The SIMC Method for Smooth PID Controller Tuning

  • Sigurd SkogestadEmail author
  • Chriss Grimholt
Part of the Advances in Industrial Control book series (AIC)


The SIMC method for PID controller tuning (Skogestad in J. Process. Control 13:291–309, 2003) has already found widespread industrial usage. This chapter gives an updated overview of the method, mainly from a user’s point of view. The basis for the SIMC method is a first-order plus time delay model, and we present a new effective method to obtain the model from a simple closed-loop experiment. An important advantage of the SIMC rule is that there is a single tuning parameter (τ c ) that gives a good balance between the PID parameters (K c ,τ I ,τ D ) and can be adjusted to get a desired trade-off between performance (“tight” control) and robustness (“smooth” control). Compared to the original paper of Skogestad (J. Process. Control 13:291–309, 2003), the choice of the tuning parameter τ c is discussed in more detail, and lower and upper limits are presented for tight and smooth tuning, respectively. Finally, the optimality of the SIMC PI rules is studied by comparing the performance (IAE) versus robustness (M s ) trade-off with the Pareto-optimal curve. The difference is small, which leads to the conclusion that the SIMC rules are close to optimal. The only exception is for pure time delay processes, so we introduce the “improved” SIMC rule to improve the performance for this case.


Controller Gain Phase Margin Load Disturbance Input Change Integrate Absolute Error 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Alcantara, S., Pedret, C., Vilanova, R.: On the model matching approach to PID design: analytical perspective for robust servo/regulator tradeoff tuning. J. Process Control 20, 596–608 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Astrom, K.J., Hagglund, T.: PID Controllers: Theory, Design and Tuning, 2nd edn. ISA—Instrument Society of America (1995) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chien, I.L., Fruehauf, P.S.: Consider IMC tuning to improve controller performance. Chem. Eng. Prog. 86, 33–41 (1990) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Foley, M.W., Ramharack, N.R., Copeland, B.R.: Comparison of PI controller tuning methods. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44(17), 6741–6750 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grimholt, C.: (2010). Verification and improvements of the SIMC method for PI control. Technical report. 5th year project. Department of Chemical Engineering. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.
  6. 6.
    Haugen, F.: Comparing PI tuning methods in a real benchmark temperature control system. Model. Identif. Control 31, 79–91 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horn, I.G., Arulandu, J.R., Gombas, J., VanAntwerp, J.G., Braatz, R.D.: Improved filter design in internal model control. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 35(10), 3437–3441 (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rivera, D.E., Morari, M., Skogestad, S.: Internal model control. 4. PID controller design. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 25(1), 252–265 (1986) Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Seborg, D.E., Edgar, T.F., Mellichamp, D.A.: Process Dynamics and Control. Wiley, New York (1989) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shamsuzzoha, M., Skogestad, S.: The setpoint overshoot method: a simple and fast method for closed-loop PID tuning. J. Process Control 20, 1220–1234 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Skogestad, S.: Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID controller tuning. J. Process Control 13, 291–309 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Skogestad, S.: Tuning for smooth PID control with acceptable disturbance rejection. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45, 7817–7822 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smith, C.A., Corripio, A.B.: Principles and Practice of Automatic Process Control. Wiley, New York (1985) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith, O.J.: Closer control of loops with dead time. Chem. Eng. Prog. 53, 217 (1957) Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tyreus, B.D., Luyben, W.L.: Tuning PI controllers for integrator/dead time processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 31, 2628–2631 (1992) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yuwana, M., Seborg, D.E.: A new method for on-line controller tuning. AIChE J. 28, 434–440 (1982) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ziegler, J.G., Nichols, N.B.: Optimum settings for automatic controllers. Trans. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 64, 759–768 (1942) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringNorwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations