FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Pasir Gudang

Jalan Purnama, Bandar Seri Alam,
81750 Masai, Johor Darul Takzim
Tel : +607-3818000

DATA PRESENTATION: PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION CHE233

Lab Title: LIQUID FLOW PROCESS CONTROL

Mark :
Course: PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION
Date : 8 MAY 2024
Participant Course : CHE239 Semester : 4 Group: 6
*Please cancel which is
No. Name Matrix No. Signature
not necessary.
1 PUTRI NURBALQIS AINA BT NAZIM 2022896926
2 NURUL QASDINA BT SUHAIMI 2022676742
3 MUHAMMAD ZAKWAN BIN FARIZAM 2022846684

Instructor 1. MADAM NOORHALIZA BINTI AZIZ

Introduction/ The techniques used to regulate process variables during product manufacturing are called
Theory and process control. The final product's quality can be greatly affected by various factors, such as
Objective
the ratio of one ingredient to another, the temperature of the materials, the quality of the mixing,
and the pressure at which the materials are maintained. Process control involves a few key
variables, including the set point, controller, process and measurement element, and final
control element.

Process control involves two systems: an open-loop system and a closed-loop system. In a
closed control loop, a process variable is measured and compared to a setpoint, and corrective
action is taken if the setpoint is violated. In an open control loop, on the other hand, the process
variable is not compared, and action is taken in response to feedback on the process variable's
condition rather than in consideration of it.

The water flow process control system is simulated by this system. Proportional only (P),
proportional and integral (PI), and proportional, integral, and derivative (PID) are the three most
widely used controller modes. The difference between a measured process variable (PV) and a
desired set point (SP) was used by the controller to calculate an error value, to which a
proportional (P), integral (I), and derivative (D) correction was applied. In feedback open loops,
it has been discovered that derivatives (D) can deteriorate system stability when there is a time
delay, causing the system to oscillate and never reach its stable state. Proportional (P) modes, on
the other hand, can only guarantee that the incorrect value is eliminated.

Thus, the goal of this experiment on the liquid flow control system is to illustrate the
distinctions between the proportional (P) and proportional-integral (PI) controller modes and, as
a result, identify the ideal gain values for the pilot plant system. Lastly, the most effective
controller mode is to get the necessary output for a liquid flow control system.
Data EXPERIMENT A: CLOSE LOOP PROPORTIONAL FLOW CONTROL
Presentation
(graph or
tables)

FIGURE 1: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 110 / SET POINT 50%)

FIGURE 2: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 110 / SET POINT 75%)

FIGURE 3: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 30 / SET POINT 50%)

FIGURE 4: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 30 / SET POINT 75%)

FIGURE 5: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 5 / SET POINT 50%)

FIGURE 6: (PROPOTIONAL,P = 5 / SET POINT 75%)

 Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
Setpoint 50% 75% 50% 75% 50% 75%
PB 110 110 30 30 5 5
I 0 0 0 0 0 0
D 0 0 0 0 0 0
Offset 0 0 12.8 12.5 0 10.1
SP-PV

EXPERIMENT B: CLOSE LOOP PROPORTIONAL PLUS INTEGRAL FLOW

CONTROL

FIGURE 7: (INTEGRAL = 1 / SP50%)

FIGURE 8: (INTEGRAL = 1 / SP75%)

FIGURE 9: (INTEGRAL = 5 / SP50%)

FIGURE 10: (INTEGRAL = 5 / SP75%)

FIGURE 11: (INTEGRAL = 40 / SP50%)

 FIGURE 12: (INTEGRAL = 40 / SP75%)

Set 1 Set 2 Set 3

Setpoint 50% 75% 50% 75% 50% 75%
PB 70 70 70 70 70 70
I 1 1 5 5 40 40
D 0 0 0 0 0 0
Offset 21.7 27.9 2.3 2.5 1.9 22.8
SP-PV

Analysis of EXPERIMENT A: CLOSE LOOP PROPORTIONAL FLOW CONTROL

Data:
At Value (PB = 110) Set Point 50, PV and MV (red and green lines) parallel and away from the
set point, offset value equals zero. Set Point 75, PV (Green Line) parallel and close to Set Point
without contact, offset value equals zero.

Then, at value (PB = 30), set point 50, PV and MV (green and red lines) touch, and the offset
value is 12.8. Set Point 75: PV and MV (green and red lines) make contact with the set point. The
Offset Value is 12.5.

Next, at Value (PB = 5). Set Point 50, PV and MV (green and red lines) intersect at the set point,
offset value equals zero. Set Point 75, PV and MV (green and red lines) make contact with the set
point, offset value is 10.1.

In short, the higher the Proportional Value, the closer the PV and MV Lines (Green Value, Red
Value) are to the Set Point. Furthermore, if the proportionate value rises or remains high, the red
and green lines will be parallel to the set point.
 EXPERIMENT B: CLOSE LOOP PROPORTIONAL PLUS INTEGRAL FLOW
CONTROL

At Integral Value 1 Set Point 50, PV and MV (green and red lines) touch, and the offset value
is 21.7. Set Point 75: PV and MV (green and red lines) make contact with the set point; the offset
value is 27.9.

Then, at 50 Set Point Integral Value, PV (Green Line) overlaps with Set Point, as does Line PV
and MV in parallel with Set Point; the offset value is 2.3. Set Point 75, PV (green line) overlapping
with set point, as well as line PV and MV in parallel with set point, offset value 2.5.

After that, at Integral Value 40 and Set Point 50, PV and MV (green and red lines) are parallel
with the set point, even without contact, and the offset value is 1.9. Set Point 75, PV And MV
(Green Line, Red Line) Parallel With Set Point. Even though PV (Green Line) is closer to the set
point and dotted, the offset value is 22.8.

In essence, the lower the integral value, the closer PV and MV (Red and Green Lines) are to the
Set Point Line. Furthermore, when the integral values of Lina PV and MV increase, so will the
set point.

Conclusion Utilizing inappropriate parameters for P, I, and D within the control system introduces instability
to the pilot plant's operations, manifesting both above and below the designated setpoint.
Consequently, achieving precise calibration and optimal parameterization for controller tuning
becomes a formidable challenge. Upon scrutinizing the performance differentials between the
proportional (P) and proportional-integral (PI) controller modes, the superiority of PI becomes
evident. Its adeptness at rectifying the steady-state error inherent in P renders it the preferred
choice. Notably, when configured with I = 5, the PI controller exhibits enhanced stability and
responsiveness, characterized by reduced rise and settling times, the absence of overshoot, and
the elimination of steady-state errors. Hence, in the context of this liquid flow system, adherence
to PI mode as the designated controller ensues, ensuring expeditious and accurate system
response.