You are on page 1of 8

EYE on EDUCATION

Chemical Process Control Education and Practice


By B. Wayne Bequette and Babatunde A. Ogunnaike

C
hemical process control textbooks and courses differ reactor in another facility. Process operations management
significantly from their electrical or mechanical-ori- philosophy, plant control hardware and software, process
ented brethren. It is our experience that colleagues in engineering structure, sensor selection and maintenance,
electrical engineering (EE) and mechanical engineering (ME) and the analytical laboratory vary substantially from plant
assume that we teach the same theory in our courses and to plant. These issues lead to virtually an entirely new con-
merely have different application examples. The primary trol system development for each process, a factor that sig-
goals of this article are to i) emphasize the distinctly chal- nificantly influences process control practice and hence,
lenging characteristics of chemical processes, ii) present a indirectly, process control education.
typical process control curriculum, and iii) discuss how The common characteristics that make chemical pro-
chemical process control courses can be revised to better cesses so challenging to control are noted in papers pre-
meet the needs of a typical B.S.-level chemical engineer. sented at most control research conferences and in
In addition to a review of material covered in a standard countless research proposals. It is worth reviewing these
process control course, we discuss innovative approaches problems here to understand if we are getting the major
in process control education, including the use of case stud- points across to our undergraduates. Chemical processes
ies, distributed control systems in laboratories, identifica- are usually high order, nonlinear, with multiple inputs and
tion and control simulation packages, and studio-based outputs; they have time delays, input constraints, and a lim-
approaches combining lecture, simulation, and experi- ited number of measured states. The desired properties of a
ments in the same room. We also provide perspectives on product stream are often not directly measured, so inferen-
needed developments in process control education. tial control is important. Economic objectives are domi-
nated by steady-state considerations. Large-scale processes
Chemical Engineering Curricula
are often energy integrated, causing a high degree of interac-
Chemical engineering curricula across the United States are
tion between inputs and outputs of different process units.
relatively uniform for several reasons: departmental history
Specialty chemicals and pharmaceuticals are often pro-
and culture, Accreditation Board of Engineering and Tech-
duced in batches, frequently with a single vessel serving
nology (ABET) accreditation requirements, and the success
more than one function (heater, reactor, and separator, for
of alumni in industry. Standard courses include material and
example). The same temperature controller may be re-
energy balances, thermodynamics, equilibrium stage sepa-
quired to provide cooling under some conditions and heat-
rations, transport phenomena, chemical reaction engineer-
ing under others. Often robustness, rather than nominal
ing, process dynamics and control, process design, and
performance for any particular operating condition, be-
chemical engineering laboratory. Virtually every topic cov-
comes the prime consideration.
ered in these chemical engineering curricula assumes
The proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller is
steady-state process operation—the sole exception is the
dominant in the chemical process industry and will remain
process dynamics and control course, which must therefore
so for many reasons. One is that lower-level loops, such as
accept the burden of introducing all topics associated with
flow control, are adequately controlled by PID action. Also,
the dynamic behavior of process systems.
no explicit process model is required for tuning the two or
Characteristics of Chemical Processes three controller parameters; many commercial PID control-
A major difference between process control and device con- lers have autotuning algorithms. Cascade control is preva-
trol is the replicability of control system designs. For exam- lent, since most higher level loops cascade a setpoint to a
ple, a disk drive manufacturer can perform a single flow control loop. Feedforward and ratio control are used in
advanced control system design for this device and use that well-studied unit operations. Distributed control systems
controller in thousands of units. Each chemical process con- (DCSs) are the norm, although the hardware/communica-
trol system design project, on the other hand, tends to be tion structure is significantly different from the systems of
unique. A styrene polymerization reactor in one manufac- the late 1970s and 1980s. Most loops are sampled at a high
turing plant may have feedstocks, flow patterns, and prod- frequency relative to the process dynamics, so continuous
uct specifications that differ significantly from a similar control system design procedures can easily be used.

Bequette (bequette@rpi.edu) is with The Howard P. Isermann Department of Chemical Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy,
NY 12180-3590, U.S.A. Ogunnaike is with DuPont Central Research and Development, Wilmington, DE 19880-0101, U.S.A.

0272-1708/01/$10.00©2001IEEE
10 IEEE Control Systems Magazine April 2001
Cascade control is worthy of further dis-
cussion, since the approach does not appear Reactor
Temperature
to be well known in other disciplines. An ex- Controller
ample of a double cascade control strategy
Tjsp TCI
to regulate temperature of a chemical reac- Reactor Feed
tor is shown in Fig. 1; the corresponding Jacket
block diagram is shown in Fig. 2. The domi- Temperature
nate time constant for the flow control loop Controller
is a few seconds, the jacket temperature loop TC2 Coolant
is a few minutes, while the reactor tempera- Return
Fsp
ture may be several minutes to several hours
(particularly for a polymerization reactor). Jacket
Notice that each control loop rejects differ- Flow Recirculation
ent disturbances. The flow control loop re- Controller Pump Reactor Product
FC
jects coolant header pressure disturbances v
and compensates for valve nonlinearities. F
The jacket temperature control loop rejects
coolant header temperature disturbances.
The reactor temperature controller rejects Coolant Make-Up
reactor feed, temperature, and concentra-
tion disturbances and compensates for Figure 1. Double cascade control strategy to regulate temperature in a jacketed,
changes in the rate of heat transfer due to stirred tank reactor.
fouling, etc. This approach has many of the
benefits of a state feedback strategy used in other disci- dated and a new constrained optimization problem is
plines, without sensitivity to model uncertainty. solved at time step k+1. Multivariable systems with con-
The most commonly used advanced control scheme is straints and time delays are handled naturally by MPC. MPC
model predictive control (MPC). The basic idea behind MPC has been particularly successful in the petroleum refining
is illustrated for a single-input, single-output process in Fig. industry where large-scale, interacting, constrained sys-
3. Here, an open-loop optimal control problem is solved at tems are the norm. Time constants and sample times are
time step k. The least-squares objective function to be mini- large, so computation time to solve large-scale constrained
mized is based on the residuals between the model predic- systems is not an issue. When linear models and quadratic
tions and the desired setpoint profile over a horizon of P objective functions are used, the optimization problem re-
time steps. The decision variables are the next M control sults in a quadratic program (QP); there are a number of ro-
moves; note that the control moves can be constrained. bust QP codes available. For a tutorial overview of MPC, see
Only the first control move is actually implemented and the Rawlings [1]. Again, we should stress that it is common that
next process measurement is obtained. The model is up- flow rates are the manipulated inputs used by MPC strate-

Coolant
Flow Temperature Reactor
Disturbance Disturbance Disturbance

Tjsp Fsp F Tj
Tsp + + +
TC1 TC2 FC FP JP RP
+ + +
− − −
Flow Process Recirculating Reactor
Jacket Fluid Process
Measured Flow Process

Measured Jacket Temperature

Measured Reactor Temperature

Figure 2. Block diagram for double cascade control strategy.

April 2001 IEEE Control Systems Magazine 11


gies. The manipulated flow rates are set points to flow con- is most often taught during the first semester of the senior
trollers, which remain PID. year, although an increasing number of schools are teaching
this course during the junior year [2].
Current Status of the Chemical Process
Dynamics and Control Course Topics
Most chemical engineering departments in the United Table 1 summarizes topics covered in a typical dynamics
States offer a single course in dynamics and control, which and control course. Contrast these with topics taught in EE
and ME systems and control courses [3], shown
in Table 2. It is particularly striking that
Past Future state-variable techniques, signal-flow graphs,
Setpoint
and Nichols charts are rarely studied in chemi-
cal engineering (ChE) courses yet widely stud-
ied in EE and ME.
A few critical topics distinguish ChE from EE
y and ME systems and control courses and books.
Model Prediction
Dynamic models are usually not encountered in
Actual Outputs (Past)
other chemical engineering courses; thus, in
process control courses, significant time is
P spent on the development and analysis of dy-
tK Prediction namic chemical process models. Almost all
Current Horizon
Step
chemical process models based on fundamen-
tal material and energy balances are nonlinear.
Max
Even simple mixing problems are bilinear, since
a manipulated input (flow rate) often multiples
u a state (concentration or temperature). More
Min
complex chemical reaction models include the
Arrhenius rate expression, where reaction rate
Past Control M is an exponential function of the reactor tem-
Moves Control Horizon perature (students learn in reaction engineer-
ing courses that this can result in multiple
steady-state behavior). It is therefore important
Setpoint for chemical engineers to learn linearization be-
fore they begin to analyze dynamic behavior.
Model Prediction Contrast this with the numerous inherently lin-
from K
ear circuit and mechanical systems; EE and ME
y New Model Prediction
students can begin to learn linear dynamic be-
Actual Outputs (Past) havior before worrying about understanding
linearization.
State feedback techniques are not com-
P
monly applied to chemical processes since few
tK+1 Prediction states are measured. Much of the focus is on
Current Horizon
Step classical feedback using continuous PID con-
Max trol. There has been a trend to incorporate more
model-based techniques, primarily internal
model control (IMC) and MPC.
u
Min A number of process dynamics and control
textbooks are currently available (Table 3). It
should be noted, however, that most of the ba-
Past Control M
Moves sic topics covered do not differ substantially
Control Horizon
from Coughanowr and Koppel [4], the first
widely used textbook. Stephanopoulos [5] was
Figure 3. Model predictive control schematic. Top—optimization at time step the first to present a detailed treatment of digi-
k, Bottom—optimization at time step k+1. tal control and to discuss plantwide control.

12 IEEE Control Systems Magazine April 2001


Seborg et al. [6] provide the first treatment of dynamic ma- Table 1. Common Chemical Process Dynamics and
trix control and model algorithmic control, two model pre- Control Course Topics [2].
dictive control algorithms. Luyben [7] has a strong focus on
Topic Lecture time, %
modeling and simulation and realistic physical examples.
Marlin [8] does a good job of considering the integration of Process Dynamics and Modeling 28.1
process design and control; it also has a MATLAB workbook Feedback Control and Tuning 22.1
available to instructors. The text by Ogunnaike and Ray [9]
is almost encyclopedic in its coverage of process control Stability and Frequency Response Analysis 14.3
techniques. Luyben and Luyben [10] include a strong sec- Computer Simulation 8.9
tion on plantwide control. A forthcoming book by Bequette
Advanced Control Techniques 8.4
[11] focuses on model-based control and contains
MATLAB-based modules that treat specific unit operation Control System Hardware 7.7
control problems in depth. In contrast to these textbooks,
Computer Control Systems 4.8
which generally analyze and synthesize controllers in the
Laplace or frequency domains, the text by Svrcek et al. [12] Other 5.7
takes a time domain approach. Case study “workshops,” us-
ing chemical process simulation software, are used to rein-
Table 2. Top 8 Topics Covered in EE and ME
force basic concepts.
Undergraduate Control Courses [3].
Deshpande [13] has suggested that more attention
should be paid to statistical process/quality control (SPC/ Topic, % of Departments EE ME
SQC). He presents a course that adds several topics to the Nyquist stability criteria 94 80
standard course; it is not clear what topics should be omit-
ted to fit this expanded version into the same number of Root-locus techniques 94 95
course hours. Routh-Hurwitz stability test 93 89
Bode plots 92 93
Simulation
Most control courses make use of a simulation package State-variable techniques 87 65
such as MATLAB. Bequette [14] presents a two-course se-
Signal flow graphs 84 45
quence in dynamics and control that makes use of the
MATLAB simulation environment for homework assign- Sensitivity analysis 66 56
ments and special projects. Rensselaer has since moved to Nichols charts 47 36
a single, four-credit course covering dynamics and control.
Bequette et al. [15] provide details of a case study project
in multivariable control. Students, working in teams, select Table 3. Process Control
a unit operation (from a list of five) to study for the last Textbooks.
third of the semester. The project begins with a literature Bequette [11]
search, followed by process identification (the “process”
Coughanowr [38]
is a SIMULINK masked block diagram) and single- input,
single-output (SISO) control loop design. The groups then Coughanowr and Koppel [4]
study multiple SISO loops and decoupling, write a final re- Erickson and Hedrick [39]
port, and give an oral presentation. Doyle et al. [16], [17]
Luyben [7]
present an integrated MATLAB-based set of modules with
several low-order linear systems and higher- order pro- Luyben and Luyben [10]
cesses such as furnaces and biochemical reactors. Marlin [8]
MATLAB-based modules focusing on process dynamics
Ogunnaike and Ray [9]
studies are presented in Bequette [18].
Cooper [19], [20] at the University of Connecticut has de- Riggs [40]
veloped a PC-based package called Control Station that sim- Seborg, Edgar, and Mellichamp [6]
ulates the dynamic behavior of several common chemical
processes. Realistic problems such as noisy measurements, Smith and Corripio [41]
unmeasured and measured disturbances, and manipulated Stephanopoulos [5]
variable saturation are included. The package can also be
Svrcek, Mahoney, and Young [12]
used to develop models from experimental data.

April 2001 IEEE Control Systems Magazine 13


Laboratory Experiments nessee-Chattanooga (http://chem.engr.utc.edu/Webres/
Some departments have control laboratories that are asso- Stations/controlslab.html).
ciated with the control course, whereas others have con-
trol experiments that are part of the unit operations Industrial Views on Undergraduate Education
laboratory course, usually taken in the senior year. The ma- Several papers authored by industrial practitioners make
jority of control laboratories use PC-based data acquisition suggestions on how undergraduate education can be
and control software where a single PC is interfaced to a changed to meet the needs of practicing engineers. Downs
single experiment. Braatz and Johnson [21] at the Univer- and Doss [27] feel that the control educational paradigm has
sity of Illinois use the Hewlett-Packard Visual Engineering been to i) start with a purely mathematical description (ab-
Environment to provide a graphical operator interface for straction), ii) develop, analyze, and evaluate theoretical de-
bench-scale experiments. Holt and Pick [22] at the Univer- scriptions, and iii) apply the theory to specific abstractions
sity of Washington present a two-tank experiment con- (e.g., “For this transfer function design a controller...”). They
trolled by a MacIntosh and Workbench software. Their contrast this with the case study paradigm used in the medi-
philosophy is to use the same experimental apparatus cal, legal, and business professions where instructors: i)
throughout the quarter; students conduct initial experi- present a single illustrative case, ii) abstract lessons from
ments on sensor calibration, design single-loop controllers, the specific to the general, and iii) iterate i) and ii) such that
and finish the quarter with multiple single-loop controller there is a gradual buildup of an overall abstract knowledge
design and implementation. base supported by hundreds of case studies.
There are some departments, however, where industrial Ramaker et al. [28] feel that control students should be
DCS-based systems are used. Rivera et al. [23] at Arizona taught using concepts that fit with the rest of the chemical
State University use a Honeywell TDC 3000-based system to engineering education. Since the rest of the curriculum em-
control 11 of 12 experiments in a senior unit operations labo- phasizes time domain ideas such as flow rates, residence
ratory. Most of the experiments are bench scale. Skliar et al. times, and rate constants, frequency domain concepts
[24] at the University of Utah use an Opto22 DCS to monitor should not be a primary focus. Contrast this with electrical
and control seven laboratory experiments; eight more are engineering where many concepts are taught in the fre-
planned. Pintar et al. [25] at Michigan Tech have developed a quency domain.
TDC 3000-based system to control a 30-gal jacketed polymer- In fact, there is as yet no true consensus perspective from
ization batch reactor (producing polydimethylsiloxane) and industry. The strictly theoretical approach is clearly inade-
a 30-ft-high distillation column, neither of which is commonly quate because it fails to confront students with enough of
available in academic settings. Students receive extensive the real-life issues routinely encountered in practice. By the
safety training for this laboratory. same token, the strict case-study approach is inadequate:
Experimental equipment can be expensive and not cost given that there is a limitless number of actual chemical pro-
effective if only operated a few days each year. Henry [26] cesses, no single case study can provide all the requisite in-
has developed a Web-based virtual laboratory where stu- gredients for teaching the concepts necessary to solve
dents from across the world can perform remote dynamics problems other than those within the scope explicitly cov-
and control studies on experiments at the University of Ten- ered by such an isolated case study. A balanced approach in
which the basic principles are taught first and then illus-
trated with practical case studies is probably more produc-
Table 4. Suggested Topics for a Course in 2000 [30]. tive in the long run.

Dynamic simulation 2 weeks Goals for Undergraduate Process Dynamics and


Response characteristics 1 week Control Education
Notice that there is not enough overlap between the per-
Development of discrete-time models 1 week ceived challenges in the control of chemical processes and
Analysis of discrete-time models 2 weeks the actual topics typically covered in an undergraduate
course.
Conventional and predictive control structures 2 weeks
Since there is a limited amount of time to cover the many
Optimization methods for controller design 2 weeks important concepts in dynamics and control, it is impera-
tive that many of these concepts be introduced in other
Tuning of controllers/robustness 1 week
courses. Laplace transforms have been taught in the differ-
Feedforward, adaptive, multivariable 2 weeks ential equations courses for many years; a primary problem
Digital hardware/implementation 1 week is that students often do not appreciate the connection be-
tween the nth-order linear differential equations and physi-
Expert systems 1 week cal reality. Too much time is often spent reviewing matrix

14 IEEE Control Systems Magazine April 2001


algebra concepts in the dynamics and control course. Again, structor provides motivating mini-lectures and poses prob-
the linear algebra course tends to be too abstract, with little lems to be discussed and solved in class. The instructor
motivation for how eigenvalues/eigenvectors can be used to serves as the “guide on the side” rather than the “sage on the
understand engineering problems. Dynamic models should stage.” Some perceived problems with this approach, when
be introduced in the introductory material and energy bal- computer-based tools are used for problem solving, is that
ances course; Felder and Rousseau [29], for example, in- students are often learning how to use software rather than
clude a chapter on dynamic models in their popular how to formulate and solve engineering problems.
textbook. The particular view at Rensselaer is to combine the most
There is certainly a strong argument for considering positive attributes of lectures, simulation-based laborato-
process systems engineering throughout the curriculum. ries, and experimental laboratories into a single course [31].
Every chemical engineering course should have some de- Simulation-based assignments have become more common
sign/operation/control components; all courses should and are used to illustrate problems that cannot be easily
still have important fundamental science in their content, studied using classical pen-and-paper analytical solutions.
but these must be accompanied by application examples Although simulation-based assignments provide much in-
that will motivate the students to learn the fundamentals sight into practical control system issues, nothing can take
and applications. the place of hands-on experiments. To this end, we have de-
veloped a control studio that combines lectures, simula-
A Look Back at a Look Forward tions, and experiments in a single classroom. We have
At the dawn of a new millennium, it is appropriate to review constructed a classroom facility that seats 40 students and
ideas presented a decade ago by Edgar [30], who suggested includes 20 computer-based simulation and control
curricula for a course on dynamics and control in 2000; his workstations. The students face the front of the studio dur-
suggested topics are presented in Ta-
ble 4. One pie-in-the-sky concept that
has not come to pass is the common
use of nonlinear programming tech- 10
1
niques; some courses do cover MPC, 3
but usually focus on the unconstrained
form, which has an analytical solution
9
for linear process models. Also, there
continues to be a focus on continu- 2
ous-time rather than discrete-time de-
sign and analysis. An important topic
notably missing from the 2000 course 10
is statistical process/quality control.
5
A Desired Course in Chemical
Process Dynamics and Control
4
During the past decade, there has been 8
a major impetus in engineering educa-
7 10
tion to change from a teacher-centered
lecture environment to a student-cen-
tered learning environment. This has 6
generally required instructors to re-
move some course content, sacrificing 1. Control Valve Fresh Water 6. Inline Conductivity Probe
breadth for depth. Since students tend 2. Control Valve Salt Water 7. Conductivity Measurement Display
to take home only a few major con- 3. Heater for Fresh Water 8. Temperature Measurement Display
4. Differential Pressure to Infer Tank Level 9. Salt Water Tank
cepts from a course, we feel it is more 5. Temperature Probe in CSTR 10. Manual Valves for Trimming ∆P
important for them to learn critical
analysis skills rather than to solve a
Figure 4. The Rensselaer prototype chemical process control experiment. Fresh
smattering of problems in a large num- feedwater, regulated with a control valve, flows into the vessel containing an electric
ber of areas. A particular type of stu- heater (upper left). Concentrated salt water, which is regulated with a control valve, then
dent-based learning is the studio mixes with the heated feedwater in a small mixing tank that contains a temperature
approach. In studio teaching, the in- probe. The effluent from this tank discharges through a conductivity sensor into the sink.

April 2001 IEEE Control Systems Magazine 15


used for data acquisition and control. The control inter-
face shown in Fig. 5 is intuitive, with a simple process and
instrumentation diagram that closely matches the experi-
mental apparatus.
We currently use two-hour sessions, twice a week, for the
studio; a third session is used for recitation and provides
time for students to “catch up” on assignments. Shorter pe-
riods would not allow enough time to set up and perform ex-
periments, whereas significantly longer periods would be
draining for students and instructors alike.

Graduate Education
The focus of this article has been on undergraduate educa-
tion. Since most chemical engineering departments have a
single faculty member with expertise in systems and con-
trol, rarely is more than one graduate-level process control
Figure 5. LabView interface for the Rensselaer prototype
process control experiment. Each control loop can be placed in course taught on a frequent basis. The available selection
either manual or automatic (PID) mode. of graduate-level process control textbooks is limited [32]-
[34]. Graduate students conducting research in process
ing lecture and discussion periods and swivel in their chairs control generally take several systems and control theory
to perform simulations and conduct experiments on the courses in electrical engineering departments. Special top-
countertops behind them. During the problem-solving peri- ics in chemical process control are normally covered in
ods, the instructor and teaching assistant move around the course notes and instructor handouts. MPC is probably the
room answering questions and generating discussion. Most most covered special topics process control course; several
of the problems have been solved in two-person groups; MPC textbooks/monographs are currently in preparation.
however, the space could handle a group size of three. Al- Nonlinear control is probably the next most widely taught
though it is conceivable that 20 copies of a single experi- special topics course. A monograph on nonlinear process
ment could be used so that all groups are working on the control has been published [35] but does not appear to be
same problem, this is not economically attractive. It is more widely used in these courses. As plantwide control begins to
attractive to have roughly five copies of an experiment; receive more attention, the monograph by Luyben et al. [36]
groups working with an experiment during one period may will probably be the text of choice.
be doing simulations or a detailed design project during the It is widely recognized that graduate students need more
next period. practical control experience, so there is a move to develop
A prototype chemical process control experiment, experiments for graduate control courses. An example from
shown in Fig. 4, mimics the behavior of a typical chemical a graduate-level multidisciplinary control laboratory at the
process. Fresh feedwater, regulated with a control valve, University of Delaware is presented by Gatzke et al. [37].
flows into a vessel containing an electric heater. A concen-
trated salt solution from a reservoir then mixes with the Summary
heated feedwater in a mixing tank that contains a tempera- The primary purpose of this article is to provide a sum-
ture probe. The outlet from the tank discharges through a mary of chemical process control education and practice
conductivity sensor into a sink. The objective of the experi- for our colleagues in other engineering disciplines. We
ment is to regulate three measured process variables have presented a typical process control curriculum, out-
(level, temperature, and conductivity) at desired setpoint lined some of the distinctly challenging characteristics of
values by manipulating three input variables (freshwater chemical processes, and discussed recent and ongoing de-
flow rate, concentrated salt solution flow rate, and heater velopments in process control education. We consider
power) via feedback control. The experimental apparatus control education to be an area where “continuous im-
is benchtop scale (with a “footprint” of roughly 3 ft2), so provement” is important and look forward to discussions
that it can be used in the studio classroom. The experiment based on this article and education sessions at future con-
was designed to have time constants that are roughly 20-30 trol conferences.
s; the time scale is slow enough for students to observe the
physical changes, yet fast enough for a number of experi- Acknowledgment
ments to be conducted during an interactive session. Na- Support from a Curriculum Development grant from Procter
tional Instruments hardware and software (LabVIEW) is & Gamble is gratefully acknowledged.

16 IEEE Control Systems Magazine April 2001


References [27] J.J. Downs and J.E. Doss, “A view from North American industry,” in
Chemical Process Control-CPCIV, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Chemical Process Control, Y.
[1] J.B. Rawlings, “Tutorial overview of model predictive control technology,”
Arkun and W.H. Ray, Eds., 1991, pp. 53-77.
IEEE Contr. Syst. Mag., vol. 20, pp. 38-52, June 2000.
[28] B.L. Ramaker, H.K. Lau, and E. Hernandez, “Control technology chal-
[2] J.D. Griffith, “The teaching of undergraduate process control,” Chemical
lenges for the future,” Chemical Process Control, V, J.C. Kantor, C.E. Garcia, and
Engineering Education Projects Committee, American Institute of Chemical
B. Carnahan, Eds., AIChE Symp. Ser. 316,1997, vol. 93, pp. 1-7, 1997.
Engineers, Nov. 1993.
[3]A. Feliachi, “Control systems curriculum national survey,” IEEE Trans. [29] R.M. Felder and R.W. Rousseau, Elementary Principles of Chemical Pro-
Educ., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 257-263, 1994. cesses, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley, 2000.
[4] D.R. Coughanowr and L.B. Koppel, Process Systems Analysis and Control. [30] T.F. Edgar, “Process control education in the year 2000: A round table dis-
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. cussion,” Chem. Eng. Educ., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 72-77, 1990.
[5] G. Stephanopoulos, Chemical Process Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: [31] B.W. Bequette, J.H. Chow, C.J. Li, E. Maby, J. Newell, and G. Buckbee, “An
Prentice Hall, 1984. interdisciplinary control education studio,” in Proc. Conf. Decision and Con-
trol, Phoenix, AZ, 1999, pp. 370-374.
[6] D.E. Seborg, T.F. Edgar, and D.A. Mellichamp, Process Dynamics and Con-
trol. New York: Wiley, 1989. [32] W.H. Ray, Advanced Process Control. McGraw Hill, 1981. Reprinted by
Butterworths, 1991.
[7] W.L. Luyben, Process Modeling Simulation and Control for Chemical Engi-
neers, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990. [33] W.F. Ramirez, Process Control and Identification. New York: Academic,
[8] T.E. Marlin, Process Control: Designing Processes and Control Systems for Dy- 1994.
namic Performance, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2000. [34] S. Skogestad and I. Postlewaite, Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis
[9] B.A. Ogunnaike and W.H. Ray, Process Dynamics, Modeling and Control. and Design. New York: Wiley, 1996.
New York: Oxford, 1994. [35] M.A. Henson and D.E. Seborg, Nonlinear Process Control. Upper Saddle
[10] M.L Luyben, and W.L. Luyben, Essentials of Process Control. New York: River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997.
McGraw-Hill, 1997. [36] W.L. Luyben, B.D. Tyreus, and M.L. Luyben, Plantwide Process Control.
[11] B.W. Bequette, An Introduction to Model-Based Control. Upper Saddle New York: McGraw Hill, 1999.
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, to be published. [37] E.P. Gatzke, R. Vadigepalli, E.S. Meadows, and F.J. Doyle, III, “Experiences
[12] W.Y. Svrcek, D.P. Mahoney, and B.R Young, A Real-Time Approach to Pro- with an experimental project in a graduate control course,” Chem. Eng. Educ.,
cess Control. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 2000. vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 270-27, 1999.
[13] P.B. Deshpande, “Process control education: A quality control perspec- [38] D.R. Coughanowr, Process Systems Analysis and Control, 2nd ed. New
tive,” Chem. Eng. Educ., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 170-175, 1993. York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.
[14] B.W. Bequette, “Computer applications in process dynamics and control [39] K.T. Erickson and J.L Hedrick, Plantwide Process Control. New York: Wiley,
courses,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 193-200, 1998. 1999.
[15] B.W. Bequette, K.D. Schott, V. Prasad, V. Natarajan, and R.R. Rao, “Case [40] J.B. Riggs, Chemical Process Control. Lubbock, TX: Ferret, 1999.
study projects in an undergraduate process control course,” Chem. Eng. [41] C.A. Smith and A.B. Corripio, Principles and Practice of Automatic Process
Educ., vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 214-219, 1998. Control, 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1997.
[16] F.J. Doyle III, E.P. Gatzke, and R.S. Parker “Practical case studies for under-
graduate process dynamics and control using process control modules,”
B. Wayne Bequette is a Professor of chemical engineering
Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 181-191, 1998.
[17] F.J. Doyle III, E.P. Gatzke, and R.S. Parker, Process Control Modules. Upper at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. His teaching and re-
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000. search interests are in the area of process systems and con-
[18] B.W. Bequette, Process Dynamics: Modeling, Analysis and Simulation. Up- trol engineering. Applications of interest include
per Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.
biomedical systems, pharmaceuticals, chromatography,
[19] D.J. Cooper, “Picles™: A simulator for ‘virtual world’ education and train-
ing in process dynamics and control,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 4, no. 3,
and complex chemical processes. He is an Associate Editor
pp. 207-215, 1996. of Automatica and the General Chair for the 2003 American
[20] D.J. Cooper and D. Dougherty, “Enhancing process control education Control Conference (Denver). He is the author of Process
with the control station training simulator,” Comp. Appl. Egr. Educ., vol. 7, p. Dynamics: Modeling, Analysis and Simulation (New York:
203, 1999.
Prentice Hall, 1998).
[21] R.D. Braatz and M.R. Johnson “Process control laboratory education us-
ing a graphical operator interface,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
151-155, 1998. Babatunde A. Ogunnaike received a B.S. in chemical engi-
[22] B.R. Holt and R. Pick, “An undergraduate process control laboratory,”
neering, an M.S. in statistics, and a Ph.D. in chemical engi-
Preprints of the IFAC Workshop on Advances in Control Education, 1991, pp.
197-201. neering. He is currently a Research Fellow in the Advanced
[23] D.E. Rivera, K.S. Jun, V.E. Sater, and M.K. Shetty, “Teaching process dy- Control and Modeling group, DuPont Central Research and
namics and control using an industrial-scale real-time computing environ- Development. He is also an Adjunct Professor in the Chemi-
ment,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 191-205, 1996.
cal Engineering Department, University of Delaware. He is a
[24] M. Skliar, J.W. Price, C.A. Tyler, T.A. Ring, and G.A. Silcox, “Integration of
laboratory experiments in the chemical engineering curriculum using a dis-
co-author (with W. Harmon Ray) of Process Dynamics,
tributed control system,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 157-167, Modeling and Control (Oxford, 1994), and he serves as an As-
1998. sociate Editor of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Re-
[25] A.J. Pintar, D.W. Caspary, T.B. Co, E.R. Fisher, and N.K. Kim, “Process simu- search. His research interests include identification and
lation and control center: An automated pilot plant laboratory,” Comp. Applic.
Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 145-150, 1998.
control of nonlinear systems, modeling and control of poly-
[26] P. Frymier, “Locating, using and developing teaching and research re- mer reactors and distillation columns, applied statistics,
sources on the Web,” Comp. Applic. Eng. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 137-144, 1998. and biosystems analysis and control.

April 2001 IEEE Control Systems Magazine 17

You might also like