CH 13

f t ( ) 0dynes = y 0 ( ) 100cm = For this problem:
k 1816
gm
s
2
= k
M g
27cm
:= g 980.7
cm
s
2
= M 50gm := From the solution of problem 2-9:
y t ( ) and a second integartion gives
d y t ( )
dt
Integration of this second derivative results in:
d
2
y t ( )
dt
2
g
f t ( )
M
+
k
M
y t ( ) =
Solve for the highest derivative:
M
d
2
y t ( )
dt
2
M g k y t ( ) f t ( ) + =
The differential equation representing the motion of the bird mobile is, from Problem 2-9:
13-1. Simulation of Bird Mobile of Problem 2-9.
Solutions to Problems 13-1 to 13-17
Chapter 13. Simulation of Process Control Systems
The period of oscillation is, as in
the solution to problem 2-9:
Period 2
M
k
:=
Period 1.043 s =
The number of complete cycles
in 10 seconds is:
10s
Period
9.592 =
The simulation plot shows the
same result.
Excerpts from this work may be reproduced by instructors for distribution on a not-for-profit basis for testing or instructional purposes
only to students enrolled in courses for which the textbook has been adopted. Any other reproduction or translation of this work
beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act without the permission of the copyright owner
is unlawful.
Period 1.795 s = Period
2
g
L
:=
g
L
3.501 Hz = The frequency of oscillation is:
(Table 2-1.1) x t ( ) x 0 ( ) cos
g
L
t
= r
2
i
g
L
= r
1.
i
g
L
= Roots:
s
2 g
L
+
X s ( ) 0 = The solution of the differential equation:

x 0 ( ) 0.1m = L 0.8m := M 0.5kg := g 9.807
m
s
2
=
d
2
x t ( )
dt
2
g
L
x t ( ) =
Substitute and simplify to obtain:
tan
( )
sin
( )
=
x t ( )
L
=
For small angles , from the geometry:
M g tan
( )
M
d
2
x t ( )
dt
2
=
Application of Newton's Second Law of Motion:
Mg
x(t)
L
Mg sin2
2
13-2. Simulation of a Pendulum
The number of oscillations in
10 s is:
10s
Period
5.572 =
The simulation plot shows
the same result.
is unlawful.
w
i
0.194
kg
s
= w
i
A
o
2
M 601300 Pa
R
g
T
601300Pa p
o
( )
:=
Assume the compressor is initially off and comes on after 200 s (five time constants) with the exact
flow required to maintain the initial pressure:
42.895 s =
V 2
M
R
g
T
601300 Pa 500000 Pa
A
o
2 601300 Pa p
o
( )
:=
From the linearization of Problem 2-23, we know that the time constant is:
p 0 ( ) 500000 101300 + ( )Pa = T 70 273.16 + ( )K := R
g
8.314
Pa m
3
mole K
:=
p
o
101300Pa := M 29
gm
mole
:= A
o
0.785cm
2
:= V 1.5m
3
:= Problem parameters:
d p t ( )
dt
R
g
T
V M
w
i
t ( ) w
o
t ( )
( )
= Substitute and solve for dp(t)/dt:
t ( )
M
R
g
T
p t ( ) = Ideal gas law, assuming constant temperature:
w
o
t ( ) A
o
2 t ( ) p t ( ) p
o
( )
=
Flow through the orifice:
V
d t ( )
dt
w
i
t ( ) w
o
t ( ) =
In Problem 2-23 the mass balance on the tank produced the following equation:
13-3. Simulation of Punctured Air Tank of Problem 2-23.
As predicted by the linearized
model, the pressure reaches
steady state in about 200 s.
is unlawful.
Run the simulation for 25 hrs (five time constants). Simulate the oven as a step function from an
inital temperature of 535R to 800R.
d T t ( )
dt
A
M c
v
T
s
t ( )
4
T t ( )
4
=
Integrate the differential equation :
5.16 hr =
M c
v
4 A 535R ( )
3
:=
By the linearization done in Problem 2-24, the time constant of the turkey is:
0.1718 10
8
BTU
hr ft
2
R
4
:= T 0 ( ) 535R = c
v
0.95
BTU
lb R
:=
0.6 := T
s
800R := A 3.5ft
2
:= M 12lb := The parameters, given in this problem are:
M c
v
dT t ( )
dt
A T
s
t ( )
4
T t ( )
4
=
From the solution to Problem 2-24, the differential equation obtained from an energy balace on the
turkey is:
13-4. Simulation of the turkey temperature response of Problem 2-24.
From the response, the time
constant is much less than 5 hr.
This is because the time constant
gets smaller with temperature. At
800R it is:
M c
v
4 A 800R ( )
3
:= 1.54 hr =
From the response, the actual time
constant seems to be about 2 hr,
which is more in line with how long it
takes to cook a turkey.
is unlawful.
E 27820
BTU
lbmole
:=
R
g
1.987
BTU
lbmole R
:= 55
lb
ft
3
:= C
p
0.88
BTU
lb R
:= A 36ft
2
:=
f
c
0.8771
ft
3
min
:=
c
62.4
lb
ft
3
:= H
r
12000
BTU
lbmole
:= U 75
BTU
hr ft
2
R
:= V
c
1.56ft
3
:= C
pc
1
BTU
lb R
:=
Check that initial conditions are at steady state (derivatives = 0):
r
A
k
o
e
E
R
g
678.9 R
0.2068
lbmole
ft
3
2
:= r
A
0.039
lbmole
ft
3
min
=
f
V
c
Ai
0.2068
lbmole
ft
3
r
A
5.87 10
4
lbmole
ft
3
min
=
f
V
T
i
678.9R
( )
H
r
C
p
r
A

U A
V C
p
678.9 602.7 ( )R 7.915 10

3
R
min
=
f
c
V
c
T
ci
602.7R
( )
U A
V
c

c
C
pc
678.9 602.7 ( )R + 0.027

R
min
=
The following is the Simulink diagram for the reactor:
13-5. Non-isothermal Chemical Reactor of Section 4-2.3
lbmole 453.59mole :=
Rearranging the model equations from Section 4-2.3:
d c
A
t ( )
dt
f t ( )
V
c
Ai
t ( ) c
A
t ( )
( )
r
A
t ( ) = c
A
0 ( ) 0.2068
lbmole
ft
3
=
r
A
t ( ) k
o
e
E
R
g
T t ( )
c
A
2
t ( ) =
d T t ( )
dt
f t ( )
V
T
i
t ( ) T t ( )
( )
H
r
C
p
r
A
t ( )
U A
V C
p
T t ( ) T
c
t ( )
( )
= T 0 ( ) 678.9R =
d T
c
t ( )
dt
f
c
t ( )
V
c
T
ci
t ( ) T
c
t ( )
( )
U A
V
c

c
C
pc
T t ( ) T
c
t ( )
( )
+ = T
c
0 ( ) 602.7R =
Design conditions: c
Ai
0.5975
lbmole
ft
3
:= T
i
633.5R := f 1.3364
ft
3
min
:= T
ci
540R :=
Parameters:
V 13.46ft
3
:= k
o
8.33 10
8
ft
3
lbmole min
:=
The following are the responses for a 0.25 ft3/min increase in process flow at 1 minute followed by
a 0.1 ft3/min increase in coolant flow at 30 minutes.
Observe the inverse response in the reactor temperature for the change in process flow.
is unlawful.
The folowing is the Simulink diagram for the mixer:
f
2
37.5
gal
min
= f
2
f f
1
:=
f
1
62.5
gal
min
= f
1
f
c
A2
0.025mole cm
3

c
A2
c
A1
:=
f
1
c
A1
f
2
c
A2
+ f c
A
0 = At the initial steady state:
(assuming constant volume) f
1
f
2
+ f = Total mass balance:
Ah 200gal := f 100
gal
min
:= c
A2
0.05
mole
cm
3
:= c
A1
0.01
mole
cm
3
c
A
0 ( ) 0.025
mole
cm
3
=
d c
A
t ( )
dt
f
1
t ( ) c
A1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) c
A2
t ( ) + f t ( ) c
A
t ( )
A h
=
The model equation, from the solution to Problem 3-1:
13-6. Mixing Process of Problem 3-1
The responses to a step increase in f1 from 62.5 to 67.5 GPM at 1 minute:
The concentration response is
typical first-order with a time
constant of approximately 2 min.
is unlawful.
13-7. Feedback control of composition in mixer of Problem 3-1
Introduce the following blocks from the Chapter 13c public nodels:
Figure 13-4.1, F401Vlv1, control valve with time constant of 1 min, linear, maximum flow of
100 gpm, and initial condition of 37.5%C.O.
Figure 13-4.3, F403PI, PI controller with initial condition of 37.5% CO.
Figure 13-4.7, F407Trmr, transmitter with 1 min time constant, range of 0 to 1 mole/cm3,
and initial condition of 0.025 mole/cm3
The controller was tuned for quarter decay ratio response with a gain of 20%CO/%TO and an
intgral time of 1.5 min.
This is the Simulink diagram of the loop (the mixer block is the one from Problem 13-5):
The response to a 5 gpm increase in f1 at 1 minute is:
The outlet flow increases by 5 gpm
at 1 min and then the controller
increases f2 to bring the outlet
concentration back up to the set
point.
The high controller gain rsults in a
very minor deviation of the outlet
concentration from its set point.
is unlawful.
The responses to a 5 ft3/min step increase in process flow are:
The Simulink diagram is given by:
k 1 min
1
= k
f c
A1
0.5lbmole ft
3

V 0.5 lbmole ft
3
:= Initial conditions at steady state:

D
i
5.5in := L
p
400ft := V 150ft
3
c
A1
2
lbmole
ft
3
:= f 50
ft
3
min
:= Design conditions:
c
A3
t ( ) c
A2
t t
o
( )
=
c
A2
0 ( ) 0.5
lbmole
ft
3
=
d c
A2
t ( )
dt
f
V
c
A1
t ( ) c
A2
t ( )
( )
kc
A2
t ( ) =
The model equations, from the solution to Problem 3-2, are:
13-8. Isothermal reactor of Problem 3-2
The concentration response shows a
time constant of about 0.75 min, a
dead time of a little over 1 min, and a
steady state change of 0.38 lbmole/ft3.
The values from the linear model are:
V
f k V +
:= 0.75 min =
t
o
D
i
2
L
p
4f
:= t
o
1.32 min =
c
A2
c
A1
0.5
lbmole
ft
3
f k V +
5
ft
3
min
:=
c
A2
0.038
lbmole
ft
3
=
is unlawful.
The responses to a 0.1 step increase in feed composition are:
The Simulink diagram for this problem is:
z
0
0.513 =
y
0
0.625 = z
0
V y
0
L 0.4 +
F
:= y
0
0.4
1 1
( )
0.4 +
:=
At initial steady state:
2.5 := M 500kmole := Problem parameters:
V 5
kmole
s
= V F L := L 5
kmole
s
:= F 10
kmole
s
y t ( )
x t ( )
1 1
( )
x t ( ) +
=
F V L + =
x 0 ( ) 0.4 =
d x t ( )
dt
1
M
F z t ( ) V y t ( ) L x t ( ) ( ) =
Rearranging the model equation developed in Problem 3-11:
kmole 1000mole :=
13-9. Flash drum of Problem 3-11
These are typical first-order
responses with a time constant
of about 50 s and a gain on x of
about 1 which match the results
of the linear model in the
solution of Problem 3-11.
is unlawful.
The responses to a 20 ft3/min increase in inlet flow are:
The Simulink diagram for the tray is:
As the response is fast, convert time units to s by multiplying the derivative by 60 s/min.
h
0
0.136 ft =
h
0
f
o
0.415 w 2 g
1
1.5
:= f
o
f
i
:= f
i
30
ft
3
min
:= Initial steady state conditions:
S 11.2ft
2
:= w 3ft := Problem parameters:
f
o
t ( ) 0.415 w h t ( )
1.5
2 g =
d h t ( )
dt
1
S
f
i
t ( ) f
o
t ( )
( )
=
The model equations from the solution to Problem 3-12 are:
13-10. Distillation tray of Problem 3-12
The first-order response has a time
constant of approximately 2 s and
the steady-state change is about
0.054 ft. The time costant matches
the one from the linerized model from
the solution of Problem 3-12. Using
the gain from that solution, the
steady-state change in level should
be:
20ft
3
min
1
331.4ft
2
min
1
0.06 ft =
close!
The students can check the results
for the change in 10 ft3/min.
is unlawful.
From Table 7-1.1, for a series PID controller tuned for quarter decay ratio response:
K
c
K
cu
1.7
:=
I
T
u
2
:=
D
T
u
8
:= K
c
147
%CO
%TO
=
I
1.5min =
D
0.38 min =
Control valve (from F401Vlv1): K
v
0.0542
m
3
min %CO
:=
v
0.1min := (Solution of Problem
6-11)
Initial position:
f
2
K
v
44.28 %CO =
Transmitter (from F407Trmr):
T
3min := Initial output:
50 20
70 20
60 %TO =
The series PID Controller block is taken from the Public Model Library, F405PIDs
The Simulink block diagram for the blender conentration control loop is:
13.11. Blending tank of Problems 3-18 and 6-11
The diagram for the blender is essentially the same as for Problem 13-6 with slightly different
notation and the following parameter and design values:
%CO % :=
c
1
80
kg
m
3
:= c
2
30
kg
m
3
:= c
0
50
kg
m
3
:= f 4
m
3
min
:= V 40m
3
:=
%TO % :=
At the intial steady state: f f
1
f
2
+ = f c
0
f
1
c
1
f
2
c
2
+ =
f
2
f
c
0
c
1
c
2
c
1
:= f
1
f f
2
:= f
1
1.6
m
3
min
= f
2
2.4
m
3
min
=
From the results of Problem 6-11, the ultimate gain and period are:
K
cu
250
%CO
%TO
:= T
u
3.01min :=
The responses to a 0.1 m3/min increase in f1 are:
The decay ratio is somewhat greater
than 1/4. Students may adjust the
controller tuning parameters to
improve the response.
Notice that the concentration can be
controlled very tightly.
is unlawful.
f
2
f
1
:= f
1
3
m
3
min
=
C
v1
f
1
h
10
:= C
v2
f
2
h
20
:= C
v1
1.897
m
2.5
min
=
C
v2
1.897
m
2.5
min
=
The linearized gains and time constants are:
K
1
2 h
10
C
v1
:=
1
2 A
1
h
10
C
v1
:= K
1
1.667
min
m
2
=
1
15 min =
K
2
C
v1
C
v2
h
20
h
10
:=
2
2 A
2
h
20
C
v2
:= K
2
1 =
2
15 min =
13-12. Non-interacting tanks in series of Fig. 4-1.1
The model equations developed in Section 4-1.1 are:
d h
1
t ( )
dt
1
A
1
f
i
t ( ) f
o
t ( ) f
1
t ( )
( )
= h
10
2.5m :=
d h
2
t ( )
dt
1
A
2
f
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( )
( )
= h
20
2.5m :=
f
1
t ( ) C
v1
h
1
t ( ) = f
2
t ( ) C
v2
h
2
t ( ) =
Design conditions: f
i
5
m
3
min
:= f
o
2
m
3
min
:=
Problem parameters: A
1
9m
2
:= A
2
9m
2
:=
At initial steady state: f
1
f
i
f
o
:=
The responses to a 0.2 m3/min step increase in inlet flow are:
The responses of the level and
flow for the first tank are first-order
with a time constant of 15 min.
The gains are 1.0 for the flows and
the steady-state changes in level
are about 0.35 m, as predicted by
the linear model:
K
1
0.2
m
3
min
0.333 m =
The responses for the second
tank are second order with the
same steady-state change in
level, meaning that the gain K
2
is
unity as predicted by the linear
model.
is unlawful.
13-13. Interacting tanks of Fig. 4-2.1
The model equations developed in Section 4-2.1 are the same as for problem 13-12, except for the
flow betwen the tanks:
f
1
t ( ) C
v1
h
1
t ( ) h
2
t ( ) =
Design conditions are the same except for the initial condition in tank 1: h
10
5m :=
At the initial steady state: C
v1
f
1
h
10
h
20
:= C
v1
1.897
m
2.5
min
=
It can be shown that the gain of the inlet flow on the level in the second tank is the same as K1 in
Problem 13-12.
K
1
1.667
min
m
2
=
The following is the Simulink diagram for the interacting tanks is series:
The responses to a 0.2 m3/min step increase in inlet flow are:
The change in the level in the
second tank is the same as in
Problem 13-12. Students may
want to study the effect of
reducing the resistance
between the two tanks by
changing the initial condition on
h
1
and recalculating C
v1
. For
example, for h
10
= 2.6 m,
C
v1
f
1
2.6m h
20
:=
C
v1
9.487
m
2.5
min
=
The response of the second
tank becomes first-order and
the two tanks behave as a
single tank.
is unlawful.
2
5 min =
1
5 min = K
2
0 =
2
V
2
f
A
f
B
+
:=
1
V
1
f
A
:= K
2
f
B
f
A
f
B
+
:=
K
1
1 = K
1
f
A
f
A
f
B
+
:= This problem is linear with a gains and time constants:
T
4
500 K = T
2
500 K = T
4
f
A
T
2
f
B
T
3
+
f
A
f
B
+
:= T
2
T
1
:= At initial steady state:
T
3
500K := T
1
500K := f
B
0
m
3
min
:= V
2
5m
3
:= V
1
5m
3
:= f
A
1
m
3
min
:=
Design conditions:
d T
4
t ( )
dt
1
V
2
f
A
T
2
t ( ) f
B
T
3
t ( ) + f
A
f
B
+
( )
T
4
t ( )
=
d T
2
t ( )
dt
f
A
V
1
T
1
t ( ) T
2
t ( )
( )
=
The model equations developed in Section 4-1.2 are:
13-14. Non-interacting thermal tanks in series of Fig. 4-1.5
is unlawful.
The resposes to a 10 K step increase in inlet temperature are:
The response for the first tank is
first-order with a unity gain and a
time constant of 5 min, matching
the theoretical model. The
response for the second tank is
second-order also with unity ain
for these conditions.
Students may study the effect of
changing flows fA and fB and
temperature T3 on these
responses.
13-15. Interacting thermal tanks of Fig. 4-2.4
The model equations developed in Section 4-2.2, ignoring f
B
, are:
d T
1
t ( )
dt
1
V
1
f
A
T
1
t ( ) f
R
T
4
t ( ) + f
A
f
R
+
( )
T
2
t ( )
=
d T
4
t ( )
dt
1
V
2
f
A
f
R
+
( )
T
1
t ( ) T
4
t ( )
( )
=
The design conditions and problem parameters are the same as in Problem 13-14, plus the recycle
flow:
f
R
1
m
3
min
:= (The results for f
R
= 0 are identical to those of Prob. 13-14)
Note: In the model of Section 4-2.2, the recycle flow is assumed to be 0.2*(f
A
+ f
B
).
The temperature responses for a 10 K step increase in inlet temperature are:
The students should study the effect
of the recycle flow on the responses.
As the recycle flow is increased, the
temperatures in the two tanks
approach each other and the two
tanks behave as one perfectly mixed
tank with the combined volume of the
two tanks. They should notice that
increasing the recycle flow does not
appreciably change the time to
steady state, or the gain.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the reactors is:
c
A20
0.767
lbmole
ft
3
= c
A20
f
1
c
A10
f
1
k
2
V
2
+
:=
c
A10
1.726
lbmole
ft
3
= c
A10
f
o
c
Ao
f
1
k
1
V
1
+ f
R
f
1
f
1
k
2
V
2
+

:=
c
A20
f
1
c
A10
f
1
k
2
V
2
+
=
f
1
20
ft
3
min
= f
1
f
o
f
R
+ := At the initial steady state:
f
R
10
ft
3
min
:= For the base case let:
V
2
125ft
3
:= V
1
125ft
3
:= f
o
10
ft
3
min
:=
k
2
0.2min
1
:= k
1
0.2min
1
:= c
Ao
7
lbmole
ft
3
:= Design conditions from Problem 6-15:
c
A2
0 ( ) c
A20
=
d c
A2
t ( )
dt
f
1
V
2
c
A1
t ( ) c
A2
t ( )
( )
k
2
c
A2
t ( ) =
c
A1
0 ( ) c
A10
=
d c
A1
t ( )
dt
1
V
1
f
o
c
Ao
t ( ) f
R
c
A2
t ( ) + f
1
c
A1
t ( )
( )
k
1
c
A1
t ( ) =
The model equatios are developed in the solution to Problem 4-9:
13-16. Reactors with recycle of Problems 4-9 and 6-15
The responses to a 0.5 lbmole/ft3 step increase in inlet concentration with a recycle flow of 10
ft3/min are:
Students shall study the effect of
changing the recycle flow as indicated
in the statement of the problem.
Notice that the initial steady state
conditions vary with the recycle flow.
is unlawful.
The Simulnk block diagram for the extractor is:
f
2
14088.6
m
3
min
=
f
2
K
a
V c
10
m
e
c
20

( )
2 c
20
:=
c
20
1.2776 10
4
kmole
m
3
=
c
20
2 f
1
c
i
c
10
( )
K
a
V c
10
+
K
a
m
e
V
:=
c
10
0.04
kmole
m
3
= c
10
1 Rec ( ) c
i
:= At the initial steady state:
V 25m
3
:= K
a
3.646min
1
:= m
e
3.95 := Problem parameters:
Rec 90% := c
i
0.4
kmole
m
3
:= f
1
5
m
3
min
c
2
0 ( ) c
20
=
d c
2
t ( )
dt
K
a
c
1
t ( ) m
e
c
2
t ( )
( )
2 f
2
t ( )
V
c
2
t ( ) =
c
1
0 ( ) c
10
=
d c
1
t ( )
dt
2 f
1
t ( )
V
c
i
t ( ) c
1
t ( )
( )
K
a
c
1
t ( ) m
e
c
2
t ( )
( )
=
The model equations developed in the solution to Problem 4-6 are:
13-17. Extraction process of Problem 4-6
The responses to a 1000 m3/min step increase in solvent flow are:
Obviously the problem parameters
are unreasonable. The large solvent
flow makes for an almost
instantaneous response of the
extract composition. The effect on
the raffinate composition is
negligible, as the extract
composition is essentially zero
under the design conditions.
Ask students to try more
reasonable parameter values:
m
e
0.95 := K
a
209min
1
:=
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the cooler is:
f
c0
0.172
m
3
min
= f
c0
U A
c
c
pc
T
0
T
c0
( )
T
c0
T
ci
( )
:=
T
c0
35.5 degC =
T
c0
T
0
f c
p
U A
T
i
T
0
( )
c
pc
4.2
kJ
kg degC
:=
c
1000
kg
m
3
:= c
p
3.8
kJ
kg degC
:=
800
kg
m
3
:= V
c
1.1m
3
:= A 4m
2
:= U 200
kJ
min m
2
degC
:= V 5m
3
T
ci
25degC := T
0
45degC := f 0.1
m
3
min
:=
T
i
70degC := Design conditions:
T
c
0 ( ) T
c0
=
d T
c
t ( )
dt
f
c
t ( )
V
c
Tci T
c
t ( )
( )
U A
V
c

c
c
pc
T t ( ) T
c
t ( )
( )
+ =
T 0 ( ) T
0
=
d T t ( )
dt
f t ( )
V
T
i
t ( ) T t ( )
( )
U A
V c
p
T t ( ) T
c
t ( )
( )
=
kJ 1000joule := degC K := The model equations, from the solution to Problem 4-7, are:
13-18. Temperature control of stirred tank cooler of Problems 4-7 and 6-19
Smith & Corripio, 3rd edition
Chapter 13. Simulation of Process Control Systems (continued)
f
c0
0.008
m
3
min %CO
21.5 %CO = Controller output:
45 20
70 20
50 %TO = Transmitter output: Initial conditions:
D
0.95 min =
I
3.8min = K
c
44
%CO
%TO
=
D
T
u
8
:=
I
T
u
2
:= K
c
K
cu
1.7
:= From Table 7-1.1:
T
u
7.59min := K
cu
75.4
%CO
%TO
:=
From the solution to Problem 6-19:
%TO % := %CO % :=
To complete the temperature control loop, install, from the Public Model Library:
A flow control loop, f401Vlv1, with a gain of 0.008 m3/min-%CO, negligible time constant.
A temperature transmitter, f407Trmr, with a range of 20 to 70 C and a time constant of 0.6 min.
A series PID controller, f405PIDs, tuned for quarter dcay ratio
The responses to a 0.2 m3/min step increase in process flow at 5 min, and a 2 C step increase in
set point at 30 min, are:
The controller output saturates for the
change in process flow and is barely
able to return the temperature to the
set point. The controller output also
temporarily saturates on the change in
set point, but is able to recover.
Saturation is a form of nonlinear
behavior. In this case it causes the
decay ratio to be much less than 1/4.
Encourage your students to figure out
what needs to be changed so that the
controller does not saturate.
is unlawful.
V 5gal :=
k
v
1.954 10
100%CO
lb
min
:= k
v
0.0618
lb
min %CO
=
Steam enthalpy, saturated at 1 atm., referenced to 32 F, is: 1150.4 BTU/lb
h
s
1150.4
BTU
lb
c
p
32 degF + := h
s
1176
BTU
lb
=
At the initial steady state: w
2
f
1
c
p
T
30
T
1
( )
h
s
c
p
T
30

:= w
2
2.518
lb
min
=
vp
0
w
2
k
v
:=
vp
0
40.8 %CO =
Note: The value of w
2
does not match the one in the problem statement.
Simulate the valve by inserting the block f401Vlv1 from the Public Model Library, linear, with a gain
kv and a time constant of
v
4s :=
v
0.067 min =
The Simulink block diagram is:
gpm
gal
min
:= degF R :=
13-19. Direct contact heater of Problem 4-5
The model equations developed in the solution to Problem 4-5 are:
d T
3
t ( )
dt
1
V
f
1
t ( ) T
1
t ( ) f
3
t ( ) T
3
t ( )
( )
h
s
V c
p
w
2
t ( ) + = T
3
0 ( ) T
30
=
w
2
t ( ) 1.954 10 vp t ( ) = k
v
vp t ( ) =
f
3
t ( ) f
1
t ( )
w
2
t ( )
+ =
Substitute to eliminate f.3(t):
d T
3
t ( )
dt
f
1
t ( )
V
T
1
t ( ) T
3
t ( )
( )
w
2
t ( )
V c
p
h
s
c
p
T
3
t ( )
( )
+ =
Design conditions: f
1
25gpm := T
1
60degF := T
30
80degF :=
Problem parameters: 7
lb
gal
:= c
p
0.8
BTU
lb degF
:=
is unlawful.
The response to a 5 gpm step increase in process flow at 0.1 min and a 5 %CO step increase in
sgnal to the steam control valve at 1 min, are
The time constant of the mixer is
matches the value of 0.2 min obtained
by linearization; the steady state
changes are a bit less than predicted
by the linear model.
The respons to the process flow is
first-order and the one to the signal to
the valve is second-order. This is
because of the lag in the valve.
This is the plot also obtained with the following Simulink diagram:
is unlawful.
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
2
.
10
5
4
.
10
5
6
.
10
5
f
s
p
1
p psi ,
( )
scfh
p
f
s
p
1
p ,
( )
836
scfh
gpm
R
psi
C
v
C
f
p
1
G T
y p
1
p ,
( )
0.148 y p
1
p ,
( )
3
|
\
|
.
:=
y p
1
p ,
( )
1.63
C
f
p
p
1
:= Functions for valve flow:
T 259 460 + ( )R := C
f
0.8 := G 0.621 := p
1
34.7psia := C
v
440
gpm
psi
:=
scfh
ft
3
hr
:= psia psi := Problem parameters from Example 5-2.2:
G
M
w
29
= y
1.63
C
f
p
p
1
=
f
s
836 C
v
C
f
p
1
G T
y 0.148 y
3

( )
=
The flow through a gas control valve can be calculated from Eq. 5-2.3:
13-20. Gas flow control valve of Example 5-2.2
This Simulink block can simulate any gas valve with variable inlet pressure and pressure drop. To
obtain the flow in scf/min, divide the Cv,max/100 by 60 min/hr.
The Simulink block diagram for the temperature control loop is:
D
0.84 min =
I
3.4min = K
c
5.9
%CO
%TO
=
D
T
u
8
:=
I
T
u
2
:= K
c
K
cu
1.7
:=
From Table 7-1.1, the quarter decay rato tuning parameters are:
T
u
6.7min := K
cu
10
%CO
%TO
:=
With the lags on the valve and the transmitter, the loop can be made unstable--it wasn't for the
conditions of Problem 6-12. The ultimate gain and period ar determined from the simulation:
678.9 640
700 640
64.8 %TO = Transmitter initial condition:
ln 0.5 ( )
ln 50 ( )
17.72 %CO = Initial position: 2 0.8771
ft
3
min
1.754
ft
3
min
= Valve maximum flow:
To the block developed in Problem 13-5 to simulate the reactor, we add the following blocks from
the Public Model Library:
f401Vlv1: equal precentage control valve with a time constant of 0.1 min and sized for 100%
overcapacity, air-to-close
f405PIDs: a series PID controller tuned for quarter decay ratio response
f407Trmr: transmitter with a range of 640 to 700 R and a time constant of 1.0 min
13-21. Temperature control of reactor of Section -2.3 and Problem 6-12
The responses to a -0.2 ft3/min step change in reactants flow at 1 min followed by a 1 R step
increase in setpoint at 30 min are:
The decay ratio is
slightly greater than
1/4. The students
should play with the
tuning of the
controller and test it
for different
magnitudes and
directions of the input
changes.
is unlawful.
13-22. Temperature control of stirred tank heater of Example 13-4.1 with
variable pressure drop across the control valve
The steam chest pressure is calculated as a function of the steam temperature using the Antoine
equation for water (Reid, Prausnitz, and Sherwood, 1977, The Properties of Gases and Liquids, 3rd
ed., Appendix.
p
2
t ( )
14.7psia
760mmHg
e
18.3036
3816.44K
T
s
t ( ) 460R +
( )
K
1.8R
46.13K
=
The Simulink block diagram of Fig. 13-4.9 is modified as follows:
The "Gas Valve 2" is a modified version of the gas valve of Problem 13-20 in that it accepts the
upstream and downstream pressures p1 and p2--instead of p--and it outputs the flow in lb/min.
This is done by multiplying the output by the molecular weight and dividing by 380 scf/lbmole and
by 60 min/hr.
Responses to this model are compared with those of Fig. 13-4.10 by running both versions of the
control loop in parallel and plotting the reponses together:
The responses to the decrease
in process flow are almost
identical, but those for the
increase in flow are different.
This is because as the steam
pressure increases the capacity
of the valve decreases and the
flow of steam does not vary as
much as when the flow is
assumed to be independent of
pressure. The response is then
slower and less oscillatory.
This is an excellent example of
the effect of a saturation
nonlinearity that is often
overlooked in modeling.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the control loop is:
m
0
40.65 %CO =
m
0
f
K
v
:= Initial conditions:
K
v
K
o
100 0 ( )%TO
1 0 ( )lb gal
1
1.845 = Process gain:

K
o
0.0075
lb
gal gpm
:= K
v
2.46
gpm
%CO
:= From the solution to Problem 6-17:
The Simulink diagram for each reactor is the same as in Problem 13-8, with a different notation and
without the transportation lag in the outlet pipe (here it is asssumed e reactors are close to each
other and the tranporation lag is negligible).
Making a subsystem block of each reactor, we build the concentratioon control loop by adding,
from the Public Model Library:
f401Vlv1: a linear control valve sized for 100% overcapacity and a time constant of 0.1 min
f405PIDs: a series PID controller tuned for quarter decay ratio response
f407Trmr: a concentration transmitter with a range of 0 to 1.0 lb/gal and negligible lag.
c
4
2
1
0.5
|
\
|
|
|
.
lb
gal
= c
3
f c
2
f k V +
:= c
2
f c
1
f k V +
:= c
1
f c
0
f k V +
V 1000gal := k 0.1min
1
:= c
0
4
lb
gal
:= f 100gpm := Design conditions:
c
0
t ( ) c
i
t ( ) = and
For j = 1,2,3 c
j
0 ( ) c
j0
=
d c
j
t ( )
dt
f t ( )
V
c
j 1
t ( ) c
j
t ( )
k c
j
t ( ) =
The model equation for each reactor is developed in the soution to Problem 6-17:
13-23. Concentration control of isothermal reactors in series of Problem 6-17
From a step test in controller output, the time constant is about 9 min and the dead time is
negligible, so the process is very controllable. The quarter decay ratio tuning formulas impose no
limit on the gain or on how small the integral time can be, so we use the synthesis formulas:
Kc adjusutable
I
= 9min =
D
0min = (PI controller)
The responses to a 1 lb/gal increase in inlet eactants concentartion (a change in inlet flow is not
possible since the flow is the manipulated variable), with Kc = 10%CO/%TO, are:
The problem will be more interesting
with a 1 min time lag in the
transmitter. The students can be
asked try this case and to play with
the tuning parameters, e.g., smaller
integral time for faster response.
Notice the deviation in concentration
is small. Students could also
examine effect of the controller gain
on the magnitude of the deviation.
is unlawful.
T
30
200degF :=
Problem parameters: U 136
BTU
hr ft
2
degF
:= D 3ft := A 974ft 0.5 in := A 127.5 ft
2
=
53
lb
ft
3
:= C
M
974ft 0.178
lb
ft
0.12
BTU
lb degF
:= C
M
20.8
BTU
degF
=
c
p
0.45
BTU
lb degF
:= p
s
115psig := 872.9
BTU
lb
:=
At the initial steady state: f
3
f
1
:= T
s0
T
30
c
p
f
1
U A
T
30
T
1
( )
+ := T
s0
343.4 degF =
w
s
U A T
s0
T
30
( )
:= w
s
47.48
lb
min
=
The Simulink diagram for the heater is:
13-24. Temperature and level control of oil heater of Problem 6-24
The model equations from the solution to Problem 6-24 are:
d h t ( )
dt
ft
3
7.48gal
4
D
2
f
1
t ( ) f
3
t ( )
( )
= h 0 ( ) h
0
=
d T
3
t ( )
dt
f
1
t ( )
V t ( )
T
1
t ( ) T
3
t ( )
( )
U A
V t ( ) c
p
T
s
t ( ) T
3
t ( )
( )
+ = T
3
0 ( ) T
30
=
V t ( ) 7.48
gal
ft
3
D
2
4
h t ( ) =
d T
s
t ( )
dt
1
C
M
w
s
t ( ) U A T
s
t ( ) T
3
t ( )
( )

= T
s
0 ( ) T
s0
=
Assume the pressures are constant and determine the flows as follows:
Inlet oil flow f
1
(t): linear valve with variable pressure drop-Model Library f402Vlv2-sized for 50%
overcapacity and pressure drop:
p
v1
p
1
14.7psi + p
2
( )
g h t ( ) 5ft ( ) =
Outlet oil flow f
3
(t): Step function input (it is the disturbance)
Steam flow w
s
(t): linear control valve with constant pressure drop-Model Library f401Vlv1-szed for
50% overcapacity.
psig psi :=
Design conditions: p
1
45psig := p
2
40psia := f
1
100gpm := T
1
70degF :=
D
0.14 min =
I
0.56 min = K
c
45
%CO
%TO
=
D
T
u
8
:=
I
T
u
2
:= K
c
K
cu
1.7
:=
Quarter decay tuning parameters from Table 7-1.1:
T
u
1.12min := K
cu
77.1
%CO
%TO
:= Ultimate gain and period of temperature controller:
m
10
46.67 %CO = m
10
32.2
1.5 46
:=
m
s0
60.58 %CO = w
smax
78.4
lb
min
= m
s0
w
s
w
smax
:= w
smax
46
41.8
1.5 w
s
:=
50% for both transmitters Intial conditions, from the results of Problem 6-24::
To complete the control loops, from the Public Model Library, introduce:
f405PIDs: series PID temperature controller tuned for quarter decay ratio response
f407Trmr: temperature (TT-50) and level (LT-50 transmitters with 100 to 200 F and 7 to 10 ft
ranges, and 0.5 min and 0.01 min time constants, respectively.
The responses to a 5 gpm increase in inlet oil flow are:
Students should be encouraged to
study the effect of problem
parameters. For example, a more
realistic valve time constant of 0.1 min
will result in more reasonable
controller parameters.
Notice the small offset in level. This is
for a level controller gain of
20%CO/%TO.
is unlawful.
13-25. Moisture control of drier of Problem 9-1. Simple feedback vs. cascade
In the solution to Problem 9-1 he drier is represented by linear transfer functions as it will be
simulated here. In the absence of information, the transfer function will be the same to a change in
ambient temperature as for a change in heater outlet temperature.
(a) The Simulink diagram for the single moisture feedback control loop is
(b) The Simulink diagram for the cascade control scheme using the heater outlet temperature as
the intermediate variable is:
is unlawful.
The respones to a 10F step increase in ambient temperature at 1 min, and a 0.3 %moisture
increase in set point at 30 min, are:
The cascade response is in magenta
and the feedback in yellow. To obtain
these results the gain of the TC-47
controller had to be reduced to 2
%CO/%TO from the 4.14 determined
in Prpblem 9-1.
The cascade reponse is less
oscillatory and faster at the expense
of larger changes and oscillations in
the fuel flow.
The controller parameters are:
Feedback: Cascade:
K
c
0.42
%CO
%TO
:= 0.56
%CO
%TO
I
3.5min := 1.0min
D
0.86min := 0.26min
is unlawful.
The feedback control responses are in
yellow and the cascade responses in
magenta. They show almost perfect
control to the disturbance input and a
slightly faster response to the set
point change for the cascade scheme
at the expense of very oscillatory
response of the manipulated variable.
study how adjustment of the
secondary gain may reduce the
oscillations of the manipulated variable
and how it affects the response of the
controlled variable and/or the master
controller tuning.
The block diagrams are given in the solution to Problem 9-3, and the responses to unit step
changes in disturbace at 1 min and set point at 75 min are:
I
10 min = K
c
6.1
%CO
%TO
=
I
T
u
1.2
:= K
c
K
cu
2.2
:=
T
u
12.5min := K
cu
13.5
%CO
%TO
:=
K
c2
2.2
%CO
%TO
:= Cascade Control. From the solution to Problem 9-3, with
I
23 min = K
c
1.1
%CO
%TO
=
I
T
u
1.2
:= K
c
K
cu
2.2
:=
From Table 7-1.1, the quaerte decay tuning parameters for a PI controller are:
T
u
27.8min := K
cu
2.38
%CO
%TO
:=
Simple Feedback Loop. From the solution to Problem 9-3, the ultimate gain and period are:
13-26. Feedback vs. cascade control of Problem 9-3
The responses to a 5C step increase in set point are:
is unlawful.
D
0.83 min =
I
3.9min = K
c
19
%CO
%TO
=
D
0.482
t
0
\
|
.
1.137
:=
I

0.878
t
0
\
|
.
0.749
:= K
c
1.435
K
p
t
0
\
|
.
0.921
:=
12.8min := K
p
0.385
%TO
%CO
:=
t
0
2.2min :=
Cascade Control (with the secondary proportional controller gain set at 2%CO/%TO):
D
1.4min =
I
5.6min = K
c
17
%CO
%TO
=
D
0.482
t
0
\
|
.
1.137
:=
I

0.878
t
0
\
|
.
0.749
:= K
c
1.435
K
p
t
0
\
|
.
0.921
:=
The tuning parameters for minimum IAE response, from Table 7-2.2:
t
0
3.5min := 13.5min := K
p
0.285
%TO
%CO
:=
Simple Feedback Loop:
The block diagrams from the solution to Problem 9-4 are simulated as in Problem 13-25 with a
parallel PID master controller and a proportional slave controller with a gain of 2%CO/%TO. From
the open-loop responses to step changes in contrller output, the following parameters are obtained:
13-27. Jacketed reactor of Problem 9-4. Simple feedback vs. cascade control
The responses show a faster
response for the cascade scheme
(magenta) than for simple feedback
(yellow), at the expense of doubling
the variation in the controller output. In
fact, because this linear analysis does
not impose limits on the controller
output, we see increases of 200 and
400%CO, which are not possible in
practice. Pointing out these
restrictions is an advantage of
simulation which is not obtained from
the anlytical analysis.
The responses to a 5 ft3/min step decrease in process flow at 3 min followed by an increase of
10F in inlet temperature at 30 min are:
The Simulink diagram for the ratio control scheme is obtained by a simple modification of the
diagram of Fig. 13-4.11:
Ratio 3.75
min %TO
ft
3
= Ratio
c
p
T
set
T
i
( )
100%TO
f
max
:=
T
set
150degF := The ratio for set point of
f
max
75
lb
min
:= T
i
100degF := 966
BTU
lb
:= c
p
0.8
BTU
lb degF
:= 68
lb
ft
3
:=
where the ratio is adjusted by the operator or a feedback controller to obtain the desired outlet
temperature. For the conditions of the problem, the ratio is:
w
set
t ( )
c
p
T
set
t ( ) T
i
f t ( ) = Ratio f t ( ) =
If the variation in the inlet temperature diturbance is neglected, the feedforward controller calculation
becomes:
13-28. Feedforward temperature control of heater of Example 13-4.2
The responses are identical for the
change in process flow, but the ratio
controller (magenta) does not take
action on the change in inlet
temperature resulting in an error of
about 10F. This reponse is slower than
the one for the flow change, so a
feedback controller can adjust the ratio
to maintain the outlet temperature at
the set point.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the ratio control scheme is:
K
c
166
%CO
%TO
= K
c
147
%CO
%TO
100%CO
R
max
f
2max
f
1
:=
The controller gain must be adjusted by the factor the output is multiplied by:
R
max
f
1max
100%CO f
2max
0.0221
1
%CO
=
The signal from the flow transmitter must then be scaled by the factor:
(at 100%CO) R
max
3 := f
2max
5.42
m
3
min
:= f
1max
4
m
3
min
:= Transmitter ranges:
Ratio 1.5 = Ratio
f
2
f
1
:= f
2
2.4
m
3
min
:= f
1
1.6
m
3
min
:=
Design conditions:
The diagram of Problem 13-11 is modified to introduce a sesor/transmitter for the concentrated
stream flow and a multiplier to represent the ratio controller. The transmitter has a ange of 0 to 4
m3/min and a time constant of 0.75 min. The multiplier allows the feedback controller to adjust the
ratio.
13-29. Ratio control of blending tank of Problems 3-18 and 13-11
The responses to a 0.1 m3/min step increase in process flow at 1 min followed by a 2 kg/m3 step
increase in concentrated stream composition at 15 min are:
The ratio controller (magenta)
results in a smaller initial
deviation than the simple
feedback (yellow) for the change
in process flow. The responses
are essentially the same for the
change in concentration.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the cascade control loop is:
D
0.47 min =
I
1.9min =
D
T
u
8
:=
I
T
u
2
:=
K
c
6
%CO
%TO
= K
c
K
cu
1.7
:= Quarter decay ratio tuning from Table 7-1.1:
T
u
3.75min := K
cu
10.5
%TO
%CO
:= Master loop:
I
:=
Set Kc to 2%CO/%TO to obtain fast response
without much oscillation.
Synthesis tuning from Table 7-4.1:
t
0
0min := 3min := K
2
1.95
%TO
%CO
:= Slave loop:
An open-loop step test in the slave controller results in the following parameters:
The Simulink diagram of Problem 13-21 is modified to introduce, from the Public Model Library,
A jacket temperature transmitter with a range of 560 to 660R and a time constant of 1.0 min
f403PI: a PI controller for the jacket temperature tuned by the synthesis method.
13-30. Cascade temperature control of reactor of Section 4-2.3
The responses to a 0.2 ft3/min step decrease in reactants flow at 2 min followed by a 1R step
increase in set point are:
The cascade
responses (magenta)
are faster than the
ones for simple
feedback control
(yellow) at the
expense of more
oscillations in the
manipulated variable.
Students should be
encouraged to study
the effect of the
tuning parameters.
Encourage them to
try the formulas for
tuning cascade
controllers in Table
9-3.1.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the linear feedforward controller is:
D
1.6min =
I
6.5min =
K
c
2.5
%CO
%TO
=
D
3.25min
2
:=
I
2 3.25 min := K
c
1.2
0.98
3.25
6.75
|
\
|
.
1
:=
The feedback controller must be retuned because of the replacement of the equal-percentage valve
with the coolant flow control loop. From Table 7-2.1 for quarter-decay ratio response:
Bias 83.86 %TO = Bias 1.255 66.82 %TO :=
m 0 ( ) m 0 ( ) 1.255 66.82 %TO + Bias + = m 0 ( ) = Bias required for the same set point:
1.3364
ft
3
min
K
DT
66.82 %TO = Initial reactant transmitter output:
To start with a correct initial set point of the coolant flow controller, a bias is needed:
delay 4.5min =
13-31. Linear feedforward control of reactor of Section 4-2.3 and Problem
13-21
For the linear feedforward controller, use Eq. 11-2.1, page 379:
FFC
G
D
H
D
G
M
=
The reactant flow transmitter is taken from the Public Model Library, f407Trmr, with a range 0 to 2
ft3/min and a tim constant of 0.1 min:
H
D
K
DT
0.1 s 1 +
= K
DT
100%TO
2ft
3
min
1
:= K
DT
50
%TO
ft
3
min
1
=
From step tests on the disturbance, the folowing parameters are obtained:
G
D
61.5
%TO
ft
3
min
1
e
5.5 s
9s 1 +
=
FFC
61.5 %TO
K
DT
ft
3
min
1
0.98 ( )
6.75s 1 +
9s 1 +
e
5.5 3.25 ( )s
=
G
M
0.98
%TO
%CO
e
3.25 s
6.75s 1 +
=
61.5 %TO
K
DT
ft
3
min
1
0.98 ( )
1.255
%CO
%TO
=
Feedforward controller gain:
FFC 1.225
%CO
%TO
6.75s 1 +
9.s 1 +
e
2.25 s 1 +
=
This calls or a lead of 6.75 min, a lag of 9 min and a delay of 2.25 min. To simplify the design,
let's drop the lead-lag unit since the lead and lag are about the same, and increase the delay by
the difference:
delay 2.25min 9 6.75 ( )min + :=
The responses to a 0.2 ft3/min step decrease in reactants flow at 1 min are
The feedforward responses are in
magenta and the simple
feedback responses are in
yellow. The feedforward
controller required some
adjustments:
Delay 3.5min :=
K
c
5
%CO
%TO
:=
I
3min :=
The delay is necessary so that
the feedforward action does not
aggravate the initial inverse
response of the temperature to
the reactants flow. The delayed
feedforward correction reduces
the downward temperature
deviation and the oscillation.
The reason the manipulated
responses are offset is that one
is adjusting the air-to-close
equal percentage valve and the
other the coolant flow set point.
is unlawful.
The feedback controller will adjust the ratio in the range 0 to Rmax as its output varies from 0 to
100%CO, so the signal from the process flow transmitter must be scaled. Use flow transmitter
ranges of 0 to 2 ft3/min for the process flow and 0 to 1.75 ft3/min for the coolant flow.
f
c
0.876
ft
3
min
= f
c
Ratio f := f 1.3364
ft
3
min
:= Check:
Ratio 0.655 = Ratio
c
p
T
i
T
( )
H
r
( )
c
Ai
c
A
( )
+
c
c
pc
T
c
T
ci
( )
:=
Ratio at design conditions:
c
A
0.2068
lbmole
ft
3
:= c
Ai
0.5975
lbmole
ft
3
:=
T
c
602.7R := T
ci
540R := T 678.9R := T
i
635R :=
13-32. Ratio control of reactor of Section 4-2.3 and Problem 13-21
Design the feedforward controller by the procedure of Section 11-6, page 395,with the reactants flow
as the only major disturbance:
Control objective: T(t) = Tset(t) (reactor temperature) 1.
Manipulated variable: fc(t) (coolant flow to the jacket) 2.
Disturbances: f(t) (reactants flow) 3.
Steady state balances: 4.
V r
A
t ( ) f t ( ) c
Ai
c
A
( )
=
f t ( ) c
p
T
i
T t ( )
( )
V r
A
t ( ) H
r
( )
+ U A T t ( ) T
c
( )
= f
c
t ( )
c
c
pc
T
c
T
ci
( )
=
Combine to eliminate rA(t):
f t ( ) c
p
T
i
T
set
t ( )
H
r
( )
c
Ai
c
A
( )
+
f
c
t ( )
c
c
pc
T
c
T
ci
( )
=
Solve for the manipulated variable:
f
c
t ( ) Ratio t ( ) f t ( ) =
6. Feedback trim: The feedback controller will adjust the ratio when the set point or some of the
other disturbances changes
7. Dynamic compensation: From inspection, we would say that a net lead will probably be required
because the coolant flow must overcome the lag of the jacket, while the reantants flow does not.
However, from the results of Problem 13-31 we know we need a delay of 3.5 min.
Design conditions: 55
lb
ft
3
:= c
p
0.88
BTU
lb degF
:= H
r
12000
BTU
lbmole
:=
c
62.4
lb
ft
3
:=
c
pc
1
BTU
lb degF
:=
The Simulink diagram for the ratio control scheme is:
K
cnew
3.3
%CO
%TO
= K
cnew
f
cmax
R
max
f
K
c
:= K
c
5
%CO
%TO
:=
K
c
K
cnew
R
max
f
max
f
cmax
100 %CO
f
f
max
100 %TO =
R
max
f
f
cmax
K
cnew
=
To maintain the same loop gain, the feedback controller gain must be adjusted:
f
c
f
cmax
50 %TO =
f
f
max
66.8 %TO = m
0
32.8 %CO = m
0
Ratio
R
max
100 %CO :=
Initial conditions:
y
R
max
f
max
f
cmax
100 %CO
r x =
Scaled feedforward equation:
f
cmax
100%TO
y
R
max
100%CO
r
f
max
100%TO
x =
Substitute into the feedforward equation:
r
Ratio
R
max
100 %CO = y
f
c
f
cmax
100 %TO = x
f
f
max
100 %TO =
The scaled variables are:

f
cmax
1.75
ft
3
min
:= f
max
2
ft
3
min
:= R
max
2 :=
The responses to a 0.2 ft3/min step decrease in reactants flow at 2 min are:
The response with the
ratio controller (magenta)
is superior to the one for
simple feedback
(yellow). To improve the
response the delay was
reduced to 3.0 min.
The reason the
manipulated variable
responses are offset is
that the feedback
controller is adjusting
the position of the
air-to-close equal-
percentage valve and the
ratio is adjusting the
coolant flow set point.
This is also teh reason
they move in opposite
directions.
Excerpts from this work may be reproduced by instructors for distribution on a not-for-profit basis for testing or instructional purpose
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the cascade control scheme is:
K
c1
5
%CO
%TO
:= Set
D1
0min :=
I1
5min := Use synthesis tuning for the master also:
t
0
0min :=
.1
5min := K
1
3.3
%TO
%CO
:=
With these slave settings, an open-loop step test on the master controller output:
K
c2
5
%CO
%TO
:= Set at K
c2
tunable =
I2

2
:= Synthesis tuning from Table 7-4.1:
t
0
0min :=
2
6min := K
2
0.58
%TO
%CO
:=
%TO % := %CO % := From the results of an open-loop step test on the slave controler output:
To the diagram of Problem 13-23 add, from the Public Model Library:
A concentration transmitter with a range of 0 to 4 lb/gal and a time constant of 1 min
f403PI: a PI controller tuned by the synthesis formula
13-33. Cascade control of reactors in series of Problem 13-23
Smith & Corripio, 3rd edition
Chapter 13. Simulation of Process Control Systems
The responses to a 0.05 lb/gal step increase in set point at 1 min and a 1 lb/gal step increase in
reactant concentration at 10 min are:
The set point response of the
cacade scheme (magenta) is
faster than the one for simple
feedback (yellow) at the expense
of slamming the control valve
opened for a period of time. For
the change in reactant
concentration, the concentation
in the third reactor moves in the
opposite directon for the
cascade scheme. This is
because the slave controller
detects the change faster and
moves the valve to correct. As
the change in reactants flow
affects the concentration in the
third tank faster than the change
in inlet concentration, the
concentration decreases on the
drecrease in flow.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram to simulate tank is:
w
P
t ( ) w
c
t ( ) w
w
t ( ) + = Total balance:
x 0 ( ) x0 =
d x t ( )
dt
1
M
w
c
t ( ) x
c
t ( ) w
P
t ( ) x t ( )
( )
= Caustic balance:
Assume perfectly mixed tank with constant mass:
w
w
16
klb
hr
= w
w
w
P
w
c
:=
w
c
24
klb
hr
= w
c
w
P
x
0
x
c
:=
At initial steady state:
M 10klb := Problem parameters:
x
c
50mass% :=
x
0
30mass% := w
P
40
klb
hr
:=
mass% % :=
Design conditions:
klb 1000lb :=
AC
SP
AT
FC
SP
FT
w
P
x
w
w
FC
FT
FC
FT
SP
SP
Caustic
Water
w
c
1
2
3
3
x
c
13-34. Multivariable control of caustic blending tank of Problem 12-2.
With these tuning parameters, the responses to a
The controllers cannot be tuned for quarter-decayb ratio response because the dead time of the
loops is zero. They were tuned onserving the simulation responses to obtain:
FC-3: Kc = 0.90%CO/%TO and integral time of 0.1 min
AC-3: Kc = -100%CO/%TO and integarl time of 10 min (the process integral time is 15 min)
x
0
50mass%
60 %TO = 30mass% AC-3:
w
P
60klb hr
1
66.667 %TO = 40
klb
hr
FC-3:
m
c0
40 %CO = m
c0
w
c
60klb hr
1
:= 24
klb
hr
FC-2:
m
w0
26.667 %CO = m
w0
w
w
60klb hr
1
:= 16
klb
hr
FC-1: Initial conditions:
To complete the control loops insert, from the Public Model Library:
f403PI: two PI controllers to control the product flow and composition
f407Trmr: two transmitters, one for the composition, AC-3, with a range of 0 to 50 mass% and
a time constant of 1 min, and one for the product flow, FC-3, with a range of 0 to 60 klb/hr and
negligible time constant
Two flow controllers, FC-1 and FC-2, with ranges of 0 to 60 klb/hr and time constants of 0.1
minute. These are modifications of the simple valve model and can be copied from f411ffst.
The Simulink diagram for the linear decoupler is:
B
w
26.667 %CO = B
w
D
21
m
c0
:= m
w0
m
w0
D
21
m
c0
+ B
w
+ =
B
c
26.667 %CO = B
c
D
12
m
w0
:= m
c0
m
c0
D
12
m
w0
+ B
c
+ =
Initial outputs: To start at the proper decoupler outputs, biases must be added to the decouplers:
D
21
0.667
%CO
%CO
= D
21
w
w
w
c
:= D
21
K
vc
K
xc
K
vw
K
xw
=
w
w
w
c
=
K
xw
w
c
w
P
= K
xc
w
w
w
P
= x K
vc
K
xc
D
21
K
vw
K
xw
+
( )
m
FC
=
D
12
1
%CO
%CO
:= D
12
K
vw
K
vc
= 1
%CO
%CO
=
K
vc
K
vw
=
60 klb hr
1
100%CO
= wP K
vw
D
12
K
vc
+
( )
m
AC
= 0 =
To keep the flow constant, the caustic flow must be adjusted as follows:
(c) Linear decoupler design as in Example 12-3.1
(a) These are the responses for the
correct pairing: caustic flow controls
the product flow and water flow
controls the composition. The
composition control has less than 1/4
deacay ratio.
Part (b) with the opposite pairing is left
as an exercise to the students.
Note: as these loops are so
controllable, both pairings should
produce about the same performance.
For part (b) the composition controller
must be reverse acting.
The responses to a 10 klb/hr step increase in product flow set point at 2 min and a 1 mass% step
increase in product composition set point at 20 min are:
For these ideal conditions the
decoupler schemes (magenta)
results in perfect control for both
changes.
design and test a basic principles
decoupler similar to the one of
Example 12-3.4
is unlawful.
2 eqns. 2 unk.(M,x)
Expand and substitute total balance:
M t ( )
d x t ( )
dt
x t ( ) w
F
t ( ) w
v
t ( ) w
P
t ( )
( )
+ w
F
t ( ) x
F
t ( ) w
P
t ( ) x t ( ) =
Simplify: d x t ( )
dt
1
M t ( )
w
F
t ( ) x
F
t ( ) x t ( )
( )
w
v
t ( ) x t ( ) +
= x 0 ( ) x
0
=
Economy relates steam and vapor flows: w
v
t ( ) E w
s
t ( ) =
At the intial steady state:
w
P
w
F
x
F
x
0
:= w
v
w
F
w
P
:= w
s
w
v
E
:= w
P
8571
lb
hr
= w
s
43609
lb
hr
=
Maximum hold up: M
max
M
min
M
0
M
min
h
L0
+ := M
max
1100 lb =
13-35. Multivariable control of evaporator of Figure 12-3.4
w
P
x
w
S
w
F
x
F
T
s
T
w
V
Condensate
Cond.
Design conditions:
w
F
50000
lb
hr
:= x
F
12mass% :=
x
0
70mass% := E 0.95 :=
M
0
747lb := h
L0
50%TO :=
Process parameters:
M
min
394lb :=
Developent of the model equations (assume perfect mixing):
Total mass balance:
d M t ( )
dt
w
F
t ( ) w
v
t ( ) w
P
t ( ) = M 0 ( ) M
0
=
Sugar balance:
d M t ( ) x t ( ) ( )
dt
w
F
t ( ) x
F
t ( ) w
P
t ( ) x t ( ) =
The evaporator is thus simulated as an integrating process and does not operate well without the
level controller. The complete control system includes, from the Public Model Library:
A proportional level controller with the gain set at Kc = 20 %CO/%TO (tight control)
f407Trmr: two transmitters, one for the product composition with a range of 40 to 90 mass%
sugars and a time constant of 0.6 min, and one for the feed flow with a range of 0 to 70000 lb/hr
and a negligible time constant
f401Vlv1: three control valves sizd for 100% overcapacity, one on the feed, one on the product,
and one on the steam
f403PI: two PI constrollers, one for the product composition manipulating the control valve on
the product and the other one on the feed flow manipulating the steam control valve
Control valve gains: Feed =
50000
100%CO
lb
hr
2 1000
lb
hr %CO
=
Product =
w
P
2
100%CO
171.4
lb
hr %CO
=
Steam =
w
s
2
100%CO
872.2
lb
hr %CO
=
Initial valve positions are 50%. Initial transmitter outputs:
x
x
0
40mass%
90 40 ( )mass%
100 %TO 60 %TO =
w
f
w
F
70000lb hr
1
100 %TO 71.4 %TO =

The Simulink diagram for the evaporator is:
The Simulink diagram of the control system is
The responses to a 1000 lb/hr step increase in feed flow set point at 5 min and a 1 mass% step
increase in product composition set point at 20 min are:
This is for the recommended
pairing. The responses shows
that an evaporator can be
controlled very tightly.
Normally the feed flow will not
be stepped because the
sudden change in steam flow
will upset the steam header.
Students may be asked to try
alternative pairings of the
three controlled and
manipulated variables.
is unlawful.
The Simulink disgram for the control system is:
I
60min := K
c
3
%CO
%TO
:= Bottoms composition:
I
60min := K
c
5
%CO
%TO
:= Distillate composition:
Open loop step tests on the two composition controller outputs showed no dead time on the
response of the composition, so the controllers cannot be tuned by the minimum IAE formulas.
Trial and error tuning resulted in the following tuning parameters:
K
WsFC
1957
lb
hr %TO
= m
B0
50%CO := K
WsFC
97873
lb
hr
2
100%TO
:= Steam flow:
K
LrFC
96.04
lbmole
hr %TO
= m
D0
50%CO := K
LrFC
4802
lbmole
hr
2
100%TO
:=
Reflux flow:
Flow control loop gains and initial conditions sized for 200% of design flows:
The model equations, design conditions, and process parameters are given in Example 13-5.1. To
complete the composition loops add, from the Public Model Library:
Two flow control loops for the reflux and steam flows (these are copied from the other two
"valves" used on the distillate and bottoms flows).
f407TRmr: two transmitters with ranges of 0 to 1.0 mole fraction and 1 min time cnstants for the
distillate and bottoms compositions.
f403PI: two PI controllers to be tuned for minimum IAE.
13-36. Control of distillation column of Example 13-5.1
The responses to a 200 lbmole/hr step increase in feed flow at 20 min are
Surprisingly, although the two
controllers were tuned
independently, each with he other
loop opened, they both performed
satisfactorily when both loops were
closed.
Students may be encouraged to test
the tuning and to observe the
responses to other disturbances.
is unlawful.
The Simulink diagram for the blender is
V 0.450kbl := Process parameter:
Reformate
Straight run lsolve
1
x
0
y
0
1
x
1
y
1
1
x
2
y
2
|
\
|
|
.
f
f x
0
f y
0
\
|
|
.
,
(
(
(
(
7.5
28.125
24.375
|
\
|
.
kbl
day
=
Alkylate
At the initial steady state:
y
5
11
3
|
\
|
.
:= x
97
80
92
|
\
|
.
:=
y
0
7 := x
0
87 := f 60
kbl
day
3 eqns. 3 unk(f,x,y)
RVP balance:
y 0 ( ) y
0
=
d y t ( )
dt
1
V
f
1
t ( ) y
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) y
2
t ( ) + f
3
t ( ) y
3
t ( ) + f t ( ) y t ( )
( )
=
Octane balance:
x 0 ( ) x
0
=
d x t ( )
dt
1
V
f t ( ) x
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) x
2
t ( ) + f
3
t ( ) x
3
t ( ) + f t ( ) x t ( )
( )
=
f t ( ) f
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) + f
3
t ( ) + = Total balance:
kbl 42000gal :=
Assuming constant volume. perfectly mixed, and constant densities, the model equations are:
13-37. Control of gasoline blending tank of Example 12-2.5
To complete the control loops, add from the Public Model Library:
Three flow control loops (can be copied from f411ffst) with ranges of 0 to 150% of design flow
and time constants of 0.1 min
f407Trmr: three transmitters, one for the product flow with a range of 0 to 100 kbl/day and 0.1
min time constant, one for the octane with range of 60 to 100 octane and a 1 min time
constant, and one for the RVP with range of 0 to 20 RVP and 1 min time constant
f403PI: three PI controllers for the product flow, octane and RVP.
Flow control loops gains and initial conditions:
(a) With the correct pairing, the responses to a 10 kbl/day step increase in product flow set point
are at 1 min:
I
3min := K
c
30
%CO
%TO
:=
Octane controller:
I
5min := K
c
20
%CO
%TO
:=
RVP controller:
I
0.1min := K
c
0.9
%CO
%TO
:=
Product flow controller:
The controllers are tuned as follows:
24.375
kbl
day
k
T3
66.7 %TO = k
T3
0.366
kbl
day %TO
=
k
T3
24.375
kbl
day
1.5
100%TO
:=
Reformate:
28.125
kbl
day
k
T2
66.7 %TO = k
T2
0.422
kbl
day %TO
=
k
T2
28.125
kbl
day
1.5
100%TO
:=
Straight Run:
7.5
kbl
day
k
T1
66.7 %TO = k
T1
0.113
kbl
day %TO
= k
T1
7.5
kbl
day
1.5
100%TO
:=
Alkylate:
0.87
k
T2
k
T3
1.004
%CO
%TO
= 0.75
k
T1
k
T3
0.231
%CO
%TO
= u
3
0.75
k
T1
k
T3
v
1
v
2
+ 0.87
k
T2
k
T3
v
3
+ =
0.27
k
T2
k
T1
1.013
%CO
%TO
= 0.71
k
T3
k
T1
2.308
%TO
%CO
= u
1
v
1
0.71
k
T3
k
T1
v
2
0.27
k
T2
k
T1
v
3
+ =
Substitute and solve for the scaled variables u and v:
m
3
k
T2
v
3
= m
2
k
T3
v
2
= m
1
k
T1
v
1
= f
2
set
k
T2
u
2
= f
3
set
k
T3
u
3
= f
1
set
k
T1
u
1
=
where all the variables are in kbl/day. In practice the gains must be scaled to apply to signals in
%CO and %TO. So we have:
f
2
set
0.25 m
1
0.29m
2
m
3
+ =
f
3
set
0.75 m
1
m
2
+ 0.87m
3
+ =
f
1
set
m
1
0.71 m
2
0.27 m
3
+ =
The decoupler developed in Example 12-3.3 gives the gains of the decoupler on the unscaled
variables:
(c) Decoupler of Example 12-3.3
These are relatively tight responses
without oscillations.
Students should be encouraged to do part
(b) with alternate pairings of the controlled
and manipulated variables. In doing so it is
important to watch the direct and reverse
action of the controllers.
u
2
0.25
k
T1
k
T2
v
1
0.29
k
T3
k
T2
v
2
v
3
+ = 0.25
k
T1
k
T2
0.067
%CO
%TO
= 0.29
k
T3
k
T2
0.251
%CO
%TO
=
All of the initial values must be 66.67%TO, so the follwing biases must be added:
Bias1 2.308 1.013 + ( ) 66.67 %TO := Bias1 86.338 %TO =
Bias3 0.231 1.004 + ( ) 66.67 %TO := Bias3 51.536 %TO =
Bias2 .067 0.251 ( ) 66.67 %TO := Bias2 21.201 %TO =
These are the gains and biases used in the following Simulink diagram of the decoupler:
With this decoupler the control
system of the gas blender
produces essentially perfect
control. The simulation with the
decoupler is in a separate file.
is unlawful.
8.33
lb
gal
:= L 3170ft := d
p
1.19ft := D 3.41ft := Problem parameters:
f
o
0 ( ) 0gpm =
d f
o
t ( )
dt
d
p
2
4
7.48gal
ft
3
g
L
h t ( ) 2.22 10
3
f
o
t ( ) 0.5184 10
6
f
o
t ( )
2
|
\
|
.
=
h 0 ( ) 0ft =
d h t ( )
dt
4
D
2
ft
3
7.48gal
f
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) + f
3
t ( ) + f
o
t ( )
( )
=
Combine and simplify:
4 eqns. 4 unks.
p
f
t ( ) g 2.22 10
3
f
o
t ( ) 0.5184 10
6
f
o
2
t ( ) +
= Pressure drop correlation:

3 eqns. 4 unks. f
o
t ( )

4
d
p
2
v t ( )
7.48gal
ft
3
=
Outlet flow in gpm:
2 eqns. 4 unks.(v,p
f
)
d
dt

4
d
p
2
L v t ( )
|
\
|
.

4
d
p
2
p
a
g h t ( ) + p
a
p
f
t ( )
( )
=
Momentum balance on outlet pipe:
1 eqn. 2 unks.(h,f
0
)
d
dt

D
2
4
h t ( )
|
\
|
.

ft
3
7.48 gal
f
1
t ( ) f
2
t ( ) + f
3
t ( ) + f
o
t ( )
( )
= Mass balance on tank:
Development of the model equations:
L
h(t)
.f
o
(t)
d
p
P
1
P
2
P
3
13-38. Three pump ad tank start-up problem
g 115.827 10
3
ft
min
2
= h
max
9ft :=
Each pump flow changes from 0 to f when the flow is turned on (step function):
f 750
gal
min
:=
Numerical values of the coefficients:
4
D
2
ft
3
7.48gal
0.015
ft
gal
=
a
1
d
p
2
4
7.48gal
ft
3
g
L
:=
a
1
304
gal
ft min
2
=
a
1
2.22 10
3
ft min
gal
0.675
1
min
=
a
1
0.5184 10
6
ft
min
gal
|
\
|
.
2
157.6 10
6
1
gal
=
The Simulink block diagram for the tank and pipe is:
Each pump is simulated as
a step test from 0 to 750
gpm and the time of the
step is the time when the
pump is turned on.
The Simulink diagram
includes a memory device
that records the maximum
level in the tank for each
run.
The following are the responses with pump 2 turned on at 7 min and pump 3 at 14 min:
The level in the tank reaches 10.5 ft with this
sequence, which means that the tank overflows.
Students must vary the times at which pumps 2
and 3 are turned on to see if they can keep from
overflowing the tank. It makes for an interesting
computer game with some fundamental concepts
attached.
is unlawful.
13-39. Ecological interaction of host-parasite populations
Developemnt of the model equations:
Rat population:
d Rats t ( )
dt
R
RG
t ( ) R
RD
t ( ) = 5 Rats t ( ) 0.05 Rats t ( ) Fleas t ( ) =
Rats 0 ( ) 100 =
d Fleas t ( )
dt
R
FG
t ( ) R
FD
t ( ) = 0.2 Rats t ( ) Fleas t ( ) 20 Fleas t ( ) =
Fleas 0 ( ) 20 =
The Simulink diagram to solve these equations is:
The populations of rats and fleas are as fllows:
The two populations cycle with a
period of about 2/3 year for the
parameters of this problem. At high
flea populations the death rate of rats
is higher than their growth rate, while
at low rat population the death rate of
the fleas is higher than their growth
rate and their population decreases,
allowing the rat population to grow
back.
Encourage the students to investigate
the effect of the four problem
parameters on the population cycles.
is unlawful.
M
c
0 ( ) M
0
=
1 eqn. 2 unks. (Mc, wc)
Entahlpy balance: M
c
t ( ) c
pL
d T t ( )
dt
U A T
a
T t ( )
( )
w
c
t ( ) = T 0 ( ) T
a
=
2 eqns. 3 unks. (T)
Flow through nozzle: Subcritical flow: w
c
t ( )
D
2
4
3600s
hr
2 M
w
P t ( ) P t ( ) P
o
( )
R
g
T t ( ) 273.16K + ( )
=
(the smaller of the two)
Critical flow:
w
c
t ( )
D
2
4
3600s
hr
M
w
R
g
T t ( ) 273.16K + ( )
P t ( ) =
3 eqns. 4 unk. (P)
Vapor pressure by Antoine equation:
Reid, Prausnitz & Sherwood, 3rd.
ed., McGraw-Hill, 1977, Appendix P T t ( ) ( ) e
15.961
1978.32
T t ( ) 273.16K + 27.01
101300Pa
760mmHg
=
4 eqns. 4 nks.
All the numbers given are in consistent units except for the diameter of the nozzle:
D 4in
0.3048m
12in
:= D 0.102 m =
The Simulink diagram for the barge is:
degC K := kJ 10
3
joule :=
13-40. Environmental impact of chlorine barge accident
kmole 1000mol :=
P
P
o
T
T
a
w
c
M
c
Problem parameters:
D 4in := A 212m
2
:=
M
0
136000kg :=
T
a
25degC :=
U 1000
kJ
hr m
2
degC
:=
R
g
8314
joule
kmole K
:=
P
o
101300Pa :=
Properties of chlorine: M
w
71.5
kg
kmole
:= 288
kJ
kg
:= c
pL
0.946
kJ
kg degC
:=
Chlorine mass balance:
d M
c
t ( )
dt
w
c
t ( ) =
The
temperature
is calculated
in K. Time is
in hr.
The responses for the barge are:
It takes a little over 3.5 hr
for the barge to empty for
these parameters.
Students should be
encouraged to investigate
which of the parameters
most affects the time
required to empty the
barge. The heat transfer
coefficient is probably the
one that has the greatest
effect.
Caution: When running
this simulation the "Stop
Time," under "Simulation
Parameters," must be
adjusted so that the mass
Mc is never zero or
negative. After that point
the results are not valid.
is unlawful.
x
r4
0 ( ) 0 =
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) x
r4
t ( )
( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat4
r
Cat1
t ( ) M
w4
= Catalyst 1:
3 eqs. 4 unks. (xr2)
x
r2
0 ( ) 0 =
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) x
r2
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) x
PA
r
B
t ( ) M
w2
= Propionic anhydride:
2 eqns. 3 unks. (xr1,rB)
x
r1
0 ( ) x
r10
=
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) x
r1
t ( )
( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat1
2 r
B
t ( ) M
w1
= 2-butanol balance:
1 eqn. 1 unk. (Mr)
M
r
0 ( ) M
r0
=
dM
r
t ( )
dt
F
PA
t ( ) F
Cat
t ( ) + = Total mass balance:
Assume
Perfect mixing of ractor and jacket contents
The reactor is initially charged with the 2-btanol, essentially pure
Cold water
TT
TT
Anhydride
Butanol
Catalyst
Hot water
13-41. Control of semi-batch reactor
V
mr
t ( )
M
r
t ( )
r
t ( )
=
9 eqns. 13 unks. (Vmr,r)
Average density:
r
t ( )
x
r1
t ( )
1
x
r2
t ( )
2
+
x
r3
t ( )
3
+
x
rBP
t ( )
5
+
x
r4
t ( ) x
r5
t ( ) +
4
+
|
\
|
.
=
10 eqns. 14 unks. (xrBP)
Butyl propionate: x
rBP
t ( ) 1 x
r1
t ( ) x
r2
t ( ) x
r3
t ( ) x
r4
t ( ) x
r5
t ( ) =
11 eqns. 14 unks.
Reaction rates:
r
B
t ( ) V
mr
t ( ) k
1
C
A
t ( ) k
2
C
Cat1
t ( ) + k
3
C
Cat2
t ( ) +
( )
C
B
t ( ) =
12 eqns. 18 unks. (CA,CB, Ccat1, Ccat2)
r
Cat1
t ( ) V
mr
t ( ) k
4
10
H
r
t ( )
C
Cat2
t ( ) C
B
t ( ) =
13 eqns. 19 unks. (Hr)
H
r
t ( ) p
1
C
Cat1
t ( ) p
2
C
Cat2
t ( ) +
( )
p
3
p
4
T t ( ) 273.16K +
+
|
\
|
.
=
14 eqns. 19 unks.
4 eqns. 6 unks. (xr4,rCat1)
Catalyst 2:
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) x
r5
t ( )
( )
r
Cat1
t ( ) M
w4
= x
r5
t ( ) 0 =
5 eqns. 7 unks. (xr5)
Water:
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) x
r3
t ( )
( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat3
F
PA
t ( ) 1 x
PA
( )
+ r
B
t ( ) M
w3
+ = x
r3
0 ( ) 1 x
r10
=
6 eqns. 8 unks. (xr3)
Enthalpy on reactor:
d
dt
M
r
t ( ) c
pavg
t ( ) T
r
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) c
p2
F
Cat
t ( ) cpcat +
( )
T
f
T t ( )
( )
U
o
A T
r
t ( ) T
j
t ( )
( )
+
=
H
r
t ( ) r
B
t ( ) T
r
0 ( ) T
r0
=
7 eqns. 11 unks. (Tr,Tj,cpavg)
Enthalpy on jacket:
M
j
c
p3
d T
j
t ( )
dt
U
o
A T
r
t ( ) T
j
t ( )
( )
F
cw
t ( ) c
p3
T
j
t ( ) T
cw
( )
F
hw
t ( ) c
p3
T
hw
T
j
t ( )
( )
+ =
T
j
0 ( ) T
j0
= 8 eqns. 11 unks.
Volume of reactants:
M
j
415kg := H
r
80000
kJ
kmole
:=
x
PA
100mass% := x
r10
100mass% :=

F
cw
10000
kg
hr
:=
Catalyst feed composition:
x
fCat1
70mass% := x
fCat3
10mass% := x
fCat4
20mass% :=
Physical properties from Perry's, 7th ed., Tables 2-1 and 2-2:
2-butanol
Propionic anhydride
Water
M
w
74
130
18
98
130
|
\
|
|
|
|
.
kg
kmole
:=
808
1012
1000
1829
866
|
\
|
|
|
|
.
kg
m
3
:= c
p
2.876
2.345
4.187
1.424
2.345
|
\
|
|
|
|
.
kJ
kg degC
:=
Sulfuric acid
Butyl propionate
Hot water flow required for an inlet jacket temperature of 30 C:
F
cw
c
p3
T
cw
F
hw
c
p3
T
hw
+ F
cw
F
hw
+
( )
c
p3
30 degC =
F
hw
F
cw
30degC T
cw
T
hw
30degC
:=
Concentrations:
C
A
t ( )

r
t ( ) x
r1
t ( )
M
w1
= C
B
t ( )

r
t ( ) x
r2
t ( )
M
w2
= C
Cat1
t ( )

r
t ( ) x
r4
t ( )
M
w4
=
C
Cat2
t ( )

r
t ( ) x
r5
t ( )
M
w4
=
18 eqns. 19 unks.
Reactor specific heat:
c
pavg
t ( ) x
r1
t ( ) c
p1
x
r2
t ( ) c
p2
+ x
r3
t ( ) c
p3
+ x
r4
t ( ) x
r5
t ( ) +
( )
c
p4
+ x
rBP
t ( ) . c
p5
+ =
19 eqns. 19 unks.
The reaction rate coefficients are Arrhenius functions of temperature:
k
i
A
i
e
E
i
R
g
T t ( ) 273.16K + ( )
=
for i = 1..4
Problem parameters:
p
0.2022
0.3205
21.38
1271
|
\
|
|
|
.
:= A
1.93 10
11
1.01 10
14
1.42 10
14
5.05 10
11
\
|
|
|
|
|
.
m
3
kmole min
:= E
80480
79160
69970
76620
|
\
|
|
|
.
kJ
kmole
=
R
g
8.314
kJ
kmole K
= M
r0
600kg := T
r0
20degC := T
j0
30degC := T
f
20degC :=
U
o
A 300
kJ
min degC
= T
cw
15degC := T
hw
90degC :=
F
hw
2500
kg
hr
=
The eight differential equations may be simplified as follows:
d x
r1
t ( )
dt
1
M
r
t ( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat1
x
r1
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) x
r1
t ( ) 2 r
B
t ( ) M
w1

=
d x
r2
t ( )
dt
1
M
r
t ( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat2
x
r2
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) x
PA
x
r2
t ( )
( )
+ r
B
t ( ) M
w2

=
d x
r3
t ( )
dt
1
M
r
t ( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat3
x
r3
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) 1 x
PA
x
r3
t ( )
( )
+ r
B
t ( ) M
w3
+
=
d x
r4
t ( )
dt
1
M
r
t ( )
F
Cat
t ( ) x
fCat4
x
r4
t ( )
( )
F
PA
t ( ) x
r4
t ( ) r
Cat1
t ( ) M
w4

=
d x
r5
t ( )
dt
1
M
r
t ( )
F
Cat1
t ( ) F
PA
t ( ) +
( )
x
r5
t ( ) r
Cat1
t ( ) M
w4
+
=
d T
r
t ( )
dt
F
Cat1
t ( ) c
pcat
F
PA
t ( ) c
p2
+
( )
T
f
T
r
t ( )
( )
U
o
A T
r
t ( ) T
j
t ( )
( )
H
r
r
B
t ( )
=
1
M t ( ) c
pavg
t ( )
d T
j
t ( )
dt
1
M
j
U
o
A
c
p3
T
r
t ( ) T
j
t ( )
( )
F
cw
t ( ) Tj t ( ) T
cw
( )
F
hw
t ( ) T
hw
T
j
t ( )
( )
+
(
(
=
d M
j
t ( )
dt
F
Cat1
t ( ) F
PA
t ( ) + =
The Simulink block diagram for the reactor is the following:
The Reactor S-fnction makes use of a file "Semibatch.m" to solve the equations. This file must be
in the MATLAB "Current Directory" for the simulation to run.
The following are the temperature profiles for a batch when the catalyst is fed at 1200 kg/hr for 5
min followed by the anhydride fed at 1200 kg/hr for 30 minutes:
These trends match the trends in the
CEP article by Feliu, et al. (Dec.
2003) for the same conditions.
The students must now device a
control strategy to minimize the batch
cycle time while satisfying the
constraint that the reactor temperature
must not exceed 60C. This constraint
is violated in the base case shown
here. Feliu proposes various
strategies in the article.
This problem probably makes for a
good term project. The instructor must
decide whether to provide the model
and simulation to the students or have
them develop their own. If the latter
please tell the students that the
Arrhenius coefficients are in
m3/kmole-min.
Excerpts from this work may be reproduced by instructors for distribution on a not-for-profit basis for testing or instructional purpose
is unlawful.

CH 13

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

CH 13

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

f t ( ) 0dynes = y 0 ( ) 100cm = For this problem:

X s ( ) 0 = The solution of the differential equation:

678.9 602.7 ( )R 7.915 10

678.9 602.7 ( )R + 0.027

:= Initial conditions at steady state:

1.845 = Process gain:

100 %TO 71.4 %TO =

= Pressure drop correlation:

También podría gustarte