Motivation and Terminology of Automatic Process Control

Automatic control systems enable us to operate our processes in a safe and

profitable manner. Consider, as on this site, processes with streams comprised of
gases, liquids, powders, slurries and melts. Control systems achieve this “safe and
profitable” objective by continually measuring process variables such as
temperature, pressure, level, flow and concentration – and taking actions such as
opening valves, slowing down pumps and turning up heaters – all so that the
measured process variables are maintained at operator specified set point values.
Safety First
The overriding motivation for automatic control is safety, which
encompasses the safety of people, the environment and equipment.
The safety of plant personnel and people in the community are the
highest priority in any plant operation. The design of a process and
associated control system must always make human safety the
primary objective.
The tradeoff between safety of the environment and safety of
equipment is considered on a case by case basis. At the extremes,
the control system of a multi-billion dollar nuclear power facility will
permit the entire plant to become ruined rather than allow significant
radiation to be leaked to the environment.
On the other hand, the control system of a coal-fired power plant
may permit a large cloud of smoke to be released to the environment
rather than allowing damage to occur to, say, a single pump or
compressor worth a few thousand dollars.
• The Profit Motive
When people, the environment and plant equipment are
properly protected, our control objectives can focus on the
profit motive. Automatic control systems offer strong
benefits in this regard.
• Plant-level control objectives motivated by profit include:
• meeting final product specifications
• minimizing waste production
• minimizing environmental impact
• minimizing energy use
• maximizing overall production rate
It can be most profitable to operate as close as possible to these minimum or
maximum objectives. For example, our customers often set our product specifications,
and it is essential that we meet them if failing to do so means losing a sale.
Suppose we are making a film or sheet product. It takes more raw material to make a
product thicker than the minimum our customers will accept on delivery. Consequently,
the closer we can operate to the minimum permitted thickness constraint without going
under, the less material we use and the greater our profit.
Or perhaps we sell a product that tends to be contaminated with an impurity and our
customers have set a maximum acceptable value for this contaminant. It takes more
processing effort (more money) to remove impurities, so the closer we can operate to
the maximum permitted impurity constraint without going over, the greater the profit.
Whether it is a product specification, energy usage, production rate, or other objective,
approaching these targets ultimately translates into operating the individual process
units within the plant as close as possible to predetermined set point values for
temperature, pressure, level, flow, concentration and the other measured process
variables.
Controllers Reduce Variability
As shown in the plot below, a poorly controlled process can exhibit large
variability in a measured process variable (e.g., temperature, pressure,
level, flow, concentration) over time.
Suppose, as in this example, the measured process variable (PV) must
not exceed a maximum value. And as is often the case, the closer we can
run to this operating constraint, the greater our profit (note the vertical
axis label on the plot).
To ensure our operating constraint limit is not exceeded, the operator-
specified set point (SP), that is, the point where we want the control
system to maintain our PV, must be set far from the constraint to ensure
it is never violated. Note in the plot that SP is set at 50% when our PV is
poorly controlled.

To ensure our operating constraint limit is not
exceeded, the operator-specified set point (SP),
that is, the point where we want the control
system to maintain our PV, must be set far from
the constraint to ensure it is never violated. Note
in the plot that SP is set at 50% when our PV is
poorly controlled.
Above we see the same process with improved
control.
There is significantly less variability in the
measured PV, and as a result, the SP can be
moved closer to the operating constraint.
With the SP in the plot below moved to 55%, the
average PV is maintained closer to the
specification limit
while still remaining below the maximum allowed
value.
The result is increased profitability of our
operation.
 Open-Loop Control System
Control systems are broadly classified as either open-loop or closed-
loop. The open-loop control system is controlled by inputting to the
controller the desired set-point necessary to achieve the ideal
operating point for the process and accepting whatever output
results.

The controller receives no

information concerning the
present status of the process
or the need for any corrective
action.
Open-loop control reduces system complexity and costs less when compared to
closed-loop control. Open-loop control systems are not as commonly used as
closed-loop control systems because they are less accurate.
 Closed-Loop Control System
A closed-loop control system is one in which the output of a process affects the input
control signal. The system measures the actual output of the process and compares it to
the desired output.

Adjustments are made continuously by the control system until the

difference between the desired and actual output is as small as is
practical.
 PLC Control Of A PID Loop
The controlled variable (pressure)
is measured and feedback is
generated
The PLC program compares
the feedback to the set point
and generates an error signal

The controller then

issues a command The error is examined in
(control output) 3-ways: with proportional,
to correct for any measured error integral, and derivative
by adjustment of the position of the outlet valve methodology
 Proportional-Integral-Derivative Control
(PID Controller)
The functions of the individual proportional, integral and derivative
controllers complements each other. If they are combined its
possible to make a system that responds quickly to changes
(derivative), tracks required positions (proportional), and reduces
steady state errors (integral).
he traditional block diagram for cruise control is thus:
Terminology of Control
We establish the jargon for this site by discussing a home heating control system as
illustrated below.
This is a simplistic example because a home furnace is either on or off. Most control
challenges have a final control element (FCE), such as a valve, pump or compressor,
that can receive and respond to a complete range ofcontroller output (CO) signals
between full on and full off. This would include, for example, a valve that can be open
37% or a pump that can be running at 73%.

For our home heating process, the control objective is to keep the measured process
variable (PV)
at the set point value (SP) in spite of unmeasured disturbances (D).
For our home heating system:
•PV = process variable is house temperature
•CO = controller output signal from thermostat to furnace valve
•SP = set point is the desired temperature set on the thermostat by the home owner
•D = heat loss disturbances from doors, walls and windows; changing outdoor
temperature; sunrise and sunset; rain…
To achieve this control objective, the measured process variable is compared to the thermostat
set point.
The difference between the two is the controller error, which is used in a control algorithm
such as a PID (proportional-integral-derivative) controller to compute a CO signal to the final
control element (FCE).
The change in the controller output (CO) signal causes a response in the final control element
(fuel flow valve),
which subsequently causes a change in the manipulated process variable (flow of fuel to the
furnace).
If the manipulated process variable is moved in the right direction and by the right amount,
the measured process variable will be maintained at set point, thus satisfying the control
objective.
This example, like all in process control, involves a measurement, computation and action:
• is the measured temp colder than set point (SP – PV > 0)? Then open the valve.
• is the measured temp hotter than set point (SP – PV < 0)? Then close the valve.
Note that computing the necessary controller action is based on controller error,
or the difference between the set point and the measured process variable, i.e.
e(t) = SP – PV (error = set point – measured process variable)
In a home heating process, control is an on/off or open/close decision.
And as outlined above, it is a straightforward decision to make.
The price of such simplicity, however, is that the capability to tightly regulate our measured
PV is rather limited.
One situation not addressed above is the action to take when PV = SP (i.e., e(t) = 0).
And in industrial practice, we are concerned with variable position final control elements,
so the challenge elevates to computing:
• the direction to move the valve, pump, compressor, heating element…
• how far to move it at this moment
• how long to wait before moving it again
• whether there should be a delay between measurement and action