PC Omar Lectures

Introduction to
Process Control
(Part 1)
Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael
7-Dec-2020
College of Electronics Engineering
Department of Systems and control Engineering
Introduction to Process Control
Introduction to Process Control 2
Process Block Diagram

Introduction to
Process Control
(Part 2)
14-Dec-2020
Example:
The pressure in a chemical reactor is measured by an electronic
sensor/transmitter with an output ranging between 4 - 20 mA. The
manipulated variable is the speed of a vacuum pump accepting a 4 - 20
mA input. The controller is a digital controller. Sketch the piping and
instrumentation diagram (P&ID) and the ‘block diagram’ for the closed
loop control system. Make sure to include all the necessary components
in the control system including the AD and DA converters.

Solution:

Example:
In order to control the temperature of a jacketed chemical reactor in
which an exothermic reaction takes place, a DAQ system with a proper
software is employed. Describe every step which is needed to read the
thermocouple output (0-10 mV) and issue a signal to manipulate the
cooling water flow rate supplied to the reactor jacket. The desired set-
point temperature is 120C. Draw the Block diagram and the P&ID of
this control system. A pneumatic control valve is used to throttle the
flow of the cooling water. Make sure to include every component needed
and the units of the signals in you diagrams.
Solution:

Introduction to
Process Control
(Part 3)
21-Dec-2020
Dynamic Behavior
of Typical Process
Systems (Part 1)
28-Dec-2020
Dynamic Behavior of Typical Process Systems
Dynamic Behavior of Typical Process Systems 2
Dynamic Behavior
of Typical Process
Systems (Part 2) &
Empirical Model
Identification
4-Jan-2021
Dynamic Behavior of Typical Process Systems & Empirical Model Identification
Dynamic Behavior of Typical Process Systems & Empirical Model Identification 2
Nonlinear Plant
Example:
Coupled-Tanks Plant

11-Jan-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant
Topics Covered
• How to mathematically model the Coupled-Tank plant from first

principles in order to obtain the two open-loop transfer functions
characterizing the system, in the Laplace domain.
• How to linearize the obtained non-linear equation of motion

about the quiescent point of operation.

2
Motivation
The problem of controlling levels of liquids in tanks a
nd flow between tank is very common in many
industries such as:
Petrochemicals, food processing and power generati
on.

3
Case Study: Quanser Coupled Tanks

4
INTRODUCTION
The Coupled Tanks plant is a "Two-Tank" module consisting of a
pump with a water basin and two tanks. The two tanks are
mounted on the front plate such that flow from the first (i.e.
upper) tank can flow, through an outlet orifice located at the
bottom of the tank, into the second (i.e. lower) tank. Flow from
the second tank flows into the main water reservoir. The pump
thrusts water vertically to two quick-connect orifices "Out1" and
"Out2". The two system variables are directly measured on the
Coupled-Tank rig by pressure sensors and available for feedback.
They are namely the water levels in tanks 1 and 2. To name a
few, industrial applications of such Coupled-Tank configurations
can be found in the processing system of petro-chemical, paper
making, and/or water treatment plants.

5
Coupled-Tank System Model Parameters and Frame Overall Dimensions

6
7
System Modelling: Nonlinear Equations of Motion (EOM)
• In order to derive the mathematical model of your Coupled-
Tanks system, it is reminded that the pump feeds into tank 1,
which in turn feeds into tank 2. Therefore, the input to the tank
1 is the voltage to the pump VP and its output is the water level
in tank 1, L1, (i.e. top tank). The input to the tank 2 process is
the water level, L1, in tank 1 (generating the outflow feeding
tank 2) and its output variable is the water level, L2, in tank 2
(i.e. bottom tank).
• The water level Equations Of Motion (EOM) in tank 1 and tank
2 still need to be derived. The purpose of the present
modelling session is to guide you with the system’s open-loop
transfer function, G1(s), and G2(s), which in turn will be used
to design an appropriate level controller.
• The obtained EOM should be a function of the system's input
and output, as previously defined.
8
Nonlinear Model
• In deriving the Tank 1 and EOM Tank 2 the mass balance

principle can be applied to the water level in tank 1 and tank 2
as follows:
where At1 is the area of Tank 1. Fi1 and Fo1 are the inflow rate
and outflow rate, respectively. At2 is the area of tank 2. Fi2 and
Fo2 are the inflow rate and outflow rate, respectively.

9
• The volumetric inflow rate (Fi1) to tank 1 is assumed to be
directly proportional to the applied pump voltage (Vp), such
that:
• The volumetric inflow rate to tank 2 is equal to the volumetric

outflow rate from tank 1, that is to say:
• Applying Bernoulli's equation for small orifices, the outflow

velocity from tank 1 (vo1) and tank 2, (vo2) can be expressed
by the following relationship:
where, g is the gravitational acceleration (in cm/s2)

10
• The outflow rate from tank 1 (Fo1 ) and Tank 2 (Fo2), can be
expressed by:
• As a remark, the cross-section area of tank 1 and tank 2

outlet holes can be calculated by:
• The outflow rate from tank 1 and tank 2 can be written as :

11
• Rearranging results in the following equation of motion for the
tank 1 and tank 2 system:
• The above two equations are the nonlinear mathematical

model of the Coupled-Tanks Plant.

12
Model Linearization
• In order to design and implement a linear level controller for
the tank 1 and tank 2 systems, the open-loop Laplace
transfer functions should be derived. However by definition,
such transfer functions can only represent the system's
dynamics from linear differential equations. Therefore, the
nonlinear EOM of tank 1 and tank 2 should be linearized
around a quiescent point of operation.
• The nonlinear mathematical model can be linearized about a

specific operating pump voltage and water levels for both
tanks ( Vp0, L10, and L20). The linearization process is
considered for each tank separately.

13
• The specific operating pump voltage and water levels for both
tanks be denoted as Vp1, L11, and L21 then the pump voltage
and water levels are changed as follows:
• At the equilibrium point, all time derivative terms equate zero.
• Solving the equation above for Vp0 gives the pump voltage at
equilibrium. Vp0 results to be a function of L10 and Kp, as
expressed below:

14
• At the equilibrium point, all time derivative terms equate zero.
• Solving the equation above for L10 gives the tank 1 water level
at equilibrium. L10 results to be a function of L20, as expressed
below:

15
• Taylor's series expansion
• Using Taylor's series expansion to linearize the two equations

that describe the nonlinear mathematical model of the
Coupled-Tanks Plant, the linearized model is obtained as:

16
• The linearized model of the coupled two-tank liquid level
system can be described by the following state-space model

17
• From the linear equations of motion, the system's open-loop transfer
function in the Laplace domain can be defined by the following
relationship:
• The desired open-loop transfer functions for the Coupled-Tank's tank 1 and
tank 2 systems, such that:
where Kdc1 and Kdc2 are the open-loop transfer function DC gains. τ1 and τ2
are the time constants.

18
• Then Kdc1, Kdc2, τ1 and τ2 are:

19
Feedback Control –
PID Controller

18-Jan-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Feedback Control – PID Controller
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
Feedback Control –
Practical Issues

25th-Jan-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Feedback Control – PID
Department of Systems and control Engineering Controller
PRACTICAL ISSUES
When I complete this lecture, I want to be

able to do the following.
Make PID work in practice!

• Use power of digital computation to
validate and correct measurements
• Use & tune various industrial PID
algorithms
• Improve performance of “simple” PID
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Let’s look at all
elements of the
feedback loop Select best physical
Process, could be far from control room
principles and apply
corrections
v1
T
Central control room
v2
Digital PID
Account for idiosyncrasies of Does the air open or

commercial algorithms close the valve?
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Let’s look at all
elements of the PID Algo
feedback loop
• Proportional + Set
- sign point
- units -
• Integral
- Windup
• Derivative
Output processing Input processing
- Filter
• Bumpless transfer • Validity
• Limits • Linearization
• Failure position • Filtering
Sensor
Process
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Input - Sensor and Pre-calculations
Typically, analog signal Digital signal
Process Sensor Analog A/D Digital

variable signal filter convert filter
Lineariztion PID
Digital computer
• What is noise?
20 • Why reduce
15
noise using a
filter?
Temperature
10
-5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (min)
PRACTICAL ISSUES
20
Signal + noise Signal?
15
Temperature
10
5 Noise?
0
-5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (min)
Noise: We think of noise as the

non-repeatable component of the The distinction
measurement. is seldom as
clear-cut as
Causes: Electrical interference, shown here!
imperfect mixing, turbulence, ...

PRACTICAL ISSUES
Controllable disturbances
What we call noise tends
to be relatively fast.
Uncontrollable disturbances
Our plants are

relatively
slow Sensor noise
Noise, electrical interference
10-4 10-2 1.0 102

Frequency (Hz)
[Values are typical for chemical processes, but vary over a wide range]
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Linearization PID
Without
filter
D(s) Gd(s)
SP(s) E(s) MV(s) CV(s)

+ +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
GS(s)
CVm(s)
Noise goes “around and around” in the feedback loop!

PRACTICAL ISSUES
Lineariztion PID
With filter
D(s) Gd(s)

+ +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Gf(s) GS(s)
CVf(s) CVm(s)
The filter is in the feedback loop. What do we

conclude about the favorable filter dynamics?
PRACTICAL ISSUES
In the process industries, we typically use a first order

system for the filter; Gf(s) = 1.0/(s+1) = CVf(s)/CVm(s).
FILTER BODE PLOT
0
10
Amplitude Ratio
-1
Not a perfect step, but
10
has the desired trend.
-2
10
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Dimensionless Frequency,  (rad/time)
-20
Contributes dynamics to
Phase Angle (degrees)
the feedback loop, but

-40
only one (small?)
-60
time constant.
-80
-100
-2 -1 0 1 2
10 10 10 10 10
Dimensionless Frequency,  (rad/time)

PRACTICAL ISSUES
Lineariztion PID
“Anti-Aliasing” filter Digital Filter

Gf1(s) = 1.0/(f1s+1) Gf2(s) = 1.0/(f2s+1)
• Time constant is small, • Built by engineer for
e.g., few tenths of a each application
second
• Time constant is
• Usually part of selected for each
commercial control application
equipment
PRACTICAL ISSUES
D(s) Gd(s)

+ +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
Gf(s) GS(s)
CVf(s) CVm(s)
Guidelines to reduce the effects of noise on feedback

1. Reduce the derivative time (often to 0.0)
2. Set filter time constant small compared to feedback
dynamics, f2 < 0.05 (+)
3. Set filter time constant large compared to disturbance
frequency, f2 > 5/n [but do not violate 2 above]
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Feedback Controller - P, I and D
Continuous PID
 1
t
d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI 0 E (t ' )dt '−Td dt  + I
Digital PID
 t N Td 
Positional MVN = K c  E N +  Ei − (CVN − CVN −1 ) + I
form  TI i =1 t 
 (t ) T 
MVN = K c  E N − E N −1 + E N − d (CVN − 2CVN −1 + CVN − 2 )
velocity
 TI t 
form
MVN = MVN −1 + MVN
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Controller sense - In most systems, the controller gain (Kc)

is ALWAYS positive. Therefore, we need a way to
determine the controller sign. This is the controller
“sense”.
 1
t
d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) = ( K sense ) K c  E (t ) +
 TI 0 E (t ' )dt '−Td dt  + I
Ksense Convention A Convention B
+1 Direct acting Increase/increase
-1 Reverse acting Increase/decrease
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Proportional - The proportional mode can be formulated

with various engineering units. Several common methods
are used in commercial systems. They do not change the
performance of the controller.
Scaled variables - Many digital (and all analog) systems

represent variables in scaled (dimensionless) form.
CV − CVmin CV − CVmin MV − MVmin MV − MVmin

CVscaled = = MVscaled = =
CVmax − CVmin CVrange MVmax − MVmin MVrange
( SP − SPmin ) − (CV − CVmin ) E

E scaled = =
CVmax − CVmin CVrange
PRACTICAL ISSUES
 1
t
d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI 0 E (t ' )dt '−Td dt  + I
 d CV (t ) 
MV (t )  CVr   E (t ) 1 t
E (t ' ) CVr 
MVr
= Kc  
 MVr   CVr TI
+ 0 CVr dt '−Td dt  +I

 
 CVr  This is the scaled proportional

(Kc ) s = K c   gain. In some software, the
 MVr 
engineer must input (Kc)s.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
 d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) 100   E (t ) 1 CVr 
t
E (t ' )
MVr
=  
 PB   CVr TI
+ 0 CVr dt '−Td dt  +I

 
100 This is the Proportional Band.

(Kc ) s = In some software, the engineer
PB
must input PB.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
 t
d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) + TR  E (t ' )dt '−Td +I
 0
dt 
1 This is the Reset Time. In some

TR = software, the engineer must
TI
input TR.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
 1
t
d CV (t ) 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI 0 E (t ' )dt '−Td dt  + I
Reset Windup - The integral is persistent, it doesn’t stop

until the error is zero. But, if the final element (valve)
has reached its maximum or minimum, the integral
should “stop”; if it doesn’t, the calculated value could
increase in magnitude towards infinity.
This is called reset windup and must be prevented.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Behavior without anti-reset-windup: The Behavior with anti-reset-windup: The

controller output continues to change controller output stops at the boundary
(winds up). It takes some time to return (doesn’t wind up). The increase in the
to a value where the controller output controller output immediately affects the
affects the valve. valve when needed
Windup. The controller output

exceeds the range of the valve No windup!
movement.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Anti-reset-windup - Several approaches are used. One

simple approach is demonstrated here.
 (t ) T 
 TI t 
MVN = MVN −1 + MVN
MVN  MVmax
Anti-reset-windup modification
MVN  MVmin
MVN is implemented and stored for use as MVN -1 during the next iteration
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Derivative Filter - If we filter the measurement, we

“slow” all controller modes. An option exists to filter only
the derivative mode.
Td s  usually is specified as 0.1, which gives

Td s + 1 a filter of 10% of the derivative time.
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Output processing
Bumpless transfer - When the controller is switched from

manual (off) to automatic (on), the final element (valve)
should start from its initial value.
IF N = 1
Special
MVN = Current output to final element
calculation for
MVN = 0
initialization
E N = SPN − CVN ; CVN −1 = CVN ; CVN- 2 = CVN
ELSE
E N −1 = E N
E N = SPN − CVN
 (t ) T 
 TI t 
END
MVN = MVN −1 + MVN ; CVN − 2 = CVN −1 ; CVN −1 = CVN
MVN  MVmax
MVN  MVmin
Store MVN −1 = MVN % for use in next execution
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Output processing
PRACTICAL ISSUES
Output processing
Failure position - This is selected based on safety.

PI
1
Fail closed: In all failure
AI PI situations, we want to
1 4
FT
reduce the fuel flow to zero.
1 TI
PI
1
5
TI
5
TI
2
feed
Fail opened: In all failure PT

TI
6
situations, we want to 1
TI
continue the flow. In not, 3
TI
7 TC TI
the oil in the pipe will heat TI
4
10
product
up, degrade and block the
pipe. TI
FT FI
2 8 TI
3
11
fuel
air
PI PI PI
2 3 6
PID Controller
Tuning for Dynamic
Performance

1st-Feb-2021
College of Electronics Engineering PID Controller Tuning
College of Electronics Engineering PID Controller Tuning 2
Single-loop
Enhancements:
Cascade Control

15th-Feb-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Cascade Control
College of Electronics Engineering Cascade Control 2
Single-loop
Enhancements:
Feedforward
Control
22th-Feb-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Feedforward Control
College of Electronics Engineering Feedforward Control 2
Feedforward
Feedback

Single-Variable
Model Predictive
Control
Internal Model
Control (IMC)
8th-Mar-2021
College of Electronics Engineering Model Predictive Control
Single-Loop IMC Control
When I complete this chapter, I want to be

able to do the following.
• Recognize that other feedback algorithms

are possible
• Understand the IMC structure and how it
provides the essential control features
• Tune an IMC controller
• Correctly select between PID and IMC
Outline of the lesson.
• Thought exercise for model-based

control
• IMC structure
• Desired control features
• IMC algorithm and tuning
• Application guidelines
E (t ) = SP(t ) − CV (t )
Let’s quickly review the  d CV 
t
1
PID algorithm MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI  E (t ' )dt '−Td
0
+I
dt 
This is the de facto standard!
• PID was developed in 1930-40’s

• PID is not the only feedback algorithm
• PID gives good balance of performance and robustness
• PID does not always give the best performance
• Multiple PIDs are used for multivariable systems
Let’s look ahead to the IMC structure and algorithm
We will have another algorithm to learn!!!!
• IMC was developed formally in 1980’s, but the ideas

began in 1950’s
• IMC uses a process model explicitly
• IMC involves a different structure and controller
• IMC could replace PID, but we chose to retain PID
unless an advantage exists
• A single “IMC” can be used for multivariable systems
Let’s do a thought experiment:
Solvent
1. We want to control the concentration in the
tank.
2. Initially, A = 6 wgt%
We want A = 7 wgt% A
3. From data, we know that
A/v = 0.5 wgt%/% open Reactant
A wgt% 6%
What do we do?
Valve
% open
time
Solvent
tank.
3. From data, we know that Reactant

A/v = 0.5 wgt%/% open
A wgt% 6% What do we expect

to happen?
Valve + 2%
% open
time
Solvent
tank.

A/v = 0.5 wgt%/% open
7.3%
• Should we be surprised?
• What do we do now?
6%
A wgt% • Devise 2 different responses
Valve + 2%
% open
Hint: We used a model for the first
calculation. What do we do if the
model is in error?
time
Solvent
tank.

A/v = 0.5 wgt%/% open
7.3%
• We apply the feedback
6% 6.91% until we have converged.
A wgt%
-0.6%
Valve + 2%
% open
time
7.3%
6% Solvent
6.91%
A wgt%
-0.6%
+ 2%
Valve
% open A
time Reactant
D(s) Gd(s)
SP(s) MV(s) CV(s)
+ +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
Discuss this diagram and complete the closed-loop

block diagram for the IMC concept.
7.3%
6% Solvent
5.91%
A wgt%
-0.6%
+ 2%
Valve
% open A
time Reactant
D(s) Gd(s)
SP(s) MV(s) CV(s)
+ +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
Gm(s)
This is a model of the
feedback process.
“Model error” = Em(s)
D(s) Gd(s)
SP(s) Tp(s) MV(s) CV(s)
+ +
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
What is GCP??
Gm(s)
Em(s)
Transfer functions Variables

GCP(s) = controller CV(s) = controlled variable
Gv(s) = valve CVm(s) = measured value of CV(s)
GP(s) = feedback process D(s) = disturbance
Gm(s) = model Em(s) = model error
Gd(s) = disturbance process MV(s) = manipulated variable
SP(s) = set point
Tp(s) = set point corrected for model error
What controller calculation gives good performance?
• It is NOT a PID algorithm

• Let’s set some key features and determine what Gcp
will achieve these features
1. Zero steady-state offset for “step-like” inputs
2. Perfect control (CV=SP for all time)
3. Moderate manipulated variable adjustments
4. Robustness to model mismatch
5. Anti-reset-windup
D(s) Gd(s)
What controller SP(s)

+
Tp(s) MV(s)
+
CV(s)
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
calculation gives good - +
performance? What is GCP?? - +

Gm(s)
Em(s)
1. Zero steady-state offset:
CV ( s ) (1 − Gcp ( s )Gm ( s ))Gd ( s )

=
(
D( s ) 1 + GCP ( s ) Gv ( s )G p ( s )GS ( s ) − Gm ( s ) )
What condition for Gcp(s) ensures zero steady-state

offset for a step disturbance?
Hint: Steady-state is at t = .
D(s) Gd(s)

+
Tp(s) MV(s)
+
CV(s)
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)

Gm(s)
Em(s)
1. Zero steady-state offset:
(1 − Gcp ( s )Gm ( s ))Gd ( s ) CONCLUSION

CV ( s )
=
(
Kcp = (Km)-1
D (1 − K cp K m ) K d
lim CV (t ) = lim s =0
t → s →0 s 1 + K cp ( K p − K m ) Easily achieved
because
both are in computer!
Oh yeah, the final value theorem!
D(s) Gd(s)

+
Tp(s) MV(s)
+
CV(s)
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)

Gm(s)
Em(s)
2. Perfect dynamic control:
CV ( s ) (1 − Gcp ( s )Gm ( s ))Gd ( s )

=
(
What is required for perfect dynamic control?
Do you expect that we will achieve this goal?

D(s) Gd(s)

+
Tp(s) MV(s)
+
CV(s)
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)

Gm(s)
Em(s)
2. Perfect dynamic control:
(1 − Gcp ( s )Gm ( s ))Gd ( s ) CONCLUSION

CV ( s )
=
(
Gcp(s) = (Gm(s))-1
(1 − Gcp ( s )Gm ( s ))Gd ( s )
CV ( s ) = D( s ) = 0
(
1 + GCP ( s ) Gv ( s )G p ( s )GS ( s ) − Gm ( s ) ) Controller is inverse of
model!
Can we achieve this?
2. Perfect dynamic control: CONCLUSION
3. Moderate manipulated variable Gcp(s) = (Gm(s))-1

adjustments
K m e −s (s + 1)es Controller is inverse of
Gm ( s ) = then Gcp ( s ) = model!
(s + 1) Km Can we achieve this?
This is a pure derivative,

which will lead to This is a prediction into the
excessive manipulated future, which is not possible
variable moves
Conclusion: Perfect control is not possible!

2. Perfect dynamic control: CONCLUSION
3. Moderate manipulated
variable adjustments Gcp(s) = (Gm(s))-1
K m ( 1s + 1) ( 2 s + 1)( 3s + 1) Controller is inverse of
Gm ( s ) = then Gcp ( s ) =
( 2 s + 1)( 3s + 1) K m ( 1s + 1) model!
Can we achieve this?
This has a second

derivative, which will lead This could have an unstable
to excessive manipulated controller, if 1 is negative.
variable moves This is unacceptable.
Conclusion: Perfect control is not possible!

Let’s begin our IMC design with the results so far.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSION We have loosened

the restriction to
a condition that
Kcp = (Km)-1 Gcp(s)  (Gm(s))-1 can be achieved.
Easily achieved Controller is inverse of Now, what does

because model! “approximate”
both are in computer! mean?
How can we define the meaning of approximate

so that we have a useful design approach?
Separate the model into two factors, one invertible and the
other with all non-invertible terms.
Gm ( s) = Gm− ( s) Gm+ ( s)
The “invertible” factor The “non-invertible” factor

has an inverse that is has an inverse that is non-
causal and stable, which causal or unstable. The factor
results in an acceptable contains models elements with
controller. The gain is the dead times and positive
model gain, Km. numerator zeros. The gain is
chosen to be 1.0.
What do we use for the controller?

Separate the model into two factors, one invertible and the
other with all non-invertible terms.
Gm ( s) = Gm− ( s) Gm+ ( s)
The IMC controller eliminates all non-invertible

elements in the feedback process model by inverting
G-m(s).
Gcp ( s ) = −
Gm ( s )-1
Looks easy, but I need some practice.

FS
solvent
FA
pure A
AC
Class exercise: We have two models for the feedback dynamics

for the 3-tank mixer. Determine Gcp(s) for each.
Empirical model Fundamental model
0.039e −5.5s Gm ( s ) =
0.039
Gm ( s ) = (1 + 5s ) 3
(1 + 10.5s )
0.039e −5.5s Gm ( s ) =
0.039
Gm ( s ) = (1 + 5s ) 3
(1 + 10.5s )
(1 + 10.5s ) ( 1 + 5s )3
Gcp ( s ) = Gcp ( s ) =
0.039 0.039
Discuss these results.
• Do they “make sense”?

• Are there any shortcomings?
(Hint: Look at other desirable features.)
(1 + 10.5s ) ( 1 + 5s )3
Gcp ( s ) = Gcp ( s ) =
0.039 0.039
First derivative Third derivative!
3. Moderate manipulated variable adjustments

4. Robustness to model mismatch
To achieve these features, we must be able to

“slow down” the controller.
We chose to include a filter in the feedback path.

D(s) Gd(s)
+ +
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
Gm(s)
Em(s)
Gf(s)
Nf
 1  The value of Nf is selected so that the product of the
G f ( s) =   controller and filter has a polynomial in “s” with a

 f s + 1  denominator order  the numerator order.
The filter is designed to prevent pure derivatives and the

filter constant is tuned to achieve “robust performance”.
Class exercise: Determine the structure of the filter for

the two possible controllers we just designed for the three
tank mixing process.
0.039e −5.5s Gm ( s ) =
0.039
Gm ( s ) = (1 + 5s ) 3
(1 + 10.5s )
(1 + 10.5s ) ( 1 + 5s )3
Gcp ( s ) = Gcp ( s ) =
0.039 0.039
Class exercise: Determine the structure of the filter for

the two possible controllers we just designed for the three
tank mixing process.
0.039e −5.5s Gm ( s ) =
0.039
Gm ( s ) = (1 + 5s ) 3
(1 + 10.5s )
(1 + 10.5s ) ( 1 + 5s )3
Gcp ( s ) = Gcp ( s ) =
0.039 0.039
1 3
 1   1 
G f ( s) =   G f ( s) =  

 f s + 1  
 f s + 1 
Now, we must determine the proper value for the filter

time constant - this is controller tuning again!
We know how to set the goals from experience with PID.
CV Dynamic Behavior:
Stable, zero offset, minimum IAE
MV Dynamic Behavior:
damped oscillations and small
fluctuations due to noise.
MV can be more
aggressive in early
part of transient
We can tune using a simulation and optimization or
Process Solve the tuning Apply, and fine

reaction curve problem. Requires a tune.
computer program.
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
0 5 10 1520253035404550
1 COMBINED DEFINITION OF TUNING
0.8
0.6 v
0.4 • First order with dead time process 1
0.2 TC
00 5 10 1520253035404550 model
• Noisy measurement signal
v • ± 25% parameters errors between
1
TC model/plant v
• IMC controller: determine Kf 2
• Minimize IAE with MV inside bound
v
2
Km = 1 f =??? We can develop tuning

correlations. These are
m = 5
available for a lead-lag
m = 5 controller, Gcp(s)Gf(s).
IMC Tuning for a typical set of conditions and goals

0.55
Scaled filter time constant, f /(+)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Fraction dead time, /(+)

Class exercise: Determine the filter time constant for the

IMC controller that we just designed for the three tank
mixing process.
Empirical model
0.039e −5.5s
Gm ( s ) =
(1 + 10.5s )
(1 + 10.5s )
Gcp ( s ) =
0.039
1
 1 
G f ( s) =  

 f s + 1 
Class exercise: Determine the filter time constant for the

IMC controller that we just designed for the three tank
mixing process.
Empirical model 1. The controller is lead-lag, so

we can use the correlation.
0.039e −5.5s
Gm ( s ) = 2. /(+) = 5.5/16.0 = 0.34
(1 + 10.5s )
3. f /(+) = 0.38 ;
f = (0.38)(15.5) = 6.1 minutes
(1 + 10.5s ) 4. See the next slide for the
Gcp ( s ) = dynamic response.
0.039
1
5. We can fine tune to achieve
 1  the desired CV and MV
G f ( s) =  

 f s + 1  behavior.
FS
solvent
FA
pure A
AC
3.5
AC
concentration
3
Discuss the control
performance.
2.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
time
60
50
valve opening, %
40
30
vA
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
time
Smith Predictor: A smart fellow named Smith saw the benefit for an
explicit model in the late 1950’s. He invented the Smith Predictor,
using the PI controller.
The elements in the box calculate an

approximate inverse
D(s) Gd(s)
SP(s) MV(s) CV(s)
+ + +
GC(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- - +
- +
G-m(s) Gm(s)
Em(s)
Notes: Gc(s) is a PI controller; G-m(s) is the invertible factor.

When do we select an IMC over a PID?
1. Very high fraction dead time, /(+) > 0.7.

2. Very strong inverse responses.
3. Cascade primary controller with slow secondary
(inner) dynamics
4. Feedforward with disturbance dead time less than
feedback dead time.
IMC CONTROL WORKSHOP 1
Trouble shooting: You have determined the model below empirically

and have tuned the IMC controller using the correlations. The closed-
loop performance is not acceptable. What do you do?
0.8
Empirical model 0.6
concentration
0.4
Km = 1 0.2
m = 5 -0.2
-0.4
m = 5
0 50 100 150
time
IMC filter -0.5

manipulated flow
f = 3.5 -1
-1.5
-2
0 50 100 150
time
Design features: We want to avoid integral windup.

1. Describe integral windup and why it is undesirable.
2. Modify the structure to provide anti-reset windup.
D(s) Gd(s)
+ +
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
Gm(s)
Em(s)
Gf(s)
Design features: We want to obtain good performance for set point

changes and disturbances. The filter below affects disturbances.
Introduce a modification that enables us to influence set point
responses independently.
D(s) Gd(s)
+ +
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
Gm(s)
Em(s)
Gf(s)
Design features: We discussed two reasons why we cannot achieve

perfect feedback control. Identify other reasons and explain how they
affect the IMC structure design.
D(s) Gd(s)
+ +
GCP(s) Gv(s) GP(s)
- +
- +
Gm(s)
Em(s)
Gf(s)
Solutions for Tutorial 1
Feedback Concepts
1.1. Drawing symbols: Determine all letters that would be used to designate each of
the following instruments on process and instrumentation (P&I) drawings.
The approach for assigning symbol letters is explained in Appendix A in Marlin,

2000. Much more detail is provided in ISA 5.1-1984.
For example, for a level controller, the designation would be LC.
i) Liquid level alarm high, LAH Set value for the alarm is NOT
shown on the drawing
ii) Pressure indicator, PI Not used for control
iii) Temperature indicator in a packed TI “in a packed bed” is not
bed, relevant; the symbol is
independent of the process
application
iv) Volume flow rate of butane in a pipe, FI Flow == F
v) Mass flow rate of hydrogen, FI The units of the flow are not
indicated in the symbol.
vi) Weight of a solid in a vessel,
vii) Speed of rotation of a shaft, and SI
viii) Mole % of propane in a gas stream AI “Analyzer” is A
You might wonder, “Where are the details?” A detailed instrument

specification sheet is completed for every sensor. This indicates the stream
conditions, physical principle, range of operation and other information. You
will be able to purchase the instrument and design installation based on the
information in the data sheet.
Conclusion: We must use a standard set of symbols so that all engineers and
plant operators understand the design.
1
1.2. Common examples of automation: Discuss whether each of the common
systems below uses automatic feedback to achieve its desired performance.
Note: The question asks if automatic feedback is applied. “Automatic” implies

the use of a computing device, such as a digital computer. Feedback could be
applied by a person, which is generally not as reliable. We’re smart but we get
tired.
a. Boiling water on a burner in a home stove.
The burner is set to a constant gas flow or electrical power, and no automatic
adjustment is applied to achieve a desired rate of boiling.
Note that the temperature is constant when the water is boiling, regardless of the
heating applied. This is NOT due to control, but is a result of the process
principles.
b. Maintaining a temperature in an oven in a home stove.
The typical home oven has a temperature controller. The automatic approach is
not complex; it applies and on/off feedback algorithm. If the temperature is
below a set point, the furnace is turned on; if the temperature is above a set point,
the furnace is turned off. Usually, a “dead band” is applied to prevent the heater
from switching on and off too frequently.
c. An alarm clock used to wake you for class.
No automatic mechanism is applied to the alarm clock. If the power fails, the
clock cannot recognize this and correct. Also, if you do not awake, the clock stops
sounding the alarm after a specified time.
So, the success of the alarm depends on our participation, which we regret every
morning.
Conclusion: We apply automatic feedback control when we desire reliable

application of a consistent policy.
2
1.3. A Chemical Engineering Example: A chemical reactor with recycle is depicted in
textbook Figure 1.8 and repeated below.
a. Can the following variable be controlled by feedback? Hint: determine which valves have a
causal effect on each sensor.
b. Select the best valve to control each, if more than one valve can effect the sensor.
c. Select a sensor principle for each of the sensors. (Hint: Check the WEB site!)
i. T4, reactor feed temperature iii. F3, reactor effluent flow

ii. T1, feed temperature iv. L1, reactor liquid level
v8
F2 F5
v3
T5 P1
T4
F1 T1 T3 F3 T6 F4
L1
v1 v5 v6 L1
T7
v2 v7
T2 T8
T9 F6
Hot Oil Hot Oil
Figure 1.1
T4, reactor temperature
v1 Yes, This will influence the flow rate through the feed exchanger and
strong the ratio of fresh to recycle, which can be at different
temperatures.
v2 Yes, This will affect the flow of heating oil to the feed heat exchanger.
strong
v3 Yes, This will affect the flow rate of both fresh and recycle feeds,
weak without changing the ratio.
v4 Yes, This will change the recycle flow temporarily. Note that the
temporary supply of recycle material is limited that the average over time can
be no more (or less) than what remains liquid in the flash drum.
v5 no This affects the flow out of the reactor.
v6 no See v5 above
v7 Yes, This will affect the heat to the reactor effluent, which influences
weak the flow rate and temperature of the recycle.
v8 Yes, This will affect the pressure in the flash drum and thus, the
weak fraction of reactor effluent that is vapor. The liquid recycles to
the reactor.
The best choice should provide a fast and strong effect on T4 and leave valves for
other important controllers. Let’s select v2.
Because this is a reactor, we could select an RTD sensor for good accuracy, but we
need more information.
3
1.4 When we consider history, we encounter a puzzle. Automatic control has been
applied for a long time. Certainly, scientists and engineers needed automatic
control since the time of the steam engine to prevent explosions and maintain the
driver speed at a desired valve. (Actually, before then, but let’s use the revolution of
the steam engine as our marker in history.) However, digital computers were not
available for these purposes until after World War II. In fact, digital control did
not begin until the 1960’s.
So, how was automatic control implemented physically before digital computation?
As usual, we have been preceded by many clever people who were able to
overcome limitations to achieve their goals. Before digital computers, we
employed a concept of “analog computation”. In analog computation, we build a
physical device that behaves in the same way as the calculation we intend to
implement. To be feasible, we typically limit ourselves to relatively simple
calculations. Even so, considerable ingenuity is required.
Let’s look an example of a simple process Flow into

control application. We have a tank containing tank
liquid that supplies a downstream process. The

flow rate to the downstream process depends
on the production rate, which changes in an
unpredictable manner. It is our task to
Flow out to
maintain the liquid level in the tank at a desired downstream
value (let’s say at 50% of the tank height) by process
manipulating the flow into the tank. Why? If
the level were not controlled,
• It could overflow and cause loss of valuable material, or perhaps, a hazard

• It could decrease to zero. Then, not liquid would be available to the
process and we would have to stop production.
First, we decide to use the feedback principle. This requires a measurement of the
level and adjustment of a causal variable. We will select a very simple automatic
control strategy, but one that is very widely used, as we will see later. We chose
to manipulate the flow in proportion to the amount that the level deviates from its
desired value. The feedback approach is given in the following equation.
Fin = F0 + K c ( L − Ldesired )
with
F0 = the base case flow
Ldesired = the desired level
L = the measured (actual) level
Kc = an adjustable constant, which we will later call the controller gain
4
We want this implemented without human interference, i.e., we seek automatic
control. This calculation would be easy via digital computation. How would you
have achieved this in 1895?
Let’s look at one way. We implement the calculation using a mechanical analog
computation. The mechanism is shown in the sketch below.
Lets look at each element of the automatic control device.
Location of the fulcrum

determines the
∆gate/∆level
Float measures
Raising and the liquid level
lowering the gate
affects the flow
in
• Sensor: The level is measured by a float, whose position indicates the

level.
• Final Element: The flow in is influenced by a “gate”, whose position
determines the flow rate. As the gate position is elevated, the opening for
flow increases, as does the flow.
• Controller: The controller is a lever that can rotate about a fulcrum. As
the float increases (decreases), the connecting rod forces the level to
decrease (increase) the gates’ position.
This device exactly implements our strategy and the control equation! It is
simple, inexpensive, and reliable (does not require electricity). However, it is not
very flexible. If we want to change the proportionality constant (Kc), we have to
change the location of the fulcrum.
Current process control technology takes advantage of digital computation to

achieve tremendous increases in process safety, product quality and profitability.
However, let’s not forget the ingenious pioneers who established automatic
control by solving practical problems with the tools and technology available at
the time!
5
Control Objectives & Benefits
2.1 We will invest lots of effort understanding process dynamics between “inputs” and
“outputs”. The outputs are key variables that we want to maintain at or near specified
desired values. The inputs belong to two distinct categories.
1. Manipulated variables that we adjust to achieve desired process behavior

2. Disturbance variables whose values vary due to changes in other processes and
the surrounding environment.
If no disturbances occurred, there would be little need for process control; however,
disturbances occur to essentially every process.
Let’s look at an example process and find some examples of variables in each of the two
categories. The process in Figure 2.1 vaporizes liquid butane and mixes the vapor with
compressed air. The mixture flows to a packed bed reactor.
Figure 2.1
1
a. Identify at least three controlled variables, which must be measured.
b. Identify at least one manipulated variable for each of the controlled variables.
Hint: these must be valves.
c. Identify at least three disturbance variables. (These do not have to be measured.)
For each, determine which controlled variable(s) are influenced, i.e., disturbed.
a. Controlled variables
1. Pressure of the vaporizer (P1), which is important for safety.
2. Liquid level in the vaporizer (L1), which influences the amount vaporized. It
should not overflow the vessel or drain empty.
3. The percentage of butane in the mixed stream (A1), which is important if we
are to avoid an explosive concentration!
b. Manipulated variables
1. The vapor lease from the vaporizer (v3). This has a causal relationship with the
pressure and can be adjusted to control P1.
2. The flow of liquid butane from storage to the vaporizer (v1). This has a causal
relationship with the liquid level and can be adjusted to control L1.
3. The flow of air is affected by the valve in the compressor suction, v4. This has
a causal relationship with the flow of air and the mixture composition and can be
adjusted to control A1.
c. Disturbances
1. Steam pressure that influences the heat transfer in the vaporizer and affects P1
and L1.
2. Air temperature that influences the compressor performance and affects the
mixture composition.
3. Pressure downstream from the reactor that influences the flows of butane and
air.
2
2.2 Economic benefits: Discuss the economic benefits achieved by reducing the
variability (and, in some cases changing the average value) of the key controlled variable
for the situations in the following.
a. Crude oil is distilled, and one segment of the oil is converted in a chemical reactor
to make gasoline. The reactor can be operated over a range of temperatures; as
the temperature is increased, the octane of the gasoline increases, but the yield of
gasoline decreases because of increased by-products of lower value. (It’s not
really this simple, but the description captures the essence of the challenge.) The
customer cannot determine small changes in octane. You are responsible for the
reactor operation. Is there a benefit for tight temperature control of the packed
bed reactor? How would you determine the correct temperature value?
Octane
Time
Gasoline yield, %
Maximum possible yield
Average yield achieved

because of “backoff”
from limit
Minimum
Octane
In this situation, the customer cannot distinguish small changes from the
minimum octane when driving their automobiles. Therefore, this small deviation
in product quality is acceptable. However, the variability in the octane results in
a lower average yield of gasoline and a higher yield of lower valued byproducts.
Tight control of reactor temperature will reduce the variability in octane and
allow a higher average yield of valuable gasoline. The average temperature can
be selected to achieve acceptable octane for all production within the variation.
Note that the goal here is to reduce variability and adjust the average value to
increase profit.
3
b. You are working at a company that produces large roles of paper sold to
newspaper printers. Your client has many potential suppliers for this paper. Your
customer can calibrate the printing machines, but after they have been calibrated,
changes to paper thickness can cause costly paper breaks in the printing machines.
Discuss the importance of variance to your customer, what your product quality
goal would be. Is this concept different from the situation in part (a) of this
question?
Desired thickness
Average
number
of breaks
Paper thickness
In this situation, the average paper thickness is not extremely important, so long
as the customers can calibrate their machinery. However, after you and the
customers have agreed on a thickness, essentially any variation is harmful,
because it increases the likelihood of paper breaks. The customers lose
production time, paper, and perhaps, the workers are subject to hazardous
conditions. If you do not supply consistent thickness, the customer will find
another supplier.
Therefore, the goal here is to retain the agreed average and reduce the
variability to the minimum achievable.
4
2.3 The data in Figure 2.3 reports experience in a blending of Residuum and more
expensive Gas Oil to produce a product with upper and lower viscosity specifications.
The “before” data represents manual operation by plant personnel. The “after” data
represents feedback control using a computer and a on-stream viscosity analyzer.
Discuss the performance and the source of benefits.
SAMPLE BENEFITS RESULTS

Before: mean = 376, stnd dev = 13
Crude oil residuum
viscosity control 40
Frequency (%)
30
20
10
0
LC
5
32
34
36
38
40
Viscosity (cst)
AC
Residuum
After: mean = 397 stnd dev = 7.5
60
Frequency (%)
50
40
30
Light Gas Oil 20
10
(expensive) 0
5
5
32
34
36
38
40
Viscosity (cst)
From: Bellingham, B., ISA paper No. 85-0716, 1985
Figure 2.3
The “before data is typical of poor control for a variable with upper and lower
bounds. The nature tendency is to maintain the variable close to the “middle” of
the range. This approach allows for the greatest variability without exceeding
either bound. However, the average viscosity is low, which indicates that
excessive expensive Gas Oil has been consumed and cannot be sold at a higher
price.
After analyzer feedback has been implemented, the variability has been reduced,
which allows the average value of the viscosity to be increased without exceeding
the bounds. Increased profit results from less use of Gas Oil in this lower value
product, which can be sold at a higher value.
5
Modelling of Dynamic Systems
3.1 Mixer: Dynamic model of a CSTR is derived in textbook Example 3.1. From the
model, we know that the outlet concentration of A, CA, can be affected by manipulating
the feed concentration, CA0, because there is a causal relationship between these
variables.
a. The feed concentration, CA0, results from mixing a stream of pure A with solvent,
as shown in the diagram. The desired value of CA0 can be achieved by adding a
right amount of A in the solvent stream. Determine the model that relates the
flow rate of reactant A, FA, and the feed concentration, CA0, at constant solvent
flow rate.
b. Relate the gain and time constant(s) to parameters in the process.
c. Describe a control valve that could be used to affect the flow of component A.
Describe the a) valve body and b) method for changing its percent opening
(actuator).
Fs Fo
CA,solvent CAO
Solvent
F1
CA
Reactant
FA
CA,reactant
Figure 3.1
a. In this question, we are interested in the behavior at the mixing point, which is
identified by the red circle in the figure above. We will apply the standard modelling
approach to this question.
Goal: Determine the behavior of CA0(t)
System: The liquid in the mixing point. (We assume that the mixing occurs essentially
immediately at the point.)
1
Balance: Since we seek the behavior of a composition, we begin with a component
balance.
Accumulation = in - out + generation
(1) MWA (Vm C A 0 | t + ∆t − Vm C A 0 | t ) = MX A ∆t (FS C AS + FA C AA − (FS + FA )C A 0 ) + 0
Note that no reaction occurs at the mixing point. We cancel the molecular weight, divide
by the delta time, and take the limit to yield
Vm dC A FS FA
(2) = C AS + C AA − C A 0
(FS + FA ) dt FS + FA FS + FA
No reactant (A) appears in the solvent, and the volume of the mixing point is very small.
Therefore, the model simplifies to the following algebraic form.
FA
(3) C AA = C A 0
FS + FA
Are we done? We can check degrees of freedom.
DOF = 1 – 1 = 0 Therefore, the model is complete.
CA0 (FS, FA, and CAA are known)
You developed models similar to equation (3) in your first course in Chemical
Engineering, Material and Energy balances. (See Felder and Rousseau for a refresher.)
We see that the dynamic modelling method yields a steady-state model when the time
derivative is zero.
Note that if the flow of solvent is much larger than the flow of reactant, FS >> FA, then,
C 
(4) C A 0 =  AA  FA

 FS 
If FS and CAA (concentration of pure reactant) are constant, the concentration of the
mixed stream is linearly dependent on the flow of reactant.
b. For the result in equation (4),
Time constant = 0 (This is a steady-state process.)
Gain = CAA/FS (The value will change as FS is changed.)
2
c. The control valve should have the following capabilities.
1. Introduce a restriction to flow.

2. Allow the restriction to be changed.
3. Have a method for automatic adjustment of the restriction, not requiring
intervention by a human.
1&2 These are typically achieved by placing an adjustable element near a restriction
through which the fluid must flow. As the element’s position in changed, the area
through which the fluid flows can be increased or decreased.
3 This requirement is typically achieved by connecting the adjustable element to a

metal rod (stem). The position of the rod can be changed to achieve the required
restriction. The power source for moving the rod is usually air pressure, because
it is safe (no sparks) and reliable. A rough schematic of an automatic control
valve is given in the following figure.
air pressure
diaphram
spring valve stem position
valve plug and seat
See a Valve You can see a picture of a typical control valve by clicking here.
Many other valves are used, but this picture shows you the key
features of a real, industrial control valve.
Hint: To return to this current page after seeing the valve, click
on the “previous view” arrow on the Adobe toolbar.
You can read more about valves at the McMaster WEB site.
3
3.2 Stirred tank mixer
a. Determine the dynamic response of the tank temperature, T, to a step change in
the inlet temperature, T0, for the continuous stirred tank shown in the Figure 3.2
below.
b. Sketch the dynamic behavior of T(t).
c. Relate the gain and time constants to the process parameters.
d. Select a temperature sensor that gives accuracy better than ± 1 K at a temperature
of 200 K.
T0
F
Figure 3.2
We note that this question is a simpler version of the stirred tank heat exchanger in
textbook Example 3.7. Perhaps, this simple example will help us in understanding the
heat exchanger example, which has no new principles, but more complex algebraic
manipulations. Remember, we use heat exchangers often, so we need to understand their
dynamic behavior.
a/c. The dynamic model is derived using the standard modelling steps.
Goal: The temperature in the stirred tank.
System: The liquid in the tank. See the figure above.
Balance: Since we seek the temperature, we begin with an energy balance.
4
Before writing the balance, we note that the kinetic and potential energies of the
accumulation, in flow and out flow do not change. Also, the volume in the tank is
essentially constant, because of the overflow design of the tank.
accumulation = in - out (no accumulation!)
(1) (U | t + ∆t − U | t ) = ∆t (H in − H out )
We divide by delta time and take the limit.
dU
(2) = (H in − H out )
dt
The following thermodynamic relationships are used to relate the system energy to the
temperature.
dU/dt = VρCv dT/dt H = FρCp (T-Tref) For this liquid system, Cv ≈ Cp
Substituting gives the following.
dT
(3) Vρ = Fρ(T0 − T )
dt
Are we done? Let’s check the degrees of freedom.
DOF = 1 –1 = 0
T (V, and T0 known)
This equation can be rearranged and subtracted from its initial steady state to give
dT'
(4) τ + T ' = KT ' 0 with τ = V/F K=1
dt
Note that the time constant is V/F and the gain is 1.0. These are not always true!
We must derive the models to determine the relationship between the process and
the dynamics. See Example 3.7 for different results for the stirred tank heat
exchanger.
5
The dynamic response for the first order equation
differential equation to a step in inlet temperature
can be derived in the same manner as in
Examples 3.1, 3.2, etc. The result is the T
following expression.
Time
(5) T ' = K∆T0 (1 − e − t / τ )
and T = Tinitial + K∆T0 (1 − e − t / τ ) T0
d. We base the temperature sensor selection on Time
the information on advantages and disadvantages

of sensors. A table is available on the McMaster WEB site, and links are provided to
more extensive sensor information. A version of such a table is given below.
Since a high accuracy is required for a temperature around 200 K, an RTD (a sensor
based on the temperature sensitivity of electrical resistance) is recommended. Even this
choice might not achieve the 1 K accuracy requirement.
sensor type limits of accuracy (1,2) dynamics, advantages disadvantages

application time
(°C) constant (s)
thermocouple
type E (3)
(chromel-constantan) -100 to 1000 ± 1.5 or 0.5% 1. good reproducibility 1. minimum span, 40 °C
(0 to 900 °C) 2. wide range 2. temperature vs emf
type J not exactly linear
(iron-constantan) 0 to 750 ± 2.2 or 0.75% 3. drift over time
4. low emf corrupted by
type K noise
(chromel-nickel) 0 to 1250 ± 2.2 or 0.75%
type T ± 1.0 or 1.5%

(copper-constantan) -160 to 400 (-160 to 0 °C)
RTD -200 to 650 (0.15 +.02 T) °C (3) 1. good accuracy 1. self heating
2. small span possible 2. less physically
3. linearity rugged
3. self-heating error
Thermister -40 to 150 0.10°C (3) 1. good accuracy 1. highly nonlinear
2. little drift 2. only small span
3. less physically
rugged
4. drift
Bimetallic ± 2% 1. low cost 1. local display
2. physically rugged
Filled system -200 to 800 ± 1% 1-10 1. simple and low cost 1. not high temperatures
2. no hazards 2. sensitive to external
pressure
1. °C or % of span, whichever is larger
2. for RTDs, inaccuracy increases approximately linearly with temperature deviation from 0 °C
3. dynamics depend strongly on the sheath or thermowell (material, diameter and wall thickness), location of element in the sheath (e.g.,
bonded or air space), fluid type, and fluid velocity. Typical values are 2-5 seconds for high fluid velocities.
6
3.3 Isothermal CSTR: The model used to predict the concentration of the product,
CB, in an isothermal CSTR will be formulated in this exercise. The reaction occurring in
the reactor is
A→B rA = -kCA
Concentration of component A in the feed is CA0, and there is no component B in the

feed. The assumptions for this problem are
F0
1. the tank is well mixed,
2. negligible heat transfer, CA0
F1
3. constant flow rate,
4. constant physical properties,
5. constant volume,
6. no heat of reaction, and
7. the system is initially at steady state.
V CA
Figure 3.3
a. Develop the differential equations that can be used to determine the dynamic
response of the concentration of component B in the reactor, CB(t), for a given
CA0(t).
b. Relate the gain(s) and time constant(s) to the process parameters.
b. After covering Chapter 4, solve for CB(t) in response to a step change in CA0(t),
∆CA0.
c. Sketch the shape of the dynamic behavior of CB(t).
d. Could this system behave in an underdamped manner for different (physically
possible) values for the parameters and assumptions?
In this question, we investigate the dynamic behavior of the product concentration for a
single CSTR with a single reaction. We learned in textbook Example 3.2 that the
concentration of the reactant behaves as a first-order system. Is this true for the product
concentration?
a. We begin by performing the standard modelling steps.
Goal: Dynamic behavior of B in the reactor.
System: Liquid in the reactor.
Balance: Because we seek the composition, we begin with a component material

balance.
7
(1) MWB (VC B | t + ∆t −VC B | t ) = MWB ∆t (FC B0 − FC B + VkC A )
We can cancel the molecular weight, divide by delta time, and take the limit to obtain the
following.
dC B
(2) V = FC B0 − FC B + VkC A
dt
0
We can subtract the initial steady state and rearrange to obtain
dC' B V Vk
(3) τB + C' B = K B C' A τA = KB =
dt F F
DOF = 2 – 1 = 1 ≠ 0 No!
CB and CA
The first equation was a balance on B; we find that the variable CA remains. We first see
if we can evaluate this using a fundamental balance.
Goal: Concentration of A in the reactor.

System: Liquid in the reactor.
Balance: Component A
(4) MWA (VC A | t + ∆t −VC A | t ) = MWA ∆t (FC A 0 − FC A − VkC A )
Following the same procedures, we obtain the following.
dC' A V F
(5) τA + C' A = K B C' A 0 τA = KA =
dt F + Vk F + Vk
Are we done? Let’s check the degrees of freedom for equations (3) and (5).
DOF = 2 – 2 = 0 Yes!
CB and CA
The model determining the effect of CA0 on CB is given in equations (3) and (5).
8
b. The relationship between the gains and time constants and the process are given in
equations (3) and (5).
c. We shall solve the equations for a step in feed concentration using Laplace transforms.
First we take the Laplace transform of both equations; then we combine the resulting
algebraic equations to eliminate the variable CA.
(6) τ B (sC' B (s) − C' B ( t ) | t =0 ) + C' B (s) = K B C' A (s)
(7) τ A (sC' A (s) − C' A ( t ) | t =0 ) + C' A (s) = K A C' A 0 (s)
KAKB
(8) C' B (s) = C' A 0 (s)
(τ A s + 1)(τ B s + 1)
We substitute the input forcing function, C’A0(s) = ∆CA0/s, and invert using entry 10 of
Table 4.1 (with a=0) in the textbook.
KAKB ∆C' A 0
(9) C' B (s) =
(τ A s + 1)(τ B s + 1) s
 τA τB 
(10) C' B ( t ) = K A K B ∆C A 0 1 + e − t / τA − e − t / τB 
 τB − τA τB − τA 
c. The shape of the response of CB using the numerical values from textbook Example 3.2
is given in the following figure. Note the overdamped, “S-shaped” curve.
This is much different from the response solid = CB

1
of CA.
0.8
Compare the responses and explain the

0.6
differences.
0.4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
d. Because the roots of the denominator time
in the Laplace transform are real, this 2
process can never behave as an 1.5

underdamped system.
1
0.5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
time
9
3.4 Inventory Level: Process plants have many tanks that store material. Generally,
the goal is to smooth differences in flows among units, and no reaction occurs in these
tanks. We will model a typical tank shown in Figure 2.4.
a. Liquid to a tank is being determined by another part of the plant; therefore, we have
no influence over the flow rate. The flow from the tank is pumped using a
centrifugal pump. The outlet flow rate depends upon the pump outlet pressure and
the resistance to flow; it does not depend on the liquid level. We will use the valve
to change the resistance to flow and achieve the desired flow rate. The tank is
cylindrical, so that the liquid volume is the product of the level times the cross
sectional area, which is constant.
Assume that the flows into and out of the

tank are initially equal. Then, we Fin
decrease the flow out in a step by

adjusting the valve. Fout
L
i. Determine the behavior of the

level as a function of time. V=AL
Figure 2.4
We need to formulate a model of the process to understand its dynamic behavior. Let’s use
our standard modelling procedure.
Goal: Determine the level as a function of time.
Variable: L(t)
System: Liquid in the tank.
Balance: We recognize that the level depends on the total amount of liquid in the tank.
Therefore, we select a total material balance. Note that no generation term appears in the
total material balance.
(accumulation) = in - out
( ρAL ) t + ∆t − ( ρAL ) t = ρFin ∆t − ρFout ∆t
We cancel the density, divide by the delta time, and take the limit to yield
dL
A = Fin − Fout
dt
10
The flow in and the flow are independent to the value of the level. In this problem, the
flow in is constant and a step decrease is introduced into the flow out. As a result,
dL
A = Fin − Fout = constant > 0
dt
We know that if the derivative is constant, i.e., independent of time, the level will increase
linearly with time. While the mathematician might say the level increases to infinity, we
know that it will increase until it overflows. Thus, we have the following plot of the
behavior.
To infinity
Overflow!
Fin
Fout
time
Note that the level never reaches a steady-state value (between overflow and
completely dry). This is very different behavior from the tank concentration that we
have seen. Clearly, we must closely observe the levels and adjust a flow to maintain
the levels in a desirable range. If you are in charge of the level – and you do not have
feedback control – you better not take a coffee break!
The level is often referred to as an integrating process – Why? The level can be determined
by solving the model by separation and integration, as shown in the following.
∫ A dL = ∫ ( Fin − Fout )dt

L = A∫ ( Fin − Fout )dt
Thus, the level integrates the difference between inlet and outlet flows.
11
ii. Compare this result to the textbook Example 3.6, the draining tank.
Fin
Fin
Fout
L Fout L
V=AL
Key Issue Example 3.6 This question

Draining tank Tank with outlet pump
Level model By overall material balance By overall material balance

Flow out Depends on the level Independent of the level
(or very nearly so)
Level behavior First order exponential for a step Linear, unbounded response
change to a step change
Level stability stable unstable
iii. Describe a sensor that could be used to measure the level in this vessel.
Naturally, we could tell you the answer to this question. But, you will benefit more from
finding the answer. Click to access the instrumentation resources and review Section 2.4
and links to more detailed resources. CLICK HERE
Fin
Fout
Only superman has X-ray vision, so how do I

determine the level in the tank?
12
3.5 Designing tank volume: In this question you will determine the size of a storage
vessel. Feed liquid is delivered to the plant site periodically, and the plant equipment is
operated continuously. A tank is provided to store the feed liquid. The situation is
sketched in Figure 3.5. Assume that the storage tank is initially empty and the feed
delivery is given in Figure 2.5. Determine the minimum height of the tank that will prevent
overflow between the times 0 to 100 hours.
Fin
Fout = 12.0 m3/h

L=?
A = 50 m2
30.0
Fin
(m3/h)
0 End of problem at 100 h
0 20 40 50 70 80
Time (h)
Figure 3.5 Tank between the feed delivery and the processing units.
This problem shows how the dynamic behavior of a process unit can be important in
the design of the process equipment.
Our approach to solving the problem involves determining the liquid volume over the
complete time period from 0 to 100 hours. The maximum volume during the period can be
used to evaluate the size of the tank; any tank smaller would experience an overflow.
The dynamic model for the tank was formulated in the previous solution, which we will
apply in this solution. The behavior of the system is summarized in the following table and
sketched in the figure.
Time (h) Fin Fout (m3/h) dV/dt = Fin -Fout V beginning V end of
(m3/h) of period period
(m3) (m3)
0 - 20 30 12 18 0 360
20-40 0 12 -12 360 120
40-50 30 12 18 120 300
50-70 0 12 -12 300 60
70-80 30 12 18 60 240
80-100 30 12 -12 240 0
13
400
Volume (m3)
300
200
100
0
0 20 40 50 70 80 100
time (h)
We see in the table and figure that the maximum volume is 360 m3. Since the cross
sectional area is 50 m2, the minimum height (or level) for the tank is calculated to be 7.2 m.
L = 360 m3 / 50 m2 = 7.2 m
We should note that this calculation results in the tank being completely full at t = 20
hours; there is no margin for error. We should look into the likely variability of the feed
deliveries and the production rates before making a final decision on the correct volume.
3.6 Modelling procedure: Sketch a flowchart of the modelling method that we are
using to formulate dynamic models.
We should develop this type of sketch so that we can visualize the procedure and clarify
the sequence of steps. A flowchart is given on the following page. Did yours look
similar?
14
Flowchart of Modeling Method
(We have not yet done the parts in the yellow boxes)
Goal: Assumptions: Data:
Variable(s): related to goals
System: volume within which variables are independent of position
Fundamental Balance: e.g. material, energy
DOF = 0 Check DOF ≠ 0 Another balance:

D.O.F. -Fundamental balance
-Constitutive equations
[e.g.: Q =hA(Th-Tc)]
No
Is model linear? Expand in Taylor Series
Yes
Express in deviation variables
Group parameters to evaluate [gains (K), time-constants (τ), dead-times(θ)]
Take Laplace transform
Substitute specific input, e.g., Analyze the model for:

step, and solve for output - causality
- order
- stability
Analytical solution Numerical solution - damping
(step)
Combine several models into
integrated system
15
Modelling of Non-Linear Systems
4.1 Isothermal CSTR: The chemical reactor shown in textbook Figure 3.1 and
repeated in the following is considered in this question. The reaction occurring in the
reactor is
A→B rA = -kCA0.5
The following assumptions are appropriate for the system.

(i) the reactor is well mixed,
(ii) the reactor is isothermal,
(iii) density of the liquid in the reactor is constant,
(iv) flow rates are constant, and
(v) reactor volume is constant.
a. Formulate the model for the dynamic response of the concentration of A in the
reactor, CA(t).
b. Linearize the equation(s) in (a).
c. Solve the linearized equation analytically for a step change in the inlet
concentration of A, ∆CA0.
d. Sketch the dynamic behavior of CA(t).
e. Discuss how you would evaluate the accuracy of the linearized model.
Goal → Variable System→ Balance → DOF → Linear?

(or constitutive equation)
Again, we apply the standard modelling approach, with a check for linearity.
a. Goal: Determine composition of A as a function of time.
Variable: CA in the reactor
System: The liquid in the reactor.
Balance: Component balance on A.
(1) (
MWA (VC A | t + ∆t −VC A | t ) = MWA ∆t FC A 0 − FC A − VkC 0A.5 )
1
Divide by delta time and take the limit to obtain
dC A
(2) V = F(C A 0 − FC A ) − VkC 0A.5
dt
DOF = 1 - 1 = 0 Yes!
b. Is the model linear? If we decide to solve the model numerically, we do not have to
linearize; in fact, the non-linear model would be more accurate. However, in this
problem we seek the insight obtained from the approximate, linear model.
All terms involve a constant times a variable (linear) except for the following term, which
is linearized using the Taylor series..
(3) ( )
C 0A.5 ≈ C 0A.5 s (
+ 0.5 C −A0.5 ) (C
s A − C As ) + higher order terms
This approximation can be substituted into equation 2, and the initial steady-state model
subtracted to obtain the following, with C’A = CA - CAS.
dC' A − 0.5
(4) V = F(C' A 0 −FC' A ) − Vk (0.5C As ) C' A
dt
This linear, first order ordinary differential equation model can be arranged into the
standard form, given in the following.
dC' A V F
(5) τ + C' A = KC' A 0 with τ = K=
dt F+ 0.5VkC −As0.5 − 0.5
F + 0.5VkC As
c. Let’s solve this equation using the Laplace transform method. We can take the
Laplace transform of equation (5) to obtain
(6) τ(sC' A (s) − C' A ( t ) | t =0 ) + C' A (s) = KC' A 0 (s)
Note that equation (6) is general for any function CA0(t). We can rearrange this equation
and substitute the Laplace transform of the step change in feed composition
(C’A0(s)=∆CA0/s to give.
K ∆C A 0
(7) C' A (s) =
τs + 1 s
2
We can take the inverse Laplace transform using entry 5 in textbook Table 4.1 to give
(8) (
C' A ( t ) = ∆C A 0 K 1 − e − t / τ )
d. A typical sketch is given here. We already have experience with the step response to a
linear, first order system. We know that
- the output changes immediately after the step

is introduced.
C’A
- the maximum slope appears when the step is
introduced
- the curve has a smooth (non-oscillatory Time
response)
- 63% of the change occurs when
t = τ (past the step) C’A0
- the final steady state is K(∆input)
Time
e. We should always investigate the accuracy of our mathematical models! We can

estimate the accuracy of the parameters used based on
Laboratory data used in developing the - Is the rate expression accurate

constitutive model - uncertainty in k
Construction of equipment V (cross sectional area)
Accuracy of measurements used to achieve V (level) and F (flow)
desired values
In addition, we should estimate the error introduced by the linearization. No error is

introduced if the process stays exactly at the initial steady state, and the errors generally
increase as the process deviates further from the initial steady state. Here, two methods
are suggested. (Remember, we do not seek highly accurate models – we seek simple,
approximate models for control design, which will be explained shortly.)
1. Evaluate the key parameters over the range of operation. We can evaluate the gain
(K) and the time constant (τ) at different values over the range of operation. If these
parameters do not change much, the linearization would be deemed accurate.
2. Steady-state prediction. Compare the steady-state output values from the non-linear
model with steady-state output values from the linearized model (K∆input). This method
will check the gain only, not the time constant.
3
4.2 Controlling the Reactor Concentration by Feed Flow Rate: The reactor in
question 3.1 above is considered again in this question. Component A is pumped to the
reactor from the feed tank. The inlet concentration of A, CA0, is constant, and the feed
flow rate varies with time.
a. Develop the dynamic model to predict the concentration of A.

b. Linearize the equation and solve the linearized equation analytically for a step
change in the feed flow rate, ∆F.
c. Sketch the dynamic behavior of the effluent concentration, CA(t).
d. Describe the equipment required to maintain the feed flow rate at a desired value.
F0
CA0
F1
V CA
Figure 3.1
Motivation: Why are we interested in this model? Often, the feed composition
cannot be adjusted easily by mixing streams. Therefore, we sometimes adjust the feed
flow rate to achieve the desired reaction conversion. (We do not like to do this, because
we change both the production rate and the conversion when we adjust feed flow rate.)
a. We begin by applying our standard method for modelling.
a. Goal: Determine composition of A as a function of time.
Variable: CA in the reactor
System: The liquid in the reactor.
Balance: Component balance on A.
(1) (
MWA (VC A | t + ∆t −VC A | t ) = MWA ∆t FC A 0 − FC A − VkC 0A.5 )
Divide by delta time and take the limit to obtain
4
dC A
(2) V = F(C A 0 − FC A ) − VkC 0A.5
dt
DOF = 1 - 1 = 0 Yes!
b. Is the model linear? If we decide to solve the model numerically, we do not have to
linearize; in fact, the non-linear model would be more accurate. However, in this
problem we seek the insight obtained from the approximate, linear model.
We see that several terms are non-linear. In fact, when flow is a variable, we would
usually find terms (F)(variable), where “variable” is temperature, compositions, etc. The
following terms will be linearized by expanding the Taylor series.
(3) FC A 0 ≈ (FC A 0 ) s + Fs C' A 0 + C A 0s F'+ higher order terms
(4) FC A ≈ (FC A ) s + Fs C' A +C As F'+ higher order terms
(5) ( )
C 0A.5 ≈ C 0A.5 s (
+ 0.5 C −A0.5 ) (C
s A − C As ) + higher order terms
Substituting the approximations, subtracting the initial steady state, and rearranging gives
the following.
dC' A V (C A 0s − C As )
(6) τ + C' A = KF' with τ = K=
dt Fs + − 0.5
0.5VkC As Fs + 0.5VkC −As0.5
We can solve this equation for step change in flow rate by taking the Laplace transform,
substituting F’(s) = ∆F/s, and taking the inverse Laplace transform. The result is given in
the following equation.
(7) (
C' A ( t ) = (∆F)K 1 − e − t / τ )
5
c. The plot and qualitative properties are the same as for other first order systems.
- the output changes immediately after the step

is introduced.
C’A
- the maximum slope appears when the step is
introduced
- the curve has a smooth (non-oscillatory Time
response)
- 63% of the change occurs when
t = τ (past the step) F’
- the final steady state is K(∆input)
Time
Does this make sense? As we increase the feed flow, the “space time” in the reactor
decreases. (See Fogler (1999) or other textbook on reaction engineering for a refresher.)
When the space time decreases, the conversion decreases, and the concentration of
reactant increases. Yes, the model agrees with our qualitative understanding!
d. Equipment is required to control the flow is needed if we are to adjust the flow to
achieve the desired reactor operation, e.g., conversion. Any feedback controller requires
a sensor and a final element. (See Chapter 2.) The sensor could be any of the sensors
described in the Instrumentation Notes. The most common sensor in the process
industries is the orifice meter, which measures flow based on the pressure drop around an
orifice restriction in a pipe. The final element would be a control valve that can adjust
the restriction to flow.
Pump to supply Valve with

the “head” for adjustable stem
flow position
)P
Orifice
meter
6
4.3 Isothermal CSTR with two input changes: This question builds on the results
from tutorial Questions 3.1 and 3.2. Consider a CSTR with the following reaction
occurring in the reactor
A→B -rA = kCA0.5
Assuming 1) the reactor is isothermal, 2) the reactor is well mixed, 3) density of the
reactor content is constant, and 4) the reactor volume is constant.
a. Derive the linearized model in deviation variables relating a change in CA0 on the
reactor concentration, CA.
b. Derive the linearized model in deviation variables relating a change in F on the
reactor concentration, CA.
c. Determine the transfer functions for the two models derived in parts a and b.
d. Draw a block diagram relating CA0 and F to CA.
e. The following input changes are applied to the CSTR:
1. A step change in feed concentration, CA0, with step size ∆CA0 at tC, and
2. A step change in feed flow rate, F, with step size ∆F at tF.> tC.
Without solving the equations, sketch the behavior of CA(t).
a/c. The model for the change in CA0 (with the subscript meaning the input change
CA0). The model for this response has been derived in previous tutorial question 3.1, and
the results are repeated in the following.
dC' A V F
τ CA 0 + C' A = K CA 0 C' A 0 with τ CA 0 = K CA 0 =
dt F + 0.5VkC −As0.5 F + 0.5VkC −As0.5
K CA 0 (C A (s)) CA 0 K CA 0
(1) (C' A (s)) CA 0 = C' A 0 (s) transfer function =
τ CA 0 s + 1 C A 0 (s) τ CA 0 s + 1
(
C' A ( t ) = ∆C A 0 K CA 0 1 − e − t / τCA 0 )
7
b/c. The model for a change in F (with the subscript meaning the input change F) The
model for this response has been derived in previous tutorial question 3.2, and the results
are repeated in the following.
dC' A V (C A 0s − C As )
τF + C' A = K F F' with τ F = − 0.5
KF = − 0.5
dt Fs + 0.5VkC As Fs + 0.5VkC As
KF (C A (s)) F KF
(2) (C' A (s)) F = F' (s) transfer function =
τ Fs +1 F(s) τ Fs + 1
(
C' A ( t ) = (∆F)K F 1 − e − t / τ F )
c. The transfer functions are given in the results above.
Remember that a transfer function simply gives the relationship between the
input and output.
INPUT → TRANSFER → OUTPUT

FUNCTION
Since the system is linearized, we can add the output changes in C’A to determine the
overall affect.
(3) (C' A (s)) = (C' A (s)) CA 0 + (C' A (s)) F
d. The block diagram is given in the figure.
Note that the primes (’) to designate deviation variables are not used in transfer
functions or block diagrams. This is because transfer functions and block
diagrams ALWAYS use deviation variables.
Remember that the block diagram is simply a picture of equations (1) to (3).
8
(CA(s))CA0
CA0(s) KCA0/(JCA0s+1)
+ CA(s)
F(s) KF/(JFs+1)
(CA(s))F
e. We can sketch the shape of the response without knowing the numerical values of
many parameters because we understand dynamic systems. Let’s list some aspects of the
response that we know.
1. KF is positive
2. KCA0 is positive
3. Both systems are first order
4. The two time constants are equal
5. Both systems are stable (time constants are positive)
The figure below was generated with 1) a positive step change in CA0 and after a long
time, a positive step change in F.
time
What would the plots look like with

a. a positive change in CA0 and a negative in F?
b. both changes introduced at the same time?
c. A slow ramp introduced in CA0?
Can you think of other types of input changes and sketch the output concentration?
9
4.4 Let’s consider the usefulness of the transfer functions that we just derived. From
the transfer function CA(s)/CA0(s), answer the following questions.
a. Does a causal relationship exist? Hint: How could the process gain help?
b. What is the order of the system? Hint: How many differential equations are
in the model?
c. Is the system stable? Wow: we sure need to know if a process is
unstable!
d. Could CA(t) exhibit oscillations Question: Why would we like to know
from a step change in CA0? this?
e. Would any of your answer change Important: We can learn general types of
for any values of the parameters of behavior for some processes!
the model (F, V, k, etc.)?
a. A causal relationship exists if the transfer function is NOT zero. While this is not
exactly correct, we will test for the existence of a causal relationship by evaluating the
steady-state gain.
K=0 ⇒ no causal relationship K≠0 ⇒ causal relationship
We should also look at the magnitude of the gain.
The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is yes; a causal relationship exists!
Follow-up question: Can you think of a situation in which the steady-state gain is zero,
but a causal relationship exists?
b. The order of the system is the number of first order differential equations that relate the
input to the output.
One quick way to check this is to evaluate the highest power of “s” in the
denominator of the transfer function.
The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is one, or first order.
Follow-up question: Are the order of all input/output pairs the same for any processes?
Hint: What is the order of CB(s)/CA0(s) for the same reactor?
c. The system is stable if the output is bounded for a bounded input. (Any real input is
bounded, but a ramp could become infinite when we overlook the physical world, where
valves open completely and mole fractions are bounded between 0 and 1.)
We determine stability by evaluating sign of the exponent relating the variable to time.
Recall that y = A e –αt = A e –t/τ. The value of alpha is the root(s) of the denominator of
the transfer function!
10
α = 1/τ > 0 ⇒ stable α = 1/τ ≤ 0 ⇒ stable
The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is τ > 0; therefore, the system is stable.
Follow-up question: If one variable in a system is stable (unstable), must all other
variables in the system be stable (unstable)?
d. The function form of the time dependence of concentration is given in the following.
(
C' A ( t ) = ∆C A 0 K CA 0 1 − e − t / τCA 0 )
When the roots of the denominator of the transfer function are real, the system will
be over damped (or critically damped).
The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is no.
Follow-up question: If one variable in a system is overdamped (underdamped), must all

other variables in the system be overdamped (underdamped)?
e. We can determine possible types of behavior by looking at the range of (physically

possible) values for the parameters in a process. (We must assume that the model
structure, i.e., the equations, is correct.)
The parameters in the model are all positive; none can change sign. For this and the
equations for the gain and time constant, we conclude that
The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is no, the qualitative features (causal, first order, stable)
cannot change.
You can test your understanding by answering these questions for any other model
in the course!
Now, you can apply your analysis skills to another process!
11
4.5 Process plants contain many interconnected units. (As we will see, a control loop
contains many interconnected elements as well.) Transfer functions and block diagrams
help us combine individual models to develop an overall model of interconnected
elements.
Select some simple processes that you have studied and modelled in this course.
a. Connect them is series.
b. Derive an overall input-output model based on the individual models.
c. Determine the gain, stability and damping.
d. Sketch the response of the output variable to a step in the input variable.
a. Series process - As a sample problem, we will consider the heat exchanger and reactor
series process in the following figure. This is a common design that provides flexibility
by enabling changes to the reactor temperature. As we proceed in the course, we will see
how to adjust the heating medium flow to achieve the desired reactor operation using
feedback control.
F
T0 CA0 F
CA0
T CA
Fh
Heat exchanger CST Reactor
In this example, the heating medium flow, Fh, (valve opening) is manipulated, and the
concentration of the reactant in the reactor, CA, is the output variable.
As we proceed in the course, we will see how to adjust the heating medium flow to
achieve the desired reactor operation using automatic feedback control.
Heat exchanger: The heat exchanger model is derived in the textbook Example 3.7, page
76. The results of the modelling are summarized in the following, with the subscript “c”
changed to “h”, because this problem involves heating.
Energy balance: (with Cp ≈ Cv)
dT
Vex ρC p = FρCp(T0 − T ) + Q − W
dt
12
aFcb +1
with Q = UA(T − (Thin + Thout ) / 2) and UA =
Fc + aFcb / 2ρ h C ph
Linearized model:
dT'
τ ex + T ' = K pex Fc' with the subscript “ex” for exchanger.
dt
Transfer function: (Taking the Laplace transform of the linearized model)
T (s) K pex
= = G ex (s) a first order system!
Fh (s) τ ex s + 1
Non-isothermal CSTR: The basic model of the CSTR is given in textbook equations
(3.75) and (3.76), which represent the component material and energy balances. They are
repeated below, with typographical errors corrected here!
dC A
V = F(C A 0 − C A ) − Vk 0 e − E / RT C A
dt
dT
VρC p = FρC p (T0 − T ) − UA(T − Tcin ) + (−∆H rxn )Vk 0 e − E / RT C A
dt
These equations are linearized in Appendix C to give the following approximate model,
with only input T0 varying.
dC' A
= a 11C' A +a 12 T '
dt
dT'
= a 21C' A + a 22 T '+a 25 T ' 0
dt
We can take the Laplace transform of the linearized equations and combine them by
eliminating the reactor temperature, T’, to give the following transfer function.
C' A (s) a 25
= 2 = G r (s) a second order system
T ' 0 (s) s − (a 11 + a 22 )s + (a 11a 22 − a 12 a 21 )
Note that the reactor is a second order system because the energy balance relates inlet
temperature to reactor temperature and the component material balance relates
temperature to concentration, because of the effect of temperature on reaction rate.
b. Combining the linearized models: The block diagram of this system is given in the
following figure. This is a series connection of two processes, a first order exchanger and
a second order reactor, which gives the overall third order transfer function given in the
following equation.
13
C' A (s) T ' (s) C' A (s) K pex a 25
= = G ex (s)G r (s) =
T ' 0 (s) T ' 0 (s) T ' (s) (
(τ ex s + 1) s − (a 11 + a 22 )s + (a 11a 22 − a 12 a 21 )
2
)
Note that heat exchanger and reactor are a third order system.
c. Model analysis –
Gain: The steady-state gain can be derived from this model by setting s=0. (Recall that
this has meaning only if the process is stable.) The gain in this system is none zero, as
long as the chemical reaction depends on temperature.
Damping: We cannot be sure that the roots of the denominator of the transfer function are
real. If fact, the analysis of the CSTR in textbook Appendix C shows that the dynamics
can be either over or underdamped, depending on the design and operating parameters.
Stability: We cannot be sure that the CSTR is stable, i.e., roots of the denominator of the
transfer function have negative real parts. If fact, the analysis of the CSTR in textbook
Appendix C shows that the dynamics can be either stable or unstable, depending on the
design and operating parameters.
d. Step response: Many different responses are possible for the CSTR, and only one
case is sketched here. Recall the dynamic response between T0 and T1 is first order.
Since we have copious experience with this step response, it is not given in a sketch.
An example of the response between T0 and T3 are given in the following figure. The
plot is developed for an example without heat of reaction. In this situation, the third
order system is guaranteed to be stable and overdamped; as we expect, the response
has an “s-shaped” output response to a step input, with the reactant concentration
decreasing in response to an increase in heating fluid to the exchanger.
DYNAMIC SIMULATION
Reactant concentration
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time
Heating fluid valve

opening
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time
14
Dynamic Behavior of Typical Dynamic Systems
5.1 First order System: A model for a first order system is given in the following
equation.
dY
= X in − X out (5.1.1)
dt
What conditions have to be satisfied for the system to be self-regulating?
A stable self-regulating system has an output variable that tends to a steady state
after the input variable has reached an altered steady-state value. The system
described in equation (5.1.1) will not necessarily be self-regulating.
If both Xin and Xout are independent of Y, the derivative of the output variable is
independent of the input variable. For example, the following condition could
occur.
dY
= X in − X out = 5 − 2 = 3
dt
Since the derivative is a constant, the output variable would increase without
limit. Therefore, the system is non-self-regulating and is unstable.
Let’s look at a physical system that is Level

stable and self-regulatory. The level in
the tank is affected by the flow in to and
out of the tank. The overall material
balance has the form of equation (5.1.1)
and gives the following for a tank with
straight sides. Fout
Fin
dL
= Fin − Fout
dt
As the level increases, the flow in decreases, which is a stabilizing effect. Also,
as the level increases, the flow out increases, which is a stabilizing effect. This is
a self-regulating, first-order system.
Note that a self-regulating system is not guaranteed to behave well. For the level
example, a large increase in the flow in (due to an increase in the source pressure)
will cause the level to increase. The flow out will also increase, but not
necessarily enough to reach a constant level before the level overflows. We see
that the magnitude of a disturbance will influence whether the variables in a self-
regulating system remain within acceptable limits.
1
We can draw two conclusions from Question 5.1.
1. We seek to design processes without non-self-regulating variables.
(This is not always possible.)
2. We must control non-self-regulating variables.
(This is possible; see Chapter 18 for details.)
5.2 Second and higher order systems can be over or under damped. Which is more
likely to occur in chemical processes?
X1 X2 X3 XN+1
…...
Most chemical processes are interconnections of first-order systems, resulting

from material and energy balances. These interconnections involve interacting
and non-interacting first order systems, which are overdamped. Therefore, the
vast majority of chemical process - without feedback control - are overdamped.
However, we will see that the application of feedback control to these processes
can, and often does, result in underdamped systems. So, even though models
developed in Chapters 3-5 are overdamped, engineers must deal with
underdamped behavior.
Most chemical process without control are overdamped.
5.3 You are working in a plant and need to estimate the delay for flow through a pipe.
How can you evaluate the dead time?
There are two obvious ways.
1. Measure the length of the pipe (L). Then, determine the velocity of the
fluid in the pipe (v). For turbulent flow (with a flat velocity profile), the dead
time would be θ = L/v.
2. Perhaps, the pipe is underground, and

we do not know the path taken. We can
perform an experiment to evaluate dead time. Xout
We can introduce a step change of a tracer θ θ = dead time
component with a small flow rate, so that the Xin

tracer does not modify the process behavior.
The dead time is the time between the
time
introduction of the tracer at the inlet to the
2
pipe and the first time that the tracer appeared at the pipe outlet.
5.4 Are the pressures in the vessels in Figure 5.4 self-regulating or non-self-regulating?
The fluid is a gas, and the feed and exhaust pressures are constant. In answering this
question, think about the response of the system to a change in the percent opening of the
first valve.
Qualitative analysis: We begin by recognizing that the flow rate through a pipe-
valve combination depends on the pressure difference (Pin - Pout), assuming that
the flow rate is sub-sonic. When the first valve opening is increased, the flow into
the first vessel increases. The increase in vessel pressure will offer greater
resistance to the flow in and a greater driving force for the flow out. Therefore,
the vessel pressure is self-regulating.
Modelling: The mass balance for the gas in a vessel is given by the following.
d ( mass )
= ρ in Fin − ρ out Fout = ρ in C v ( v i −1 ) Pi −1 − Pi − ρ out C v ( v i ) Pi − Pi +1
dt
Also, the mass in the vessel can be related to the pressure by the ideal gas law. If
the temperature is assumed constant, the derivative of mass is simply a constant
times the derivative of pressure.
PV ( MW )
mass =
RT
dP RT d ( mass )
=
dt V ( MW ) dt
Substituting, yields the expression that demonstrates the reliance of the pressure
derivative on the pressure
V ( MW ) dPi
= ρ in C v ( vi −1 ) Pi −1 − Pi − ρ out C v ( vi ) Pi − Pi +1
RT dt
Therefore, the pressure in each vessel is self-regulating.
Note that the process is an interacting series of first-order systems.
3
5.5 You have obtained the graph in Figure 5.5 by making a step to a valve opening and
observing the dynamic response of the temperature. From the results of this experiment,
describe the physical process (order, dead time, etc.)
Change in Measured
2
Output (K)
-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
3
Change in valve opeining (%)
-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (min)
Figure 5.5
The experimental data gives us valuable information about the process. In fact,
we will see in the upcoming topics that this type of information is exactly what is
used for designing control systems. However, the data shows the “input-output”
behavior only, and it does not provide sufficient information to enable us to
reconstruct the complete process structure.
Let’s see what we can conclude about the process.
• The output variable attains steady state after a step change in the input.
We conclude that the process is stable and self-regulatory.
• From the shape of the output to a step, which does not oscillate, we
conclude that the process is overdamped.
• The output does not change perceptibly when the input variable is first
changed. This indicates a “dead time”. However, we cannot be sure about
the process structure that would yield this behavior. Recall that a series of
first-order processes has a step response with essentially no change for an
initial period; we call this “apparent dead time”. So, we conclude that the
process has either an actual time delay, e.g., a pipe, or a higher order,
overdamped process. Naturally, a combination of dead time and time
constants is also possible.
4
• Since the output has no “inverse response” we conclude that no negative
zeros in the transfer function. Since the output does not overshoot its final
value, we conclude that positive zeros are not greater than the poles. In
short, the step response is smooth and monotonic in spite of any parallel
paths that might exist.
• We can determine the steady-state gain from the graph, which is
Kp = ∆(output)/ ∆ (input) ≈ 1.0 K/%open
• We can determine the “speed” of the response, which we characterize

using the 63% time of the response.
t 63% = ∑ (θ
i
i + τ i ) ≈ 15.0 min
As we see, we can learn a lot from the data, but we cannot describe the
process exactly.
5.6 We have models for several processes which we decide to connect in the process
structure shown in Figure 5.6. The input variable experiences a step change of 3.5 %
open. Describe the dynamic behavior based on qualitative and semi-quantitative
analysis, that is, do not simulate the process.
Tf TR
A2
A-2
fuel CP
v
v(s) Tf(s) TR(s) CP(s) A2(s)
G1(s) G2(s) G3(s) G4(s)

Valve Reactor feed Reactor Product Product
opening temperature temperature Composition Composition
Measurement
Figure 5.6
5
The models for the system are given in the following.
1.2e −1s 1.5e −2 s

G1 ( s ) = G3 ( s ) =
5s + 1 (3s + 1)(5s + 1)
0.80e 0.5s 1.0e −0.5s
G2 ( s) = G4 ( s) =
( 2 s + 1) (1s + 1)( 2 s + 1)
We can determine a great deal about the dynamic response.

• The processes are in series; therefore the overall transfer function is the
product of the individual process transfer functions.
• Each individual process is satble (negative poles), so the series is stable.
• The steady-state gain of the series is the product of the individual gains.
Kp = (1.2)(0.80)(1.5)(1.0) = 1.44 mole fraction/%open
From this result, we can calculate the steady-state change in the product
composition for a 3.5% change in the valve opening.
∆A1 = 1.44*3.5 = 5.04 mole fraction
• The shape of the dynamic response can be determined in a qualitative

way. First, some dead time will exist. Second, the system is sixth order
and overdamped, because the roots of the denominator are all real. (Note
they can be factored.)
• The “speed” of the process can be estimated from the 63% time of the step
response, which is the sum of the dead times and time constants of the
elements in the series.
t 63% ≈ (1 + 0.5 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 5 + 0.5 + 1 + 2) = 17 minutes
We could determine an approximate first-order with dead time model using the
moments method in Appendix D, but this effort is not usually warranted. We
already have a good understanding of the response, and we can simulate it easily
if more precise results are required.
Reaction: A → B Rate: -rA = kCA
5.7 The recycle process shown in
Figure 5.7 is to be analyzed in this
question.
Product (pure B)
Ff
feed FP
Recycle (pure A)
Any inerts
appear here
Figure 5.7 Fr after
separation
6
Information:
• The initial steady-state reactor conversion in the isothermal, constant-volume

CSTR is 50%. Therefore, Ff = FR.
• The separator has first order dynamics.
a. Determine the dynamic behavior of the concentration of an inert that enters in the
fresh feed. The inert exits the separation unit in the bottoms stream that is the
recycle; none leaves in the product stream. (To simplify the analysis, assume that
the concentration of the inert is initially small, so that the chemical reaction and
the total flow rates are not affected by changes in the inert concentration.)
b. Determine the response of the concentration of the reactant to a change in the

reactor temperature that reduces the reaction rate by 10%, i.e., from 50% to 45%.
a. Qualitative analysis: We note inert material enters with the fresh feed and
does not exit the process. Therefore, inert must accumulate in the process,
leading to an increasing concentration. Thus, the inert composition is a non-self-
regulatory variable. While the composition is initially small and might not affect
the process, it will ultimately increase sufficiently to affect the reaction and
separation.
We know from our Material and Energy Balances course that a recycle system
should have a purge to prevent an excessive concentration of inert. Naturally, the
purge can be costly due to loss of material; therefore, the purge rate is set to
achieve the acceptable inert concentration.
Quantitative analysis: For the inert component, component balances are required.
Note that we take advantage of the assumption that the total flows and reaction
rate are not affected, which is valid when the inert concentration is very small at
the initial part of the transient. The following balances can be derived.
Reactor feed concentration (mass fraction) (essentially steady-state mixing):
x fi ( s ) = 0.50 x freshi ( s ) + 0.50 x recyclei ( s )
Reactor outlet concentration (essentially, a mixing tank):
1
x reactori ( s ) = x fi ( s )
τ Rs +1
Recycle concentration (first order dynamics given in statement)
7
2
x recyclei ( s ) = x reactori ( s )
τSs +1
These equations can be combined to give a concentration response to a change in

the fresh feed concentration. We will select the reactor feed concentration. We
solve the linear equations simultaneously, by combining and eliminating variables
(using methods introduced in Chapter 4).
x fi ( s ) = 0.50 x freshi ( s ) + 0.50 x recyclei ( s )

2
= 0.50 x freshi ( s ) + 0.50 x ( s)
τ S s + 1 reactori
2 1
= 0.50 x freshi ( s ) + 0.50 x fi ( s )
τ Ss +1τ Rs +1
Solve for xfi(s),
 2 1 
x fi ( s ) 1 − 0.50  = 0.50 x freshi ( s )
 τ S s + 1 τ R + 1
s
Rearrange to yield a transfer function,
x fi ( s ) 1 0.50(τ S s + 1)(τ R s + 1)
=
x freshi ( s ) s τ Sτ R s + (τ S + τ R )
The model for the reactor feed inert concentration has an “1/s” in the transfer
function. This is a “pure integrator”. The quantitative analysis confirms our
conclusion from the qualitative analysis.
b. Qualitative analysis: No reactant exits the process; therefore, all reactant

must be consumed by the chemical reaction. Since the reactor temperature has
decreased, the rate of chemical reaction decreases. Therefore, the initial response
must be an increase of reactant in the system. Is reactant concentration also a
pure integrator?
The difference is the concentration in the reactor affects the reaction rate, the
consumption of reactant A and production of product B. The reactant
concentration increases until the reaction rate attains its original value. Since the
temperature caused a 10% decrease in reaction rate, the concentration must
increase enough for the rate (kCA) to achieve a new steady state. To increase the
concentration, the recycle flow rate must increase.
The net effect is a reduction of the “single-pass” reactor conversion and an

increase in the recycle flow rate, so that the “overall conversion” attains its
previous value.
8
In practice, the best single-pass conversion depends upon side reactions and
energy costs for recycle.
Quantitative Analysis: The models and analysis for this system is presented in the
design example in Chapter 25. The large increase in the recycle is demonstrated.
The effect is sometimes called the “snow-ball” effect for the buildup of snow on a
ball as it rolls downhill on snow-covered ground. Some control designs can avoid
this behavior.
9
Empirical Modelling
In this tutorial , you are going to apply the principles you have learned to identify a
model of a chemical process empirically . The non-isothermal CSTR shown in Figure
6.1 is considered in this problem.
F CA0
Solvent CA
T0
vA T
A→B
Pure A
TC TC
out
in
vC
FC
Figure 6.1 Non-isothermal CSTR with cooling coils.
Empirical Model Identification
An experiment has been performed to identify the model relating the reactor
concentration, CA, and the coolant valve opening, vC. A step change of +20 % was
introduced in vC, and reactor concentration was measured using an analyzer. The process
reaction curve is shown in Figure 6.2.
1
0.5
CA (m ole/m 3)
0.45
0.4
0.35
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
80
valve C (% open)
70
60
50
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
Figure 6.2 Process reaction curve for a step change in vC.
6.1 Determine the parameters for the first order with dead time model.
6.2 Critique your results carefully.
Before we begin to perform the calculations, we must thoroughly evaluate the experiment
and data to be sure that
1. the procedures were designed and performed correctly and

2. the data represents the process
Let’s begin with the experiment procedures for the process reaction curve method.
Process reaction curve True for this experiment?

Is the input signal nearly a perfect step? Yes
Are the assumptions of output behavior valid? Yes
(i.e. smooth, S-shaped output response)
Did process begin at steady state? Yes
Did the process achieve a new steady state? Yes
Is the signal to noise ratio large enough? Yes
Was the experiment repeated, process returned to initial No
operation
2
We see that the essential features have been satisfied. We can proceed with caution if the
experiment has not been repeated.
Hint: Employ your understanding of the fundamental chemical engineering principles.

Now, let’s use our Chemical Engineering skills to evaluate the data.
• During the experiment, cooling valve c was opened by 20%.

• This should cool the reactor.
• Because of the temperature dependence of the reaction rate, the rate should decrease.
• Because the rate decreased, the concentration of reactant should increase in the
reactor.
However, the experimental data indicate that the concentration decreased! Therefore, a
severe inconsistency exists in the data. We should not use the data. We should repeat
the experiment.
Many possible explanations are possible; just a few are given in the following.
• The feed temperature changed during the experiment.

• The feed concentration changed during the experiment.
• We plotted the % closed for valve c, but labeled it % open.
We must have data that conforms to the experimental methods and is

consistent with chemical engineering principles before we build empirical
models for process control.
3
Two additional experiments, +20% and –20% changes in vC, were performed. The other
input variables were monitored to make sure there were no changes. The process
reaction curves for two different experiments are shown in Figure 6.3.
6.3 Discuss the good and poor aspects of these experiments for use with the process
reaction curve modelling method.
Process reaction curve True for this experiment?

Is the input signal nearly a perfect step? Yes
Are the assumptions of output behavior valid? Yes
(i.e. smooth, S-shaped output response)
Did process begin at steady state? Yes
Did the process achieve a new steady state? Yes
Is the signal to noise ratio large enough? Yes
Two steps to test for linearity Yes
Agrees with engineering principles for chemical Yes
reactor
Was the experiment repeated, process returned to initial No
operation
Note that this data
• satisfies the essential experimental criteria, and

• is consistent with our qualitative understanding of the process dynamics.
We decide to use this data, given the careful monitoring of the process and two
experiments, which allows checking of results.
6.4 Determine the parameters for the first order with dead time model using two
different sets of experimental data.
For the step increase in the cooling valve opening:
δ = 20%
∆= 0.084 mole/m3 .63∆ = 0.053 mole/m3 .28∆ =0.024 mole/m3
t63% = 30 min t28% = 14 min
Kp = ∆/δ = 0.0042 [mole/m3]/% open

τ = 1.5 (t63% - t28%) = 24 min
θ = t63% - τ = 6 min
4
For the step decrease in the cooling valve opening:
δ = -20%
∆= 0.113 mole/m3 .63∆ = 0.71 mole/m3 .28∆ =0.032 mole/m3
t63% = 23.3 min t28% = 12.8 min
Kp = ∆/δ = 0.0057 [mole/m3]/% open

τ = 1.5 (t63% - t28%) = 15.8 min
θ = t63% - τ = 7.5 min
The graphs are not large, so that errors in reading the distances can lead to different
answers by different people. However, your answer should not be too different.
To check our calculations, you should plot the model on the same figure, so that
the model can be compared with the experimental data. This will enable you to
visually check the accuracy of the model.
6.5 Compare the parameter values in part c obtained from two different experiments,
and explain any differences.
The model parameters are significantly different, compared with the likely errors
introduced by the calculation procedure. However, the process is non-linear, and the
changes in the valve opening are large compared with the maximum of ± 50% from its
initial valve of 50% open. These differences are not unexpected.
A key question is, “Can we design a computer control approach for a system with
dynamics that change with the magnitude in this example?”
We will see that the answer is YES, which makes the modelling effort worthwhile!
6.6 Discuss experimental designs that could help identify the problem encountered in
question 6.1.
At a minimum, the experimental design should include a (second) step that returns the
process to its original steady state. This gives a second set of data in the same operation.
The models determined from the two experiments should be similar, within the errors
introduced by sensor noise and graphical calculations.
If these models were very different, we would suspect a disturbance has occurred during
the experiment, and we would repeat the procedure.
5
0.6
0.55
CA (m ole/m 3)
0.5
0.45
0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
80
valve C (% open)
70
60
50
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
0.5
0.45
CA (m ole/m 3)
0.4
0.35
0.3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
60
valve C (% open)
50
40
30
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
tim e (m in)
Figure 6.3. Process reaction curves for the CSTR without any unmeasured disturbances.
6
Selecting Controlled and Manipulating Variables
Before designing process control, we must know the control objectives!
7.1 Designing a feedback control system involves the selection of controlled and
manipulated variables, and sensors for measuring the controlled variables. In addition,
we have to know the possible disturbances occurring in the process in order to design a
control system with good dynamic performance.
In this exercise, you are going to select the variables to be controlled for the CSTR in
Figure 7.1 to satisfy the seven control objectives. The seven control objectives were
introduced in Chapter 2 and are listed in Table 7.1. Complete Table 7.1 by filling in the
selected controlled and manipulated variables, sensor principle (e.g., orifice meter) for
the measurements and the possible disturbances occurring in the CSTR. You may add
valves and sensors to the figure, if necessary.
Hint: Review the discussion on control objectives for the flash separator presented in
Chapter 2.
F CA0
Solvent
T0
vA
CA T
Pure A
TC Tc out
in
vc
FC
Figure 7.1 CSTR with heat exchange for the reaction system A → B → C.
1
Table 7.1 Control objectives for the non-isothermal CSTR.
Control Controlled Sensor Manipulated Disturbances

Objective Variable Principle Variable that would
affect the
controlled
variable
Safety
Maintain liquid in 1.Liquid level 1. Pressure 1. Valve after 1. Flow in and

the reactor difference pump pump pressure
2 Liquid level 2. position of 2. valve in feed 2. feed pressure

float pipe
Environmental
Protection
None
Equipment
Protection
Exit flow rate Head (∆P) across Valve in • Pump
Maintain flow through the pump orifice meter recycle back to pressure
through the pump tank • Liquid
availability
Smooth Plant
Operation and
Production Rate
1. Reactor space 1. Liquid level 1. Pressure 1. valve after 1. Pressure of

time difference pump pump
2. Reactor inlet 2. Inlet 2. Composition 2. valve in 2. Pressure of
concentration concentration analyzer reactant reactant
3. Feed flow rate 3. total feed flow 3. Pressure drop pipe 3. Pressure of
across orifice 3. valve in solvent
solvent
flow
4. Reactor exit 4. flow rate 4. Orifice head 4. valve in exit 4. flow in and
flow pipe level sensor
noise
5. Reactor 5. Temperature 5. thermocouple 5. coolant flow 5. coolant

temperature rate temperature
and pressure
2
Product Quality
Reaction product Product Composition 1. Impurities

concentration concentration analyzer affecting
rate
2. Flow rate
3. Liquid
volume
4. Temperature
Profit
Optimization
Yield of valuable
(B) vs. undesired Reaction Thermocouple or Valve in 1. Coolant
(C) product environment, RTD coolant pipe pressure
temperature 2. Coolant
A→B→C temperature
Monitoring and
Diagnosis
A. Yield of Maximum yield

valuable vs. (?) N/A
undesired product
B. Variability of
1. reactant 1. low variance
concentration
from set point
2. reactor volume 2. low variance
3. outlet flow 3. acceptable
rate variance
C. Behavior of limited
input (disturbance) disturbances
variables
D. Calculated heat near clean value

transfer coefficient
3
The control strategy is shown in the following figure. Recall that the “circles” with a “C”
within represents a controller. The first letter indicates the process variable being
measured; for example, “F” represents flow. The dashed line is connected to the valve
being manipulated. The controller applies the feedback principle. The calculations used
by the controller will be explained in the next topic.
Notes:
1. We have decided not to control the feed composition. We have decided to adjust
the reactant valve to control the product concentration of B.
2. We have controlled the reactor temperature. We can adjust the temperature value,
i.e., the controller set point, to affect the yield.
FC
T0
AC
LC
AC
TC
TC TC
F in out
C
FC
Discussion questions:
1. Why didn’t we control the reactant concentration of B by adjusting the

coolant flow rate?
2. Why don’t we maximize the yield by adjusting the coolant flow rate?
4
7.2 Discuss whether each of the following control designs satisfies the specified
control objective.
a. Control the flow in a pipe.
b. Control the flow in a pipe.
c. Control the pressure in an enclosed vessel.
d. Control the pressure in an enclosed vessel.
FC
a. Flow Source at
P1
FC
b. Flow Source at
P1
PC
c. Pressure Source at
P1
PC
d. Pressure Source at
P1
a. Yes, the sensor measures the flow rate and the valve changes the restriction for flow.
Thus, the flow through the pipe is controlled.
b. Yes, this is essentially the same as (a) above. Note that the location of the
measurement (before or after the valve) does not affect the application of feedback.
Feedback depends on a casual relationship.
c. Yes, the pressure is measured correctly in the vessel, and the pressure is influenced by
changing the restriction to flow in the (vapor) exit pipe.
d. No, the pressure is not measured in the vessel. Therefore, feedback control is not
possible.
5
7.3 Possibility of feedback control.
Engineers must be able to quickly determine whether feedback control is possible.

For many “straightforward” process systems, we can make this determination using
qualitative analysis of the process behavior. If we do not have sufficient insight, we can
develop mathematical models and perform identification experiments.
In this exercise, we will build our ability to use the modelling principles
developed in prior lessons to predict the behavior of process systems. Here, we will
apply qualitative reasoning to determine whether feedback control is possible for some
proposed designs. Feedback is possible if a causal relationship exist between the
manipulated and controlled variables. Later, we will consider other factors to find the
best variables, but now we will concentrate on the possibility of control.
In addition, engineers must actually do it in the real world. Thus we require

sensors and final elements (valves). The designs provide proposals for the equipment
associated with each design; we will evaluate these as well.
Prior to Chapter 8, we do not know what calculation is required to implement

feedback control. Therefore, we will look for the causal relationship. We recall that the
symbol for a controller is a circle or “bubble” with letters inside, such as “TC” for
temperature controller.
Scenario: You are working as an engineer and a colleague has asked you to
evaluate some designs that she has prepared. She says that she does not have as
much experience as you have in control and would appreciate your assistance.
For each of the designs, determine whether feedback control is possible and
evaluate the instrumentation recommendations.
The proposed designs are presented in Figure 7.3.
6
Hot fluid
FC
Flow Control:
Temperature Control:
(a) • Centrifugal pump with
(d) Cooling • Manipulate the cooling
constant speed (rpm)
water water flow
• Orifice plate sensor
• Thermocouple sensor
• Globe valve
• Globe valve
FC TC
Flow Control:
(b) • Positive displacement
pump Hot fluid
• Butterfly valve Temperature Control:
TC
(e) Cooling • Manipulate the cooling
FC water water flow
Flow Control: • bimetalic coil sensor
(c) • Centrifugal pump with • Globe valve
variable speed driver
Flows into the pipe

steam
TC Pressure Control:
Temperature Control of
boiling water
(h) • Manipulate one exiting
(f) • Manipulate the hot oil
flow
• Flexible diaphragm
flow to heating coil
• Globe valve
Hot oil inside tank
• RTD sensor
PC
• Diaphragm valve
Flows exiting the pipe
Liquid Level Control Pressure Control:

LC • Manipulate the exit flow • Manipulate exiting flow
(g) • Pressure difference
sensor
(i) from vessel
• Piezoelectric
• Needle valve PC • Globe valve
LC LC
(j) (k)
AC AC
CB CB
Reaction: A → B Reaction: A → B → C
Composition Control in isothermal CSTR Composition Control in isothermal CSTR

• Manipulate the inlet flow • Manipulate the inlet flow
• Control CB, measured using refractive • Control CB
index • Ball valve
• Ball valve • Level maintained constant by LC
• Level maintained constant by LC
Table 7.3 Proposed Control Designs with instrumentation recommendations.
7
Solutions for proposed designs
a) The centrifugal pump increases the pressure of the FC
fluid, i.e., it provides “head”. The pump can operate at low

Flow Control:
or no flow, at least for a short time; the speed of the rotor • Globe valve
does not determine the flow through the pump. Thus, the
FC
Flow Control:
pump
fluid flow rate is determined by the “driving force” • Orifice plate sensor
• Butterfly valve
(pressure) and the resistances to flow. The pump provides

FC
Flow Control:
(c) • Centrifugal pump with
the driving force and the valve provides an adjustable • Orifice plate sensor
resistance. Opening the valve increases the flow rate.
Yes, feedback control is possible. There is a causal

relationship between the valve (resistance) and the flow
rate
The orifice plate is a good sensor for clean fluids, and the
globe valve is the “workhorse” control valve body in the
process industries.
b) The positive displacement pump has moving FC
components that define the liquid flow rate by the speed of

Flow Control:
rotation or by the linear movement distance and speed. • Globe valve
Therefore the valve resistance does not affect the flow rate,
FC
Flow Control:
pump
and if the valve is closed too far could result in damage to the • Orifice plate sensor
• Butterfly valve
pump.
FC
Flow Control:
No, feedback control is not possible in this situation. The

operation of the pump could be adjusted to influence the
flow rate; in this case the control valve should be
removed.
c) The pressure increase from a centrifugal pump FC
depends on the rotor speed – the fast the rotation, the higher
Flow Control:
the pressure. A variable speed motor can be adjusted to • Globe valve
achieve the desired flow rate, which is more energy efficient

FC
Flow Control:
pump
than adjusting a variable pressure drop (valve) in the pipe. • Orifice plate sensor
• Butterfly valve
Increasing the speed increases the flow rate.

FC
Flow Control:
Yes, feedback control is possible.

d) The temperature of the hot fluid needs to be Hot fluid
controlled because of changes in its flow rate and inlet (d) Cooling
water
• Manipulate the cooling
water flow
temperature. The heat transferred depends upon many • Thermocouple sensor

• Globe valve
factors, including the tube film heat transfer coefficient and TC
Hot fluid
the cooling water temperature. Increasing the cooling water TC

flow rate will (1) increase the tube film coefficient and (2)
(e) Cooling
water water flow
• bimetalic coil sensor
• Globe valve
decrease the average cooing water temperature in the tubes

(its flowing faster). Both changes will increase the heat
transfer and decrease the hot fluid exit temperature.
8
A thermocouple provides a good balance of cost and
accuracy. Again, the globe valve is a typical choice for a
clean fluid.
e) The temperature sensor is located at the inlet to the Hot fluid
heat exchanger. The heat transfer in the exchanger does not (d) Cooling
water
water flow
influence the fluid before it enters the exchanger. If we want • Thermocouple sensor
• Globe valve
to control the temperature at the inlet, we must adjust heat TC
Hot fluid
transfer upstream. TC
(e) Cooling
water water flow
• bimetalic coil sensor
• Globe valve
No, feedback control is not possible with the equipment

shown.
The bimetallic coil is often used for local temperature

display; it is not used for sensors that transmit their readings.
f) The temperature of boiling water at atmospheric steam
pressure is constant. Changing the heat transferred affects

TC
boiling water
the rate of boiling, but not the temperature of the boiling Hot oil
inside tank
• RTD sensor
• Diaphragm valve
water.
Liquid Level Control
LC • Manipulate the exit flow
(g)
No, feedback control is not possible with the equipment
• Pressure difference
sensor
• Needle valve
shown.
The diaphragm valve would not be used for clean, hot oil; it
is used for slurries at lower temperatures.
g) In this example, the inlet flow is not manipulated, and steam
the valve in the exit pipe is manipulated. Certainly, the

TC
boiling water
outlet flow is influenced by the valve position (see (a) Hot oil
inside tank
• RTD sensor
above), so a causal relationship exists. Since the level is

• Diaphragm valve
unstable without control, feedback control is especially (g) LC

Liquid Level Control
• Manipulate the exit flow
important.
• Pressure difference
sensor
• Needle valve
Measuring the liquid level using differential pressure is one

of the common methods in the process industries. A needle
valve would not be used for control; a globe or ball valve
would be typical choices.
h) The pressure in a pipe can be controlled by adjusting Flows into the pipe
one of the flows. We can prove this by formulating a (h)

Pressure Control:
• Manipulate one exiting
flow
dynamic material balance. Naturally, successful control can

• Globe valve
PC
only be achieved over a range of flows; when the valve is Flows exiting the pipe
either fully opened or closed, control is no longer possible. Pressure Control:

• Manipulate exiting flow
(i) from vessel
• Piezoelectric
PC • Globe valve
9
A pressure sensor that deflected because of pressure and
converted the deflection to an electronic signal is used in
such circumstances. A globe valve is acceptable here.
i) The pressure in a vessel can be controlled using the Flows into the pipe
exit (or inlet) flow. The principles are identical to the (h)
Pressure Control:
• Manipulate one exiting
flow
previous design.
• Globe valve
PC
Flows exiting the pipe
Yes, feedback control is possible. Pressure Control:

• Manipulate exiting flow
(i) from vessel
• Piezoelectric
PC • Globe valve
A piezoelectric sensor generates a small electronic signal

when a pressure is applied; it can be used in this application.
j) The conversion (or extent of reaction) depends on the
space time in the reactor. Clearly, the flow rate affects the LC
space time. The model for this system was derived in (j)
AC
CB
Tutorial 3, which could be extended to the concentration of Reaction: A → B

CB. Composition Control in isothermal CSTR
• Manipulate the inlet flow
• Control CB, measured using refractive
index

• Ball valve
A sensor like refractive index can be used when the property

of the product is significantly different from reactant and
solvent. The level must be controlled, because it is unstable
without control.
k) The conversion (or extent of reaction) depends on the
space time in the reactor. Clearly, the flow rate affects the LC
space time. (k)

AC
CB
Reaction: A → B → C
However, this process is more complex, some might say. Composition Control in isothermal CSTR
“Tricky.” For control to be successful, we need to have a

• Manipulate the inlet flow
• Control CB
• Ball valve
controller gain that has a non-zero gain. The gain can be

either positive or negative, but it should not change sign!
What happens in this example? The figure below shows that
the gain changes sign, because of the two reactions. In two
regions, control is possible, but would only function within
the region. At the maximum CB point, control is not possible
by adjusting the feed flow rate.
While control is possible, great care would have to be

employed when implementing. A different manipulated
variable, such as feed concentration should be investigated.
A ball valve would be an acceptable choice.
10
0.7
CB cannot be controlled by
0.6 adjusting F
0.5
0.4
0.3
CB can be CB can be
0.2 controlled; controlled;
decrease the flow increase the flow
rate to increase rate to increase
0.1
CB CB
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Figure showing the effect of flow (and volume) on the effluent concentration of the
intermediate product B. When the flow is large (residence time is small) reducing the
flow gives more time to form B (since CB is small, the loss to C is small). When the
flow is small (the residence time is high) reducing the flow gives more time for the loss
of B to C (since CA is low and CB is high).
11
The PID Algorithm
8.1 The Proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller algorithm involves simple
calculations. Why was this important during the development of the algorithm and for
the practice of process control?
The PID controller was developed long before digital computation was available
for process control; it was developed in the 1930’s, while digital control began in
the 1960’s. Therefore, the controller calculations had to be implemented using
the concepts of analog computation, in which a physical system was designed and
built that followed the equations to the solved. For process control, pneumatic
computers were used. Their dynamic behavior, basically described by Newton’s
laws, were matched to behave like the PID equation. For this to be possible, the
equation was required to be simple.
However, the PID controller can give quite acceptable performance for many
process applications. As a result, the PID is available in essentially every digital
control system. It is the “work horse” of process control because a high
percentage the valves in the process industries are regulated by the PID algorithm.
Many new and more powerful algorithms have been developed for demanding
process applications. Even in these cases, the PID is typically used to provide
basic control, with the advanced algorithm at a higher level in a hierarchy. We
call this cascade control and will learn about it in Chapter 14.
8.2 The statement is made that the feedback controller affects stability and damping.
Demonstrate that this statement is correct for a proportional-only controller. Use the
three-tank mixer model from Example 7.2.
FS
solvent
FA
pure A
AC
Figure 8.2
1
We know that the transfer function relating an input-output pair for a feedback
control system is given in the following equation.
CV ( s ) G p ( s )Gv ( s )Gc ( s )
=
SP( s ) 1 + G p ( s )G v ( s )G c ( s )G S ( s )
We also know that we can determine the stability and damping of the system by
evaluating the roots of the characteristic equation, i.e., the denominator of the
transfer function. We will use the following models (individual transfer
functions) for the elements in the characteristic equation.
Proportional controller: GC ( s ) = K C
0.039
Three-tank process: G P ( s )Gv ( s )G S ( s ) =
(5s + 1) 3
Substituting and rearranging, the characteristic equation is determined.
1 + G p ( s )Gv ( s )G c ( s )G S ( s )
KC K P
1+ =0
(1 + τs )3
(1 + 5s )3 + K C ( 0.039 ) = 0
125s 3 + 75s 2 + 15s + [1 + 0.039 K c ] = 0
Clearly, the controller (Kc) affects the equation! The roots of the equation for
various values of the controller gain are given below.
Kc =0 Kc = 50 Kc = 100 Kc = 150
-0.2000 -0.4499 -0.5148 -0.5604
-0.2000 + 0.0000i -0.0751 + 0.2164i -0.0426 + 0.2726i -0.0198 + 0.3121i
-0.2000 - 0.0000i -0.0751 - 0.2164i -0.0426 - 0.2726i -0.0198 - 0.3121i
Columns 5 through 6
Kc = 200 Kc = 250
-0.5966 -0.6273
-0.0017 + 0.3435i 0.0136 + 0.3700i Unstable!
-0.0017 - 0.3435i 0.0136 - 0.3700i
We observe that the roots become complex at Kc = 50. This indicates some
oscillation in the dynamic behavior. Also, at Kc = 250, two of the roots have
positive real parts, which indicate unstable behavior.
2
8.3 Proportional Mode:
a. What are the units of Kc? What is the sign for stabilizing negative feedback?
a. The definition of the controller is
MV ( s )
Gc ( s) = K c =
CV ( s )
Therefore, the units of the controller gain are (MV units)/(CV units). We note
that these are the inverse of the units for the process gain, Kp, although Kc≠1/Kp.
We look at the controller equation to determine the sign.
E (t ) = SP(t ) − CV (t )
 ∞
1 d CV 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI ∫ E (t ' )dt '−Td +I
dt 
0 
Let’s do a thought experiment, in which we will increase the set point by +1.0.
Since the error is defined as (SP-CV), the error will increase, i.e., its change will
be positive. Also, we assume that the process gain is positive, Kp > 0. Also, to
increase the CV, we know that the controller must increase the MV. As a result,
the controller gain (Kc) must be positive. We leave as additional exercises other
combinations of positive and negative set point changes and process gains.
After considering all combinations, we conclude that the product of the process
gain times the controller gain must be positive to give negative feedback control,
KpKc > 0.
8.3 Integral Mode:

a. Determine the final value of the error from set point for a PI controller applied to
a first order process in response to a first-order disturbance. The disturbance is an
impulse in the feed concentration of A in the solvent stream.
b. Determine the final value of the error from set point for a PI controller applied to
a first order process in response to a first-order disturbance. The disturbance is a
step in the feed concentration of A in the solvent stream.
c. Determine the final value of the error from set point for a PI controller applied to
a first order process in response to a first-order disturbance. The disturbance is a
ramp in the feed concentration of A in the solvent stream.
The deviation for the error from set point is exactly the deviation of the controlled
variable (CV) from its initial value. The closed-loop transfer function for this
system is given below.
3
CV ( s ) K d /(τ d s + 1)
=
D ( s ) 1 + K  1 + 1  K P 
C TI s  (τ P s + 1) 

We will determine the final value by substituting the specific disturbance input
function and applying the Final Value Theorem.
a. The disturbance is an impulse; its Laplace Transform is L(impulse) = C,

with C being a constant.
K d /(τ d s + 1)
CV ( s ) = D ( s )
1 + K C 1 + 1  P 
K
 T I s  (τ P s + 1) 
K d /(τ d s + 1)
=C
1 + K C 1 + 1  P
 
K
 T I s  (τ P s + 1) 
K d /(τ d s + 1)
lim sCV ( s ) = lim s C =0
1 + K C 1 + 1  P 
s →0 s →0 K
T I s  
(τ P s + 1) 

We see that the PI controller provides zero-steady-state offset for an impulse

disturbance. In fact, a proportional-only controller would achieve the same
desirable behavior; the verification is left as an exercise for you to complete.
b. The disturbance is an step; its Laplace Transform is L(step) = C/s, with C

being a constant.
K d /(τ d s + 1)
CV ( s ) = D ( s )
1 + K C 1 + 1  P 
K
 T I s  (τ P s + 1) 
C K d /(τ d s + 1)
=
s 1 + K  1 + 1  K P 
C TI s  (τ P s + 1) 

C K d /(τ d s + 1)
lim sCV ( s ) = lim s =0
s →0 s →0 s 1 + K  1 + 1  K P 
C T I s  (τ P s + 1) 

We see that the PI controller provides zero-steady-state offset for a step

disturbance. Would we obtain the same desirable result for a Proportional-only
controller?
c. The disturbance is an ramp; its Laplace Transform is L(ramp) = C/s2, with

C being a constant.
4
K d /(τ d s + 1)
CV ( s ) = D ( s )
1 + K C 1 + 1  P 
K
 T I s  (τ P s + 1) 
C K d /(τ d s + 1)
= 2
s 1 + K  1 + 1  K P 
C T I s  (τ P s + 1) 

C K d /(τ d s + 1) Kd
lim sCV ( s ) = lim s = ≠0
s →0 s →0 2
s 1 + K  1 + 1  P K  K C KP
C TI s  (τ P s + 1)  TI

We see that the PI controller does not provide zero-steady-state offset for a ramp
disturbance. Would the result change if we added a derivative mode to the
controller?
8.4 Derivative Mode: The derivative mode is described as a exact derivative. Rather
than exact derivative, it is often implemented using the equation below, which is the
Laplace Transform for the function. Suggest a reason for using the modified derivative
mode calculation in the following equation.
MV ( s ) Td s
Derivative mode: GC ( s ) = = KC
CV ( s ) 1 + αTd s
The transfer function can be separated into two series calculations that help to
understand the overall behavior of the modified derivative mode.
1
CV(s) (1 + αTd s ) K C Td s MV(s)
First order Exact

filter derivative
The first term is a filter that reduces the “noise” in the signal. The parameter
alpha (α) is small, usually about 0.10, so that the filter does not unduly slow the
response of the derivative. The second term is the exact derivative which acts on
the signal after filtering.
The goal is to have an effective derivative mode without amplifying the high
frequency noise in the measured variable. The modified calculation is effective
when the noise is if much higher frequency than the dynamics of the process
variable, i.e., the critical frequency of the feedback system (see Chapter 10 for the
evaluation of the critical frequency).
5
8.5 A PID controller must be initialized every time it is “turned on” (or placed in
automatic) by the plant personnel. Some data is given for the situation when the
controller is placed in automatic; the controller equation is also given. Perform the
initialization calculation.
E (t ) = SP(t ) − CV (t )
 ∞
1 d CV 
MV (t ) = K c  E (t ) +
 TI ∫ E (t' )dt'−T
d +I
dt 
0 
Data: Set point = 100 °C
Measured controlled variable = 98 °C
Derivative of the controlled variable ≈0
Signal to control valve = 63.7 % open
Controller Gain, Kc = 2.30 %/°C
Controller integral time = 4.50 minutes
Controller derivative time = 0.67 minutes
The initialization calculation determines the bias constant (I), so that the valve
does not “jump” when the controlled is turned on. We call this bumpless transfer.
The derivative is zero based on the data, and the integral mode is zero, because
the value of time is zero when the controller starts its calculation.
Now, we calculate the bias (I) so that the first calculation does not change the
signal to the valve.
E (t ) = SP(t ) − CV (t ) = 2
MV (t ) = K c [E (t )] + I =
= 2.3( 2) + I = 63.7
I = 59.1 %open
The signal to the valve, MV(t), will not change at the instant that the controlled is
placed in operation. The bias is never changed after the initialization calculation,
so that the controller can change the valve and control the CV!
6
Digital Control
11.1 Your goal is to control the

concentration of B in the reactor effluent
by adjusting the pure A control valve.
In Tutorial 9, your determined the tuning

for the proposed PID controller based on
the process reaction curve in Figure 9.5,
with concentrations in mole/m3 and time
in minutes. The results are reported here.
τ = 1.5 ( t63% - t28% ) = 1.5 ( 13.4 – 8.56 ) = 7.2 minutes

θ = t63% - τ = 13.4 – 7.2 = 6.2 minutes
Kp = ∆/δ = 2.5 mole/m3 / 10% open = 0.25 (mole/m3)/%open
PID tuning from the Charts, Figure 9.5 a-c.
θ/(θ+τ ) = 6.2/(13.4) = 0.47

KcKp = 0.9 Kc = 0.9/0.25 = 3.6 %open/ (mole/m3)
TI/(θ+τ) = 0.67 TI = 0.67 (13.4) = 9.0 min
Td/(θ+τ) = 0.06 Td = 0.06 (13.4) = 0.80 min
The analyzer to be used for control is not continuous; it provides a new measurement
from a sample every 10 minutes. Estimate the tuning for a PID controller.
First, we note that the controller execution period should be not be shorter than
the time between new measurement values. This guideline makes sense because
there is no advantage to perform feedback without (new) information about the
controlled variable.
We will apply the guideline that tuning should be calculated using the modified
dead time, which is the sum of the process dead time and one half of the
execution period of the controller.
θ’ = θ + ∆t/2 = (6.2 + 5) = 11.2
1
θ’/(θ’+τ ) = 11.2/(18.4) = 0.61

TI/(θ’+τ) = 0.61 TI = 0.6 (18.4) = 11.04 min
Td/(θ’+τ) = 0.10 Td = 0.1. (18.4) = 1.84 min
We note that the tuning is less aggressive, with a smaller controller gain and
larger integral time.
11.2 Suppose that you had an option to purchase a different analyzer with a faster
measurement period for the feedback control system in Tutorial Question 11.1. What
would be a good sample period?
We would like to have a faster sample period, so that we could improve the
feedback control performance. Naturally, a period of 0.0, which is a continuous
measurement, would be ideal. Perhaps, a continuous measurement is not possible
or is very costly. Therefore, we would like to determine the slowest sampling
period that would not significantly affect the control performance.
The textbook provides a guideline that the sampling period should be less than
5% of the t63% of the process reaction curve. An acceptable sampling period is
calculated below using the guideline.
Sampling period = ∆t = 0.05 (13.4) = 0.68 minute
11.3 The textbook gives advantages and disadvantages for distributed computing in a
digital control system. Discuss additional advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages
1. Low initial cost, because the smallest system requires limited equipment.
2. Possible to perform control near the sensor and valve, reducing
transmission time.
3. Information for processes that are far apart geographically can be used for
control and monitoring.
Disadvantages
1. High cost for a single controller compared with an analog system, because
the digital system requires more infrastructure.
2. Control at the sensor and valve requires more time to repair, because a
person must travel to the local, which could be 100s of meters.
2
3. More parallel equipment would increase the failure rate, although the
impact of each failure would be limited because of the few controllers per
computer.
4. Equipment from different vendors is difficult to integrate. The ability to
integrate is termed “interoperability”.
5. Loss of the LAN would not directly affect feedback control; however, the
operating personnel could not monitor or intervene.
6. The communication between processors must not be at too high a rate to
prevent overloading the LAN.
3
Solutions for Tutorial
The PID Controller Tuning
9.1 The feedback PID controller has been implemented to control the concentration of
the reactant in the reactor effluent from a CSTR. The system is shown in Figure 9.1
Reaction: A → B ; -rA = k CA
Solvent
flow, FS
AC
Reactant Effluent
flow, FA flow, FA
FA << FS
Figure 9.1
a. We have learned that the controller tuning must consider the likely changes in
feedback dynamics. Identify several causes for the feedback dynamics to change
in this process, and for each cause, explain how the change affects the dynamics.
b. One of the major reasons for feedback control is to compensate for disturbances.
Identify several disturbances that would affect the reactant concentration.
a. The dynamic behavior of the model between the pure feed flow rate and
the effluent concentration has been derived any times (see textbook Example 3.2
for assumptions and derivation) and is repeated below.
dC A
V = F (C A0 − C A ) − VkC A
dt
We can determine how changes in operating conditions affect the feedback

dynamics, if at all. For example, if we consider just one disturbance (total feed
rate) as well as the manipulated variable, we obtain the following models.
dC A'
τ + C A' = K F F ' + K CA0 C A' 0 (3.78)
dt
with τ = V/(F+Vk)
KF = (CA0 – CAs)/(Fs+Vk)
KCA0 = F/(F+Vk)
1
A model for each input can be derived by assuming that the other input is constant (zero
deviation) to give the following two models, one for each input, in the standard form.
dC A'
Effect of the disturbance: τ + C A' = K CA0 C A' 0 (3.79)
dt
dC A'
Effect of the manipulated variable: τ + C A' = K F F ' (3.80)
dt
Clearly, the feedback dynamics depend on

• The total feed rate
• The reactor volume
• The temperature, because of the temperature dependence of the rate
constant, k
We can determine the effects from specific changes in sign and magnitude by
using the analytical expressions.
b. Many changes will influence the operation of the chemical reactor and
affect the effluent concentration. Some examples are given below.
Disturbance
Feed pressure A change in pressure changes the flow rate of pure A,
even when the valve % open does not change
Solvent pressure A change in pressure changes the flow rate of solvent,
even when the valve % open does not change
Reactor volume The volume affects the “space time” available for
reaction
Feed and solvent The reactor temperature affects the rate constant
temperatures
The solvent valve A deliberate change in the solvent flow valve opening
changes the reactor feed concentration and the total
flow rate and “space time”
We must recognize the sources of disturbances so that we can prevent as many as

possible and ensure that the feedback control adequately responses to those
remaining. For example, we have concluded that we should control the reactor
level and temperature. Also, we see the need to control some flow rates to reduce
the effects of pressure disturbances. We will use multiple PID controllers to
achieve the improvements, so that we must learn the basics of PID control well in
Chapters 7-9.
2
9.2 Let’s consider the objectives for the controlled variable, which we must
understand to design successful feedback control systems.
a. Several measures of controlled variable “overall” deviation from set point are
possible, for example integral of the absolute value of error (IAE) and integral of
the error squared (ISE). Compare the two measures.
b. Discuss other measures of controlled variable performance.
a. The two measures are defined in the following equations.
∞ ∞
∫ ∫ (SP − CV ) dt
2
IAE = | SP − CV | dt ISE =
0 0
Both measures “accumulate” deviations from set point during the transient. Also,
they prevent negative and positive values of the errors from canceling each other.
They are very useful in summarizing a complete transient response with one
number.
• The primary difference is the increased weighting that ISE gives to large
errors. Often, large errors (deviations from set point) reduce performance
much more than small disturbances; ISE penalizes large disturbances more
than small.
• In some cases, the loss of performance is proportional to the deviation
from set point; IAE is appropriate for these cases.
The engineer must analyze the process, quality control and economics to select
the correct performance measure. Typically, tuning based on IAE or ISE are
similar.
b.
Maximum deviation: Perhaps, the most common measure of CV performance,

other than IAE or ISE, is the maximum deviation from set point. The maximum
deviation must be below a threshold to prevent a hazardous condition (leading to
a unit shutdown) or very poor product quality (leading to wasted product).
Rise time: A simple measure of the system’s ability to follow a change in

command, i.e., set point, is the rise time. In some situations, material produced
during a transition between set points cannot be sold; it is waste. In these
situations, rise time, and perhaps, settling time, is very important.
Standard deviation: When we consider a long set of data when the plant has been
subject to many (nearly random) disturbances, we use the standard deviation of
the data from the set point, not from its mean value.
3
9.3 Let’s consider the objectives for the manipulated variable, which we must
understand to design successful feedback control systems. Why do we have
objectives for the manipulated variables? Give some examples.
The first observation is that we must change the value of the manipulated variable
to achieve control. Also, the changes must be rapid enough to return the
controlled variable to its set point “quickly”. This is required for good CV
performance.
However, we should determine limits on the manipulated variable.
• Very high frequency changes to the manipulated variable will not

influence the controlled variable because they will be “filtered” by the
process. We should avoid them because they would damage a control
valve over a long time.
• Very large, rapid changes are often avoided to prevent damage to
equipment. For example, large (fast) changes to a distillation reboiler can
cause a high pressure at the bottom of the tower, which can cause a high
vapor flow rate and damage to trays.
• A manipulated variable should remain within maximum and minimum
values where equipment operates properly. For example, an excessively
high fuel rate to a boiler can damage the tubes, and too low a reflux flow
rate can lead to poor separation due to dry trays.
9.4 We have collected dynamic data from several different feedback control loops
using the PID algorithm. For each, estimate whether the performance is good or not, and
when not, diagnose the cause and suggest changes to improve performance. Use the
guidelines presented in the textbook for the evaluation; we know that the control
performance goals depend on the specific application.
4
a. The performance appears good. 10
S-LOOP plots deviation variables
• The controlled variable achieves zero 8

steady-state offset.
Controlled Variable
6
• The dynamic system is stable. 4
• The process has a dead time of about 5 2
minutes; therefore, very fast response is not 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
possible. Time
• The initial change in the MV is nearly equal 12
to the final value, which is good.

10
Manipulated Variable
8
• The CV settling time is good. 6
• The overshoot of the CV past the set point 4
2
and the MV past its final value are moderate 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
and acceptable. Time
Process: Controller:
Kp = 1.0 Kc = 0.90
Dead time = 5 TI = 7.0
Time constant = 5
b. The performance appears good. 1.5

• The controlled variable achieves zero

steady-state offset.
Controlled Variable
• The dynamic system is stable. 0.5
• The process has a dead time of about 5 0
minutes; therefore, very fast response is -0.5

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
not possible. Time
• The initial change in the MV is nearly 2
equal to the final value, which is good. 1.5

• The CV settling time is good. 1
• The overshoot of the CV past the set point 0.5
and the MV past its final value are

0
moderate and acceptable. -0.5

0 20 40 60
Time
80 100 120
Process: Controller:
Kp = 1.0 Kc = 0.90
Dead time = 5 TI = 7.0 Note that the only difference between cases (a) and (b) is
Time constant = 5 high frequency variation. This could be due to sensor
noise or high frequency process disturbances. They are
much faster than the feedback dynamics and cannot be
controlled.
5
c. The performance appears questionable. 1.2
• The controlled variable achieves zero 1
Controlled Variable
steady-state offset. 0.8
0.6
• The process has no dead time; therefore, 0.2
very fast response is possible. -0.2

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
• The initial change in the MV exceeds its

Time
final value by a factor of about 9. 10
• The CV settling time is good.
6
• The overshoot of the CV past the set point is 4
2
very small, and the rise time is extremely 0
fast. -2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Process: Controller: Time
Kp = 1.0 Kc = 10.0 The large overshoot in the manipulated variable would

Dead time = 0 TI = 7.0 generally not be acceptable. However, if the
Time constant = 5 manipulated variable were cooling water, this might be
OK.
d. The performance appears good for this 1.4

difficult process 1.2
• The controlled variable achieves zero

Controlled Variable
0.8
steady-state offset. 0.6
0.2
• The process has 9 minutes of dead time; 0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
therefore, very fast response is not possible. Time
• The initial change in the MV is small, about 1.4
1.2
40% of its final value, but this is expected

because aggressive control of a process with 0.8
0.6
a large fraction dead time is not possible 0.4
with feedback. 0.2
• The CV rise time and settling time are long

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time
because of the long process dead time. This process has a long dead time and is difficult to
• The overshoot of the CV past the set point is control. While the control performance is much worse
very small. the case (a), it is not because of a problem with the
Process: Controller: controller.
Kp = 1.0 Kc = 0.40
Dead time = 9 TI = 5.0 If we want to improve the performance, we should use
Time constant = 1 our engineering skills to shorten the dead time.
Alternatively, we could evaluate the use of new

methods (cascade and feedforward) that are introduced
later in the course. Something to look forward to!
6
9.5 Your goal is to control the
concentration of B in the reactor effluent
by adjusting the pure A control valve.
Determine the tuning for the proposed

PID controller based on the data in
Figure 9.5, with concentrations in
mole/m3 and time in minutes. Show all
calculations and briefly explain decisions
you make.
7
8
CB effluent
6
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
16
14
CA effluent
12
10
8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
35
30
CA0 Feed
25
20
15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
60
58
valve opening, %
56
54
52
50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time
Figure 9.5. Data from process reaction curve experiment.
8
The procedure is shown on the following graph. Note that we do not estimate the models
for the intermediate variables (CA0 and CA), because we need the dynamics between the
final element (valve) and the measured controlled variable (CB).
8
7
CB effluent
6 0.63∆ ∆
0.28∆
Zero time 4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
starts
here! 60
58
valve opening, %
56
δ
54
52
50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time
τ = 1.5 ( t63% - t28% ) = 1.5 ( 13.4 – 8.56 ) = 7.2 minutes
θ = t63% - τ = 13.4 – 7.2 = 6.2 minutes
Kp = ∆/δ = 2.5 mole/m3 / 10% open = 0.25 (mole/m3)/%open
θ/(θ+τ ) = 6.2/(13.4) = 0.47
TI/(θ+τ) = 0.67 TI = 0.67 (13.4) = 9.0 min
Td/(θ+τ) = 0.06 Td = 0.06 (13.4) = 0.80 min
9
9.6 We know that a chemical process has many variables to control. How can we achieve
good control by using the PID algorithm for feedback, since it is limited to a single
measured controlled variable and a single manipulated variable?
It might help if you considered a process example. The CSTR is shown in Figure 9.6.
We want to design controls for the four measured variables.
T
F P Vapor
product
feed
L
CW
Liquid
product
Figure 9.6
The most widely used approach is to control each CV with an individual PID
controller, which adjusts an individual manipulated variable, i.e., valve. Thus,
each controller has one CV and one MV; we refer to the choice of which MV to
adjust to control a CV as loop pairing. We term a design that employs several
PID controllers as “multiloop control”.
Recall that each controller is completely independent from the others, and no
communication is shared among the controllers. We recognize immediately that
these controllers will “interact”, so the possibility exists for poor (or improved)
performance because of the multiple loops. The topic of loop pairing will be
covered later in the course. Now, we are concentrating on designing one
feedback loop and making it perform well.
10
A possible multiloop design for the example in this question is shown in the
following figure. Each controller (FC, LC, etc.) is an individual PID controller
using one measured value and adjusting one valve.
PC
TC
FC fo
fc
LC
fo
CW
fo
As an exercise, you should discuss this design and determine whether it “makes
sense”. We will learn a design procedure later.
11
Cascade Control
Cascade control can dramatically improve the performance of feedback control systems,
when it is designed and implemented correctly. This tutorial provides exercises on the
proper design of cascade control. Recall that the cascade design criteria provide the
basis for the proper selection of cascade control; these criteria should be used during this
tutorial.
14.1 Furnace coil outlet temperature control in Figure 14.1.

a. Determine whether the cascade control is possible as designed. If not, make
appropriate changes to achieve cascade control.
FC
PC
TC
FC
Figure 14.1 Fired heater process with simplified control.
1
a. Yes, cascade is possible because the design satisfies the cascade design criteria.
1. Control without cascade is not N/A for determining if cascade is possible.

acceptable. But, it is important to determine when
cascade is recommended!
2. Secondary variable is measured Yes
3. Indicates a key disturbance see responses for each disturbance
4. Influenced by the manipulated Yes
valve
5. Secondary dynamics faster Yes
b. For each of the following disturbances, determine whether the cascade design,
after modifications in part a (if needed), will perform better, the same, or worse
than single loop feedback (TC→ valve).
1) fuel supply pressure: Cascade is better. The flow controller will compensate for the
disturbance. Whether the secondary corrects for the complete disturbance
depends on the flow sensor. See the discussion below for a few situations.
Orifice meter (gas fuel): The typical orifice meter is calibrated for a constant
pressure, so that the relationship between the pressure difference and the flow is
given in the following.
actual flow: F = K ∆P / ρ measurement: F = K ∆P
Since the density changes with pressure, maintaining the flow measurement (∆P)
constant does not maintain the actual flow constant. The flow measurement
indicates the change in flow, so that the secondary partially compensates for the
disturbance. However, the secondary controller cannot compensate completely
for the pressure disturbance. Some compensation must be made by the primary to
correct for the flow measurement error.
Mass flow meter (gas fuel): The mass flow rate can be measured by a mass flow
meter, such as a coriolos meter. The total heat release depends on the mass flow
rate for light gas hydrocarbon fuels without hydrogen (Duckelow, S., Intech, 35-
39 (1981)). Therefore, maintaining mass flow rate constant will completely
compensate for pressure changes. Cascade control with mass flow control would
perform better than with an orifice meter. However, the mass flow meter will be
more costly.
Orifice meter (liquid fuel): The density of the liquid does not depend on the
pressure. Therefore, the orifice meter provides a good measurement, and the
secondary controller can compensate for the pressure disturbance completely.
Cascade control will provide good performance.
2
2) fuel density (composition): Cascade is better. Again, the improvement possible
using cascade control depends on the sensor used and the change in heating value
for changes in density.
Gas fuels: The situation is basically the same as for the pressure disturbance. The
orifice meter does not provide complete compensation, and a mass flow meter
will provide complete compensation. See Duckelow (Intech, 35-39 (1981) for a
discussion of this situation.
3) fuel control valve sticking: Cascade is better. The fuel flow meter will immediately
sense the deviation in flow and correct the flow. Note, if the stiction is serious,
the flow will oscillate, which would degrade control performance and could lead
to unsafe conditions. A valve positioner could correct the effect of moderate
stiction, but mechanical correction should be performed to reduce the stiction.
4) feed temperature: Cascade is neither better nor worse; the performance is the
same. The secondary measured variable is not affected by the feed temperature.
Therefore, cascade provides no compensation.
Follow-up question: Answer the same question for other disturbances.
1. Now it’s your turn to define the disturbance! What other variables are likely to
change for the process and how would the cascade controller perform?
3
14.2 Bottoms composition analyzer control for distillation in Figure 14.2.
a. Determine whether the cascade control is possible as designed. If not, make

appropriate changes to achieve cascade control.
than single loop feedback (AC→valve)
PC
LC
F R
Z
D
q A
XD
LC
AC
FC XB
Figure 14.2. Two-product distillation with basic regulatory control.
4
a. Yes, cascade is possible because the design satisfies the cascade design criteria.
1. Control without cascade is not N/A for determining if cascade is possible.

acceptable. But, it is important to determine when
cascade is recommended!
2. Secondary variable is measured Yes
3. Indicates a key disturbance see responses for each disturbance
4. Influenced by the manipulated Yes
valve
5. Secondary dynamics faster Yes
than single loop feedback (AC→ valve).
1. Heating medium temperature: Cascade is the same. The temperature of the heating
medium does not affect the flow measurement significantly. Therefore, the
cascade and single-loop controllers would perform essentially the same.
2. Feed temperature: Cascade is not better. The temperature of the distillation feed
does not affect the flow measurement significantly. Therefore, the cascade and
single-loop controllers would perform essentially the same.
3. Reflux flow rate: Cascade is not better. The reflux flow rate does not affect the
reboiler heating flow measurement significantly. Therefore, the cascade and
single-loop controllers would perform essentially the same.
4. Heating medium supply pressure: Cascade is better. The pressure influences the
heating medium flow rate, which is measured by the flow sensor. The secondary
controller can quickly adjust the reboiler valve to correct for pressure
disturbances. Whether the secondary flow controller compensates for the
disturbance completely depends whether the flow sensor measures the flow
accurately for changing pressure. See the discussion for the fired heater for
further details.
Follow-up question: Answer the same question for other disturbances.
1. Now it’s your turn to define the disturbance! What other variables are likely to
change for the process and how would the cascade controller perform?
5
14.3 For a cascade control design, the sensor for the secondary variable should provide
good
accuracy
reproducibility ← correct
noise moderation
A constant bias in the secondary measurement will not seriously degrade the control
performance. The primary controller will adjust the secondary set point to correct for a
small bias. Remember, a sensor with good reproducibility is often less expensive than a
highly accurate sensor.
14.4 For a cascade control design, the sensor for the primary variable should provide
good
accuracy ← correct
reproducibility
noise moderation
Nothing can correct errors in the primary sensor. Therefore, the primary sensor must
achieve the accuracy needed for the process application.
6
Feedforward Control
Feedforward adds a new control approach that can significantly improve dynamic
performance when properly designed and implemented. Recall that the feedforward
design criteria provide the basis for the proper selection of feedforward; these criteria
should be used during this tutorial.
15.1 For the processes in the following figure, determine whether feedforward control
is possible, whether it will improve dynamic performance, and if yes to both, sketch the
feedforward control on the figure.
Heat exchanger with by-pass flow: The controlled variable is the temperature and the
manipulated variable is the split of the process flow between through the exchanger and
the by-pass. The measured disturbance is the inlet temperature.
Measured
disturbance
c.w.
T
TC
Controlled
variable
Figure 15.1. Heat exchanger.
First, let’s discuss the process.
• Does a causal relationship exist? Certainly, the by-pass flow affects the outlet
temperature after the mixing point; the greater the percentage by-passed, the
warmer the controlled variable.
1
Valve
• How does the three-way valve stem
work? The sketch shows two
plugs attached to the valve stem.
As the stem moves, both plugs
move in the same direction. As
a result, one opening for flow
becomes larger, while the other
opening becomes smaller. Each
opening leads to a different flow
path. In this example, one path
is to the heat exchanger, and the
other is to the by-pass.
Thus, one valve can split the flow in two different paths, while the total flow does
not have to be changed.
Second, let’s address feedforward control.
1. Is feedforward control possible? We refer to the feedforward design criteria.

We conclude from the table that feedforward is possible.
1. Is feedback alone unsatisfactory Discussed next

2. Measured feedforward variable Yes
3. Variable indicates important disturbance Yes
4. no relationship between manipulated and Yes
disturbance and feedforward variables.
5. Disturbance dynamics not faster than Yes
feedback
2. Is feedforward likely to improve control performance? The answer would be

“yes” for a feedback control system that has dynamics that are difficult to control.
These would include
• long dead time

• many and long time constants
• inverse response
2
However, the feedback system in this process involves mixing and a fast sensor.
Therefore, the feedback dynamics are very fast.
Because the feedback dynamics are very fast, we expect the feedback
performance to be very good. We would not recommend feedforward
compensation for this process.
15.2 In this question, you will consider a packed bed reactor experiencing feed
composition disturbances. The reactor shown in Figure 15.2 is similar to the
process in textbook Example 15.1; however, the effluent composition is not
measured, so that feedback is not possible. Determine whether feedforward
control is possible and desirable. If yes to both questions, sketch the feedforward
controller on the figure and derive the feedforward controller transfer function
using the modelling information in textbook Example 14.1.
FC
2
V
A2 T2
F1 T1
Figure 15.2 Packed bed Chemical reactor with feed composition disturbance.
3
To evaluate the possibility of feedforward, we refer to the feedforward design criteria.
1. Is feedback alone unsatisfactory Clearly, yes. Feedback control of

effluent composition does not exist in
this example.
2. Measured feedforward variable Yes
3. Variable indicates important disturbance Yes
4. no relationship between manipulated and Yes
disturbance and feedforward variables.
5. Disturbance dynamics not faster than Yes (no feedback)
feedback
Therefore, we conclude that feedforward is possible. Also, we conclude that we

should obtain a significant performance improvement because no composition
feedback exists. We recommend feedforward in this situation.
Feedforward controller
AY
2
FC
2
V
A2 T2
F1 T1
AC
1
4
15.3 You can use feedforward principles in everyday life, but not everywhere. Here,
you can decide when to use feedforward in typical decisions.
Case Decision Controlled variable Disturbance

a Stock selection for Maximum return Cost of energy
investing
b Baking bread in an oven Oven temperature Room temperature
c Driving an automobile Position in lane Bump in the road
a. We can measure many events that affect world energy prices, such as discoveries
of oil and gas, wars, political conflicts, and so forth. If we act quickly, we might
gain an advantage. Feedforward could provide over feedback after energy prices
change.
b. The room temperature has a very small effect on the oven temperature. Also, the
room temperature is not likely to change rapidly. Feedforward is not
recommended.
c. If we can see the bump before we hit it, we can take evasive action and miss the
bump. Feedforward is recommended.
15.4 For feedforward control (used in conjunction with feedback), the sensor for the
disturbance variable should provide good
accuracy
reproducibility ← correct
noise moderation
Note: Feedback would correct for a bias in the feedforward sensor. Feedforward only
needs to correct for changes in the measured disturbance variable.
15.5 After feedforward control has been implemented, what changes should we make
to the feedback controller tuning?
make more aggressive because the controlled variable will stay in a narrow range
make less aggressive because feedforward will “do most of the work”
make no change ← correct
Note 1: The feedforward controller does not change the feedback process dynamics.
Therefore, the feedback controller tuning should not be modified.
Note 2: If the feedforward and feedback signals were multiplied, as it would if feedback
were added to textbook figure 15.14, the feedback gain would be affected; therefore, the
controller gain (KC) should be modified. See textbook Section 16.3 and Figure 16.5.

PC Omar Lectures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PC Omar Lectures

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PC Omar Lectures

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

College of Electronics Engineering

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

College of Electronics Engineering

College of Electronics Engineering

College of Electronics Engineering

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

• How to mathematically model the Coupled-Tank plant from first

• How to linearize the obtained non-linear equation of motion

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• In deriving the Tank 1 and EOM Tank 2 the mass balance

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• The volumetric inflow rate to tank 2 is equal to the volumetric

• Applying Bernoulli's equation for small orifices, the outflow

where, g is the gravitational acceleration (in cm/s2)

• As a remark, the cross-section area of tank 1 and tank 2

• The outflow rate from tank 1 and tank 2 can be written as :

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• The above two equations are the nonlinear mathematical

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• The nonlinear mathematical model can be linearized about a

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• At the equilibrium point, all time derivative terms equate zero.

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

• Using Taylor's series expansion to linearize the two equations

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

College of Electronics Engineering Nonlinear Plant Example: Coupled-Tanks Plant

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

Lecturer: Omar Y. Ismael

When I complete this lecture, I want to be

Make PID work in practice!

Account for idiosyncrasies of Does the air open or

Typically, analog signal Digital signal

Process Sensor Analog A/D Digital

Noise: We think of noise as the

imperfect mixing, turbulence, ...

Our plants are

Noise, electrical interference

10-4 10-2 1.0 102

SP(s) E(s) MV(s) CV(s)

Noise goes “around and around” in the feedback loop!

SP(s) E(s) MV(s) CV(s)

The filter is in the feedback loop. What do we

In the process industries, we typically use a first order

the feedback loop, but

Dimensionless Frequency,  (rad/time)

“Anti-Aliasing” filter Digital Filter

SP(s) E(s) MV(s) CV(s)

Guidelines to reduce the effects of noise on feedback

Controller sense - In most systems, the controller gain (Kc)