Professional Documents
Culture Documents
FACOLTÀ DI INGEGNERIA
Course:
Instrumentation and Control of Chemical Processes
http://secure.softwarekey.com/solo/products/ProductOption.aspx?ProdOptionID=6002
• SOFTWARE MODULES
– Case Studies
• Example No.1 – TWO NON-INTERACTING TANKS
• Example No.2 – THE PUMPED TANK
• Custom Process
• Companion and Web-based Materials
Case Studies:
Design Tools:
Custom Process:
disturbance
variable cooling
flow exit
manipulated variable
controller
output
measured
temperature sensor
process variable
& controller
Jacket
manipulated variable
controller
output
measured
process variable level sensor
& controller
disturbance
variable
V a r ia b le /S e tp o in t
Control Station: Case Studies
Proc e ss: Gra vity Dra ine d Ta nk Cont.: Ma nua l Mode
5 .0
4 .5
4 .0
u t p uP t r o c e s s
Process Reaction Curve Method 3 .5
3 .0
75
O
74
C o n tr o lle r
73
72
71
70
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36
T im e (m in s )
The Design Tools module allows to import “external” data of a dynamic response for a step input change in a “text” file
and to compute it in order to find the best dynamic model for the tuning controller by means of IMC correlations.
l e
b
C o n t r o l S t a t io n : D e s ig n T o o ls
r i a
a
V
4 .5 0
ls e s
FOPDT fitting
be
4 .2 5
V P a r ro i ac
4 .0 0
KP = 0.1252 m/% d
t e 75
74
tP = 1.60 min
l a
73
u
P = 0.779 min
i p
72
n
71
a
M
70
N
SSE = å [Measured Data i - Model Data i ] =
0 5 10 15 20 25
2 T im e
i=1
= 0.0256
25/06/2018 Instrumentation and Control of Chemical Processes - Prof. M. Miccio 21
Two non-interacting tanks:
2. Tuning of the PID controller with IMC correlations
NOTE:
tc is the larger between 0.8td and 0.1tP
in this mode we can evaluate the system response with the feedback control
changing the set point and the disturbance in different way
• using other correlations for the open loop tuning, the software cannot perform the estimate of the
optimized PID controller parameters. It has to be done off-line.
it is always possible to move from the Manual Mode to the Automatic Control clicking on the controller
(LC) in the synoptic figure
the Controller Design window will be opened. In this case, the controller parameters evaluated off-line
have to be inserted by a manual mode in the relative fields
in the Controller Design window, PID is selected from the drop-down menu (H)
In our example,
the optimized PID controller parameters
for the open loop tuning
calculated with other correlations are:
V a r ia b le /S
4.48
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP t r o c e s s
3.92
8 2 .6 1
6 7 .5 9
tuning methods 6 0 .0 8
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
T im e (m in s )
)
e s s V a ria b l e /S e tp o in t (le v e l, m
C o n tro l S ta tio n : P ID tu n e d w ith Z ie g le r-N ic h o ls 1 s t m e th o d
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t Time = 1.98, De riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
P r o c e s s : G r a v it y D r a in e d C To an nt . k: P I D ( P = R A , I = A R W , D = I d e a l ( m e a s ) , F = o ff)
5 .0
4 .5
IMC 4 .0
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p u t ( P% r o )c
3.a 1st meth. 3 .0
100
Ziegler &
90
80
60
40
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Coon
)
T im e ( m in s )
e s s V a ria b l e /S e tp o in t (le v e l, m
C o n tro l S ta tio n : P ID tu n e d w ith C o h e n -C o o n
P r o c e s s : G r a v it y D r a in e d C To an nt . k: P I D ( P = R A , I = A R W , D = I d e a l ( m e a s ) , F = o f f )
T u n in5 .0g : G a in = 1 9 . 7 , R e s e t T im e = 1 . 5 6 , D e r iv T im e = 0 . 3 8 9 , S a m p le T im e = 1 . 0 0
4 .5
4 .0
3 .5
Cohen & Coon
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p u t ( P% r o )c
3 .0
100
90
tuning rules
80
70
60
50
40
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
T im e ( m in s )
T u n in g : G a in = 2 3 . 8 8 , R e s e t T im e = 1 . 6 1 , D e r iv T im e = 0 . 2 6 , S a m p le T im e = 1 .0 0
SUMMARY
•The method acts on the proportional controller
•Integral and derivative actions are deactivated 2nd meth.
•The procedure starts from a steady-state of the process Ziegler &
•A step input change is forced on the set point and the Nichols
and error
by trial
dynamic response y(t) is monitored
•The gain Kc is increased up to a stable cycle (constant
amplitude oscillation of y(t)) (with the control final element
far from the saturation)
•The specific value Ku = Kc is recorded, for which a stable
oscillation of the closed loop response y(t) occurs Ziegler-Nichols (2nd Method) Tuning Chart
•The distance from two consecutive peaks is measured controller Kc tI tD
(natural period of oscillation Pu o t0 o T)
•La natural frequency of oscillation is f0=1/ t0 P Ku/2
•La crossover frequency is ωco =2π/ t0
PI Ku/2.2 Pu/1.2
PID Ku/1.7 Pu/2 Pu/8
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP tr o ( c% e s) s V a r i a b l e / S e t p o i n t ( l e v e l , m )
P c o n tro lle r: C lo s e d -lo o p c o n tin u o u s ly o s c illa tin g s te p re s p o n s e
• The two non-interacting tanks are P r o c e s s : G r a v it y D r a in e d T a n k C o n t. : P ID ( P = R A , I= o ff, D = o ff, F = o ff)
3.0
at the steady state, in the closed loop
configuration, only with the
proportional controller (P-only) and
the gain Kc=90 % /m
2.5
set-point is h2=1.9 m
• A step input change 100
showed in figure 20
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
T im e ( m in s )
V a r ia b le /S e tp o in t
Control Station: Case Studies
P roc e ss: Gra vity Dra ine d Ta nk Cont.: P ID ( P= RA, I= AR W , D= Ide a l (me a s), F = off)
4.48
4.20
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP t r o c e s s
3.92
3.64
9 0 .1 2
8 2 .6 1
7 5 .1 0
6 7 .5 9
6 0 .0 8
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
T im e (m in s )
)
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t Time = 1.98, De riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
e s s V a ria b l e /S e tp o in t (le v e l, m
C o n tro l S ta tio n : P ID tu n e d w ith Z ie g le r-N ic h o ls 2 n d m e th o d
Calculation of the P r o c e s s : G r a v it y D r a in e d C To an nt . k: P I D
5 .0
( P = R A , I= A R W , D = Id e a l (m e a s ), F = o ff)
4 .0
70
60
40
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
T im e ( m in s )
T u n in g : G a in = 5 2 . 9 4 , R e s e t T im e = 1 . 0 5 , D e r iv T im e = 0 . 2 6 2 5 , S a m p le T im e = 1 .0
Remember
Remember
Remember
REFERENCE CASE
V a r ia b le /S e tp o in t
3.51
3.24
2.97
2.70
8 3 .1 0
7 4 .7 9
6 6 .4 8
5 8 .1 7
4 9 .8 6
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
T im e (m in s )
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t Time = 1.98, De riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
4.08
3.84
6 8 .9 7
6 5 .3 4
6 1 .7 1
rise time DECREASE
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
V a r ia b le /S e tp o in t
T im e (m in s )
Control
se t TimeStation:
= 1.98, DeCase Studies
overshoot INCREASE
Tuning: Ga in = 5.30, Re riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
P roc e ss: Gra vity Dra ine d Ta nk Cont.: P ID ( P= RA, I= AR W , D= Ide a l (me a s), F = off)
4.65
4.34
3.72
3.41
9 7 .1 0
7 7 .6 8
period of oscillation DECREASE
5 8 .2 6
3 8 .8 4
Tuning: Ga in = 45.0, Re se t Time = 1.98, De riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
5.04
4.20
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP t r o c e s s
3.78
3.36
103.20 tI/3 rise time INCREASE
9 2 .8 8
(eventually it loses its physical meaning)
8 2 .5 6
7 2 .2 4
overshoot DECREASE
6 1 .9 2
T im e (m in s )
Control
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t TimeStation:
= 0.66, DeCase Studies
riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
decay ratio DECREASE
P roc e ss: Gra vity Dra ine d Ta nk Cont.: P ID ( P= RA, I= AR W , D= Ide a l (me a s), F = off)
3.75
oscillation (eventually it loses its physical meaning)
3.50
8 3 .4 9
response DECREASE
7 5 .9 0
6 8 .3 1
time (eventually it loses its physical meaning)
6 0 .7 2
5 3 .1 3
10 12 14 16 18
T im e (m in s )
20 22 24 26 The loss of the physical meaning occurs when the process
moves from an underdamped system to an overdamped
system.
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t Time = 4.00, De riv Time = 0.3131, S a mple Time = 1.00
2.47
Considering the decrease of tD, the diagrams evidence
3 τD
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP t r o c e s s
2.28
2.09
1.90
rise time DECREASE
8 7 .8 0 (eventually it loses its physical meaning)
7 0 .2 4
5 2 .6 8
overshoot INCREASE
3 5 .1 2
1 7 .5 6
(eventually it loses its physical meaning)
V a r ia b le /S e tp o in t
26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
T im e (m in s )
2.47
period of DECREASE
τD /3
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p uP t r o c e s s
2.28
6 3 .2 0
response DECREASE
5 9 .2 5
5 5 .3 0
time (eventually it loses its physical meaning)
5 1 .3 5
4 7 .4 0
14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
The loss of the physical meaning occurs when the
T im e (m in s )
process moves from an underdamped system to an
Tuning: Ga in = 15.87, Re se t Time = 1.98, De riv Time = 0.105, S a mple Time = 1.00
overdamped system.
3
Tank level, m
1
80
Manipulated Variable, %
70
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
Time
d)
NO.
The procedure for the estimate of FOPDT model parameters cannot be applied because
the tank level does not reach a new steady state value.
e)
3 different routes can be outlined:
• adopting a FOPDT integrating model, calculating the parameters and applying the
“IMC (lambda) correlations for integrating processes”
• estimating the PI controller parameters by an empirical correlation
• taking the process in a closed loop configuration with the only proportional
controller and trying to apply the 2nd Ziegler-Nichols method.
from
Control
Station®
help
screen
Only 1 pole at
the origin of
the axes:
Re
s=0
Tank level, m
2
1
80
Manipulated Variable, %
70
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
Time
• selecting Start Fitting (F), the software will calculate the best representing FOPDT integrating line of
the process (with the minimum SSE), estimating the related parameters:
KP*, P
from which the controller parameters can be calculated.
V a r ia b le / S e t p o in t
C o n tro l S ta tio n : C a s e S tu d ie s
P ro c e s s : P u m p e d T a n k C o n t. : P ID ( P = D A , I= A R W , D = o ff, F = o ff)
fitting with 4 .0
FOPDT integrating 3 .2
2 .4
C o n t r o l l e r O u t p u tP r o c e s s
1 .6
7 1 .4
P = 1.04 min 6 6 .3
6 1 .2
-16 -8 0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64
T im e ( m in s )
N
SSE = [Measured Data i Model Data i ]
2
T u n in g : G a in = - 1 8 . 8 2 , R e s e t T im e = 6 . 8 9 , S a m p le T im e = 1 .0 0
i =1
G
• The software estimate the parameters of
chosen PID with IMC correlations
• We can now introduce the optimized
parameter directly into the controller by means
the button Implement (G)
• In this case, the optimized parameters with
IMC correlations for the case of the PI controller
are:
Kc = -18.82 (%) (min) m-1
(direct acting controller)
tI = 6.89 min
Now we can evaluate the system response of the Pumped Tank with the feedback
control when changing the set point and the disturbance
4.8
4.4
4.0
70
65
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
T im e (m in s )
T u n in g : G a in = - 5 . 0 7 , S a m p le T im e = 1 .0 0
Forward path
ySP(s) + ε(s) CO(s)
y(s)
Gc GP
-
Feedback path
Definition: GOL(s)=Gc(s)Gp(s)
Re
Re
Pumped tank:
LTI Dynamic response plots
Proportional Control only
Pumped tank:
Closed Loop Transfer Function
PID Controller
d(s)
ySP(s) + ε(s) CO(s) y(s)
Kc(1+tDs+1/tIs) KP'/s
-
Servo Problem
(Hyp.: d(s) = 0):
y(s)=GCL,SP(s)ySP(s)
K c K 'p t Dt Is 2 t Is 1
G c (s)G p (s) K c 1 t Ds 1 t Is K 'p s t Is 2
G CL ,SP (s)
1 G OL (s) 1 K c 1 t Ds 1 t Is K 'p s K c K 'p t Dt Is 2 t Is 1
1
t Is 2
K c K 'p t Dt Is 2 t Is 1
t I
K c K 'pt Dt I s 2 K c K 'pt Is K c K 'p
25/06/2018 Prof M. Miccio 54
Pumped tank:
Closed Loop Transfer Function
PID Controller
Root Locus
G OL (s)
K c K 'p t Dt Is 2 t Is 1 2 open-
t Is 2
loop poles
Data: at the
All constants origin
set to 1
2 open-
loop
zeroes in
the
negative
half-plane
G CL ,SP (s)
K c K 'p t Dt Is 2 t Is 1
t I
K c K 'pt Dt I s 2 K c K 'pt Is K c K 'p BIBO stable closed-loop system for any Kc
25.06.2018 Instrumentation and Control of Chemical Processes - Prof. M. Miccio 55
CUSTOM PROCESS
CUSTOM PROCESS
G rat
1n
n 0.5 2 n 0.5
s s
n 0.5 n 0.5
n
s
where n = 5
G dt e 4
0.82
G rat
0.66s 2 0.815s 1
0.82* e 1.25s
G rat
0.66s2 0.815s 1