Thu AM

Part 5: Advanced control + case studies

Advanced control layer (1h)

•Design based on simple elements:
– Ratio control
– Cascade control
– Selectors
– Input resetting (valve position control)
– Split range control
– Decouplers (including phsically based)
– When should these elements be used?
•When use MPC instead?

Case studies (3h)

•Example: Distillation column control
•Example: Plantwide control of complete plant Recycle processes: How to avoid
snowballing

1
 Control layers

CV1s
“Advanced “control

CV2s

PID

2
u (valves)
 Outline

• Skogestad procedure for control structure design

I Top Down
• Step S1: Define operational objective (cost) and constraints
• Step S2: Identify degrees of freedom and optimize operation for disturbances
• Step S3: Implementation of optimal operation
– What to control ? (primary CV’s) (self-optimizing control)
• Step S4: Where set the production rate? (Inventory control)
II Bottom Up
• Step S5: Regulatory control: What more to control (secondary CV’s) ?
– Distillation example
• Step S6: Supervisory control
• Step S7: Real-time optimization

3
 ”Summary Advanced control”
STEP S6. SUPERVISORY LAYER

Objectives of supervisory layer:

1. Switch control structures (CV1) depending on operating region
– Active constraints
– self-optimizing variables

2. Perform “advanced” economic/coordination control tasks.

– Control primary variables CV1 at setpoint using as degrees of freedom (MV):
• Setpoints to the regulatory layer (CV2s)
• ”unused” degrees of freedom (valves)
– Keep an eye on stabilizing layer
• Avoid saturation in stabilizing layer
– Feedforward from disturbances
• If helpful
– Make use of extra inputs
– Make use of extra measurements

Implementation:
• Alternative 1: Advanced control based on ”simple elements” (decentralized control)
• Alternative 2: MPC
4
 Summary of some simple elements

Feeforward control with Multiple feeds etc. (extensive variables).: Ratio control
•Ratio setpoint usually set by feedback in a cascade manner

Feedback

1.Use of extra measurements for improved control;: Cascade control

– Cascade control is when MV (for master) =setpoint to slave controller
– MV1 = CV2s
2.Switch between active constraints: Selectors
3.Make use of extra inputs
– Dynamic (improve performance): Input resetting = valve position control =
midranging control
– Steady state (extend operating range): Split range control
4.Reduce interactions when using single-loop control: Decouplers (including phsically based)

5
 Control configuration elements

• Control configuration. The restrictions imposed on the overall controller by

decomposing it into a set of local controllers (subcontrollers, units, elements,
blocks) with predetermined links and with a possibly predetermined design
sequence where subcontrollers are designed locally.

Some control configuration elements:

• Cascade controllers
• Decentralized controllers
• Feedforward elements
• Decoupling elements
• Input resetting/Valve position control/Midranging control
• Split-range control
• Selectors

6
 Most important control structures
1. Feedback control
2. Ratio control (special case of feedforward)
3. Cascade control

7
 Ratio control (most common case of
feedforward)
General: Use for extensive variables (usually flows) with constant optimal ratio
Example: Process with two feeds q1(d) and q2 (u), where ratio should be
constant.
Use multiplication block (x):
(q2/q1)s
(desired flow ratio)
q1 q2
(measured x (MV: manipulated variable)
flow
disturbance)

“Measure disturbance (d=q1) and adjust input (u=q2)

such that
8 ratio is at given value (q2/q1)s”
 Usually: Combine ratio (feedforward)
with feedback
• Adjust (q1/q2)s based on feedback from process, for example, composition
controller.
• This is a special case of cascade control

– Example cake baking: Use recipe (ratio control = feedforward), but

adjust ratio if result is not as desired (feedback)
– Example evaporator: Fix ratio qH/qF (and use feedback from T to fine
tune ratio)

9
 Example

Cascade control
• Controller (“master”) gives setpoint to another controller (“slave”)
– Without cascade: “Master” controller directly adjusts u (input, MV) to control y
– With cascade: Local “slave” controller uses u to control “extra”/fast measurement (y’). “Master” controller adjusts
setpoint y’s.

• Example: Flow controller on valve (very common!)

– y = level H in tank (or could be temperature etc.)
– u = valve position (z)
– y’ = flowrate q through valve

flow in
Hs flow in
Hs
H H
LC LC
MV=z MV=qs
valve position
q
FC
measured
z flow
flow out
flow out
10 WITHOUT CASCADE WITH CASCADE
 What are the benefits of adding a
flow controllerq (inner cascade)?
s

Extra measurement y’ = q
q z

f(z)
1. Counteracts nonlinearity in valve, f(z) 1
alv
e
v
• With fast flow control we can assume q = q s il ne
ar

0
2. Eliminates effect of disturbances in p1 and p2 0 1 z
(valve opening)

11
Example (again): Evaporator with heating
qF [m3/s]
TF [K]
From cF [mol/m3] evaporation
reactor
level measurement
H
temperature measurement
T ∞
q [m3/s]
T [K]
c [mol/m3]
Heating fluid concentrate

qH [m3/s]
TH [K]

NEW Control objective

• Keep level H at desired value
• Keep composition c (rather than temperature T) at desired value
BUT: Composition measurement has large delay + unreliable
Suggest control structure based on cascade control
12
 Split Range Temperature Control

Split-Range
Temperature
Cooling Controller
Water

RSP
Steam
TT

TT TC
13
 Split Range Temperature Control
100
Signal to Control Valve

80

60
(%)

Cooling Steam
40 Water

20

0 E0
Error from Setpoint for Jacket Temperature

14 Note: adjust the location er E0 to make process gains equal

 Sigurd’s pairing rule for decentralized
control:
“Pair MV that may (optimally) saturate
with CV that may be given up”

• Reason: Minimizes need for reassigning loops

• Important: Always feasible (and optimal) to give up a CV when optimal MV
saturation occurs.
– Proof (DOF analysis): When one MV disappears (saturates), then we have one less
optimal CV.

15
 Use of extra measurements: Cascade
control (conventional)
The reference r2 (= setpoint ys2) is an output from another controller
General case (“parallel cascade”)

Not always helpful…

y2 must be closely
related to y1

Special common case (“series cascade”)

16
 Series cascade

1. Disturbances arising within the secondary loop (before y 2) are corrected by the secondary
controller before they can influence the primary variable y 1
2. Phase lag existing in the secondary part of the process (G2) is reduced by the secondary
loop. This improves the speed of response of the primary loop.
3. Gain variations in G2 are overcome within its own loop.

Thus, use cascade control (with an extra secondary measurement y2) when:
• The disturbance d2 is significant and G1 has an effective delay
• The plant G2 is uncertain (varies) or nonlinear

Design / tuning (see also in tuning-part): Example: Flow cascade for level control
• First design K2 (“fast loop”) to deal with d2 u = z, y2=F, y1=M,
K1= LC, K2= FC
17 • Then design K1 to deal with d1
 Pressure control distillation

• Need to stabilze p using Qc

• But want Qc to be max
• Use cascade with backoff on Qc (

• Another similar example: reactor temperature control (stabilization)

closed to Qmax.

18
 Use of extra inputs

Two different cases

1. Have extra dynamic inputs (degrees of freedom)
Cascade implementation: “Input resetting to ideal resting value”
Example: Heat exchanger with extra bypass
Also known as: Midranging control, valve position control

2. Need several inputs to cover whole range (because primary input may
saturate) (steady-state)
Split-range control
Example 1: Control of room temperature using AC (summer), heater
(winter), fireplace (winter cold)
Example 2: Pressure control using purge and inert feed (distillation)

19
 Extra inputs, dynamically

• Exercise: Explain how “valve position control” fits into this

framework. As en example consider a heat exchanger with bypass

20
 QUIZ: Heat exchanger with bypass

closed

CW
qB

Thot

Nvalves
•Want tight = 3,of Thot
control N0valves = 2 (of 3), Nss = 3 – 2 = 1
•Primary input: CW
•Secondary input: qB
•Proposed control structure?

21
 Alternative 1

closed

CW
qB

TC Thot
Nvalves = 3, N0valves = 2 (of 3), Nss = 3 – 2 = 1
Use primary input CW: TOO SLOW

22
 Alternative 2

closed

CW
qB

Thot
Nvalves = 3, N0valves TC
= 2 (of 3), Nss = 3 – 2 = 1

Use “dynamic” input qB

Advantage: Very fast response (no delay)
Problem: qB is too small to cover whole range
+ has small steady-state effect

23
 Alternative 3: Use both inputs (with input resetting of dynamic input)

closed

CW
qB
qBs
Thot
FC
Nvalves = 3, N0valves TC
= 2 (of 3), Nss = 3 – 2 = 1

TC: Gives fast control of Thot using the “dynamic” input qB

FC: Resets qB to its setpoint (IRV) (e.g. 5%) using the “primary” input CW
IRV = ideal resting value

24 Also called: “valve position control” (Shinskey) and “midranging control” (Sweden)
 Too few inputs

• Must decide which output (CV) has the highest priority

– Selectors
• Implementation: Several controllers have the same MV
– Selects max or min MV value
– Often used to handle changes in active constraints

• Example: one heater for two rooms. Both rooms: T>20C

– Max-selector
– One room will be warmer than setpoint.
• Example: Petlyuk distillation column
– Heat input (V) is used to control three compositions using max-selector
– Two will be better than setpoint (“overpurified”) at any given time

25
 Divided wall column example

26
 Control of primary variables

• Purpose: Keep primary controlled outputs c=y1 at optimal setpoints cs

• Degrees of freedom: Setpoints y2s in reg.control layer
• Main structural issue: Decentralized or multivariable?

27
 Decentralized control
(single-loop controllers)
Use for: Noninteracting process and no change in active constraints
+ Tuning may be done on-line
+ No or minimal model requirements
+ Easy to fix and change
- Need to determine pairing
- Performance loss compared to multivariable control
- Complicated logic required for reconfiguration when active constraints
move

28
 Multivariable control
(with explicit constraint handling = MPC)
Use for: Interacting process and changes in active constraints
+ Easy handling of feedforward control
+ Easy handling of changing constraints
• no need for logic
• smooth transition
- Requires multivariable dynamic model
- Tuning may be difficult
- Less transparent
- “Everything goes down at the same time”

29
 Model predictive control (MPC) =
“online optimal control”

ydev=y-ys Discretize in time:

udev=u-us

Note: Implement only current input Δu1

30
 Implementation MPC project
(Stig Strand, Statoil)

• Initial MV/CV/DV selection

• DCS preparation (controller tuning, instrumentation, MV handles, communication logics etc)
• Control room operator pre-training and motivation
• Product quality control  Data collection (process/lab)  Inferential model

• MV/DV step testing  dynamic models

• Model judgement/singularity analysis  remove models? change models?

• MPC pre-tuning by simulation  MPC activation – step by step and with care – challenging different
constraint combinations – adjust models?
• Control room operator training
• MPC in normal operation, with at least 99% service factor

DCS = “distributed control system” = Basic PID control layer

31 31
 Depropaniser Train 100 – 24-VE-107 24
HC
24 24
24 PC PDC 1015
PI 1021
1020 Flare
1014

24
TI
1020
24 B = C2
AR
C = C3
1008
D = iC4 24 24
TI LC
24-HA-103 1021 24-VA-102 1010
A/B
48
40
24
TI
1011 39 Kjølevann

35
24 34
TI 24
1017 33 FC
24 24 1008
TI LC
21
1005 1001

25
24LC1001.VYA 24
TI FI
1038 1003
24 24
20 FC TI 24-PA-102A/B Propane
Bottoms from deetaniser 24 1009 1013
PD
18 1009
24
TI
1012 17 Normally 0 flow, used for start-ups to remove inerts

24
TC
6

5
Controlled variables (CV) = Product qualities, column deltaP ++
1022

1
Manipulated variables (MV) = Set points to PID controllers
24
Disturbance variables (DV) = Feedforward AR
1005
C = C3
E = nC4
24 F = C5+
PC
1010 24-VE-107
24
LC
1009

LP steam 24
LC
1026 Debutaniser 24-VE-108

LP condensate

32 32 24
TI
1018
 Depropaniser Train100 step testing
• 3 days – normal operation during night
•

DV =Feedrate

MV1 = L

MV2 = Ts

CV1=TOP COMPOSITION

CV2=BOTTOM COMPOSITION

CV3=¢p
33 33
 Estimator: inferential models
• Analyser responses are delayed – temperature measurements respond 20 min earlier
• Combine temperature measurements  predicts product qualities well

CV1=TOP COMPOSITION

Calculated by 24TI1011 (tray 39)

CV2=BOTTOM COMPOSITION

Calculated by 24TC1022 (t5), 24TI1018 (bottom), 24TI1012 (t17) and 24TI1011 (t39)

34 34
 Depropaniser Train100 step testing – Final model
• Step response models:
• MV1=reflux set point increase of 1 kg/h
• MV2=temperature set point increase of 1 degree C
• DV=output increase of 1%.

MV1 = L MV2 = Ts DV =Feedrate

V1=TOP COMPOSITION 3 t 20 min

V2=BOTTOM COMPOSITION

CV3=¢p

35 35
Depropaniser Train100 MPC – controller activation
• Starts with 1 MV and 1 CV – CV set point changes, controller tuning, model verification and
corrections
• Shifts to another MV/CV pair, same procedure
• Interactions verified – controls 2x2 system (2 MV + 2 CV)
• Expects 3 – 5 days tuning with set point changes to achieve satisfactory performance
MV1 = L
CV1=TOP COMPOSITION

MV2 = Ts CV2=BOTTOM COMPOSITION

DV =Feedrate

36
CV3=¢p
36
 Another column:
0 – 65%
Deethanizer PC 65-100%
CV Flare

Propane Fuel gas

Heat ex to boilers

34

28
FC
LC
23 Reflux drum

FC 21

Feed from stabilizators 20

DV FC
FC
16

Product pumps
10

MV MV Reflux pumps
TC 1 Quality estimator
PC

LC
CV
LP Steam
LC
CV
Quality estimator

37 LP Condensate
To Depropaniser
 Top: Binary separation in this case
Quality estimator vs. gas chromatograph
(use logarithmic composition to reduce nonlinearity, CV = - ln ximpurity)

7 temperatures

2 temperatures

38
=little difference if the right temperatures are chosen
 The final test: MPC in closed-loop

CV1

MV1

CV2

MV2

CV3

DV
39
 Conclusion MPC

• Generally simpler than previous advanced control

• Well accepted by operators
• Statoil: Use of in-house technology and expertise successful

40
 Outline

• Skogestad procedure for control structure design

I Top Down
• Step S1: Define operational objective (cost) and constraints
• Step S2: Identify degrees of freedom and optimize operation for disturbances
• Step S3: Implementation of optimal operation
– What to control ? (primary CV’s) (self-optimizing control)
• Step S4: Where set the production rate? (Inventory control)
II Bottom Up
• Step S5: Regulatory control: What more to control (secondary CV’s) ?
• Step S6: Supervisory control
• Step S7: Real-time optimization

41
 Sigurd Skogestad

Optimization layer (RTO)

• Purpose: Identify active constraints and

compute optimal setpoints (to be implemented
by control layer)
RTO

CVs
MPC

PID

MVs

Process
42
 An RTO sucess story: Statoil Mongstad Crude
oil preheat train

Max T

20 heat exchangers, 5 DOFs (splits), 85 flow andf temperature measurments

43
 Symposium Chemical Process Control 6, Tucson, Arizona, 7-12 Jan. 2001,
Preprints pp. 476-480. Published in AIChE Symposium Series, 98 (326), pp. 403-
407. ISBN 0-8169-0869-9 (2002).

44
 European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering 11,
Kolding, Denmark, 27-30 May 2001, Elsevier, pp. 1041-1046.

45
 Data reconcilation

”All” variables are reconciled: Flows, feed temperatures, UA-values....

46
 Optimization: 2% energy reduction

47
In service for 20 years
 Improvements

Max T

20 heat exchangers, 5 DOFs (splits), 85 flow and temperature measurements

48
 An RTO failure: Complete Statoil Kårstø
gas processing plant

Plan: 20 + distillation columns, 4 parallel trains, steam system,...

49
 Alternative to Real-Time Opimization:
Indirect optimization using control layer

Use off-line optimization to identify

controlled variables (CV):
- Active constraints RTO
- Self-optimizing variables CVs

MPC

PID
MVs

50 Process
 Step S7. Optimization layer (RTO)

• Purpose: Identify active constraints and compute optimal setpoints (to

be implemented by supervisory control layer)
• Main structural issue: Do we need RTO? (or is process self-
optimizing)

• RTO not needed when

– Can “easily” identify change in active constraints (operating region)
– For each operating region there exists self-optimizing variables

51
 Question

• Why not combine RTO and control in a single

layer with economic cost function (N-MPC =
D-RTO)? RTO
• Why is this not used?
CVs
• What alternatives are there?
MPC

PID

MVs

Process
52