University of Khartoum Faculty of Engineering Chemical Engineering Department

University of Khartoum
Faculty of Engineering
Chemical Engineering Department
Advanced Control Strategies

2 References
 D.R. Coughanowr & S.E. LeBlance, Process Systems Analysis and Control, 3rd
Edition McGraw-Hills,2009.
 Parbir K. Sarkar, Process Dynamics and Control, PHI Learning Private Limited,
2014.
3 Introduction
 Up to this point, the control systems considered have been single-loop
systems involving one controller and one measuring element.
 Multi-loop systems include:
1. Cascade Control
2. Feedforward Control
3. Ratio Control
4. Smith Predictor Control
5. Internal Model Control (IMC)
 The first three have found wide acceptance in industry. Smith predictor
control has been known for about forty years, but it was considered
impractical until the modern microprocessor-based controllers provided the
simulation of transport lag. Internal model control, based on a rigorous
mathematical foundation and an accurate model of the process, has
been the subject of research for the past twenty years.
Cascade Control
4
 Consider the single-loop control of a jacketed kettle as shown in figure(a). the system
consists of a kettle through which water, entering at temperature 𝐓𝐢 , is heated to 𝐓𝐨
by the flow of hot oil through a jacket surrounding the kettle. The temperature of the
water in the kettle is measured and transmitted to the controller, which in turn adjusts
the flow of hot oil through the jacket.
 This control system is satisfactory for controlling the

kettle temperature; however, if the temperature of
the oil supply should drop, the kettle temperature
can undergo a large prolonged excursion from the
set point before control is again established. The
reason is that the controller does not take
corrective action until the effect of the drop in oil
supply temperature has worked itself through the
system of several resistances to reach the
measuring element.
5  To prevent the sluggish response of kettle temperature to a disturbance in oil
supply temperature, the control system shown in figure (b) is proposed. In this
system, which includes two controllers and two measuring elements, the output
of the primary controller is used to adjust the set point of a secondary controller,
which is used to control the jacket temperature. Under these conditions, the
primary controller indirectly adjusts the jacket temperature. If the oil temperature
should drop, the secondary control loop will act quickly to maintain the jacket
temperature close to the value determined by the set point that is adjusted by
the primary controller.
 This system shown in figure (b) is called a

cascade control system. The primary
controller is also referred to as the master
controller, and the secondary controller is
referred to as the slave controller.
6  A simplified block diagram of the single-loop system is shown in figure (a) .
figure (b), which is a block diagram representation of the cascade control
system, shows clearly that an inner loop has been added to the
conventional control system.
7 Analysis of Cascade Control
 To develop the closed-loop transfer functions for a cascade control system,
consider the general block diagram shown in figure. In this diagram, the load
disturbance (U) enters between two blocks of the plant, and the inner loop
encloses this load disturbance.
 To determine the transfer function 𝐶 Τ𝑅, the inner loop is reduced to one
block. The result is shown in figure (b), and the block diagram of figure
(b)can be used to give the result:
𝐶 𝐺𝑐1 𝐺𝑎 𝐺3
=
𝑅 1 + 𝐺𝑐1 𝐺𝑎 𝐺3 𝐻1
𝐺𝑐2 𝐺1 𝐺2
𝐺𝑎 =
1 + 𝐺𝑐2 𝐺1 𝐺2 𝐻2
 To obtain the transfer function relating output
to load 𝐶 Τ𝑈, the block diagram of figure (a) is
rearranged by placing the transfer function
𝐺𝑐2 𝐺1 in the feedback paths of the primary
and secondary loops. the new arrangement
is shown in figure (a) next slide.
8  Since R= 0 for the case under consideration, the block diagram can be
redrawn as shown in figure (b) . This diagram, which has the same form as
the one in figure (a) in the previous slide, can now be reduced to the form
shown in figure (c), which gives:
𝐶 𝐺3 𝐺𝑎
=
𝑈 𝐺1 𝐺𝐶2 1 + 𝐺𝑐1 𝐺𝑎 𝐺3 𝐻1
 Where 𝐺𝑎 is the same as given above.
9 Example
 Consider the conventional control system of figure(a) in which a third-order
process is under PI control. A cascade version of this single-loop control
system is shown in figure(b) in which an inner loop having proportional
control encloses the load disturbance U.
 To obtain a response of the conventional control system for use in comparison
10
with the response of the cascade system, the block diagram of figure(a) was
simulated on a computer.
 The values of 𝐾𝑐 and 𝜏𝑖 were chosen by trial and error to give the response to
a step change in set point shown as curve (I) of figure below; this response,
which has a decay ratio of about 1Τ4, was obtained with 𝐾𝑐 = 2.84 and 𝜏𝑖 = 5.
 The cascade control system of

figure(b) was also simulated to
obtain a load response. The
controller gain 𝐾𝑐2 of the inner
loop was chosen arbitrarily to be
10. This value was chosen to be
high to obtain a fast-responding
inner loop, a desirable situation for
cascade control.
11
 Because of the introduction of the inner loop, the dynamics of the control
system have changed, and it is necessary to tune the primary controller
parameters for a good response to a step change in set point. By trial and
error, primary controller settings of 𝐾𝑐1 = 1and 𝜏𝑖 = 0.63 were found that
produced the response to a unit step in set point, shown as curve (II) in
figure above.
12
 the response of the conventional control system
to a step change in U of 4 units as curve II of
figure.
 The load response for no control (𝐾𝑐 = 0) is also
shown as curve I for comparison.
 Using the controller parameters found from the
step change in set point (𝐾𝑐1 = 1 and 𝜏𝑖 = 0.63 )
the response of the cascade system to a step
change in load of 4 units was obtained and is
shown as curve (III).
 As shown in figure , the load response for the
cascade control system is far superior to the load
response of the conventional control system. The
maximum deviation of the cascade response has
been reduced by a factor of about 4, and the
frequency of oscillation has nearly doubled.
13 Generalizations
 Cascade control is especially useful in reducing the effect of a load

disturbance that moves through the control system slowly. The inner loop
has the effect of reducing the lag in the outer loop, with the result that the
cascade system responds more quickly with a higher frequency of
oscillation.
 The choice of control action and tuning of the primary and secondary
controllers for a cascade control system must be given careful
consideration:
 The control action for the inner loop is often proportional with the gain set
to a high value. The rationale for the use of proportional control rather than
two- or three-mode control is that tuning is simplified and any offset
associated with proportional control of the inner loop can be handled by
the presence of integral action in the primary controller.
14
 The gain of the secondary controller should be set to a high value to give a
tight inner loop that responds quickly to load disturbance; however, the
gain should not be so high that the inner loop is unstable. Although the
primary control loop can provide stable control even when the inner loop is
unstable, it is considered unwise to have an unstable inner loop because
the system will go unstable if the primary controller is placed in manual
operation or if there is a break in the outer loop.
 The action for the primary controller is generally PI or PID. The integral action
is needed to reduce offset when sustained changes in load or set point
occur. The problem of adjusting a primary controller is essentially the same
as for a single-loop control system. Since the addition of the inner loop can
change the dynamics of the outer loop significantly, the primary controller
must be retuned when the inner loop is closed or when the secondary
controller settings are changed.
 Microprocessor-based controllers available today can implement cascade
control very easily.
15 Example
 consider the conventional control and the cascade control of a third-order
plant in figure (a) and (b).
 The equivalent single-loop control system of the cascade system, shown in
figure (c), was obtained by the usual method for reducing a loop to a
single block.
16  Comparing figure (a) with (c) shows that the use of cascade control has
replaced a second-order critically damped system represented by the first
two blocks of the plant [1Τ 𝑠 + 1 2 ] with this underdamped second-order
system.
𝐾
𝜏 2 𝑠 2 + 2ξ𝜏𝑠 + 1
Where:
10
𝐾=
11
1
𝜏=
11
1
ξ =
11
 This second-order underdamped system, for which t and z are small,

responds much faster than the critically damped second-order transfer
function of the first two blocks of the open-loop system. Consequently, the
cascade system will respond faster with a higher frequency of oscillation.

University of Khartoum Faculty of Engineering Chemical Engineering Department

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Khartoum Faculty of Engineering Chemical Engineering Department

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Khartoum

Advanced Control Strategies

 This control system is satisfactory for controlling the

 This system shown in figure (b) is called a

 The cascade control system of

 Cascade control is especially useful in reducing the effect of a load

 This second-order underdamped system, for which t and z are small,

You might also like