###### Abstract
[PERSON] [7, 20] proposed a three-state and PID controller structure to obtain a time-optimal set-point response. The process model is neatly calculated by the least-squares-based identification technique during a process set-point change. Therefore, the process model does not have to be known a priori, before changing the process set point. Most tunings methods for first-order integrating systems with time-delay can also be applied in higher-order systems by approximating the process as an IFOTD model [30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50, 51]. Controller design based on IMC PID tuning rules was proposed by [PERSON] [PERSON] [18], [PERSON] [39], [PERSON] [43], [PERSON] [41], [PERSON] et al. [35], and [PERSON] et al. [34]. The IMC filter time constant in the [PERSON] and [PERSON] [18] method was chosen to set the trade-off between performance and robustness of tracking and control responses. Similarly, it was used to choose the robustness degree in the [PERSON] and [PERSON] [43] method. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [44] developed a PID controller tuning method for IFOTD processes with or without additional process zero. The method is based on a pole-placement strategy, while the tuning parameter is the maximal sensitivity (M\({}_{\text{S}}\)) value. This is similar for the [PERSON] [32] method. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [31] developed a PID controller with a unique set-point filter that created a two-degrees-of-freedom (2-DOF) control system. Controller tuning is based on the linear quadratic regulator (LQR) using a dominant pole-placement approach to obtain a good regulatory response. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [49] tuned a PID controller using particle-swarm-optimisation (PSO) and artificial-bee-colony (ABC) algorithms. [PERSON] et al. [51] proposed a tuning method where the controller parameters are determined by obtained stability-boundary loci. Controller parameters for IFOTD or unstable first- and second-order processes with time-delay in a discrete domain were developed by [PERSON] et al. [42]. A predictor-based 2-DOF control design was proposed by [PERSON] et al. [36]. The proposed control-system design was based on using a dead-time compensator (DTC) to predict non-minimal-phase (NMP) dynamics. Some of the tuning methods set the controller integrating gain to zero ([PERSON] et al. [38], [PERSON] et al. [46]). Those methods are not suitable for rejecting process input disturbances. A modified series cascade control structure (SCCS) with two PI and one P controller for a class of IP models with/without positive zero was proposed by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [29]. PI and P controller parameters are obtained using the method of moments and Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion, respectively. [PERSON] [52] proposed the tuning of PID controllers for general IP by using the symmetrical-optimum method. The method is effective for disturbance rejection, while it results in higher process output overshoots on reference changes. Nonparametric controller-tuning methods are model-free (data-based), i.e., they directly exploit a set of closed- or open-loop-process data without requiring the use of a process model. [PERSON] [53] proposed a PI/PID controller method that was based on the direct synthesis approach and specification of the desired closed-loop transfer function for disturbances. The set-point response can be independently improved by using set-point weighting in the PID controllers. [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] [54] developed an autotuning PD controller that adjusts proportional and derivative gains to achieve improved overall performance during set-point changes and load disturbances. Due to the lack of an integrator, the tuning rule is not suitable for rejecting process input disturbances. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [56] proposed PI and PID tuning rules on the basis of an extended Ziegler-Nichols experiment (besides ultimate gain and frequency, the steady-state gain and angle of the tangent to the process Nyquist curve at ultimate frequency should be obtained).