PIDTune

Developer: Richard H Street

Category: Tools

Add App to Comparison

100 installs

2.00 ratings

ASO Keyword Dashboard

Tracking 90 keywords for PIDTune in Apple App Store

Developer: Richard H Street Category: tools Rating: 5

PIDTune tracks 90 keywords (9 keywords rank; 81 need traction). Key metrics: 11% top-10 coverage, opportunity 70.6, difficulty 40.1, best rank 8.

Tracked keywords

9 ranked • 81 not ranking yet

Top 10 coverage

11%

Best rank 8 • Latest leader —

Avg opportunity

70.6

Top keyword: setting

Avg difficulty

40.1

Lower scores indicate easier wins

Opportunity leaders

setting

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.0 • Rank —

Competitors: 202
68.3
series

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.8 • Rank —

Competitors: 255
68.6
second

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.3 • Rank —

Competitors: 166
67.8
calculate

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.7 • Rank —

Competitors: 87
67.8
reduce

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.2 • Rank —

Competitors: 151
68.3

Unranked opportunities

setting

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.0 • Competitors: 202
series

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 43.8 • Competitors: 255
second

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.3 • Competitors: 166
calculate

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 41.7 • Competitors: 87
reduce

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 42.2 • Competitors: 151

High competition keywords

time

Total apps: 190,736 • Major competitors: 2,965

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 55.3
make

Total apps: 159,506 • Major competitors: 2,933

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 54.9
using

Total apps: 115,141 • Major competitors: 1,549

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 53.5
information

Total apps: 112,143 • Major competitors: 1,128

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 52.4
simple

Total apps: 98,968 • Major competitors: 1,442

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 51.6

All tracked keywords

Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks

							Major Competitors
complete control	71	100	33	55 1,836 competing apps Median installs: 550 Avg rating: 4.1	8	8	16 major competitor apps
controlling	71	100	34	56 2,317 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 3.8	20	15	24 major competitor apps
total control	69	100	33	47 653 competing apps Median installs: 750 Avg rating: 4.0	20	20	12 major competitor apps
controlled	72	100	36	59 3,227 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 3.9	45	35	38 major competitor apps
control system	69	100	28	46 560 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 3.8	72	72	6 major competitor apps
simple controls	70	100	32	49 876 competing apps Median installs: 700 Avg rating: 4.2	90	90	28 major competitor apps
processes	72	100	36	60 3,898 competing apps Median installs: 250 Avg rating: 4.0	163	153	24 major competitor apps
tuning	71	100	34	56 2,123 competing apps Median installs: 700 Avg rating: 4.1	164	164	38 major competitor apps
control	68	100	50	81 65,573 competing apps Median installs: 470 Avg rating: 4.0	226	226	969 major competitor apps
change	69	100	48	77 38,601 competing apps Median installs: 650 Avg rating: 4.0	—	—	778 major competitor apps
changes	72	100	44	69 13,260 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	203 major competitor apps
internal	72	100	38	62 5,106 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.0	—	—	39 major competitor apps
order	68	100	51	80 60,309 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.2	—	—	791 major competitor apps
make	65	100	55	87 159,506 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	2,933 major competitor apps
information	66	100	52	84 112,143 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	1,128 major competitor apps
setting	73	100	43	68 12,109 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.0	—	—	202 major competitor apps
using	66	100	53	85 115,141 competing apps Median installs: 500 Avg rating: 4.0	—	—	1,549 major competitor apps
time	65	100	55	88 190,736 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	2,965 major competitor apps
program	72	100	44	71 17,297 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	228 major competitor apps
process	70	100	45	74 25,749 competing apps Median installs: 350 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	226 major competitor apps
directly	68	100	51	79 52,289 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	708 major competitor apps
test	69	100	48	77 38,610 competing apps Median installs: 600 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	709 major competitor apps
series	73	100	44	69 12,613 competing apps Median installs: 650 Avg rating: 4.0	—	—	255 major competitor apps
delay	71	100	36	57 2,457 competing apps Median installs: 400 Avg rating: 4.2	—	—	41 major competitor apps
simple	67	100	52	84 98,968 competing apps Median installs: 450 Avg rating: 4.1	—	—	1,442 major competitor apps

App Description

PID Tuner uses the IMC (Internal Model Control) method to calculate PID tuning parameters. I’ve tried a lot of tuning methods over the years and have found this one to be the best. The app is written for the iPad to show all the information on one page.

The program calculates:

PID Parameters:
Controller Gain (Kc)
Integral Time (Ti)
Derivative Time (Td)

For process types
First Order with Dead Time (FO)
Second Order with Dead Time (SO)
Integrating or Long Time Constant with Dead Time (I)

For controller types
Parallel (non-interacting)
c(s) = Kc (1 + 1/(Ti s) + Td s)
Series (interacting)
c(s) = Kc (Ti s + 1)/(Ti s)(Td s + 1)

For controller modes
PID
PI

You can either enter the process gain (Kp) directly or enter the changes in the controlled virable (CV) and manipulated variable (MV).

Tuning aggression is adjusted using the slider to set the closed loop time constant to the process time constant ratio (λ/Ƭ).

The closed loop time constant (λ) is the time the controller is expected to reach set point (plus the dead time (ϴ)). Setting the closed loop time constant to process time constant ratio (λ/Ƭ) to 1.0 will make the MV change to its final value and allow the process to settle out to the setpoint. Setting (λ/Ƭ) greater than 1.0 will give a slower responce. Setting (λ/Ƭ) less than 1.0 will cause the MV to make a larger change and then reduce to its final value. Tight tuning would be to set the close loop time constant to the dead time.

Use the Integrating Process type (Ƭ = ∞) for both integrating processes or processes with long time constants. These processes use the maximum slope as the process gain. Tuning aggression for these processes is determined by setting the closed loop time constant to the dead time ratio (λ/ϴ). Once again, setting the closed loop time constat to the dead time gives tight control.

References:

“Probably the test simple PID tuning rules in the World,” Sigurd Skogestad, Jounal of Process Control, July 3, 2001

“Consider the generalized IMC-PID method for PID controller tuning of time-delay processes,” Y. Lee, S. Park, M. Lee, Hydrocarbon Processing, January 2006