Editor's Choice


Loop Signatures 13: Digital controllers – Part 5: The D term

July 2022 Editor's Choice System Integration & Control Systems Design

I would be remiss not to mention at the outset that the next three articles on the D term in digital controllers were previously published some years ago in this magazine. However, I feel strongly that this part of the Loop Signatures article series covering digital controllers would hardly be complete if these were left out, so I ask in advance for your forbearance if you have read them previously.

The derivative, or D term, is hardly ever used in feedback control loops, and most people have very little practical understanding of the subject. Opinions on its use vary from one extreme to the other. A professor of control at a leading South African teaching establishment once told me that he had proved conclusively that the derivative was not only of no help, but that it actually slowed down control response. At the other end of the spectrum, a grizzled senior control technician in a large paper mill, with many years of experience, stated that he insisted that his people tuned the derivative into virtually every loop in the plant, as he was convinced that it not only speeded up response, but it was also a major contributor to loop stability.

Both of these views could be said to be partially correct in some respects, but do not reflect the whole truth. In actual practice, the derivative is generally employed in less than one in several hundreds of control loops. Reasons for this will be given in this and the next two Loop Signatures articles.

The objective of the derivative term is to speed up the control response in very slow processes, as often encountered in some temperature controls. A good example of where the derivative could be used was found by this author in a plant in Secunda, where a practical control course was being held. The class had

just finished tuning a very slow temperature loop and were trying the calculated settings using only P and I control. Upon making a 10% setpoint change, the valve opened up to about 30% under the proportional action and the temperature started rising very slowly. The integral action then also started ramping the output up and the temperature eventually got to setpoint about 45 minutes later.

The operator watching this laughed and mentioned that he could do the same thing in manual, but much faster. To demonstrate this, and after the temperature had been reset to its original value, he placed the loop in automatic and immediately opened the valve fully to 100%. The temperature then started rising much faster than it had done the previous time. Based on his experience and judgement, when it had risen a certain amount but was still some way from the setpoint, he started closing down the valve to prevent the temperature from overshooting. Eventually he got the temperature to the new setpoint about 40% faster than it had in the previous automatic PI control. The same result would have occurred in automatic if the derivative term had been used correctly.

Our experience has been that the derivative term can in fact improve the control response time on two types of process dynamics. The first is a slow self-regulating process with multiple single-order lags in series. This is typified by an ‘S-shaped’ response to a manual step change in controller output. This response often gives the impression of long deadtime (Figure 1 shows such a response for a process with a total of five first-order lags in series, each with a 5 second time constant, and zero deadtime). The I term cancels out part of the lags and the D term can also cancel out a further lag, which allows better straightening of the closed-loop Bode gain plot at the high-frequency end.

It should be noted that the D term is ineffective on self-regulating processes with only a single lag, irrespective of the size of the lag. The I term cancels the poles effectively on its own, and D will actually not help the response at all.

The second type of process where the D term is particularly effective is on an integrating process with a large lag. These process types are typified in batch reactor temperature control. A schematic of a simple batch reactor control scheme is shown in Figure 2. The response of such a process to a manual step change in controller output is shown in Figure 3. Note how the process variable curves slowly into the ramp.

In automatic, the D term will cancel out the lag and the process will respond to changes much faster, so it works really well in these applications. In a pharmaceutical factory in the UK, one plant consisted of only batch reactors. Previously, all the temperature control had been performed by using P only. By adding the D term, the reaction times were so much faster that production through the plant was eventually increased by a staggering 17%!

The reason that the I term is not used in this particular type of process is because a setpoint change on an integrating process that employs the I term in the controller will always result in an overshoot. If there is no cooling on a batch reactor, overshoot is not acceptable as there is no way to reduce the temperature back to setpoint in a reasonable time after an overshoot.

How is the D term applied in a controller? Figure 4 shows the principle. The derivative is used in calculus to measure the slope of a line. On a continuous system as seen in control applications, the error signal – or sometimes the process variable (PV) signal, as will be discussed in the next article in this series – is fed into a derivative calculation block.

The output represents the rate of change of the input signal. The derivative of a constant input signal is zero, while the derivative of a ramp input is a step – the steeper the ramp, the bigger the output step. The derivative of a vertical change in input, however big or small, gives a theoretical output of infinity. This is one of the main reasons why D is so seldom used: most process variable signals are noisy, so small, fast-changing variations of PV cause the output of the controller to jump about too much.

The D term is employed to try and move the output faster if the error signal changes quickly. Some people call it ‘anticipatory’ control. Nathaniel B. Nichols, co-developer of the famous Ziegler-Nichols method, coined the phrase ‘preact control’.

Figure 5 is a schematic of a simple controller configured with a ‘parallel’ PI algorithm. For simplicity, no I action is included. Therefore, a manual bias is provided to allow ‘manual reset’ which lets one manually eliminate offset between PV and setpoint. A ramp change of setpoint is shown in Figure 5.

The resultant error signal, and the proportional action, also ramp, and the output of the D unit is a step. The final output of the controller is then a step followed by a ramp. This response is enlarged in Figure 6 and compared with a P-only response. It can be clearly seen that the controller output reacts to a step change in error ‘T’ seconds faster with P+D control as opposed to P-only control.

In the next Loop Signatures article, the application and use of the derivative in modern digital controllers will be discussed.


About Michael Brown


Michael Brown.

Michael Brown is a specialist in control loop optimisation, with many years of experience in process control instrumentation. His main activities are consulting and teaching practical control loop analysis and optimisation. He now presents courses and performs optimisation over the internet. His work has taken him to plants all over South Africa and also to other countries. He can be contacted at: Michael Brown Control Engineering CC, +27 82 440 7790, [email protected], www.controlloop.co.za



Credit(s)



Share this article:
Share via emailShare via LinkedInPrint this page

Further reading:

How to size and select a servo motor
Festo South Africa Editor's Choice Motion Control & Drives
Festo highlights some factors to consider in the process of sizing and selecting a servo motor effectively to ensure optimal performance, reliability and energy efficiency.

Read more...
Dynamic control of industrial solar plants and energy storage systems
Beckhoff Automation Editor's Choice Electrical Power & Protection
Spanish Group, Power Electronics has demonstrated its comprehensive expertise in sustainable energy supply in over 3000 solar and energy storage projects with a total installed capacity of 120 GW. To control its modular systems, the company relies on open, high-performance Beckhoff control technology.

Read more...
Loop signature Part 2-4: Feedforward Control: Part 3
Michael Brown Control Engineering Editor's Choice Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
In the previous articles in this series, the basic theory behind feedforward control was discussed, and it was also shown how to apply feedforward in practice. In this article, it will be shown how well feedforward can work in practice by giving a couple of examples.

Read more...
Engineers, AI and the risk of cognitive surrender
Editor's Choice
AI will have a significant impact on how engineering work gets done in the future, but the cognitive implications of continued AI use are serious.

Read more...
Reinventing grain silo management
VEGA Controls SA Editor's Choice
The VEGAPULS 6X radar sensor is designed for continuous level measurement to help overcome the challenges faced by storage in grain silos.

Read more...
Trends in humanoid robots
Editor's Choice
Humanoid robots are increasingly viewed less as futuristic prototypes and more as a practical route to bring artificial intelligence into human-designed environments.

Read more...
Four futures for AI: The choices we need to make now
Editor's Choice IT in Manufacturing
AI is everywhere and its implications are now structural. The question is no longer whether AI will matter, but what kind of society it will shape.

Read more...
Modular control platform for the hydrogen industry
Beckhoff Automation Editor's Choice Electrical Power & Protection
With a seamless modular control solution from Beckhoff featuring over 500 data points and numerous ELX series terminals with intrinsically safe interfaces, Greenlight Innovation is breaking new ground in hydrogen testing.

Read more...
Loop signature Part 2-3: Feedforward Control: Part 2
Michael Brown Control Engineering Editor's Choice Fieldbus & Industrial Networking
Feedforward control tuning is not nearly as critical as feedback tuning, and fairly simple models are usually fine for the purpose in hand.

Read more...
Proactive treatment of industrial boiler water
Editor's Choice
As water treatment is a critical aspect of industrial boiler management and potentially one of the greatest operational risk points, AES relies on close partnerships with third-party industrial water treatment specialists. These act as important safety nets.

Read more...









While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein, the publisher and its agents cannot be held responsible for any errors contained, or any loss incurred as a result. Articles published do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers. The editor reserves the right to alter or cut copy. Articles submitted are deemed to have been cleared for publication. Advertisements and company contact details are published as provided by the advertiser. Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or veracity of supplied material.




© Technews Publishing (Pty) Ltd | All Rights Reserved