Mostly, MPC uses step response models, which provide
future prediction of process outputs. The future prediction
Figure 1 : Process of Distillation Column
is possible if the compositions of both the top and bottom
product streams are controlled to their design values.
Reflux flow is used to control top product temperature
while reboiler is used to control bottom product
temperature. However, changes in reflux also affects
bottom product temperature and component fractions in
the top product stream are also affected by changes in
reboiler. Several loop interactions can therefore occur in
the dual temperature control of distillation columns. If for
some reason, the composition of bottom product stream
changes, then the heat input (Reboiler) will change in an
attempt to maintain the composition at its desired level.
However, changes in reboiler flow will alter the
temperature of the bottom product stream, which will then
affect the temperature of upper side of the column.
Change in reflux will in turn influence bottom product
temperature. It is therefore clear that interaction exists
between the two compositions loops. Unless proper
precautions are taken in terms of control system design,
loop interactions can cause system instability [11].
4 MPC THEORY
MPC is an advanced method of process control. It relies
on dynamic model of the process, most often linear and
empirical models obtained by system identification. The
applied models are determined to depict the behavior of
complex dynamical systems. Hence, the models are used
to predict the behavior of dependent variables (i.e.
outputs) of the modelled dynamical system with respect to
changes in the process (i.e. inputs). The MPC uses the
models and current plant measurement to calculate future
moves in the independent variables that will result in
operation that honors all independent and dependent
variable constraints. The MPC then sends this set
independent variable moves to the corresponding
regulatory controller set points to be implemented in the
process. Model Predictive control offers several
The basis for MPC technology is the Process Model.
is used to compute the predicted error vector as an input
to the MPC controller. MPC controller uses an
incremental model. It means that, at model initialization,
real process input and output values are assigned to the
model. Later on, increments of the inputs are accounted
for and increments of the model outputs are calculated
[8]. The model used for control system design, is the first-
order plus time-delay model or second-order plus time-
delay model,
−θ s
y(s) =
Kp eθ s Kpe
τ ps +1 τ p S+ 1
------------------------ (1)
Where Kp is process gain,θ is dead time,τ p is process
time constant.[11].
6 PROCESS MODELING EQUATIONS
MPC application assumes a linear process model. For
single-input, single-output (SISO) process prediction, the
equations are in the form:
X k = A X k−1 +b ∆u k + f W k ----------------------(2)
y 0=C X k -------------------------- (3)
T
Where X k−1=[ y 0 , y 1 , … y i , … , y p−1 ] is the vector
of process output prediction at a time k – 1, 0, 1, 2, … p –
1 steps ahead. Matrix A is the shift operator defined for a
self-regulating process as
A X k−1=[ y 1 , y 2 , … y i , … , y p−1 ]T -----------
(4)
T
b=[b0 , b1 , ….. , bi , … , b p−1 ] is the vector of p step
response coefficients. ∆ u k =uk −uk−1 is the change in
p m
the process input/controller output. W k = y − y is the
process output measurement minus the model output (the
difference between the process and the model that results
from the noise, unmeasured disturbances, and model
inaccuracy). f is the p dimension filter vector with unity
default values. Matrix C is the operator for selecting the
current model output defined as y 0=C X k +1 [ 8]
7 MPC IMPLEMENTATION ON THE PART
OF DISTILLATION COLUMN
Here bottom product composition is considered for
control. Temperature is the indirect measurement
parameter for the composition [3]. Bottom temperature is
main control variable for the bottom composition. To
manipulate this control variable, used manipulated
variables are Reboiler flow ,Side Stream flow, Reflux
flow and Pressure. Reflux Valve Position and Re-boiler
Valve position are constraint variables. By the following
way MPC has been implemented using DeltaV.

7.1 MODEL IDENTIFICATION

Model plays an important role in Model Predictive
Control (MPC) because it facilitates approximately
correct time response of change in process output
(controlled or constrained variable) for a change in
process input (manipulated variable). Looking at the
difficulties of Distillation Process, model identification
assists in the development of plant model that can
adequately characterize temperature and flow control.
Multivariable model tries to show relationships between
input-output pair that may have prominent association
with each other. By using MPCPro block of DeltaV
Figure 2: PRBS test for Model Identification
variables can be selected. Selected variables are shown in
Table 3
Condition to execute MPCPro algorithm
is that number of controlled and constrained parameters
must be less than or equal to manipulated parameter. [13]
model which will be generated in future. By
Table 1 Controlled Variable Constraint Variable

SP SP Low High Time Upper Side Bottom Side Reboiler Reflux

Variables Temp. Temp. Valve Valve
Low High Limit Limit
Position Position
Bottom Side 11.45 135.81 226.34 96.07 85.47
Controlled 0 300 - -
Temp. 12.00 138.54 231.13 91.01 87.43
Variable
Upper Side Temp. 0 500 - - 12.15 138.66 221.11 100 80.75
Constraint Reboiler Valve 12.30 141.58 235.66 100 80.45
- - 0 95
Position
Variable selecting the AUTO generation button, model is
Reflux Valve
- - 0 95 generated. The validity of the step response can
Position
Manipulate Sidestream flow - - 35 80 be obtained from the background color of the
d Variable Reboiler Flow - - 45 90 individual step response as shown in the Figure
Pressure - - 15 25
Reflux Flow - - 50 90
3. Red colored step response is the most
Disturbanc Reflux significant for the associated Manipulated
- - - -
e Temperature process input.Step test provides Steady State
Process Gain, Time Constant and Dead Time.
After putting all the relevant values for the Controlled, Matrix is obtained in the Transfer Function form
Manipulated, Constraints and Disturbances, launch the as below:
DeltaV PredictPro application for the commission and Bottom side temperature
testing. Parameters required for model generation are
Time to Steady State and Step Size. Here values for above
parameters are 240 sec and 5% respectively. Step testing
offers interaction between process variables during MPC
implementation. DeltaV provides Pseudo Random Binary
[ Reboiler Valve Position
Upper SideTemperature
Reflux Valve Position
=
]
Signal (PRBS) signal to MV for a test to generate 0.19 e−22 s 0.4 e−10 s 0.211e−16 s

[ ]
corresponding CV response. As shown in Figure 2. 0 0
18 s +1 15.2 s +1 16.61 s+1
Table 2 and Table 3 R
0.893 e−2 s

[
gives us corresponding values of Controlled and 0 0 0 0
Constraint variables for change in Manipulated variable. 4.15 s+1 Re
From this we can obtain gain and can verify the Pre
−0.20 e−8 s 0.078 e−20 s
0 0 0 Re
Table 2 19.72 s +1 20.109 s +1 Side
Manipulated Variable 0.98 e−2 s
Time Reflux Reboile Pressur Sidestream
0 0 0 0
r e
4.15 s+1
11.45 57 72 20 70.99
12.00 67 62 17.50 75 Model is verified by choosing the Control and Constraint
12.15 47 82 22.50 65 parameter. The squared error is shown for all Control and
12.30 47 82 22.50 75 Constraint parameters. In addition, for selected
parameters, the calculated and actual values can be
plotted for the original time or for the timeframe selected v a
by the green bar in the overview. y k =∑ ai y k−i+ ∑ bi uk−d −i -------------- (6)
i=1 i=1

Where a, v are autoregressive and moving average

Figure 3: Model overview in DeltaV
8 MODEL VERIFICATION
Alternatively, the FIR response can be used as a guide in
manually editing the step response. FIR identifies pulse
response coefficients, as in below for a SISO process.
equation orders of ARX; a = 4, v = 4 satisfy most
applications;a i , bi are moving average and autoregressive
coefficients of the ARX model; and d is dead time in
scans. As shown in Figure 4, the FIR response provides
valuable information on the process gain and response.
This alternative method essentially involves comparison
of ARX (Auto Regressive model with External input)
with FIR. The squared error is shown for all Control and
Constraint parameters. Here squared error is 0.21. Refer
Figure 5. In addition, for selected parameters, the
calculated and actual value can be plotted for the original
time or for the timeframe selected by the green bar in the
overview. This involves comparison of calculated output
and actual output. This is shown in the Figure 6.

p
∆ y k =∑ hi ∆ uk −i ---------------------- (5)
i=1

where p is prediction horizon, with a typical default value

for MPC model 120; ∆ y k is change in the process
output at the time k; ∆ u k−i is change in the process input
at the time k – i; and hi is the pulse response coefficient of

Figure 5: Performance of Model

Figure 6 : Comparison between actual and predicted value of CV

Figure 4: Comparison between ARX and FIR Response

the model[8]. On other hand ARX has fewer coefficients

which are defined with higher confidence, provided the

process dead times are known.

9 CONTROLLER GENERATION
A dynamic matrix is used for developing an MPC
controller. A dynamic matrix is built from step responses prediction horizon (number of scans); and c is the control
to predict the changes in the process outputs that result horizon (number of scans).
from moves of the manipulated variables over the control
horizon. Dynamic matrix Su as in Equation below,
calculates prediction vector ∆ X k resulting from c future 10 MPC CONTROLLER EQUATION
moves of MV, defined by the vector∆ u (k ).
ΔMV(k) = (SuT Г yT Г ySu + Г uT Г u)-1 SuT Г yT Г y Ep(k)
--------- (8)
∆ X k =¿ Su ∆ u(k).=
Where Su is the p × c process dynamic matrix built from
the step responses of dimension p ×c for a SISO model
b0 0 0 0

[ ][ ]
∆u k and pn × cm for a MIMO model with m manipulated
b1 b0 0 0 inputs and n controlled outputs; and E p ( k ) is the error
∆ uk +1
b2 b1 b0 0 vector over prediction horizon. Presenting MPC control
∆ uk +2 equation in the form
⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ =
⋮
bi bi−1 bi−2 bi−c+1
⋮
⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮ Δ MV ( k )=K mpc E p ( k )----------------(9)
∆u k+c−1
b p−1 b p−2 b p −3 b p−c
Where K mpc =¿(SuT Г yT Г ySu + Г uT Г u)-1 SuT Г yT
∆ y0 Г y

[]
∆ y1
∆ y2
11 RESULTS
⋮
∆ yi 11.1 Comparison of variables between with MPC and
⋮ without MPC (local)
In Local Mode i.e. without MPC, deviation of 5% in
∆ y p−1 steady state value of manipulated variable ( Reboiler
Flow) results in change in most relevant controlled
variable i.e. Bottom Side Temperature from 217.620 F
Once the model is accurate, Controller Generation is the to 218.910 F . This value is noted down. It also deviates
next stage. Condition to execute Controller Generation is other controlled variable, Upper Side Temperature from
number of Controlled and Constrained Parameters must their Set Point (SP) and constraint variable from its steady
be less than or equal to Manipulated Parameter. Penalty state value. During this procedure, other manipulated
on Move (POM) and Penalty on Error (POE) are two variables remained to its original position. Note that,
parameters to adjust the robustness of control and speed constraint variable (Reboiler valve Position) crossed its
of response. By using Controller Setup, parameters are higher limit (95%) i.e. 97.49%.
selected for controller generation. This gives condition
number. Lower condition number gives better control. A. In Local Mode (Without MPC)
Penalty on Move is a parameter that affects robustness.
To make control less aggressive Penalty on Move of that Table 3
parameter increases. The MPC controller minimizes the
squared error of a controlled variable over prediction Manip Controlled Constrai
horizon and the squared error of controller output over ulated Variable nt
control horizon. Variabl Variable
e
Reboiler Botto Upper Reb Ref
2 2 Flow m Side side oile lux
min
∆ MV (k)
{
‖Г y [CV ( k )−R (k )]‖ +‖Г u ∆ MV (k )‖ } Tempe
rature
tempe r Val
0rature 0Val
94.9 ve
95.
----------- (7)
70 KPPH 217.62 127.79
F 2%F 43
0 97.4
0 95.
75 KPPH 218.91 128.77
F 9%F 38
94.9 95.
where CV(k) is the controlled output p-step ahead 70 KPPH 217.64 0127.89
F 0
1%F 42
prediction vector; R(k) is the p-step ahead reference
trajectory (set point) vector; ΔMV(k) is the c-step ahead
incremental control moves vector; Гy is a diagonal Now, noted value of Bottom Side Temperature in local
penalty matrix on the controlled output error; Гu is a mode is given as Set Point of Bottom Side Temperature
diagonal penalty matrix on the control moves; p is the in MPC mode and results are checked. It is rightly
 observed that not only controlled variable tracks set point System. As seen from above results MPC was able to
but also does not affect other CVs (Controlled and handle constraints very effectively as in this case Reflux
Constraint Variable). To track set point, MV Valve Position and Reboiler Valve Position was
(Manipulated Variable) utilization is carried out. As constrained between low limit and high limit.
constraint (Reboiler Valve Position) is reached to its
higher limit, Reboiler flow (MV) didn’t change
significantly (69.90 KPPH to 69.95 KPPH). Instead of ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
that, sidestream is changed from 69.71 BPD to 71.13 We are very thankful to Emerson Export
BPD. Again set point is changed from 218.910 F to Engineering Centre for giving us opportunity. We would
like to thank Mr. Koustubh Palnitkar and Mr. Archis Labhe
217.620 F . Then, Reboiler flow (mv) is changed for technical assistance. We are very grateful to Mr. Sachin
significantly, because now, its related constraint (Reboiler Soman for moral inspiration while carrying out this project.
Valve Position) is in limit. Like this way, Set point tracks
Set point tracks as well as constraints are handled Using
MPC as shown in Figure 7. REFERENCES:
B. In MPC Mode (With MPC)
[ 1] Willian L. Luyben, ‘Process Modelling, Simulation
and Control for Chemical Engineers’, 1990.
Table 4
Controlled Variable Manipulated Variable [ 2] Warren L. McCabe, Julian C. Smith, Peter
S.P. of Bottom Side Reboile Sidestrea Harriott, ‘Unit Operations of Chemical engineering’,
Bottom Side r Valve Reboiler Reflux Mc GRAW-HILL International Editions, Chemical
Temperatur m
Flow Flow
Temperatur e Position flow and Petroleum Engineering Series, Fifth
e 0 0 69.90KPP 76.79 Edition,1993.
217.62 F 217.62 F 94.40%
H
69.71BPD
Bbl/day
69.95KPP 76.90
218.910 F 218.910 F 94.45%
H
71.13 BPD
Bbl/day [ 3] Bѐla G. Lipták, Instrument Engineers’ handbook :
65.11KPP 74.75 Process Control, Third Edition, 1995.
217.620 F 217.620 F 92.48%
H
70.25 BPD
Bbl/day
[ 4] B. Wayne Bequette, ‘Process Control, Modelling
and Simulation’, Prentice Hall of India Pvt.
Ltd.2003.

[ 5] S. Joe Qin, Thomas A. Badgwell, ‘A survey

of industrial model predictive control technology’,
Control Engineering Practice 11 (2003) 733-764.

[ 6] Sudhir Panditrao, Sudhir Agashe, Prashant

Shevgaonkar, ‘Model Predictive Control of Pilot
Spray Dryer Unit Designed and implemented for an
Educational Institute ’.

[ 7] Dale E. Seborg, Thomas. F. Edgar, Duncan A.

Mellichamp, ‘Process Dynamics and
Control’,Second Edition, 2004.

[ 8] W.K. Wojsznis (2005), Model Predictive Control

and Optimization.

[ 9] Tri Chandra S.Wibowo, Nordin Saad, and Mohd

Noh Karsiti, ‘System Identification of an Interacting
Series Process for Real-Time Model Predictive
Control’, 2009 American Control Conference Hyatt
Regency Riverfront, St. Louis, MO, USA June 10-
12, 2009.

Figure7: How better Interactive process is handled by MPC over
PID
12 CONCLUSION
Model generated in MPC is of high accuracy, as it is
rightly confirmed from the methods used in Model
Verification. Further MPC gives better results over PID in
the application of Interactive Multivariable Control
[ 10] Vu Trieu Minh, Wan Mansor Wan
Muhamad, ‘Model Predictive Control of a
Condensate Distillation Column’, International
Journal of Systems Control (Vol. 1-2010/ Iss.1).
[ 11] Saniye Ay and Suleyman Karacan,
‘Decoupling Constrained Model Predictive Control
of Multi-component Packed Distillation Column’,
World Applied Sciences Journal 13, 2011.
[ 12] Yucai Zhu, Rohit Patwardhan, Stephen B.
Wagner, Jun Jhao, ‘Toward a low cost and high
performance MPC: The role of system
identification’, Computers and Chemical
Engineering 51 (2013) 124-135.

[ 13] Books on-line, DeltaV DCS Documentation,

Emerson Process Management, USA.