Copyright © IFAC Dynamics and Control of Process Systems,

Corfu, Greece, 1998

A NEW MEASURE OF PROCESS OUTPUT CONTROLLABILITY

David R. Vinson and Christos Georgakis

Chemical Process Modeling and Control Research Center.

and Department a/Chemical Engineering.
Lehigh University, Bethlehem. PA 18015

ABSTRACT
A steady state, multi variable, and non linear measure is presented for assessing the
input-output, open-loop controllability of a process, This measure is ascertaining the
inherent controllability of the process, as it is calculated in the absence of any regulatory
control structure. It is also independent of the inventory control structure that might be
assumed present in order to keep the inventory levels constant. This measure evaluates
the ability of a design to reach all points of the desired output space and to reject the
expected disturbances utilizing input action not exceeding the available input space.
Besides being applicable to a SISO case, its multivariable character is shown to be more
accurate than existing measures such as RGA, minimum singular value, and condition
number. Copyright © 1998 IFAC

Keywords: Control theory, Controllability, Distillation columns, Inputs, Nonlinear gain,

Output, Polygons

1. INTRODUCTION
It has been recognized by numerous authors that
improved measures need to be developed for the
evaluation of process controllability and operability.
The following quote is representative: "More
research has to be devoted to the development of
simple criteria for controllability evaluation and to
clearly understand their limitations. Only then is it
meaningful to formulate an algorithmic synthesis
technique to trade-off controllability and economics"
(Morari and Perkins, 1994). Given the procedure
commonly used for process synthesis and
development in the chemical process industry
(Vinson, et. at., 1995), these criteria must be
developed for both steady state analysis and
dynamic analysis. The first step is then to develop a
steady state controllability measure that accurately
quantifies the ability of the designed process to
reach the full range of desired output values in the
face of expected process disturbances and within the
limited range of its available inputs.
This paper defines a steady state controllability
measure called the Output Controllability Index,
QCI. Unlike the notion of controllability in the
classical systems theory, the QCI does not focus on
the states of the system describing the dynamics of
the process. Instead, it focuses on the input-output
relations and accounts for the effect that the limited
range of the input has on achieving the performance
objectives of the process. It both quantifies the
controllability of a process design with a single
numerical value as well as provides an equally
useful graphical interpretation. Furthermore, it
provides insights into the aspects of a process design
that may have to be modified to improve its
controllability. The development of this measure
will be presented, followed by its application to
some example linear and nonlinear processes.

663
 2. SERVO CONTROLLABILITY MEASURE the output streams, and the variables that
characterize the output compositions. For example,
Although the ideas that will be presented also apply in a distillation column with constant feed rate the
to a SISO process, a MIMO process will be used to two natural output values are the two product
introduce the general concept. While the introduced purities.
concept is easily presentable in two-dimensional
schematics, it also applies to an nxn process.
Furthermore, prior controllability indices have been
mostly focused in MIMO cases, not being able to
examine the controllability of a SI SO case, which
will addressed in a more detailed publication
(Vinson and Georgakis). To be able to accurately DIS
introduce the controllability concept some new but
simple and intuitive definitions will be developed
and introduced. For the n process inputs U h U l • . .. Un
the Available Input Space (AIS) is defined as the
set of values that these input variables can take -----------. I
based on the design of the process. For many
processes, the available input values range from a
minimum value, often equal to zero, to a maximum
value, often a multiple of the nominal value. The
AIS for a process with two inputs is schematically
depicted in Figure J as a rectangular parallelogram .
The shape of the AIS can be arbitrary and its
dimensionality will be equal to the number of
independent process inputs, usually equal to the
degrees of freedom of the process. The initially Figure 2. Desired Output Space (DOS) for a
rectangular space over which each Ui can vary, might Process with Two Outputs
be further restricted by the operating constraints
related to the designed process and the associated In addition to the desired values of the output
equipment and machinery limitations. Examples of variables, one is also interested in calculating the
these constraints are compressor surge or distillation output values that can be achieved based on the
tray weeping and flooding . available input values and the process characteristics
described by the steady state process model. The set
of all such achievable output values will be denoted
by the Achievable Output Space (ADS) and can be
calculated by y = G(u) , where G represents the steady
AIS state model and the values of u lie in the AIS. An
example of the achievable output space (ADS)
calculated through a nonlinear model is depicted in
Figure 3.

U 2s - - - - - - - - - - - ~

AOS

UI

Figure 1. Available Input Space (AIS) for a Process

with Two Inputs

The second definition of interest is that of the

Desired Output Space (DOS) schematically
depicted in Figure 2 for a process with 2 outputs.
The DOS represents the set of desired values of the
Figure 3. Achievable Output Space (ADS) for a
output variables YJ. Yl . .. .• Ym' These output variables
Nonlinear Plant
could represent product flow rates, temperatures of

664
If the magnitude of the AOS is not large enough to 1.5
cover the entire Desired Output Space (DOS) then
the controllability of the process is less than 100%. S
The relative magnitude of the intersection of the
A vailable and the Desired Output Spaces, 0.5
J.1{Aosn DOS), in relation to the magnitude of the
Desired Output Space, J.1{DOS) , produces a measure o
of the steady state input-output controllability of the
process. The corresponding Output Controllability
Index (OCl) is defined as
DOS
-1
OCl = J1(AOS DOS) n (I)
J1(DOS) -1 .5 L-_-'--_-"-_---'-_---:-'-:-_~--:-'
-1 .5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1.5
y1
where f1 represents a function calculating the size of
the space. Since this definition refers only to the Figure 5. Achievable and Desired Output Spaces
ability of the process to achieve the desired values of AOSand DOS
the output variables, in the absence of disturbances,
it might also be called the Servo Output The shape and location of this intersection
Controllability Index (s-OC!) . (AOSnDOS) provides information in addition to the
relative sizes of the DOS and A OS, such as the exact
In Figure 4 the AOS of a process described by a subset of the desired output specifications that
linear steady state gain matrix is depicted . Since the cannot be achieved with the available ranges of the
AOS is a transformation of the AIS by a constant input variables. Figure 5 indicates for this linear
gain matrix model G, the result is also a example process that the achievable output space
parallelogram . The AOS is only a rectangular covers more than the desired output space in one
parallelogram if the matrix G is diagonal. The diagonal direction but less than desired along the
relative coverage of the DOS by the AOS as opposite diagonal.
schematically shown in Figure 5 can lead into a
quantification of the s-OCf. This quantification It is worth noting that the same result is achieved if
might often be quite useful but does not fully the output controllability of the process is calculated
represent all the geometrical interrelationships in the space of input variables . This is achieved by
between the two output spaces. calculating the Desired Input Space (DIS) as the
values of the input variables that will enable us to
achieve the desired output variables. The DIS is
1.5 then compared to the Available Input Space (AIS) .
In particular, the DIS is calculated by
DIS = G- J (DOS) and define the Servo OCI by:

DOS
Figure 4. AOS for Linear Process Based on a Y2 1 - - - - - -'O""":'"
Rectangular AIS

u, y,
Figure 6. Desired Output Space (DOS) Translated
to Desired Input Space (DISy )

665
 3. REGULATORY CONTROLLABILITY respectively, are denoted as DlSy(d) and DlSd(y).
MEASURE The DlS can now be written as the union of all
DlSy(d) or the union of all DlSd(y) :
In the above section, the inherent controllability of
the process to achieve the desired values of its
DlS = UDlSy(d) = UDlSd (Y) (4)
output variables has been addressed . Attention will dEEDS y EDOS
now be focused on the ability of the process to
compensate for the effects of disturbances and The corresponding definition of the generalized OCI
regulate the output variable to a fixed set of values.
provides the overall Output Controllability Index of
This inherent property of the process will be called the process.
Regulatory Output Controllability. The Expected
Disturbance Space (EDS) is defined as the space of
steady state disturbance values that are expected to QCl = J-i(AlS DlS)n (5 )
effect the process. The Desired Output Space (DOS) J-i(DlS)
and the Expected Disturbance Space (EDS) are both
translated back to the required input space by the
linear, y =Gu + Gdd, or nonlinear, y=G(u,d), process
models by solving for the values of u that satisfy the
steady state model. The values of y and d used to
calculate u are in the DOS and EDS, respectively.
For an unchanged desired output value y =O and a
AIS
... tl
G-l(O)

"

0
.1
d.
linear process model the EDS is translated into the DlS ... .
DlS via u=-G' Gdd. To imply that this desired
input space is needed to compensate the different -G-f (Gcfl)
disturbance values, it will be denoted by DlSd . This d,
translation of the expected disturbance space to the
input space desired is shown in Figure 7 along with Figure 8. Calculation of OCl from the Intersection
the DlS., space from Figure 6. of the Combined Translated Spaces DOS and EDS
withAlS

AlS EDS For a linear process model and rectangular shapes of

u, ~ ____--, ~ d2 ~----,
-G-l(GJl)
u, d,
Figure 7. Expected Disturbance Space (EDS)
Translated to Desired Input Space (DlSd)
A steady state Regulatory Output Controllability
Index (r-OCl) for evaluating if the expected
disturbances can be appropriately rejected so as to
keep the process outputs at their nominal values
(y =O) can then be defined as
r _ QCl = _J-i_(A_J,_S_n_D_J,_Sd_) (3)
J-i(DlS d ) presented. The models that will be utilized here are
Consider now the simultaneous tasks of
compensating for the expected disturbances and also
achieving the different desired values of the output
variables. This leads to the calculation of the
desired input space, DlS. This DlS (shown in Figure
8) is the set-theoretic combination of the two desired
input spaces for the servo (DISy ) and regulatory
the DOS and EDS, the servo and regulatory DlS 's
each have the shape of a parallelogram . The shape
of the combined DlS is, in general, an octagon.
Although, in some cases depending on the rotation
imparted by the G and Gd gain matrices, the DlS
may also have the shape of a parallelogram (Vinson
and Georgakis) . The shaded area in Figure 8 is the
intersection of the AlS with the DIS.
Calculation of the OCl therefore involves finding the
intersection and ratio of two polyhedral spaces. The
method selected has been developed by
Veres (Veres, et. al. , 1996).
4. SIMPLE EXAMPLE PROCESSES
To illustrate the definitions introduced above some
simple 2x2 linear example processes are now
steady state gain matrices. An example calculation
of the regulatory output controllability index (r-OCI)
for the case with the following process and
disturbance matrices
1.2
G=
[ .5 1.2.5] and G d = [0] (6)

(DlSd) tasks . To further refine the notation , the

spaces DlS, and DlSd ., which depend on d and y is shown in Figure 9.

666
 process gain is defined by G = [1.2 a] ,then the
2 o1.2
r-QCI =0.84 effect on the Output Controllability Index of varying
u2
the value of the gain in the (1,2) position can be
1 calculated. The numerical values of the DC! for
- I 0 ~ a ~ 10 and a disturbance gain matrix of
o
GJ = [.~ .~1are shown in Figure I I.
-1

u1
-2L---____~______~
-2 o 2
Figure 9. Calculation of the r-DC!
u
o
The achievable input space (AIS) is defined here as
- J S U; S J and the desired output space is defined as
- J Sy; S J. The regulatory DCI value is 0.84,
indicating that the available inputs need to be
extended into the lower right and upper left corners
of their space for the process to be controllable over -20.000 -10.000 0.000 10.000 20.000
all the values of the desired output space. If the G(1,2)
disturbance gain matrix is changed to

.~l
.2
Gd = [ 0 (7)
and the expected disturbance values are - J S d; S J,
then, because of the diagonal character of G,J, the
combined DIS retains the shape of a parallelogram
and the DCI reduces to the value of 0.71. This is
because the DIS is larger indicating that even more
power (Figure 10) is desired from the inputs U J and
Ul to achieve the combined servo and regulatory
tasks.
2 gain matrix is larger than 2x2.
u2
1 the same information as the DCI is when the process
0
-1
u1
-2
-2 0 2
Figure 10. Combined Servo and Regulatory DIS
Compared with the AIS of Process A
The comparison of the proposed DC! in relationship
of the other previously used controllability measures
can be illustrated with process B whose steady state
gains are given by a triangular gain matrix. If the
Figure 11. Effect of G( 1.2) on DCI
The greater the absolute value of a, the lower the
value of DCI. This is due to distortion of the
input/output maps by the shear caused by the off-
diagonal term. As the off-diagonal term gets large
relative to the diagonal terms, variation in the DCI
becomes smaller. From this data, it is clear that the
DCI can differentiate between different cases of the
process gain G. This is not the case for the relative
gain array RGA . The RGA provides no indication
of variation in the plant operability because it is
equal to 1.0 for all values of a. The RGA also does
not provide a single number for evaluation when the
Another example where the RGA does not provide
gains are uniformly small. For
.12
G= (8)
[ o
the calculated RGA is 1.0 but the DC! is .014
indicating the inability to reach a large portion of the
desired output space with the available input space.
The singular values and the condition number of
process gain matrix properly represent the amount of
stretching (cr~ I) or compression (cr~ I) that takes
places when the gain matrix transforms a given input
space or when its inverse transforms an output
space. However, they do not represent the rotational

667
 effect that a matrix has on an input region. While a
small value for the minimum singular value does
hint at controllability problems, it does not fully
represent them. For example in the case that
G = [ 1.50.5] the minimum singular value is
0.5 1.5
equal to 1.0 and the OCI is equal to 1.0 when the
AIS is -1::; U; ::; 1 and the DOS is defmed as
-1 ::;y;::; 1. However, if the AIS is -0.5 ::;u; ::;0.5
because of constraints imposed by equipment, then
the OCI is equal to 0.5 indicating a lack of complete
controllability, but the minimum singular value is
still equal to 1.0 since it is dependent only on the
gain matrix (re-scaling of the gains would be
inappropriate in this case). The schematic
representation of the A OS and that of the DOS are
presented in Figure 12. The minimum singular value
is associated with a direction along the diagonal of
the DOS and thus it is not large enough to render the
process completely output controllable (OCI= I).
Furthermore, it is well known that the singular
values are dependent on the scaling of the variables
often leading some researchers to search for the
"optimal scaling" that either minimizes the condition
number or maximizes the smallest singular value.
The calculation of the OCI presented here does not
depend on the selected units for the process
variables. This is achieved by comparing the sizes
of spaces in the same type of variables, such as the
DOS and A OS in the input variables or the AIS and
DIS in the input variables. Consequently, the OCI is
always a dimensional fractional number independent
of the units used in each of the input and output
variables.
1.5
QCI= 0.50
y2
0.5
o
-0.5
-1
-1 .5 '---~-~-~-~-~--
-1 .5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 y1
Figure 12. Maximum and Minimum Singular
Values of AOS
Some examples that demonstrate the ability of the
OCI to properly represent the effect disturbances
have on the controllability of a process will now be
developed and applied.
668
Examining the effect of varying the {l,2) value of
the disturbance gain matrix provides a way to
evaluate the usefulness of the OCI versus other
measures. The closed loop disturbance gain CLDG
(Skogestad and Hovd, 1990) is representative of the
measures available to account for the effect of
disturbances. The CLDG is defmed as
(9)
where G is a matrix conslstmg of the diagonal
elements of G. The CLDG and OCI were calculated
for the following process and disturbance gains:
G -_ [1.2 a] and G _ [0.2 fJ] (lO)
° 1.2
d -
° 0.2
where the (1,2) process and disturbance gains where
varied between - 10:s;; a :s;; 10 and - 10 :s;; f3 :s;; 10 .
The results are shown in Figure 13. Only the
CLDGO.2) is presented as it is the only value
affected by the different values of a and p and it is
plotted versus the values of GLI.2) =/J. In the same
graph the different values of a are varied as a
parameter, without explicitly identifying the points
plotted with the specific parameters a. It can be
observed that, for a given value of GLI.2) , the value
of CLDG(l.2) varies somewhat. Nevertheless, its
largest sensitivity is with the values of GLI.2) .
Processes with low values of the CLDG are
preferred. Notice also that the variation of
CLDGO.2) with process gain variation is the same
regardless of the disturbance gain. This does not
provide a true picture of the change in process
operability. The OCI, on the other hand, indicates
that both gains have a combined effect on
controllability. It indicates a more significant
sensitivity of controllability on GO.2) when the
GLI,2) is close to zero than at larger values. This is
an accurate representation as indicated in Figure 14.
 • 1.200
X abs(cldg (1,2))

'TOCI 0 1.000

N'
..:
10

.8 'I

II I I 0.800

I
"-
~ 0 0.600 U
Q 0
...J 6 "
(,,)

I B B

!
OAOO
4 .
0
0.200
2
~ ~ ~ 8 g' IiiI
" 0.000
-1 5.000 -1 0.000 -5.000 0.000 5.000 10.000 15000
Gd(1,2)

Figure 13. CLDG and GCI Response to GO ,2) and GdO,2) Variation

2 QCI = 1 2 QCI = 0.7917

N
:J
0

-2
D N
:J
0

-2
TI
-2 0 2 -2 0 2
u1 u1
2 QCI = 0.5833 2 QCI = 0.12

,. ---------------,

N
:J
0 N
:J
0

1._------------_ . ..
,

-2 -2
-2 0 2 -2 0 2
u1 u1
Figure 14. Schematic Diagrams and OCI Values for Gd(l ,2)=0 and G(I ,2)=0, 1,2, 10, Respectively

5. LINEAR DISTILLATION EXAMPLE moles, respectively. The available input space AIS
is defined with the constraint equations derived from
A dual composition, distillation column will be used material balance
to demonstrate the application of the GCI for a more
complex process of industrial interest. The outputs V::; L+qF,B ~O
y, and Y2 are defined as the distillate and bottoms
V ~ L -F(l-q),D ~ 0
light purity YD and YB respectively. The disturbances, (11 )
d, and db are the feed flow F and feed purity XF, and 0.5 ::; V ::; 1.5Vs
the inputs u, and u: are defined as the reflux flow L 0 .5::; L ::; I .5L s
and the boil-up flow V. The desired output space
DGS is defined with the ranges 95%::;YD::;98% and
with both V and L varying from 0.5 to 1.5 times their
O.4%::;YB ::;0.6%, the expected disturbance space
design value. Although this example assumes the
EDS is defined with the ranges
existence of a level control structure that leads to the
1.95 lbs/min::; F::; 2.55 lbs/min and 44 .5%::;xF::;48 .5%

669
LV configuration for compositIOn control, it has
F=ql +q2
been shown (Vinson and Georgakis) that the OCl
values are not affected by such a choice and are T = qlT; + q2T2 (13)
identical for all level control input configurations
(DV , LB). Taking these the process matrices to be
ql +ql
equal to
The AlS and DOS are defined as indicated in Figure
16.
G=
6.4 -9.45]
[ 3.3 -9.7 ' q; T
AlS DOS
q;m=3 94
13.3 3.5] q;.,.=2 ........ .. .....
G -[
d - 17.15 3.5
( 12)
T,=84 ...........
a value of 0 .79 is calculated for the ocr The q, 74 F
corresponding spaces are shown in Figure 15. ql.o=3 q'm=4 3 F,=5 7
Figure 16. AIS and DOS for the Shower Problem

AIS The design operating point shown in the figure is 3

5 OCI= 0.79 .----------- .., gpm of cold water flow q" and 2 gpm of hot water
--- --- , flow q2" which produces a total flow F, of 5 gpm
4 , with a temperature T, of 84°F. The DOS indicates
,
,,, that a range of temperatures from 74°F to 94°F is
, desired with flow ranging from 3 gpm to 7 gpm .
,
3 Calculation of the ADS indicates that, although a
V much larger space can be covered than desired, the
2 complete DOS can not be reached. Figure 17 clearly
indicates that the expectations of the range of
operability were unrealistic. The output constraints
1 form the bounds of the A OS. Looking at the
0 1 2 3 problem in the input space (Figure 18) indicates the
L large region of the AIS that does not intersect with
Figure IS. Dual Composition Distillation OCl the DIS and is therefore not useful for reaching
operating points in the DOS.

6. NONLINEAR PROCESSES
130.0
Unlike many of the eXlstmg controllability 120.0 +-----"""'1
measures, the OCl is also applicable to non linear .
processes. The definition of OCl is based upon the 110.0 ADS
interrelationships between the available and desired,
100.0
input and output spaces. These spaces may be
generated from linear process gain models as T 90.0
described earlier or they may be generated from 80.0
non linear process models . A simple example of a
nonlinear process is the mixing of two streams of hot 70.0
and cold water. This example will be called the 60.0 ~ _ _ _ _ _ _..J
shower problem . For this process, the inputs u, and
Ul are the flow of cold water q J and hot water q b and
50.0 - ' - - - r - - - - - , . - - - - , - - - , - - - . . . , - - - ----1

the outputs y, and Yl are the total flow F and the o 2 3 4 5 6 7

combined temperature T. It is assumed that the
F
temperatures of the input streams to be constant at T, Figure 17. Output Operability for the Shower
of 60°F and T2 of 120°F although these temperatures Problem
could also be defined as disturbances . The energy
and material balance equations are written as

670
 4.5 5 , -________________________
4.0
3.5 OCI=O.69
4
3.0 1----
2.5 1 AIS Vs
q2 2 .0
1
1.51 I
I
1.0 1 2 ,
I

I
I
0.5
1
_______ ...J
I
I

0.0 Lsi
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 2 3 4 5

ql L
Figure 18. Output Operability for the Shower
Problem Based on Input Space Figure 19. AIS for LV Distillation Column

Note that nonlinearities in this example problem
yield an OCI based in the output space that is not the
same value as the OCI based in the input space.
To further develop this concept, the more complex
example of a full non linear model of dual
composition, distillation column will be addressed.
The design specifications for the column are a
constant, saturated liquid feed flow with a 50/50
composition, light product purity of 99 mole %,
heavy product purity of 95 mole %, and a relative
volatility of 2.0. The LV inventory control structure
The results of this algorithm are shown in Figure 20.
The triangles represent the calculated output points
necessary to meet the specified accuracy. Notice
that the process non linearity accurately represented .
The DOS is defined as . 9~D$ 1.0 and O~B$.1.
Allowing the inputs to vary by ±50% permits the
AOS to cover a substantially larger area than
required.
DOS
0.95

is used. The simulation is generated as a MA TLAB

CMEX file for fast execution while permitting
access to m file routines for calculation of the OCI.
085
The method of calculating the OCI is to first define
the AIS and DOS. The constraint equations 08
(Equation (I I» typically define the AIS for this
process as a hexagon as shown in Figure 19. The 075
AOS is then constructed by stepping along the AIS
boundary line and calculating the output points on
07 L-__L -_ _~_ _~_ _-L__~__~____L_~
the A OS. In order to minimize the calculation o 005 01 Oil 02 025 0) 035
xS
complexity but still preserve the right degree of
nonlinearity, an algorithm to adjust the step size Figure 20. AOS for Nonlinear Distillation Model
along the boundary line of the AIS depending on the with ±50% Input Variation
difference in the length of successive AOS line
segments has been developed. However, the portion of the DOS in the ultra pure
range is still not reachable, indicating the operability
limitations imposed by a finite number of trays.

It is also interesting to examine the output space for

the same process if the inputs were restricted to
± \0% variation around the nominal design values.
The same DOS is maintained. The restricted AOS
for this design is shown in Figure 21.

671
 Skogestad, S. and M. Hovd. Use of Frequency-
Dependent RGA for Control Structure
0.99
Selection. in American Control Conference .
098 1990: American Automatic Control Council.
0 .97 Veres, S.M ., et aI. , Geometric Bounding Toolbox , .
0 .%
OCl=0.3 1996, The University of Birmingham :
Edgbaston, UK.
0 .95
Vinson, D.R., C. Georgakis, and J. Fossy. Studies in
0 .94 plant-wide controllability using the Tennessee
0 .93 Eastman challenge problem, the case for
0.92
multivariable control. in 1995 American
Control Conference. 1995. Seattle, WA, USA .
09 1 DOS Vinson, D.R. and C. Georgakis, An Open-Loop
0 .02 003 0 04 0 .05 0 .06 007 0 08 009 0.1
Measure for the Design of Operable Processes.
To be submitted for publication.
Figure 21. AOS for Nonlinear Distillation Model
with Restricted AIS

The OC! of 0.3 indicates that the restricted AlS is

overly small for the size of the specified DOS
because the AOS definitely does not cover the entire
space. Examining the results in this way provides a
motivation to reevaluate the design so that the
restricted AIS might be modified to produce a larger
OCl value and for the AOS to cover a larger portion
of the DOS.

7. CONCLUSIONS

The novel Steady-State Output Controllability

Index, OCl, has been presented. Although not
proven in detail here , the OCl is independent of the
inventory control structures within a process
flowsheet and it can therefore be applied during the
process synthesis stage before the process control
structure has been determined . It has been shown
that the OCl remedies many of the drawbacks of
RGA, singular values, condition number and other
existing steady state operability measures. Although
most of the examples presented relate to linear and
nonlinear 2x2 cases, the offered definitions of the
novel concept apply equally well to the SISO and
higher dimensional cases. The nonlinear examples
presented here indicate the applicability of th is
technique to non linear processes. This Steady-State
Output Controllability concept is offered as a
necessary but not sufficient property of an
acceptable flow sheet. It needs to be complemented
with an equally novel definition of Dynamic Output
Controllability .

8. REFERENCES

Morari, M. and J. Perkins. Design/or Operations.

in Foundations o/Computer Aided Process
Design. 1994. Snowmass Village, CO:
CACHE.

672