Cover Story
Modeling
To Optimize
Process Control
In the operations area,
process modeling
can he used to
`sweat the assets'
or increase asset
utilization
Marty Richards, Richard Schmotzer
and Gail E . Pogal
ABB Inc.
n the chemical process industries
CPI : . the drive to improve safety,
around
product quality, product yield, turn-
time and overall profitability
of ` tile " process is relentless . Industrial-
grade computers, with superfast cen-
tral processing units and ever-expand-
ing memory and bandwidths, can be
had at relatively low cost . These hard-
ware advances have been matched by
significant software. developments in
information and production manage-
ment. systems, such as enterprise re-
sources planning (ERP) and manufac-
turing execution systems ( MES).
Typically, ERP is focused on financial
and transactional information . MES
has evolved from its origins as the link
between the process and the enterprise
to take on a larger role in optimization
and decision support for ebusiness .
Equipped with these tools, companies
are further integrating plant informa-
tion to streamline production manage-
ment and boost profitability .
66 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE .COM AUGUST2001
FIGURE 1 . Measurements of process variables are transmitted to the control system,
which determines the required action and signals the information to the actuator
In the operations area, however, sig-
nificant improvements in the prof-
itability of the process can still be real-
ized by increasing asset utilization . or
"sweating the assets ." Process control
technology can be utilized to raise the
effectiveness of the total plant-control
infrastructure, from field devices to
process optimizers. Among the new
technologies being implemented are :
" Fieldbus and intelligent field de-
vices to improve control-system in-
frastructure
" Loop performance monitoring using
statistical models to improve basic
regulatory control
" Process modeling far advanced ap-
plications to improve overall
process performance
An integrated information system be-
gins with intelligent field instruments,
positioners and actuators. Standard
open architectures minimize network
and systern incompatibilities . This en-
ables tight integration of field devices
A control-room operator
typically works off a set of
throughput, yield and quality
targets established by the
production department
and data servers, and reduces the need
for interface equipment or gateways .
The most common fieldbus standards
in rise today are Foundation Fieldbus
and Profibus . Many of the benefits of
information integration can also he ob-
tained with conventional 4-20mA
or
Hart systems.
Managing the control loop
In a typical plant control system,
shown conceptually in Figure 1, the
operator works off of a set. of through-
put., yield and quality targets estab-
lished by the production department .
More closely related to the process op-
eration, specific target values for
process variables, such as individual
pressures, temperatures, flows, and
levels, am based on design and safety
considerations and a history, of opera-
tional experience .
process variables are measured
using instruments and analyzers . Mea-
surement signals are transmitted to
 Production Targets and Constraints

0 Ideal on
U
C control
E

t Optimization
n potential

r
a
0 " Off control - - Poorly
6 toned on
Increased c control
production
Loop Loop or quality
variability , tuned Time

FIGURE 2. Profitability of the process can be improved by FIGURE 3. Poorly maintained control loops can compromise
reducing the variability in process control loops product yield, quality and throughput 1171

the control system, and am used by the
various automatic controllers to deter-
mine lire required actions to keep the
plant at target conditions, Signals rep-
resenting these actions are -sent to
plant actuators such as valves and
motor drives to control the process to
the desired conditions, With modern
digital control systems in most plants,
information from the process and the
control system is visible to the operator
on a human system interface ( I HSI I dis-
play WE . November 199h, pp . s2 941,
In CPI facilities, such as petroleum
refinerles, chemical plants, pulp and
paper mills, mining and metals facil
ities, and food and pharmaceutical
plants, there may he anywhere from
tens to hundreds or thousands of
basic control loops, Inopportunely,
while the operation of the process
control loop can be described simply
enough, there are a number of areas
where less than optimum perfor-
mance can occur, resulting in lower
plant profitability, For example,
process measurements may be sub-
ject to noise, calibration errors, or in-
strument drift, Control valves may
stick, display hysteresis, he subject to
wear, or respond with poor accuracy"
due to improper sizing or lack of a po-
sitioner. Control tuning may he solo-
optimal due to process nonlinearities
or to the process moving outside nor
mat operating ranges,
Properly tuned loops enable plants
to run smoother and more safely, A
fully functional and tuned regulatory
control system is the foundation for
an y" advanced control application. Un-
less the basic regulatory control sys-
tem is operating at its best, the bene-
fits of advanced control are likely to be
compromised, Bv reducing the vari-
ability in the regulatory process con-
trol loops, as shown in Figure 2. ad-
vanced controls can then be used to
push the process toward more prof-
itable operating conditions without vi-
olating any plant. constraints . Yet
studies show that many" plants have a
number of poorly performing loops -
and some plants have up to a third or
more of their loops on manual control'
Ideally, trained staff of the plant in-
strurnentation and control (I&C)
group maintains the performance of a
process control loop, This group should
check control loop performance on a
regular basis and have analysis tools
on hand to facilitate work, The follow-
ing act ributes are key to the success of
the I&C group [1]:
Training: Qualified members of the
I&C group should have froth formal
training and field experience. The ex-
tent of training should be based on job
requirements. Some universities and
automation suppliers provide formal
training, Typictolly, automation suppli-
ers offer courses :r. lair! of their train-
ing curriculum for prices
., control
Regular performance checks : The
tuning for ;ill (-one rol loops should be
checked nn it regular oasis Follow-
ing any process changes to piping,
instrument or actuator location,
trained personnel should review con-
trol loop performance, Changes in
process operating conditions, such as
a significant change in feedstock
quality or quantity or a change in
product grade, will also require a re-
view of affected control loops. If no
process changes have occurred, then
a rule of thumb is to check basic
loops such as flow, pressure and tem-
perature everv six months, Loops
that include special measurement
equipment, such as stack gas analyz-
ers. pH meters or gas chro-
matographs, should be checked more
frequently, Both loop-tuning para-
meters and analvzer calibrations
should be checked k,, according to man-
I it
Proper
ufacturers' loop tuning : 's1 When
recommendations checking
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE .COM AUGUST 2001
control loop performance, how does one
know if a loop is correctly tuned" The
quickest method is to observe a trend
plot of the controlled variable typically
flow, pressure, temperature ) versus de-
sired setpoint, If the controlled vari-
able is not. a t its target . or if oscillations
appear in the trend, then the loop tun-
ing needs to he adjusted . Worse, if the
amplitude of the loop increases, then
the loop should temporarily be put in
manual control, as the tuning is caus-
ing an unstable condition .
There are standard manual and
computer-based timing techniques
available that. can be used to determine
how well a control loop is tuned. Man y
companies now use computer-based
tools, because then are usually more
precise than traditional tuning-mile
methods, such as Zirgler-Nichols A
good computer-based control tuning
package should be capable of simulat-
ing the Imp and providing
recom-mended tuning parameters based on
the control algorithm and the tuning
criteria The ability" to
specified. simu-late the Impwil help confirm that the
new tuning parameters will provide ac-
ceptable loop performance,
Clearly there are benefits from tun-
ing up and maintaining the basic
process control loops in a plant, In ad-
dition .
studies[2] have shown Ihat ad-vanced control can lava processindus-tries 2- 6% 111 annual operating cost-:,
Using statistical tools
Micro n control I+lop is first commis-sioned.itsperformance is usually
very good . Over time, however, per-
formance tends to degrade for rea-
sons already noted. Figure 3 shows
the typical progression of control
loop performance.
'there's no doubt that loop timing
improves operations . Yet., how often is
n done? As previously noted, loop per-
formance ideally" would he managed
67
 On control

Off control

Y, (t) +~ GUltl G
u
r * controller -- k process
5etpoint
z " ai .rl
FIGURE 4. Standard deviation provides a benchmark for FIGURE 5. In a control loop, the controller tracks the setpoint
controller performance for each variable

by the trained staff of the I&C group, trail, related to each device, and as- models for the controller, plant and dis-
In some cases, a member of the plant. sist in documenting information rele- turbances leg, measurement noise and
I&C staff actually has the time to reg- vant to individual devices such :i . cal- or either other disturbances, respec-
ularly consider control loop perlor ibration data, tively . In a well-performing controller,
mance . Occasionally, a control special- Such tools allow the stove from cor- the controlled variable should track the
ist is assigned from elsewhere within rective maintenance Unexpected re- setpoint and the deviation between the
the company, or one is brought in from pairs V through preventive maintenance two should be minimal - ideally con-
a vendor to manage loop performance, ;elapsed-lime-scheduled repairs, to sisting of only " small random noise,
Too often, however, loop mainte- predictive maintenance based upon re- However, process dynamics are charac-
nance goes undone, and operators altime device assessments, Smart de- terized by some amount of dead time,
must compensate far any control loop vices and predictive maintenance poli- -Noting that controller action can take
deficiencies, In the meantime, produc- cies have proven cost saving-. . place no sooner than the process dead
tion suffers due to reduced quality, Automated technology for time, a minimum variance controller is
yield or throughput, An automated ap- monitor-ing control lo p performance is being defined simply as that which restores
proach to this problem is warranted . used successfully in industrial envi- control as soon as possible once the
With the availability of historical ronments . The theoretical basis for dead time has elapsed . That is, it mini-
and realtime plant data, statistical and many of the benclunarks used for loop mizes the variance of the output,
other computational modeling tech- monitoring comes from statistical Using the benchmark that a mini-
niques are being used increasingly to models. Relatively simple statistics mum variance controller is best, then
track performance of a plant:: asset-c . such as on-slream time and the stan- the ratio of the output variance or.-, of
For example, spectral analysis has dard deviation, ~t, of the controlled a minimum variance controller to the
been used for a number of years to de- variable about its setpoint provide in- output variance it -, of the actual con-
tect . vibration in rotating equipment, dicators of control loop performance . troller can be used to define a loop
The use of statistical process control It. may seem too obvious to state, quality index (LQI) 131, Defining a as
tools is well known as a key component but a control loop must be on ,auto- the mean deviation of i from v, to ac-
for maintaining production quality lev- matic operation) to have any positive count for steady offsets from zero then :
els in a number of process operations . effect on process performance, Sur
This combination of plant data and prisingly, during a plant ,survey of d r
LQI- 1-d'-r,
:'~
- .1

analysis tools has evolved into asset control loops, toe finds that many
optimization or asset management mops have been turned off (replaced
programs . The objective of these pro- by manual operation, for one reason This index, defined by Harris and
grams is to optimize overall equipment or another, and have never been Desborough, is used by" a number of
effectiveness by focusing on turned back on, For loops that are on, industrial and commercial control-
maximiz-ingasset availability while minimiz- the standard deviation provides an in- loop per] formance monitors 1.51 An im-
ing operating and maintenance costs dication of performance, Often, two portant aspect of the index is that it
over the life of the asset, sigma is the metric for loop perfor- provides numerical bounds for con-
How can this approach be used to mance. The smaller the standard de- troller performance benchmarking,
improve the performance of the hun- viation the better the control, a .. illus- The lower bound for the mdex is zero,
dreds of control loop "assets" in a trated in the histogram in Figure 4 . When LQI = 0, the controller is indi-
plant" Asset optimization exploits the In recent Years, there has been con cating good performance_ If the LQI is
information available from intelligent . siderable development beyond these near zern, yet the output variance is
devices, Profibus and Foundation and other simple loop-performance unacceptable, changes such as process
Fieldbus digital protocols. a s well as metrics, Automated assessment of con- modifications or new control design
analog protocols such as Hart, sup- trol loop performance uses the concept will be necessary to improve perfor-mance, The upperbound is LQI = l.
port digital status signals, called of minimum variant-(- control 13, 41 .
maintenance triggers . These Consider, for example, Figure 5, the When LQI is not zero, there may be
numeri-cal or computedvariablesair inter- block diagram representation of the opportunities to reduce output vari-
preted to trigger a maintenance re- control loop from Figure l, Here, v, rep- ance using the existing controller do-
quest ant] initiate a work order in a resents the setpoint . F repre ents the sign by improving the loop tuning or
Computer Managed Maintenance loop output or controlled variable, u is the control valve performance,
System (CMMS) Software can also the control signal, and u, is white noise, LQI is relatively" simple to imple-
manage work orders, provide audit (: G;, and C ;, represent. mathematical ment and to use, since only normal op-

68 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE .COM AUGUST 2001

 Asset optimization workplace
on office machines, or
in remote locations

crating; data is required tween wholly true and wholly

along with a fairly accurate false, For example, a tempera-
estimate of the loop dead ture input could be rated too
Condition
time. It can be a useful monitoring hot, hot ., normal, cold, too cold,
means for tracking con- system with a weighting reflecting
troller performance over how much of each its current
time, However, there are value represents . Variables are
limitations to using this combined into sets with rules
index, depending on the of the form : If x or y. or both,
control problem being ana- then e . Each rule will be acti-
lyzed and the performance vated to an extent dependent
objectives desired, A nun- on the level of the ,r and v vari-
her of other modified met- ables, and the z's are then com-
rics have been proposed, bined according to the activa-
Further discussion of this tion level to give an output .
FIGURE 6 . Automatic The technical difficulty with
and related topics can be maintenance programs
found 16, 7, 8, 91, Process control system fuzzy logic is rite development
help staff prioritize work and its validitv
A good, automated loop of the rule set.
monitoring and assessment testing, This is very difficult
package consists of several statistical depth understanding of the. funda- with large rule sets, A familiar exam-
tools, including those described inentals of the process design, opera- ple of fuzzy logic use is an automobile's
above . Careful application of these tional procedures and operational phi- cruise control system . Industrially,
tools can improve control loop perfor- losophy . Capturing this information fuzzy logic is used in some self-tuning
mance and result in significant provides a basis for improvement, PID controllers and has been very ef-
process improvement . . With modern The "container" for this technical fective in controlling cement kilns,
communications technology, loop per- knowhow is a process model, A model, Fuzzy logic implementations require
formance management can be deliv- as discussed here, implies both the applications expertise but do not re-
ered onsite in the plant, as well as re- knowledge and the processing of the quire training in the process
motely, using Web technology . knowledge to derive results . With a Transfer function models : Model
With modern process-control sys- process model, it is possible to further predictive multivariable controllers use
tems enabling automatic mainte- improve plant performance by imple- transfer function models to reflect
nance triggers connected to colnput- menting advanced multivariable con- process dynamics . Input variables are
erized-maintenance management trol, process optimization . fault diag- perturbed while output variables are
systems, I&C personnel can now nosis . alarm management, and recorded . This enables the determina-
fixes on problems as they occur, as similar measures . tion of relationships between all the in-
shown in Figure 6, Not only does this Process models may be based upon puts and outputs . The disadvantage is
minimize degradation of product neural networks, fuzzy logic, transfer the effect on the process of the pertur-
quality or yield, but it. maintains a functions, or a rigormis first . principles bations, whether introduced or existing
solid foundation for the application of methodology . Definitions of each First principles models : Equation-
advanced control and optimization . model methodology follow, based, first principles models enable
Neural networks : Simulating brain rigorous modeling of real processes
Process modeling neurons, neural networks train, or through dynamic simulation and opti-
The "optimized" regulatory control learn, from accumulated historical op- inization . Processes are described using
system discussed above is fine, as far erations data, The training results in fundamental physical, chemical and
as it goes, How is it possible to go fur- a model that mathematically reflects thermodynamic relationships and im-
ther'' Even with a well-maintained the data that were used for the train- posed task sequences, The solver ana-
control system, process loops are still ing. Commercially available products lyzes the relationships governing the
subject to variation due to signal make use of such networks to analyze process and can provide steady-stale
noise, controller taming, and so forth, historical data, providing insights into simulation or optimization or parame-
In addition, loop interactions can process dependencies, critical process ter estimation, Unlike neural nets, first
cause problems . This variation results quality variables, etc, and are even principles models do not. require 'train-
in sub-optimal process performance, used to implement multivariable con- int ' on a process and are reusable at
because operators must. avoid safety trol . A potential shortcoming of a several stages during the process
and quality constraints by a reason- neural network model is that it is only lifecy-cle. Con on uses of irst principles
able margin, and the margin is based valid within the domain of the data models include equipment performance
on the process variability . that was used to train it monitoring, leak detection, custody
Familiarity with the constraints Fuzzy logic : An extension of Boolean transfer and yield accounting,
and margins for variability is gained logic, which handles the concept . of par- In the past, practical development of
from operations experience and an in- I
tial truth, fuzzy logic is in the realm be- models was easier said than done_ It .

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM AUGUST 2001 69

could he costly and difficult to jus- Model development and up-
tify . However, these barriers are keep can be eased through uti-
now being reduced arid removed . lization of a graphical model
builder to generate process
Rigorous dynamic models topology . A library of predefined
Advanced technology for suit. models . including classic unit op-
ware, hardware and theory has erations and common equipment
increased the usage of solutions- types, provides additional sim-
based models . Despite reduced plification . Model generation is
costs arid simplified user in :( r then reduced to parameteriza-
faces, however. the adoption t ion of a process diagram-
model solutions is not as wide-spread as it should he.A furtherr Model libraries can be parti-
tioned and distributed based on
step toward reducing the application specifics . For exam-
overallcost of model development is ple, pharmaceutical processors
use the model for many applica might have particular interest in
tions . when a model can be used batch-related models, whereas
for multiple purposes, its develop
: pulp-anti-paper makers with di-
ment cost, is easier to justify . For _=esters and their non-Newtonian
example, a rigorous dynamic contents-attract attention .
model of the process could he used Although less obvious, rigor-
for different types of applications . ous dynamic models also sim-

Online : plify d maintenance- What's s more,

" Inferential calculations for ad- the need to account . for inaccura-
vanced control schemes. Be- due to linearization of a
sides good basic control, before Process plants may have anywhere boon tens to thou- nonlinear model and inappropri-
adding advanced control arid sands of basic control loops ate elimination of troublesome,
optimization, it is essential to apparently irrelevant transient
make sure the proper measure- The major attribute required of a behavior from the model .
ments are. available "universal" model is robustness . A Overcoming both the lack of neces-
" To conjunction with model predic- model designed for many purposes sary data and errors in the data avail-
tive control (MPC) to generate non- must . b e able to operate over a wide do- able is possible with an application of
linear control main and handle process nonlinearities model-based technology . Data recon-
" Closed-loop optimization, dynamic and discontinuities . Model-centric ciliation, using some of the latest
or steady state, depending on the tech-nologies must conquerchal engesthat solver technology, can reveal not only
process fragile models cant . handle . Specifi- the error in process measurements,
At line : cally, the technology must surmount: but can estimate unmeasured para-
" Process performance monitoring " Dependence on sensor outputs that meters . These value.., can be used to
" Advisory optimization are not. always available improve the quality of the model be-
Offline: " Inaccurate measurements fore it is applied to the task of im-
" Debottlenecking studies, control " Inability to handle_ dynamics proving process performance, through
studies, decision support arid other " Maintenance difficulties either multivariable control or opti-
'what if' analyses Meeting these- challenges has driven mization . or both . The resultant "ac-
Model use in design and simulation is the development of model-centric curate" process model also means
increasingly common . Online applica- technologies arid defined the neces- that . optimization is more likely to re-
tions are less common . They are most sary software functionality from a flect the true process optimum- rather
often found on high volume or valuable user's perspective . than always push the process up
materials processes where the return As with common office-database against a constraint, a problem with
on the investment in model develop- applications, the model-centric ap- linearized models .
ment is mast rapid . proach relies on many applications
Training simulators arid realtitne utilizing the knowledge contained in Model predictive controllers
optimization are the usual applica- a single repository-in this case, tire As an example of the application of a
tions . However, there are clearly many model itself For instance, multiuse model to a particular
more processes that could benefit from multivaria-ble control, optimization,arid alarm methodology, model predictive control
model-based applications . management can all utilize a com- (MPC) has been studied . MPC is the
lmplemen-tation rates for these applications are mon model . This reuse reduces engi- most. popular of the multivariable con-
increasing as modeling packages that. neering costs to tire point where it be- troller techniques in use today . It was
are less costly and easier to use become comes economically feasible for many developed in industry with an eye to-
commercially available . more potential users . ward the problems, knowledge, and

70 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM AUGUST 2001

 Process model as an MPC model generator Use of a model with MPC
for nonlinear process control
Setpoint Disturbances

Process Simulator Linear

Parameter estimator model Model transformer
Out variable
Model validation
Process Change detector -1
MPC MPC tuner
Linear model generator

Model
Model Current
Measurements tuning settings
Process
Estimator
model
. -
Measurements
MPC
Process MPC 1 eng. tool

FIGURE 7. Model predictive control (MPC) allows a controller FIGURES. With a processmodel, MPC is mom efficientfornonlinear
to be modeled and refined before it applied to the actual process process control becausethe controller canbe adaptedin realtime

skill: available, and it has been ap-
plied successfully in the CPI 1101 .
Some of the more challenging issues
surrounding NIPC include configura-
tion, tuning and nonlinear applica-
tion .For configuration, a standard
controller requires process informa-
tion that is generated typically by
making small perturbations to process
variables. Sometimes, process infor-
mation from existing variations is
used to minimize the need to Perturb
the proces . Product quality is under-
turned when perturbations use is un-
avoidable- This provides a transfer
function model as described above . A
rigorous model call eliminate the need
to do this by providing a basis for de-
termining a controller model offline,
and then, through simulation, allow
for controller refinement before it is
applied to the. real process.
Applying a suitable process model
to the process improves MPC and
takes it a step further. With this ap-
proach, one can configure, tune, and
:study prospective control strategies
without perturbing the process. Fur-
thermore, reduced implementation
time and, as a result, improved control
make this approach very attractive, as
shown in Figure 7.
The model approach has particular
power in the case of nonlinear
processes. Classically, the
method to invoke nonlinear NIPC is to
Return on asset investments their instrumentation and control sys-
Process operations are asset intensive, tems . Using the latest model-based
and profit margins are often slim . technologies, these processors can im-
Small deviations from optimal process plement advanced control schemes,
and maintenance operations are costly operate closer to constraints safely
as the "economies of
scale" peak at a turn around faster and perform "what.
certain point and turn around to work if simulations. These process ad-
against the profitability goal . vances contribute directly to the oper-
Market leaders on every sector of ating company's bottom line,
the CPI can do more than manage Edited in Deborah Hairston
References Authors
1 Adler I u ,[l1q . //que stion 1 paperloop .com 1 rty Richard Lu l :, .
;"t' , I d. l I I :,- :3 ub-
"
2 Marlin, 'T E., Perkins, .1 . D. . Barton, G. \4 . ,tinns tl :U:[nn'rrtior.
and Brink, \I . 7--. Benefits room process con- 1t.lef,'j t`rodudr Iii":. oh
trol R ult et a court indu stry university L lac e Lt a \1 'Ti, ., C:,
Control, Vol 1. pp .
57 -83. 1991 1.3 L173 -7140:
716- '13, Emaf ;
3. Astrom h Into duct ion to Stochastic Control [ rich r Cu . nblrconl~.
Theory Academie Press l, New York, 1470 .
L "I~~,ru1 . mark,"-ine :md re
t Morris . T I \' m n[ -t Omitted loop per :r. wt .I,c:eitic:rtion Ii,r
formance t Journal of C. " mical
d ian
1,I , :I puntizat, Iriltn :nioi,ic
Erg 6., pp. 856-861. cr .1 I It :, -n Ill nul .1111 n u" . I ,I I n :Il r:cn :,-
c: o msn :,I;c'rsnl lo,a,nrd: Kt, r...,-d in :tppli
5. Harris T. ante
. Desborough h, L . Perf . rmance
c .u n I l:l t , I c, t l,a sl. par: in
assessment measures t r univariate . feed-back h. . t, . Ill: A1311 H, h,l I' a h,l) ir6
Eng., 70, pl, . 11,6-1197. .1 ,u1.t1 rnl;tIauinq Ill III till I'nivcrsity of
r tL. .1 .R,I-: . .1v L:,1:u,ll
6. Harris, T, .l nndSrppr. :,, .(' T. . hcc."n[devel- Rn,hnrt7 E. (Rick. sdunotwr
cpnv,nl it controller performance monitor ti alni,al spcci:dtat in the
ing :n ( assessment t . I . techniques Chemical ' .lobo 1 tl ,. :Ir.1_v Pr-l
Process Control \°I . 'III I" _*Q, , r" Ihv .,f .4RR Inc. II'hene-
\riz uI , : .tn t ts' .4ass5-
. F." n:uf. n l, .vrd ahmelu"r
7. 1 Hugo A Pr,ws,. : o: :, I 11 p, aar - :ut,e :rs- a~t.,r, r', Ire ,em ,Lv
ses" nr nl . Heir,l :,r 7 " r April : . .1 = :: .1 ii-Ipa :rnt f,,r thr,
2001, .,p s5-90 - .v .19 onNn'nn:aI of ABB'a
d -ins,"" d aatonotion sn-
8. Qin, 4. .1 ., Control performance monitoring latd.ns. Pt:er to - non¢ ARP,
a revise' and assessment Computers and ~:Iun cc':,er ,a .r7:od R.r RP,
Chemical Engineering 2:i .:21 . pp . 173-156, ,'here rte held n numb- of IuWlt`w.n8 in
process,
1998.
. ., . . .sing :uid de,sloptnont III also
ea.rk for 91,e71 Ilevelopman[ Co . . to honest) .,
Ell Kozub 11 J \I t:u oty and diavm , of ss r It t "It!, 6 1 lu. .
simplest eh.. . . . . ... . 1 116 s .,,1, '601 automated pr c".sv s nu I pr :mot , I? I1, ;, Ph 11 111
control lb local t4u Control l, 1996, R,,",
I . : l ester L'ntrer-
1

Lake 1 h-, Nev

" ~I :,n 1~IF t 1 L :ol-~ ".em \. ulloce Coliq ;e.
have several controller settings, each
10 . Qin . S 7 r 1 Badgwell II T, it of tut E. Pogal I, marketing
applicable to a small linearized domain industrial model predictive control t .dtnui . r I .t 111,1111 opthnizs-
of the process. Switching between t' 16
"
' rn 1 [ ('f rr icsl 1'rarn"s r ,ntrol i : .u Li ".h :, . Aaunnatian'Rch-
\~-lau . I .,. F196, 'Ioll,, f .nine free+.,dint ; :' 1 ": P1 d~rt ". Dive [,f ARR
these settings gives a measure of con- published s 1tChE ntp ,urn S.-r,,, 316, .. i Hume . ' 16- 7(Ct):
,A 93. pp . . 1 - .i(i IACH ,nd At( hE . 'iI1
. 213 014,Email+ 7t
trol . Now, the availability of a process Il lnuwraG :uzahh.eoml . she
model makes use of tins technique 1h Pantehd r. t. l: .1 R 1 . H L, Mullipu-r- pons761 br the nuvket-
pose prx. . . n ,1419 e, u C esuneuu ;. 1'r'..e ' pass .-Jtinln11 ln n
more efficient. By observation of the Cant . n E.unl .d,n+ t t t .Nuled ,nfnr,rtl` Ivnml re nlh.,
state of the process, use of the model to Proca D 6En 11,11UtLfoi,h<.,  9 ., 7,1. . 1 u cs K al as
125-111,1,35 .
linearize around this point and adapt huho
l 'era . ?,non? pe. ::F
1 1. SLV,, K- - n U. . Sing . I,o', control o,ll 1, 11011r to till AlChEE he :d-.+ ~ n she11rlds
the controller in real lame, better con- :\BB Indu :tu l Spsh,n. T1vlanenl Training B S r hE . old MBA till t*n,,r,,,It,
trol is possible, as shown in Figure N. Cenler,lb96 . of lierh.ador.

CHEMI CALENGINEERING WWW.CHE.COM AUGUST 2001 71