International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)

Volume 17– No.6, March 2011

Comparative Analysis of Conventional, P, PI, PID and

Fuzzy Logic Controllers for the Efficient Control of
Concentration in CSTR
Farhad Aslam Gagandeep Kaur
Department of Electrical & Instrumentation Engineering Department of Electrical and Instrumentation Engg.
Thapar University, Patiala, Punjab, India Thapar University, Patiala, Punjab, India

ABSTRACT algebra and the structure of a Fuzzy system, which comprised

All the industrial process applications require solutions of a of an implication between actions and conclusion as
specific chemical strength of the chemicals or fluids antecedents and consequents. Abstract algebra incorporates
considered for analysis. Such specific concentrations are systems or models dealing with groups, fields and rings.
achieved by mixing a full strength solution with water in the Linear algebra incorporates system models dealing with
desired proportions. In this paper the control the concentration vector spaces, state vector and transition matrices. The
of one chemical with the help of other has been analyzed. This primary benefit of fuzzy system theory is to approximate
paper features the influence of different controllers like P, PI, system behavior where numerical functions or analytical
PID and Fuzzy logic controller upon the process model. functions do not exist. Hence, Fuzzy systems have high
Model design and simulation are done in MATLAB potential to understand the very systems that are devoid of
SIMULINK, using fuzzy logic toolbox. The concentration analytical formulations in a complex System. Complex
control is found better controlled with the addition of fuzzy systems can be new systems that have not been tested, they
logic controller instead of PID controller solely. The can involve with the human conditions such as biological or
improvement of the process has been observed. medical systems. The ultimate goal of the fuzzy logic is to
form the theoretical foundation for reasoning about the
imprecise reasoning, such reasoning is known as approximate
Keywords: Fuzzy Logic (FL), PID Control, Chemical reasoning.
Concentration, Mamdani Fuzzy model, CSTR
In this paper, CSTR has been used to mix ethylene oxide with
water to make ethylene glycol. Here the purpose is to control
1. INTRODUCTION the concentration of ethylene glycol with the help of
Chemical reactors often have significant heat effects, so it is
concentration of ethylene oxide. But undershoot and
important to be able to add or remove heat from them. In a
overshoot come in the considered system while performing in
CSTR (continuously stirred tank reactor) the heat is add or
a conventional way. But after implementation of a PID
removed by virtue of the temperature difference between a
controller to the process, removing of those shoots can be seen
jacked fluid and the reactor fluid. Often, the heat transfer fluid
but still the output is unstable. So finally fuzzy logic
is pumped through agitation nozzle that circulates the fluid
controller is used to achieve a desirable output.
through the jacket at a high velocity. The reactant conversion
in a chemical reactor is a function of a residence time or its
inverse, the space velocity. For a CSTR, the product 2. CASE STUDY
concentration can be controlled by manipulating the feed flow In this paper, CSTR has been considered in which
rate, which change the residence time for a constant chemical concentration of two chemicals is controlled for better results,
reactor. the chemical ‗X‘ and ‗Y‘ and the byproduct is ‗Z‘. Ethylene
A proportional controller could lead to offset between the oxide (X) is reacted with water (Y) in a continuously stirred
desired set point and the actual output. This is because the tank reactor (CSTR) to form ethylene glycol (Z) .Assume that
process input which is controller output and the process the CSTR is manipulated at a constant temperature and that
output come to new equilibrium values before error goes the water is in large excess. The stoichiometric equation is
down to zero. Now to make the controller output proportional X+Y= Z…………………………………… (1)
to the integral of the error desired compensation is to be
provided. This is known as the proportional integral control. The reactant conversion in a chemical reactor is a function of
As long as there continuous to be an error signal to the residence time or its inverse, the space velocity. For an
controller, the controller output will continue to change. isothermal CSTR, the product concentration can be controlled
Therefore, the integral of error forces the error signal to zero. by manipulated the feed flow rate, which change the residence
Now add one more term that accounts for current rate of time (for a constant volume reactor). It is convenient to work
change i.e. derivative of the error. This is known as in molar units when writing components balances, particularly
proportional integral derivative control. Using knowledge of if chemical reaction is involved. Let CX and CZ represent the
the error helps the controller to predict where in future the molar concentration of X and Z (mol/volume).
error is heading and compensate for it.
dVCX = Fi CXi – FCX + VrX ………… (2)
Fuzzy systems are universal approximates. Fuzzy controlled
systems models do not require any certain model for dt
implementation of system under consideration. These proofs dVCz = – F Cz + VrZ … …………... (3)
stem isomorphism between an abstract algebra and linear dt

12
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 17– No.6, March 2011

Where rX and rZ represent rate of generation of species X and Z For the particular reaction under consideration, the rate
per unit volume, and CXi represents the inlet concentration of constants are k1=5/6 /min k2 =5/3 /min k3=1/6
species X. If the concentration of the water change than the mol/litre.min Based on the steady state operating point of
reaction rate is second order with respect to the concentration of CXs = 3 gmol/liter, CZs = 1.117 gmol/liter and Fs /V = 0.5714
Ethylene oxide min-1. The state model is

rX = -k1CX –k3CX2…………………………. (4)

Where k1, k2 & k3 are the reaction rate constants and the minus
sign indicate that X is consumed in the reaction. Each mole X
reacts with a mole of Y and produces one mole of Z, so the rate
of generation of Z is

rZ = k1 CX – k2CZ ………………………….. (5)

Expanding the left hand side of equation (1)

dVCX = VdCX + CX dV ……… (6)

dt dt dt

Combining eq (1) & (5)

dCX = Fi (CXi – CX ) - k1CX – k3CX2 ... (7)

dt V

Similarly,

dCZ = - F CZ + k1CX – k2CZ …………....(8)

dt V The manipulated input output process transfer function G(s)
= C(sI –A)-1 B is calculated with the help of Matlab.
3. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The linear space model or case study of CSTR is given by Gp(s) = -1.117s +3.1472 .. (11)
s 2 + 4.6429s + 5.3821
.
x = Ax + Bu ………………………………….. (9) It is desired to produce 100 million pounds per day of
y = Cx + Du …………………………………..(10) ethylene glycol. The feed stream concentration is 1.0 lbmol/ft3
and an 80% conversion of ethylene oxide has been to be
Where the states, inputs and output are in deviation variable determined reasonable. Since 80% of ethylene oxide is
form. converted to ethylene glycol, the ethylene glycol
The first input (dilution rate) is manipulated and the second concentration is 0.8 lbmol /ft3. In this process it is seen that
(feed concentration of A) is a disturbance input. Linearization the process has inverse response with delay time as well as
of the two modeling equations (from equation (6) & (7)) at overshoot. To overcome this problem and to obtain the
steady state solution to find the following state space matrices desired response, the use of P, PI and PID controller. For that,
is done: the controller parameters are calculated. The desired
parameters for the PID controller are the proportional gain
(KP), integral gain (KI) and the differential gain (KD). Firstly,
find and solve for the characteristic equation of the process
which is given by

s 2 + (4.6429 – 1.117kc) s + (5.3821 + 3.1472 kc ) = 0

… (12)
Where kc is the critical (ultimate) gain. The value of kc can be
calculated by the Routh Hurwitz criterion and the other
parameters can be calculated by the Ziegler Nichols tuning
method. The values of these parameters are

KP = 0.1 KI = 0.2, KD = 0.2

By putting these values in the simulink PID controller, the
response for the step input is obtained. We see that the output
have no overshoot but a little inverted response and also its
settling time and rise time is little bit more. That is not the
desired response. Now for the better control, the Fuzzy logic
controller is used. When we connect a Fuzzy logic controller,
then we require a multiplexer to give input to the controller.
The inputs to the controller are error (difference of the set
point and output) and feedback output (output as the
feedback). Now construct the membership function for the
inputs and the output taking triangular memberships.

13
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 17– No.6, March 2011

In this paper, the input is unit step input. In this process, the
80% of the ethylene oxide converted in to the ethylene glycol
(output is 80% of the input). Thus the range for the output is
[0 – 0.8]. The second input is error and its range is [0 – 0.2].
Using these values, make fuzzy rules in the fuzzy rule base
editor and observe the response that there is no inverted
response, no overshoot, no undershoot, rise time and settling
time are reduced to a negligible value from our response.

4. SIMULATION, TESTING AND

RESULTS
The process is represented by the transfer function given in
fig. 1, and fig. 2 depicts the output of the process.

Fig. 4: Time response with P controller

By using P controller there is not much effect to the output

response as compared to uncontrolled process.

The process with PI controller is shown in the fig. 5, and fig. 6

depicts the output of the process.
Here KP= 100 and KI= 100

Fig. 1: Process model

Fig. 5: Process model with PI controller

Fig. 2: Time response of uncontrolled process

When there is no control to the process, there is some time

delay and inverted response and also the response is settled
below the desired magnitude.

The process with P controller is shown in the fig. 3, and fig.4

depicts the output of the process. Here KP = 100

Fig. 6: Time response with PI controller

As can be seen from fig. 6, there is almost the same response

as that of uncontrolled and P controller model.

The process with PID controller is shown in the fig. 7 and fig.
8 depicts the output of the process. The tuning of controller
parameters is done by Zeigler & Nichols method.

Here KP= 0.1 KI= 0.2 KD= 0.2

Fig. 3: Process model with P controller

14
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 17– No.6, March 2011

Fig. 7: Process model with PID controller

Fig. 10: Time response with fuzzy controller

As can be seen from fig. 10,

Rise time ( tr) = 3 sec Settling time ( ts) = 4 sec

Overshoot= 0% Undershoot= 0%

There is no any time delay and also no any inverted response.

All the limitations are reduced as compared to the PID
Fig. 8: Time response with PID controller controller.

As can be observed from the fig. 8,

In fig.11, membership values of input 1 called ―error‖ having
Rise time ( tr) = 20 sec Settling time ( ts) = 40 sec three ranges low, medium and high is shown.
Overshoot= 0% undershoot= 0%

There is almost negligible time delay and inverted response.

So Fuzzy controller is used to reduce the rise time, settling
time to almost negligible and also try to remove the time delay
and inverted response.

The process is controlled by the fuzzy controller, is shown in fig.

9, and fig. 10 depicts the output of the process with fuzzy
controller. For that the rules in FIS has been made and call them
in simulink by the fuzzy logic controller.

Fig. 11: Fuzzy membership sets of input ‘1’ (error)

In fig. 12, the membership values of input 2 called ―feedback‖

having the three ranges low, medium and high.

Fig. 9: Process model with fuzzy logic controller

Fig. 12: Fuzzy membership sets of input ‘2’ (feedback)
The output response is shown below.
In fig. 13, membership values of ―output‖ having the same
ranges low, medium and high.

15
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 17– No.6, March 2011

Fig.16 surface analysis of both inputs and outputs

Fig. 13: Fuzzy membership sets of output (output)

In fig. 14, fuzzy if-then rules using mamdani fuzzy model are 5. CONCLUSION
shown. When there is no control to the process, it generates an inverse
response together with an overshoot and considerable delay
time. But when the PID control is implemented to the process,
the problems of inverse response, overshoot and delay time are
controlled in the ongoing process and are removed considerably
but then it was showing instability in terms of rise time and
settling time. To overcome this instability in rise time & in
settling time a fuzzy logic controller has been used. The fuzzy
control scheme helps to remove those delay times and the
inverted response shown in graphs. Rise time and settling time
are also reduced.

6. REFERENCES
[1] Schmidt, Lanny D. (1998). The Engineering of Chemical
Reactions. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-
19-510588-5
[2] Yung C. Shin, Chengying Xu ―Intelligent Systems:
Modeling, Optimization, and Control‖ CRC Press 2009.

Fig. 14: Fuzzy If – then rules [3] Fried land B., ―Advanced Control System Design‖,
Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1996.
Fig. 15 depicts the mesh analysis of the two inputs (error and [4] Jaya, N. , Sivakumar, D. and Anandanatarajan, R. (2007)
feedback) and output. — Implementation of fuzzy gain scheduling of PID
controllers for a two capacity interacting nonlinear
process, paper presented at TIMA, January
[5] K.J. Astrom, & T. Hagglund, ―The future of PID control
Control Engineering Practice”, pp.1163 -1175. 2001.
[6] Rajani K. Mudi, Chanchal Dey, & Tsu – Tian Lee, “An
improved auto – tuning scheme for PI controllers‖,
Journal of science Direct ISA Transactions, 47: 45 – 52,
2008.
[7] Luis E. Zarate, Peterson Resende, & M. Benjamin,” A
Fuzzy Logic and Variable Structure Base Controller for
CSTR Control‖. Annual conference of IEEE, 2001.
[8] Xiao-Feng Li, Jian Sun, Hui-Yan Wu, Wei-Dong Zong,
“Application of the fuzzy PID to the Power Plant‖, IEEE
2007.
Fig. 15 mesh analysis of both the inputs and outputs [9] Yun Li,Kiam Heong Ang and Gregory C.Y.Chong,
―PID Control System Analysis and Design – Problems,
Fig. 16 depicts the surface view of the two inputs (error and Remedies, and Future Directions‖. IEEE control system
feedback) and output. magazine, February 2006 pp. 32-41,2006
[10] Dimiter Driankov, Hans Hellendoorn, Michael
Reinfrank, Fuzzy control

16