CONTROL SYSTEMS

Case History 188

Process gain – an important dynamic.
Michael Brown is a specialist in control loop optimisation, with many years of experience in process
control instrumentation. His main activities are consulting and teaching practical control loop
analysis and optimisation. He now presents courses and performs optimisation over the internet.
His work has taken him to plants all over South Africa and also to other countries. He can be
contacted at: Michael Brown Control Engineering CC, +27 82 440 7790, michael.brown@mweb.co.za,
www.controlloop.co.za

When analysing a control loop, one of the
important things that one must do is to
determine the dynamics of the process. Process
dynamics can be loosely defined as various
types of mathematical components that may
be present in the response of a process to a
change in the input. Industrial type processes
may include one or more of the following
dynamics: process gain, dead time, first and
also higher order lags, multiple lags, and
positive and negative leads.
Apart from gaining valuable information
about the components in the control loop, it is
essential to identify and possibly quantify these
dynamic components in order to be able to
tune the controller scientifically. In passing, it
should be mentioned that the various dynamic
components generally affect self-regulating
processes differently from the way they do to
integrating processes. This can make tuning of
processes of complex dynamics very difficult,
and it really becomes necessary for one to
employ a good tuning package for these.
Fortunately however, approximately 75 to 85%
of all processes encountered in normal industrial
process plants can be treated as having only two
or more of the first three dynamics mentioned
above, namely process gain, dead time, and
a first order lag. These processes are relatively
simple and in general if they can be identified
properly, they can be tuned without the need
for such a tuning package.
Ziegler and Nichols quickly realised in the
1930s that the ultimate method of tuning using
dynamic operational testing which oscillates
the process sinusoidally over a wide range
of frequencies was not practical or feasible
on industrial processes. They then pioneered
research to establish other alternative methods
for tuning. Although one of their methods was
to use a limited cycle on the loop, and which
works well on ideal loops, their other methods
all involved making a mathematical model
of the process by recording the response of
the process to a step change on the input.
One then graphically tries to determine the
values of the two or three dynamics, and then
plug the values into a formula to establish the
tuning parameters. This is called ‘model based
tuning’ and has not proved very successful,
even though many other people have also
come up with a variety of formulae. It works
occasionally, but not often, and seldom gives
really good tuning. However it can be adapted
to serve with a certain amount of trial and error
testing if you really understand what you are
doing.
In this article we are going to discuss the
process gain of a self-regulating process. Figure
1 shows how the PG (process gain) is measured
for the response on a simple self-regulating
process like a flow process. It is the ratio of the
change in the PV (process variable) that results
from a change in the PD (controller output).
Note that it is best done by making a step
change on the PD with the controller in manual.
The ideal value of PG is unity, as you are
then making use of the full ranges of both the
Figure 1.
valve and the measurement. As a general rule,
on a flow loop the PG is considered reasonable
if it lies between 0,5 and 2. Problems can
result if it is outside that range as described
below. The value of the PG when measuring it
on flow loops in particular can give valuable
information as to whether the valve is
oversized or if the transmitter span is
too wide.
Oversized valves (PG>1) can cause two
problems:
1. All valve problems are effectively multiplied
by the PG value so that in closed loop
control the control variance will be made
worse by that value, and any cycling
will cause the PV’s amplitude to be
correspondingly that much bigger than the
PD’s amplitude. For example if you have
a stick-slip cycle occurring with the valve
cycling over a range of say 2%, and the valve
is four times oversized, then the amplitude
of the cycle on the PV will be 8%.
2. Many fast self-regulating processes like
fast flow loops are tuned with a very small
proportional gain, and an extremely fast

16 July 2023 www.instrumentation.co.za


Figure 2.
integral. For some unknown reason, some
makes of controllers (even some very well
known ones) have a very limited low end
proportional gain setting. Typically, very
commonly, it is limited to 0,1 (or 1,000%
proportional band). I have even come across
one make of PLC where the lowest value you
can insert is 0,25. In many cases on these
fast loops, and if the valve is oversized, then
these controllers will not allow you to insert
a small enough gain to prevent instability.
Figure 3.
To overcome this, one needs to increase the
integral value, usually quite substantially.
This adversely affects pole cancellation
tuning, and can drastically slow down the
tuning.
Transmitters with too wide a span (PG<1)
also can cause two problems:
1. The accuracy and quality of the
measurement can be badly affected. This is
because you will always be working lower
CONTROL SYSTEMS
down on the measurement scale. Nearly
all transmitters have a limited rangeability,
with very few being able to give accurate
or even valid measurements near the
bottom of their range. (Also be aware that
many types of transmitters have accuracies
specified in terms of ‘% of full scale’, instead
of ‘% of reading. This means that these
transmitters are less accurate as you move
down the scale.)
Continued on page 18
www.instrumentation.co.za July 2023 17
 CONTROL SYSTEMS

Continued from page 17
2. The PG is now small and must be less than
unity. As the control speed of response to
SP (setpoint) changes when in automatic
is largely dependent on the product of
PG (process gain) and Kp (controller gain)
i.e. PG x Kp = Response, it means that as
PG gets smaller you will have to put in a
proportionally bigger Kp to get the desired
response. Now, although it is sometimes
necessary to use high Kp values to get
the control response you need, what is
happening here is that you are putting in a
higher Kp than would be needed if you had
a properly spanned transmitter. Remember,
the higher the Kp, the more you are going
to move the valve around, and this will
result in a shorter valve life. I have come
across quite a few cases where with very
over-spanned transmitters, they have had
to insert such a high Kp in the controller to
get the desired speed of control response,
and this has caused the controller’s output
to fluctuate widely, with unacceptable valve
movements. This is particularly the case
where there is fairly high process noise on
the PV. To overcome this, C&I technicians or
artisans often either drastically filter the PV,
or else equally drastically reduce the Kp to
‘save the valve’. This means that one may not
obtain the good control needed.
A brilliant example of this recently occurred
when I was supervising loop bump tests on
the controls of an offshore oil rig over the
internet. The testing of the controls on this
particular rig was very difficult due to the
safety requirements. Any proposed test had
to be first submitted to a panel for evaluation
and approval with values given of size of
steps etc. All the tests had to be performed
by a senior operator and could not be done
by the optimising team. This of course makes
optimisation very slow and frustrating.
However it is understandable as oil rigs
are very hazardous plants, and safety is
paramount.
The process in the example was a simple
flow loop. The operators had been complaining
that they had to run the loop in manual as it
just didn’t seem to work properly in automatic.
We first tried performing a closed loop test
with the existing parameters where one makes
a step change in SP. They would only allow
a 9% change to be made. It was also initially
found that they had the wrong controller setup
on the controller, so that on SP changes there
was only I (integral) action. They then changed
this so that both P and I action came in. The
result was that even after a few minutes it
appeared as if the PV had not reacted.
An open loop test was then performed,
and this is shown in Figure 2. It should be
noted that when performing these tests on
our recording system we only see the variables
trending on a 0-100% scale. The PD was moved
up and down in a number of steps over a 20%
range over a test lasting some 22 minutes.
During this period there seemed to be no
noticeable movement of the PV. It appeared to
me that the valve was sticking. I wanted them
to move the output further but the operators
would not allow this as they thought that the
valve might suddenly jump and cause a big
surge in flow.
Later that day the C&I staff on the rig
emailed me the tests so I could examine them
in more detail. On expanding the tests, to my
amazement I saw that the flow was reacting to
our changes fairly well but in tiny movements.
The PG turned out to be an amazingly low
0,09. This is far too low and indicates there
is something seriously wrong with the
measurement scaling. The reason the process
didn’t respond on the closed loop test was
that their tuning was completely wrong, with a
proportional gain some 40 times too low and
an integral three times too slow.
It should also be pointed out that the
flow was being measured using a differential
pressure transmitter over an orifice plate. The
flow was running below 20% of measurement,
which is considered a region too low for this
type of measurement. Generally the rule of
thumb is that the measurement should be over
25%. However this did not really influence our
observations.
This is a very interesting example of how
measuring process gain can give you a big
insight into loop problems.

Michael Brown’s Practical Process Control Training Courses and

Loop Optimisation Services
THE PART 1 COURSE IS NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE VIA SELF STUDY AND ZOOM SESSIONS
Courses:
These well known courses are unique and invaluable to newcomers as well as experienced
practitioners and process engineers in the field of industrial regulatory control optimisation.
The courses offer a new and very practical approach to this subject, which very few people
really understand properly.
Courses are available on demand for six or more delegates and are suitable for instrumentation
and control technicians and engineers, and for plant process engineers. Many chemical and
mechanical engineers have attended the courses as well as metallurgists.
Even people with many years of experience in this field have found the courses
a real eye opener.

Optimisation Services and Consulting:

Michael Brown has had 35 years of experience in control loop optimisation, and in that time has
Cell: +27 (0)82 440 7790 successfully optimised controls in many different types of plants, including pulp and paper,
Email: michael.brown@mweb.co.za power stations, chemical and petrochemical, oil, steel, mining and metallurgical recovery,
cement, brewing, glass, dairy, food, and sugar, both in South Africa and many overseas countries.
Website: www.controlloop.co.za
His work has proved invaluable to plants and has resulted in greatly improved performance
and ROI.

MICHAEL BROWN CONTROL ENGINEERING CC

18 July 2023 www.instrumentation.co.za

 CONTROL SYSTEMS

Catch the light

Sioen Industries optimises intralogistics processes with a pick-to-light system based on the Banner
PTL110 series and Turck’s robust TBEN logic I/O modules.
Anyone who works in challenging and potentially dangerous
environments needs quality protective clothing that protects against
injury or accidents. The Belgian company Sioen specialises in technical
textiles and protective workwear, and produces more than three million
pieces of protective clothing at 22 sites in 20 countries worldwide. At
the Mouscron site, the family-owned company operates a large shipping
and distribution centre in addition to four production plants. Garments
produced worldwide are processed, stored and picked there so that they
can be shipped to customers quickly and efficiently.
Previously, the inbound and outbound processes were largely carried
out manually. After delivery, the pallets were transported to a coworker
who scanned the individual cartons and placed them on defined pallet
positions. These positions were reserved for specific goods – whether
they were present or not. It took four to five coworkers around five hours
to process a truck.
A coworker in the outbound area would receive a pick list for each
customer and go through the stores in order to collect the goods.
“This was obviously not an efficient way of working,” recalls Filiep
Vanwymelbeke, head of logistics at Sioen Apparel. “We therefore
looked for a system that could handle the challenges of the inbound
and outbound logistics. We finally implemented a powerful warehouse
management system (WMS) to solve this problem, in combination with
an error-free pick-to-light solution based on the PTL110 series of Turck’s
optical sensor partner, Banner Engineering.

Inbound: pick-to-light as a playmaker

In the incoming goods area (inbound), employees lift the cartons from
the pallets onto a conveyor belt. A scanner captures the labels on the
cartons as they pass by. They are then directed to one of six conveyor
belts. Once a coworker at the end of the conveyor belt has scanned the
delivered carton, the WMS immediately indicates via the pick-to-light
system which pallet it must be placed on. The coworker places the carton
on the appropriate pallet and acknowledges the action via the touch
button of the PTL110 device above the pallet.
The PTL110’s three-digit display immediately shows the number of
cartons on the pallet. The pick-to-light system provides several signal
states. A green signal indicates that the system is ready for use, while red
indicates an operating error. In addition, a purple signal indicates that a
mixed pallet must undergo quality control. When the pallet is complete
and can be removed, the LED of the PTL110 finally lights up blue.
Outbound: reliable order consolidation
Two streams of goods converge on the outbound conveyor: cartons
with standard contents and cartons with a mixture of different goods
that vary in height depending on the contents. At this point, the
pick-to-light system becomes active again. The coworker scans the
carton, whereupon the WMS determines the pallet on which it is to be
placed, according to the customer or carrier. The PTL110s indicate the
correct location of the pallet by means of simple colour signals.
Multiprotocol I/O module ensures reliable operation
The communication of the PTL110 devices with the WMS is crucial for
the optimal operation of the solution. All PTL110 devices are connected
for this purpose via Turck’s TBEN-S multiprotocol I/O modules. The robust
IP67 modules can be mounted directly on the conveyor line without a
control cabinet, and feature as standard the web-based ARGEE field logic
controller software.
Communication with the WMS can be easily configured by using
PickIQ. The customer’s IT personnel do not need any special knowledge
of automation software for this. PickIQ uses a serial bus protocol that
uses a common ID to avoid latency or delays when polling multiple
devices. This allows the system to operate without delays, even during
peak hours.
Error rate reduced to zero
The versatility of the PTL110 devices is demonstrated by their application
in both inbound and outbound systems. The multifunctional displays
with touch button options, optical sensors and three-digit display with
clear signal indication, enable simple and reliable monitoring of the
number of cartons on a pallet. The M12 connectors enable fast and
safe installation of multiple devices. The display also has the ability to
show up to 14 colours, combined with several animation functions to
distinguish different states.
“The inbound error rate has dropped to virtually zero,” Vanwymelbeke
notes. “Where it used to take five coworkers up to five hours to handle
a truck, it is now handled by three coworkers in two to three hours. This
corresponds to a time saving of up to 15 hours per truck per day.”
For more information contact Turck Banner, 27 11 453 2468,
brandon.topham@turckbanner.co.za, www.turckbanner.co.za

www.instrumentation.co.za July 2023 19

 CONTROL SYSTEMS
PC-based control for additive
manufacturing with solid-state metals
Image copyright: Foreword LLC, 2022.
Meld Manufacturing has pioneered a
solid-state metal additive process that is based
on applying friction and force. The advantages
compared to melt-based processes include
very large-format 3D printers, and higher part
strength. For optimal control of its systems,
the company relies on flexible EtherCAT and
PC-based control technology from Beckhoff.
Launched in 2018, the Virginia-based
company offers its capabilities to a wide
range of customers in defence, research,
and manufacturing. MELD spun off from
its parent company, Aeroprobe, in 2018 to
apply the principle of friction stir welding to
additive manufacturing technologies. Friction
stir welding is a method for welding metals
without melting them.
From this, MELD developed an additive
process to enable deposition of multiple layers
for 3D printing applications. The patented
process entails rotating a bar of solid metal
while applying a specified force at the point of
deposition. Friction causes the metal to deform
plasticly and be deposited in a layer. Through
adiabatic heating, i.e. without exchanging heat
with the environment, the metal feedstock will
continue to flow if spun continuously at the
correct speed.
The innovative process allows equipment
end users to print parts using any metal,
including aluminium alloys and others that
have typically posed problems for other
20 July 2023 www.instrumentation.co.za
additive manufacturing systems. As it does not
require melting like most other established
3D printing methods, the process also doesn’t
affect the metal‘s properties. As a result,
the product remains stronger and is less
susceptible to porosity, hot-cracking or other
typical issues of melt-based additive processes.
The solid-state process is also at least 10 times
faster and requires less energy.
MELD offers the CD-14 package consisting
of a spindle with rotating deposition tool,
electrical enclosure and HMI, which machine
builders can implement in large, custom
systems. Open, scalable control technologies
have proven critical to enabling continued
development. MELD’s original controls platform
could not keep pace. Senior automation
engineer, Fred Lalande eventually got in touch
with members of the local Beckhoff team. As
he learned about fully integrated PC-based
control from Beckhoff, Lalande believed he had
found the ideal platform for MELD.
What pushed Lalande toward Beckhoff
was the TwinCAT 3 automation software.
“Previously, I had to use two or three different
software packages. That was a pain,” he says.
“With TwinCAT, I open one program and
everything I need is there.”
As the solutions have developed, the code
has grown more sophisticated over time. The
portability of code in TwinCAT made it easy to
adapt one machine’s program when designing
the next. In addition, IP protection is critical in
additive manufacturing and especially so with
this unique patented process. The Beckhoff
software platform gave MELD the ability to lock
down its valuable code. Everything is password
protected and encrypted, so no one can copy
MELD’s developments.
In this 3D process, the spindle speed
must be modulated for each specific material
to maintain the desired temperature for
continuous printing. To accomplish this,
the PID controller in the TwinCAT Controller
Toolbox provides dual-loop closure on the axis,
ensuring successful implementation of MELD’s
unrivalled technology.
Motion control and functional safety
The L3, K2 and 3PO machines rely on Beckhoff
servo solutions for motion control. A variety of
AX5000 servo drives and AM8000 servomotors
with appropriate gearboxes handle
movement in X, Y and Z coordinates. The drive
components also offer One Cable Technology,
which combines power and feedback in one
cable to simplify commissioning.
A VFD and spindle motor from a third-party
spin each machine’s rotating deposition tool,
and since the VFD is EtherCAT-based, Lalande
found integration to be simple. EtherCAT
provided the ease of plug-and-play operation
when using devices from both Beckhoff and
third parties.
MELD also leverages TwinSAFE, the
integrated functional safety solution from
Beckhoff. This allows Lalande to implement
E-stops, safety doors and TwinSAFE motion
functions. “TwinSAFE is straightforward to use,”
he says. “By implementing this solution, we
elevated the level of safety that our machines
provide to PLe, the highest level.”
3D printing grows with futureproof
technologies
As MELD continues to make advances in
additive manufacturing, PC-based control
provides a solid foundation. EtherCAT and OCT
shorten commissioning times, while TwinCAT
consolidates HMI, motion control, PLC and
other machine control functions.
For more information contact
Beckhoff Automation, +27 11 795 2898,
info@beckhoff.co.za, www.beckhoff.co.za