| ??? 01/11/05 17:58 Read: times |
#84776 - integrating cap Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Kai Klaas said:
I guess the demand for +-0.04° steady state error relevantly slows down the PID control, maybe due to an unsuited integral control 'Ki', unsuited in terms of allowing any fast settling. That's probably it. 0 SSE... Why not braking the cooling profile into segments working with different PID parameters, using the difference between actual temperature of probe and wished final temperature as criterium?
The first segment could use PID parameters optimized for fast settling time, still allowing much overshot and big steady state error. Then, before overshot occurs, second segment takes place, optimized for little overshot but still rather big steady state error. And finally switching to third segment, optimized for very little steady state error. We did try a scheme like that, but the end results were a bit disappointing. Steve |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| OT Step responses | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Step respons | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Happy with PID | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re Happy with PID | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| more details | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Making Use of Three Sensors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Heat pipe? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Minimizing Settling Time | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Timing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Heat Transfer Rates and Efficiency | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nice estimation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Worked that out | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Segments of different PID parameters | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| integrating cap | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Abruptly changing... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Exaclty | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Have you Read Above? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sorry | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Maybe this can help? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Interesting | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Reference | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reference | 01/01/70 00:00 |