing excessive
overshoot in the servo response for step change in setpoint
input. The occurrence of overshoot in the output response
to
step
123changes in setpoint is inherent in integrating systems.
By

Table 2 Robustness analysis of PID controller case study 1

Tuning method

tr e

Proposed
Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a)

14.7
5.56

Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008c)

Lee et al. (2000)

Peak

IAE

51
49

0.455
0.520

9.221
12.9

11.3

47.1

0.522

12.26

11

71.8

0.53

16.35

ChienFruehauf

15.28

78.7

0.498

18.01

Horn et al.

11.8

59.8

0.588

16.27

Rivera et al.

3.31

0.567

40.61

Paul et al.

15.12

>140
78.7

0.496

17.68

6.5

>140

0.501

38.45

Gopi
Krishna
Rao et al.
(2013)
the addition of a setpoint filter G f r (s) of the form Eq. (19)

suggested by Tan et al. (2003) and Shamsuzzoha (2014), it

is
possible to enhance the servo performance, and the
overshoot reduced.

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Fig. 4 Load disturbance
response perturbed model case
study 1

Fig. 5 Setpoint responses with

and without setpoint filter case
study 1

G f r (s) =

s+1
as + 1

(19)

4 Simulation Results and Analysis

Two pure integrating processes with delay time (IPDT) are
considered for simulation to demonstrate effectiveness of
the PID controller with lead/lag filter designed with
proposed IMC filter for disturbance rejection. The
processes consid- ered have been studied and presented by
other researchers. The performance evaluation is carried
out in terms of

4.1 Integral Error Criteria

The closed-loop performance is evaluated for load disturbance/setpoint using integral absolute error (IAE) (Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a; Gopi Krishna Rao et al. 2014a;
Stephanopoulos 1984). IAE is defined as (Gopi Krishna
Rao et al. 2014a, b; Stephanopoulos 1984)

IAE =

(20)

|e(t )dt |

123

J Control Autom Electr Syst

4.2 Peak Overshoot

the response recovers to 5% of error region (Liu and Gao

2012).

Peak overshoot is the measure of excursion of response

above
final value after the application of step change in load
distur- bance.
4.3 Recovery Time

4.4 Maximum Sensitivity (Ms) to Model Mismatches

The evaluation of the controller for robustness to model
mismatches is conducted with maximum sensitivity (MS ).

The recovery time (tr e ) is the time period from the instance

a step change in load disturbance occurs in the process and

The maximum sensitivity MS = max

|S( j )| is the inverse
of the shortest distance from N yquist plot to the critical
point (Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a; Gopi Krishna Rao et
al.
2014a, b; Seborg et al. 2004; Selvi et al. 2007). The
stability margin of the system is enhanced with the decrease
in M S value. For uniform comparison, the controllers are
designed to have same M S value by adjusting the , which
affects K P
alone. The range of M S for a satisfactory performance of
the
control system is 1.22.0 (Gopi Krishna Rao et al. 2014a,
b; Seborg et al. 2004; Selvi et al. 2007).
The performances of the PID controller based on IMC
method with conventional filter projected by Rivera et al.
(1986) and filter proposed by Horn et al. (1996), Liu and
Gao (2011), Gopi Krishna Rao et al. (2013) and tuning
tech- niques proposed for IPDT by Lee et al. (2000),
Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a, c), Chien and Fruehauf
(1990) and Paul et al. (2013) are compared with proposed
method for conciseness, and for uniform comparison, the
controllers are designed to possess identical robustness on
the grounds of maximum sen- sitivity M S .

Fig. 6 Controller response for disturbance case study 1

Case
study 1

Fig. 7 Controller response for setpoint case study 1

Table 3 PID controller performance of case study 2
Tuning method

KP

Ti

The separation of fluid mixtures in the chemical and

petro- chemical industries is performed using distillation
technique, and the operation of distillation column (DC) is
very critical (Shamsuzzoha and Lee 2008a). The DC model
considered by Chien and Fruehauf (1990) and
Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a) is considered for the study,
Setpoint
Td
Ms transferDisturbance
which
has the
function
tr e

Proposed
Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008c)

23.75
19.3

4.142
1.466

103
34.169

Lee et al. (2000)

21.75

1.467

58.634

Paul et al.

23.5

1.492

53

Horn et al.

20.6

3.098

103

Rivera et al.

9.15

1.344

103

Gopi
Krishna
Rao et al.
(2013)
Shamsuzzo
ha and Lee
(2008a)
Proposed
123
(for Ms =
1.63)

10.8

1.4751

24
16.15

2.913
1.490

Peak

IAE

IAE

1.4
1.4

59.01
59.02

0.127
0.143

6.006
6.043

19.05
25.53

1.195

1.4

84.77

0.151

9.879

25.7

2.830

1.4

80.28

0.138

8.863

26.45

2.913

1.4

72.5

0.164

8.441

30.7

2.913

1.4

147

0.167

17

29.23

103

2.913

1.4

140.5

0.146

15.39

26.08

0.0323

1.5

1.63

180

0.283

28.11

20.33

6.860

103

2.913

1.63

41.7

0.107

3.67

16.29

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Fig. 8 Load disturbance
response nominal model case
study 2

Table 4 Robustness analysis of PID controller case study

2
Tuning method
Peak

t
re

Proposed

IAE

Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008c)

23.75
19.3

59
58.22

0.131
0.149

6.006
6.025

Lee et al. (2000)

21.75

84.2

0.156

9.876

Paul et al.

23.5

80

0.141

8.861

Horn et al.

20.6

72.5

0.169

8.417

Rivera et al.

9.15

146.1

0.171

17

Gopi
Krishna
Rao et al.
Proposed (for M s = 1. 63)
(2013)

10.8

138.8

0.149

15.4

24

178.7

0.288

28.1

16.15

41.72

0.111

3.602

Shamsuzzoha and Lee (2008a)

0
G M (s) =

.4 s

.2 e -7
s

(21)

The controller is designed with the consideration of IPDT

as G M (s) = 20e-7.4s (100s + 1). All the techniques considered are designed for robustness of M S = 1.9. Step change
in load disturbance input of magnitude 0.25 is applied at
t = 0. The simulation results of Table 1 and Fig. 3 indicate that in comparison with the other techniques
considered, the proposed method provides improved
disturbance rejec- tion. A model mismatch of 10 % is
introduced in the time delay ( ) for the evaluation of the
robustness of the controller G M (s) = 0.2e-8.14 s /s. The
simulation results of Table 2 and Fig. 4 indicate the
robustness of the proposed method.
The integral systems produce overshoot in the output
24.0803s+1
response to step changes
in setpoint. A setpoint lead/lag
servo performance and
overshoot with the pro1 14eliminate
.7 s +1 \ is introduced to enhance
filterdesigned
G f r (s)method.
=
posed
Figure 5 represents
the closed-loop
response
of the proposed design method with and withthe
out setpoint filter. IAE is reduced to 14.74 from 20.76.

Figures 6 and 7 represent the controller response (MV) for

disturbance of magnitude 0.25 and setpoint of 1,
respectively.
Case study 2
A well-known IPDT model [Eq. (22)] considered by
Chien and Fruehauf (1990), Shamsuzzoha and Lee
(2008a, c), Nageswara Rao et al. (2011) and Paul et al.
(2013) is consid- ered for the study .
G M (s) = 0.0506

e-6s

(22)

The controller is designed with consideration of IPDT as

G M (s) = 5.06e-6s (100s + 1). All the techniques considered are designed for robustness of M S = 1.4. Shamsuzzoha
and Lee (2008a) method is designed for robustness of M S =
1.63, as it was the least possible maximum sensitivity
achievable
by this method
forof
this
case 3study.
Step 8change
in that
load
The simulation
results
Table
and Fig.
indicate
disturbance input of magnitude 0.25 is applied at t = 0.
in comparison with other techniques considered, the proposed method provides improved disturbance rejection. A
model mismatch of 10 % is introduced in the time delay
( ) for the evaluation of the robustness of the
controller G M (s) = 0.0506e-6.6 s /s. The simulation results
of
Table 4 and Fig. 19 23indicate
.75 s +1 \ the robustness of the
a setpoint filter G f r (s) =
35.3854s+1
proposed method.
the closed-loop response of the proposed design method
The setpoint response and the overshoot are accounted
with
by
and without setpoint filter.
. Figure 10 represents

5 Conclusions

n+1

a) An
IMC filterfor
of the
G f (s)
(ascontroller
+ 1) (s based
+
is proposed
theform
design
of =
PID
n

1)

123

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Fig. 9 Load disturbance
response perturbed model case
study 2

Fig. 10 Setpoint responses

with and without setpoint
filter case study 2

on IMC principle to enhance disturbance rejection

efficiency.
b) The pure integrating process with delay time is
modelled
as first-order process with time delay for the design of
c) the controller.
The tuning formula for the proposed PID tuning is summarised as
KP =

Td =

P,

P K (3 + - 2a)
P2
2

+P

Ti = P + , 2

r
a = P 1 -

1- P

31

d) A setpoint filter is suggested to reduce the overshoot in

the setpoint response as the proposed method is
,
basically designed for disturbance rejection.

123

e) the closed-loop time constant is the single adjustable

tuning parameter for a given process/plant model, and
it provides the compromise between performance and
robustness.
f) Two benchmark processes are considered in the simulation study to demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed
method with the controllers designed to have same
robustness in terms of maximum sensitivity (M S ).

References
Alcntara, S., Vilanova, R., & Pedret, C. (2013). PID control in terms
of
robustness/performance and servo/regulator trade-offs: A
unifying approach to balanced auto tuning. Journal of Process
Control,
23(4), 527542.

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Anusha, A. V. N. L., & Rao, A. S. (2012). Design and analysis of
IMC
based PID controller for unstable systems for enhanced closed
loop performance. Proceedings of the IFAC Conference
Advances in PID control (PID12).
Arbogast, J. E., & Cooper, D. J. (2007). Extension of IMC tuning
correlations for non-self regulating (integrating) processes. ISA
Transactions, 46(3), 303311.
Chia, T. L., & Lefkowitz, I. (2010). Internal model-based control for
integrating processes. ISA Transactions, 49(4), 519527.
Chien, I. L., & Fruehauf, P. S. (1990). Consider IMC tuning to
improve performance. Chemical Engineering Progress, 86, 33
41.
Desborough, L. D., & Miller, R.M. (2002). Increasing customer
value of industrial control performance monitoring
Honeywells expe- rience. Chemical Process Control - VI,
AIChE Symposium Series No. 326. 98, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
(pp 153186).
Eris, O., & Kurtulan, S. (2011). A new PI tuning rule for first order
plus dead-time systems. IEEE Africon, 11, 14.
Garcia, C. E., & Morari, M. (1982). Internal model controls 1. A
unify- ing review and some new results. Industrial Engineering
Chemical process Design and Development, 21, 308.
Gopi Krishna Rao, P. V., Subramanyam, M. V., & Satyaprasad, K.
(2013). Model based tuning of PID controller. Journal of
Control
& Instrumentation, 4(1), 1622.
Gopi Krishna Rao, P. V., Subramanyam, M. V., & Satyaprasad, K.
(2014a). Design of IMC-PID controller with improved filter for
disturbance rejection. Systems Science & Control Engineering:
An Open Access Journal, 2(1), 583592. doi:10.1080/
21642583.
2014.956372.
Gopi Krishna Rao, P. V., Subramanyam, M. V., & Satyaprasad, K.
(2014b). Design of cascaded IMC-PID controller with improved
filter for disturbance rejection. International Journal of Applied
Science and Engineering, 12(2), 127141.
Gopi Krishna Rao, P. V., Subramanyam, M. V., & Satyaprasad, K.
(2015). Time delay approximation: Its influence on the
structure and performance of IMC-PI/PID controller.
Intelligent Comput- ing, Communication and Devices, Advances
in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer India, 308, 561
569.
Horn, I. G., Arulandu, J. R., Christopher, J. G., VanAntwerp, J. G.,
& Braatz, R. D. (1996). Improved filter design in internal model
control. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 35,
3437
3441.
Jin, Q. B., & Liu, Q. (2014). Analytical IMC-PID design in terms of
performance/robustness trade-off for integrating processes: From
2-Dof to 1-Dof. Journal of Process Control, 24(3), 2232.
Lee, Y., Park, S., Lee, M., & Brosilow, C. (1998). PID controller
tun- ing for desired closed-loop responses for SI/SO systems.
AIChE Journal, 44, 106115.
Lee, Y., Lee, J., & Park, S. (2000). PID controller tuning for
integrating and unstable processes with time delay. Chemical
Engineering Science, 55(17), 34813493.
Lee, M., Shamsuzzoha, M., & Vu, T. N. L., (2008). IMC-PID
approach: An effective way to get an analytical design of
robust PID controller, International Conference on Control
Automation and Systems, Seoul, Korea, 28612866.
Liu, T., & Gao, F. (2011). Enhanced IMC design of load disturbance
rejection for integrating and unstable processes with slow
dynam- ics. ISA Transactions, 50(2), 239248.
Liu, T., & Gao, F., (2012). Control of single-input-single-output
(SISO)
processes, Advances in Industrial Control, Springer Link, 978-085729-977-2, 243277.
Morari, M., & Zafiriou, E.
(1989). Robust process
control. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Nageswara Rao, C. V., Seshagiri Rao, A., & Padma Sree, R. (2011).
Design of PID controllers for pure integrator systems with time

ODwyer, A. (2006). Hand book of PI and PID controller tuning

rules
(2nd ed.). London: Imperial College press.
Pai, N. S., Chang, S. C., & Huang, C. T. (2010). Tuning PI/PID
controllers for integrating processes with deadtime and inverse
response by simple calculations. Journal of Process Control,
20(6),
726733.
Panda, R. C., Vijayan, V., Sujatha, V., Deepa, P., Manamali, D., &
Mandal, A. B. (2011). Parameter estimation of integrating and
time delay processes using single relay feedback test. ISA
Transactions,
50(4), 529537.
Paul, P. K., Dey, C., & Mudi, R. K. (2012). Model based PID
controller for integrating process with its real time
implementation. Inter- national Journal of Advancements in
Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 1(2), 139144.
Paul, P. K., Dey, C., & Mudi, R. K. (2013). Design of fuzzy based
IMC-PID controller for IPDT process. IEEE International Symposium on Computational and Business Intelligence (ISCBI),
111114.
Rivera, D. E., Morari, M., & Skogestad, S. (1986). Internal model
con- trol. 4. PID controller design. Industrial Engineering
Chemical Process Design and Development, 25, 252265.
Saxena, S., & Hote, Y. V. (2012). Advances in internal model control
technique: A review and future prospects. IETE Technical
Review,
29, 461472.
Seborg, D. E., Edgar, T. F., & Mellichamp, D. A. (2004). Process
dynam- ics and control (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Selvi, J. A. V., Radhakrishnan, T. K., & Sundaram, S. (2007). Performance assessment of PID and IMC tuning methods for a
mixing process with time delay. ISA Transactions, 46(3), 391
397.
Shamsuzzoha, M., & Lee, M. (2007). IMC-PID controller design
for improved disturbance rejection of time-delayed processes.
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 46(7),
2077
2091.
Shamsuzzoha, M., & Lee, M. (2008a). Analytical design of enhanced
PID filter controller for integrating and first order unstable
processes with time delay. Chemical Engineering Science, 63,
27172731.
Shamsuzzoha, M., & Lee, M. (2008b). Design of advanced PID
controller for enhanced disturbance rejection of second-order
processes with time delay. AIChE Journal, 54(6), 15261536.
Shamsuzzoha, M., & Lee, M. (2008c). PID controller design for integrating processes with time delay. Korean Journal of Chemical
Engineering, 25(4), 637645.
Shamsuzzoha, M., Skliar, M., & Lee, M. (2012). Design of IMC filter
for PID control strategy of open-loop unstable processes with
time delay. Asia-Pacific Journal of Chemical Engineering, 7
(1), 93
110.
Shamsuzzoha, M. (2014). A unified approach of PID controller
tuning for time delay processes, American Control Conference
(ACC), pp. 48654870, doi:10.1109/ACC.2014.6859067.
Simhachalam, D., & Mudi, R. K. (2014). A self-tuning fuzzy PI
controller for pure integrating processes. Proceedings of the
Inter- national Conference on Frontiers of Intelligent Computing:
Theory and Applications (FICTA), Springer International
Publishing, 25
32.
Stephanopoulos, G. (1984). Chemical process control: An
introduction to theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice- Hall Inc.
Tan, W., Marquez, H. J., & Chen, T. (2003). IMC design for
unstable processes with time delays. Journal of Process
Control, 13(3),
203213.
Vanavil, B., Anusha, A. V. N. L., Perumalsamy, M., &123
Rao, A. S.
(2013). Enhanced IMC-PID controller design with leadlag filter
for unstable and integrating processes with time delay. Chemical
Engineering Communications, (just-accepted).

J Control Autom Electr Syst

Zhao, Z. C., Liu, Z. Y., & Zhang, J. G. (2011a). IMC-PID tuning
method
based on sensitivity specification for process with time-delay.
Journal of Central South University of Technology, 18,
1153
1160.

123

Zhao, Z., Liu, Z., & Zhang, J. (2011b). IMC-PID robust tuning
method
for integrated process with time-delay. Journal of Huazhong
University of Science and Technology (Nature Science
Edition),
39(12).