McMaster University

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

ii)
iii)

Pressure indicator,
Temperature indicator in a packed
bed,

PI
TI

iv)
v)

Volume flow rate of butane in a pipe,

Mass flow rate of hydrogen,

FI
FI

vi)
vii)
viii)

Weight of a solid in a vessel,

Speed of rotation of a shaft, and
Mole % of propane in a gas stream

SI
AI

Set value for the alarm is NOT

shown on the drawing
Not used for control
in a packed bed is not
relevant;
the
symbol
is
independent of the process
application
Flow == F
The units of the flow are not
indicated in the symbol.
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.

09/19/16

McMaster University

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. Were 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.

09/19/16

McMaster University

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.
ii.

T4, reactor feed temperature

T1, feed temperature

iii.
iv.

F3, reactor effluent flow

L1, reactor liquid level

Figure 1.1

T4, reactor temperature

v8
F2
F1

T1

v3
T3

T4

F5

T5
F3

T6

P1

F4

L1

v1

v5
v2

v6

L1

v7
T2

Hot Oil

T7

T8
T9

Hot Oil

F6

v1 Yes, strong This will influence the flow rate through the feed exchanger and
the ratio of fresh to recycle, which can be at different
temperatures.
v2 Yes, strong This will affect the flow of heating oil to the feed heat exchanger.
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. Lets select v2.
Because this is a reactor, we could select an RTD sensor for good accuracy, but we
need more information.

09/19/16

McMaster University

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 lets 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 1960s.
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.
Lets look an example of a simple process
control application. We have a tank containing
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
maintain the liquid level in the tank at a desired
value (lets say at 50% of the tank height) by
manipulating the flow into the tank. Why? If
the level were not controlled,

Flow into
tank

Flow out to
downstream
process

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

09/19/16

McMaster University

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?
Lets 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

Raising and
lowering the gate
affects the flow
in

Float measures
the liquid level

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 (K c), 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, lets not forget the ingenious pioneers who established automatic
control by solving practical problems with the tools and technology available at
the time!

09/19/16

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 2

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.
2.

Manipulated variables that we adjust to achieve desired process behavior

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.
Lets 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

09/19/16

McMaster University

a.
b.
c.

Identify at least three controlled variables, which must be measured.

Identify at least one manipulated variable for each of the controlled variables.
Hint: these must be valves.
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.

09/19/16

McMaster University

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. (Its 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

09/19/16

McMaster University

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.

09/19/16

McMaster University

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.

09/19/16

10

McMaster University

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

Residuum

30
20
10

40
5

38
5

36
5

0
32
5

LC

40

34
5

Frequency (%)

Crude oil residuum

viscosity control

Viscosity (cst)

AC

40
5

38
5

36
5

32
5

Light Gas Oil

(expensive)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
34
5

Frequency (%)

After: mean = 397 stnd dev = 7.5

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.

09/19/16

11

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 3

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, C A, can be affected by manipulating
the feed concentration, CA0, because there is a causal relationship between these variables.
a.

b.
c.

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.
Relate the gain and time constant(s) to parameters in the process.
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).

Solvent

A,solvent

Reactant

F
C

Fo
C AO

A
A,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.)
Balance: Since we seek the behavior of a composition, we begin with a component
balance.
09/19/16

12

McMaster University

Accumulation
(1)

in

out

+ generation

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
(2)

FS
Vm
dC A
FA

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.
(3)

FA
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,
(4)

C AA
FS

C A 0

FA

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.)

c. The control valve should have the following capabilities.

09/19/16

13

McMaster University

1.
2.
3.

Introduce a restriction to flow.

Allow the restriction to be changed.
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 elements position in changed, the area
through which the fluid flows can be increased or decreased.

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.

09/19/16

14

McMaster University

3.2
a.
b.
c.
d.

Stirred tank mixer

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.
Sketch the dynamic behavior of T(t).
Relate the gain and time constants to the process parameters.
Select a temperature sensor that gives accuracy better than 1 K at a temperature
of 200 K.

F
T0

F
T

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.

09/19/16

15

McMaster University

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
(1)

U | t t

in

out

(no accumulation!)

U | t t (H in H out )

We divide by delta time and take the limit.

(2)

dU
(H in H out )
dt

The following thermodynamic relationships are used to relate the system energy to the
temperature.
dU/dt = VCv dT/dt

H = FCp (T-Tref)

For this liquid system, Cv Cp

Substituting gives the following.

(3)

dT
F(T0 T )
dt

Are we done? Lets 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
(4)

dT '
T ' KT ' 0
dt

with = V/F

K=1

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.

09/19/16

16

McMaster University

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
following expression.

T
Time

(5)

T ' KT0 (1 e t / )

and

T Tinitial KT0 (1 e t / )

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.
limits of
application
(C)

accuracy (1,2)

thermocouple
type E
(chromel-constantan)

-100 to 1000

type J
(iron-constantan)

1.5 or 0.5%
(0 to 900 C)

0 to 750

2.2 or 0.75%

type K
(chromel-nickel)

0 to 1250

2.2 or 0.75%

type T
(copper-constantan)

-160 to 400

RTD
Thermister

sensor type

-200 to 650

(3)

-40 to 150

0.10C

(3)

2%
-200 to 800

1%

advantages

(3)

1.0 or 1.5%
(-160 to 0 C)
(0.15 +.02 T ) C

Bimetallic
Filled system

dynamics,
time
constant (s)

1-10

disadvantages

1. good reproducibility
2. wide range

1. minimum span, 40 C
2. temperature vs emf
not exactly linear
3. drift over time
4. low emf corrupted by
noise

1.
2.
3.
1.
2.

good accuracy
small span possible
linearity
good accuracy
little drift

1.
2.
1.
2.

low cost
physically rugged
simple and low cost
no hazards

1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.

self heating
less physically rugged
self-heating error
highly nonlinear
only small span
less physically rugged
drift
local display

1. not high temperatures

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.

09/19/16

17

McMaster University

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.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

the tank is well mixed,

negligible heat transfer,
constant flow rate,
constant physical properties,
constant volume,
no heat of reaction, and
the system is initially at steady state.

CA0

F1

CA

Figure 3.3
a.
b.
b.
c.
d.

Develop the differential equations that can be used to determine the dynamic
response of the concentration of component B in the reactor, C B(t), for a given
CA0(t).
Relate the gain(s) and time constant(s) to the process parameters.
After covering Chapter 4, solve for CB(t) in response to a step change in CA0(t),
CA0.
Sketch the shape of the dynamic behavior of CB(t).
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.
Accumulation =
09/19/16

in

out

generation
18

McMaster University

(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.
(2)

dC B
FC B0 FC B VkC A
dt
0

We can subtract the initial steady state and rearrange to obtain

(3)

dC' B
C' B K B C ' A
dt

V
F

KB

Vk
F

Are we done? Lets check the degrees of freedom.

DOF = 2 1 = 1 0

No!

CB and CA
The first equation was a balance on B; we find that the variable C A 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.

(5)

dC' A
C' A K B C' A 0
dt

V
F Vk

KA

F
F Vk

Are we done? Lets 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).
09/19/16

19

McMaster University

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)

B sC' B (s) C' B ( t ) | t 0 C' B (s) K B C' A (s)

(7)

A sC' A (s) C' A ( t ) | t 0 C' A (s) K A C' A 0 (s)

(8)

C' B (s)

KAKB
C' A 0 (s)
( A s 1)( B s 1)

We substitute the input forcing function, CA0(s) = CA0/s, and invert using entry 10 of
Table 4.1 (with a=0) in the textbook.
(9)

(10)

C' B (s)

C' A 0
KAKB
( A s 1)( B s 1)
s

A
B
C' B ( t ) K A K B C A 0 1
e t / A
e t / B
B A
B A

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
of CA.

solid = CB

1
0.8

Compare the responses and explain the

differences.

0.6
0.4

d. Because the roots of the denominator

in the Laplace transform are real, this
process can never behave as an
underdamped system.

20

40

60
time

80

100

120

20

40

60
time

80

100

120

2
1.5
1
0.5

09/19/16

20

McMaster University

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
decrease the flow out in a step by
adjusting the valve.
i.

Fin

Determine the behavior of the

level as a function of time.

Fout

V=AL

Figure 2.4
We need to formulate a model of the process to understand its dynamic behavior. Lets 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
( AL ) t t ( AL ) t Fin t Fout t

We cancel the density, divide by the delta time, and take the limit to yield
A

09/19/16

dL
Fin Fout
dt

21

McMaster University

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,
A

dL
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!
L

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.

09/19/16

22

McMaster University

ii.

Compare this result to the textbook Example 3.6, the draining tank.

Fin

Fin

Fout

Fout

V=AL

Key Issue
Level model
Flow out
Level behavior
Level stability
iii.

Example 3.6
Draining tank

This question
Tank with outlet pump

By overall material balance

Depends on the level

By overall material balance

Independent of the level
(or very nearly so)
First order exponential for a step Linear, unbounded response
change
to a step change
stable
unstable
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?

09/19/16

23

McMaster University

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

20

40 50

70 80
Time (h)

End of problem at 100 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

(m3/h)

0 - 20
20-40
40-50
50-70
70-80
80-100

30
0
30
0
30
30

12
12
12
12
12
12

18
-12
18
-12
18
-12

09/19/16

V beginning
of period
(m3)
0
360
120
300
60
240

V end of
period
(m3)
360
120
300
60
240
0

24

McMaster University

Volume (m3)

400
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 m 3. 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?

09/19/16

25

McMaster University

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:

-Fundamental balance
D.O.F.

-Constitutive equations
[e.g.: Q =hA(Th-Tc)]

Is model linear?
Yes

No

Expand in Taylor Series

Express in deviation variables

Group parameters to evaluate [gains (K), time-constants (), dead-times()]

Take Laplace transform
Substitute specific input, e.g.,
step, and solve for output
Analytical solution
(step)

Numerical solution

Analyze the model for:

- causality
- order
- stability
- damping

Combine several models into

integrated system

09/19/16

26

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 4

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.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Formulate the model for the dynamic response of the concentration of A in the
reactor, CA(t).
Linearize the equation(s) in (a).
Solve the linearized equation analytically for a step change in the inlet
concentration of A, CA0.
Sketch the dynamic behavior of CA(t).
Discuss how you would evaluate the accuracy of the linearized model.

Goal

Variable

System
Balance
(or constitutive equation)

DOF

Linear?

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.
Accumulation

09/19/16

in

out

generation

27

McMaster University

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

(2)

dC A
F(C A 0 FC A ) VkC 0A.5
dt

Are we done? Lets check the degrees of freedom.

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..

C 0A.5 C 0A.5

(3)

0.5 C A0.5

C
s

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 CA = CA - CAS.
(4)

dC' A
F(C' A 0 FC' A ) Vk (0.5C As0.5 )C' A
dt

This linear, first order ordinary differential equation model can be arranged into the
standard form, given in the following.

(5)
K

dC' A
C' A KC' A 0
dt

with

V
F 0.5VkC As0.5

F
F 0.5VkC As0.5

c. Lets solve this equation using the Laplace transform method. We can take the
Laplace transform of equation (5) to obtain
(6)

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
(CA0(s)=CA0/s to give.
09/19/16

28

McMaster University

(7)

C' A (s)

K C A 0
s 1 s

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 /

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.
- the maximum slope appears when the step is
introduced
- the curve has a smooth (non-oscillatory
response)
- 63% of the change occurs when
t = (past the step)
- the final steady state is K(input)

CA
Time

CA0

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
constitutive model
Construction of equipment
Accuracy of measurements used to achieve
desired values

- Is the rate expression accurate

- uncertainty in k
V (cross sectional area)
V (level) and F (flow)

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 () at different values over the range of operation. If these
parameters do not change much, the linearization would be deemed accurate.

09/19/16

29

McMaster University

2. Steady-state prediction. Compare the steady-state output values from the non-linear
model with steady-state output values from the linearized model (Kinput). This method
will check the gain only, not the time constant.

09/19/16

30

McMaster University

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.
b.
c.
d.

Develop the dynamic model to predict the concentration of A.

Linearize the equation and solve the linearized equation analytically for a step
change in the feed flow rate, F.
Sketch the dynamic behavior of the effluent concentration, CA(t).
Describe the equipment required to maintain the feed flow rate at a desired value.
F0
CA0

F1

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.
Accumulation
(1)

in

out

MWA VC A | t t VC A | t MWA t FC A 0 FC A VkC 0A.5

generation

Divide by delta time and take the limit to obtain

09/19/16

31

McMaster University

(2)

dC A
F(C A 0 FC A ) VkC 0A.5
dt

Are we done? Lets check the degrees of freedom.

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

0.5 C A0.5

C
s

C As higher order terms

Substituting the approximations, subtracting the initial steady state, and rearranging gives
the following.
(6)

V
dC' A
C' A KF' with
Fs 0.5VkC As0.5
dt

(C A 0s C 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)

09/19/16

C' A ( t ) (F)K 1 e t /

32

McMaster University

c. The plot and qualitative properties are the same as for other first order systems.

- the output changes immediately after the step

is introduced.
- the maximum slope appears when the step is
introduced
- the curve has a smooth (non-oscillatory
response)
- 63% of the change occurs when
t = (past the step)
- the final steady state is K(input)

CA
Time

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.

Valve with
adjustable stem
position

Pump to supply
the head for
flow

P
Orifice
meter

09/19/16

33

McMaster University

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 C A0 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 C A0 (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.

V
dC' A
C' A K CA 0 C' A 0 with CA 0
F 0.5VkC As0.5
dt
F
K CA 0
F 0.5VkC As0.5
K CA 0
(C' A (s)) CA 0
C' A 0 (s)
(1)
transfer function
CA 0 s 1

CA 0

(C A (s)) CA 0
K CA 0

C A 0 (s)
CA 0 s 1

C' A ( t ) C A 0 K CA 0 1 e t / CA 0

09/19/16

34

McMaster University

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.
F

dC' A
C' A K F F'
dt

(2)

(C' A (s)) F

with F

KF
F' (s)
Fs 1

C' A ( t ) (F)K F 1 e t / F

V
Fs 0.5VkC As0.5

transfer function

KF

(C A 0s C As )
Fs 0.5VkC As0.5

(C A (s)) F
KF

F(s)
Fs 1

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
FUNCTION

OUTPUT

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
Remember
that the block
diagramvariables.
is simply a picture of equations (1) to (3).
diagrams ALWAYS
use deviation

09/19/16

35

McMaster University

CA0(s)

KCA0/( CA0s+1)

(CA(s))CA0

+
F(s)

KF/( Fs+1)

CA(s)

(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. Lets list some aspects of the
response that we know.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

KF is positive
KCA0 is positive
Both systems are first order
The two time constants are equal
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?

09/19/16

36

McMaster University

4.4

Lets consider the usefulness of the transfer functions that we just derived. From the
transfer function CA(s)/CA0(s), answer the following questions.
Does a causal relationship exist?
What is the order of the system?

Hint: How could the process gain help?

Hint: How many differential equations are in the
model?
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 this?
from a step change in CA0?
e.
Would any of your answer change
Important: We can learn general types of behavior
for any values of the parameters of 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

K0

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.)

09/19/16

37

McMaster University

We determine stability by evaluating sign of the exponent relating the variable to time. Recall that y = A e
t
= A e t/. The value of alpha is the root(s) of the denominator of the transfer function!
= 1/ > 0

stable

= 1/ 0

stable

The answer for CA(s)/CA0(s) is > 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 / CA 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!

09/19/16

38

McMaster University
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

CA0
T

CA
T

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)

Vex C p

09/19/16

dT
FCp(T0 T) Q W
dt

39

McMaster University

Q UA(T (Thin Thout ) / 2) and

with

UA

aFcb 1
Fc aFcb / 2 h C ph

Linearized model:

ex

dT '
T ' K pex Fc'
dt

with the subscript ex for exchanger.

Transfer function: (Taking the Laplace transform of the linearized model)

K pex
T (s)

G ex (s)
Fh (s) ex s 1

a first order system!

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
F(C A 0 C A ) Vk 0 e E / RT C A
dt

VC p

dT
FC 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 11 C' 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.

a 25
C ' A (s )
2
G r (s )
T ' 0 (s) s (a 11 a 22 )s (a 11a 22 a 12 a 21 )

09/19/16

a second order system

40

McMaster University
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.

K pex
a 25
C' A (s)
T' (s) C' A (s)

G ex (s)G r (s)
2
T ' 0 (s) T ' 0 (s) T' (s)
( ex s 1) s (a 11 a 22 )s (a 11a 22 a 12 a 21 )

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.

09/19/16

41

McMaster University

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

10

20

30
Time

40

50

60

10

20

30
Time

40

50

60

Heating fluid valve opening

09/19/16

42

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 5

Dynamic Behavior of Typical Dynamic Systems
5.1
First order System: A model for a first order system is given in the following
equation.
(5.1.1)

dY
X in X out
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.
Lets look at a physical system that is
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.

Level

Fin

Fout

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 selfregulating system remain within acceptable limits.

09/19/16

43

McMaster University

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 = L/v.

09/19/16

44

McMaster University

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

component with a small flow rate, so that the X

in
tracer does not modify the process behavior.
The dead time is the time between the
introduction of the tracer at the inlet to the
pipe and the first time that the tracer appeared at the pipe outlet.

= dead time

time

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 pipevalve 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 )
in Fin out Fout in C v ( v i 1 ) Pi 1 Pi 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 )
RT
dP
RT
d ( mass )

dt
V ( MW )
dt
mass

Substituting, yields the expression that demonstrates the reliance of the pressure
derivative on the pressure

09/19/16

45

McMaster University

V ( MW ) dPi
in C v ( v i 1 ) Pi 1 Pi out C v ( v i ) 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.

09/19/16

46

McMaster University

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
Output (K)

3
2
1
0

Change in valve opeining (%)

-1

10

20

30

40

50

60

10

20

30
Time (min)

40

50

60

3
2
1
0
-1

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.
Lets see what we can conclude about the process.

09/19/16

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.

47

McMaster University

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%

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

CP

fuel

v
v(s)

Tf(s)

G1(s)
Valve
opening

Reactor feed
temperature

TR(s)

G2(s)
Reactor
temperature

CP(s)

G3(s)
Product
Composition

A2(s)

G4(s)
Product
Composition
Measurement

Figure 5.6

09/19/16

48

McMaster University

The models for the system are given in the following.

1.2e 1s
5s 1
0.80e 0.5 s
G2 ( s)
( 2 s 1)
G1 ( s )

G3 ( s )

1.5e 2 s
(3s 1)(5s 1)

G4 ( s)

1.0e 0.5 s
(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

5.7 The recycle process shown in

Figure 5.7 is to be analyzed in this
question.

Rate: -rA = kCA

Product (pure B)

Ff

FP

feed

Recycle (pure A)

Figure 5.7

09/19/16

Fr

Any inerts
appear here
after
separation

49

McMaster University

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-selfregulatory 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):

x reactori ( s )

1
x fi ( s )
Rs 1

Recycle concentration (first order dynamics given in statement)

09/19/16

50

McMaster University

x recyclei ( s )

2
x reactori ( s )
Ss 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 )
0.50 x freshi ( s ) 0.50

2
x reactori ( s )
Ss 1

0.50 x freshi ( s ) 0.50

2
1
x fi ( s )
Ss 1 Rs 1

Solve for xf(s),

2
1
x fi ( s ) 1 0.50
0.50 x freshi ( s )
S s 1 R s 1

Rearrange to yield a transfer function,

x fi ( s )
x freshi ( s )

1 0.50( S s 1)( R s 1)
s S R s ( S 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.

09/19/16

51

McMaster University

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.
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.

09/19/16

52

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 6

Empirical Modelling
In this tutorial, you are going to apply the principles you have learned in Chapter 6 to identify a model of a
chemical process empirically. The non-isothermal CSTR shown in Figure 6.1 is considered in this
problem.

CA0

F
Solvent

CA

T0
vA

AB
Pure A

TC

TC
in

out

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, v C. 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.

09/19/16

53

McMaster University

CA (mole/m3)

0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

valve C (% open)

80
70
60
50
40

Figure 6.2 Process reaction curve for a step change in vC.

6.1
6.2

Determine the parameters for the first order with dead time model.
Critique your results carefully.

Before we begin to perform the calculations, we must thoroughly evaluate the experiment
and data to be sure that
1.
2.

the procedures were designed and performed correctly and

the data represents the process

Lets begin with the experiment procedures for the process reaction curve method.
Process reaction curve
Is the input signal nearly a perfect step?
Are the assumptions of output behavior valid?
(i.e. smooth, S-shaped output response)
Did process begin at steady state?
Did the process achieve a new steady state?
Is the signal to noise ratio large enough?
Was the experiment repeated, process returned to initial
operation
09/19/16

True for this experiment?

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

54

McMaster University

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, lets 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.

09/19/16

55

McMaster University

Two additional experiments, +20% and 20% changes in v C, 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 5.3.
6.3

Discuss the good and poor aspects of these experiments for use with the process
reaction curve modelling method.

Process reaction curve

Is the input signal nearly a perfect step?
Are the assumptions of output behavior valid?
(i.e. smooth, S-shaped output response)
Did process begin at steady state?
Did the process achieve a new steady state?
Is the signal to noise ratio large enough?
Two steps to test for linearity
Agrees with engineering principles for chemical
reactor
Was the experiment repeated, process returned to initial
operation

True for this experiment?

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No

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:

= 20%
=
0.084 mole/m3

.63 = 0.053 mole/m3

t63% = 30 min

.28 =0.024 mole/m3

t28% = 14 min

Kp = / = 0.0042 [mole/m3]/% open

= 1.5 (t63% - t28%) = 24 min
= t63% - = 6 min

09/19/16

56

McMaster University

For the step decrease in the cooling valve opening:

= -20%
=
0.113 mole/m3

.63 = 0.71 mole/m3

t63% = 23.3 min

.28 =0.032 mole/m3

t28% = 12.8 min

Kp = / = 0.0057 [mole/m3]/% open

= 1.5 (t63% - t28%) = 15.8 min
= t63% - = 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.

09/19/16

57

McMaster University

If these models were very different, we would suspect a disturbance has occurred during
the experiment, and we would repeat the procedure.

09/19/16

58

McMaster University

CA (mole/m3)

0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

10

20

30

40

50
60
time (min)

70

80

90

100

valve C (% open)

80
70
60
50
40

CA (mole/m3)

0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3

valve C (% open)

60
50
40
30
20

Figure 6.3. Process reaction curves for the CSTR without any unmeasured disturbances.

09/19/16

59

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 7

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.

CA0

Solvent
T0
vA
CA

Pure A
Tc out

TC in

vc
FC

Figure 7.1 CSTR with heat exchange for the reaction system A B C.

09/19/16

60

McMaster University

Table 7.1 Control objectives for the non-isothermal CSTR.

Control
Objective

Controlled
Variable

Sensor
Principle

Manipulated
Variable

Disturbances
that would
affect the
controlled
variable

1.Liquid level

1. Pressure
difference

1. Valve after
pump

1. Flow in and
pump pressure

2 Liquid level

2. position of
float

2. valve in feed
pipe

2. feed pressure

Valve in
recycle back to
tank

Safety
Maintain liquid in
the reactor

Environmental
Protection
None

Equipment
Protection
Maintain flow
through the pump

Exit flow rate Head (P) across

through the pump orifice meter

Pump
pressure
Liquid
availability

Smooth Plant
Operation and
Production Rate
1. Reactor space 1. Liquid level
time
2. Reactor inlet 2. Inlet
concentration
concentration
3. Feed flow rate 3. total feed flow

4. Reactor exit
flow

4. flow rate

5. Reactor
temperature

5. Temperature

09/19/16

1. Pressure
1. valve after
difference
pump
2. Composition 2. valve in
analyzer
reactant
3. Pressure drop
pipe
across orifice 3. valve in
solvent
flow
4. Orifice head 4. valve in exit
pipe

1. Pressure of
pump
2. Pressure of
reactant
3. Pressure of
solvent

5. thermocouple

5. coolant
temperature
and pressure

5. coolant flow
rate

4. flow in and
level sensor
noise

61

McMaster University

Product Quality
Reaction product
concentration

Product
concentration

Composition
analyzer

1. Impurities
affecting
rate
2. Flow rate
3. Liquid
volume
4. Temperature

Reaction
environment,
temperature

Thermocouple or Valve in
coolant pipe
RTD

1. Coolant
pressure
2. Coolant
temperature

Profit
Optimization
Yield of valuable
(B) vs. undesired
(C) product
A B C

Monitoring and
Diagnosis
A. Yield of
valuable vs.
undesired product
B. Variability of
1. reactant
concentration
from set point
2. reactor volume
3. outlet flow
rate

Maximum
(?)

yield

1. low variance
2. low variance
3. acceptable
variance

C. Behavior of
input (disturbance)
variables

limited
disturbances

D. Calculated heat
transfer coefficient

near clean value

09/19/16

N/A

62

McMaster University

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.
2.

We have decided not to control the feed composition. We have decided to adjust
the reactant valve to control the product concentration of B.
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

FC

TC

in

TC

out

FC

Discussion questions:
1.
2.

09/19/16

Why didnt we control the reactant concentration of B by adjusting the

coolant flow rate?
Why dont we maximize the yield by adjusting the coolant flow rate?

63

McMaster University

7.2

Discuss whether each of the following control designs satisfies the specified
control objective.
Control the flow in a pipe.
Control the flow in a pipe.
Control the pressure in an enclosed vessel.
Control the pressure in an enclosed vessel.

a.
b.
c.
d.

FC

a. Flow

Source at
P1

FC

b. Flow

Source at
P1

c. Pressure

Source at
P1

PC

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.

09/19/16

64

McMaster University

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.

09/19/16

65

McMaster University

Hot fluid

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
constant speed (rpm)
Orifice plate sensor
Globe valve

(a)

FC

(d)

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
water flow
Thermocouple sensor
Globe valve

Cooling
water

TC

Flow Control:
Positive displacement
pump
Orifice plate sensor
Butterfly valve

(b)

Hot fluid

(e)

FC

TC

Cooling
water

Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
variable speed driver
Orifice plate sensor

(c)

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
water flow
bimetalic coil sensor
Globe valve

Flows into the pipe

steam
TC

Temperature Control of
boiling water
Manipulate the hot oil
flow to heating coil
inside tank
RTD sensor
Diaphragm valve

(f)
Hot oil

Pressure Control:
Manipulate one exiting
flow
Flexible diaphragm
Globe valve

(h)

PC
Flows exiting the pipe

(j)

Liquid Level Control

Manipulate the exit flow
Pressure difference
sensor
Needle valve

LC

(g)

LC
AC

Pressure Control:
Manipulate exiting flow
from vessel
Piezoelectric
Globe valve

(i)
PC

(k)

LC
AC
CB

CB

Reaction: A B

Reaction: A B C

Composition Control in isothermal CSTR

Manipulate the inlet flow
Control CB, measured using refractive
index
Ball valve
Level maintained constant by LC

Composition Control in isothermal CSTR

Manipulate the inlet flow
Control CB
Ball valve
Level maintained constant by LC

Table 7.3 Proposed Control Designs with instrumentation recommendations.

09/19/16

66

McMaster University

Solutions for proposed designs

a)
The centrifugal pump increases the pressure of the
fluid, i.e., it provides head. The pump can operate at low
or no flow, at least for a short time; the speed of the rotor
does not determine the flow through the pump. Thus, the
fluid flow rate is determined by the driving force
(pressure) and the resistances to flow. The pump provides
the driving force and the valve provides an adjustable
resistance. Opening the valve increases the flow rate.

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
constant speed (rpm)
Orifice plate sensor
Globe valve

(a)

FC

Flow Control:
Positive displacement
pump
Orifice plate sensor
Butterfly valve

(b)

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
variable speed driver
Orifice plate sensor

(c)

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
components that define the liquid flow rate by the speed of
rotation or by the linear movement distance and speed.
Therefore the valve resistance does not affect the flow rate,
and if the valve is closed too far could result in damage to the
pump.
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
depends on the rotor speed the fast the rotation, the higher
the pressure. A variable speed motor can be adjusted to
achieve the desired flow rate, which is more energy efficient
than adjusting a variable pressure drop (valve) in the pipe.
Increasing the speed increases the flow rate.
Yes, feedback control is possible.
d)
The temperature of the hot fluid needs to be
controlled because of changes in its flow rate and inlet
temperature. The heat transferred depends upon many
factors, including the tube film heat transfer coefficient and
the cooling water temperature. Increasing the cooling water
flow rate will (1) increase the tube film coefficient and (2)
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.

09/19/16

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
constant speed (rpm)
Orifice plate sensor
Globe valve

(a)

FC

Flow Control:
Positive displacement
pump
Orifice plate sensor
Butterfly valve

(b)

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
variable speed driver
Orifice plate sensor

(c)

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
constant speed (rpm)
Orifice plate sensor
Globe valve

(a)

FC

Flow Control:
Positive displacement
pump
Orifice plate sensor
Butterfly valve

(b)

FC
Flow Control:
Centrifugal pump with
variable speed driver
Orifice plate sensor

(c)

Hot fluid

(d)

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
water flow
Thermocouple sensor
Globe valve

Cooling
water

TC
Hot fluid

(e)

Cooling
water

TC

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
water flow
bimetalic coil sensor
Globe valve

67

McMaster University

Yes, feedback control is possible.

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
heat exchanger. The heat transfer in the exchanger does not
influence the fluid before it enters the exchanger. If we want
to control the temperature at the inlet, we must adjust heat
transfer upstream.

Hot fluid

(d)

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
water flow
Thermocouple sensor
Globe valve

Cooling
water

TC
Hot fluid

(e)

TC

Cooling
water

Temperature Control:
Manipulate the cooling
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
pressure is constant. Changing the heat transferred affects
the rate of boiling, but not the temperature of the boiling
water.
No, feedback control is not possible with the equipment
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
the valve in the exit pipe is manipulated. Certainly, the outlet
flow is influenced by the valve position (see (a) above), so a
causal relationship exists. Since the level is unstable without
control, feedback control is especially important.

steam
TC

Temperature Control of
boiling water
Manipulate the hot oil
flow to heating coil
inside tank
RTD sensor
Diaphragm valve

(f)
Hot oil

Liquid Level Control

Manipulate the exit flow
Pressure difference
sensor
Needle valve

LC

(g)

steam
TC

Temperature Control of
boiling water
Manipulate the hot oil
flow to heating coil
inside tank
RTD sensor
Diaphragm valve

(f)
Hot oil

(g)

Liquid Level Control

Manipulate the exit flow
Pressure difference
sensor
Needle valve

LC

Yes, feedback control is possible.

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
one of the flows. We can prove this by formulating a
dynamic material balance. Naturally, successful control can
only be achieved over a range of flows; when the valve is
either fully opened or closed, control is no longer possible.

Flows into the pipe

Pressure Control:
Manipulate one exiting
flow
Flexible diaphragm
Globe valve

(h)

PC
Flows exiting the pipe

(i)
PC

Pressure Control:
Manipulate exiting flow
from vessel
Piezoelectric
Globe valve

Yes, feedback control is possible.

A pressure sensor that deflected because of pressure and

09/19/16

68

McMaster University

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
exit (or inlet) flow. The principles are identical to the
previous design.

Flows into the pipe

Pressure Control:
Manipulate one exiting
flow
Flexible diaphragm
Globe valve

(h)

PC
Flows exiting the pipe

Yes, feedback control is possible.

Pressure Control:
Manipulate exiting flow
from vessel
Piezoelectric
Globe valve

(i)
PC

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
space time. The model for this system was derived in
Tutorial 3, which could be extended to the concentration of
CB.

(j)

LC
AC
CB

Reaction: A B
Composition Control in isothermal CSTR
Manipulate the inlet flow
Control CB, measured using refractive
index
Ball valve
Level maintained constant by LC

Yes, feedback control is possible.

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
space time.
However, this process is more complex, some might say.
Tricky. For control to be successful, we need to have a
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 C B point, control is not possible
by adjusting the feed flow rate.

(k)

LC
AC
CB

Reaction: A B C
Composition Control in isothermal CSTR
Manipulate the inlet flow
Control CB
Ball valve
Level maintained constant by LC

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.

09/19/16

69

McMaster University

09/19/16

70

McMaster University

0.7
0.6

Concentration of B

0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4
0.5
0.6
volume / flow

0.7

0.8

0.9

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).

09/19/16

71

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 8

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 1930s, while digital control began in
the 1960s. 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 Newtons
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

09/19/16

72

McMaster University

We know that the transfer function relating an input-output pair for a feedback
control system is given in the following equation.
G p ( s )G v ( s )G c ( s )
CV ( 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

Three-tank process:

G P ( s )G v ( s )G S ( s )

0.039
(5s 1) 3

Substituting and rearranging, the characteristic equation is determined.

1 G p ( s )G v ( s )G c ( s )G S ( s )
1

KC K P

1 s 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
-0.2000
-0.2000 + 0.0000i
-0.2000 - 0.0000i

Kc = 50
-0.4499
-0.0751 + 0.2164i
-0.0751 - 0.2164i

Kc = 100

Kc = 150

-0.5148
-0.0426 + 0.2726i
-0.0426 - 0.2726i

-0.5604
-0.0198 + 0.3121i
-0.0198 - 0.3121i

Columns 5 through 6
Kc = 200
-0.5966
-0.0017 + 0.3435i
-0.0017 - 0.3435i

Kc = 250
-0.6273
0.0136 + 0.3700i
0.0136 - 0.3700i

Unstable!

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.

09/19/16

73

McMaster University

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

Gc ( s ) K c

MV ( s )
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 Kc1/Kp.
We look at the controller equation to determine the sign.
E (t ) SP (t ) CV ( t )

1
MV (t ) K c E (t )
TI

E (t ' )dt 'T

d CV
I
dt

Lets 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.

09/19/16

74

McMaster University

K d /( d s 1)
CV ( s )

D( s) 1 K 1 1 K P

C
T
s
(

1
)
I
P

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 /( d s 1)

1 K C 1 1 K P

T
s
(

1
)
I
P

K d /( d s 1)
C

1 K C 1 1 K P

T
s
(

1
)
I
P

CV ( s ) D( s )

lim sCV ( s ) lim s C

s 0

s 0

1 K C

K d /( d s 1)
0
K

1 1 P
TI s
( 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 /( d s 1)

1 K C 1 1 K P
TI s
( P s 1)

K d /( d s 1)
C

s 1 K 1 1 KP

C
T
s
(

1
)
I
P

CV ( s ) D( s )

lim sCV ( s ) lim s

s 0

09/19/16

s 0

K d /( d s 1)
C
0
s 1 K 1 1 KP

C
TI s
( P s 1)

75

McMaster University

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.

K d /( d s 1)
K

1 K C 1 1 P

T
s
(

1
)
I
P

K d /( d s 1)
C
2

s 1 K 1 1 KP

C
T
s
(

1
)
I
P

CV ( s ) D( s )

lim sCV ( s ) lim s

s 0

s0

C
2

s 1 K
C

K d /( d s 1)
Kd

0
KC K P
K

1
P
1
TI
TI s
( P s 1)

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.
Derivative mode: GC ( s )

Td s
MV ( s )
KC
CV ( s )
1 Td s

The transfer function can be separated into two series calculations that help to
understand the overall behavior of the modified derivative mode.

CV(s)

1
(1 Td s )
First order
filter

09/19/16

K C Td s

MV(s)

Exact
derivative

76

McMaster University

The first term is a filter that reduces the noise in the signal. The parameter
alpha () 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).
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
MV ( t ) K c E ( t )
T

Data: Set point

Measured controlled variable
Derivative of the controlled variable
Signal to control valve
Controller Gain, Kc
Controller integral time
Controller derivative time

E ( t ' ) dt ' Td

d CV
I
dt

= 100 C
= 98 C
0
= 63.7 % open
= 2.30 %/C
= 4.50 minutes
= 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!
09/19/16

77

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 9

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
flow, FA

Effluent
flow, FA

FA << FS

Figure 9.1

a.
b.

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.
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.
V

dC A
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.

with

09/19/16

KF
KCA0

=
=
=

dC A'
C A' K F F ' K CA0 C A' 0
dt

(3.78)

V/(F+Vk)
(CA0 CAs)/(Fs+Vk)
F/(F+Vk)

78

McMaster University

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.

Effect of the disturbance:

Effect of the manipulated variable:

dC A'
C A' K CA0 C A' 0
dt
dC A'

C A' K F F '
dt

(3.79)
(3.80)

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
Solvent pressure
Reactor volume
Feed and solvent
temperatures
The solvent valve

A change in pressure changes the flow rate of pure A,

even when the valve % open does not change
A change in pressure changes the flow rate of solvent,
even when the valve % open does not change
The volume affects the space time available for
reaction
The reactor temperature affects the rate constant
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.

09/19/16

79

McMaster University

9.2
a.
b.

Lets consider the objectives for the controlled variable, which we must
understand to design successful feedback control systems.
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.
Discuss other measures of controlled variable performance.
a.

The two measures are defined in the following equations.

IAE

| SP CV | dt

ISE

SP CV

dt

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 systems 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.

09/19/16

80

McMaster University

9.3

Lets 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.

09/19/16

81

McMaster University

a. The performance appears good.

The controlled variable achieves zero

steady-state offset.

The dynamic system is stable.

The process has a dead time of about 5

minutes; therefore, very fast response is not
possible.

The initial change in the MV is nearly

equal to the final value, which is good.

The CV settling time is good.

The overshoot of the CV past the set

point and the MV past its final value are
moderate and acceptable.
Process:
Controller:
Kp = 1.0
Kc = 0.90
Dead time = 5
TI = 7.0
Time constant = 5

09/19/16

Controlled Variable

8
6
4
2
0

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

Manipulated Variable

12
10
8
6
4
2
0

S-LOOP plots deviation variables

Controlled Variable

1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
0

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

2
Manipulated Variable

b. The performance appears good.

The controlled variable achieves zero

steady-state offset.

The dynamic system is stable.

The process has a dead time of about

5 minutes; therefore, very fast response is
not possible.

The initial change in the MV is nearly

equal to the final value, which is good.

The CV settling time is good.

The overshoot of the CV past the set

point and the MV past its final value are
moderate and acceptable.
Process:
Controller:
Kp = 1.0
Kc = 0.90
Dead time = 5
TI = 7.0
Time constant = 5

S-LOOP plots deviation variables

10

1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
0

Note that the only difference between cases (a) and (b) is
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.

82

McMaster University

Controlled Variable

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
-0.2

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

Manipulated Variable

10
8
6
4
2
0
-2

The large overshoot in the manipulated variable would

generally not be acceptable. However, if the
manipulated variable were cooling water, this might be
OK.

S-LOOP plots deviation variables

1.4
1.2
Controlled Variable

d. The performance appears good for this

difficult process

The controlled variable achieves zero

steady-state offset.

The dynamic system is stable.

The process has 9 minutes of dead time;

therefore, very fast response is not possible.

The initial change in the MV is small,

about 40% of its final value, but this is
expected because aggressive control of a
process with a large fraction dead time is not
possible with feedback.

The CV rise time and settling time are

long because of the long process dead time.

The overshoot of the CV past the set

point is very small.
Process:
Controller:
Kp = 1.0
Kc = 0.40
Dead time = 9
TI = 5.0
Time constant = 1

S-LOOP plots deviation variables

1.2

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

20

40

60
Time

80

100

120

1.4
Manipulated Variable

c. The performance appears questionable.

The controlled variable achieves zero

steady-state offset.

The dynamic system is stable.

The process has no dead time;

therefore, very fast response is possible.

The initial change in the MV exceeds its

final value by a factor of about 9.

The CV settling time is good.

The overshoot of the CV past the set

point is very small, and the rise time is
extremely fast.
Process:
Controller:
Kp = 1.0
Kc = 10.0
Dead time = 0
TI = 7.0
Time constant = 5

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

This process has a long dead time and is difficult to

control. While the control performance is much worse
the case (a), it is not because of a problem with the
controller.
If we want to improve the performance, we should use
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!

09/19/16

83

McMaster University

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.

09/19/16

84

McMaster University
8

CB efuent

7
6
5
4

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

16

CA efuent

14
12
10
8

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

10

15

20

25
Tim e

30

35

40

45

50

35

CA0 Feed

30
25
20
15

valve opening, %

60
58
56
54
52
50

Figure 9.5. Data from process reaction curve experiment.

09/19/16

85

McMaster University

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

CB efuent

7
6

0.63

0.28

Zero time
starts
here!

4
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

30

35

40

45

50

valve opening, %

60
58
56

54
52
50
0

10

15

20

25
Time

= 1.5 ( t63% - t28% ) = 1.5 ( 13.4 8.56 ) = 7.2 minutes

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

09/19/16

KcKp = 0.9

Kc = 0.9/0.25 = 3.6 %open/ (mole/m3)

TI/(+) = 0.67

TI = 0.67 (13.4) = 9.0 min

Td/(+) = 0.06

Td = 0.06 (13.4) = 0.80 min

86

McMaster University

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

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.

09/19/16

87

McMaster University

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.

TC

PC

FC

fo
fc

CW

LC

fo

fo

As an exercise, you should discuss this design and determine whether it makes
sense. We will learn a design procedure later.

09/19/16

88

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 10

Stability Analysis
10.1
In this question, you will analyze the series of three isothermal CSTRs show in Figure
10.1. The model for each reactor is the same at presented in Textbook Example 3.2, which is
repeated in the figure. To simplify, we will assume that a 1% change in the valve will cause a
1 mole/m3 change in the feed composition, CA0. The effluent concentration of reactant is
controlled by adjusting the pure reactant flow rate to the mixing point using a proportionalintegral controller.
C A0 ( s )
mole / m 3
1
v( s)
%open
C Ai ( s )
0.503

C Ai 1 ( s ) (12.4 s 1)

CA0

The unit of time is minutes. The sensor

and final element (valve) dynamics are
negligible.

CA1

CA2

CA3

AC

Pure
reactant

Figure 10.1

Answer the following questions. (Hint: Use the MATLAB program S_LOOP for the
calculations.)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Determine the characteristic equation.

Determine the poles (roots of the characteristic equation) for a closed-loop system with a
proportional-only controller for values of the controller gain (0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75).
Plot the poles determined in part (b).
Discuss the expected dynamic behavior obtained for each of the results in part (b).
Determine the tuning for a PI controller using the Zeigler-Nichols method.
a.
The characteristic equation is the denominator of the closed-loop transfer
function. For this system, it is

1 G p ( s )Gv ( s )Gc ( s )G S ( s )
1

b&c.

KC K P

1 s 3

K C ( 0.503 )3

1 12.4 s 3

The characteristic equation can be rearranged to

3 s 3 3 2 s 2 3s (1 K 3p K c ) 0

The results for the five values for Kc are plotted in the following figure.

09/19/16

89

McMaster University
Three roots are the
same for Kc=0
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

Imaginary

0.1
0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.3

-0.25

-0.2

-0.15

Real

-0.1

-0.05

0.05

Values for all three roots are plotted. We note that the system becomes unstable (the real
part becomes positive) between the Kc values of 60 and 75.
d.

The roots are all real for Kc = 0. We expect that the behavior will be critically
damped (no oscillation).
The roots with Kc > 0 are complex. We expect oscillatory behavior, which
becomes stronger as the imaginary parts become larger in magnitude.
When the real parts are negative, the oscillations decrease in magnitude; when
the real parts are positive, the oscillations increase in magnitude.

e.
We apply the Zeigler-Nichols tuning method. The open-loop transfer function
is every element in the feedback loop, with the controller being a proportional-only with
Kc = 1.
0.503
GOL ( s )

12.4 s 1

The frequency response is evaluated by setting s=j and evaluating the amplitude and
phase angle for various values of the frequency, . The resulting plot was generated
using S_LOOP.

09/19/16

90

McMaster University

BODE PLOT OF GOL

10

Amplitude Ratio

-1

10

-2

10

-3

10

-4

10

-2

10

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

Phase Angle (degrees)

0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-2
10

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

The critical frequency is 0.1396 rad/min, and the amplitude ratio at the critical frequency
is 0.0159 %open/ (mole/m3).
Ku = 1/0.0159 = 62.9 mole/m3/%open
Pu = 2/c = 6.28/0.1396 = 45.0
Kc = Ku/2.2 = 28.6 mole/m3/%open
TI = Pu/1.2 = 37.5 min
The dynamic behavior obtained with this tuning is given in the following figure for a step
set point change.

09/19/16

91

McMaster University

S-LOOP plots deviation variables (IAE = 58.6424)

Controlled Variable

2
1.5
1
0.5
0

50

100

150

200

250
Time

300

350

400

450

500

50

100

150

200

250
Time

300

350

400

450

500

Manipulated Variable

40
30
20
10
0
-10

We note that the behavior is too oscillatory and is not acceptable. We conclude (again)
that the Zeigler-Nichols tuning is not the best available method. (Lets remember that
they developed the concepts and procedures in the 1940s, well before digital
computation.)
This question demonstrated the application of two methods for stability analysis;
pole evaluation and Bode. Both methods are based on an analysis of the
characteristic equation of the closed-loop system.

10.2

The results from textbook Example 10.12 give tuning for feedback control of several
series of first order systems, different numbers of elements in the series. The results are
repeated in Table 10.2.
Table 10.2
n
1
3
5
7

0.35
0.145
0.096

Process:

09/19/16

AR|c

0.122
0.348
0.484

Kc

3.72
1.31
0.94

CV ( s )
1.0

MV ( s ) 5s 1

TI

15.0
36.1
54.5

92

McMaster University

a.
b.

Rank the results based on how aggressively each manipulates the manipulated variable
from most to least aggressive.
Discuss why limitations might exist in a real process to very aggressive adjustments.
a.
We note that the controller gain decreases and the integral time increases with
increasing n. Therefore, the controller in most aggressive for small n and becomes
progressively less aggressive as n increases.
We also note that for n=1, the controller gain is infinite, which is not practical. This will
cause the final element to bounce between is maximum and minimum limits.
b.
Very aggressive (large and frequent) changes to the manipulated variables can
cause damage to equipment or cause the equipment to operate improperly. Note that this
is not a general rule, but in many practical cases, the engineer must tune for moderate
changes to the manipulated variable, while achieving the desired performance for the
controlled variable.
An example (form Chapter 9) is given below.

Steam flow

40

M anip ulated V ariab le

30
20
10
0

-10
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Time

AC

Large, rapid changes

to the steam flow can
damage the trays

This question demonstrates that good control performance requires more than
stability and more than good controlled variable behavior.
10.3

Zeigler-Nichols tuning was determined for two process models in textbook Example
10.13. The results are repeated below. Perform the calculation for a third process with
the following model, and discuss the results.
Plant A:

CV ( s )
1.0e 2 s

MV ( s )
(8s 1)

New Case:

09/19/16

Plant B:

CV ( s )
1.0e 8 s

MV ( s )
( 2 s 1)

CV ( s )
1.0e 5 s

MV ( s )
(5s 1)

93

McMaster University

Parameter
c
ARc
Ku
Pu
Kc
TI
Td

Plant A
0.86
0.144
6.94
7.3
4.1
3.65
0.91

New Case

Plant B
0.32
0.84
1.19
19.60
0.70
9.8
2.45

The calculations can be performed by hand (trial and error) or using S_LOOP.
The results of the analysis are given in the following figure, where G OL(jw) are plotted.
BODE PLOT OF GOL

Amplitude Ratio

-0.1

10

-0.2

10

-0.3

10

-0.4

10

10

-2

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

Phase Angle (degrees)

0
-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-2
10

The critical frequency is between

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

0.40554
and 0.40633

The amplitude ratio at the critical frequency is 0.44196

Ku = 1/0.442 = 2.26
Pu = 2/c = 6.28/0.406 = 15.5

Kc = Ku/1.7 = 1.33
TI = Pu/2.0 = 7.75
Td = Pu/8 = 1.94

We note that the tuning is less aggressive than Plant A and more aggressive than Plant B.
This question demonstrates that the tuning becomes less aggressive as the
feedback dynamics become slower, with increasing dead time and time constant.

09/19/16

94

McMaster University

10.4

You have tuned a PID controller using the Ziegler-Nichols method. You know that the
process gain (KP) changes due to equipment changes (e.g., heat exchanger fouling,
catalyst aging) and variability in operating conditions (e.g., production rate). For
purposes of this question, we will assume that only the gain changes.

a.

How large a change in process gain will cause the closed-loop system to become
unstable?
We know that small or reasonable changes to the gain are acceptable. What is this
reasonable range?

b.

a.
The process gain affects the amplitude ratio but NOT the phase lag of G OL. Also,
the Zeigler-Nichols method provides a gain margin of approximately 2. Therefore, we
expect that an increase in the process gain of about a factor of 2 will cause instability.
b.
There is not exact rule for the sensitivity because of difference objectives for the
controlled variable behavior for different process applications. However, we have seen in
part (a) that a factor of 2 will be unacceptable for most tuning rules.

control performance, IAE

Also, we have seen in Chapter 9 that small changes (about 25%) do not strongly
influence control performance, when the controller is properly tuned. A typical result is
repeated in the figure below.

60

Bad
40

?
20
0

0.5

1
1.5
controller gain

This question demonstrated the importance of a reasonable margin from the

stability limit. The engineer must understand the variation occurring in the
process when deciding the appropriate margin for a specific application.

09/19/16

95

McMaster University

10.5

Processes have variables that are stable and unstable without process control.

a.

For the distillation tower in Figure 10.5, identify two examples of variables in both
categories.
For each variable, discuss why it is stable or unstable, as appropriate.
For each variable, decide whether the variable should be controlled automatically.
For the variables identified in part (c) as needing automatic control, select a manipulated
variable. (Hint: The manipulated variables should be valves.)

b.
c.
d.

To flare

PAH
PC-1

PV-3

L4
P3

T5

TAL

LC-1
17
F3

F7

16
dP-1
15
T6
AC-1

T10
3
TC-7
T20

dP-2

F4

LAH
LAL
LC-3
F9
F8

Figure 10.5

a&b.
Unstable:
L-1 which is a level with a pumped exit flow rate
L-2 which is a level with a pumped exit flow rate
These variables are unstable because the level has no effect of the flows in or out (they
are NOT draining tanks). If the flows in and out are not exactly equal, the level will
empty or fill completely.

09/19/16

96

McMaster University

Stable:
Feed temperature T-20. This is stable, because as the temperature increases, the heat
exchanger duty tends to decrease. Thus, the temperature will reach an equilibrium or
steady state.
Bottoms flow F-8. This is stable because equilibrium is quickly reached between the
head provided by the pump and the head required for a steady state flow.
c&d.
L-1: Yes, it must be controlled. The flow of either the reflux or the distillate product can
be manipulated to control the level.
L-2: Yes, it must be controlled. The flow of the bottoms product can be manipulated to
control the level.
T-20: This could be controlled, but it is not necessary. In this design, no valve is
available for controlling the feed temperature. The variations in the temperature will be a
disturbance to the distillation tower.
F-8: This is influenced by the valve in the liquid bottoms product pipe. However, the
level L-2 uses this valve. Therefore, the flow is not controlled to a specific value; it is
changed to ensure that L-2 does not empty or overflow.
This question demonstrates the analysis to identify unstable process variables.
These must be controlled by feedback.

10.6

The distillation process in Figure 10.6 has two feedback analyzer controllers. Should you
tune each controller using the Zeigler-Nichols method?

AC

AC

Figure 10.6

The Zeigler-Nichols method assumes that the process model, Gp(s), is the model between
the valve and the measured variable to be controlled. However, in this situation, the
relationship between a valve and a sensor includes not only the process, but also the
other controller. Therefore, the Zeigler-Nichols method is not appropriate.

09/19/16

97

McMaster University

The situation is shown in the following figure, where the relationship between MV1 and
CV1 is influence by controller Gc2.

direct path

G11(s)
MV1(s)

CV1(s)

interaction path

G21(s)
G12(s)

MV2(s)

SP2(s)

+
-

Gc2(s)

G22(s)

+
CV2(s)

You will learn about multiloop system in Chapter 20.

This question warns us that tuning a several multi-loop controllers is different
from tuning each controller as a single-loop.

09/19/16

98

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 11

Digital Control

Your goal is to control the

concentration of B in the reactor effluent
by adjusting the pure A control valve.
11.1

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.
= 1.5 ( t63% - t28% ) = 1.5 ( 13.4 8.56 ) = 7.2 minutes
= t63% - = 13.4 7.2 = 6.2 minutes
Kp = / = 2.5 mole/m3 / 10% open = 0.25 (mole/m3)/%open
PID tuning from the Charts, Figure 9.5 a-c.
/(+ ) = 6.2/(13.4) = 0.47
KcKp = 0.9
Kc = 0.9/0.25 = 3.6 %open/ (mole/m3)
TI/(+) = 0.67
TI = 0.67 (13.4) = 9.0 min
Td/(+) = 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.
= + t/2 = (6.2 + 5) = 11.2

09/19/16

99

McMaster University

PID tuning from the Charts, Figure 9.5 a-c.

/(+ ) = 11.2/(18.4) = 0.61
KcKp = 0.7
Kc = 0.7/0.25 = 2.8 %open/ (mole/m3)
TI/(+) = 0.61
TI = 0.6 (18.4) = 11.04 min
Td/(+) = 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.
2.
3.

Low initial cost, because the smallest system requires limited equipment.
Possible to perform control near the sensor and valve, reducing
transmission time.
Information for processes that are far apart geographically can be used for
control and monitoring.

Disadvantages
1.
2.

09/19/16

High cost for a single controller compared with an analog system, because
the digital system requires more infrastructure.
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.

100

McMaster University

3.
4.
5.
6.

More parallel equipment would increase the failure rate, although the
impact of each failure would be limited because of the few controllers per
computer.
Equipment from different vendors is difficult to integrate. The ability to
integrate is termed interoperability.
Loss of the LAN would not directly affect feedback control; however, the
operating personnel could not monitor or intervene.
The communication between processors must not be at too high a rate to
prevent overloading the LAN.

11.4 Search library references and the internet for examples of on-stream analyzers that
provide essentially continuous and that provide periodic, sampled measurements.
Describe examples of sampled measurements and why these sensors do not provide
continuous values.

11.5 Search library resources and the internet for information on new digital technology for
sensors, valves and signal transmission between the control room and the field devices (sensors
and valves). You can use the following key worlds; smart sensors, digital valve positioners,
fieldbus. Briefly describe advantages and disadvantages for (a) digital sensors, (b) digital
computation at the valve, and (c) digital signal transmission.

09/19/16

101

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 12

Stability Analysis
12.1
A colleague states, A filter in a feedback control loop influences stability. In fact, it
could cause instability when added to a loop that had been stable. You are not sure that the
statement is correct. Investigate the issue and determine whether the statement is true or false.
Naturally, you will provide clear explanations and concise mathematical evidence.
We know that elements in the feedback loop affect stability. This can be demonstrated by
showing that all elements in the characteristic equation of the closed-loop system affect
stability.
The block diagram for a feedback loop with a filter is given in the following block
diagram.

D(s)
SP(s)

E(s)
+

Gd(s)

MV(s)
GC(s)

+
Gv(s)

CV(s)

GP(s)
+

CVf(s)

Gf(s)

CVm(s)

GS(s)

Clearly, the filter is in the feedback loop. In addition, the filter appears in the
characteristic equation, as shown in the following transfer function.
Gd ( s)
CV ( s )

D( s)
1 G p ( s )G v ( s )G c ( s )G f ( s )G S ( s )

Therefore, the first part of the statement by your colleague is

correct; a filter affects stability!

Is it likely that a filter will destabilize an otherwise stable loop? The answer depends
upon the value of the filter time constant. The guideline is that the filter time constant
should be small compared with the feedback dynamics, i.e., f < 0.05 (+). Lets look at
an example; we will extend an example from Chapter 9 of the textbook, with the results
in the chapter repeated in the following figure.

09/19/16

102

McMaster University

09/19/16

103

McMaster University

Process
reaction curve

15

CV

10

v
1
TC

-5
0
COMBINED DEFINITION OF TUNING

First order with dead time process

model
Noisy measurement signal
25% parameters errors between
model/plant
PID controller: determine Kc, TI, Td
Minimize IAE with MV inside bound

20
10
0
0

v
2

Kp = 1

Kc = 0.74

= 5

TI = 7.5

= 5

Td = 0.90

20 40 60 80 100 120

30

MV

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
00 5 10 15202530 35404550

5
0

1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
0 5 10 15202530 35404550

20 40

60 80 100 120
time

TC

We will evaluate the stability, i.e., the gain margin, without and with a filter. The Bode
stability analysis gives the following results with the tuning in the figure and no filter.

Amplitude Ratio

BODE PLOT OF GOL

10

10

-2

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

Phase Angle (degrees)

-50
-100
-150
-200
-250
-300
-350
-2
10

-1

10
Frequency, w (rad/time)

10

The critical frequency is between 0.41382 and 0.41477

The amplitude ratio at the critical frequency is 0.32213
We repeat the calculation with a first-order filter with a time constant of 0.50. The plot is
nearly the same and the numerical results are given in the following.
The critical frequency is between 0.3705 and 0.37135
The amplitude ratio at the critical frequency is 0.34543
We see that the amplitude is slightly higher; thus, the affect of the filter is to destabilize
the system. However, the effect is minor (insignificant) when using the guideline that the
maximum filter time constant is 5% of the feedback t 63%.

09/19/16

104

McMaster University

12.2 You have performed the controller tuning procedures described in Chapter 9 (process
reaction curve for dynamics and correlations for tuning) for the stirred tank heater shown in
Figure 12.2. The tuning is given below. Determine the scaled controller gain, proportional band
and reset time, which might be required in a commercial controller.

Digital PID

E s (t ) SPs (t ) CV s (t )

MV s (t )

d CV s
100
E s (t ) TR E s (t ' )dt 'Td
I
PB
dt
0

Figure 12.2

Kc = -2.1 K/% open

TI = 8.1 minutes
Td = 0.9 minute

Temperature sensor is 50-200 C

The valve is fail closed

The hard work has been completed. Here, we simply need to convert units. We use the
following relationships.
(Kc)s = Kc (CVr)/MVr)
PB=100/(Kc)s.
TR = 1/TI
For this example,
(Kc)s = Kc (CVr)/MVr) = -2.1 K/%open (150K)/(100 %open) = -3.15 (dimensionless)
PB = 100/|-3.15| = 31.7 (always positive)
TR = 1/TI = 1/8.1 = 0.123 repeats per minute
Lets recall that we have not changed anything in the controller or PID performance.
However, we must observe the standards used in various commercial digital control
software.

09/19/16

105

McMaster University

12.3 Consider the calculation of a digital first-order filter. Write pseudo-code for the initialization
and normal execution of the filter.
The initialization should provide a smooth transition. Therefore, the first value of the
filter output is set to the current measurement. On subsequent executions, the equation
for the first-order filter is calculated.
% pseudo-code for first order filter
% the inputs are
%
the initialization flag INIT = true for initialization
%
The current measured value (MeasV)
%
% stored values
%
the previous filter output (PVN_1)
%
the filter constant alpha = 1 - exp (-t/f)
%
% output variable
%
the current filter variable (PVN)
%
% determine if initialization
IF INIT = true
PVN
= MeasV;
PVN_1 = MeasV;
END

% IF INIT

% Calculate the filter

PVN = alpha*MeasV + (1-alpha)*PVN_1;
PVN_1 = PVN;

% store for next iteration

12.4 The flash process introduced in Chapter 2 is shown in Figure 12.4. Determine the failure
position for each of the control valves. We know that we must analyze the entire process,
including sources and sinks for all flows, before determining the failure positions. For this
exercise, consider only the equipment in the figure.

09/19/16

106

McMaster University

T6

Feed

T1

Vapor
product

P1

T5

T2

P 1000 kPa
T 298 K

Methane
Ethane (LK)
Propane
Butane
Pentane

F1

T4

F2

T3

L1

F3

Process
fluid

Liquid
product

A1

Steam

L. Key

Figure 12.4

The failure positions are given in the following table along with a brief explanation.
Valve

Failure
position

Process fluid to heat exchanger

Steam to heat exchanger
Feed flow
Vapor leaving drum
Liquid leaving drum

closed
closed
closed
open
open

Explanation
Reduce heating to closed heat exchanger
Reduce heating to closed heat exchanger
Reduce flow in of material to closed vessel
Prevent high pressure in closed vessel
Prevent high pressure in closed vessel
(Note that this could lead to zero flow through a
pump and flow to another closed vessel.)

12.5 Diagnose the performance of the closed-loop system using a PID controller. Suggest
changes for improving the performance, if warranted.
S-LOOP plots deviation variables

Reactor temperature (K)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

control valve position (% open)

-0.5
0

20

30

40

50

60

10

20

30
Time (minutes)

40

50

60

10
5
0
-5
-10
0

09/19/16

10

107

McMaster University

First, we consider the CV performance, temperature. We have no knowledge of the dead

time or time constant, so we cannot judge the performance.
We note that the manipulated variable experiences very large (up to 10%) high frequency
variation. This does not improve the CV performance, and it is fast enough to wear out
the valve.
As a first step, we could filter the derivative mode (only). If this does not provide
sufficient improvement, the derivative mode could be eliminated by setting the derivative
time to zero.

09/19/16

108

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 13

Feedback Control Performance
13.1
The process in Figure 13.1 has a single-loop feedback controller using the PID algorithm.
We seek to maintain the product composition within 0.10 mole/m3 of the set point for all
disturbances. The feedback dynamics between the heating valve and the analyzer and the
disturbance dynamics between the feed composition and the analyzer are given in the models.
heating stream
F
2

A1( s )
0.11e 44 s

v( s)
(54 s 1)
A1( s )
0.50e 42 s

XF ( s )
(35s 1)

Feed
composition

F
1

T
2
T
3

packed bed
reactor

A1 is product composition
(mole/m3)
v is the valve affecting the heating
stream (% open)
XF is feed composition (mole/m3)
Time is in seconds

a.

AC
1

product

Figure 13.1

A feed composition disturbance occurs that can be approximated by a sine. The

disturbance magnitude is 0.50 mole/m3 and the period is 6280 s/cycle, i.e., its frequency is
10-3 rad/s. Without simulating, do you think that the feedback control can maintain the
product composition within the desired maximum deviation?
Solution: We want to determine the behavior of the closed-loop system. Before starting,
we will tune the PID controller, which is required for the quantitative calculations to
check our answer. We will use the tuning correlations in the textbook.

The fraction of dead time is equal to 44/98 = 0.45. From Ciancones tuning
correlation,
KcKp = 0.9

TI/(+) = 0.66,

TD/(+) = 0.07

The PID tuning parameters are:

Kc = 0.9/(-.11)
TI = 98(0.66)
TD = 0.07(98)

09/19/16

= -8.2 %open/ mole/m3

= 64.7 s
= 6.9 s

109

McMaster University

The closed-loop behavior in the time domain for a step set point change shows that the
tuning is reasonable.
S-LOOP plots deviation variables (IAE = 82.9779)

1.4
Controlled Variable

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

100

200

300
Time

400

500

600

100

200

300
Time

400

500

600

Manipulated Variable

0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
0

Now, how good is the performance for a sine input with a frequency of .001 rad/s? We
know that the feedback controller will function well for disturbances at frequencies much
lower than the feedback critical frequency. Also, feedback is not effective at much higher
frequencies (but the process attenuates the disturbance). Near the critical frequency, the
control performance will be worst.
The critical frequency for this feedback loop is defined by the following equation.
180 (360 / 2 ) tan 1 ( )

The trial and error solution gives c = 0.044 rad/s.

The disturbance frequency is much small that the critical frequency of the closed-loop
system. Therefore, we predict that the control performance should be good.
This qualitative analysis is confirmed by the quantitative calculation, here performed
using S_LOOP. The amplitude ratio is .035; therefore, the output amplitude would be
(0.5 mole/m3/mole/m3)(0.035 mole/m3) = 0.0175 mole/m3 << 0.10 mole/m3. Therefore
the control performance would be acceptable.

09/19/16

110

McMaster University
CLOSED-LOOP DISTURBANCE BODE PLOT

Amplitude Ratio, |CV| / |D|

10

Frequency, w (rad/time)

Disturbance frequency

b.

Here, we repeat part (a) with a different disturbance frequency. A feed composition
disturbance occurs that can be approximated by a sine. The disturbance magnitude is
0.50 and the period is 300 s, i.e., its frequency is about .02 rad/s. Without simulating, do
you think that the feedback control can maintain the product composition within the
desired maximum deviation?
In this case, the disturbance frequency is near the critical frequency of the closed-loop
system. Therefore, a quick estimate of the output amplitude (K d*D = 0.5*0.50 = 0.25)
is greater than the maximum allowed amplitude. In fact, essentially the same answer is
obtained using the frequency response above from the quantitative calculation. In this
case, we predict that acceptable dynamic performance cannot be achieved. Other
methods are required to improve performance, and some will be introduced in subsequent
chapters.
This question demonstrated the importance of the disturbance frequency on
feedback control performance. Disturbances near the critical frequency are not
affected by feedback and not reduced by process time constants.

13.2 The series of first order processes in Figure 13.2 without control experiences an input
disturbance that can be approximated as a sine. The input has a magnitude of 1.0 and a frequency
of 0.333 rad/min. Determine the output of each system in the series, and discuss the results.
Each of the systems has the same dynamic model, given in the following equation.

X i 1 ( s )
0.80

X i ( s)
(3s 1)
time in minutes

09/19/16

X1

X2

X3

...

XN+1

Figure 13.2.

111

McMaster University

The amplitude ratio for each of the systems is given below.

G ( j )

0.80
1 (3 * .333)

0.80
0.566
1.414

The amplitude ratio for a series process is the product of the individual amplitude ratios.
n

G ( j )

0.80
1 (3 * .333)

0.80

1.414

0.566 n

We see that the amplitude ratio for each system is less than one and that the series
amplitude ratio is the amplitude ratio for single system to the n th power. Therefore, the
amplitude ratio will decrease as the series has more elements.

X1

X2

This result is important, because we learn

that a series of process (with AR<1) will
reduce the effect of a periodic disturbance
without control. Lets look at a couple of
typical process systems.
The temperature in a series of heat
exchangers or the feed composition in a
series of chemical reactors will behave as we
have seen for a series system.

X3

...

XN+1

Heat exchangers in series

inlet
T

.........
0

CSTRs in series

inlet
C

.........
0

The question demonstrated that a series of processes (with an amplitude

ratio less than 1.0) can attenuate a periodic disturbance, even if no control is
applied.

09/19/16

112

McMaster University

13.3 In the previous questions, the amplitude ratio had the same or smaller value than the
disturbance gain for every system. Is this relationship true for all process systems?
The chemical reactor without feedback control in Figure 13.3 has the following transfer function,
which is derived in Appendix C of Marlin (2000).
T ( s)
(6.07 s 45.84)
2
Fc ( s )
( s 1.79 s 35.80)
K p ( lead s 1)
2 2
s 2s 1
with
K p 1.28

v1
T

K /( m 3 min)

v2

lead 0.132 min

0.167 min

0.15
Figure 13.3

The coolant flow rate (v2) input is a sine. What is the amplitude ratio of the output to the input?
(Hint: You may want to use a software package for the calculation, such as SOFTLAB or write a
short MATLAB program.)
Before investigating the frequency response, lets understand the qualitative behavior of
this process. We observe that the process is second order, and from Chapter 5, we know
that a second order system can be overdamped, critically damped or underdamped. The
underdamped systems will tend to oscillate, even if the input does not oscillate. The
reactor model demonstrates that the process is underdamped, because the damping factor,
= 0.15 << 1. The figure below shows the behavior of the temperature to a step change
in coolant flow, where we clearly see the oscillatory nature of the process.
DYNAMIC SIMULATION, Sloop plots deviation variables

Reactor Temperature (K)

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

3
Time (min)

-0.2

Coolant Flow (m /min)

-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
-1

Now, we evaluate the frequency response over a range of input frequencies and plot the
amplitude ratio in a Bode plot. The results are given in the following figure.

09/19/16

113

McMaster University

A m plitude Ratio, |T |/|Fc| (K /(m3 /m in)

Approaches steady-state gain

10

10

10

10

Resonance

PROCESS (GP) BODE PLOT

-1

-2

10

10
Frequency, w (rad/min)

10

We note that the amplitude ratio at very low frequencies is 1.28, which is the magnitude
of the steady-state gain. (The limit of very low frequencies is steady state.) In addition,
the amplitude ratio becomes small at very high frequencies, as occurs in all processes.
However, we see that at intermediate frequencies, the amplitude is much greater than the
steady-state value. Clearly, the system amplifies the effect of the input at frequencies
near the resonance frequency. We must avoid disturbances near the critical frequency for
underdamped systems.
This question showed that an underdamped system can increase the amplitude
of a periodic disturbance. Note that most feedback control systems are
underdamped. Therefore, disturbances near the critical frequency are highly
undesirable.

09/19/16

114

McMaster University

13.4 In this question, we will again consider the packed bed reactor that was used in Tutorial
Question 13.1. The basic information is repeated below.
heating stream
F
2

A1( s )
0.11e 44 s

v( s)
(54 s 1)
A1( s )
0.50e 42 s

XF ( s )
(35s 1)

F
1

T
2

Feed
composition

T
3

packed bed
reactor

A1 is product composition
(mole/m3)
v is the valve affecting the
heating stream (% open)
XF is feed composition
(mole/m3)
Time is in seconds

AC
1

Set point
product

Figure 13.4

In this question, we will investigate the behavior in response to step inputs (rather than sine
inputs, as was done in Question 13.1.). Each step input will be investigated individually.
a.

A step disturbance occurs in the feed composition with a magnitude of 0.50 mole/m3. We
seek to maintain the product composition within 0.10 mole/m3. Is this performance
possible using the feedback control show in the figure?
We could simulate the system to answer the question. However, lets first apply our
knowledge and see if we can answer the question without simulation. The feedback
controller cannot immediately influence the controlled variable, because of dead time
(and inverse response, if it existed in this process). Therefore, the disturbance will not be
influenced by feedback for the dead time in the feedback process.
The dead time in the feedback process is 44 seconds. The disturbance will be unaffected
for 44 seconds, and the step response for those 44 seconds is calculated in the following.
(Note that the disturbance dead time does not influence this calculation, because
disturbance dead time just delays the time when the effect is observed in A1.)
A1(t ) ( XF ) K d (1 e t / d )
(0.50)0.50(1 e 44 / 35 ) 0.25(.716) 0.179 mole / m 3 0.10 mole / m 3

The deviation of 0.179 is the smallest possible using feedback, and it is too large! We
conclude that the required control performance cannot be achieved by the process and
feedback control loop. We can take steps to reduce the disturbance or evaluate some of
the advanced methods in subsequent chapters (cascade, feedforward, etc.)

09/19/16

115

McMaster University

Lets simulate the control system to confirm our prediction. We use the PID tuning
determined in the solution to Question 13.1. The results are given in the following figure,
with the variables in deviation from their initial values.
S-LOOP plots deviation variables (IAE = 17.9256)

Controlled Variable, A1

0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

500

600

Manipulated Variable, heating valve

Not influenced by feedback

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

100

200

300
Time (s)

400

We see that the maximum deviation is close the minimum calculated above.
b.

A step set point change is introduced to the feedback composition controller with a
magnitude of 0.50 mole/m3. We seek to change the product composition to its new value
(within a small deviation) within 200 seconds. Is this performance possible using
feedback control as show in the figure?
We could simulate the system to answer the question. However, lets first apply our
knowledge and see if we can answer the question without simulation. The feedback
controller cannot immediately influence the controlled variable, because of dead time
(and inverse response, if it existed in this process). Therefore, the controlled variable will
not track the set point change for at least the feedback dead time, and longer because of
the time constant. (Note that information about the disturbance is not used in this part of
the answer.)
The dead time in the feedback process is 44 seconds. The controlled variable will be
unaffected for 44 seconds; then, it will respond faster than an open-loop step change
because of the overshoot in the manipulated variable.
Lets evaluate the response of the controlled variable to a step in the manipulated variable
(without feedback). We do this because the calculation is simple and the response of the
controlled variable will be slower than for the closed-loop set point change. The step
response requires one dead time plus three time constants to approach its final value; for
this process the time would be (44+3*54) = 206 seconds. This is on the order of the 200
seconds required. Since the feedback response will be faster, we predict that the required
control performance can be achieved.
Lets simulate the control system to confirm our prediction. We use the PID tuning
determined in the solution to Question 13.1. The results are given in the following figure,
with the variables in deviation from their initial values.

09/19/16

116

McMaster University

Not influenced by feedback

S-LOOP plots deviation variables (IAE = 41.0869)

Controlled Variable, A1

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1

Manipulated Variable, Heating valve

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

50

100

150

200
Time (s)

250

300

350

400

0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7

We see that the control performance is achieved, as predicted!

This question showed the importance of dead time on control performance.
It also demonstrated that we can estimate the performance for step inputs in
the time domain using simple principles about the process dynamics.

13.5 The temperature of a stirred tank heat exchanger will be controlled using a single-loop
feedback PID controller. Two designs in are proposed Figure 13.5a/b. Select the control design
from these two proposals that would give the better feedback performance.
A

B
FC
1

L
1

feed

FC
1

L
1

feed

TC
2

product

product
TC
2

F
2

T
3

F
2

T
3

heating stream
heating stream

Figure 13.5a

09/19/16

Figure 13.5b

117

McMaster University

A. We observe that the feedback path includes the valve, heat exchanger and liquid in the
tank. This could be very slow, depending on the equipment designs.
B. The feedback path in this design includes the mixing point. These dynamics will be
much faster than design A. Therefore, this design will provide much better feedback
control performance.
Note that we have made a relatively small change to the process equipment and obtained
a substantial improvement in control performance!
13.6 The temperature of a stirred tank heat exchanger will be controlled using a single-loop
feedback PID controller. Two designs are proposed; Design B is the same as A except that a mass
of metal is in the tank. Select the control design for these two proposals that would give the
better feedback performance (faster response of the controlled variable) for a set point change in
TC-2.
A

B
FC
1

FC
1

L
1

feed

L
1

feed

TC
2

product
TC
2

F
2

T
3

F
2

T
3

heating stream

product

heating stream

Figure 13.6

Note: This question is analogous to determining the effect of catalyst (thermal capacitance) on
dynamic performance.
We observe that we have increased the thermal holdup in the stirred tank, because the
heat capacity (energy/volume) of metal is higher than of a typical liquid. The result is
slower dynamic response to the changes in coolant. Therefore, Design A, with faster
feedback dynamics, would give better performance for a set point change.

The last two questions showed that comparing the feedback performance of
competing designs can be achieved without simulation in limited cases by
applying principles and knowing the (relative) process dynamics.

09/19/16

118

McMaster University

13.7 The control design in Figure 13.7

has been proposed. Three different
sizes for the globe control valve have
been proposed. Which of the valve
sizes do you recommend and explain
why?

Valve stem position* at

steady-state design conditions
A. 10%
B. 70%
C. 90%

Feed
composition

F
2
F
1

T
2
T
3

heating stream
packed
bed
reactor

Figure 13.7

* Stem position is the signal to the valve from the controller (0-100%)

AC
1

product

When we discuss the valve size, we mean the Cv, which is the flow rate at design
conditions through the valve at 100% open. The Cv can be determined from information
from valve manufacturers. The valve size increases with the pipe size for the valve.
The control equipment capacities are selected to provide good performance at the
expected, design conditions and to be able to adjust the manipulated variable in response
to differences from the design conditions, which can be due to the following

Inaccuracy in the models used for design (which always exist)

Disturbances in operation from expected conditions, e.g., feed composition,
cooling water temperature or pump exit pressure
Changes to the operating condition, for example, to produce a new product

Another important factor is the ability to change the manipulated variable with sufficient
precision, i.e., the change the valve opening in small increments to have smooth,
continuous changes to the manipulated flow rate.
Lets evaluate the proposed valve sizings in light of the discussion above.
A.

B.
C.

09/19/16

The valve is 10% open at design conditions. Clearly, the valve has a large
capacity and could be adjusted for changes from no flow to nine times the design
flow (if the relationship between flow and opening were linear). However, the
valve is being operated nearly closed during expected operation. This valve
would have very poor precision; small errors in the valve opening would
constitute large changes in flow. This valve size is not recommended.
The valve is 70% open at design conditions. It can be adjusted to increase the
flow rate by about a factor of two from design. Also, the precision should be
good at this location in the valve opening. This valve size is recommended.
This valve is 90% open at design conditions. Clearly, the flow cannot be
increased much; this valve has too small a capacity. This valve is not
recommended.

119

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 14

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
a.

FurnacecoiloutlettemperaturecontrolinFigure14.1.
Determine whether the cascade control is possible as designed. Ifnot, make
appropriatechangestoachievecascadecontrol.

FC

PC

TC

FC
Figure14.1Firedheaterprocesswithsimplifiedcontrol.

09/19/16

120

McMaster University

a.Yes,cascadeispossiblebecausethedesignsatisfiesthecascadedesigncriteria.
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
b.

Control without cascade is not N/Afordeterminingifcascadeispossible.

acceptable.
But, it is important to determine when
cascadeisrecommended!
Secondaryvariableismeasured
Yes
Indicatesakeydisturbance
seeresponsesforeachdisturbance
Influenced by the manipulated Yes
valve
Secondarydynamicsfaster
Yes
Foreachofthefollowingdisturbances,determinewhetherthecascadedesign,
aftermodificationsinparta(ifneeded),willperformbetter,thesame,orworse
thansingleloopfeedback(TCvalve).

1)fuelsupplypressure:Cascadeisbetter.Theflowcontrollerwillcompensateforthe
disturbance. Whether the secondary corrects for the complete disturbance
dependsontheflowsensor.Seethediscussionbelowforafewsituations.
Orificemeter(gasfuel):Thetypicalorificemeteriscalibratedforaconstant
pressure,sothattherelationshipbetweenthepressuredifferenceandtheflowis
giveninthefollowing.
actualflow:

FK

P /

measurement: F K P

Sincethedensitychangeswithpressure,maintainingtheflowmeasurement(P)
constant does not maintain the actual flow constant. The flow measurement
indicatesthechangeinflow,sothatthesecondarypartiallycompensatesforthe
disturbance. However,thesecondarycontrollercannotcompensate completely
forthepressuredisturbance.Somecompensationmustbemadebytheprimaryto
correctfortheflowmeasurementerror.
Massflowmeter(gasfuel):Themassflowratecanbemeasuredbyamassflow
meter,suchasacoriolosmeter.Thetotalheatreleasedependsonthemassflow
rateforlightgashydrocarbonfuelswithouthydrogen(Duckelow,S.,Intech,35
39 (1981)). Therefore, maintaining mass flow rate constant will completely
compensateforpressurechanges.Cascadecontrolwithmassflowcontrolwould
performbetterthanwithanorificemeter.However,themassflowmeterwillbe
morecostly.
Orificemeter(liquidfuel): Thedensityoftheliquiddoesnotdependonthe
pressure. Therefore, the orifice meter provides a goodmeasurement, and the

09/19/16

121

McMaster University

secondary controller can compensate for the pressure disturbance completely.

Cascadecontrolwillprovidegoodperformance.

09/19/16

122

McMaster University

2) fuel density (composition): Cascade is better. Again, the improvement possible

usingcascadecontroldependsonthesensorusedandthechangeinheatingvalue
forchangesindensity.
Gasfuels:Thesituationisbasicallythesameasforthepressuredisturbance.The
orificemeterdoesnotprovidecompletecompensation,andamassflowmeter
willprovidecompletecompensation.SeeDuckelow(Intech,3539(1981)fora
discussionofthissituation.
3)fuelcontrolvalvesticking:Cascadeisbetter.Thefuelflowmeterwillimmediately
sensethedeviationinflowandcorrecttheflow.Note,ifthestictionisserious,
theflowwilloscillate,whichwoulddegradecontrolperformanceandcouldlead
tounsafeconditions. Avalvepositionercouldcorrecttheeffectofmoderate
stiction,butmechanicalcorrectionshouldbeperformedtoreducethestiction.
4) feedtemperature: Cascadeisneitherbetternorworse;theperformanceisthe
same.Thesecondarymeasuredvariableisnotaffectedbythefeedtemperature.
Therefore,cascadeprovidesnocompensation.
Followupquestion:Answerthesamequestionforotherdisturbances.
1.

09/19/16

Nowitsyourturntodefinethedisturbance!Whatothervariablesarelikelyto
changefortheprocessandhowwouldthecascadecontrollerperform?

123

McMaster University

14.2

BottomscompositionanalyzercontrolfordistillationinFigure14.2.

a.

Determine whether the cascade control is possible as designed. Ifnot, make

appropriatechangestoachievecascadecontrol.
Foreachofthefollowingdisturbances,determinewhetherthecascadedesign,
aftermodificationsinparta(ifneeded),willperformbetter,thesame,orworse
thansingleloopfeedback(ACvalve)

b.

PC

LC

XD

LC

B
FC

AC
XB

Figure 14.2. Two-product distillation with basic regulatory control.

09/19/16

124

McMaster University

a.Yes,cascadeispossiblebecausethedesignsatisfiesthecascadedesigncriteria.
1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
b.

Control without cascade is not N/Afordeterminingifcascadeispossible.

acceptable.
But, it is important to determine when
cascadeisrecommended!
Secondaryvariableismeasured
Yes
Indicatesakeydisturbance
seeresponsesforeachdisturbance
Influenced by the manipulated Yes
valve
Secondarydynamicsfaster
Yes
Foreachofthefollowingdisturbances,determinewhetherthecascadedesign,
aftermodificationsinparta(ifneeded),willperformbetter,thesame,orworse
thansingleloopfeedback(ACvalve).

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.
Followupquestion:Answerthesamequestionforotherdisturbances.
1.

09/19/16

Nowitsyourturntodefinethedisturbance!Whatothervariablesarelikelyto
changefortheprocessandhowwouldthecascadecontrollerperform?

125

McMaster University

14.3

For a cascade control design, the sensor for the secondary variable should provide
good

accuracy
reproducibility
noise moderation

correct

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
reproducibility
noise moderation

correct

Nothing can correct errors in the primary sensor. Therefore, the primary sensor must
achieve the accuracy needed for the process application.

09/19/16

126

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 15

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
T

c.w.

TC
Controlled
variable

Figure 15.1. Heat exchanger.

First, lets discuss the process.

09/19/16

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.

127

McMaster University

Valve
stem

How does the three-way valve

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, lets 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

2. Measured feedforward variable

Discussed next

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

09/19/16

128

McMaster University

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

F1

T2

T1

Figure 15.2 Packed bed Chemical reactor with feed composition disturbance.

09/19/16

129

McMaster University

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

F1

T2

T1

AC
1

09/19/16

130

McMaster University

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
a
b
c

Decision
Stock selection for
investing
Baking bread in an oven
Driving an automobile

Controlled variable
Maximum return

Disturbance
Cost of energy

Oven temperature
Position in lane

Room temperature
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
noise moderation

correct

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.

09/19/16

131

McMaster University

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.

Solutions for Tutorial 18

Level and Inventory Control
18.1 Most plants receive feed material periodically from pipelines, ships, trucks, and
railroad cars. Discuss the issues related to the amount of feed material that you would
store for a plant that operates continuously.

Figure 18.1 Plant delivery with feed inventory.

Advantages: Inventory increases the flexibility in operating the plant. When the plant
has large feed inventories, we can change the selection of feed materials at any time and
feed the plant at any rate. Thus, large feed inventory (along with large feed storage
capacities) improves operability.
Disadvantages: A large inventory of material can have the following disadvantages.
a.
b.
c.
c.
d.

Requires expensive land

Requires expensive storage facilities
Increases working capital, i.e., money that is invested in material that does not
contribute to profit. When the plant is shut down, this capital is recovered, but the
potential profit from investing this money is lost during the operation of the plant.
Can result in degradation of quality during storage
Can increase fire and other hazards

Thus, the engineer must select the appropriate amount of inventory by considering
the factors above
the operating conditions, i.e., the feed rates and frequency of switches from one feed
type to another,
the time to ship, transport, and unload feed material from the source to the plant, and
the frequency and types of feed delivery disruptions.
09/19/16

132

McMaster University

09/19/16

133

McMaster University

18.2

A process with two distillation towers is shown in Figure 18.2.

a.
b.
c.

Identify all liquid inventory in the process.

Discuss advantages and disadvantages for each of the inventories.
Critique the type of level control, i.e., which variable is adjusted to control the
level, for each inventory. If not acceptable, sketch changes and explain.
For every liquid inventory, provide a recommended liquid inventory and explain
your recommendation.

d.

The following analysis is provided for the feed drum.

Inventory:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Level Control:

Inventory:

L-1, Liquid in the feed drum, V-29

Provides mixing to attenuate feed composition variation and hold-up
to attenuate feed flow rate variation
Requires a drum, pump, and controls. Also, increases inventory of
hydrocarbons in the plant.
No remote sensor or control provided; this is not acceptable.
L-1 should be transmitted to the central control room.
LC-1 should be automated feedback control of the level by
adjusting the FC-1 set point in a cascade.
The level controller should be tuned for averaging control.
The inventory should be sized to attenuate the expected disturbances
in feed flow and properties. Lacking this information, the level
should have 10 minutes hold.

The following analysis is provided for the Depropanizer distillation tower.

Inventory:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Level Control:
Inventory:

09/19/16

Liquid on trays
Required for separation by liquid-vapor equilibrium
Slows dynamic responses for control
Increases inventory of hydrocarbons in the plant.
The level is determined by the weir height between the tray and the
downcomer.
The liquid is in the form of froth; a typical liquid inventory is 2
inches of clear liquid.

134

McMaster University

Inventory:
Advantages:

Disadvantages:
Level Control:
Inventory:

Inventory:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Level Control:
Inventory:

LC-3 in overhead accumulator, V-30

Provides inventory so that small fluctuation does not stop liquid
supply to the pumps
Enables smooth flow rate of liquid product and reflux
Increases inventory of hydrocarbons in the plant.
Requires a pressure vessel
Feedback control by adjusting the product flow (FC-5) set point in a
cascade.
The inventory should not be too large. Five minutes is recommended,
unless the product flow must be very smooth
LC-2, liquid inventory in the bottoms of tower
Enables smooth flow to downstream processing unit
Increases inventory of hydrocarbons in the plant.
Increases height and cost of distillation tower
Feedback level control adjusting the valve in the pipe to the
downstream distillation tower.
The inventory should not be too large. Five minutes is recommended.

The analysis for the Debutanizer is similar to the Depropanizer; therefore, most of
the analysis is not repeated. Only the analysis of the condenser is given.

PC

This is condensed liquid

accumulated in the heat
exchanger

LC

09/19/16

135

McMaster University

Before discussing the liquid inventory, we must understand the principles of operation.
The exchanger E-28 condenses the overhead vapor, as shown in the figure above. To
control pressure, the condenser duty must be adjusted. In this design the liquid in the
exchanger influences the condenser duty. As more liquid is accumulated, less area is
available for condensation; less liquid is accumulated, more area is available for
condensation. The pressure controller manipulates the valve in the exit from the
condenser; this affects the liquid flow rate from the condenser.
Inventory:
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
Level Control:
Inventory:

Liquid accumulated in the condenser heat exchanger, E-28

Required for pressure control!
Slightly increases the liquid inventory of hydrocarbons.
This system is self-regulatory, so that no level control is required.
The size of the heat exchanger is determined by the maximum heat
duty required when no liquid is retained in the exchanger.

18.3

Many levels occur in the process in Figure 18.2.

a.

For each level, explain the physical principle that

could be used to measure the level using an industrial sensor.
What would you recommend for each level?

b.

Two commonly used methods for measuring liquid levels are

1.
2.

The pressure difference between to locations in the vessel.

The change level in a side chamber, which is measured by a float position
or the weight of a metal object that is immersed in the liquid.

18.4 Two approaches to plant level control are shown in textbook Figure 18.8. In Figure 18.8a, feed is set by flow control; well
call this feed push. In Figure 18.8b, the production is set on flow control; well call this demand pull.

Which of these two approaches is used in Figure 11.2? Is the approach used
appropriate for this process?
First, the feed drum level is not controlled in the figure. It should be controlled as
explained in the answer to question 2. The controller would measure the level and adjust
the liquid flow leaving the drum.
With the change above, the inventory control approach involves a feed push
approach. This seems acceptable because we have no way to adjust the feed to the
unit. Therefore, we must process all feed that is sent to the unit, and the levels must
send the liquid to downstream equipment.
09/19/16

136

McMaster University

09/19/16

137

McMaster University

18.5 Some engineers believe that Pressure in a closed vessel is similar to liquid
inventory in a tank. Discuss this opinion and its impact of control design.

The basis for the similarity is the fundamental balance for both the liquid inventory and
the pressure in a closed vessel total material balance. In particular, a vessel with one
phase has a material balance given in the following.
{Accumulation of material} =

{material in}

{material out)

The accumulation of material for a gas can be related to pressure using a gas law; for
example, for an ideal gas, (with = density)
d(mass)/dt

V(MW)/(RT) * dP/dt

inFin -

outFout

Thus, controlling pressure is equivalent to controlling mass in an isothermal, constant

composition, fixed volume vessel. The system below shows how the control could be
implemented. Note that measuring all flows and manipulating one flow as the difference
among the others is not recommended. Measurement errors would be significant with
this approach, while the pressure represents the effect of the true flows and is not affected
by measurement errors.

PC

Follow-up Question: One might wonder whether pressure can be self-regulatory and
non-self-regulatory, as liquid level can. End-of-Chapter question 18.7 addresses this
issue.

09/19/16

138

McMaster University

Figure 18.2. Distillation process (from Woods, Process Design and Engineering
Practice, Prentice Hall, 1995)

09/19/16

139

McMaster University

Solutions for Tutorial 20

Multiloop Control
20.1. Some multiple-loop control designs are given in the following. For each design, explain whether the
control design is correct and will function, i.e., the controllers can maintain their measured variables near
their set points. If the control design can not function, suggest a modification that will achieve all or part of
the desired function.

a.

Heat exchanger with by-pass.

FC

v1

v2

TC

We will analyze the design using the controllability test in textbook Chapter 20. The system is
controllable if we can achieve independent values of the two controller variables by adjusting the two
manipulated variables. The linearized, steady-state model for the process is given in the following.

K 11
K
21

K 12
K 22

v1 F
v T
2

The process is controllable if the equations are linearly independent. Formally, we test the gain
matrix for (non) singularity. The system is non-singular if
K11 K22 K12 K21 0
We should be able to answer this question for many processes without quantitative analysis, by
applying our process understanding. We note that the first valve adjusts a variable resistance to total flow.
In contrast, the second three-way valve adjusts the split of the total flow between the heat exchanger and

09/19/16

140

McMaster University
the by-pass; adjusting the three-way valve does not substantially change the total resistance to total flow.
From the qualitative analysis, we see that

Valve 1 has a strong effect on total flow and a weak effect of temperature

Valve 2 has a strong effect on temperature and a weak effect on total flow

Without quantitative values, we can conclude that this system is controllable.

Note that we have not concluded that interaction is absent; a controllable multivariable system can (and
usually does) have interaction. Also, we require detailed calculations (or plant experience) to determine the
operating window, to be sure that the process will operate over the required range of conditions.
b.

Flow and pressure of a gas in closed vessels.

PC
2

PC
1
FC

v1

v2

v3

v4

compressor
Note: v3 is partially open.

Again, we will analyze this system using qualitative process principles. We note that the flow can
be adjusted by changing the resistance to flow using any one of the valves shown; valve 1 is acceptable. If
other valves change their resistance, the flow controller can return the total flow to the desired valve by
adjusting valve 1.
Next, we note that we want to control the pressure P1 and P2, which are in adjacent vessels.
When we control the two pressures, we implicitly determine the pressure difference between the two
vessels.

09/19/16

141

McMaster University

However, the pressure difference depends on the opening of valve 3 and the total flow rate, neither
of which is adjusted by the control system! Thus, setting the total flow rate and the pressures P1
and P2 (or the pressure difference P1-P2) is not consistent. Therefore, the proposed design is not
controllable.

In a correct the design, we must adjust valves that can achieve the desired total flow, P1 and P2
independently, even when the total flow is determined independently. For example, we can do this by
changing the valve manipulated by the P2 controller, so that the pressure difference between P1 and P2 is
affected by an adjusted valve. The acceptable control design is shown in the following.

PC
2

PC
1
FC

v1

v2

v3

v4

compressor
Note: v4 is partially open.

Note that we have not concluded that interaction is absent; a controllable multivariable system can (and
usually does) have interaction. Also, we require detailed calculations (or plant experience) to determine the
operating window, to be sure that the process will operate over the required range of conditions.

09/19/16

142

McMaster University
c.

Cooled, stirred tank chemical reactor.

FC
TC
Coolant effluent

Feed

TC
LC
FC

Coolant

Product

Again, we will analyze this system using qualitative process principles. We note that the reactor
temperature is controller by two controllers with the same set point values. This is not acceptable: they will
fight and essentially never reach a steady state because many combinations of precooling and jacket
cooling will result in the same reactor temperature. No unique operating condition exists.
Here, we suggest that one of the reactor temperature controllers be removed.

Other approaches are introduced in textbook Chapter 22; they use split range control to adjust
either cooler (but not both at the same time) to extend the operating window.
Note that we have not concluded that interaction is absent; a controllable multivariable system can
(and usually does) have interaction. Also, we require detailed calculations (or plant experience) to
determine the operating window, to be sure that the process will operate over the required range of
conditions.

09/19/16

143

McMaster University

d.

Flash drum.

FC
Source at
P1

PC
FC

This is a more involved process, with a poor initial design. Before beginning to consider
the control design, we should be sure to understand the control objectives. This flash
process is similar to the process considered in Chapters 2 and 24. A complete summary
of control objectives is given in textbook Table 24.1. The reader is asked to review this
table before proceeding.
We will be concerned with only the basic control, not alarms and safety valves.
The proposed design is deficient in several respects.
1.
2.
3.

The liquid level in the drum is not controlled.

The quality of the flash product is not controlled.
The feed flow is measured after the valve, where the fluid has two phases.

To correct each of these deficiencies, we recommend the following changes.

1.
2.
3.

09/19/16

Measure the liquid level in the tank, and control it by adjusting the liquid flow
rate.
Measure the temperature in the flash, and control it by adjusting the heat transfer
in the heat exchanger. (An analyzer could be included, if justified.)
Locate the flow sensor before the heat exchanger, where the temperature is low
and the pressure high.

144

McMaster University

The proposed control system is shown in the following sketch.

TC
PC
Source at
P1

FC
FC

09/19/16

LC

145