CHE 510: Process Control & Instrumentation

MODULE 5:
Design of More Complex Control Structures

Ayorinde Bamimore, Ph.D.

Department of Chemical Engineering
Obafemi Awolowo University
 Module Objectives
After completing this module, students will be able to:

I. Design cascade control system,

II. Design feedforward control system,
III. Design time-delay compensation scheme,
IV. Design ratio control,
V. Use MATLAB/SIMULINK to implement the control structure in (I) to
(IV).

Obafemi Awolowo University 2

Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Control
Disturbance Variable

d
Manipulated u y Controlled
Variable Process Variable

Control Objective: Maintain y at its set point, yd, despite disturbances.

Feedback Control:
 Measure y, compare it to yd, adjust u so as to maintain y at Yd.
 Widely used (e.g., PID controllers)
 Feedback is a fundamental concept
Feedforward Control:
 Measure d, adjust d so as to maintain y at yd.
 Note that the controlled variable y is not measured.

Obafemi Awolowo University 3

Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Vs. Feedback Control

Fig. 5.1: Simplified block diagrams for feedforward and

feedback control
Obafemi Awolowo University 4
Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Vs. Feedback Control

Fig. 5.2: Feedback control of the liquid level in a boiler drum

Obafemi Awolowo University 5
Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Vs. Feedback Control

Fig.5.3: Feedforward control of the liquid level in a boiler drum

Obafemi Awolowo University 6

Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Vs. Feedback Control

Fig.5.4: Feedforward-feedback control of the

liquid level in a boiler drum
Obafemi Awolowo University 7
Chemical Engineering
 Comparison of Feedback and Feedforward Control
1) Feedback (FB) Control
Advantages:
• Corrective action occurs regardless of the source and type of
disturbances.
• Requires little knowledge about the process (For example, a
process model is not necessary).
• Versatile and robust (Conditions change? May have to re-tune
controller).
Disadvantages:
• FB control takes no corrective action until a deviation in the
controlled variable occurs.
• FB control is incapable of correcting a deviation from set point at
the time of its detection.
• Theoretically not capable of achieving “perfect control.”
• For frequent and severe disturbances, process may not settle out.
Obafemi Awolowo University 8
Chemical Engineering
 Comparison of Feedback and Feedforward Control

2) Feedforward (FF) Control

Advantages:
• Takes corrective action before the process is upset (cf. FB control.)
• Theoretically capable of "perfect control"
• Does not affect system stability
Disadvantages:
• Disturbance must be measured (capital, operating costs)
• Requires more knowledge of the process to be controlled (process
model)
• Ideal controllers that result in "perfect control”: may be physically
unrealizable. Use practical controllers such as lead-lag units

Obafemi Awolowo University 9

Chemical Engineering
 Comparison of Feedback and Feedforward Control

3) Feedforward Plus Feedback Control

FF Control
• Attempts to eliminate the effects of measurable disturbances.
FB Control
• Corrects for unmeasurable disturbances, modeling errors, etc.
(FB trim)

Obafemi Awolowo University 10

Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Controller Design Based
on Steady State Models

Example 5.1
Symbols
F, D, B are flow rates
z, y, x are mole fractions of the light
component

Control objective
Control y despite disturbances in F
and z by manipulating D.
Fig.5.5: A simplified
schematic diagram of a
distillation column

Obafemi Awolowo University 11

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.1

By taking mass and component balances around the column, we

have:
Fss=Dss + Bss (5.1)
Fsszss=Dssyss + Bssxss (5.2)
Solving (5.1) for B and substituting it into (5.2) gives:
(5.3)
Because x and y are not measured, we replace x and y by their set-
points and replace Dss, Fss and zss by D(t), F(t) and z(t) respectively.
This yields the feedforward controller
(5.4)

Obafemi Awolowo University 12

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.1
N.B.:
• The feedforward controller calculates the required value of the
manipulated variable D from the measurements of the disturbance
variables, F and z, and the knowledge of the composition set
points xsp and ysp.
• Note that Eq.5.4 is based on physical variables, not deviation
variables.
• The feedforward control law is nonlinear due to the product of
two process variables, F(t) and z(t).
• Because the control law was designed based on the steady-state
model in Eqs.5.1 and 5.2, it may not perform well for transient
conditions.
Obafemi Awolowo University 13
Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Controller Design Based
on Dynamic Models

Fig.5.6: A block diagram of feedforward-feedback

control system
Obafemi Awolowo University 14
Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward Controller Design Based
on Dynamic Models
The response of controlled output y(s) to disturbance changes, d(s)
can be found using block diagram algebra:
(5.5a)
For “perfect control” we want y = 0 even though d  0. Then
rearranging Eq.5.5a, with y = 0 , gives a design equation.

(5.5b)

Obafemi Awolowo University 15

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.2
Suppose that a chemical process has the following dynamics, derive
the feedforward controller for the process.
, , (5.6)
Recall,
(5.5b)
Substituting for all the dynamic elements, we have:
(5.7)
N.B.: This controller is a lead-lag transfer function with a gain of
. The dynamic characteristics of such systems have
been studied in CHE509.

Obafemi Awolowo University 16

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.3
Suppose that a chemical process has the following dynamics, derive
the feedforward controller for the process.
, , (5.8)
Recall,
(5.5b)
Substituting for all the dynamic elements, we have:
(5.9a)
N.B.: This controller is unrealizable because of predictive element
( ). The time delay can be approximated by increasing the order
of lead time constant from to .That is:
(5.9b)
Obafemi Awolowo University 17
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.4
Suppose that a chemical process has the following dynamics, derive
the feedforward controller for the process.
, , (5.10)
Recall,
(5.5b)
Substituting for all the dynamic elements, we have:
(5.11a)
N.B.: This ideal FF controller is unrealizable because of higher
numerator order. The FF controller can be approximated thus:
(5.11b)

Obafemi Awolowo University 18

Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward-Feedback Controller Design

Fig.5.6: A block diagram of feedforward-feedback

control system
Obafemi Awolowo University 19
Chemical Engineering
 Feedforward-Feedback Controller Design
The closed-loop transfer function between y(s) and d(s) can be
found using block diagram algebra:
(5.12)
Stability analysis
The stability of a FF/FB control system is determined by xtics eq.:
(5.13)

N.B.:
• The roots of the characteristic equation determine system stability.
• But this equation does not contain gf.
• Therefore, FF control does NOT affect stability of FB system.

Obafemi Awolowo University 20

Chemical Engineering
 FF-FB Controller Configuration 1

feedback trim is normally used in

conjunction with feedforward control
to compensate for modeling errors
and unmeasured disturbances.
Feedforward and feedback
controllers can be combined in
several different ways.
In a typical control configuration, the
outputs of the feedforward and
feedback controllers are added
together, and the sum is sent to the
final control element. Its chief
advantage is that the feedforward
Fig.5.6: A block diagram of FF-FB controller theoretically does not
affect the stability of the feedback
control system control loop.

Obafemi Awolowo University 21

Chemical Engineering
 FF-FB Controller Configuration 2

Fig.5.7a: FF control of exit Fig.5.7b: FF/FB control of exit

composition in the blending composition in the blending
system system
Obafemi Awolowo University 22
Chemical Engineering
 FF-FB Controller Configuration 2
An alternative configuration for feedforward–feedback control is to
have the feedback controller output serve as the set point for the
feedforward controller. It is especially convenient when the
feedforward control law is designed using steady-state material and
energy balances.
For example, a feedforward–feedback control system for the
blending system is shown in Fig.5.7b. Note that this control system
is similar to the feedforward scheme in Fig.5.7a except that the
feedforward controller set point is now denoted as .
It is generated as the output signal from the feedback controller.
The actual set point is used as the set point for the feedback
controller. In this configuration, the feedforward controller can
affect the stability of the feedback control system, because it is now
an element in the feedback loop.
Obafemi Awolowo University 23
Chemical Engineering
 Tuning Feedforward Controller

Feedforward controllers, like feedback controllers, usually require tuning

after installation in a plant. Most tuning rules assume that the
feedforward controller is a lead–lag unit model in Eq.5.14 with possible
addition of a time delay θ in the numerator.
(5.14)
Where , and are adjustable controller parameters
The latter modification is used when there is a significant time delay
associated with the effect of the disturbance on the controlled variable.
Tuning rules and guidelines for the feedforward controllers are available
in (Guzmán and Hägglund, 2011; Hast and Hägglund, 2014; McMillan,
2015). Comparisons of alternative FF–FB configurations have also been
reported (Guzmán et al., 2015; McMillan, 2015).

Obafemi Awolowo University 24

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control
• A disadvantage of conventional feedback control is that corrective
action for disturbances does not begin until after the controlled
variable deviates from the set point.
• As discussed earlier feedforward control offers large improvements
over feedback control for processes that have large time constants
or time delays. However, feedforward control requires that the
disturbances be measured explicitly, and that a steady-state or
dynamic model be available to calculate the controller output.
• An alternative approach that can significantly improve the dynamic
response to disturbances employs a secondary measured variable
and a secondary feedback controller.

Obafemi Awolowo University 25

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control

• The secondary measured variable is located so that it

recognizes the upset condition sooner than the controlled
variable, but possible disturbances are not necessarily
measured.
• This approach, called cascade control,
• It is widely used in the process industries and is particularly
useful when the disturbances are associated with the
manipulated variable or when the final control element
exhibits nonlinear behavior (Shinskey, 1996).

Obafemi Awolowo University 26

Chemical Engineering
 Motivational Example: Furnace Temperature Control

Fig.5.8a: Furnace temperature control using conventional feedback

As an example of where cascade control may be advantageous, consider

the natural draft furnace temperature control system shown in Fig.5.8a

Obafemi Awolowo University 27

Chemical Engineering
 Motivational Example: Furnace Temperature Control

The conventional feedback control system in Fig.5.8a may keep the hot
oil temperature close to the set point despite disturbances in oil flow rate
or cold oil temperature.
However, if a disturbance occurs in the fuel gas supply pressure, the fuel
gas flow will change, which upsets the furnace operation and changes the
hot oil temperature. Only then can the temperature controller(TC) begin
to take corrective action by adjusting the fuel gas flow based on the error
from the setpoint, which can result in very sluggish responses to changes
in fuel gas supply pressure.
This disturbance is clearly associated with the manipulated variable.

Obafemi Awolowo University 28

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control of Furnace Temperature

Cascade control involves

the use of multiple
measurements and a
single manipulated
variable.

The major trick in

implementing Cascade
control is identifying the
secondary measurement
point.
Fig.5.8b: Furnace temperature control
using cascade control

Obafemi Awolowo University 29

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control of Furnace Temperature

• Fig.5.8b shows a cascade control configuration for the furnace, which consists
of a primary control loop (utilizing TT and TC) and a secondary control loop
that controls the fuel gas pressure via PT and PC.
• The primary measurement is the hot oil temperature that is used by the
primary controller (TC) to establish the set point for the secondary loop
controller.
• The secondary measurement is the fuel gas pressure, which is transmitted to
the slave controller (PC).
• If a disturbance in supply pressure occurs, the pressure controller will
act very quickly to hold the fuel gas pressure at its set point.
• The cascade control scheme provides improved performance, because the
control valve will be adjusted as soon as the change in supply pressure is
detected.

Obafemi Awolowo University 30

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control of an Exothermic CSTR

• Consider a chemical reactor, where reactor temperature is to be

controlled by coolant flow to the jacket of the reactor (Fig.5.9a).
• The reactor temperature can be influenced by changes in disturbance
variables such as feed rate or feed temperature; a feedback controller
could be employed to compensate for such disturbances by adjusting a
valve on the coolant flow to the reactor jacket.
• However, suppose an increase occurs in the coolant temperature as a
result of changes in the plant coolant system.
• This will cause a change in the reactor temperature measurement,
although such a change will not occur quickly, and the corrective action
taken by the controller will be delayed.
• Cascade control is one solution to this problem (see Fig.5.9b).

Obafemi Awolowo University 31

Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control of CSTR
Here, the jacket temperature is measured, and an error signal is sent
from this point to the coolant control valve; this reduces coolant flow,
maintaining the heat transfer rate to the reactor at a constant level and
rejecting the disturbance.
The cascade control configuration will also adjust the setting of the
coolant control valve when an error occurs in reactor temperature.
The cascade control scheme shown in Fig.5.9b contains two controllers.
The primary controller is the reactor temperature coolant temperature
controller. It measures the reactor temperature, compares it to the set
point, and computes an output, which is the set point for the coolant flow
rate controller. This secondary controller compares the set point to the
coolant temperature measurement and adjusts the valve.
The principal advantage of cascade control is that the secondary
measurement (jacket temperature) is located closer to a potential
disturbance in order to improve the closed-loop response.
Obafemi Awolowo University 32
Chemical Engineering
 Conventional Feedback Control of CSTR

Fig.5.9a: Conventional feedback control of exothermic CSTR

Obafemi Awolowo University 33
Chemical Engineering
 Cascade Control of CSTR

The cascade control loop structure

has two distinguishing features:
1. The output signal of the primary
controller serves as the set point for
the secondary controller.
2. The two feedback control loops
are nested, with the secondary
control loop (for the secondary
controller) located inside the primary
control loop (for the primary
controller).
Thus there are two controlled
variables, two sensors, and
one manipulated variable, while the
conventional control structure has
one controlled variable, one sensor,
and one manipulated variable.

Fig.5.9b: Cascade control of exothermic CSTR

Obafemi Awolowo University 34
Chemical Engineering
 Block Diagram for Cascade Control

Secondary loop

Fig.5.10: Cascade control block diagram

Obafemi Awolowo University 35

Chemical Engineering
 Closed-loop Transfer Function for Cascade Control
For the secondary loop: (5.15)

, (5.16)

(5.17)

Fig.5.11: Block diagram of the secondary loop

Obafemi Awolowo University 36

Chemical Engineering
Closed-loop Transfer Function for Cascade Control

Fig.5.12: Cascade control block diagram

(5.18a)

Obafemi Awolowo University 37

Chemical Engineering
Closed-loop Transfer Function for Cascade Control
(5.18b)

(5.18c)

(5.18d)

(5.18e)

(5.18f)

Obafemi Awolowo University 38

Chemical Engineering
 Block Diagram for Cascade Control

Secondary loop

gc2=1
Master Slave
Controller Controller

gm2=0

Primary loop
Fig.5.10: Cascade control block diagram

Obafemi Awolowo University 39

Chemical Engineering
 Block Diagram for Cascade Control

Master
Controller

Primary loop
Fig.5.10: Cascade control block diagram

Obafemi Awolowo University 40

Chemical Engineering
 Closed-loop Transfer Function for Cascade Control
If the inner loop were removed (by setting
Characteristics equation for the cascade control system:
(5.19a)
Characteristics equation for the conventional feedback control is
(5.19b)
Advantages of cascade over conventional feedback

(1.) Faster response

(2.) Lower offset

Obafemi Awolowo University 41

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5
Consider the block diagram in Fig.5.13. with the following transfer
function:
,

Where the time constants have units of minutes and the given have
consistent units .Assume for the secondary controller.
QUESTIONS
(a.) Determine for the inner loop when

(i) cascade control is in use

(ii) conventional control is in use
(iii) Which has a faster speed?
(iv)Comment on the response time of

Obafemi Awolowo University 42

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5
(b.) Determine and the resulting offset for a unit step change in
secondary disturbance , when:
(i) Cascade control is in use.
(ii) Conventional control is in use
(iii) Which has a smaller offset?
(iv) Comment on plant’s ability for disturbance rejection.

(c) Determine the stability limits for

(i) Cascade control system
(ii) Conventional feedback control system

Obafemi Awolowo University 43

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(a) (i) With Cascade control in use:

(5.20a)

N.B: Time constant =0.2minute

(ii) With conventional feedback control in use and
Eq.5.20 thus become
(5.20b)

N.B Time constant =1minute

(iii) Cascade control has a faster speed

Obafemi Awolowo University 44

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(iv) The cascade control has speeded up the response of
N.B.: (5.21)

(b.) From Eq.5.18e

(5.18e)

(i) With cascade control

(5.22a)

(5.22b)

Obafemi Awolowo University 45

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(5.22c)

(5.22d)

For a unit step change in secondary disturbance

(5.22e)

Recall final value problem: (5.22f)

(5.22g)

(5.22h)

Obafemi Awolowo University 46

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
Recall also offset=

Assume (5.22i)

(ii) With conventional feedback control in use

Eq.5.28e reduces to

(5.22j)

(5.22k)

(5.22l)

Obafemi Awolowo University 47

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(5.22m)

(5.22n)

Offset=

(iii) For the sameConventional

Cascade
value of
control

< (5.22o)

(iv) Cascade control system has a better ability of rejecting disturbance

than conventional.
(c) Characteristics equation for cascade control system
(5.19a)
Obafemi Awolowo University 48
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution

(5.22p)

(5.22q)

Which reduces to: (5.22r)

Using the Routh stability criterion
Table 5.1: Routh array
Row
1
2
3
Obafemi Awolowo University 49
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(5.22s)

For marginal stability: , Thus,

(5.22t)

Which gives
(ii) Characteristics equation for conventional feedback control
(5.19b)

(5.22u)

(5.22v)

Which reduces to:

Obafemi Awolowo University 50
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.5-Solution
(5.22w)
Using Routh stability criterion to establish the kc1max,

(iii) Comments: The cascade configuration has increased the ultimate

gain by nearly a factor of four. Increasing will result in each larger
values of . For this example, there is no theoretical upper limit for
except that large values will cause the value to saturate for small set-
point changes or disturbances.
Assignment: Repeat the problem when

Obafemi Awolowo University 51

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6
Consider the process with a series cascade control system shown below.

Fig.5.13: Cascade control block diagram

,

(a) Specify so that the damping factor is 0.707 for the slave loop

Obafemi Awolowo University 52

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6
(b) Specify and for the master loop using Ziegler-Nichols tuning
relation
Solution
(a) Design based on

So, (5.23a)

(5.23b)

By making comparison with (5.23c)

Obafemi Awolowo University 53

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6
and (5.23d)

With 0.707, (5.23e)

(5.23f)
(5.23g)
(b) with (5.23h)
For the master loop: (5.23i)
Let =gain of controller
Characteristics equation for the master loop is
(5.23j)

Obafemi Awolowo University 54

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6

(5.23k)
(5.23l)
(5.23m)
To determine and , put
(5.23n)
(5.23o)
(5.23p)
Equating both Real and Imaginary part to zero
(5.23q)
(5.23r)

Obafemi Awolowo University 55

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6

(5.23p)
At

Z-N Settings

Obafemi Awolowo University 56

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.6

Fig.5.14a:A comparison of d2 Fig.5.14b:A comparison of d1

step responses step responses

Obafemi Awolowo University 57

Chemical Engineering
 Ratio Control
An important control problem in chemical industry is the combining of two
or more streams to provide a mixture having a desired ratio of
components.
Common examples include:
(a) holding a constant reflux on a distillation column
(b) keeping stoichiometric amounts of two reactants being fed into a
reactor,
(c) purging off a fixed percentage of the feed stream to a unit.
(d) holding the fuel-air ratio to a furnace at the optimum value.

Ratio control is similar to feed-forward control, since both typically involve

the measurement of stream flow rate.

Obafemi Awolowo University 58

Chemical Engineering
 Ratio Control
In ratio control, the flow rate of the ‘wild’ or uncontrolled stream is
measured, and the flow rate of the manipulated stream is changed to
keep the two streams at a constant ratio with each other.
The two variables are usually flow rates, a manipulated variable u and a
disturbance variable d. Thus, the ratio
(5.24)
is controlled rather than the individual variables.
In Eq.5.24, u and d are physical variables, not deviation variables.

Ratio control is achieved by two alternatives schemes:

Obafemi Awolowo University 59

Chemical Engineering
 Ratio Control

The flow rates for both the

disturbance stream and the
manipulated stream are measured,
and the measured ratio,
(Rm = um/dm), is calculated.
The output of the divider element is
sent to a ratio controller (RC) that
compares the calculated ratio Rm to
the desired ratio Rd and adjusts the
manipulated flow rate u accordingly.
The ratio controller is typically a PI
controller with the desired ratio as its
set point.
Fig.5.15a: Ratio control: Method I

Obafemi Awolowo University 60

Chemical Engineering
 Advantages and Disadvantages of Ratio Control-Method I
The main advantage of Method I is that the measured ratio Rm is
calculated.
A key disadvantage is that a divider element must be included in
the loop, and this element makes the process gain vary in a
nonlinear fashion. From Eq.5.24, the process gain

(5.25)

is inversely related to the disturbance flow rate d.

Because of this significant disadvantage, the preferred scheme for
implementing ratio control is Method II, which is shown in Fig.5.15b

Obafemi Awolowo University 61

Chemical Engineering
 Ratio Control
In Method II, the flow rate of the
disturbance stream is measured and
transmitted to the ratio station (RS),
which multiplies this signal by an
adjustable gain, KR, whose value is the
desired ratio. The output signal from
the ratio station is then used as the set
point usp for the flow controller, which
adjusts the flow rate of the manipulated
stream, u. The chief advantage of Method
II is that the process gain remains
constant. Note that disturbance variable d
is measured in both Methods I and II.
Thus, ratio control is, in essence, a simple
type of feedforward control

Fig.5.15b: Ratio control: Method II

Obafemi Awolowo University 62
Chemical Engineering
 Disadvantage of Ratio Control

A disadvantage of both Methods I and II is that the desired

ratio may not be achieved during transient conditions as a
result of the dynamics associated with the flow control loop for
u.
Thus, after a step change in disturbance d, the manipulated
variable will require some time to reach its new set point, usp.
Fortunately, flow control loops tend to have short settling times
and this transient mismatch between u and d is usually
acceptable.
For situations where it is not, modified versions of Method II
have been proposed by Hägglund (2001) and Visioli (2005a,b).

Obafemi Awolowo University 63

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.7
A ratio control scheme is to be used to maintain a stoichiometric ratio of
H2 and N2 as the feed to an ammonia synthesis reactor. Individual flow
controllers will be used for both the H2 and N2 streams. Using the
information given below,
(a) Draw a schematic diagram for the ratio control scheme.
(b) Specify the appropriate gain for the ratio station, KR.
Available information:
(i) The electronic flow transmitters have built-in square root extractors.
The spans of the flow transmitters are 30 L/min for H2 and 15 L/min for
N2.
(ii) The control valves have pneumatic actuators.
(iii) Each required current-to-pressure (I/P) transducer has a gain of 0.75
psi/mA.
(iv) The ratio station is an electronic instrument with 4–20 mA input and
output signals.
Obafemi Awolowo University 64
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.7
The stoichiometric equation for the ammonia synthesis reaction is
3H2 + N2 ⇄ 2NH3 (5.26)
In order to introduce a feed mixture in stoichiometric proportions, the
ratio of the molar flow rates (H2/N2) should be 3:1.
For the sake of simplicity, we assume that the ratio of the molar flow
rates is equal to the ratio of the volumetric flow rates. But, in general, the
volumetric flow rates also depend on the temperature and pressure of
each stream (cf.the ideal gas law).
(a) The schematic diagram for the ammonia synthesis reaction is shown
in Fig.5.16. The H2 flow rate is considered to be the disturbance variable,
although this choice is arbitrary, because both the H2 and N2 flow rates
are controlled. Note that the ratio station is merely a device with an
adjustable gain. The input signal to the ratio station is dm, the measured
H2 flow rate. Its output signal usp serves as the set point for the N2 flow
control loop.
Obafemi Awolowo University 65
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.7

It is calculated as
usp = KR dm (5.27)

(b) From the stoichiometric equation, it follows that the desired ratio is
Rd = (u/d) = 1/3
N.B.:
Regardless of how ratio control is implemented, the process variables
must be scaled appropriately. For example, in Method II the gain setting
for the ratio station KR must take into account the spans of the two flow
transmitters.

(2.1)
Obafemi Awolowo University 66
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.7

Thus, the correct gain for the ratio station is given as:
(5.28)
Where is the desired ratio, and are the spans of the flow
transmitters for the manipulated and disturbance streams, respectively.
(5.29)

Obafemi Awolowo University 67

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.7

Fig.5.16: Ratio control scheme for an ammonia synthesis reactor

Obafemi Awolowo University 68

Chemical Engineering
 Dead-Time Compensation Scheme: Smith’s Predictor
The occurrence of time delays in chemical processes
Here, we present an advanced control technique, called time-delay
compensation, which deals with a problematic area in the process control,
namely the occurrence of significant time delays. Time delays commonly
occur in the process industries because of the presence of:
(1) distance velocity lags,
(2) recycle loops, and
(3) the analysis time associated with the composition measurement.

Obafemi Awolowo University 69

Chemical Engineering
 How Time Delays Limit the Performance of a Conventional
Feedback Control System
As we will later see from simulation results below, the presence of time
delays in the process limits the performance of a conventional feedback
control system.
From a frequency response perspective, a time delay adds phase lag to
the feedback loop, which adversely affects closed-loop stability.
Consequently, the controller gain must be reduced below the value that
could be used if no time delay were present, and the response of the
closed-loop system will be sluggish compared to that of the control loop
with no time delay.
Obafemi Awolowo University 70
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.8
A chemical process plant can be described by the transfer function

assume =1 and the time constants in minutes

(1) By using the following PI controllers, simulate the plant’s servo

response:
(a) For θ=0, and
(b) For θ=2min the controller gain must be reduced to meet stability
requirements
( )
(2) Compare the servo responses of the plant for the two cases (with
delay and without delay)
Obafemi Awolowo University 71
Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.8-Solution
Here, we make use of SIMULINK - the MATLAB companion software for
simulating dynamical systems.
(a) Fig.5.17a below shows the block diagram of the conventional
feedback control system in the absence of time delay in the process.
t3
Step1
Clock
To Workspace
y3

Controller Parameters To Workspace1

P=3.02, I=3.02/6.5 min

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller Transfer Fcn Transfer Fcn2 Scope

Designed by Bamimore A.
01/11/2009

Fig.5.17a: Block diagram of the feedback control system with no delay

Obafemi Awolowo University 72

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.8-Solution
(b) Fig.5.17b below shows the block diagram of the conventional
feedback control system in the presence of time delay in the process.

t2
Step1
Clock To Workspace
Controller Parameter y2
P=1.23, I=1.23/7 min
To Workspace1

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller Transfer Fcn Transfer Fcn2 Transport Scope
Delay
r2

To Workspace2

Designed by Bamimore A.
01/11/2009

Fig.5.17b: Block diagram of the feedback control system with delay

Obafemi Awolowo University 73

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.8-Solution

(c) The servo responses of the process are compared with and without
time delay. The MATLAB scripts below was used to generate Fig. 5.18,
having first run Fig.5.17a and b

plot(t2,y2,'-',t3,y3,'--',t2,r2,'-.')
ylabel('y')
xlabel('Time(min)')
legend('with delay','without delay')

Obafemi Awolowo University 74

Chemical Engineering
 Example 5.8-Solution
1.4
with delay
Comments
without delay
1.2
For θ=2, the resulting response is
1
more sluggish.
0.8
Clearly the closed-loop response for
y

0.6
the time-delay case has deteriorated,
0.4
with a 50% increase in response time
0.2
(30 vs. 20min).
This response is longer than might be
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time(min)

Fig.5.18: A comparison of closed- expected from the size of the time

loop response to a unit setpoint delay.
change
Obafemi Awolowo University 75
Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique
In order to improve the performance of system with time delay, special
control strategies have been developed that provide effective time-delay
compensation. The Smith predictor technique is the best known strategy
(Smith, 1957). Various investigators have found that the performance of
a controller incorporating the Smith predictor for set-point changes is
better than a conventional PI controller based on an integral-squared-
error criterion. However, the Smith predictor performance may not be
superior for all types of disturbances.

Obafemi Awolowo University 76

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique

Fig.5.19a: The block diagram of the Smith Predictor

Obafemi Awolowo University 77

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique
A block of the Smith predictor controller structure is shown in Fig.5.19a
where for simplicity. Here the process model is divided
into two parts: the part without a time delay, and the time-delay
term, thus, the total transfer function model is .The
model of the process without the time delay, is used to predict the
effect of the control actions on the undelayed output. The controller then
uses the predicted response to calculate its output signal. The
predicted process output is also delayed by the amount of the time
delay, for comparison with the actual undelayed output Y .

Obafemi Awolowo University 78

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique
This step in the procedure corrects for modelling errors and for
disturbance entering the process. This delayed model output is denoted
by in Fig.5.19a.
From the block diagram,
(5.30)
If the process model is perfect and the disturbance is zero, then
and (5.31)
For this ideal case the controller responds to the error signal that would
occur if no time delay were present.

Obafemi Awolowo University 79

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique

Fig.5.19b: An alternative block diagram of the Smith Predictor

Fig.5.19b shows an alternative (equivalent) configuration for the Smith
predictor that includes an inner feedback loop, somewhat similar to that
in cascade control.

Obafemi Awolowo University 80

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique
Assuming there is no model error ( ), the inner loop has the
effective transfer function

(5.32)

Where is defined analogously to , that is

After some rearrangement, the closed-loop set-point transfer function is
obtained:
(5.33)

By contrast, for conventional feedback control

(5.34)

Obafemi Awolowo University 81

Chemical Engineering
 The Smith Predictor Technique
Comparison of Eqs.5.33 and 5.34 indicates that the Smith predictor has
the advantage of eliminating the time delay from the characteristics
equation. Unfortunately, this advantage is lost if the process is
inaccurate. Even so, the Smith predictor can still provide improvement
over conventional feedback control if the model error are not too large
(i.e., if the model parameters are within about +/-30% of the actual
values). Morari and Zafirious (1989) have discussed the robustness
aspects of the Smith predictor and have recommended that tuning be
performed with other inputs besides step inputs.

Obafemi Awolowo University 82

Chemical Engineering
 Servo Control with Smith Predictor and Conventional feedback
Here, servo responses are compared for the two cases; when Smith
predictor is in use and when conventional feedback is in use, the results
are as shown in Fig.20a.
t1
Clock
To Workspace
Step1

y1
Controller Parameters To Workspace1
P=3.02, I=3.02/6.5 min

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller Transfer Fcn Transfer Fcn2 Transport Scope
Delay2

r1
Designed by Bamimore A.
To Workspace2 01/11/2009
Modified on 27/11/09
1 1
5s+1 3s+1
Transfer Fcn3 Transfer Fcn1 Transport
Delay1

Fig.5.20a: A block diagram of the control system with Smith Predictor

Obafemi Awolowo University 83

Chemical Engineering
Servo Control with Smith Predictor and Conventional feedback

t3
Step1
Clock
To Workspace
y3

Controller Parameters To Workspace1

P=3.02, I=3.02/6.5 min

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller Transfer Fcn Transfer Fcn2 Scope

Designed by Bamimore A.
01/11/2009

Fig.5.20b: A block diagram of the conventional feedback control

system

Obafemi Awolowo University 84

Chemical Engineering
 Servo Control with Smith Predictor and Conventional feedback
1.4
Smith Predictor,with delay Fig.5.21 shows the closed-loop
Conventional,without delay

responses for Smith predictor (θ=2)

1.2

and PI control (θ=0). This shows

1

0.8

the improvement that can be

y

0.6

obtained with the Smith predictor.

0.4

0.2

plot(t1,y1,'-',t3,y3,'--',t1,r1,'-.')
0
0 5 10 15 ylabel('y')
20
Time(min)
25 30 35 40

xlabel('Time(min)')
Fig.5.21: A comparison of servo legend('Smith Predictor,with
responses with and without Smith delay','Conventional,without delay')
Predictor

Obafemi Awolowo University 85

Chemical Engineering
 Regulatory Control with Smith Predictor
Smith predictor configuration generally is beneficial for handling
disturbances. However, under certain conditions, a conventional PI
controller can provide better regulatory control than Smith
predictor.
This somewhat anomalous behaviour can be attributed to the
closed-loop transfer function for disturbances and a perfect model:

(5.35)

Again, regulatory responses are compared for the two cases; when
Smith predictor is in use and when conventional feedback is in use,
by introducing a step change in disturbance of +1 into the system,
the results are as shown in Fig.5.22.
Obafemi Awolowo University 86
Chemical Engineering
 Regulatory Control with Smith Predictor

t1
Clock
T o Workspace
1 1
5s+1 3s+1 y1
Step1 T ransfer Fcn5 T ransfer Fcn4
Controller Parameters T o Workspace1
P=3.02, I=3.02/6.5 min

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller T ransfer Fcn T ransfer Fcn2 T ransport Scope
Delay2

r1
Designed by Bamimore A.
T o Workspace2 01/11/2009
Modified on 27/11/09
1 1
5s+1 3s+1
T ransfer Fcn3 T ransfer Fcn1 T ransport
Delay1

Fig.5.22: A block diagram of the control system with Smith Predictor

Obafemi Awolowo University 87

Chemical Engineering
 Regulatory Control with Smith Predictor

1 1
t2
5s+1 3s+1
Clock
To Workspace Step1 Transfer
Transfer Fcn1 Fcn3
Controller Parameter y2
P=1.23, I=1.23/7 min
To Workspace1

1 1
PID
5s+1 3s+1
Step PID Controller Transfer Fcn Transfer Fcn2 Transport Scope
Delay
r2

To Workspace2

Designed by Bamimore A.
01/11/2009

Fig.5.23: A block diagram of the conventional feedback control system

Obafemi Awolowo University 88

Chemical Engineering
 Regulatory control with Smith Predictor

0.6
Conventional PI
Smith Predictor
0.5

0.4

0.3
y

0.2

0.1

-0.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time(min)

Fig.5.24: A comparison of regulatory responses with and without

Smith Predictor
Obafemi Awolowo University 89
Chemical Engineering