FACULTY OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Pasir Gudang

Jalan Purnama, Bandar Seri Alam,
81750 Masai, Johor Darul Takzim
Tel : +607-3818000

DATA PRESENTATION: PROCESS CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION CHE233

Lab Title: Level Flow Process Control Training System

Mark :
Course:
Date :
Participant Course : CHE 239 Semester : 4 Group: 1
*Please cancel which is
No. Name Matrix No. Signature
not necessary.
1 MUHAMMAD HAFIZ BIN MANSOR 2021205954
MUHAMMAD HAFIZ BIN SHAMSUL
2 2021472846
ANUAR
MUHAMMAD HARITH WAFIQ BIN
3 2021450102
MAHAT
4. NURUL IZZAH BINTI MD ZAIN 2021625294

Instructor 1. NORHAFINI BINTI HAMBALI

2.
Introductio
n/
Theory and OBJECTIVE
Objective
1. To study the principle of process control
2. To observe how PI flow control operate
3. To observe how the loop response to disturbance

INTRODUCTION

Level flow process control system forms a control system with combination of level controller
and flow controller. These controllers are used in feedback loop control system to compare the
actual and desired output. The various parameters in the controller compares the error and
modifies the set point and process variable output each time in the loop to get the desired
response.

The level controller have the level sensor which depicts the change in the height of water in the
tank. If the height is more than set point then valve is closed. If height is less than set point valve
opens. In this way, level of water in the tank is controlled.

The flow controller measures the fluid flow and the rate at which flow occurs is measured. In this
the set point is adjusted with the aid of level control loop. It has three modes of control namely
cascade, auto and manual.

THEORY

Since it is the most flexible and straightforward approach, the proportional integral and
derivative (PID) controlled method was used in this experiment. Additionally, it offers
the best regulated parameter performance, such as easy parameter adjustment when an
integrated controller produces zero steady state. Quick responses are produced by terror
and derivative controller [6]. An extensive feedback controller known as a proportional
integral and derivative (PID) controller is frequently utilised in industrial control
systems. The Proportional Integral and Derivative (PID) controller, which has three
components and functions as a compensator in the feedback control system, determines
the output with the following characteristics:

i. Proportional (P) action modifies the controller output based on the magnitude of the
current mistake.

ii. The steady state offset, which is the past mistake, was erased by integral(I) action.

iii. Derivative (D) action, which is the prediction of future mistake, foresees the future
error.
By combining the three elements which are proportional, integral and derivative, the
equations that describes its action is as below where Kp is the proportionality constant,
Ki is the integral constant, and Kd is the derivative constant.

The above equation also can be written as below where Ti is the integral time and Td is
the derivative time.
Data
Presentatio FIGURE 1: Graph result for derivative time (𝑻𝒅) of 0 second
n (graph or
tables)
FIGURE 2: Graph result for derivative time (𝑻𝒅) of 9 second
FIGURE 3 : Graph result for derivative time (𝑻𝒅) of 9 second
FIGURE 4 : Graph result for derivative time (𝑻𝒅) of 9 second
Analysis of
Data:
For level control, the results also showed an abrupt spike or kick that occurred
during the load changed. But the load changed was implemented by opening
the hand valve, HV620 for 20 seconds and the valves was closed partially. Like
flow control, the process variable (PV) line was stabilized using PID controller,
LIC-603. Then, the setpoint (SP) was changed from 500 mmH2O to 600
mmH2O where a sudden rise of setpoint (SP) line followed by process variable
(PV) line was observed. From these figures, every value of derivative time (𝑇𝑑)
showed different time taken to stabilize the process variable (PV) after the load
change. Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5 showed that they
almost have the same time taken which is around 6 to 9 seconds to stabilize the
process variable (PV) line while Figure 10 showed that it took more than 3
minutes to stabilize the process variable (PV) line. Besides, Figure 10 also
displayed greater number of oscillations which is more than 1 oscillation
compared to other figures. During the changed of setpoint (SP) value, Figure 5
and Figure 10 took the longest time which is more than 10 minutes for the
process variable (PV) line to reach the setpoint (SP) line. But Figure 10 showed
that the process variable (PV) line was not able to each the setpoint (SP) line
after several time. This is due to constant error where it caused the derivative
action to remain the same. Nevertheless, Figure 8 showed the shortest time
taken which is around 7 to 8 minutes for the process variable (PV) line to reach
the setpoint (SP) line after a setpoint (SP) changed from 500 mmH2O to 750
mmH2O.
Conclusion