You are on page 1of 19

1

2
3
4
5
7

6
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA

FAKULTI KEJURUTERAAN KIMIA

CHEMICAL PROCESS CONTROL


10

11
12
131
142
153
164
175
186
197
208
219
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
----36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

NAME
STUDENT ID.
DATE SUBMIT
SEMESTER
PROGRAMME / CODE
GROUP
ASSIGNMENT
SUBMIT TO

(CPE562)

: SHEH MUHAMMAD AFNAN BIN SEH HANAFI


: 2013210382
: 75/12/2015
:5
: EH221
: EH2215A
: CONTROL LOOP SIMULATION
: SIR MOHD AIZAD AHMAD

Remarks:

Checked by:

Rechecked by:

-------------------------------

-----------------------------

(SIR MOHD AIZAD AHMAD )


)

Date:

Date:

44

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

45

History of PID controller


46

PID also known as proportionalintegralderivative controller is a control

feedback mechanism. In early years, PID controller is used as automatic ship steering.It was
implemented as a mechanical device such a lever, spring and a mass and were often energized by
compressed air. The first PID controller was developed by Elmer Sperry in 1911 and theoretical
analysis first introduced by Russian American engineer Nicolas Minorsky, (Minorsky 1922). The
goal is stability, not general control, which simplified the problem significantly. Proportional
control provides stability against small disturbances while derivative term was added to improve
stability and control. In modern years, PID controllers in industry are implemented
in programmable logic controllers (PLCs) and applied in industrial ovens, plastics injection
machinery, hot stamping machines . It used the the implementation of the PID algorithm.
47
48

PID controller theory and equation

49

50

i (s)
+ d (s)
s
)
Gc ( PID )=K c
1+

51

Where

Kc

is the PID control gain,

i (s)

is the integral gain,

d (s )

is the derivative

gain
52
53

Proportional Action
54

Proportional (P) control has a function in determining the magnitude of the

difference between the set point and the process variable which is indicated as error. Then this
proportional control will applies appropriate proportional changes to the control variable to
eliminate error. Many control systems will, in fact, work quite well with only Proportional
control due to it fast response time and its ability to minimize fluctuation. However, it contains
large offset. It is an instantaneous response to the control error for improving the response of a
stable system. Contrastly, it cannot control an unstable system by itself. Therefore when the
frequencies leaving the system , the gain is the same with a nonzero steady-state error.
55

Integral Action
56

Integral (I) control usually examines the offset of set point and the process

variable over time and corrects it when and if necessary. This integral control has small offset
and always return to steady state but it leads to slow response time. Integral action drives the
steady-state error towards 0 but slows the response since the error must accumulate before a
significant response is output from the controler. Since an integrator introduces a system pole at
the origin, an integrator can be detrimental to loop stability. Only controllers with integrators
can wind-up where, through actuatorsaturation, the loop is unable to comply with the control
command and the error builds until the situation is corrected.
57
58

Derivative Action

59

Derivative (D) control, monitored the rate of change of the process variable and

consequently makes changes to the output variable to provide unusual changes.


When there is a "process upset", meaning, when the process variable or the set point quickly
changes - the PID controller has to quickly change the output to get the process variable back
equal to the set point. Once the PID controller has the process variable equal to the set point, a
good PID controller will not vary the output. Thus, there are two responses occur such as fast

response (fast change in output) when there is a "process upset", but slow response (steady
output).
60
61

Controller gain
62

The proportional gain (Kc) determines the ratio of output response to the error

signal. For instance, if the error term has a magnitude of 10, a proportional gain of 5 would
produce a proportional response of 50. In general, increasing the proportional gain will increase
the speed of the control system response. However, if the proportional gain is too large, the
process variable will begin to oscillate. If Kc is increased further, the oscillations will become
larger and the system will become unstable and may even oscillate out of control.
63

Deadtime
64

Deadtime is a delay between when a process variable changes, and when that

change can be observed. For instance, if a temperature sensor is placed far away from a cold
water fluid inlet valve, it will not measure a change in temperature immediately if the valve is
opened or closed. Deadtime can also be caused by a system or output actuator that is slow to
respond to the control command, for instance, a valve that is slow to open or close. A common
source of deadtime in chemical plants is the delay caused by the flow of fluid through pipes.
65

Effect of increasing and decreasing value of P,I &D toward process response
66

When parameters of an existing controller have to be tuned, there will be a

problem in the identification of PID controller. Controller structure has to be determined since
manufacturers do not provide data on controller structure whether serial or parallel. Manual
tuning of controller parameters had to be done if they are changed with time. Other than that,
manual tuning of controller parameters also had to be done when change in process parameters
occurred. Manual parameter tuning can be done using trial and error and if rules shown in the
table below:
67
71

Parameter

68

Speed of

Increasing K

72

Response
Increases

69
73

Stability

70

Accuracy

Deteriorate

74

Improves

75

79

Increasing Ki
Increasing Kd

76
80

Decreases
increases

77
81

Deteriorate
Improves

78
82

Improves
No effect

83
84
85

Settling time : The time at which the PV reaches 5% of the total change in the
86

87

Overshoot

process variable (PV).


: Most notably associated with P-only controllers, is the difference fromthe

SP to
88
89

Decay ratio

where the PV settles out at a steady state value.


:

The size of the second peak above the new steady state divided by thesize of the
90

first peak above the same steady state level

91
92

Objective of this study is to determine the effect of PIDs parameters

to the process controllability. To study the effect of controller gain, effect of integral time, effect
of derivative time and effect of deadtime on the control loop process.
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100

101
102
103
104
105

CHAPTER 2 : METHODOLOGY

106

LAB 1: Effect of Controller Gain to Process Controllability

107

Procedure

Open matlab software then new model is opened by selecting file button.

Then, untitled window will appear.

3
Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller,
108
order.

transfer fcn , sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink in the right
5s
s 10 s
2

Process transfer function is set as

PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05, I1=0.01, D1=0

Set simulation parameters to 600

Run the simulation

Plot PV vs time

109

, process set point=1

>>plot(time,PV)

Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.1, I2=0.01, D2=0

10

Plot the second process response

110

>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)

11

Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.2, I3=0.01, D3=0

12

Plot the third process response

111

>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)

13

View all the figure in figure palette.

14

Combine response of figure(2) and figure(3) into figure(1)

15

Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, and PID3.

16

Show the SP at 1.

112
113

114
115

Figure 1 : PFD FOR EFFECT OF CONTROLLER GAIN

116

117

LAB 2: Effect of Integral Gain to Process Controllability

118

Procedure

Open mat lab software then new model is opened by selecting file button.

Then, untitled window will appear.

119
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn, sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink in the right
order.
5s
s 10s
2

120

4. Process transfer function is set as

, process set point=1

121

5. PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05,I1=0.01,D1=0

122

6. Set simulation parameters to 600

123

7. Run the simulation

124

8. Plot PV vs time

125

>>plot(time,PV)

126

9. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.05 I2=0.02 D2=0

127

10. Plot the second process response

128

>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)

129

11. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.05 I3= 0.04, D3=0

130

12. Plot the third process response

131

>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)

132

13. View the figure in figure palette

133

14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure (1)

134

15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.

135

16. Show the SP at 1.

136

137

138

Figure 2 : PFD for integral gain

139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146

LAB 3: Effect of Derivitive time to Process Controllability

147

Procedure

148

1. Open Mat lab software then new model is opened by selecting file button.
149

Then, untitled window will appear.

150
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn , sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all simulink in the right
order.
5s
s 10 s
2

151

4. Process transfer function is set as

, process set point=1

152

5. PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.05,I1=0.01,D1=0

153

6. Set simulation parameters to 600

154

7. Run the simulation

155

8. Plot PV vs time

156

>>plot(time,PV)

157

9. Run a second set of PID`s value P2=0.05 I2=,0.01 D2=2

158

10. Plot the second process response

159

>>figure(2),plot(time,PV)

160

11. Run a third set of PID`s value P3=0.05 I3=0.01, D3=4

161

12. Plot the third process response

162

>>figure(3),plot(time,PV)

163

13. View the figure in figure palette.

164

14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure(1)

165

15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.

166

16. Show the SP at 1.

167
168
169
170

171
172

Figure 3 : PFD for derivitive time

173
174

LAB 4: Effect of deadtime to Process Controllability

175

Procedure

176

1. Open mat lab software then new model is opened by selecting file button.

177

2. Then, untitled window will appear.

178
3. Click button simulink library browser, then drag clock, to workspace, constant, PID
controller, transfer fcn , variable time delay , sum, scope and display. Arrange and connected all
simulink in the right order.

5s
s 10 s
2

179
4. Process transfer function is set as
and set
180

, process set point=1. Add transport delay

Time Delay to 5.

181

5. PID controller`s parameter was setup as P1=0.2, I1=0.01,D1=0

182

6. Set simulation parameters to 600

183

7. Run the simulation

184

8. Plot PV versus time

185

>>plot(time,PV)

186

9. Run a second set of Time delay = 7

187
188
189

10. Plot the second process response


>>figure(2),plot (time,PV)

190

11. Run a third set of Time delay = 9

191

12. Plot the third process response

192

>>figure(3),plot (time,PV)

193

13. View the figure in figure palette.

194

14. Combine response of figure (2) and figure (3) into figure (1)

195

15. Rename the x-axis as time and y-axis as PV and every figure as PID1, PID2, PID3.

196

16. Show the SP at 1.

197

198

199

Figure 4 : PFD for deadtime

200
201
202
203

CHAPTER 3 : RESULT AND DISCUSSION

204

LAB 1: Effect of Controller Gain to Process Controllability

205

Result

206

1.8
PID1
1.6

PID2

1.4

PID3

1.2
SP

PV

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

100

207

200

300
time

400

500

600

Figure 5 : Combination of 3 graph controller gain

208

DISSCUSSION

209

In the figure above shows 3 different graph plotted in order to observe the oscillations of

each graph plotted. The 3 different values of Proportional (P) are considered which are 0.05, 0.1,
and 0.2. Based on the graph, it can be concluded that the high proportional value will lead the
system to become unstable and oscillate. The proportionality is given by controller gain. For a
given change in time, the amount of output process value (PV) will be determined by the
controller gain. It is the best controller gain if the peak of the graph reaches the set point. From
the graph obtained, figure 3 has the best controller gain since the peak point of the graph is
nearest to the set point (SP=1). Thats why this condition will contribute to better processes.
210
211

212

LAB 2: Effect of Integral Gain to Process Controllability

213

Result

214

1.8

PID3
PID2

1.6
PID1
1.4

1.2
SP

PV

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

100

215

200

300
TIME

400

500

600

Figure 6 : Combination of 3 graph Integral time

216
217

DISSCUSSION

218

For second experiment is to find the effect of integral time. The larger value of integral

time, the more oscillates of the graph obtained. Based on observation of the graph, there are
more oscillations for integral time, I=0.04. Thus, the integration will take part until the area
under the curve becomes zero. If there is decreasing in I, it will result in instability system. From
the graph, it can be concluded that increasing too much I will contribute the present value to
overshoot the set point value. Figure 6 has a better process since the peak point reaches nearest to

the set point. So that, we can conclude that the increasing value of I will lead the graph to more
oscillations.
219

LAB 3: Effect of Derivative Time to Process Controllability

220
221

1.8
1.6

PID1
PID2

1.4

PID3

1.2

SP

PV

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

222

100

200

300
TIME

400

500

600

Figure 7 : Combination of 3 graph Derivative time

223
224

DISSCUSSION:

225

From the the graph obtained, it can be concluded that the larger values of derivative will

decrease the overshoot. Besides that, this change will lead to instability since it will slow down

transient response. In fact, derivative control is used to reduce the magnitude of the overshoot
produced. Derivatives term is also used in slow processes such as processes with long time
constant.
226
227
228
229
230

231

LAB 4: Effect Of Deadtime to Process Controllability

232

Result

233

2.5

PID3

PID2
PID1

PV

1.5

SP

0.5

100

234
235

200

300
Time

400

500

Figure 8 : Combination of 3 Graphs for Different deadtime

600

236

DISSCUSSION

237

Based on the graphs, it can be concluded that the increasing in Time Delay will produce

more oscillations on the graph. The calculation is starting at the dead time icon. The more time
delay, the instability of the system also increases. This is due to the long stopped reaction time.
For time delay = 5, there is not much oscillation occur. When we increase the time delay to 7,
there is small oscillation occur.
238
239
240
241
242

243

CHAPTER 4 : CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

244
245

The performance of each of the three types of controllers varies due to the differing

components of controller equation. In P-only control, the only adjustable tuning parameter is KC as
the proportional term is the only term in the corresponding controller equation. The advantage of
P-only control is that there is only one tuning parameter to adjust and therefore the best tuning
values are obtained rather quickly.Tthe disadvantage to P-only control is that it permits offset. To
minimize offset, KC may be increased, however this results in greater oscillatory behavior.
246

The advantage to PI control is that it eliminates the offset present in P-only control

by minimizing the integrated area of error over time. To assess the effect changing the two tuning
parameters has on a PI controller performance, both K C and I were halved and doubled. In this
process, using these tuning parameters actually resulted in increased magnitude of oscillations over
time and thus an unstable system. Either lowering I, or increasing KC from the initial value
resulted in a greater peak overshoot, larger settling time and larger decay ratio.
247

In PID control all three terms are utilized. The function of the derivative term is to

determine the rate of change of the error (slope) thus influence the controller output. A rapidly
changing error will have a larger derivative and therefore a larger effect on controller output. The
derivative term will therefore work to decrease the oscillatory behavior in the process variable. To

assess the effect of changing derivative time, a comparison of the tuning parameter D was made
for the PID controller by halving and doubling the initial value.
248

Increasing the derivative time results in less oscillatory behavior of the process

variable however there is also an increased noise in the controller output. Increasing D also
increase rise time, settling time, and decreases peak overshoot
249
250
251
252
253
254

RECOMMENDATION
255

In choosing the best performing controller it must be noted that best

performance is subjective, meaning that some processes may desire a PV response with no
overshoot, others may be able to tolerate overshoot and prefer faster rise times. For a process that
desires fast rise time with the minimal amount of oscillatory behavior and overshoot it would be
suggested to use a moderate to moderately aggressive PI controller.
256
257

258

REFRENCES
1. Abdul Aziz Ishak & Zalizawati Abdullah. (2014). PID TUNING Fundamental Concepts
259

and Application. UITM Press.

2. H. Bischoff*, D.Hoffmann*, E.V.Terzi. (1997). Process Control System, Control of


260

Temperature, Flow and Filling Level. Festo Didactic GmbH & Co.

3. Basso, Christophe (2012). "Designing Control Loops for Linear and Switching Power
261

Supplies: A Tutorial Guide". Artech House, ISBN 978-1608075577

262
4. Blanke, M.; Kinnaert, M.; Lunze, J.; Staroswiecki, M. (2006), Diagnosis and
263
264
265
266

Fault-Tolerant Control (2nd ed.), Springer