PID behavior

[Manoel]

Originally Posted by Felipe Sagui

When the PV = SP the output starts to be constant but not 0. We guess that it has something with the I term and with the reinitialize boolean on PID .VI

Now we ask: why output doesn't decrease until 0? What we can make to do it in the better way that is possible?

Yes, it's because of the integral term. Think about this: the controller has no idea of what's going on other than, at that particular output, it drove the error to zero. Why would it want to change its output?

You are too attached to this "output must go to zero" mantra. Truth is, it's not always the case. Suppose you were controlling a motor's speed with a PID loop. When you reached the desired setpoint, would you like the controller output to go to zero? Of course not, because then the motor would stop spinning.

Manually changing the process variable value isn't really a way to test anything, as it doesn't represent anything and isn't even reproducible. You guys should follow Greg's suggestion of trying the PID example VIs - they actually simulate a process and will be a lot more helpful.


PS - It seems you already understand a bit about PID controllers, so what is the purpose of those tests?

Please ask again if you need clarifications, and best of luck!

[Felipe Sagui]

Originally Posted by Manoel

You are too attached to this "output must go to zero" mantra. Truth is, it's not always the case. Suppose you were controlling a motor's speed with a PID loop. When you reached the desired setpoint, would you like the controller output to go to zero? Of course not, because then the motor would stop spinning.

Here we want to attach a motor on a encoder, set a SP and get the encoder pulses as variable process, but we were intending to do an output curve that starts on maximum(error high) and while the PV increases, the output decreases until a value near 0 (motor stops spinning). is possible make it on PID .VI on LV?
we already did it on past years when the programming was on RC (C language), but we decided to try another kind of programming. It was like it:

previous_error = 0
integral = 0
start:
error = setpoint - actual_position
integral = integral + (error*dt)
derivative = (error - previous_error)/dt
output = (Kp*error) + (Ki*integral) + (Kd*derivative)
previous_error = error
wait(dt)
goto start

We tested on the motor before the manually test of the PV. However, we got the same result.

[Joe Ross]

Have you read the PID manual that is included with LabVIEW? I think you'll find that Ki and Kd are treated differently then the code you used in the past.

It certainly is possible to write your own PID code, but it's worth the time to understand NI's implementation.

[Felipe Sagui]

We read the PID manual before starts the tests, and we discovered that on LV PID is on Academic formula. Ti divides 1 (inverse of Ki) the Td only sums.

We are wondering too write our own PID like that pseudocode we already used. Or try to discovery another logic that fits to our problem.

[Manoel]

Originally Posted by Felipe Sagui

Here we want to attach a motor on a encoder, set a SP and get the encoder pulses as variable process, but we were intending to do an output curve that starts on maximum(error high) and while the PV increases, the output decreases until a value near 0 (motor stops spinning). is possible make it on PID .VI on LV?

Yes, if properly tuned, your system will behave as described.

[Felipe Sagui]

Thanks everybody...

We got it