APPARATUS.......................................................................................1 PROCEDURE.......................................................................................2 RESULTS/CALCULATIONS.....................................................................5 QUESTION 1 ...............................................................................................................5 STEADY- STATE ENERGY BALANCE BETWEEN THE HOT TANK AND PRODUCT.........................................

5 QUESTION 2 ...............................................................................................................5 STEADY- STATE ENERGY BALANCE FOR HOLDING TUBE...............................................................5 QUESTION 3 ...............................................................................................................6 FOPDT MODEL RELATING EXIT TEMPERATURE T4 TO HEATER OUTPUT............................................6 QUESTION 4 ...............................................................................................................8 LINEARITY OF HEATER-OUTPUT-TO-TEMPERATURE DYNAMICS..........................................................8 QUESTION 5 ...............................................................................................................9 FOPDT MODEL RELATING EXIT TEMPERATURE T1 TO HEATER OUTPUT............................................9 QUESTION 5 .............................................................................................................10 COMPARISON OF FOPDT MODELS....................................................................................10 QUESTION 6 .............................................................................................................10 PROPORTIONAL CONTROL STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.........................................................10 QUESTION 7 .............................................................................................................12 PROPORTIONAL INTEGRAL CONTROL STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES.............................................12 QUESTION 8 .............................................................................................................12 T4 CONTROLLER CONFIGURATION......................................................................................12 QUESTION 9..............................................................................................................12 DERIVATIVE ACTION?....................................................................................................12 DISCUSSION.....................................................................................14 FOPDT MODEL.....................................................................................14 VALVE ACTION.......................................................................................14 TIME DELAYS / DEAD TIME ........................................................................14 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS...............................................................................14 SOURCES OF ERROR..................................................................................15 CONCULSION....................................................................................16 REFERENCES....................................................................................17 APPENDIX A.......................................................................................A APPENDIX A.......................................................................................A FIGURE 1 PFD OF APPARATUS USED....................................................1

GRAPH 1 CHANGE IN TEMPERATURES, T1, T2 AND T4 WITH CHANGES IN HEATER POWER FOR OPEN LOOP MODE...............................................A GRAPH 2 CHANGES IN OUTLET TEMPERATURE, T4 AND IN HEATER POWER WITH SETPOINT CHANGES FOR CLOSED LOOP MODE.................A

ii

APPARATUS
Pct23-MkII software and apparatus which contains Two water feed vessels Three stage indirect plate heat exchanger Holding tube arrangement Hot water vessel Solenoid valves (SOL 1 - 5) Two peristaltic pumps : feed pump (N1), hot water pump (N2) Pressure reducing valve (PRVI) Flow control valve (V1) Temperature sensors (T 1 - 4)

DIVERTED PRODUCT MAIN WATER SUPPLY TANK A TANK B T2 T1

RECYCLE STREAM

HOLDING TUBE

COOLING WATER (IN)

T3

T4

FINISHED PRODUCT COOLING WATER (OUT)

DRAIN

FIGURE 1 PFD OF APPARATUS USED

PROCEDURE
i. Before turning on the console, the switches were set as follows. All function switches to MANUAL All control potentiometers to counterclockwise) Valve control switch for SOL1 to Divert Valve control switch for SOL2 to FEED A Valve control switch for SOL3 to STOP Valve control switch for SOL4 to FILL A Valve control switch for SOL5 to FILL B ii. minimum (fully

Ensuring that the three circuit breakers and the RCCB on the rear of the console were in the UP position, the console was powered up and the computer turned on. The water level in the hot water tank was checked, the heater element was covered by at least 10 mm of water. The LOW LEVEL LED on the console was out. The flow control valve V1 was fully opened (fully counterclockwise) and the pressure reducing valve PRV1 was also fully opened (fully clockwise). Valve V2 connecting the feed tanks was open and valves V3, V4 and V5 were closed. The water supply valve was gradually opened until a slow stream of makeup water begun to flow into feed tanks A and B. N.B. This valve was adjusted periodically to ensure that the feed tanks do not overflow or empty. The flexible tubing from the top outlet in the hot water tank was loaded into the peristaltic pump head N2. The pump head was clamped onto the tubing by pivoting the clamp forwards and downwards. The water pump was switched on and then the pump speed gradually increased by rotating the speed control clockwise to a setting of 8.0. The flexible tubing from SOL2 to the heat exchanger was loaded into the peristaltic pump head N1 and the pump head clamped onto the tubing. The feed pump was switched on and the pump speed then gradually increased by rotating the speed control to a setting of 7.0. The water heater was switched on and the heater control dial on the console turned from MANUAL to USB (I/O).

iii.

iv.

v.

vi.

vii.

viii.

ix.

Double-click the PCT23 icon on the Windows desktop and load experiment F - 1 loop (temp T4 to heater PWR). Familiarize yourself with the basic features of the Armsoft package, especially the mimic diagram, graph and table functions available on the toolbar. The mimic diagram was opened and the values of T1, T2 and T4 recorded and then a value of 20 was entered in the Heater Output box.

x.

PROCEDURE xi. Select View graph from the toolbar then Configure the graph data. Trend variables T1, T2 and T4 on the primary y-axis and Heater Power PWR (kW) on the secondary y-axis. Set the range of the primary axis to 20-60 C and that of the secondary axis to 0.20.6 kW (Format, Graph, Axis Scales). Configure the data sampling for a sample interval of 2 seconds and start the data collection by clicking the green Go icon. The system was allowed to come to steady-state. When the process temperatures lined out, the heater output was increased to 30% and waited for steady-state to be re-established. The heater output was decreased to 20% and the process was allowed to return to its initial steady-state. Stop the data collection by clicking the red Stop button on the toolbar. Save your results in Formula One and Excel formats with filenames openloop.vts and openloop.xls, respectively. Copy these files to a diskette. When this is accomplished, select View table and Delete the current sheet of results. Select View graph from the toolbar then Configure the graph data. Trend variables T4 and Set Point Term (Loop 1) (C) on the primary y-axis and Heater Power PWR (kW) on the secondary yaxis. Set the ranges of the axes to those specified in step xi). Restart the data collection by clicking Go. Left-click on the PID 1 box on the mimic diagram and configure a proportional-only controller by entering a proportional band of 10%, an integral time of 0 seconds and a derivative time of 0 seconds. The controller was switched to automatic, and the set point increased by 5 C and the process permitted to attain steady-state. Select the PID 1 box on the mimic diagram and configure a proportional-integral controller by entering a proportional band of 10%, an integral time of 100 seconds and a derivative time of 0 3

xii.

xiii. xiv.

xv.

xvi.

xvii.

seconds. Click on OK and let the process come to steady-state. The set point was decreased by 5 C and the process variables once again allowed to line out. xviii. When the experiment is complete, stop the data collection and save your results (File, Save As) in Formula One and Excel formats as closedloop.vts and closedloop.xls, respectively. Copy these files to a diskette. Switch the controller to manual, set the heater output to 0% and exit the software. All controls on the console were set to minimum/OFF and all function switches to MANUAL. The makeup water valve was closed and the console and the computer switched off. The clamps on the peristaltic pump heads were released to prevent permanent distortion of the flexible tubing.

xix.

RESULTS/CALCULATIONS
Question 1 Steady- state Energy Balance between the Hot tank and Product.
Energy Entering system = Energy Leaving system i.e. Heat Gained from Flow entering + Heat added via heated vessel = Heat Loss from Flow leaving the system + Heat losses to environment m*c*T
ENTER

+ Q = m*c*T
ENTER

LEAVE

+H
LEAVE

H = m*c*T Now,

+ Q m*c*T

Same liquid flowing through system so c is same Steady state analysis so flow rate entering is same as flow rate leaving system. , therefore

From system boundary T LEAVE is T1 and T water entering system, 20.5500 C

H = *v*c*(T LEAVE - T ENTER) +Q

ENTER

is same temperature as

Hence heat loss between the hot tank and product = 0.6274 kW

Question 2 Steady- state Energy Balance for Holding Tube

Similar analysis as with question 1, Energy Entering system is equal to Energy Leaving system, however, for holding tube no heat is added to the system, Q = 0 and temperature entering system is T4 while temperature leaving is still T1 i.e. Heat Gained from Flow entering = Heat Loss from Flow leaving the system + Heat losses to environment m*c*T
ENTER

= m*c*T

LEAVE

+H

= *v*c*(T 4 - T 1)

See Discussion on how temperature of water entering system was obtained.

Hence heat loss across holding tube = 0.0208 kW

Question 3 FOPDT Model relating Exit Temperature T4 to Heater output

FOPDT model given by equation

Where

is time constant, seconds PV (t) is the process variable, T4 C, in this case is dead time, seconds KP is process gain, C / % and CO (t) is the controller output, heater output, kW

Solving using Laplace transform

Applying Linearity property of Laplace transform

But p(s) = 0, therefore

Hence

Now finding constants using Graph 1, from approximately sample number 1279 till end for T4 curve Process Gain, KP

Question 3 Time Constant, Time constant is the time taken for a 63.2% in the total steady state PV when a change is made to the CO. For a CO change of 30% to 20% Initial steady state PV = 33.8000C Final steady state PV = 30.8000C 63.2% PV = 0.632*(33.8000 30.8000)C = 1.8690C Value of PV at = 33.8000 1.8690 = 31.9040C From results, PV(t) = 33.8000C occurs at sample number 1279 and PV(t) = 31.9040C occurs at sample number 1420. Number of samples taken during = 1420-1279 = 141 Sample time is 2s, therefore = 141*2 = 282s Dead time, From Graph 1, when 30% to 20% change in CO was made Sample number at point of step change = 1279 Sample number when PV (t) begins to change =1298 Number of samples taken before response = 1298 -1279 = 19 Sample time is 2s, therefore = 19*2 = 38s Therefore FOPDT model is

Question 4 Linearity of Heater-output-to-Temperature Dynamics

The heater output-to- temperature dynamics is not a linear relationship. Considering Graph 1, it can be seen that an increase in heater output gives an almost immediate change in temperature (around sample number 600 and after) whereas for a decrease in heater output, dead time is more noticeable on the graph (sample number 1300 onwards). If the relationship was linear, increasing or decreasing the heater output would not have made a difference in the response time of the temperature change. This is probably because it is easier for cold/cool water to gain heat and increase in

temperature than for warm/water to lose heat and decrease in temperature in the same surroundings.

Question 5 FOPDT Model relating Exit Temperature T1 to Heater output

Again using Graph 1, from approximately sample number 1279 till end for T1 Process Gain, KP

Time Constant, Time constant is the time taken for a 63.2% in the total steady state PV when a change is made to the CO. For a CO change of 30% to 20% Initial steady state PV = 33.0000C Final steady state PV = 30.3000C 63.2% PV = 0.632*(33.0000 30.3000)C = 1.7064C Value of PV at = 33.0000 1.7064 = 31.2936C From results, PV (t) = 33.8000C occurs at sample number 1279 and PV(t) = 31.2936C occurs at sample number 1442. Number of samples taken during = 1442-1279 = 163 Sample time is 2s, therefore = 163*2 = 326s Dead time, From Graph 1, when 30% to 20% change in CO was made Sample number at point of step change = 1279 Sample number when PV (t) begins to change =1300 Number of samples taken before response = 1300 -1279 = 21 Sample time is 2s, therefore = 21*2 = 42s Therefore FOPDT model is

Question 5 Comparison of FOPDT Models

The final equations for T4 and T1 are, respectively, .....Eq 1 ..Eq 2 From these equations, we see that

Process gain is great for T4 model than T1, (0.3>0.27) this means that T4 value changed more T1 for the same change in heater output Dead time is smaller for T4 than T1, (38<42) the time taken to respond is quicker for T4 and Time constant is smaller for T4 than T1, (282<326) the rate of change of T4 is greater than that of T1

These variations are caused by the holding tube, and they are expected. T4 is measured just after the water exits the plate heater exchanger, whereas T1 is after the insulated holding tube. What the holding tube effectively does is reduce the rate of heat loss by the water after it leaves the heat exchanger as oppose to if the water were to flow through an un-insulated pipeline.

Question 6 Proportional Control Strengths and Weaknesses

Consider Graph 2 , from sample number 110, when the first set point is change is made. The strengths of a proportional only control loop are:

A fast response time to the change in controller output - We see that as soon as the change is made, T4 begins to change almost immediately as well. A quick return to a steady-state - The change was made at sample number 110 and by sample number 170, (170-110 * 2s = 120s), steady-state was re-established. No oscillations in returning to a steady-state - The changes in T4 is noise in the system, T4 does not go pass above the set point and then decrease.

10

The main weakness of proportional only control is offset, i.e. the difference between steady-state value and set point after a change was made. From graph 2 we see that the set point was given a value of 38C, when steadystate was established, T4 had a value of 35C. This is a characteristic of all Ponly control loops.

11

Question 7 Proportional Integral Control Strengths and Weaknesses Again we consider Graph 2, from sample number 500 when the last change is made. We see the advantage of PI control right away: Process variable goes to the set point The set point was 31C and the last temperature measured was 30.9C, this is close considering the noise in the system. The disadvantage that is visible is the length of time taken to return to a steady-state. The change was made at sample number 512 but steadystate was not established till sample number 612, (512-612 * 2s = 200). Another major problem with PI control loops is oscillations. Usually the process variable oscillates a few times about the set point before it finally stays at the set point value. This is not visible in the data collected since data collection was stopped as soon as T4 reach the set point value, if however the experiment was continued we may have seen the oscillations. Question 8 T4 Controller Configuration In this process, water is being heated, so an increase in heater output would cause an increase in water temperature. This means that the transmitter is direct acting. However in heating processes, we do not want the temperature to increase excessively, so when the temperature begins to increase, the heat to the process needs to be reduced. This means that the controller output signal is reduced increasing PV, decreasing CO means a reverse acting controller. If a directing acting controller was used instead, when the temperature begins to rise, the heater output would also rise further increasing the temperature which could lead to very dangerous situations. Question 9 Derivative Action? Looking at the data collected for this experiment, derivative action would not have improved the response of this system. The major purpose of using the derivative term is to decrease the oscillations from integral action. However, when PI control was

12

applied to this system, there were no oscillations observed for the time data was collected. Another major reason not to use PID control for this system is the amount of noise in the system. Derivative control is based on rate of change, in a noisy system such as in this experiment, derivative action amplifies noise and makes the controller output unstable. Additionally, properly tuning the system would be a problem as it is not always certain which term, P, PI or PID in affecting the system.

13

DISCUSSION
FOPDT Model Valve Action AO, air to open and AC, air to close are the two type of valve action for pneumatic valves. Air-to-open means that air is required to move the valve stem upwards so that the fluid moving through the valve can pass freely. These types of valve are fail close meaning that if a failure occurs in the system, the air supply to the system will be stopped and the valve will close completely. Time Delays / Dead Time Dead time is the delay from when a controller output (CO) signal is issued until when the measured process variable (PV) first begins to respond. Dead time is usually not wanted in industry as it can decrease the efficiency of many processes and increase the level of difficulty of controlling a plant/process. The only advantage of having dead time is for the situation were an error may have been made in changing a set point or controller output which would lead to a hazardous situation. A time delay in the change actually occurring would allow for changes to be made to prevent or reduce the effect of the hazardous situation. Temperature controllers are widely used in industries, most often, in association with heat exchangers where specific temperatures are required. Also in the food industry for process like pasteurization, freezing of foods, and bottling of beer which requires specific temperature control

Analysis of Results

14

DISCUSSION Safety Analysis It was ensured that the initial water level in the hot water tank was 10mm higher than the heating element to prevent the element from begin damaged. The opening and closing of valves were done as specified to prevent water flowing into the wrong places. The main valve controlling the water supply was opened slowly to prevent the water pounding on the pressure sensor L1 at the bottom of the tank else it would have been damaged. The level in the feed tanks was monitored and the supply valve adjusted to ensure the tanks did not overflow or empty out

Sources of Error On switching from P-only to PI control, the set point temperature was not set to current temperature but higher as a result there was bumping in the system The flow rate used to calculate heat losses in questions 1 and 2 were assumed to be constant, but having to adjust the water supply from the mains indicates that the flow rate was in fact not constant. For question 1, the inlet temperature was assumed to be the average temperature of T1 and T4 which were recorded at step (x) of the procedure. This was a onetime measurement and could have varied through the experiment but was assumed to be constant

15

CONCULSION
From the results, it can be concluded that: Heat loss between the heater and product was 0.6274 kW Heat loss in the holding tube was 0.0208 kW. The transfer functions for the system between exchanger and, T4 and T1, in seconds are, respectively:

In this experiment where it was necessary to control the temperature the Proportional Integral controller was better suited than the Proportional only controller since it maintained the set point value after a step change.

16

REFERENCES
www.controlguru.com Cooper, Douglas Validating Our Heat Exchanger FOPDT Model (2007) PI Control of the Heat Exchanger (2008) A Discrete Time Linear Model of the Heat Exchanger By Peter Nachtwey (2006)

Cooper, Douglas. Practical Process Control using Control Sataion. 2004. Luben, Luben and. Essentials of Process Controls. McGraw Hill, 1997.

17

APPENDIX A
GRAPH 1 CHANGE IN TEMPERATURES, T1, T2 AND T4 WITH CHANGES IN HEATER POWER FOR OPEN LOOP MODE

A1

APPENDIX A
GRAPH 2 CHANGES IN OUTLET TEMPERATURE, T4 AND IN HEATER POWER WITH SETPOINT CHANGES FOR CLOSED LOOP MODE

A2