| ??? 04/26/03 12:20 Read: times |
#44316 - RE: p.i.d... Kunal Responding to: ???'s previous message |
"Is your method a sort of rule-of-thumb or a standard practice?"
Neither. Its a question of divide and rule. For a typical position control loop this is one way to tune : You start with only the P-Term. Keep changing the Set Value (SV) and see how best the Process Value (PV) follows your command. If PV overshoots - reduce P-Term, if PV undershoots or does not catch up fast enough then increase P-Term. Once you have optimized this then lock P-term. Do you notice that the PV never really comes up to the SV when you stop changing SV? Then its time to bring in the I-Term to knock out the steady state error. Start with something like a 10% setting and adjust till PV=SV under steady state conditions. OK the D-Term is tricky - it monitors the rate at which the PV is "approaching" the SV term and can help to smoothen out the overshoots even when a high P-Term is used. End of lecture. The above is the verbatim of an algorithm that we developed for self tuning of a hydraulic servo positioner for a training kit. Very basic but it did deliver the goods. And if you want the analog Op-Amp circuit that we used its available . Mail me. Raghu |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d... Jacob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d... Kunal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: p.i.d. implementation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: p.i.d. | 01/01/70 00:00 |



