See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313594054

Advanced process control system for a crude distillation unit. A case study

Article  in  Automation and Remote Control · February 2017

DOI: 10.1134/S0005117917020138

CITATIONS READS
4 2,037

4 authors, including:

Andrei Torgashov
Institute of Automation and Control Processes FEB RAS
25 PUBLICATIONS   22 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Andrei Torgashov on 26 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 0005-1179, Automation and Remote Control, 2017, Vol. 78, No. 2, pp. 357–367. c Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2017.
Original Russian Text c D.Kh. Fayruzov, Yu.N. Bel’kov, D.V. Kneller, A.Yu. Torgashov, 2013, published in Avtomatizatsiya v Promyshlennosti,
2013, No. 8, pp. 3–10.

AUTOMATION IN INDUSTRY

Advanced Process Control System

for a Crude Distillation Unit. A Case Study
D. Kh. Fayruzov∗ , Yu. N. Bel’kov∗, D. V. Kneller∗∗,a , and A. Yu. Torgashov∗∗∗
∗
Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat JSC, Salavat, Russia
∗∗
Honeywell CJSC, Moscow, Russia
∗∗∗
Institute of Automation and Control Processes, Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Vladivostok, Russia
a
e-mail: Dmitry.Kneller@honeywell.com
Received January 11, 2013

Abstract—Development, implementation, and operation of an advanced control system for a

crude distillation unit are described. The system is based on Honeywell Profit Controller soft-
ware. The paper outlines the CDU/VDU-4 plant of Gasprom Neftekhim Salavat JSC (Bashkor-
tostan Republic, Russia) as a control object, discusses project implementation phases, mentions
APC maintenance issues, and summarizes key success factors.
DOI: 10.1134/S0005117917020138

1. INTRODUCTION
The growing market competition along with toughening environmental regulations had been
making oil refiners to look for new ways of costs saving and margins improvement.
Over the past two decades, advanced process control (APC) provides an effective response to
this challenge. APC is a generic term comprising a variety of control techniques more sophisticated
than simple PID control. We will further focus on its main stream known as “MPC” from “model–
based predictive control”: a multi–variable control technology based on a predictive process model
operating in real time in the control loop [1]. In practice, APC is most often delivered as a COTS
software to be further installed on and integrated with the plant’s distributed control system (DCS)
and customized to specific process technology. An APC system resembles an autopilot: it runs the
plant automatically over a variety of operation modes thus reducing the operators’ involvement
both in the steady state and during grade changes. At each time step (say, once per minute), the
embedded process model, the system’s “electronic brain,” predicts plant’s future behavior subject to
the most recent instrument readings. In case the forecast indicates some process variable may soon
violate the specified limit, the system calculates new base–level control targets and communicates
them via DCS as PID control setpoints. APC thus operates as a master in a multi–loop cascade
with PID controllers responding as slave controllers. That is why all related base–level control and
instrumentation should be reliable and properly tuned to ensure timely and correct response.
The long-term worldwide application experience testifies that APC systems run process plants
more effectively than operators in terms of process stability, quality consistency, and smoother
transients. Moreover, they operate a plant closer to constraints thus ensuring economic benefits,
a key factor to justify APC investments. The emerging Russian APC market, generally, complies
with world trends [2–4]. Against this background, the paper provides a case study of a successful
APC implementation on a crude distillation unit of a Russian major refining and petrochemical
complex. It briefly presents the control plant, describes project implementation phases, discusses
its results and success factors. System’s maintenance and further development are also outlined.

357
358 FAYRUZOV et al.

2. THE SITE AND THE PROCESS UNIT

Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat (hereafter “Salavat” or “Company”) is a major Russian refining and
chemical complex comprising oil refinery, petrochemical and gas chemical plants. The CDU/VDU-4
has been the key crude distillation unit of the Refinery until a larger one was commissioned in 2013.
CDU/VDU-4 strongly affected the operation of several downstream units and eventually the refining
margin. Further improvement of its operation efficiency required serious investments in process
technology; therefore, APC was chosen as a relatively low–cost alternative with attractive payback.
The unit desalts and processes up to 4 million tonnes of stable gas condensate; its key products
are unstable naphtha, kerosene, Diesel, vacuum gas oil, and long residuum. A mix of stable
condensate and desalted crude oil can be also processed unless the mix’s maximum density exceeds
0.805 g/cm3 . The unit comprises of (Fig. 1) a desalter section (electric dehydrators), crude and
desalted crude preheat trains, evaporator E-200, pre-flash column K-210, atmospheric heater P-210,
main atmospheric column K-220 with two strippings and five pumparound flows, vacuum heater
P-310, and vacuum distillation column K-310 with two pumparounds.

Fig. 1. 1 CDU/VDU-4 flow diagram.

3. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
An APC project is typically implemented in three stages: (a) site survey and draft design,
(b) detailed design, (c) commissioning, acceptance test and trial operation. An additional research
and preparatory stage may be added if: (i) this is the first APC project at the site (thus no available
APC infrastructure), (ii) the benefits look unclear, (iii) process and equipment bottlenecks, that
may affect project implementation and system performance, are probable but cannot be identified
in advance. Such four-stage implementation scheme was chosen by Salavat to decrease the project’s
overall risk:
• Phase 1. Process unit selection for a pilot project, site survey, control strategy development,

and benefit estimation (“pre–audit”);

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

 ADVANCED PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM 359
• Phase 2. Soft sensors development, loop tuning, preliminary step–test, and draft design;
• Phase 3. Main step–test, model identification, detailed design, engineer training, factory
acceptance test;
• Phase 4. APC/DCS integration, operator training, commissioning, acceptance test, trial op-

eration, and post–audit.

The works per each phase are expounded below.
Phase 1—Preparation
The process unit for a pilot APC project was selected by Industrial Automation Development
Center (IADC), a section of Salavat’s IT and Communication Department. IADC experts have:
—examined the APC fundamentals and application experience available from open sources,
—analyzed the flow diagrams of Salavat’s three subdivisions and selected several process units
of interest for APC,
—informed the Company’s management and key specialists about positive APC experience both
in Russia and worldwide, discussed the selected units and collected the suggestions,
—chosen the CDU/VDU-4 unit as the most preferable candidate and justified their choice to
the top management based on all the information collected and discussion results.
The arguments in favor of CDU/VDU-4 were as follows:
—its key role in the refinery’s flow diagram (the bigger CDU/VDU-6 unit commissioned 1.5 years
later was then still under construction);
—the lack of critical process–related issues to hamper APC deployment or limit its potential
benefits;
—the availability of the state–of–the–art DCS (Honeywell Experion PKS), a framework for
APC;
—the readiness of operations personnel to adopt a new control technology.
The APC contractor was chosen by IADC in several steps. At first, several internationally
known APC vendors were invited to present their products, solutions, and experience; the audience
comprised of mid–level operations managers and technical specialists of the Refinery. Based on the
discussions with vendors and the examination of their APC collateral, Honeywell was pointed out as
the most preferable candidate. The key reason for this choice was Honeywell’s extensive experience
of APC implementation and maintenance in Russia along with its largest market share in oil refining
APC. Several Salavat specialists have further visited a major Russian refinery operating several
APC systems implemented by Honeywell’s Russian engineering team. Based on the interviews with
process operators and supervisors, APC engineers, and managers along with APC demonstration
in control rooms, the Salavat guests have confirmed their intention to contract Honeywell.
Their opinion was communicated to and approved by the Company’s top management.
The spec requirements for APC were developed by Refinery’s and IADC’s engineers based on a
template provided by Honeywell. They included the following key targets:
—automatic product quality control to target specifications,
—decreased losses caused by grade changes and external disturbances,
—higher refining benefits due to operation mode and/or product value optimization.
During the contracting period Salavat has summoned up a project team of several specialists
from IADC, operations, and recently established Process Optimization Group with the overall
responsibility conferred on IADC. The team was staffed with reference to Honeywell’s experience
gained in similar projects at other Russian sites.
The site survey was undertaken by Honeywell with Salavat’s project team support. The analysis
of the information gathered through the survey resulted in the following key conclusions:

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

360 FAYRUZOV et al.
• Crude preheat optimization looked unpromising due to significantly nonlinear dynamics, peri-
odical heat carrier redistribution over various streams, and insufficient instrumentation. Therefore,
the APC should focus on unit’s atmospheric (heater P-201, columns K-210 and K-220) and vacuum
(heater P-301 and column K-310) sections.
• The key benefit sources identified were more naphtha, kerosene, Diesel, and vacuum gas oil

(VGO) to be lifted from appropriate heavier atmospheric and vacuum products. Product quality
stabilization could add more.
• Several technical issues were detected which complicated project implementation and prede-

termined the subsequent engineering solutions in many respects. The key one was a wild heavy
naphtha flow added to the naphtha product through a shunt pipe from the atmospheric column’s
top pumparound. This could undermine the validity of the naphtha endpoint model and, hence,
the potential benefit from naphtha draw increase. (Naphtha endpoint is a key constraint limiting
the draw; for lack of a consistent inferential model, the draw cannot be optimized by APC against
the specification.)
• The base–level control underlying the future APC solution required improvement: several loops

had to be reconfigured, some others retuned.

By the end of Phase 1, Honeywell has submitted a report outlining the control strategy, benefit
estimates, and technical requirements stipulating the benefits. Salavat has examined technical
feasibility and expediency of Honeywell’s requirements and recommendations in the light of project’s
expected payback. Company’s acceptance of the report gave start to the next project phase.
Phase 2—Draft Design
Draft design is a key project phase. Its purpose is to determine what a system should do to
meet spec requirements.
The work started with a preliminary step–test (“pre–test”) of the unit. Each process variable to
be included in the APC system as a manipulated variable (MV) underwent a stepwise impact; after
process stabilization (return to steady state), a similar step was made in the opposite direction.
The procedure was repeated for all MVs. The objectives of the pre–test were as follows:
—reveal the interrelations between manipulated and controlled variables, build preliminary pre-
dictive models to be further elaborated after the main step-test;
—for each MV, evaluate the parameters of the forthcoming main step–test such as step size and
TTSS (“time to steady state”);
—dig deeper into base–level controls (BLC), detect poor control performance and any hidden
problems that might pose a risk on APC deployment.
Pre–test results were fixed in a brief report with the status-quo description and recommendations
on BLC improvement. Honeywell’s Control Performance Monitor (CPM) software suite was used
for control performance assessment against standard KPIs and automatic report generation. This
has facilitated the analysis and presented its results in a clear and vivid way. CPM’s TaiJi PID
module was further employed for both off- and on–line loop tuning.
Considerable effort was spent on soft sensors development. All product qualities of CDU/VDU-4
are sampled and measured by Refinery lab three or less times per day, while the closed–loop product
quality control requires the availability of reliable readings at the control rate (typically, once per
minute). The unit had no reliable on–line stream analyzers; even though it had, they could be
hardly helpful in multi–variable closed–loop control due to delayed responses.
A soft sensor is a mathematical relationship between the product quality and one or more process
variables measured directly. Regression analysis is the most typical modeling tool; artificial neuron
networks are also used as well as semi–empirical (“grey–box”) models. Soft sensors are the “eyes”
of an APC system through which it “sees” product qualities and controls them directly without

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

 ADVANCED PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM 361

addressing lab data or stream analyzers, both the latter ones are used only for periodical soft sensor
calibration.
The following soft sensors were developed for CDU/VDU-4.
Atmospheric section:
—K-210 naphtha endpoint (EP),
—K-220 naphtha EP,
—Combined naphtha EP,
—Kerosene initial boiling point (IBP),
—Kerosene EP,
—Kerosene cloud point,
—Light Diesel IBP,
—Light Diesel EP,
—Heavy Diesel IBP,
—Heavy Diesel vaporization up to 360 ◦ C, vol. (%),
—Combined distillate stream (kero+Diesel) IBP,
—Combined stream vaporization up to 360 ◦ C, vol. %,
—Combined stream cloud point,
—K-220 bottoms stream vaporization up to 360 ◦ C, vol. %;
Vacuum section:
—Vacuum Diesel IBP,
—Vacuum Diesel vaporization up to 360 ◦ C, vol. %,
—Vacuum gas oil IBP,
—Vacuum gas oil EP,
—Vacuum gas oil vaporization up to 360 ◦ C, vol. %,
—Kinematic viscosity of long residuum.
Successful development of a Heavy Diesel vaporization model was a crucial point of the whole
APC project; it enabled closed–loop control of this critical quality. Prior to APC commissioning
the operators had to recycle all heavy Diesel back to the feed; the APC system eliminated the need
in this recycle without any risk of combined Diesel stream blackening.
All soft sensors were developed with the help of Honeywell’s Profit Sensor Pro toolkit. For most
of them the weighted least square (WLS) technique ensured admissible approximation accuracy;
however, three Diesel models required more sophisticated partial least square (PLS) techniques.
Phase 2 ended with Draft Design Report submission and approval. The report included the
structures of both multi–variable controllers, i.e., the lists of their manipulated, controlled, and
disturbance variables. The generic control and optimization tasks were detailed. Preliminary
system integration solutions were developed subject to Salavat’s production safety and information
security requirements. In particular, a decision was made to implement APC operator interface on
the basis of Honeywell’s standard Profit Suite Operator Station (PSOS) software supporting the
optimal operators’ APC functionality. This decision minimized the number of additional operator
schematics and thus reduced the overall design and implementation efforts.
Phase 3—Detailed Design
Detailed design phase started with process unit’s step–test. According to the agreed program,
each manipulated variable underwent a series stepwise perturbations. The exercise resembled the
pre-test from Phase 2, but the number of reciprocal steps for each perturbed variable now exceeded
two. The objective was to make as many steps as necessary to obtain clear relationships between

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

362 FAYRUZOV et al.

MVs and CVs based on the process data generated during the test. The step sizes were estimated
based on pretest results. The steps should have been big enough to exceed natural process noise
level but not too big to harm process equipment or deteriorate product quality. Additional product
samples were taken during the step-test to improve soft sensor models. Disturbance variables
(DVs) were also stepped where possible. (Some DVs not under operator’s control, such as ambient
temperature, obviously cannot be tested, the related DV–CV models are then being built based on
historical process data.)
Honeywell’s Profit Design Studio toolkit was further applied: the step-test data were processed,
and predictive models built in the form of linear transfer functions. The whole set of MV–CV and
DV–CV models was arranged in the form of two model matrices (one matrix for each of the two
multi–variable controllers) and incorporated in the APC system. Dynamic simulation was further
undertaken with the help of the embedded simulator to review the whole system’s dynamic behavior.
Typical scenarios were run such as step–wise changes of throughput and product qualities along with
gradual changes of ambient conditions and other modeled process noises. The simulation allowed
to select preliminary controller settings to be further improved during the on–site commissioning.
The simulation was repeated as a factory acceptance test (FAT) in the presence of Salavat’s en-
gineers. This was preceded by an engineer training course conducted by Honeywell. The audience
included process engineers and Process Optimization Group’s specialists who were appointed by
Salavat management to support APC applications. The course comprised key concepts and prin-
ciples of model–based predictive control, featured properties of Honeywell’s APC software (such as
the range control algorithm), APC project methodology including step–test, model identification
and validation, system integration solutions, and controller commissioning. The FAT conducted
just after the engineer training confirmed the system’s adequate response in all tests. Some mi-
nor discrepancies between the demonstrated system dynamics and the expectations of Salavat’s
operations engineers were discussed, carefully analyzed, and eventually eliminated. Finally, the
signed test record sheet confirmed the system’s availability to DCS integration and commissioning.
Phase 3 was completed by the submission of the detailed design report. The document is as im-
portant as the draft design one. Whereas the draft design outlines what the system should do to
meet the spec, the detailed one describes how this will be attained. The document details control
and optimization tasks, provide mathematical expressions for soft sensors, predictive models, and
objective functions, list preliminary controller settings and process variable limits.
The final system structure for CDU/VDU-4 as per the detailed design consisted of the two multi–
variable controllers. The key manipulated variables for the CDU controller (Fig. 2) were column
overhead temperatures, pumparound flows, atmospheric heater outlet temperature, product and
steam flows to strippings, while column overhead pressures were included as auxiliary MVs. For
the VDU controller, pumparound and hot reflux flows as well as some other independent variables
were chosen as key advanced control handles.
The report also included the detailed description of all system integration solutions, in particular,
emergency algorithms (watchdog, emergency switch–off buttons, etc.).
Salavat’s approval of the detailed design report opened up the final project phase.
Phase 4—Commissioning
Profit Suite software was installed on the APC server, which was mounted beforehand and
connected with the Experion PKS server. After all software was installed and configured on the
APC server and operator workstations, a system integration test (SIT) was undertaken to confirm
APC safety and reliability. Special attention was paid to APC emergency algorithms ensuring
PID controllers to shed bumplessly back to their normal modes in case APC is switched off either
by operator or per external event (such as the loss of connection between servers). All system
integration works and SIT were done in combined efforts of Salavat’s and Honeywell’s engineers.

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

 ADVANCED PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM 363

Fig. 2. Key manipulated (MV) and disturbance (DV) variables of the APC system.

In parallel with SIT, operator training was conducted in Company’s Training Center for all
CDU/VDU-4 operator brigades. On the formal approval of SIT and training protocols, the APC
applications were commissioned with subsequent site acceptance test (SAT).
The SAT’s objective was to check how the multi–variable controllers execute control and opti-
mization tasks stated in the spec, further detailed in design documents and polished during the
FAT. All troubles detected were recorded and fixed on–the–fly by means of controller tuning. On
successful SAT completion, the system was formally commissioned to 1.5–month trial operation.
During the course of the trial operation, operators and engineers were improving their advanced
control skills, while Salavat APC support engineers and Honeywell experts organized day–by–day
system monitoring, addressed all troubles not evident during commissioning and SAT, undertook
fine tuning of optimization schemes and collected data for post–audit. By the end of the trial
period, all troubles detected were fixed, and system’s commercial operation was signed off.

4. AFTER THE PROJECT

Post–Audit
Any APC project would complete with a post–audit. Its key objective is to confirm the benefits
attained with APC. The trial operation data (“the APC case”) are compared against the data for
the period prior to APC commissioning (“the base case”), most preferably prior to project start–up.
The selection of “base” and “APC” periods may be not an easy task, because oil refining facili-
ties, especially, crude distillation units, operate under changing conditions such as summer/winter
modes, equipment failures and replacements, a variety of feedstock sources coupled with a wide
range of operation targets. This is fully applicable to CDU/VDU-4 with its frequent throughput
changes and variable feedstock quality (mix of condensates from various fields). Before comparing
the base case and the APC case data, appropriate adjustments were made to compensate for the

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

 364

Fig. 3. K-210 naptha EP stabilization.

FAYRUZOV et al.

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL

Vol. 78
No. 2
Fig. 4. Heavy Diesel recycle decrease.

2017
 ADVANCED PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM 365

above–mentioned differences. Even though, due to the specificity of CDU/VDU-4 operation, both
cases had to be assembled as combinations of small comparable fragments of the baseline and the
trial operation periods; small sample sizes posed an additional challenge to the analysis, which
eventually was successfully surmounted.
The post–audit report was made by Honeywell with Salavat’s participation and included the
following key statements.
Application of APC resulted in:
—Kero+Diesel draw increase by 3 % on the atmospheric column’s feed rate;
—VGO increase by 4.5 % on the vacuum column’s feed rate;
—Stabilization of key product qualities measured in their standard deviation decrease by 53 %
(K-2 naphtha EP as shown in Fig. 3), 10.5 % (kero+Diesel stream EP), and 43 % (VGO vaporiza-
tion up to 350 ◦ C) respectively;
—Heavy VGO recycle minimization by 33 m3 /h (Fig. 4) on average, enabling Heater P-201
energy conservation as well as the better controllability of the atmospheric column under high
loads.
Relatively poor stabilization of kero+Diesel EP shown in the report was caused by frequent
operation target changes along with the impossibility of combined naphtha draw optimization
due to the above–mentioned addition of unmeasured heavy naphtha from the pumparound flow.
Salavat made the decision to mount a flow meter on a heavy naphtha shunt–pipe during the next
turnaround maintenance. This would ensure the incorporation of a valid soft sensor model of the
combined naphtha EP in the APC model matrix.

Project Results
The key results look as follows:
• Soft sensors has demonstrated their reliability in multi–variable closed–loop control.

• The admissible accuracy of kerosene and light Diesel soft sensors enabled the decommissioning

of the corresponding stream analyzers resulting in considerable maintenance and replacement cost
saving.
• APC controls product qualities directly within admissible ranges specified by operators.

• Faster and smoother grade changes (transients) were observed.

• Longer APC operation demonstrated its consistent capability to maximize kero+Diesel and

VGO draws (and combined naphtha as well after appropriate maintenance actions) under minimum
possible energy inputs.
Altogether, APC operation indicated the system’s durability, robustness, and effectiveness in
product quality stabilization, energy conservation, and loss reduction at grade changes. The overall
benefits estimated per trial operation data resulted in six months payback.
Along with the benefits enabling more or less rigorous numerical estimation, more “intangible”
benefits would be typically added, such as:
—Higher operations reliability;
—Decreased atmospheric emissions;
—Stabilization of downstream operations;
—Higher automation level (less process variables requiring permanent operators’ attention and
actions; refer to APC comparison with an autopilot);
—Additional useful information about the process and controls for operators and engineers.
All these factors were noted as applicable to the CDU/VDU-4 unit. The Customer expressed
the intention to spread the positive experience of the engagement with the Customer upon APC

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

366 FAYRUZOV et al.

implementation on other units, in particular, introduced in action in 2012 a large–capacity unit of

crude and vacuum distillation CDU/VDU-6.

Support and Maintenance

An APC system is a sophisticated software product, or rather a toolkit helping operators and
engineers to handle their day–to–day operation tasks more affectively. As such, it needs support
and maintenance including continuous monitoring and other regular activities stipulated in user
manuals. Based on the twenty–five–year world experience of APC operation, the lack of regu-
lar support results in the degradation of APC applications within a couple of years [5], whereas
right support and timely development may entail incremental benefits. Salavat’s top management
had provided favorable feedback to Honeywell’s recommendations on timely Company’s engineers
participation in the training with subsequent involvement in the project. By the end of the trial
operation several engineers of the Process Optimization Group were sufficiently trained and actively
collaborating with Honeywell.
All warranty services were rendered by Honeywell in tight contact with Salavat support engi-
neers who regularly sent data packages to Honeywell’s Moscow office with the descriptions of all
process–related events that might affect explicitly or implicitly the advanced control performance.
Honeywell analyzed the data and provided recommendations on system tuning or model updates,
which were further received and implemented on–site. Gradually, with increasing local expertise,
more support functions were delegated to Salavat, starting with regular soft sensor bias update,
through soft sensor model upgrades, through additional step-testing where necessary with subse-
quent predictive model identification, etc. Thus, a win–win cooperation pattern was established,
which has underlain future annual maintenance contracts made up between Salavat and Honeywell.

Success Factors
Project success was ensured by:
—Attention and support from the top management of the Refinery and the Company (Salavat
Complex);
—Good project preparation and organization by Salavat IADC;
—Salavat operations’ commitment to the project—all project solutions, tests, documents, etc.,
were examined and discussed on time and with due consideration;
—Right choice of APC vendor and technology—by the project startup Honeywell had more than
five-year APC experience in Russia, and Profit Controller was acknowledged among world best
industrial APC platforms (the leading one in oil refining);
—The appointment of APC support engineers by Salavat, their timely training and involvement
in the project.
An APC system is a complex, science–intensive tool capable to address a wide range of industrial
tasks. Within process unit’s lifecycle the tasks may change, and new ones may appear. A well–
supported and maintained system is aligned with real-life operations: all its wide functionalities are
aimed at maximum profitability. However, if APC performance does not follow the changing world,
the timely and effective modernization of the applications should be undertaken. The cooperation
between Salavat and Honeywell has been evolving consistently in this direction.

REFERENCES
1. Tatjevsky, P., Advanced Control of Industrial Processes: Structures and Algorithms, London: Springer,
2010.

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

 ADVANCED PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM 367

2. Zakharkin, M.A. and Kneller, D.V., Applications of Advanced Process Control Techniques, Datch. Sist.,
2010, no. 10.
3. Dozortsev, V.M., Itskovich, E.L., and Kneller, D.V., Advanced Process Control: 10 Years in Russia,
Automat. Promyshl., 2013, no. 1.
4. Logunov, P.L, Shamanin, M.V., et al., Advanced Process Control: From PID Loop through Refinery–
Wide Optimization, Automat. Promyshl., 2015, no. 4.
5. Kern A.G., Summiting with Multivariable Predictive Control, Hydrocarbon Process., 2007, vol. 6,
pp. 63–64.

AUTOMATION AND REMOTE CONTROL Vol. 78 No. 2 2017

View publication stats