PROCESS CONTROL & INSTRUMENTATION LABORATORY

(BKF4791)
2015/2016 Semester I
Title of Experiment : Gas Pressure Control Using PID Controller (Experiment 6)
Date of Experiment : 8th October 2015
Lecturer Name

: Dr. Noorlisa

Group members

Name
1. JOSEPHINE WONG SIAN CHEE
2.
3.
Group No.

:5

Section

: 05

Marks

ID
KE12056

FACULTY OF CHEMICAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA PAHANG

Tear here

Please keep for student reference.

Submitted by;

Received by;

Subject Code : BKF4791

Title of Experiment: : Gas Pressure Control Using PID Controller (Experiment 6)

CONTENT
Contents

Pages

1.0 Abstract
2.0 Methodology
3.0 Results and Discussion
4.0 Conclusion and Recommendation
5.0 References
6.0 Appendix

1.0

ABSTRACT
2

2.0

METHODOLOGY

Experiment 1

The operator workstation was switch ON and Gas pressure process was selected. Single
capacity process was chosen and the bypass valves was checked to make sure B92A and
B92 are open

PIC91 controller was set to PID control and the controller faceplate of PIC91 was called up
and the control loop was set to manual mode.

The set point of 15 psig was entered and the output, (MV) was gradually adjust so that
the pressure in the tank T91 matches the set point (within 0.1psig). and the process was left to
stabilize.

PIC91 Detail faceplate was openned and the first trial PID tunning parameters were
inserted as in Table. Then the control loop was set into Auto Mode.

The Process History View for PIC91 was called up from its Detail faceplate and the
response for the pressure changes in tank T91 was observed and the pressure was
waited to reach the set point.

Pressure Load Disturbances was performed by switching PIC91 contorller to Manual Mode
and decrease its MV by 10% for 10 seconds and switched back PIC91 contorller back to
auto mode.

Tank T91 pressure response was observed at PIC91 Process History View.

The process was repeated with different PIC setting

PIC91 pressure trend response was compared with the response with different PIC setting
and comment in observation column

Figure 1 Single Capacity Tank Pressure Control Procedure

Experiment 2

The operator workstation was switch ON and Gas pressure process was selected. Multiple
capacity process was chosen and the bypass valves was checked to make sure B92A and
B92 are open

PIC92 controller was set to PID control and the controller faceplate of PIC92 was called up
and the control loop was set to manual mode.

The set point of 15 psig was entered and the output, (MV) was gradually adjust so that
the pressure in the tank T92 matches the set point (within 0.1psig). and the process was left to
stabilize.

PIC92 Detail faceplate was openned and the first trial PID tunning parameters were
inserted as in Table. Then the control loop was set into Auto Mode.

The Process History View for PIC92 was called up from its Detail faceplate and the
response for the pressure changes in tank T91 was observed and the pressure was waited
to reach the set point.

Pressure Load Disturbances was performed by switching PIC92 contorller to Manual Mode
and decrease its MV by 10% for 10 seconds and switched back PIC92 contorller back to
auto mode.

Tank T92 pressure response was observed at PIC92 Process History View.

The process was repeated with different PIC setting

PIC91 pressure trend response was compared with the response with different PIC setting
and comment in observation column

Figure 2 Multiple Capacity Tank Pressure Control Procedure

3.0
3.1

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS
5

Experiment 6.1: Study single capacity gas pressure control using PID single control loop
Table 3.1: Summary of PID Trial Observations based on Different Values of Gain, Reset and
Rate
PID PIC91A Gain
Trial Set point (100/P)
(Psig)

Reset Rate
(I) sec (D) sec

Observation

15

1.7

5.0

0.0

The manipulated output (black line) response was

fast and increasing from 60 to 70++ with an
overshoot and the ocssilation damped out over
time. This is same to the process output (red line).
When there is a disturbance, it raise back to set
point with few osccilation and damped out to set
point in a very short time

II

15

3.5

5.0

0.0

The manipulated output (black line) response was

fast and with a very huge amplitude with a range
or 55-100. The response did not damped out after
3 ocssilation. The process output (red line) also
showed a similar trend with the manipulated
output where it oscillate without damping out to
set point.

III

15

1.7

30.0

0.0

The manipulated output (black line) response start

with a small change then with a huge change/
amplitude between 10- 100. The process output
(red line) also showed a similar trend osccilating
and did not damped out after few oscillation to set
point.

IV

15

1.0

0.0

The manipulated output (black line) and process

output (red line) showed overshoot and damped
out to set point within a short time. There are not
much osccilation and peaks produced.

*The Figures obtained were attached at the appendix

Experiment 6.2: Study multi capacity gas pressure control using PID single control loops

Table 3.2: Summary of PID Trial Observations based on Different Values of Gain, Reset and
Rate
.
PID PIC91A Gain Reset (I) Rate (D)
Trial Set point (100/P)
sec
sec
(psig)

Observation

15

0.5

25.0

0.0

The manipulated variable output (black

line) and process output (red line)
increased smoothly and process output
reach the set point line where gave the
steady state without any oscillation.

II

15

0.9

11.0

0.0

The manipulated output increase remain

steady while the process output (red
line) increase smoothly and achieve set
point

III

15

3.5

11.0

0.0

The graph is similar to trial II but with

steeper increase in manipulated output
and process output. Manipulated output
has an overshoot and back to steady
state but process output did not show
any overshoot and reach steady state at
set point.

IV

15

3.5

5.0

The manipulated output has overshoot

and oscillate and damped out to steady
state while process ouput also showed
similar trend which has an overshoot
and oscillate and damped out to set point

*The Figures obtained is attached at the appendix

3.2

DISCUSSIONS
7

1.

Based on your observation in both experiment, discuss briefly for each process that was
occurred.
Single Capacity Experiment
Comparing Trial 1 and Trial 2 with same Reset (I) and Rate (D) but with different
Controller Gain (P) which is 1.7 and 3.5, an increase in contorller gain has caused the
manipulated output with higher amplitute and higher frequency of oscillation. High
controller gain at 3.5 also cause the process output cannot reach the set point after several
oscillation unlike trial 1. Comparing Trial 1 and Trial 3 with same Gain (P) and Rate (D)
but with different Reset (I) which is 5.0 and 30.0. Higher reset graph has caused the
manipulated output with higher amplitude and higher frequency of oscillation. At higher
reset =30.0, the set point is oscillating and did not damped out. Due to the consideration
of high gain and high reset is not favorable to this process, Trial 4 was tried with lower
Gain (P) and Reset (I) compared to Trial 1. The process output has achieved steady state
at set point faster than Trial 1 but with an overshoot. But the oscillation damped out very
soon compared to Trial 1 too. In conclusion, for this process control will require lower
gain and lower reset.
Multiple Capacity Experiment
Comparing Trial 2 and Trial 3 with same Reset (I) and Rate(D) but with different Gain(P)
which is 0.9 and 3.5, higher Gain (P) resulted in a better response where the process
output acheive steady state at set point faster. Comparing Trial 3 and 4 with same Gain
(P) but with different Reset (I) which is 11s and 5s. Reducing Reset (I) has caused the
process output to response faster however it cause the process output with an overshoot
and oscillate before it damped out to the set point while there are no overshoot in higher
Reset (I) which is 11s. It was concluded that higher Gain (P) for multiple capacity will
have a faster response and reach set point faster. Besides that, reducing Reset (I) time also
improve the speed of the response however, there is a limit the minimum Reset (I) can go
because lower reset in Trial 4 has cause the process output to have an overshoot. Thus,
there is an optimum Gain(P) and Reset(I) for this multiple capacity control system.

2.

Which is the best PID setting for each experiment?

8

For single capacity, the best trial was trial 1 and trial 4. This is because trial 1 reached set
point at 1 psig eventhough it oscillates and damped out and trial 4 has faster response and
reach steady state faster but it has a huge overshoot then only damped out at set point. For
multiple capacity, the best trial was trial 3. This is because the process output acheive steady
state fastest without overshoot and have no oscillation to the set point.
3.

Is it possible to use PI controller in both cases? Explain briefly either yes or no.
Yes, we can get a good result without setting rate for both experiments. Trial 1 in single

capacity able to reach steady state at set point after few small amplitude oscillation while Trial 3
in multiple capacity able to reach steady state at set point without overshooting and oscillation in
a very short time.

4.0

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, for single capacity control, reducing Gain (P) and Reset (I) to lower value

will cause the process output to response faster and reach steady state at set point faster.
However if the Reset (I) is too low, it will cause an overshoot but it will damped out very fast
too. PI controller for this process control is adequete.
Secondly, for multiple capacipty control, increase Gain (P) will speed up the process
output but reducing Reset (I) will slower down the process output response. Thus it is considered
to be a better control with higher Gain (P) and lower Reset (I). However, when the Reset (I) is
too low at 5s, the process output will experience an overshoot and ocsillation before damping to
set point at steady state.

5.0

REFRENCES
9

Seborg, D. E., Edgar, T. F., Mellichamp, D. A., & Doyle III, F. J. (2011). Process dynamics and
control. NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

6.0

APPENDIX
10

Experiment 6.1

Figure 3: Trial 1 ( Gain = 1.7; Reset = 5s; Rate = 0s)

Trial 2

11

Trial 3

Trial 4

12

Experiment 6.2

Trial 1

Trial 2
13

Trial 3

Trial 4

14

Rubric for LAB REPORT

Item Assessed
Abstract

Unacceptable
(0)

Average
(2)

Good
(3)

Score

No abstract

No highlight of the
Missing objective
Objective
significant results
and/or conclusion. Summary of the
and/or methodology.
methodology
Summary of the
results
Conclusion

No flowchart

Methodology flow is
incorrect.

Methodology flow is
correct, but not
concise.

Methodology flow is
correct and
concise.

Tables provided but

no captions given
OR
Tables provided but
captions not in
sequence and not
mentioned in the
text

Tables provided,
captions given and
numbered in
sequence but no
units

Tables numbered with

the Arabic numerals
and have captions
in sequence. The
units in which
results are
expressed are given
at the top of each
column (in
parentheses)

No Graph OR
All graphs wrongly
plotted

Graphs provided but

no captions given
OR
Graphs provided but
captions not in
sequence and not
mentioned in the
text

Properly captioned,
Properly captioned,
numbered and
numbered and
graphs mentioned
graphs mentioned
in the text.
in the text.
However, conditions
Conditions of
of experiment (P, T)
experiment (P, T)
not mentioned in
mentioned in the
the caption
caption

Calculations not
shown OR
Calculations totally
wrong

Skip a few important

calculation steps

All calculation steps

are clearly written
and correct but
wrong unit

(x 5)

Methodology
flowchart

Poor
(1)

(x 5)
Data Tabulation No table
(x 3)

Graph
(x 3)

Calculations
(x 5)

All calculation steps

are clearly written
and correct and
with correct unit

15

Item Assessed
Results
(x 10)

Discussion
(x 20)

Conclusions
(x 5)

References
(x 5)

Grammar and
Spelling
(x 5)

Unacceptable
(0)

Poor
(1)

Data sheet with stamp Results given but

not provided with
significant amount
the report OR
not tally with the
requirement/
Results not
scopes
compatible with
scopes
Only mention the
results without
meaningful
discussion

Average
(2)

Good
(3)

Score

Results given but a

Results shown for all
few not tally with
the scopes of
the requirements of
experiments
experiment

Attempt to discuss but Elucidation of result

failed miserably
but contains some
flaws

Elucidation and
supported by
proper references
or logical
explanations.

No conclusion
Conclusion missing
Conclusions regarding Important/ significant
sections OR
the important points
major points are
results are
OR
drawn, but many are
highlighted which
Conclusions totally not
misstated, indicating
also meets the
No recommendation
reflecting the
a lack of
scopes of
scopes
given to improve the
understanding OR
experiments AND
experiment.
Conclusion is too
Several
general. Several
recommendations
recommendations
have been stated.
have been given but
they are too general
and not contributing
to the experiments
improvement.
Copy & paste
Most of citations in
A few citations in text All citations in text are
references OR
text are not
are not available in
available in list of
available in list of
list of reference
reference and use
Ununiformed
reference
although
AND
the same
referencing system
use same
referencing system
Use same referencing
OR
referencing system
AND
system
80% references from
OR

All
references from
internet OR

Internet
sources
>
reliable
resources
Use of Wikipedia
60%
Unreadable and not
written in scientific
way

Numerous spelling
and/or grammar
errors. Direct
translation using
Google Translate.

Occasional spelling
and/or grammar
errors.

Correct use of words.

Total Assessment Marks (198)

16