Combined Sensitivity–Complementary Sensitivity Min–Max Approach for Load Disturbance–Setpoint Trade-off Design

  • Ramon Vilanova
  • Orlando Arrieta
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 5)

An approach to proportional-integrative-derivative controller tuning based on a simple plant model description, first order plus time delay, is presented. The approach is based on the formulation of an optimal approximation problem in the frequency domain for the sensitivity transfer function of the closed loop. The inclusion of the sensitivity function allows for a disturbance attenuation specification. The solution to the approximation problem provides a set of tuning rules that constitute a parameterized set that is formulated in the same terms as in [1] and includes, a third parameter that determines the operating mode of the controller. This factor allows one to determine a tuning either for step response or disturbance attenuation. The approach can be seen as an implicit 2-degree-of-freedom controller because by using one parameter, the operating mode (servo/regulation) of the control system is determined as well as the appropriate tuning of the controller.


Step Response Disturbance Attenuation Internal Model Control Integral Square Error Time Domain Response 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. Vilanova (2006) PID controller tuning rules for robust step response of first-order-plus-dead-time models. ACC06, American Control Conference, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. Ziegler and N. Nichols (1942) Optimum settings for automatic controllers. Transactions ASME 759-768.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    I. Chien, J. Hrones, and J. Reswick (1952) On the automatic control of generalized passive systems. Transactions ASME 175-185.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Hang, K. Astrom, and W. Ho (1991) Refinement of the Ziegler-Nichols formula. IEEE Proceedings. Part D. 138: 111-118.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. Astrom and T. Hgglund (2004) Revisiting the ziegler nichols step response method for PID control. Journal of Process Control, 14: 635-650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Hwang and H. Chang (1987) Theoretical examination of closed-loop properties and tuning methods of single loop pi controllers. Chemical Engineering Science, 42: 2395-2415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Skogestad (2003) Simple analytic rules for model reduction and pid controller tuning. Jour- nal of Process Control, 13: 291-309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Astrom and T. Hgglund (1995) PID controller. Instrument of Society of America.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. Astrom, H. Panagopoulos, and T. Hgglund, (1998) Design of pi controllers based on non-convex optimization. Automatica, 34: 585-601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Fung, Q. Wang, and T. Lee (1998) Pi tuning in terms of gain and phase margins. Automat-ica, 34: 1145-1149.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Ge, M. Chiu, and Q. Wang (2002) Robust pid controller design via lmi approach. Journal of Process Control, 12: 3-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Toscano (2005) A simple pi/pid controller design method via numerical optimizatio ap-proach. Journal of Process Control, 15: 81-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. Vilanova and P. Balaguer (2006) Robust pid tuning relations based on min max optimisa-tion. ROCOND06, IFAC Symposium on Robust Control.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Cominos and N. Munro (2002) Pid controllers: recent tuning methods and design to speci-fication. IEEE Proceedings. Part D. 149: 46-53.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D.E. Rivera, M. Morari, and S. Skogestad (1986) Internal model control 4. pid controller design. Industrial & Engieneering Chemistry Research, 25: 252-265.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Morari and E. Zafirou (1984) Robust process control. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    B. Chen (1984) Controller synthesis of optimal sensitivity: Multivariable case. IEEE Proceed-ings. Part D. 131: 547-551.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. Francis (1987) A Course in H Control theory. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. Vilanova and I. Serra (1999) Model reference control in two degree of freedom control systems: Adaptive min-max approach. IEEE Proceedings. Part D. 146: 273-281.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Sarason (1967) Generalized interpolation in 〈 . Transactions AMS 127: 179-203.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    G. Zames and B. Francis (1983) Feedback, minmax sensitivity and optimal robustness. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 28: 585-601.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramon Vilanova
    • 1
  • Orlando Arrieta
    • 1
  1. 1.Telecommunication and System Engineering DepartmentUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations