Manipal University Jaipur

Department of Biotechnology & Chemical Engineering

CE 3231 – PROCESS DYNAMICS & CONTROL LAB

III YEAR, 6TH SEMESTER, 2024-25

EXPERIMENT #4
EXPERIMENT TITLE – FIRST ORDER SYSTEM SUBJECTED TO
SINUSOIDAL CHANGE

INSTRUCTOR:
Instructor Name – Prof. (Dr.) Anees Y. Khan
Made By – Mragank Rastogi (229101003)

Experiment Carried On: - February 17, 2025

Report Submitted On: - February 20, 2025

PRELAB REPORT (10) ______

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (10) ______
OBJECTIVES/INTRODUCTION/SCOPE/PROCEDURE (30) ______
RESULTS & DISCUSSION (30) ______
CONCLUSIONS (5) ______
REFERENCES (5) ______
APPENDIX
a) Original data, sample calculations, other information (5) ______
GENERAL COMPLETENESS
a) Conciseness and neatness (5) ______
TOTAL (100) ______
 Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY …………………………………………………… 3

1. OBJECTIVE ………………………………………………………………... 4
2. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………….. 4
3. THEORY AND EXPERIMENTAL SETUP ……………………………... 4
4. DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………………….. 7
5. PRECAUTION ……………………………………………………………... 8
6. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………... 8
7. REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………... 8
APPENDIX AND RESULT …………………………………………………... 9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This experiment analyzes the dynamic response of a first-order thermal system when subjected
to sinusoidal temperature variations. A thermometer placed inside a thermowell was exposed to
controlled temperature fluctuations from a thermobath, simulating a first-order system response.
The objective was to evaluate amplitude attenuation and phase lag to understand how the system
reacts to periodic temperature changes.
The maximum temperature recorded in the thermobath was 42°C, while the thermowell reached
a peak of 27°C, demonstrating amplitude reduction due to heat transfer resistance. The phase lag
between the thermobath and thermowell was observed to be approximately 5.5 seconds,
confirming the delayed response expected in thermal systems.
Two different methods were used to calculate the time constant (τ):
 From amplitude decay: 6.73 seconds
 From phase lag analysis: 5.5 seconds
These values closely match, validating the first-order system approximation. Minor discrepancies
may be attributed to sensor placement, heat losses, or external disturbances. The results confirm
that the thermowell acts as a low-pass filter, allowing low-frequency temperature changes to pass
while attenuating higher-frequency variations. The study highlights the importance of thermal
response analysis in temperature control, process regulation, and system modeling in industrial
applications.
1. OBJECTIVE
To study the dynamic response of first order system subjected to a sinusoidal change.

2. INTRODUCTION
This experiment investigates the dynamic response of a first-order system when exposed to a
sinusoidal input signal. By applying sinusoidal signals at different frequencies, the system's
behavior is evaluated in terms of amplitude reduction and phase lag, providing valuable insights
into how it processes signals across various frequency ranges.
A significant aspect of this study is the low-pass filter behavior of first-order systems, where
low-frequency signals pass through with minimal distortion, while higher-frequency components
are attenuated. Understanding this phenomenon is essential for applications in control systems,
signal processing, and dynamic system analysis.
By analyzing the relationship between input and output signals, engineers can gain a deeper
understanding of system stability, transient response, and overall performance. Additionally, this
experiment highlights the importance of frequency response analysis in assessing a system’s
capability to manage dynamic inputs effectively.

3. THEORY AND EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

A first-order system subjected to a sinusoidal input function can be mathematically expressed as:
X ( t )= Asin(ωt) t≥0
where:
 A = Amplitude of the input signal
 ω = Radian frequency of the sinusoidal input
Taking the Laplace Transform of the input:
Aω
X ( s) = 2 2
s +ω
The first-order system response is given by:
−t

Y ( t )=
Aωτ e τ
2
(ωτ ) +1
+
[√ A
( ωτ ) +1
2
] sin ⁡( ωτ + ϕ)

For steady-state conditions (t → ∞), the response simplifies to:

[√
Y ( t )=
A
2
( ωτ ) +1 ] sin ⁡(ωτ + ϕ)
where:
 τ = Time constant of the first-order system
 φ = Phase lag introduced by the system
This equation shows that as frequency (ω) increases, the output amplitude decreases, and a phase
lag (φ) is introduced. This confirms the low-pass filter behavior, where the system attenuates
high-frequency signals while allowing low-frequency signals to pass with minimal distortion.
This experiment aims to validate these theoretical principles by analyzing the output response of
a first-order system to sinusoidal inputs of different frequencies and studying its amplitude and
phase shift characteristics.

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP: -
This experimental setup is designed to examine the dynamic response of a thermometer placed
inside a thermo-well as well as for thermo-bath when exposed to a sudden temperature change.
The system simulates a first-order thermal response, enabling the observation of heat transfer
dynamics and transient behavior.
Components & Their Functions:
1. Thermo-bath:
o A controlled heating system that maintains a constant hot water temperature.
o Ensures uniform heat distribution around the thermometer for precise response
measurement.
2. Thermo-well:
o A protective enclosure that isolates the thermometer from direct contact with the
flowing hot water.
o Ensures accurate temperature measurement while minimizing external
disturbances.
3. Hot Water Inlet:
o Introduces hot water into the system to create a sudden temperature change.
o This rapid variation in temperature is essential for analyzing the thermometer’s
transient response.
4. Hot Water Outlet:
o Maintains a continuous flow of water, preventing temperature stratification.
o Helps sustain steady experimental conditions for reliable data collection.
 FIG 1: - HEATING BATH

Procedure: -
1. Open the inlet valve of the heating bath to initiate the clean water supply, ensuring a
steady flow and maintaining a constant water level in the head indicator tube.
2. Place thermometers inside both the thermowell and the heating bath for accurate
temperature monitoring.
3. Set the cyclic timer to operate in 30-second on-time and 30-second off-time mode.
4. Turn on the main power supply to begin heating the water in the bath.
5. Once the system stabilizes, observe the sinusoidal temperature response on the
thermometer.
6. Adjust the cyclic timer settings if needed to modify the temperature amplitude (range).
7. At steady-state, measure and record the amplitude ratio and phase lag for analysis.
4. DISCUSSION

Si nus oi dal change on fi r s t or de r s ys t e m

Thermowell Thermobath

45

40

35

30
Temperature (℃)

25

20

15

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Time (sec)

FIG 2: - SINUSOIDAL CHANGE RESPONSE CURVE OF TEMPERATURE VS TIME

The graph illustrates the dynamic response of a first-order system when subjected to sinusoidal
temperature variations. It compares the temperature behavior of the thermobath and thermowell
over time, revealing key characteristics such as amplitude attenuation and phase lag.
The thermobath reaches a maximum temperature of approximately 42°C, while the thermowell
exhibits a lower peak of around 27°C, demonstrating the system's tendency to dampen
temperature fluctuations.
The system's thermal inertia caused a delay (phase lag) between the temperature changes in the
thermobath and thermowell. The time constant calculated from the amplitude decay was 6.73
seconds, while the time constant determined from the phase lag was 5.5 seconds. These values
are quite close, confirming that the system behaves like a first-order system. The small difference
between them may be due to experimental errors, sensor positioning, or heat loss. This lag
indicates that changes in the thermobath temperature take time to influence the thermowell,
further confirming the system's low-pass filter behavior, where high-frequency variations are
suppressed while low-frequency changes are transmitted more effectively.
The results align with theoretical expectations, showing that the thermowell does not respond
instantaneously to fluctuations but instead follows an exponential trend.
Possible errors that may have affected the results include:
 Measurement inaccuracies: Manually recording temperature readings could lead to
minor errors.
  Flow variations: The heating system may not have maintained a perfectly steady flow of
hot water.
 Environmental factors: External influences like slight vibrations or surrounding
temperature fluctuations might have slightly impacted the readings.

5. PRECAUTION
1. Ensure Proper Equipment Setup – Check that all pipes, valves, and connections are secure
to prevent leaks.
2. Maintain a Stable Flow Rate – Adjust the inlet flow carefully to ensure consistent heating
and avoid fluctuations.
3. Eliminate Air Bubbles – Remove air bubbles from the system as they can affect temperature
readings.
4. Accurate Temperature Measurement – Record temperature readings at precise intervals to
minimize measurement errors.
5. Prevent Water Overflow – Keep water levels within the specified range to avoid disruptions
in the experiment.
6. Minimize External Interference – Conduct the experiment in a controlled environment to
prevent temperature fluctuations due to ambient conditions.

6. CONCLUSION
The experiment confirmed the first-order response of a thermowell-thermobath system to
sinusoidal temperature variations. The thermowell exhibited amplitude and a phase lag of 5.5
seconds, with a maximum temperature of 27°C compared to 42°C in the thermobath. The
calculated time constants from amplitude decay (6.73s) and phase lag (5.5s) were close,
validating the first-order model. Minor discrepancies were attributed to sensor placement and
heat losses. These findings reinforce the role of first-order thermal systems in temperature
control and industrial process modeling.

7. REFERENCES

1. Coughanowr, D. R., & LeBlanc, S. (2017). Process Systems Analysis and Control (3rd ed.).
McGraw-Hill.

2. Seborg, D. E., Edgar, T. F., & Mellichamp, D. A. (2016). Process Dynamics and Control
(4th ed.). Wiley.
3. Lab Manual, Process Dynamics & Control Lab.

Process Control Lab CHC211_16thMay.pdf

APPENDIX AND RESULT

S.No. Time (sec) Thermowell (℃) Thermobath (℃)
1 0 23 20
2 5 23.7 23.5
3 10 24 27
4 15 24.6 32
5 20 25 37
6 25 26 40
7 30 27 42
8 35 26 42
9 40 25 40
10 45 24.5 33.5
11 50 24 30
12 55 23.5 24
13 60 23 22
14 65 23 23
15 70 23.7 26
16 75 24 29
17 80 25 33
18 85 25.5 36
19 90 26 40
20 95 27 42
21 100 26 40
22 105 25 36
23 110 24.7 31
24 115 24 28
25 120 23.5 23
26 125 23 22
27 130 23 24
28 135 23.5 27
29 140 24 30
30 145 25 35
31 150 25.5 40
32 155 26 42
33 160 27 40
34 165 26 35
35 170 25 29
36 175 24.7 25
 37 180 24 23
38 185 23.5 21

CALCULATION: -
Maximum Thermobath Temperature = 42℃
Minimum Thermobath Temperature = 20℃
Maximum Thermowell Temperature = 27℃
Minimum Thermowell Temperature = 23℃
Observed Phase Lag = 5 sec
Period of Oscillation = 60 sec
MaximumThermobath Temperature−Minimum Thermobath Temperature
Input Amplitude = =11
2
MaximumThermowell Temperature−Minimum Thermowell Temperature
Output Amplitude = =2
2
2π
Frequency of Oscillation = =0.105
60
Output Amplitude
Amplitude Ratio = =0.18
Input Amplitude

√
2
1−Amplitude Ratio
Time Constant = 2 2
=6.73 sec
Amplitude Ratio −Frequency of Oscillation
Observed Phase Lag∗360
Phase Lag = =30
Period of Oscillation
tan(ϕ)
Time Constant from Phase Lag = =5.498 sec
ω