PWC2

Process
Control
Laboratory
2. Single-Loop Control Enhancements
2.1 PID controller enhancements
2.1.1 The ideal PID controller
2.1.2 Derivative filter
2.1.3 Setpoint weighting
2.1.4 Handling integrator windup
2.1.5 Industrial PID controllers
2.2 Model-based controllers
2.2.1 Time-delay compensation
2.2.2 Internal model control (IMC)
2.2.3 Gain scheduling
2.2.4 Sampled-data control
2.3 Use of extra measurements
2.3.1 Cascade control
2.3.2 Feedforward control
2.3.3 Selective control

KEH Plantwide Control 21
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4 Use of extra actuators
2.4.1 Split-range control
2.4.2 Coordinated control
2.4.3 Valve position control
Process
Control
Laboratory
The basic feedback control loop

[WJ]

= measured output (= controlled variable)
= disturbance (acting on output)
= control (manipulated) variable
= setpoint (desired value of controlled variable)
= = control error
r e
d
y u
Process
Control
Laboratory
Control-loop enhancements
In single-loop control, the objective is to control the measured output
(a single variable) well according to some criterion, using a control signal
affecting a single actuator.
In this chapter we are considering ways of improving the control of
when basic single-loop control is insufficient (because of the process
properties).
The methods include
enhancements to the ideal PID controller
model-based controllers
use of extra measurements
use of extra actuators
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements
PID controller (pee-i-dee) is a generic name for a controller containing a
linear combination of
proportional (P)
integral (I)
derivative (D)
terms acting on a control error (or sometimes the process output).
All parts need not be present. Frequently I and/or D action is missing,
giving a controller like
P, PI, or PD controller
It has been estimated that of all controllers in the world
95 % are PID controllers

Process
Control
Laboratory
2. Single-Loop Control Enhancements 2.1 PID controller enhancements
2.1.1 The ideal PID controller
Control law
=
c
+
1
0
+
d
d()
d
+
0

=
c
+
i

0
+
d
d()
d
+
0

Transfer function
=
c
1 +
1
+
d
=

c
1 +
i
+
i
2

Block diagrams [M]

A possible way of imple-
menting a PI controller

( ) G s
c
K
1
i
K s
d
K s
c
K
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1.2 Derivative filter
Problems with derivative term
measurement noise
setpoint changes
cannot be implemented exactly
A solution [Silva et al.: PID Controllers for Time-
include derivative filter Delay Systems, Birkhuser, 2005]
do not differentiate setpoint
=
c
+
1
0

d
d
f
()
d
+
0
,
f
d
f
d
+
f
=
=
c
1 +
1

c

d
f
+1
()

An easy way of implementing
a differentiator + filter exactly
[M]
f
1
1 T s
+
c
K
d
c c
f
T
K K
T
=
y
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1.3 Setpoint weighting
A controller has (or can have) two main tasks
disturbance rejection
setpoint tracking
A problem is that the optimal tuning of a standard PID controller for one
of the tasks is seldom (even close to) optimal for the other task.
One solution to this problem is to use
setpoint weighting

p
(t) () (), () () (),
d
() ()
f
()
=
c

p
+
1
0
+
d
d
d
()
d
+
0
,
f
d
f
d
+
f
=
=
c
+
1
+
d

c
1 +
1
+

d
f
+1

=
vPID

PIDf
()

Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements 2.1.3 Setpoint weighting
The controller is a special case of a
two-degrees-of-freedom (2DOF) controller

[Visioli]

An equivalent structure ( =
vPID
/
PIDf
)

[Visioli]
PIDf
G
vPID
G
G
G
u
PIDf
G
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements 2.1.3 Setpoint weighting
Control illustration [WJ]

Response of system to a setpoint change and a load disturbance
for controller with different values of (= in equations).
u
y
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1.4 Handling integrator windup
A practical problem with integral action in a controller (a PI or PID
controller) is integrator windup. This can occur when the control signal
reaches a constraint, e.g., a valve fully open or closed.
Control illustration of integrator windup [H]
PI control of an integrating
process, when the control
signal is limited as
0.1 0.1.
The setpoint change causes
the control signal to
saturate momentarily
(because of the value of
c
).
Control law:
=
c
+
=

c
0

Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements 2.1.4 Handling integrator windup
There are several ways to avoid integrator windup. One possibility is to
stop updating the integral when the actuator saturates; this is called
conditional integration.
A more advanced method is to
recompute the integral term so that its new value gives an output at
the saturation limit; this is called back-calculation (or tracking).
However, it is advantageous not to reset the integrator immediately, but
dynamically, as illustrated in the block diagram.
( ) G s
t
K
i
K
c
K
d
K s
f
1
1 T s +
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements 2.1.4 Handling integrator windup
c
K
For a PI controller, a simplified
anti-windup scheme, corre-
sponding to
t
=
i
/
c
, is
shown in the block diagram. [Visioli]

Control illustration with anti-windup technique [H]
The process is the same
as in the integrator windup
illustration.
Here anti-windup using
back-calculation is applied.
Notice that the output of
the integrator is quickly
reset to a value such that
the controller output is at
the saturation limit, giving
the integral a negative
value during the initial phase.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1.5 Industrial PID controllers
Industrial PID controllers in automation systems contain many more
special functions than those presented above.
The following illustration is not even an extreme case.

PID block with the inputs and
outputs required for various
forms of tracking. [Smith]
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.1 PID controller enhancements 2.1.5 Industrial PID controllers
Inputs and outputs for the
PID block. [Smith]
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2 Model-based controllers
In spite of its simplicity, a PID controller can be tuned to perform
surprisingly well for processes with simple dynamics.
The structure of the PID controller is not general enough to give good
control of
time-delay processes
processes with complex
dynamics (e.g., inverse
response)
The figure [WJ] illustrates
PI control of a first-order
time-delay process for both
setpoint and load changes.
A larger controller gain in order to make the response faster would give a
more oscillatory response, which is not desired (in this case).
Better control can be achieved by a
model-based controller, whose structure depends the process model
Process
Control
Laboratory
2. Single-Loop Control Enhancements 2.2 Model-based controllers
2.2.1 Time-delay compensation
Consider a time-delay system [WJ]

p
=
0
()e

where is the time delay and
0
() is the time-delay-free part of the
system.
Assume that a (PID) controller ()
is designed for control of
0
().
For the fictitious system
0
(),
this gives the closed-loop system

0r
() =

0
()
1+
0
()

Assume now that a controller
c
() is used to control the true time-
delay system
p
. The closed-loop system is then

r
=

p

c

1+
p

c

=
e
0

c

1+e
0

c

C
0
G
r e u y
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2 Model-based controllers 2.2.1 Time-delay compensation
Can we design
c
() to achieve
r
=
0r
() ? No, because

c
= ()e
+
is not realizable (unless () contains a time delay )
if the uncontrolled system has a time delay , the controlled system
cannot have a time delay <
Can we achieve
r
=
0r
()e
, i.e., a closed-loop system

r

that behaves exactly as
0r
(), except for the time-delay ? Yes, if

0

c

1+e
0

c

=

0
()
1+
0
()

can be achieved with a realizable controller
c
()
Solving gives

c
=

1+(1e
)
0

=

1+[
0

p
()]

c
is realizable as shown
in the block diagram! [WJ]
It is called a Smith predictor

c
G
C
p
G
p 0
G G
r
Process
Control
Laboratory
Control illustration with Smith predictor [WJ]

The system is the same as was controlled with a standard PI controller
previously.
Because of the time-delay compensation, it was possible to use a five
time larger controller gain.
This resulted in faster control responses, both for setpoint changes
and load disturbances, without oscillations and with small overshoot.
Process
Control
Laboratory
An alternative way of implementing a Smith predictor

p
=
0
()e
is the true system

p
=
0
()e
is a model of the system

However, the Smith predictor also has drawbacks
it does not work for unstable (or even integrating) systems
0
()
a disturbance is amplified for certain frequencies
0
G
e
Ls
0
G

e
Ls
c
G
r
y
C
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.2 Internal model control (IMC)
Consider the block diagram, where

IMC
is a controller

p
is a model of the true system
p

The dashed rectangle corresponds
to a controller
c
in a standard feed-
back loop. It can be expressed as

c
=

IMC
()
1
IMC
()
p
()

The closed-loop transfer function is

r
=

p

c

1+
p

c

=

p

IMC
()
1+ [
p

p
]
IMC

p

IMC
()
To obtain a desired closed-loop system
r
,
IMC
() should be
chosen as

IMC

p
1

r
()
p
1

r
()

Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2 Model-based controllers 2.2.2 Internal model control (IMC)
Is this always possible? No, it does not work if

p
() (or
p
) is unstable

p
contains a zero in the right-half plane (which is not cancelled by an
identical zero in
r
()), because it gives an unstable controller
IMC
()

p
contains a time delay (not cancelled by a time delay in
r
())
An improved design procedure
The model is factored as
p
=
()
(), where

() contains all non-minimum phase factors of
p
(i.e., RHP zeros
and time delays), but no minimum phase factors, and normalized so that
0 = 1 (i.e., the static gain is 1)

() contains all minimum phase factors of
p

IMC
() is calculated as
IMC
=
f
()[
()]
1
, where

f
() is a filter usually of the form
f
= 1/(
r
+ 1)
with large
enough to make
IMC
() proper
If the model is perfect (i.e.,
p
=
p
()), the closed-loop transfer
function
r
=
f
(), which gives an indication how to choose
f
()
Process
Control
Laboratory
Illustration of internal model control [WJ]

The system is the same as was previously controlled with a standard PI
controller and a Smith predictor.
The overshoot in the step response has disappeared.
The step response is slightly slower than with pure time-delay
compensation it could be tuned to become faster, but then an
imperfect model might worsen the control performance.
Process
Control
Laboratory
IMC-based tuning of PID controllers
The IMC methodology is often used for tuning a standard PID controller
The IMC-based expression for
c
, i.e.,
c
= (1
IMC
p
)
1
IMC
, is
converted to the form of a PID controller
if a time delay is present, it has to be approximated;
usually a Pad approximation e
1 , e
(1 + )
1
, or
e
(1
1
2
)(1 +
1
2
)
1
, is used
other dynamical elements not conforming to the structure of a PID
controller also have to be approximated (e.g., by a Taylor series expansion)
The PID controller is implemented in a standard feedback loop
the structural advantage of a true IMC implementation is lost
it is a convenient model based way of tuning a PID controller
A drawback of the IMC design procedure is that it is based on cancel-
lation of poles and zeros (this also holds for the true IMC structure)
as a result of this, the response to load disturbances may be poor
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.2 Internal model control (IMC) IMC-based tuning of PID controllers
The following table presents IMC-based PID controller tunings based on a
Pad approximation of the time delay.

r
is a design parameter chosen by the user
essentially,
r
is the desired time constant of the closed-loop system
Process
Control
Laboratory
Optimized IMC-based tunings for PI/PID/PIDf controllers
The approximation
of
c
is optimized to
allow a PID controller
with a derivative
filter (PIDf)

r
is a design
parameter chosen
by the user
a PI or PID con-
troller is obtained
simply by omitting
unwanted parts
negative derivative
(T
d
) or filter (T
f
)
time constants
should not be used!
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.3 Gain scheduling
In many situations it is known how the dynamics of a process change with
the operating conditions of the process.
One source for the change in dynamics may be nonlinearities.
If the nonlinearities are known, it is possible to change the parameters
of the controller on-line by monitoring the operating conditions.
This strategy is called gain scheduling.
A major difficulty in the design of a gain scheduling mechanism, is to find
suitable monitoring or scheduling variables, which
give desired information about the operating conditions
can be used for adjusting controller parameters
Gain-scheduling can be implemented in various ways.
Controller parameters are determined in advance for a number of
operating conditions and selected based on the scheduling variable(s).
Controller parameters (mainly the controller gain) are calculated as a
(nonlinear) function of the scheduling variables(s).
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2 Model-based controllers 2.2.3 Gain scheduling
Example [WJ]
A simple feedback loop with
a nonlinear valve is shown in
the figure. The static valve
characteristic is
= =
4
, 0
Since the valve is nonlinear,
the control system can
perform well at one opera-
ting point, but poorly at
other operating points.
The simulations show the
control performance with
fixed controller parameters
for a setpoint change at
three different operating
points.
c
K
r
y
u
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.3 Gain scheduling Example
One way of improving the
control performance over
the whole operating range
is to introduce an inverse
of the valve characteristic
between the controller and
the valve.
The simulations show
the control performance
obtained with gain
scheduling.
To make the example more
realistic, an approximate
inverse of the valve is used.
y
u
r
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.4 Sampled-data control
In practice, controllers are implemented in computers.
The control algorithm is executed repeatedly with a given frequency
the time between repetitions is called sampling interval (or period or time);
measurements (samples) are available only at the start of a new run;
control actions can be implemented only after the algorithm has been
executed (usually done at the following sampling instant).
This introduces a time
delay in the control loop.
Control of a process
working in continuous
time with a controller
working in discrete
time is called
sampled-data control.

Figure from [WJ].
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2 Model-based controllers 2.2.4 Sampled-data control
Aliasing
Aliasing is a phenomenon caused by the sampling mechanism.

[WJ]

The figure shows two sinusoidals, one with the frequency 0.9 Hz (full
line), the other with the frequency 0.1 Hz (dashed line).
When both sinusoidals are sampled with the frequency 1 Hz, they
have the same value at each sampling instant!
Thus, the signals cannot be distinguished from each other (because
information is lost due to sampling).
In practice, the high-frequency signal will be interpreted as a lower-
frequency signal.
Can this be avoided?
prefiltering (a high-frequency signal is probably mainly noise)
a higher sampling frequency
Process
Control
Laboratory
Selecting a sampling frequency
A fundamental sampling property is that a frequency higher than the
Nyquist frequency
N
/ , where is the sampling interval,
cannot be distinguished from a signal in the frequency range [0,
N
].
If
max
is the highest frequency of interest (after prefiltering), the
sampling interval should satisfy /
max
.
However, selecting the sampling interval according to the sampling
theorem is not sufficient to enable good control.
Guidelines from a control perspective [from various sources]
use 10 times higher sampling frequency than
max
(i.e., 0.1/
max
)
the sampling interval should be between 10 and 25 % of the rise time of
the controlled system
a full oscillation (of interest) should give 1545 samples
the sampling frequency should be 1030 times the bandwidth (which is
the frequency where the closed-loop gain is 1/ 2)
Note: 2/
s
, where
s
is the sampling frequency expressed in
radians per time unit.
Process
Control
Laboratory
Intersample ripple
A possible problem in sampled-data control is the intersample behaviour.
The figure illustrates sample-data control of a step change in the setpoint
(in a particular case).
if only the sample points of the output are considered, the step
response looks like the response of a first-order system
the true continuous-time value of oscillates; this is called
intersample ripple (or ringing)
the input signal oscillates at sample points (and continuously)

= sampling point, full line = continuous-time value [SEMD]
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.4 Sampled-data control Intersample ripple
In particular, intersample ripple can occur when a discrete-time controller
has been designed based on a discrete-time (sampled) model.
When a continuous-time model is sampled using standard techniques,
the transfer function of the sampled model often receives a zero close
to (but > than) = 1 even if the continuous-time model has no zero;
e.g. =
e
(
1
+1)(
2
+1)

1
=

0
+
1
1
1+
1
1
+
2
1
,
0
< 1.
If the controller design is based on the inverse of
1
,
0
+
1
1
becomes a pole of the controller, i.e., a controller pole
close to = 1, which causes intersample ripple.
Two solutions
replace
0
+
1
1
in the model by
0
+
1
(Dahlins modification)
include
0
+
1
1
as a zero in the desired closed-loop transfer function
(Vogel-Edgar modification); in discrete-time IMC design,
0
+
1
1
is
included in the filter

Process
Control
Laboratory
2.2.4 Sampled-data control Intersample ripple
The figure illustrates sample-data control using the Vogel-Edgar design
modification [SEMD]
no intersample ripple
no oscillations in the control signal

Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3 Use of extra measurements
Summary of single-loop feedback control
Advantages
achieves zero steady-state control error (if integral action is used)
uses only one measurement
algorithm and tuning rules are readily available
Disadvantages
control is activated only after an error is detected in the process output
control performance can be poor for some combinations of
disturbances and dynamics
poor feedback can cause instability

If the control performance is unacceptable, it might be possible to
improve it by including extra measurements.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2. Single-Loop Control Enhancements 2.3 Use of extra measurements
2.3.1 Cascade control
If the performance of single-loop feedback control is poor, the difficulty
may arise from
disturbances with a delayed or slow effect on the measured output
varying process parameters or nonlinear effects
In both cases, the desired performance improvement on the controlled
variable might be achieved by using an extra measurement , called a
secondary variable, with the following properties:
it is affected by a disturbance or process parameter variation (a non-
linearity), which causes poor control of
it is affected by the manipulated variable used to control
its dynamics are faster than the dynamics of
If these criteria are fulfilled, the control of the primary variable can be
improved by cascade control, where
the secondary variable is controlled by a secondary (or slave)
controller, which receives its setpoint from
a primary (or master) controller controlling the primary variable
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3 Use of extra measurements 2.3.1 Cascade control
Block diagram [WJ]

p
=
p1
p2
= process

c1
= primary controller

c2
= secondary controller

1
= measurement of primary variable

2
= measurement of secondary variable

r1
= setpoint for primary controller (variable)

r2
= setpoint for secondary controller (variable)

1
= disturbance not affecting secondary variable

2
= disturbance affecting secondary variable

Process
Note: The primary variable
is the variable we want to
control, the secondary
variable is controlled only
to improve the control.
Process
Control
Laboratory
Analysis
To analyse the properties of cascade control, let us consider the two
limiting cases
no secondary controller is used (i.e., feedback by one controller)
the secondary controller is perfect (i.e.,
2
follows
r2
perfectly)
In the case of no secondary controller (
c2
= 1,
t2
= 0)

1
=

d1
1
+
p1
d2
2
+
p1
p2
c1
r1
1+
t1
p1
p2
c1

In the case of perfect secondary control (
2
=
t2
1
r2
)

1
=

d1
1
+
t2
1
p1
c1
r1
1+
t2
1
t1
p1
c1

What conclusions can we draw concerning the (possible) advantages of
cascade control over single-loop control?
the cascade controller is less sensitive disturbances in
2

the cascade controller is less sensitive to variations in
p2

the primary controller can be tuned to better handle disturbances in
1
and setpoint changes in
r1

Process
Control
Laboratory
Design and tuning guidelines
The choice of secondary measurement is essential, since the secon-
dary loop ideally should enable perfect control of this loop. Therefore
the secondary loop should not contain any time delay or RHP zero
the essential disturbance to be cancelled should enter the secondary loop
the settling time of secondary loop should be significantly faster than the
primary loop dynamics
Choice of secondary controller type
the secondary controller can often be a pure P controller
derivative action may be included to improve the bandwidth of the loop
integral action may be useful mainly if
p1
contains significant time delay
Controller tuning
the secondary controller is tuned first
the primary controller
can then be tuned, e.g.,
based on a redrawn
block diagram, where
the secondary con-
troller is already tuned
2 t2 p2 c2
L G G G =
Process
Control
Laboratory
Control illustration [SEMD]
The figures illustrate the kind of control improvements that can be
achieved by cascade control.

Step disturbance in
1
Step disturbance in
2

Process
Control
Laboratory
Multiple cascade levels
Because of static and dynamic friction, control
valves often stick and do not (easily) achieve the
position commanded by the controller. Often a
valve positioner, which is a built-in controller in
the valve, is used to overcome this problem.
This means that a simple flow control loop
is usually a cascade loop. If the flowrate
setpoint is given by a (primary) controller,
it becomes a 3-level cascade.
The principle can be extended.
If the valve for the cooling
water makeup is controlled
by a valve positioner and a
flow rate controller (not
shown in the figure), the
two-level temperature
control cascade makes this a
4-level cascade.
Process
Control
Laboratory
Exercise
Discuss the advantages and
disadvantages of the shown
control structures for control
of the temperature of an
exothermic reactor.
[Figures from Smith]
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3.2 Feedforward control
An obvious limitation of feedback control is that corrective actions can not
be taken before a disturbance is noticed in the controlled variable.
In many process control applications it is possible to measure the
disturbances affecting the system.
Typical examples are concentration or temperature changes in the feed to a
chemical reactor or distillation column.
Measurements of these disturbances can be used to make control
actions before anything is noticed in the output of the process.
It is then possible to make the system respond more quickly than if only
feedback is used.
This is known as feedforward control.
The measured variable, the feedforward variable, must satisfy the
following criteria:
it must indicate the occurrence of an important disturbance
the control variable must not affect the disturbance
if feedforward is combined with feedback, the disturbance dynamics
must not be significantly faster than the main input-output dynamics
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3 Use of extra measurements 2.3.2 Feedforward control
Block diagram [WJ]

p
and
v
are process transfer function

f
is a feedforward controller
The disturbance is totally eliminated from the output if

f
=
p

Process
Control
Laboratory
Comparison with feedback control
Feedforward Feedback
Advantages
acts before the effect of a dis-
turbance is seen in the output
good for slow systems and
time-delay systems
does not cause instability
Disadvantages
cannot handle unmeasured
disturbances
sensitive to variations in
process parameters
requires good knowledge of
the process model
Advantages
does not require disturbance
identification and measurement
insensitive to modelling errors
insensitive to variations in
process parameters
Disadvantages
does not act before the effect of
a disturbance is seen in the output
ineffective for slow systems and
time-delay systems
may create instability in the
closed-loop system
Process
Control
Laboratory
Design issues
The fact that the optimal feedforward controller is given by
f
=
p
,
i.e., the ratio between two (usually proper) transfer functions, may give
problems
if the magnitude of
v
(j) is large compared to the magnitude of
p
(j), the required control signal may be too large to be
implemented. This can be a problem both at
steady state, causing saturation of the control signal
higher frequencies, causing amplification of measurement noise
if
p
has more poles than
v
(i.e.,
p
is of higher order than
v
), the
feedforward controller will contain (high-order) derivatives of the
measured disturbance
if
p
contains a larger time delay than
v
, the feedforward controller
cannot be implemented exactly
For these reasons, an approximate feedforward controller is often
implemented.
Process
Control
Laboratory
Approximations
Assume that
p
=

p
(
p1
s+1)(
p2
s+1)
and
v
=

v
v
s+1
.
The optimal feedforward controller is then

f
=
v

p1
s+1
p2
s+1
p

v
s+1
=
v

p1
s+1
p

v
s+1

p2
s +1
which can be implemented as a series connection between an ideal PD
controller and a PD controller with filtering.
This might be unsatisfactory (for reasons mentioned previously). When
approximations are made, high-frequency components are usually
eliminated. This motivates the following kinds of approximations:

f

v
[
p1
+
p2
+1]
p

v
s+1
, i.e., a PD controller with filtering

f

p
, i.e., a P controller
Process
Control
Laboratory
Combined feedforward and feedback control
Feedforward control is usually used together with feedback control to
combine their advantages (and avoid their disadvantages).
The block diagram shows such a control structure [SEMD]. (Note that the
notation differs slightly from that in the previous block diagram.)
The feedback controller can essentially be tuned independently of the
feedforward controller.

Process
Control
Laboratory
Control illustration [WJ]
This example illustrates control of a tank system. The level is controlled
using the input flow. The output flow is a measurable disturbance. It is
assumed that there is a calibration error (bias) in the measurement of the
output flow.

p
() =
1

valve
=
1
+1

f
=
1
valve

= +1
Approximations to avoid
pure differential

f1
=

f
+1
+1

f2
= 1
r
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3.2 Feedforward control Control illustration

Feedforward control Feedforward + feedback control
f1 f
( ) , 0.1 G s T =
f 2
G
f 2
G
f1 f
( ) , 0.1 G s T =
nobias
bias 0.05 =
without feedforward
withfeedforward
Process
Control
Laboratory
Ratio control
Ratio control is a simple version of feedforward control, where the effect
of a disturbance is counteracted by maintaining a fixed ratio between two
variables (one of which is the disturbance). Typical examples are
to control the property of blended streams, e.g., the molar ratio of two
feed streams to a reactor to ensure a proper stoichiometric mixture
the ratio between the reflux and distillate flow rates in distillation
Consider the mixing of a hot stream and a cold stream to obtain a
given temperature in the mixed stream. Assume that one of the streams
is selected as control variable and the other is considered a disturbance.
The shown ratio control scheme will keep the ratio =
b

a
constant
if the RC controller contains integral action.
The control scheme has a clear drawback.
The gain between the control error
=
b

a
and
a
is

a
=
/
a
, i.e., inversely proportional to
a

for a given ratio . This means that the
control performance will vary with
a
. [King: Process Control, Wiley, 2011]
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3.2 Feedforward control Ratio control
The ratio control scheme shown here does
not have the problem of a varying gain.
Now the control error is
=
a

b

and the gain is

a
= , i.e., a
constant gain. This means that the control
performance will not vary with
a
.
If the desired ratio
b

a
is very small, or
very large, it might be better to define the
ratio as =
b
(
a
+
b
) . This ratio
scheme is shown to the right. It also has
the gain

a
= .
In practice, the
ratio control
scheme is
combined with
feedback control,
where the feed-
back controller is
adjusting .

Process
Control
Laboratory
Exercise [Smith]
Discuss the following control schemes for control of a hear exchanger.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3.3 Selective control
There are control systems that involve one manipulated variable and
more than one possible controlled variable. Since only one output can be
controlled by one control variable, the selective control system transfers
control from one output to another according to need.
A selective control system is possible if there is
one manipulated variable and several potential controlled variables
a causal relationship between the manipulated variable and each
controlled variable
there is a feasible operating point that satisfies all control objectives
There are many types of selective control systems. Here we consider only
two types
override control
auctioneering control
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3 Use of extra measurements 2.3.3 Selective control
Override control
During normal operation of a plant, or during its startup or shutdown, it is
possible that dangerous situations arise which may lead to destruction of
equipment or operating personnel.
In such cases, it is necessary to change from the normal control action to
one that can prevent a process variable from exceeding an allowable
upper or lower limit.
This change can be achieved through the use of switches.
A high selector switch (HSS, HS, >) selects the higher of two signals.
A low selector switch (LSS, LS, <) selects the lower of two signals.
The example illustrates override
control to protect a boiler system.
During normal operation, the
steam pressure is controlled by
the discharge line. However, if
the water level in the boiler falls
below an allowable limit, LSS
switches the discharge line from [Steph]
pressure control to level control.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.3 Use of extra measurements 2.3.3 Selective control
Auctioneering control
In auctioneering control, the measurement with the highest (or lowest)
value of a number of similar measurements is selected as controlled
variable.
The example illustrates
temperature control of
a tubular reactor with
highly exothermic
reactions. The so-called
hot spot, which is the
highest temperature in
the reactor, can be
(almost) anywhere in the
reactor. It is not allowed
to exceed a given limit.
The auctioneering system
finds the hotspot and
allows it to be controlled by [Steph]
the temperature controller.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4 Use of extra actuators
Another possibility to improve the control performance of single-loop
control is to use extra actuators (control signals). Typical situations are
to make it possible to achieve a larger range of setpoints than with a
single actuator
to speed up the dynamic response of a process during serious upsets
or transitions between setpoints
Often the applications involve a dual mode of operation, e.g.,
to heat or cool a process
to vent or bleed gases for pressure control
Requirements for this kind of control is that there is
one controlled variable and more than one manipulated variable
a causal relationship between each manipulated variable and the
controlled variable
a fixed priority ranking for the proper order of adjusting the
manipulated variables
Process
Control
Laboratory
2. Single-Loop Control Enhancements 2.4 Use of extra actuators
2.4.1 Split-range control
In split-range control, there is
one controller
the control signal is directed to an actuator depending on the value of
the control signal (i.e., it is split in parts, e.g., 050% and 50100%)
Illustration [Steph]
The block diagram illustrates split-range control of the pressure in a gas-
phase reactor. The pressure can be reduced by closing valve
1
and/or
opening valve
2
. The operating point is at 6 psi. Pressure disturbances
from 3 to 9 psi, are controlled by
2
with
1
fully open;
above 9 psi, they are controlled by
1
with
2
fully open.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4.2 Coordinated control
In coordinated control (also called parallel control), there is
more than one controller controlling the same output;
a given strategy to coordinate the actions of the controllers.
In the case of two controllers, one usually acts
fast, but is inaccurate or expensive to use;
slowly, but is accurate or inexpensive to use.
Note that only one controller can have integral action when several
controllers act simultaneously to control the same output. Why?
Illustration [OR]
The temperature in a heating tank is controlled.
During normal operation, it is controlled by
TC1 using process steam. The steam is cheap,
but the temperature response is rather slow.
For setpoint changes, an auxiliary heater and
cooler are used. They use expensive elec-
trical power, but the effect on temp. is fast.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4.3 Valve position control
Valve position control is a special type of coordinated control, where
two controllers act together to control the process output using two
manipulated variables
one of the controllers uses the output from the other controller as
input to adjust the position of a valve
In most valve position control applications the objective is process
optimization, which is achieved when the valve in question operates close
to a constraint (i.e., almost fully open or closed) or at some other desired
position. This maximizes or minimizes (or optimizes in some other way)
the use of the process stream controlled by the valve.
Valve position control resembles cascade control. With this interpretation
the valve position controller is the primary controller
the process output controller is the secondary controller
Note: A valve position controller is not a valve positioner.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4 Use of extra actuators 2.4.3 Valve position control
Illustration: Control of a heat exchanger using a bypass
The figure illustrates a heat exchanger with a bypass.
Most of the cold liquid is heated in the heat exchanger by steam
(controlled by controller TC2).
Part of the cold liquid is used for rapid and accurate control of the
temperature of the heated liquid (controller TC1).
To maximize controllability, the bypass valve must not operate near to
fully open or closed. Thus,
there is a desired value for the valve opening, e.g., 50% open;
controller TC2 has this value as setpoint;
controller TC2 controls
the steady-state value
of the valve opening;
controller TC1 controls
the temperature of
the heated liquid.
Process
Control
Laboratory
2.4 Use of extra actuators 2.4.3 Valve position control
Illustration: Maximizing the production rate of a reactor
The figure shows a reactor, where an exothermic reaction takes place.
Thus, it has to be cooled. In this case
it is desired to maximize the feed flow rate to the reactor;
the reactor temperature has to be controlled and it must not exceed a
given maximum value.
The control system with a valve position controller (VPC) works as follows:
the opening of the cooling water valve (CWV) is fed to the VPC;
the set point for the VPC is the desired opening of the CWV;
the VPC controls the CWV opening by adjusting the feed flow rate;
in order to maximize the
feed flow rate, the set-
point for the CWV opening
should be at the maximum
value, which still allows the
temperature to be control-
led, e.g., 90 % open.
(Note that the temperature [Smith]
control cascade is not shown.)

PWC2

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

PWC2

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Process

, i.e., a closed-loop system

is the true system

is a model of the system

() contains all non-minimum phase factors of

0 = 1 (i.e., the static gain is 1)

() contains all minimum phase factors of

Potrebbero piacerti anche