Manipal University Jaipur

Department of Biotechnology & Chemical Engineering

CE 3231 – PROCESS DYNAMICS & CONTROL LAB

III YEAR, 6TH SEMESTER, 2024-25

EXPERIMENT #3
EXPERIMENT TITLE – TWO TANKS NON-INTERACTING SYSTEM

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

Experiment Carried On: - January 30, 2025

Report Submitted On: - February 13, 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
APPENDIX AND RESULT …………………………………………………... 8
4. DISCUSSION ……………………………………………………………… 13
5. PRECAUTION ……………………………………………………………. 16
6. CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………. 17
7. REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………. 17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report investigates the dynamic response of a two-tank non-interacting system subjected to
step and impulse changes in inflow. The experiment aimed to analyze how the liquid level in
each tank changes over time and compare the results with theoretical predictions. The system
consists of two tanks connected in series, where the outflow from Tank 1 enters Tank 2 after
discharging into the atmosphere. This ensures that the transient behavior of Tank 1 is not
influenced by Tank 2, making the system non-interacting.
For the step change experiment, the inlet flow rate was increased from 30 LPH to 42 LPH, and
the water level in Tank 1 rose from 69 mm to 116 mm, while Tank 2 increased from 64 mm to
110 mm. The response followed a first-order system behavior, where the level increased rapidly
at first and then gradually stabilized. The experimental time constant (τ) was determined to be 97
seconds for Tank 1, closely matching the theoretical values of 96.19 seconds and 94.14 seconds,
respectively.
In the impulse change experiment, 200 mL of water was suddenly added to Tank 1, causing an
initial sharp rise in water level from 31 mm to 58 mm, followed by a gradual decline as the water
drained out. Tank 2 exhibited a delayed response, peaking at 14 mm before stabilizing. This
confirmed that the tanks do not influence each other’s behavior in real-time but instead respond
sequentially.
Overall, the experimental data closely aligned with theoretical predictions, validating the first-
order system response. Minor deviations were observed due to measurement errors, flow
inconsistencies, and environmental disturbances. The results provide valuable insights into
system dynamics, time constant estimation, and process control strategies, which are essential for
industrial applications involving fluid flow regulation.
1. OBJECTIVE
To study the dynamic response of two tank non-interacting system subjected to a step and
impulse change.

2. INTRODUCTION
The aim of this experiment is to develop a deeper understanding of how a system of two non-
interacting tanks responds to step and impulse changes.
This system consists of multiple first-order processes arranged in series, where the outlet flow
from the first tank acts as the inlet flow to the second tank. In a non-interacting configuration, the
outflow from the first tank is discharged into the atmosphere before entering the second tank.
Consequently, the flow through resistance R₁ depends only on the liquid level in the first tank
(h₁), while fluctuations in the liquid level of the second tank (h₂) have no influence on the
transient behavior of the first tank.
The system's response to variations in inlet flow (step change) and sudden disturbances (impulse
change) offers valuable insights into system dynamics, process control strategies, and the
determination of key parameters such as the time constant and system resistance.
Assumptions:
1. The liquid has a constant density.
2. The tanks have a uniform cross-sectional area.
3. The flow resistance is linear.

3. THEORY AND EXPERIMENTAL SETUP

FIG 1: - TWO TANK NON-INTERACTING SYSTEM

Balance on Tank 1 gives;
d h1
q−q 1= A1 ….. ….. (1)
dt
Balance on Tank 2 gives;
d h2
q−q 2= A2 ….. ….. (2)
dt
Now, the flow-head relationships for the two linear resistances are given by the expression
h1
q 1= ….. ….. (3)
R1
h2
q 2= ….. ….. (4)
R2

On combining Eqn. (1) and (3) and introducing deviation variables we get the transfer function
for tank 1,
H 1 (s) 1
= ….. ….. (5)
Q(s) τ 1 s +1

Similarly, on combining Eqn. (2) and (4) we obtain the transfer function for tank 2,
H 2 (s) R2
= ….. ….. (6)
Q1 (s) τ 2 s +1

Finally, we obtain the overall transfer function by multiplying Eqn. (5) and (6),
H 2 (s) 1 R2
= ….. ….. (7)
Q(s) τ 1 s +1 τ 2 s +1

Now, for a step change of magnitude A,

Q ( t ) =A∗u ( t ) ….. ….. (8)
Therefore, the overall transfer function for a step change from equation (8) becomes:

A 1 R2
H 2 ( s )= ….. ….. (9)
s τ 1 s +1 τ 2 s+ 1

Taking Inverse Laplace Transform of equation 9:

( √ 1−ζ 2 tτ + tan−1 √1−ζ )

−ζt 2
1
H ( t ) =1− eτ
sin ζ <1
√1−ζ 2 ζ
−t
t
( )
H ( t ) =1− 1+ e τ ζ=1
τ

( )
−ζt
t ζ t
H ( t ) =1−e τ
cosh √ ζ 2−1 + 2 sinh √ ζ 2 −1 ζ > 1
τ √ ζ −1 τ
Now,
For an impulse change of magnitude V (volume added to the system):
Q ( t ) =V∗δ(t ) ….. ….. (10)
Similarly, the overall transfer function for an impulse change is given as:

V ∗1 R 2
H 2 ( s )= ….. ….. (11)
τ 1 s+ 1 τ 2 s+1

Taking Inverse Laplace Transform of equation 11:

−ζt
1 1 t
H (t)= e τ
sin √ 1−ζ 2 ζ <1
τ √ 1−ζ 2 τ
−ζt
1 τ
H (t)= te ζ =1
τ2
−ζt
1 1 t
H (t)= e τ
sinh √ ζ 2−1 ζ >1
τ √ ζ 2−1 τ

We know; Two Tank Non-Interacting System is second order system;

Y (s) kp
∴ = 2 2 ….. ….. (12)
X ( s) τ s +2 ζτs+ 1

EXPERIMENTAL SETUP: -
This setup is designed to study how liquid flows between tanks and how the system responds to
changes in input. It consists of three tanks, valves, a pump, and a rotameter for measuring flow.
Tank 1 holds the liquid and releases it through a valve (R1), allowing it to flow freely into Tank
2. Since the liquid enters the atmosphere before reaching Tank 2, the level in Tank 2 does not
affect the flow from Tank 1, making this a non-interacting system. The liquid in Tank 2 is then
drained through another valve (R2). A pump recirculates the liquid back into Tank 1 and Tank 3,
ensuring continuous flow. The rotameter is used to measure the flow rate passing through the
system.
 FIG 2: - PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM FOR TWO TANK NON-INTERACTING
SYSTEM

Procedure: -
Starting: -
1. Switch on the main power supply.
2. Ensure all pipe fittings and connections between Tank 1, Tank 2 and the rotameter are secure.
3. Adjust the outlet valves: partially close R1, fully open R2, and keep R3 completely closed.
4. Start the pump and set the desired flow rate.
5. Allow the liquid level in Tank 1 and Tank 2 to stabilize at a steady state.

For a Step Change: -

1. Once the system reaches a steady state, introduce a step change by increasing the inlet flow
rate to the tank.
2. Record the water level of both tanks at fixed time intervals until the new steady state is
achieved.
3. After stabilization, note the final water level in the tank.
4. Repeat the experiment for another set of readings.

For an Impulse Change: -

1. After reaching steady state, introduce an impulse change by adding 200 mL of water directly
into the tank 1.
2. Immediately record the water level.
3. Continue recording the water level of both tanks at fixed time intervals until the system
stabilizes again.
4. Note the final water level once the steady state is reached.
5. Repeat the process for another set of readings.

Closing: -
1. After completing all measurements, turn off the pump and main power supply.
2. Drain the tanks and clean the apparatus thoroughly.

APPENDIX AND RESULT

For Step Change: -

Initial Flow Rate = 30 LPH

Final Flow Rate = 42 LPH

TABLE 1: STEP UP (FOR TANK 1)

S.No. Time (sec) h (mm) H (mm)
1 0 69 0
2 10 73 4
3 20 77 8
4 30 81 12
5 40 84 15
6 50 87 18
7 60 90 21
8 70 93 24
9 80 95 26
10 90 97.6 28.6
11 100 99 30
12 110 101 32
13 120 102.4 33.4
14 130 104 35
15 140 106 37
16 150 107 38
17 160 108.9 39.9
18 170 110 41
19 180 111 42
20 190 112 43
21 200 113 44
 22 210 114.2 45.2
23 220 115.4 46.4
24 230 116 47
25 240 116 47
26 250 116 47
27 260 116 47
28 270 116 47
29 280 116 47
30 290 116 47
31 300 116 47

TABLE 2: STEP UP (FOR TANK 2)

S.No. Time (sec) h (mm) H (mm)
1 0 64 0
2 10 65.5 1.5
3 20 66.2 2.2
4 30 67.4 3.4
5 40 68 4
6 50 70 6
7 60 71.5 7.5
8 70 72.6 8.6
9 80 74 10
10 90 76.7 12.7
11 100 78 14
12 110 79.2 15.2
13 120 80.4 16.4
14 130 82 18
15 140 83.7 19.7
16 150 85 21
17 160 86.3 22.3
18 170 88 24
19 180 89.5 25.5
20 190 91 27
21 200 92 28
22 210 93.7 29.7
23 220 95 31
24 230 96 32
25 240 96.4 32.4
26 250 97 33
27 260 99 35
28 270 101 37
29 280 102 38
30 290 102.4 38.4
31 300 103.1 39.1
 32 310 104 40
33 320 104.6 40.6
34 330 106 42
35 340 106.9 42.9
36 350 107.7 43.7
37 360 108 44
38 370 109.5 45.5
39 380 109.7 45.7
40 390 110 46
41 400 110 46
42 410 110 46
43 420 110 46
44 430 110 46
45 440 110 46

For Impulse Change: -

Volume of water added = 200 mL

Flow Rate = 25 LPH

TABLE 3: FOR IMPLUSE (FOR TANK 1)

S.No. Time (sec) h (mm) H (mm)
1 0 31 0
2 10 58 27
3 20 54 23
4 30 52 21
5 40 50 19
6 50 48 17
7 60 46.7 15.7
8 70 43.9 12.9
9 80 42 11
10 90 41 10
11 100 40 9
12 110 39 8
13 120 38 7
14 130 37.4 6.4
15 140 36 5
16 150 35.4 4.4
17 160 34.6 3.6
18 170 34 3
19 180 33.6 2.6
20 190 33 2
 21 200 32.2 1.2
22 210 32 1
23 220 31.7 0.7
24 230 31.3 0.3
25 240 31 0
26 250 31 0
27 260 31 0
28 270 31 0
29 280 31 0

TABLE 4: FOR IMPLUSE (FOR TANK 2)

S.No. Time (sec) h (mm) H (mm)
1 0 75 0
2 10 79 4
3 20 81 6
4 30 83 8
5 40 85 10
6 50 86.5 11.5
7 60 87.6 12.6
8 70 89 14
9 80 88 13
10 90 87.4 12.4
11 100 87 12
12 110 86.4 11.4
13 120 86 11
14 130 85.2 10.2
15 140 84.6 9.6
16 150 84 9
17 160 83.6 8.6
18 170 83 8
19 180 82.5 7.5
20 190 82 7
21 200 81.7 6.7
22 210 81.2 6.2
23 220 80.8 5.8
24 230 80.4 5.4
25 240 80 5
26 250 79.4 4.4
27 260 79 4
28 270 78.7 3.7
29 280 78 3
30 290 77.2 2.2
31 300 76.3 1.3
32 310 75.6 0.6
 33 320 75.1 0.1
34 330 75 0
35 340 75 0
36 350 75 0

SAMPLE CALCULATION: - (FOR STEP CHANGE)

Initial Height of Tank 1 = 69mm

Final Height of Tank 1 = 116mm

Value of 63.2% of step (t = τ ¿ = 0.632 * (116 – 69) = 29.704

At 29.704, from the graph we got the value of τ =97 sec

From experimental data: - (Tank 1)

Area of Tank 1 = 68.22 cm2=6822 mm 2

H = 116 – 69 = 47mm

Q = 42 – 30 = 12 LPH = 3333.34 mm3 /sec

H 47 mm 2
R= = =0.0141 sec /mm
Q 3333.34 mm3 /sec

τ =A∗R=¿ 6822 * 0.0141 = 96.19 sec

∴ τ 1=96.19 sec

From experimental data: - (Tank 2)

Area of Tank 1 = 68.22 cm2=6822 mm 2

H = 110 – 64 = 46mm

Q = 42 – 30 = 12 LPH = 3333.34 mm3 /sec

H 46 mm 2
R= = =0.0138 sec /mm
Q 3333.34 mm /sec
3

τ =A∗R=¿ 6822 * 0.0138 = 94.14 sec

∴ τ 2=94.14 sec
For calculating (ζ );

1 R2 0.0138
=
τ 1 s+ 1 τ 2 s+1 (96.19 s +1)(94.14 s +1)
0.0138
¿ ….. ….. (13)
( 96.19 ) ( 94.14 ) s2 + ( 96.19+ 94.14 ) s +1
On, comparing Eqn. (12) and (13);
We get;
2
τ =96.19∗94.14=9055.327
∴ τ =95.16 sec
2 ζτ =96.19+94.14=190.13
∴ ζ =1.00005≈ 1

4. DISCUSSION

For Step Change (Step Up): -

Time vs Deviati on
Theoretical data (Simulink) Tank 1 Experimental data
50
45
40
35
Deviation H (mm)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time (sec)

FIG 3: - STEP CHANGE RESPONSE CURVE OF H (DEVIATION) VS TIME OF TANK 1

When the water flow rate was increased from 30 LPH to 42 LPH, the water level in the tank
began to rise. Initially, the increase was rapid, but over time, the rate of change slowed down
until the water level stabilized at approximately 116 mm. This behavior aligns with the
characteristics of a first-order system, where changes occur quickly at the beginning and then
gradually settle into a steady state. From Figure 3, at t = τ, we determine τ = 97 seconds.
Observing the data, it took around 4–5 minutes for the system to fully stabilize. This closely
aligns with the theoretical model, confirming that the system responds in a predictable manner to
sudden changes in inflow.
Comparing with theoretical data for tank 1, reveals that both exhibit a first-order system
response, characterized by a rapid initial increase followed by gradual stabilization within 4–5
minutes. The theoretical curve is smooth, with a time constant (τ) of 96.19 seconds, while the
experimental data shows slight deviations due to noise, disturbances, or sensor inaccuracies,
resulting in a time constant of 97 seconds. Despite these minor differences, the overall response
patterns closely match, confirming the validity of the model in accurately predicting the system’s
behavior under a step change.

Ti me vs De vi ati on
50
45
40
35
Deviation H (mm)

30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (sec)

FIG 4: - STEP CHANGE RESPONSE CURVE OF H (DEVIATION) VS TIME OF TANK 2

The graph shows the time vs. deviation response for Tank 2 after a step change in inlet flow from
Tank 1. Initially, when the step change is applied, the deviation in water level increases slowly
because the water first fills in Tank 1 and then slowly, shows the increase in the water level of
Tank 2 until the system reaches a new steady-state value of approximately 47-50 mm. This
behavior is characteristic of a first-order system, where changes occur at first and then gradually
stabilize over time.
There is a noticeable non-linear increase in the middle of the curve, likely due to disturbances,
sensor fluctuations, or flow variations. Despite this, the overall trend follows the expected first-
order response pattern. The system takes approximately 400-450 seconds (6-7 minutes) to fully
stabilize.
After, performing the calculations for both Tank 1 and Tank 2 we get the value of τ , i.e. 96.19
for Tank 1 and 94.14 for Tank 2. With the help of these values of τ , we are able to calculate the
overall value of τ for the complete system to be 95.16 sec. Then, using the transfer function eqn.
we get ζ nearly about 1.

For Impulse Change: -

Ti me vs De vi ati on
30

25
Deviation H (mm)

20

15

10

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time (sec)

FIG 5: - IMPULSE CHANGE RESPONSE CURVE OF H (DEVIATION) VS TIME OF TANK 1

For the impulse test, we added 200 mL of water to the tank all at once. This caused a sudden rise
in water level to 58 mm. After that, the level started to slowly decrease as the extra water drained
out. The decrease was fast at first and then slowed down over time, following the expected
pattern of a first-order system.

By looking at the figure 5, the water level returned to its original state, we can estimate how the
system naturally stabilizes. The results showed that the system does not oscillate or overshoot,
meaning it behaves smoothly without sudden jumps.
 Ti me vs D e vi ati on
16
14
12
Deviation H (mm) 10
8
6
4
2
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Time (sec)

FIG 6: - IMPULSE CHANGE RESPONSE CURVE OF H (DEVIATION) VS TIME OF TANK 2

The second graph illustrates how Tank 2 responds to an impulse change applied to Tank 1. Since
Tank 2 receives water from Tank 1, its level does not increase immediately but experiences a
delay as water gradually flows between the tanks. Initially, the water level in Tank 2 was 75 mm,
rising to a peak of approximately 14 mm before gradually decreasing. This decline follows a
similar pattern to Tank 1 but occurs more slowly due to the time required for water to transfer
between the tanks.
Over time, Tank 2 stabilizes at a final height of 75 mm. This response confirms that the system is
non-interacting, meaning changes in Tank 1 influence Tank 2 with a delay, but once equilibrium
is reached, neither tank significantly affects the other.
Both tanks display a rapid initial rise followed by a gradual decline until reaching steady-state
conditions, characteristic of a first-order system responding to an impulse input. Since Tank 1
directly receives the impulse, its peak occurs earlier than that of Tank 2, highlighting the
sequential nature of liquid transfer in a non-interacting system. The delayed peak in Tank 2
further supports this observation, as its response depends on the overflow from Tank 1.

Possible Errors: -

Error that may have influenced the results include:

 Measurement inaccuracies: Manually recording water levels could introduce minor
errors.
 Flow inconsistencies: The pump may not always deliver a perfectly consistent flow rate.
 Environmental factors: External influences such as slight vibrations or temperature
fluctuations may have had a small impact on the results.
5. PRECAUTION
1. Verify Equipment Setup – Check that all pipes, valves, and connections are securely in
place before starting the experiment to prevent leaks.
2. Maintain Consistent Flow – Adjust the rotameter carefully to ensure a stable inlet flow
rate before introducing step or impulse changes.
3. Eliminate Air Bubbles – Ensure the system is free from air bubbles, as they can impact
measurement accuracy.
4. Record Measurements Precisely – Take water level readings carefully at the correct
time intervals to ensure accuracy.
5. Avoid Overflow – Keep the water level within the tank’s capacity to prevent spillage and
ensure reliable measurements.

6. CONCLUSION
The experiment successfully demonstrated the first-order dynamic response of a two-tank system
under different input conditions. The data showed that Tank 1 responded immediately to inflow
changes, while Tank 2 exhibited a delayed but predictable response, confirming a non-interacting
system behavior. Although some discrepancies were observed between theoretical and
experimental values, the overall trends matched closely, validating the system model. Key
factors such as measurement errors, flow inconsistencies, and environmental disturbances were
identified as potential sources of deviation.

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.