Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Process Dynamics and Control Seborg 2nd Ch24 PDF
Process Dynamics and Control Seborg 2nd Ch24 PDF
24.1
a)
i.
Number of variables: NV = 22
w1
xR,A
x2B
w2
xR,B
x2D
w3
xR,C
x4C
w4
xR,D
x5D
w5
xT,D
x6D
w6
VT
x7D
w7
HT
x8D
w8
Number of Equations: NE = 17
Eqs. 2-8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 20(3X), 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 31
Number of Parameters: NP = 4
VR, k, ,
Degrees of freedom: NF = 22 17 = 5
Number of manipulated variables: NMV = 4
w1, w2, w6, w8
Number of disturbance variables: NDV = 1
x2D
Number of controlled variables: NCV = 4
x4A, w4, HT, x8D
nd
24-1
xR,A
w4
w2
xR,B
x4A
w6
xR,D
x8D
w8
xT,D
HT
x2D
VT
Number of Equations: NE = 9
Eq. 2-33 through Eq. 2-41
Number of Parameters: NP = 4
VR, k, ,
Degrees of freedom: NF = 14 9 = 5
Number of manipulated variables: NMV = 4
w1, w2, w6, w8
Number of disturbance variables: NDV = 1
x2D
Number of controlled variables: NCV = 4
x4A, w4, HT, x8D
iii.Third model (simplified holdups model):
Number of variables: NV = 14
w1
HR,A
w4
w2
HR,B
x4A
w6
HR,D
x8D
w8
HT,B
HT
x2D
HT,D
24-2
Number of Equations: NE = 9
Eq. 2-48 through Eq. 2-56
Number of Parameters: NP = 3
VR, k,
Degrees of freedom: NF = 14 9 = 5
Number of manipulated variables: NMV = 4
w1, w2, w6, w8
Number of disturbance variables: NDV = 1
x2D
Number of controlled variables: NCV = 4
x4A, w4, VT, x8D
b)
Model 1:
The first model is left in an intermediate form, i.e., not fully reduced, so
the key equations for the units are more clearly identifiable. Also, such a
model is easier to develop using traditional balance methods because not
as much algebraic effort is expended in simplification.
Models 2 and 3:
Both of the reduced models are easier to simulate (fewer equations), yet
contain all of the dynamic relations needed to simulate the plant.
Model 3:
The holdups model has the further advantage of being easier to
analyze using a symbolic equation manipulator because of its more
symmetric organization. Also, it requires one less parameter for its
specification.
c)
24-3
1
w3
Sum
input flows1
2
x8
1
s
1
w8
1
s
x1
Demux
Mux
1
s
w1
2
3000
C
5
-out
+ in
+generated
HR
1
s
x2
w2
x3
Sum
input flows
[-0.5 -0.5 1 0]
330
stoich. factors
k
3000
rho*VR
Demux
generation &
Accumulation
T1
T2
24-4
Product3
4
x4
3
2
Product2
Demux
x3
Product
w4
w3
2
Product5
x5
1
Product1
w5
Product4
1
Purge Flow
1
2
w7
w5
x5
x7
24-5
1010
w1
w1
w1-save
xRA
xRA-save
w1-change
xRB
w2
xRB-save
w2-save
1100
xRD
w2
xRD-save
x2D
w2-change
Equations 2-(32-38)
VT-save
0.01
x2D-set
xTD
110
Purge Flow
HT
xTD-save
w6
w4
w6-save
w4-save
890
x4A
Recycle Flow
w8
E.2-32-38
x4A-save
w8-save
24-6
HRA
HRA-save
HRB
1010
w1
w1
w1-save
HRB-save
HRD
1100
HRD-save
w2
w2
HTB
w2-save
HTB-save
Equations 2-(48-52)
HTD
HTD-save
0.01
w4
x2D
w4-save
110
Purge Flow
x4A
w6
x4A-save
w6-save
xTD
890
xTD-save
Recycle Flow
HT
w8
w8-save
E.2-48-52
HT-save
24-7
2010
1014
2008
1013
2006
Full model
Reduced concentrations
Reduced holdups
w4
w1
1015
1012
2004
1011
2002
1010
10
20
30
40
1101
2000
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
0.104
1100.5
w2
0.102
xTD
1100
1099.5
1099
0.1
10
20
30
40
110.5
500
HT
550
w6
111
110
450
109.5
109
400
10
20
30
350
40
890.5
0.0101
x 4A
0.0102
w8
891
890
0.0101
889.5
889
0.01
0.01
0
10
20
30
40
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-8
1010.5
2006
1010
2004
1009.5
1009
Full model
Reduced concentrations
Reduced holdups
w4
2008
w1
1011
2002
10
20
30
2000
40
0.102
1108
0.1
1106
0.098
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
20
30
40
w2
1110
0.096
x TD
1104
1102
1100
0.094
10
20
30
0.092
40
111
800
110.5
HT
w6
700
110
600
109.5
109
10
20
30
500
40
-3
890.5
10
890
9.95
889.5
889
x 10
x 4A
10.05
w8
891
9.9
10
20
30
9.85
40
Time (hr)
10
Time (hr)
24-9
1011
2000
Full model
Reduced concentrations
Reduced holdups
2000
1010.5
w4
2000
w1
1010
2000
1009.5
1009
2000
0
10
20
30
40
2000
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
0.1
0.1
w2
1100.5
1100
0.1
1099.5
0.1
1099
10
x TD
1101
10
20
30
0.1
40
120
500
118
400
HT
116
w6
300
114
200
112
110
10
20
30
40
891
100
0.01
890.5
x 4A
w8
0.01
890
0.01
889.5
889
10
20
30
40
0.01
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-10
1011
2008
w4
2006
w1
1010.5
1010
2004
1009.5
1009
2002
10
20
30
40
2000
0.1001
1100.5
0.1001
w2
x TD
1101
1100
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
0.1
1099.5
1099
Full model
Reduced concentrations
Reduced holdups
0.1
10
20
30
0.1
40
111
500
498
110.5
HT
w6
496
110
494
109.5
109
492
0
10
20
30
490
40
0
-3
10.01
898
10
9.99
w8
896
894
9.98
892
9.97
890
x 10
x 4A
900
10
20
30
40
9.96
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-11
1011
2000.5
Full model
Reduced concentrations
Reduced holdups
1010.5
2000
w4
w1
1010
1999.5
1009.5
1009
10
20
30
40
1999
1101
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
0.16
1100.5
w2
x TD
0.14
1100
0.12
1099.5
1099
10
20
30
0.1
40
110.5
515
HT
520
w6
111
110
510
109.5
109
505
10
20
30
500
40
891
0.0105
w8
x4A
890.5
890
0.01
889.5
889
10
20
30
40
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-12
24.2
To obtain a steady state (SS) gain matrix through the use of simulation,
step changes in the manipulated variables are made. The resulting matrix
should compare closely with that found in Eq. 24.1 of the text (or the
table below). The values calculated are:
Gain Matrix w1
w2
w6
w8
1.93
2.26 E-2
0
6.25 E-3
w4
8.8 E-4
-7.62 E-4
0
5.68 E-6
x8D
2.57
E-5
-1.14
E-5
0
-3.15 E-6
x4A
-0.918*
0.973*
-1*
-6.25 E-3*
HT
* For integrating variables: Gain = the slope of the variable vs. time
divided by the magnitude of the step change.
RGA
w4
x8D
x4A
HT
w1
0.9743
0
0.0257
0
w2
0.0135
0.9737
0.0128
0
w6
0
0
0
1
w8
0.0122
0.0263
0.9615
0
24.3
Controller parameters are given in Tables E.2.7 and E.2.8 in Appendix E
of the text. A transfer function block is placed inside each control loop
to slow down the fast algebraic equations, which otherwise yield large
output spikes. These blocks are of the form of a first-order filter.:
G f ( s) =
1
0.001s + 1
24-13
2004
No ratio control
Ratio control
w4
2002
2000
1998
1996
10
15
10
15
10
15
20
25
30
35
20
25
30
35
20
25
30
35
0.0101
x 4A
0.01
0.0099
Time (hr)
0.12
x TD
0.11
0.1
0.09
2150
No ratio control
Ratio control
w4
2100
2050
2000
1950
10
15
10
15
10
15
20
25
30
35
20
25
30
35
20
25
30
35
0.01015
x 4A
0.0101
0.01005
0.01
0.00995
Time (hr)
0.104
x TD
0.102
0.1
0.098
24-14
24.4
a)
Gain
Integral Time (hr)
-5000
1
0.002
1
2
1
-500000
1
The RGA shows that flowrate w6 will not directly affect the composition
of D in the recycle tank, xTD, but the xTD-w6 loop will cause unwanted
interaction with the other control loops. The system can be controlled,
however, if the other three loops are tuned more conservatively and
assist the xTD-w6 loop.
c)
The manipulated variable, w6, is the rate of purge flow. Purging a stream
does not affect the compositions of its constituent species, only the total
flowrate. Therefore, purging the stream before the recycle tank will only
affect the level in the tank and not its compositions. The resulting RGA
yields a zero gain between xTD and w6.
d)
e)
With a set point change of 10%, the controllers must be detuned to keep
variables within operating constraints. The HT-w6 loop in the RGA
structure must be more conservative (gain reduced to -1) to keep the
purge flow, w6, from hitting its lower constraint, zero. A 20% change
will create a problem within the system that these control structures
cannot handle. The new set point for w4 does not allow a steady-state
value of 0.01 for x4A. This will make the x4A-w8 control loop become
unstable. This outcome results for production rate step changes larger
than roughly 12% (for this system).
(See Figure S24.4c)
24-15
1060
2100
1040
2050
w4
2150
w1
1080
1020
1000
Exercise 24.4
RGA structure
2000
10
20
30
40
1950
1180
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
520
1160
510
HT
1140
w2
500
1120
490
1100
1080
10
20
30
480
40
140
0.102
x TD
120
w6
100
80
0.1
0.098
60
40
10
20
30
40
0.096
0.0102
1200
1100
w8
x 4A
0.0101
1000
0.01
900
800
0.0099
0
10
20
30
40
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-16
1100
2100
1050
2050
w4
2150
w1
1150
1000
950
2000
10
15
20
1950
600
1300
550
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
10
15
20
w2
HT
1400
1200
500
1100
1000
Exercise 24.4
RGA structure
450
10
15
400
20
160
0.115
0.11
x TD
140
0.105
w6
120
0.1
100
80
0.095
0
10
15
0.09
20
891
0.012
890.5
x 4A
w8
0.011
890
0.01
889.5
889
10
15
20
Time (hr)
0.009
Time (hr)
Figure S24.4b. Step change in w4 set point(+5%) at t=5 with one loop open.
24-17
1150
2300
2200
1100
w4
w1
2100
Exercise 24.4
RGA structure
1050
2000
1000
20
40
1900
60
1250
20
40
60
20
40
60
20
40
60
20
40
60
540
520
1200
w2
500
1150
HT
480
1100
1050
460
20
40
440
60
150
0.104
0.102
w6
x TD
100
0.1
0.098
50
0.096
0
20
40
60
0.094
0.0104
1400
0.0103
w8
x 4A
1600
1200
0.0102
1000
800
0.0101
20
40
60
Time (hr)
0.01
Time (hr)
24-18
24.5
a)
Gain
Matrix
w4
x8D
x4A
HT
HR
Using the same methods as described in solution 24.3, the resulting gain
matrix is:
w1
w2
5.762E-3
4.760E-3
5.554E-6
4.558E-6
-2.905E-6 -2.398E-6
-2.137
-1.927
1
1
All variables are integrating
w6
w8
w3
0
0
0
-1
0
5.831E-3
5.445E-6
-2.944E-6
-10.12
1
-1.285E-2
-9.130E-6
6.542E-6
8.829
-1
The resulting RGA does not provide useful insight for the preferred
controller pairing due to the nature of these integrating variables.
b)
24-19
2120
Variable reactor level (P)
Variable reactor level (PI)
Constant reactor level
2100
2080
w4
2060
2040
2020
2000
1980
10
15
20
25
30
35
10
15
20
25
30
35
20
25
30
35
0.104
0.103
x TD
0.102
0.101
0.1
0.099
Time (hr)
0.0108
0.0106
x 4A
0.0104
0.0102
0.01
0.0098
10
15
24-20
1200
2150
Variable reactor level (P)
Variable reactor level (PI)
Constant reactor level
2100
w4
w1
1100
2050
1000
900
2000
0
10
20
30
1950
40
0.104
1150
0.102
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
x TD
w2
1200
1100
1050
10
20
30
40
0.1
0.098
510
100
500
w6
HT
150
50
0
490
10
20
30
0.011
1600
1400
x 4A
w8
0.0105
1200
0.01
1000
800
10
20
30
40
3400
0.0095
10
20
30
3030
3020
w3
HR
3200
3010
3000
2800
480
40
3000
0
10
20
30
40
2990
10
20
Time (hr)
Time (hr)
24-21
30
40
24.6
To simulate the flash/splitter with a non-negligible holdup, derive a mass
balance around the unit. Assume that components A and C are well
mixed and are held up in the flash for an average HF/w4 amount of time.
Also assume that the vapor components B and D are passed through the
splitter instantaneously.
dH F
= w3 w4 w5 = 0
dt
d ( H F xFA )
= w3 x3 A w4 x4 A
dt
d ( H F xC )
= w3 x3C w4 x4C
dt
Since the holdup is constant, the flows out of the splitter can be modeled
as:
w5 = w3 ( x3 B + x3 D )
w4 = w3 w5
Use the component balances and output flow equations to simulate the
flash/splitter unit. This will add a dynamic lag to the unit which slows
down the control loops that have the splitter in between the manipulated
variable and the controlled variable. However, a 1000kg holdup only
creates a residence time of 0.5 hr. Considering the time scale of the
entire plant, this is very small and confirms the assumption of modeling
the flash/splitter as having a negligible holdup.
24-22
1014
2001
1010
2000
w4
2000.5
w1
1012
1008
1006
1999.5
10
20
30
40
1200
1999
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
10
20
30
40
0.108
0.106
1150
x TD
w2
0.104
0.102
1100
0.1
1050
10
20
30
40
0.098
510
200
505
w6
HT
250
150
100
500
10
20
30
40
495
0.01
900
0.01
w8
x 4A
850
0.01
800
0.01
750
0.01
0
10
20
30
40
Time (hr)
24-23
24.7
The MPC controller achieves satisfactory results for step changes made
within the plant. The production rate can easily be maintained within
desirable limits and large set-point changes (20%) do not cause a
breakdown in the quality of this stream. A change in the kinetic
coefficient (k), occurring simultaneously with a 50% disturbance change
will, however, initially draw the product quality (composition of the
production stream) out of the required limits.
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.2
w4
w1
-0.5
0
10
20
30
40
-1
50
1.5
1
x4A
w2
-0.2
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
-0.5
-0.2
-2
-0.4
HT
w6
10
0.5
2
0
-4
-0.6
-6
-8
10
20
30
40
50
-0.8
60
40
xTD
w8
-2
20
-4
0
-20
10
20
30
40
50
-6
Figure S24.7a. Step change in x2D (+50%). All variables are recorded in
percent deviation.
24-24
-3
4
w4
w1
-2
-4
-5
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
1.5
-2
x4A
w2
-4
-6
-8
0.5
10
20
30
40
50
-0.5
0.1
HT
-5
-10
w6
-0.1
-15
-0.2
-20
10
20
30
40
50
-0.4
15
0.5
10
0
xTD
w8
-25
-0.3
-0.5
0
-5
-1
10
20
30
40
50
-1.5
Figure S24.7b. Step change in production rate w4 (+5%). All variables are
recorded in percent deviation.
24-25
-1
w4
w1
2
0
-2
10
20
30
40
-3
50
15
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
20
15
10
x4A
w2
10
5
0
-5
10
20
30
40
-5
50
20
0.5
-20
HT
w6
-40
-0.5
-60
-80
10
20
30
40
-1
50
150
100
xTD
w8
-5
50
-10
0
-50
10
20
30
40
50
-15
Figure S24.7c. Simultaneous step changes in x2D (+50%) and k(+20%). All
variables are recorded in percent deviation.
24-26
-5
25
20
-10
w1
w4
15
10
-15
5
-20
10
20
30
40
50
10
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
10
20
30
40
50
0
w2
4
x4A
-10
-20
-30
10
20
30
40
-2
50
-20
0.5
-40
0
HT
w6
-40
-60
-0.5
-80
10
20
30
40
50
-1.5
60
40
0
xTD
w8
-100
-1
20
0
-20
-2
-4
10
20
30
40
50
-6
Figure S24.7d. Step change in production rate w4 (+20%). All variables are
recorded in percent deviation.
24-27