Abstract:
A method and apparatus for automatically adjusting the gains of a feedback controller while the process continues to run and the controller continues to operate and control the process is disclosed. A desired closed-loop control bandwidth and a target loop transfer function are specified by the operator, and the tuning is accomplished automatically with minimal operator intervention and without the need for developing a model of the process. The automatic tuner subjects the process to one or more disturbance and the operation of both the process and the controller are monitored.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
         [0001]    This invention generally relates to a method and apparatus for controlling the operation of a process. More specifically, this invention provides a method and apparatus for automatically adjusting the gains of a proportional-integral-derivative controller while the controller continues to control the process.  
         BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
         [0002]    A simple proportional-integral-derivative (PID) feedback controller is the most popular apparatus used in the industry for controlling the operation and performance of a process. A feedback controller is also known as a closed-loop controller.  
           [0003]    Systems used for operating plants and monitoring the operation of one or more processes within such plants typically include several feedback (or closed-loop) PID controllers, hereinafter referred to as PID controller or simply controller, as standard “equipment” with assumed default values for the PID gains. In order for these plants, and processes therein, to operate correctly and robustly, each of the PID gains of the controller must be adequately and appropriately tuned for the application at hand. When the “best” PID gains are used, the controller will quickly react to overcome and compensate for any internally and/or externally induced disturbances to which the process is subjected. Examples of disturbances are: change in control set point, change in process characteristics, sensor noise and uncertainty, etc. However, determining the appropriate PID gains is a challenging task for engineers and plant operators because some level of user expertise is necessary for successfully establishing the “best” gains.  
           [0004]    Several tools, methods, and theories are available for tuning PID controller gains (for example, Astrom and Hagglund, PID Controllers:  Theory, Design, and Tuning,  2nd ed., ISA, 1995). However, in practice the bulk of these methods require a lot of engineering effort to get satisfactory results. Currently, control engineers use commercially available tools only as a starting point, and then “play” with the PID gains to get acceptable results. This is a very time consuming effort. Therefore, the notion of an auto-tuning or a self-tuning PID controller for determining PID gains with minimal operator interaction is highly desirable. This concept has tremendous commercial value, and there are a number of automatic gain tuners in the market. In some automatic gain tuners, the controller PID gains are derived analytically based on a low-order model of the process. In other methods, the tuning is based on the optimization of some performance measure of the controller as related to the characteristics of the frequency and/or time response of the process. Persons skilled in the art will recognize that current auto-tuning techniques require frequent adjustment of the PID gains, are unreliable, and are not particularly effective (Shinskey,  Feedback Controllers for the Process Industries , McGraw Hill, 1994). Yet, the tuning of PID gains remains a subject of great practical interest because of the large number of PID controllers in existence, e.g., a typical refinery could have as many as 3,000 PID controllers.  
           [0005]    In view of the foregoing, it is desirable to provide an improved method for tuning the controller gains. It is preferable for the gain tuner to require minimal operator interaction and for the tuning to be accomplished without the need for models of the process and/or the controller. It is further desirable to tune the PID controller gains while the controller continues to control the process.  
         SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
         [0006]    The preferred embodiment of this invention includes a method and apparatus for tuning a PID controller such that the individual PID gains are adjusted while the process is underway, and thus without the need for developing a representative model of the process. A desired closed-loop control bandwidth and a target loop transfer function are specified by the operator, and the tuning is preferably accomplished automatically with no additional operator intervention. The desired closed-loop control bandwidth is preferably indicative of the preferred settling time or the time constant of the process in response to a disturbance, and the target loop transfer function is the targeted or desired Laplace transfer function representative of the overall system or loop typically including the controlled process, the process controller, sensors, actuators, etc., and thus indicative of the desired response of the process (e.g., first-order response, second-order response, etc.). The automatic PID gain tuner subjects the process to one or more disturbance and the operation of both the process and the controller are monitored. In the preferred embodiment, the PID gains are estimated by using recursive least squares curve fitting techniques. 
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0007]    [0007]FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an automatic PID gain tuner, a process controller, and a process; and  
         [0008]    [0008]FIG. 2 is a more detailed block diagram of an illustrative embodiment of the present invention.  
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS  
       [0009]    [0009]FIG. 1 is an illustrative block diagram of the invention showing the signal flows between PID controller  12 , controlled process  30 , and PID gain tuner  36 . Controller  12  receives the process set point on path  10 , and signal  16  indicative of the process output  14 . Controller output on path  20  is adjusted by controller  12  to maintain process output on path  14  as close as possible to the process set point on path  10 . Under normal operation, i.e., when PID gain tuning is not underway, and when the difference between process output  14  and process set point  10  is negligible and it is not necessary to change the controller&#39;s PID gains, controller output  20  is relayed as the process input control signal  26  for adjusting the operation of process  30 .  
         [0010]    PID gain tuner  36  is used for monitoring the performance of controller  12  and process  30  such that new PID gains can be determined automatically when initiated by an operator, upon reaching some a priori set conditions such as slow responding or un-responding process output  14  to changes in controller output  20 , at a predetermined interval, etc. When PID gain tuning is initiated, a desired closed-loop control bandwidth on path  34  and a target loop transfer function on path  32  are either entered by an operator or pre-specified values are used. The desired closed-loop control bandwidth is preferably indicative of the preferred settling time or the time constant of the process in response to a disturbance, and the target loop transfer function is the targeted or desired Laplace transfer function representative of the overall system or loop typically including the controlled process, the process controller, sensors, actuators, etc., and thus indicative of the desired response of the process (e.g., first-order response, second-order response, etc.).  
         [0011]    A disturbance signal is introduced on path  24  by PID gain tuner  36  to process  30  by perturbing the controller output on path  20  such that the process input control signal on path  26  is different from that necessary for maintaining process output  14  at process set point  10 . PID gain tuner  36  monitors the controller&#39;s proportional error, integral error, and derivative error, provided on path  18 , the controller output  20  on path  22 , and the process input control signal  26  on path  28 . In an illustrative embodiment, new values for the controller PID gains are then recursively computed by the PID gain tuner  36 , and transmitted on path  38  to controller  12 . The PID gains in controller  12  are then replaced by the new gains provided on path  38 . In some embodiments, PID gain tuner  36  continues monitoring the performance of controller  12  and process  30 , and automatically continues to adjust the PID gains until gain tuning is terminated by the operator and/or some a priori set conditions are satisfied.  
         [0012]    In FIG. 2, the individual functional blocks have internal labels describing the individual functions which each represent. Established conventions are followed in FIG. 2 to represent the various functions of the invention. Circles to which are supplied two or more signals imply a sum or difference calculation as indicated by the adjacent plus or minus signs. Thus, the plus and minus signs adjacent the junctions of paths  10  and  16 , respectively, at summation element  2  implies subtraction of the value encoded in the signal on path  16  from the value encoded on path  10  to form an error e transmitted on path  4 . Each rectangular block, say block  60 , represents some type of mathematical or computational operation on the values encoded in the signals supplied to that block. Thus, the signal on path  4 , which encodes the error e, is supplied to functional block  60 , to collectively represent an apparatus which performs a Laplace transform operation on the error e. Other functional blocks represent decision operations, calculation of other mathematical functions, such as multiplication, and other operations of various types.  
         [0013]    Referring now to FIG. 2, element  2  of controller K in block  12  subtracts the process output y  14  received on path  16  from the set point r on path  10  to form the error e on path  4 . The error e on path  4  is sequentially operated on by blocks  50  and  52  to form a proportional error which is transmitted on path  54  to summation element  6  and which is also transmitted on path  56  to the PID gain tuner  36 . Block  50  performs the function of multiplying the error e with the numeric value shown in block  50 , said numeric value typically being  1 . 0 , and block  52  performs the function of multiplying the signal from block  50  with the proportional gain value designated as K p  in block  52 . Similarly, the error e on path  4  is sequentially operated on by blocks  60  and  62  to form an integral error which is transmitted on path  64  to summation element  6  and which is also transmitted on path  66  to the PID gain tuner  36 . Block  60  performs an integration Laplace transformation on the error e input on path  4 , and block  62  multiplies the signal from block  60  with the integral gain value designated as K i  in block  62 . Additionally, the error e on path  4  is sequentially operated on by blocks  70  and  72  to form a derivative error which is transmitted on path  74  to summation element  6  and which is also transmitted on path  76  to the PID gain tuner  36 . Block  70  performs a derivative Laplace transformation on the error e input on path  4 , and block  72  performs the function of multiplying the signal from block  70  with the derivative gain value designated as K d  in block  72 . Summation element  6  of controller  12  adds the proportional, integral, and derivative errors received on paths  54 ,  64 , and  74 , respectively, to yield a controller output signal Ke. The controller output Ke is transmitted on path  20  to summation element  8  and also on path  22  to the PID gain tuner  36 .  
         [0014]    Under normal controller operation, i.e., when PID gain tuning is not underway, PID gain tuner  36  remains inactive and controller output Ke received on path  20  by element  8  is transmitted without modification as the process input control signal u on paths  26  and  28 , respectively, to the controlled process  30  and the PID gain tuner  36 . The controlled process represented in block  30  by the Laplace transfer function G includes a plurality of control elements controlled by controller  12 . Controlled process  30  receives the process input control signal u on path  26  and manipulates the operation of the control elements to match the process output y  14  to the process set point r  10 . Typical examples of control elements are valves, pumps, fans, etc.  
         [0015]    The algorithms used in the PID gain tuner  36  for determining new PID gains for controller  12 , as envisioned in the preferred embodiment of this invention will now be discussed in detail. The objective of a feedback controller is to maintain a system or process at a desired output level in the presence of disturbances, uncertainty, system instability, measurement noise, etc. In such controllers, the closed-loop transfer functions relating the error e on path  4  to the set-point r on path  10  are:  
             e   =         1     1   +   GK            (     r   -     d   0       )       +       GK     1   +   GK          n     -       G1     1   +   GK            d   i                 Equation                   (   1   )                                 
  e=S ( r−d   o   −Gd    1 )+ Tn   Equation (2) 
         [0016]    where,  
         [0017]    n is the measurement noise imposed on the process output y  14  resulting from the characteristics of the sensors, transmitters, receivers, etc., used for measuring the process output  14 ,  
         [0018]    d o  and d 1 , are disturbances experienced by the controlled process  30 ,  
         [0019]    G is the transfer function representative of the process  30  being controlled,  
         [0020]    K is the transfer function representative of the controller  12 ,  
         [0021]    S=1/(1+GK) is a sensitivity function, and  
         [0022]    T=GK/(1+GK) is a complimentary sensitivity function.  
         [0023]    It is desirable to keep the error e on path  4  small which translates to the minimization of both S and T. However, the control system must also meet the fundamental constraint of S+T=1. Therefore, S and T can not be made arbitrarily small at the same time. Realizing that set points and disturbances are typically low frequency signals and measurement noise is a high frequency signal, satisfactory performance can be achieved by making S small at low frequencies and T small at high frequencies. Since both S and T depend on the transfer function of the overall system which includes the controlled process, process controller, sensors, actuators, etc., a target loop transfer function L is selected in block  32 , and transmitted on path  33  to the PID gain tuner  36 , such that the closed-loop transfer functions have desirable properties. Loop-shaping is the classic frequency based control design methodology that achieves this objective by shaping the open-loop transfer function, 
           L ( jω )= G ( jω ) K ( jω )  Equation (3) 
         [0024]    This is done by choosing loop-shapes that have a large gain at low frequencies below crossover and a small gain at high frequencies above crossover. The controller K, i.e., the PID gains of the controller  12 , is selected such that the loop transfer function GK approximates the target loop transfer function L specified in block  32 .  
         [0025]    As previously described, the target loop transfer function is the targeted or desired Laplace transfer function representative of the overall system or loop typically including the controlled process, the process controller, sensors, actuators, etc., and thus indicative of the desired response of the process (e.g., first-order response, second-order response, etc.). The PID gain tuner  36  selects the target loop-shape based on the desired closed-loop control bandwidth ω c  specified in block  34 , and the nature of the process specified by the operator as an input to block  32 . For example, if the operator specifies the process to be stable in nature, then the PID gain tuner  36  will select a first-order shape for the target loop transfer function (L=ω c /s). Alternately, if the operator specifies the process as having an integration nature, then the PID gain tuner  36  will select a second-order shape for the target loop transfer function,  
             (     L   =         ω   c          (     s   +       ω   c     x       )         s   2         )           Equation                   (   4   )                                 
 
         [0026]    Here x is a parameter that governs the low-frequency slope or overshoot in response to a step change in the set point. Selection of the target loop transfer function L is governed by bandwidth constraints imposed by uncertainty, non-minimum phase behavior and unstable poles.  
         [0027]    As part of the tuning method, one or more system disturbance u id  is generated by the PID gain tuner  36  and transmitted to summation element  8  on path  24 . It is important for the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  to be plant friendly, i.e., a signal with which the operator is comfortable. The controller output Ke on path  20  and the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  are arithmetically added by summation element  8  and then transmitted on path  26  as the process input control signal u to the process  30 . The disturbance signal u id  on path  24  is selected to have power in the frequency region around the desired closed-loop control bandwidth w c  specified in block  34  and transmitted on path  35  to the PID gain tuner  36 . As previously described, the desired closed-loop control bandwidth is preferably indicative of the preferred settling time or the time constant of the process in response to any disturbance. The preferred settling time for the process typically represents the desired or acceptable duration of time within which the process output should reach stability after the process has been subjected to a disturbance such as a step change in the control set point. As is well known in the art, the time constant of the process is the duration of time in which the process output has changed by approximately 66.7% in response to a disturbance such as a change in the set point value. The closed-loop control bandwidth is limited by the nature of the system and uncertainty represented by the quality of the data collected during testing. The tuning algorithm permits the operator to adjust the desired closed-loop control bandwidth ω c    34  to get a desirable loop with acceptable performance. An approximate range for the desired closed-loop control bandwidth ω c    34  can be obtained using a pre-tuning step test.  
         [0028]    In the preferred embodiment of this invention, the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  includes one or more step changes. In an alternate embodiment, the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  includes a pseudo random binary sequence. In another embodiment of this invention, the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  includes band-pass filtered noise. In yet another embodiment, the disturbance signal u id  on path  24  includes clipped white noise.  
         [0029]    In the preferred embodiment of this invention, a recursive least squares algorithm is used to fit the PID gains to meet the following objective: 
           min∥u   ID ( L−GK )/(1+ GK ) 5 ∥ 2    Equation (5) 
         [0030]    which is equivalent to 
           min∥Lu+Ke∥   2   Equation (6) 
         [0031]    Since G does not explicitly appear in this objective it allows one to directly tune the PID controller gains without the need for a model of the controlled process  30 . In the preferred embodiment of the PID feedback controller of this invention, this is a solution to a least-squares problem.  
         [0032]    In the preferred embodiment of this invention, the auto-tuning PID controller is based on the loop-shaping concept described above. The proportional gain K p , integral gain K i , and the derivative gain K d  are determined by directly fitting the loop transfer function to a target loop-shape. Thus, the PID gains are automatically estimated recursively without identifying a model for the process  30  and/or the controller  12 , and with minimal operator interaction.  
         [0033]    Numerous advantages of the invention covered by this document have been set forth in the foregoing description. It will be understood, however, that this disclosure is, in many respects, only illustrative. Changes may be made in details, particularly in matters of shape, size, and arrangement of parts without exceeding the scope of the invention. The invention&#39;s scope is, of course, defined in the language in which the appended claims are expressed.