CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control

Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |1

4.2 Set Point Step Test (Normal Operation)

In set point test of Normal Operation, it began by using First (I) PID trial value, the SV
were increased with values of 2.4 m3/hr, 2.8 m3/hr, 3.2 m3/hr, 3.8 m3/hr and 4.2 m3/hr where the
graph responses were observed in the Figure 2 until it became steady before increased the SV to
another value respectively.

From the observation, it showed that the First (1) trial values were able to control lower
flow of SV which were from 2.4 m3/hr to 2.8 m3/hr while it was vice versa for the higher flow
which were from 3.2 m3/hr to 4.2 m3/hr. The lower flow gave less fluctuation or damping curve
while the higher flow gave too oscillatory curves which only being proven when the SV was 3.2
m3/hr. The SV of 3.8 m3/hr and 4.2 m3/hr did not show oscillation because there were some poor
control that may resulted by improper installation of flow meter or poor experimental practices.

SENIOR
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |2

Figure 3: The graph response of Second (II) PID trial values with increasing values of SV

Then, the experiment proceeded with second (II) PID trial values which were PB =
150%, TI1 = 10s, and TD1 = 0s which were set in M mode. Then, the FIC21 was set back to A
mode. The SV started with 2.8 m3/hr before increased it to 3.2 m3/hr, 3.8 m3/hr, and 4.2 m3/hr
when it became steady. The observations of the graph curves were made in the Figure 3. From
the observation, it showed that second (II) PID trial values able to control the all the SV values
where the damping curves were improved but the control responses were not satisfactory. The
response became slower and sluggish resulted poor set point recovery. It can be concluded
between the observations between Figure 2 and Figure 3 that higher PB and TI1 values were
better than the lower values in controlling higher SV but the lower values were better in
controlling lower SV compared to the higher values.

Figure 4: The graph response of the PID Controller tuning (Normal Operation)

Next, the experiment continued with the PID Controller Tuning (Normal Operation) by using the
First (1) PID Trial Values and with the M mode, the MV was set to 100% in order to ensure the
flow was maximum. The observation of the graph was made in the Figure 4. The downward of
CF (Pattern 4) occurred when the mode of the FIC21 was set to Cascade (C) mode and the
upward of CF (Pattern 5) occurred when the mode was changed to M mode. In order to check the
maximum flow rate for CF, pump P21 was started. The maximum value of CF was recorded. In
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |3

the other hand, to check the maximum flow rate of Wild Flow (WF) which was indicated by the
green pen, both pumps P22A and P22B was started. The maximum value of WF was recorded.
From the observations the maximum value of CF was 4.43 m3/hr and WF was 1.13 m3/hr. The
value of process ratio was calculated which was 3.92 by using the following formula:

Controlled flow ( CF )
Process ratio , PR=
Wild flow (WF)

4.3 PID Controller Tuning (Normal Operation)

At this part, the Flow Ratio controller was changed to Cascade mode. As the FIC 21, in manual
mode and MV 100%, the 1st trial PID value was set to:

PB 1= 100% TI 1=5sec TD 1=0 sec

The maximum CF and WF flow rates were proceeded as followed:-

2
CF reading = Pump 21 and read CF at the recorder FR21 (Channel 1)

WF reading = Pump P22A/B and read WF at the recorder FR21 (Channel 2) 1

Figure 4.2 Responses for PID Controller Tuning.

Based on the figure 4.2 above, SV is no longer operator set, but is remotely cascaded. As
the theory, cascaded was when variable control will be at the same values. Therefore, the green
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |4

pen starts to operate to the set point. At this part, the green pen and red pen were take part their
function as well as the flow ratio controller.

Form the result above, at the point 1 the red pen, CF was show the under dumping
response while the green pen, WC still in steady condition. When the pump 22A and 22B was
opened, at point 1, the controller flow, CF show the under damping was decrease from 70% to
12%. Then the response increase rapidly to 84% and became steadily. However, the wild flow,
WF was also have response where it totally increasing approximately to 40% and became
steadily. After that, both pump 22A and 22B were off, the response for both flow were obviously
can shows at the figure 4.2 above. At point 2, the response of controlled flow, CF was decreasing
as well as the wild flow, WF off to the 0%. This is because of the operation during the process
was fully off. Therefore, both of the flows were totally decrease rapidly to 0%.

Other than that, in this part was also to determine the value of R and PR by using:

CF( FT 22)
=PR=R
WF (FT 21)

In order to get the value of R and PR was due to the control panel that records the value of FT22
as channel 1 and FT21 as channel 2. From the panel control shows that:

Channel 1 = 5.6

Channel 2 = 2.29

5.6
PR=R=
2.29

PR = R = 2.18

Therefore, the process gain is 2.18 as well as the flow ration controller.

4.4 Flow Ratio Control, Linear PID (Normal Operation)

By using, 2nd trial PID values which was:

CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |5

PB 1=150% TI 1= 10 sec TD 1= 0 sec

In this part, there are 4 different test that test the wild flow, WF either use one or two WF where
also consider the value of R.

As for the result, it could be shown in the table below

Table 4.4.0: Result of the four test for Flow Ratio Control, Linear PID

PV=SV R
Test
1 (One Pump) PV=2.25,SV=2.25 1
2(Two Pump) PV=2.25,SV=2.25 1
3(One Pump) PV=4.03,SV=2.25 1.8
4(Two Pump) PV=4.09,SV=2.24 1.8

Based on the table 4.4.0, the main reason for the entire test were to get the value of R. Therefore,
from the result, the value of R could be founded by

CF
=PR=R
WF

From the table above, there are four value of R where for test 1 (one pump) and test 2 (two
pump), the value R were same as well as the ratio of controlled flow, CF and wild flow, WF are
same. While, for test 3 (one pump) and test 4 (one pump) also show the same value of R. other
than that, during the 4 test of wild flow pump, the PV value are equal with SV value. Therefore,
all of the test are in steady state condition.

4.3 Responses of Flow Ratio and Linear PID.

CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |6

Figure 5: The graph response of the flow ratio control, linear PID (Normal Operation)

From figure 4.3 above, the first step was use 2nd trials PID value and the result show the
process was at steady state at 82% but it decreasing slowly until 38%. While for green pen only
show the process is steadily at 38%. After that, the test 1 was applying by set the value of R is 1
and only use one wild flow pump where pump P21 and P22A start. Then, set in cascade mode.
From the figure above show the red pen response was increasing from 38% until 44% then the
flow was totally steady state. While the green pen show steady state too. Basically, to get R value
is also same with PR value. From test 1, PR value is 1 when the value of channel 1 is 2.25 and
channel 2 is 2.25. The process was continuing with test 2. In the test 2, there are use two wild
flow pump in order to get the value of R is 1. Same well as test 1 but in test 2 there are use
second pump P22B to disturb the wild flow. As the result for test 2, there red pen response was
totally steady state as well as the green pen too. The value of channel 1 and 2 are also same with
test 1.

However, for test 3 that use one wild flow pump and the pump P22B was stopped. The
value of R is 1.8, so the processes was run and record the data of channel 1 and 2 at control
panel. As the result, channel 1 is 4.03 and channel 2 is 2.25 thus, the value of PR is 1.8 as well as
the value of R. Meanwhile, from the figure above that the response of red pen is increasing from
38% to 66% and became steady condition. Last but not least, for test 4 pump P22B was start and
same with the test 3 where the R value is 1.8. Form the result above show the process was
became steady state at 66%. As the result, channel 1 is 4.09 and channel 2 is 2.24 thus, the value
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |7

of PR is 1.8 as well as the value of R There are some oscillatory occurred that can be consider as
rapid response.

Finally, the experiment proceeded with the Flow Ratio Control, Linear PID (Normal
Operation). It was conducted with the second (II) PID trial values throughout four test where the
observation was made in the Figure 5. A disturbance was applied by switching on and of the WF
pump (P22A and P22B) while CF pump (P21) was always opened. The by-pass valves (B21A,
B22A, and B22B) were shut but their discharge valve were opened.

For test 1, the PP2A was opened, the ratio, R was set to 1 and the mode was changed to C
mode where the controller was functioned as ratio controller. When the CF was steady and the
WF was in same oscillation for three cycle where both of them overlap with each other, the
recorded value of CF was 2.23 m3/hr and WF was 2.21 m3/hr which both of the values were the
same with the values of PV and SV respectively. Therefore, the PR value was calculated which
was 1 approximately and equivalent to the value of R. The value of PV was equivalent to SV.

For test 2, the experiment continued by switching on the P22B to apply disturbance.
When the CF was steady and the WF was in same oscillation for three cycle where both of them
overlap with each other, the recorded value of CF was 4.26 m3/hr and WF was 4.25 m3/hr which
both of the values were the same with the values of PV and SV respectively. Therefore, the PR
value was calculated which was 1 approximately and equivalent to the value of R. The value of
PV was equivalent to SV.

For test 3, the experiment continued by switching off the P22B and set the R to 1.8. From
the observation, it showed that the CF gave higher response than WF resulted by only one WF
pump was switched on and bigger ratio was set. When the CF was steady and the WF was in
same oscillation for three cycle, the recorded value of CF was 4.05 m3/hr and WF was 2.22 m3/hr
which both of the values were the same with the values of PV and SV respectively. Therefore,
the PR value was calculated which was 1.8 approximately and equivalent to the value of R. At
this test, the value of PV was not equivalent to SV.

For test 4, the experiment continued by switching on the P22B to apply disturbance.
From the observation, it showed that both CF and WF increased resulted by two WF pump was
switched on. When the CF was steady and the WF was in same oscillation for three cycle, the
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |8

recorded value of CF was 4.42 m3/hr and WF was 4.26 m3/hr which both of the values were the
same with the values of PV and SV respectively. Therefore, the PR value was calculated which
was 1 and not equivalent to the value of R. At this test, the value of PV was not equivalent to SV.
Therefore, it can be concluded that smaller ratio would be easier to control when the disturbance
occurred.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control Page |9

Figure 2: Response for PID single loop flow control

At this experiment, the flow consists of FT21-FIC21-FCY21/PP/CV21. The pump used was only
the pump 21. Next, for the 1st trial the PB 1= 100% TI 1= 5 sec TD 1= 0 sec, the SV was set to
1.8 m3/hr and manually adjust the MV=PV. Then, FIC21 was maintained at Auto mode while the
response were observed and recorded.

The panel mount PID controller (FIC21) was set to Manual (M) and manipulated value
(MV) was set to 100 % before the normal operation of set-point step test was started where in the
First (1) PID trial values:

PB1 = 100%, TI1 = 5s, TD1 = 0s, and then the set-point (SV) was set to 1.8 m3/hr.

The MV was adjusted to be same value as SV where MV=SV=0 %, and it was

determined that the RED pen (controlled flow, CF) curve went downward in a quite short time
during adjustment. When CF was steady, FIC21 was set to Auto (A) mode and through
observation the graph inclined before starting to be steady. When CF became steady, values of
PB, t1 and TD1 were recorder which are 100 %, 5s and 0s, respectively.
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control P a g e | 10

As you can see from the graph, the initial value of SV starts at 1.8m3/hr. The disturbance was
applied by increasing the value of SV to 2.4, 2.8, 3.2, 3.6, 4.0 and 4.2 m3/hr. The flow response
(red pen) was observe carefully until its oscillate 3 cycle or shows a steady line to change the
SV value. By increasing the value of SV, the red line will fluctuate even more.

The same process was repeated with 2nd PID values : PB1 = 150%, TI1 = 10 sec, TD1 = 0 sec,
GW1 = 0.0% and GG1 = 1.0.

The disturbance was applied by decreasing the value of SV from 4.2 to 4.0, 3.6, 3.2, 2.8 and 2.4
m3/hr. By decreasing the value of SV, the red line will declining even more.
CPB30004- Process Dynamics and Control
Experiment 2: Flow Ratio Process Control P a g e | 11