Measurement and Control

Step Into
TheVirtual
Plant
The power of this concept will reach out and
grab you. Its ability to warehouse process and
Michael M. Mansy, control-system knowledge offers a vast
Gregory K. McMillan and
Mark S. Sowell III, potential for improved operations by sharing
Solutia, Inc. one common source of information and
avoiding data duplication.

T he decentralization of technical resources

has created the need for a more extensive
and efficient sharing of plant knowledge.
Consider the case where the design origi-
nates in the U.S., the engineering is done in Taiwan,
the distributed control system (DCS) is configured
in Singapore, the displays are built in India and the
plant is built in Thailand. Also, consider that within
each company, the average turnover rate during the
life of the project is 20%.
Realize as well that companies and engineers
have their own individual favorite computer pro-
grams for sizing and specifying equipment, piping,
instrumentation and valves, as well as for generat-
ing the process flow and piping and instrumentation
diagrams, and control-system functional diagrams.
Often, these programs come and go with the indi-
vidual or the firm.
Yet, the whole design and construction must
come together seamlessly. Ultimately, local techni-
cians and engineers must smoothly and quickly as-
sume responsibility for operation, maintenance and
improvement without any assurance of ongoing sup-
port of the people who designed and built the plant,
or understanding of the programs used.
While the globalization of resources cited above
is an extreme example, the proliferation of computer
tools and the diversification of technical resources
have accentuated the need to ensure accessibility of
all information and to avoid the duplication of effort.
At Solutia, we have recently taken the approach
of creating virtual plants that become the warehouse
of process- and control-system knowledge. The vir-
tual plant naturally evolves from the design and be-
comes the common source of information for oper-
ating, maintaining and improving the plant. The
new work needed to create this capability is within
the noise level of a project and the potential for
sharing information and avoiding duplication or in-
consistency is tremendous. It is a real-time repre-
sentation of the actual plant running on a standard
desktop computer. No special hardware is required.
The virtual plant starts out as a process flow dia-
gram (PFD) created from a graphical high-fidelity
steady-state process modeling program. However,
additional detail is included that is usually associat-
ed more with a piping and instrumentation diagram
(P&ID) than a PFD. Final elements (e.g., control
valves and variable-speed drives), actuator dynam-
ics, sensor lags and equipment volumes are added.
Finally, an interface table to a programmable elec-
tronic system (PES) is completed and communicates
via object-linking and embedding (OLE) for process
control (OPC) to the control and interlock system
configuration and displays. This model can continue
to be operated in the steady-state mode or switched
to the dynamic mode to become a virtual plant. The
PES consists of both the basic process-control sys-
tem (BPCS) and the safety-interlock system (SIS).
There may be some reluctance to invest in a dy-

56 www.cepmagazine.org February 2002 CEP

namic simulation mostly due to the high initial cost and
maintenance of previous implementations where the dy-
namic model had to be written from scratch and the
control system and displays had to be emulated by pro-
grammers. State-of-the-art modeling and PES software
eliminate these efforts. A properly set up steady-state
model can be readily made dynamic and interfaced to
the actual configuration and displays of the PES. Also,
the graphical Windows environment of the modeling
program and PES mean that the average engineer can
run or modify the virtual plant. The ease of the ap-
proach means that the virtual plant is not restricted to
large or complex processes, but can be employed for
much smaller applications.
Models are sometimes thought of as artificial or im-
practical. This view fails to conceptually understand the
role that models fundamentally play in knowledge
building. Advances in engineering and physics use
mathematical models to represent reality. Similarly,
high-fidelity process models use drag-and-drop blocks
have not been able to build upon the investment in the
steady-state model or its physical properties package.
These dynamic models required programming the dif-
ferential equations for the unit operations and the con-
trol system and numerically integrating them in special
programs such as MATLAB or Advanced Continuous
Simulation Language (ACSL). The addition of physical
properties, control algorithms and the initial steady
state required an intensive effort by highly trained and
experienced dynamic simulation specialists. These cus-
tom dynamic simulations are a luxury that most compa-
nies could not afford. Often, the simulation used for
control-system studies had to be rewritten in a different
language, such as FORTRAN or C++, or it had to be
configured in a graphical simulator, such as LABVIEW,
to be connected to a PES for control-system checkout
and operator training.
Tieback models came on the scene in the 1980s as an
inexpensive and efficient method of creating simple dy-
namics. For discrete control devices, such as pumps and

... [new] computer tools and the diversification of

technical resources have accentuated the need to ensure
accessibility of all information.
of the mathematical relationships for common unit op-
erations. While all technical knowledge is based on a
model, not all models are based on technical knowl-
edge. In particular, tieback models that connect the PES
inputs to the PES outputs with a simple delay, gain,
and/or lag make the displays functional for basic check-
out and operator training, but do not reflect or convey
process knowledge.
on-off valves, the tieback would read the discrete outputs
and send back the appropriate motor-run contact or
valve-limit-switch contact action for the discrete inputs
after a suitable delay. For control loops, the tieback
would read the analog output and respond back with an
analog input in the right direction with an adjustable
gain, lag and delay. For levels, ramps were initially de-

Present practices
A traditional steady-state modeling practice is to
omit utility streams, flow resistances, elevations and
prime movers. Since pressure drops do not determine
flow in these steady-state models, very little attention is
paid to the specifying the proper pressure profile.
Often, there are negative pressure gradients where flow
is shown coming from a source at a lower pressure than
the destination. Heaters and coolers with heat duties
computed from a temperature specification are used
rather than heat exchangers with heat-transfer coeffi-
cients and utility streams. The steady-state model starts
and ends in the office of the simulation specialist.
Figure 1 shows a typical steady-state model for a dis-
tillation column. Note that the sump, reboiler, condenser,
and overhead receiver are built into the column sub-flow-
sheet. It is not possible to insert valves, nozzle locations,
pumps and pressure drops for the reflux- or reboiler-cir- Figure 1.Typical steady-state process flow diagram (PFD)-type model
culation flow or to simulate the utility streams. of a column.
Custom dynamic models for control system studies

CEP February 2002 www.cepmagazine.org 57

Measurement and Control
vised and later integrators were set up to simulate the
change in inventory. Tieback models could automatically
be generated from the configuration. These tieback mod-
els made the displays and color conditionals operational,
but did not provide an independent test and did not di-
rectly show flaws in logic or mistakes in assignments.
The practice to date for operator training and con-
trol-system checkout has been to use a tieback model or
custom dynamic simulation connected to the inputs and
outputs (I/O) or data highway of a PES hardware sys-
tem (Figure 2). The cost of this setup varies from
The virtual plant naturally evolves from the design
and becomes the common source of information for
operating, maintaining and improving the plant.
$100,000 to $1 million depending upon the size and
vintage of the PES. For large systems, it is too expen-
sive to have all of the controllers and consoles, so only
a portion of the plant is simulated at any one time. A
special room with particular air-conditioning and
power-conditioning requirements is also needed to han-
dle the actual controllers, I/O card racks, network, and
operator consoles. Also, with hardware processing and
memory capabilities changing yearly for a state-of-the-
art PES, the hardware system is obsolete by the time it
is running. Finally, there is no opportunity to either
speed up or slow down the PES execution to run scenar-
ios faster or to analyze confusing situations.
An alternative is the emulation of the PES in a com-
Delta V Excel
Add In
Mimic
Delta V Delta V Delta V
Hub Controllers I/O
Simulates Field
Discrete Devices
Delta V
Figure 2. Hardware-based system for configuration check out and operator training.
58 www.cepmagazine.org February 2002 CEP
puter. However, this requires a translation of propri-
etary configuration blocks and displays that is expen-
sive and vulnerable to errors. Often, there is a different
interface since the actual consoles are not used, so that
learning the navigation of displays for startup, shut-
down or abnormal conditions, which is one of the major
objectives of operator training, is compromised. The
cost of a custom dynamic simulation and PES emula-
tion can easily exceed $1 million. Typically, only nucle-
ar power plants or high-capacity petrochemical plants
can justify such a large expenditure.
Proposed practices
The expected pressure drops for valves, exchangers,
filters and piping should be added to a steady-state
model and built-in sizing routines used to compute the
flow coefficients based on all of the physical property
data that are in the fluid basis to create the beginning of
a virtual plant. Nozzle locations should be specified or
pseudo-pumps inserted, to show the effect of liquid
head. The individual split-ranged and on-off (isolation)
valves should be depicted to enable the detailing of sep-
arate characteristics and responses. Finally, the efficien-
cies and characteristic curves of pumps and compressors
should be added to provide the proper pressure-flow re-
lationships. Individual series or parallel pumps or com-
pressors should also be inserted to
show the interaction or transition
from one unit to another.
Actual heat exchangers should be
used with utility streams, rather
than heaters and coolers with heat
OPC duties, to simulate the effect of
I/O Hysys pressure and temperature changes,
fouling, frosting, piping configura-
tions and control valves in brine,
steam, Therminol, Dowtherm and
Simulates Field water systems. The omission of this
Analog Devices extra effort has historically created
a fertile ground for performance
problems. The unexpected periodic
upsets from these utility streams
due to interactions and control-
valve stick and slip are a major
source of variability. It is usually
too expensive to fix these utility

Figure 3. Column model with piping and instrument design
(P&ID)-type details added.
Figure 4. Interface table for the object-linking and -embedding (OLE) for
process control (OPC)-connection of the virtual process to the pro-
grammable electronic system (PES).
Figure 5. Interface for monitoring and controlling the speed of the virtual
programmable electronic system (PES).
systems after the fact. Consequently, various control
techniques, such as power-spectrum analysis, are used
to track down the source of the oscillations. Special
tuning of responsive control valves and techniques,
such as feed-forward control, are used to reduce the
variability. The deficiency of current modeling practice
is good news if you are hoping to be contracted for
these automation services.
Figure 3 shows the same column as Figure 1, but
with the sump and overhead receiver modeled as sepa-
rators, and the reboiler and condenser modeled as heat
exchangers. Pumps, valves, measurements, volumes,
steam, and cooling-tower-water streams have been
added. A transfer function has been used to simulate the
thermowell dynamics for the temperature measurement
and a separator has been placed on the condensate
stream from the reboiler to simulate a steam trap.
Valves are inserted and sized to provide the expected
piping pressure drops. This structure also facilitates the
modeling of a thermosyphon reboiler by a spreadsheet
calculation where the bottoms pump-pressure rise, and
hence, the reboiler circulation flow is a function of the
sump level. The pump pressure rise is used because
nozzle locations do not affect pressure in the steady-
state mode. The increase in time for the steady-state
model to converge is just a few seconds. This more de-
tailed model is saved as a template that can be brought
into other models as a starting point.
Figure 4 shows the interface table that has been
added to connect the virtual process to a virtual PES via
OLE. Any operating condition in the model (e.g., com-
position, density, level, pressure and temperature) can
be inserted into the process variable (PV) export table
to be sent from the process to the control system. Field
switches, such as level switches, can be readily set to
activate via spreadsheets in the process model and
placed into the same PV Export table. Control-valve
analog signals, on-off valve and pump discrete com-
mand signals are read from the PES via the PV Import
table. They are also automatically initialized in the PES
by the model, putting the analog output block or dis-
crete control block in automatic, and writing a setpoint
to match the position or status in the process model.
When the PES link button is enabled, the model ver-
ifies each of the OPC connections and pinpoints any
missing ones. When the integrator start button is select-
ed, each controller output, on-off valve and pump in the
PES is automatically initialized to match the current
valve position and pump status in the process. No pro-
grams or scripts are needed. This initialization is criti-
cal to provide a fast and smooth transition to the de-
sired operating conditions. For slow processes, such as
columns, this is essential, since it can take hours to re-
cover from a valve that is in the wrong position or a
pump that is not running.
CEP February 2002 www.cepmagazine.org 59
Measurement and Control
A key concept is that there is no duplication, transla-
tion or modification of the actual control system. This
is of great significance in terms of reduced cost and in-
creased confidence. The duplication of a complex or
advanced control strategy in the process modeling pro-
gram can easily add 50% more time to the modeling ef-
fort, especially, since the model software lacks a com-
plete set of function blocks used in a PES. The invest-
ment in these blocks is incredible and cannot be expect-
ed to be a feature of a process simulation program.
There is no assurance that the simulated control system
will behave the same as the real control system. Conse-
quently, changes would need to be made in both places.
The process model should be used to represent the field
equipment, measurements and final elements, and be
connected to the actual PES configuration and operator
displays to create a virtual plant.
The virtual plant resides in a single desktop comput-
er, or for large processes, in a network of desktops.
These desktop computers can be at any location and
connected to another desktop or laptop anywhere on the
local area network (LAN). You dont need to wait for
A virtual plant can go where you dont want the real plant
to go or think the real plant can go. Thus, it can show
how to recover from undesirable situations and reveal
unforeseen or doubted capabilities.
satellites for Internet connection. Access and navigation
via a modem, analog telephone connection is slower,
but sometimes is sufficient for demonstration purposes.
Thus, the virtual plant can be accessed while at home,
traveling or visiting another site. The virtual plant can
be enhanced with other Windows-based software. For
example, software for data archiving, performance
monitoring, model predictive control, neural networks
and real-time optimization can be loaded and interfaced
via OPC. The only limits are your imagination and the
number of desktops in the control network.
A tool built into the virtual PES changes the neces-
sary parameters of the desired functional blocks to en-
able simulation without making any permanent changes
to the actual configuration. The interface for this tool as
shown in Figure 5 displays the status of each functional
block and allows the user to run the PES system either
30 times slower or faster than real time to match the ac-
celeration factor set in the process model.
There is, of course, some reluctance to add these de-
tails. The size and convergence time for a steady-state
model will increase. However, as the processing speed
of PCs increase, this becomes less of an issue. Steady-
60 www.cepmagazine.org February 2002 CEP
state modeling techniques have been around a long time
compared to those for dynamic flowsheet modeling.
The use of templates for common unit operations, and
sub-flowsheets will eventually make the transition from
a steady-state PFD to a dynamic P&ID model faster
than the custom approach presently used, by providing
a common starting point and method. The result is a
much more accurate representation of the plant plus a
standardization of techniques that expedite the effort
and expand the potential number of people who can
create or interrogate the model. An analogous benefit to
the 25% or more effort savings in developing and main-
taining control-system configurations gained from the
standardization on the control-system type and configu-
ration-module library is expected. Of greater signifi-
cance is the wider audience of contributors and users of
the knowledge base in the virtual plant.
Benefits
The virtual plant facilitates the simulation of a wide
range of operating conditions, process upsets, control
schemes and equipment conditions, such as condenser
and reboiler fouling, control valve stick-slip and pump
failures (1). Pressures, temperatures, and concentrations
can be viewed and changed by simply double clicking
on the stream and either the condition or composition
option. The user can also easily navigate process and
ambient heat-transfer coefficients, volumes and flow
coefficients. A pump can be started or stopped and a
valve opened or closed from the operator display.
Trials of improvements in batch sequences and regu-
latory controls can be conducted and the actual imple-
mentation in the configuration checked out. Expert sys-
tems can be developed for advisory control and neural
networks can be trained as intelligent sensors to predict
compositions. Model predictive control and optimiza-
tion strategies can be quickly prototyped. The virtual
plant can be used to uncover a common flaw in these
advanced control techniques, the ability to handle a
wide range of normal and abnormal operating condi-
tions and plant dynamics. A virtual plant can go where
you dont want the real plant to go or think the real
plant can go. Thus, it can show how to recover from un-
desirable situations and reveal unforeseen or doubted
capabilities. This last advantage of being able to
 Table. A Cost and Benefit Comparison of Simulation Methods.
Initial Life Model
Cost Cost Scope
Custom Tieback ! ! " "
Tieback
Virtual "
demonstrate setpoints closer to constraints builds oper-
ator confidence.
The portability of the virtual plant means that train-
ing is not relegated to a training room or a particular
audience or purpose. Operator training systems have
traditionally been used to gain familiarity with the in-
terface, process, and to learn how to start up, shut
down, and to deal with failures (2). It is particularly im-
portant to provide continual access to these systems to
refresh skills in units with frequent transitions, trips,
campaigns and high personnel turnover rates. Less ob-
vious is the need to replace operating skills lost from
the lack of interaction with the process and loops
caused by extensive automation.
There are huge additional benefits if you consider that
the operators are potentially the biggest constraint to
pushing plant capacity, especially when it is beyond the
original nameplate. The gap between the operating point
and the constraint is often set based on a perceived rela-
tionship that may have only occurred one time to one op-
erator. The gap based on a war story is typically an order
of magnitude larger than the gap dictated by process
variability. Consider how much plant production has in-
creased when an experienced process or control system
engineer is in the control room or an advanced control
system stays online for all of the shifts. High-fidelity
process simulations and actual control-system configura-
tions can be used to increase the knowledge base and
skill level of the operator to push the limits safely and re-
liably to achieve this incremental capacity. This can be
accomplished by the operators just choosing better set-
points or by keeping control systems in their highest
mode, despite rough or confusing conditions.
Access to the virtual plant should be opened to non-
traditional audiences, such as maintenance, mechanical
and control-system engineers, so that they can test, cal-
Literature Cited
1. Lo, P., et al., Distillation Tower Pump Failure, Control, pp. 7182
(Oct. 2000).
2. Chin, K., Learning in a Virtual World, Chem. Eng., pp. 107110
(Dec. 2000).
Model Model Control Ease of Idea Operator
Fidelity Access Studies Prototyping Training
! " ! "
! ! " "
ibrate, troubleshoot and adjust setpoints, equipment, in-
strumentation and control schemes for various scenar-
ios and improvements. The time to prototype an idea
can be a matter of a few hours or days. The effort and
cost to explore and demonstrate a new idea is no longer
an obstacle. Investments in more advanced control tools
can be analyzed, optimized and justified. PES configu-
rations with new operating points, equipment or control
capabilities can be checked out, tuned, exported and
downloaded without modification.
The table summarizes the cost and benefits of the
present practices that use hardware or emulated systems
with tieback or custom models and the proposed prac-
tice of creating a virtual plant. The virtual plant offers
the opportunity to warehouse plant understanding,
where each person develops a stake in using, updating
and upgrading the knowledge base. CEP
MICHAEL M. MANSY is in the advanced process control group for
Solutia, Inc. (P.O. Box 66760, St Louis, MO 63141; Phone: (314) 674-
8733; Fax (314) 674-7098; E-mail: mmmans@solutia.com). Prior to
his current position, he worked as a technology, manufacturing and
design engineer within Solutia. He holds a BS degree in chemical
engineering from the Univ. of Texas at Austin.
GREGORY K. McMILLAN is a retired senior fellow from Solutia Inc.
During his 33-year career with Monsanto and its spin off Solutia, he
specialized in improving loop performance, controller tuning, valve
dynamics, opportunity assessments, dynamic simulation, fermentor
control, pH control and reactor control. McMillan is the author of 30
articles and 12 books, his most recent being the ISA best seller for
2001, Good Tuning A Pocket Guide. He has contributed to five
handbooks and is the editor of the Process/Industrial
Instrumentation and Controls Handbook. He received a BS from
Kansas Univ. in engineering physics and a MS from the Univ. of
Missouri Rolla in control theory. McMillan is an ISA Fellow and is
presently an adjunct professor at Washington Univ. in St. Louis, MO
and is a consultant through EDP Contract Services in Austin, TX. He
can be reached by phone at (314) 703-9981 or e-mail,
gkmcmi@msn.com.
MARK S. SOWELL III is a process control fellow for Solutia, Inc. at the
Pensacola, FL Nylon Plant (E-mail: mssowe@solutia.com). He has
over 20 years of experience implementing process control systems
and advanced control applications. He holds a BS degree from
Auburn Univ. in chemical engineering and a MS in systems analysis
from the Univ. of West Florida.
CEP February 2002 www.cepmagazine.org 61