Process Dynamic and Control Lecture Note
Process Dynamic and Control Lecture Note
CONTROL
CHE 512
➢Product specification / quality: → The final products from the plant must meet
demanding quality specifications set by purchasers. Process control contributes to
good plant operation by maintaining the operating conditions required for excellent
product quality.
E.g. a centrifugal pump can deliver only a certain flow rate as determined by
its impeller size and the available pressure drop in a line. Control systems
need to recognize and satisfy all such operational constrains.
• Notation:
• w1, w2 and w are mass flow rates
• x1, x2 and x are mass fractions of component A
0 = w1 + w2 − w (1-1)
Component A balance:
w1x1 + w2 x2 − wx = 0 (1-2)
xSP − x1
w2 = w1 (1-3)
1 − xSP
CONTROL ALGORITHM
An open –loop system is a system with only the input and the output but no
regulation / no control action at all.
FF CONTROLLER
Disturbance (d)
CONTROL
EQUATION
SP
PROCESS Y(t)
U(t)
Fig:B
MEASUREMENT
SP U(t)
CONTROLLER PROCESS Y(t)
TC
I/P
DISADVANTAGES
Process variables
MEASUREMENT
CONTROLLER
Set point
AT AC I/P
Pure A I/P
W2
Mixture (A,B) X2=1
W1 AC
X1
AT
FFC
AT
x1 x2
w2
w1
AC sp
AT
• The corresponding transfer function for the PI controller in Eq. 8-8 is given
by
• where τD, the derivative time, has units of time. Note that the controller
output is equal to the nominal value as long as the error is constant (that
is, as long as de/dt = 0).
• Stable.
• Less offset than proportional alone (use of higher gain possible).
• Reduces lags, i.e., more rapid response.
• Derivative control action also tends to improve the dynamic response of the
controlled variable by the settling time, the time it takes reducing to reach
steady state.
• where the constant α typically has a value between 0.05 and 0.2, with 0.1
being a common choice. In Eq. 8-12 the denominator term serves as a
derivative mode filter (or a derivative filter) that reduces the sensitivity of
the control calculations to noisy measurements.
• Figure 8.8 illustrates that this controller can be viewed as three separate
elements operating in parallel on E(s).
• The parallel-form PID controller with and without a derivative filter are
shown in Table 8.1.
• The controller parameters for the expanded form are three "gains," Kc, KI
and KD, rather than the standard parameters, Kc, τI, and τD· The expanded
form of PID control is used in MATLAB. This form might appear to be
well suited for controller tuning, because each gain independently adjust the
influences only one control mode.
• Equations 8-2 through 8-16 describe how controllers perform during the
automatic mode of operation.
• However, in certain situations the plant operator may decide to override the
automatic mode and adjust the controller output manually.
• where Km is the gain given by Eq. 9-1 and τm is the measurement time
constant. For the temperature transmitter example, the units of Km are
mA/⁰C.
Solution
(a) A-O (fail-close) to make sure that a transmitter failure will not cause the
reactor to overheat, which is usually more serious than having it operate at
too low a temperature.
15/03/2021 2019/2020 PROCESS DYNAMIC AND CONTROL 72
(b) A-O (fail-close) to prevent the reactor from being flooded with
excessive reactants.
(c) A-O (fail-close) to prevent excessive and perhaps untreated waste
from entering the stream.
(d) A-C (fail-open) to ensure that overhead vapor is completely
condensed before it reaches the receiver.
• Conservation of Component i
• where Is the enthalpy per mole and w is the molar flow rate. Note that
the conservation laws of this section are valid for batch and semi-batch
processes, as well as for continuous processes.
• Eqs. 2-2 and 2-3 provide an unsteady state model for the blending system.
• The corresponding steady state model It also can be obtained by
setting the accumulation terms in Eqs. 2-2 and 2-3 equal to zero,
• The dynamic model in Eqs. 2-17 and 2-18 is quite general and is based on
only two assumptions: perfect mixing and constant density. For special
situations, the liquid volume V is constant (that is, dV/dt = 0), and the exit
flow rate equals the sum of the inlet flow rates, w = w1 + w2. For example,
these conditions occur when
1. An overflow line is used in the tank as shown in Fig. 1.3.
2. The tank is closed and filled to capacity.
3. A liquid-level controller keeps V essentially constant by adjusting a flow
rate.
15/03/2021 2019/2020 PROCESS DYNAMIC AND CONTROL 89
• In all three cases, Eq. 2-17 reduces to the same form as Eq. 2-4, not
because each flow rate is constant, but because w = w1 + w2 at all times.
• The dynamic model in Eqs. 2-17 and 2-18 is in a convenient form for
subsequent investigation based on analytical or numerical techniques.
• In order to obtain a solution to the ODE model, we must specify the inlet
compositions (x1 and x2) and the flow rates (w1, w2 and w) as functions of
time.
• After specifying initial conditions for the dependent variables, V(0) and
x(0), we can determine the transient responses, V(t) and x(t). The derivation
of an analytical expression for x(t) when V is constant is illustrated in
Example 2.1.
• (b) The component balance in Eq. 2-3 can be rearranged (for constant V
and ρ) as
• where In each of the three parts, (b)-(d), τ = 3 min and the right side
of (2-19) is constant for this example. Thus, (2-19) can be written as
• Substituting C* into (2-22) gives the desired solution for the step change
in w1
(d) Similarly, for the simultaneous changes in x1 and w2, Eq. 2-21 gives C*
= 0.625. Thus, the solution is
• Because x and y are not measured, we replace these variables by their set
points to yield the feedforward control law:
• where the bar over the variable denotes a steady-state value. These
equations are the steady-state version of the dynamic model in Eqs. 2-12
and 2-13. Substituting Eq. 15-8 into Eq. 15-9 and solving for gives:
15/03/2021 2019/2020 PROCESS DYNAMIC AND CONTROL 111
• In order to derive a feedforward control law, we replace
• Note that this feedforward control law is based on physical variables rather
than deviation variables.
• The feedforward control law in Eq. 15-11 is not in the final form required
for actual implementation, because it ignores two important
instrumentation considerations:
• First, the actual value of x1 is not available, but its measured value x1m is.
Second, the controller output signal is p rather than inlet flow rate, w2.
15/03/2021 2019/2020 PROCESS DYNAMIC AND CONTROL 112
• Thus, the feedforward control law should be expressed in terms of x1m
and p, rather than x1 and w2. Consequently, a more realistic feedforward
control law should incorporate the appropriate steady-state instrument
relations for the w2 flow transmitter and the control valve, as shown
below.
• Composition Measurement for x1
• Suppose that the sensor/transmitter for x1 is an electronic instrument with
negligible dynamics and a standard output range of 4-20 mA. If the
calibration relation is linear, it can be written as
• where Kv and K1P are the steady-state gains for the control valve and l/P
transducer, respectively, while (w2)0 is the w2 flow rate that corresponds to
the minimum controller output signal of 4 mA.
• This value also corresponds to the minimum signal of 3 psi from the l/P
transducer.
• Substituting (15-14) and (15-15) into (15-11) and rearranging the resulting
equation provides a feedforward control law that is suitable for
implementation:
• Ideally, we would like the control system to produce perfect control, where
the controlled variable remains exactly at the set point despite arbitrary
changes in the disturbance variable, D. Thus, if the set point is constant
(Ysp(s) = 0), we want Y(s) = 0, even though D(s) ≠ 0
• This condition can be satisfied by setting the numerator of (15-20) equal to
zero and solving for Gf: