ABSTRACT

In this experiment an open-loop dynamic model between tank level and pump speed from
set response data was developed. Also, the transient behaviour of proportional-only level control
loops were studied. All of the appropriate switches and valves were set as required and the
PTC23 console was powered up. Feed tank A was approximately half filled and the feed pump
was then switched on. The water supply valve was opened and valve V1 was adjusted until
steady state was achieved. The necessary settings were configured on the computer before the
controller output underwent an increase of 10%, decrease of 10%, decrease of 10% and another
increase of 10% allowing time for steady state to be achieved between each setting. A
proportional band of 50% was entered and the setpoint was increased by 25mm and time was
allowed for steady state to be achieved. A new controller gain value was computed and using the
user specified parameter, =0.5 the setpoint was decreased by 25mm and the process variables
were permitted to line out. This step was repeated using =2.5. Approximately 1L of water was
dumped into the tank and the system was allowed to return to steady state. Valve V1 was closed
by a few turns and again the system was allowed to return to steady state. Data obtained was
saved and the system was shut down. An inversely proportional relationship was observed
between pump speed and tank level. An average velocity gain, Kavg of 0.325% increase in level
per min was obtained and actual closed loop time constants were 1.0 and 4.4 whereas the
theoretical values were 0.5 and 2.5. From the results obtained a proportional level controller will
be expected to exhibit offset following step changes in setpoint, pulse disturbances in inlet
flowrate and step disturbances in inlet flowrate.

APPARATUS

Figure 1. Apparatus used in the experiment.

Armfield Ltd. process plant trainer (PCT23-MkII) - 2 feed vessels, a 3 stage indirect plate
heat exchanger, a holding tube arrangement and a hot water vessel.
Personal computer
Jug
Water
Peristaltic pump

PROCEDURE
1. The following switches were set as follows:

All function switches to 'MANUAL'

All control potentiometers to minimum (fully counter clockwise)
Valve control switch for SOL1 to 'Divert'
Valve control switch for SOL2 to 'FEED A'
Valve control switch for SOL3 to 'STOP'
Valve control switch for SOL4 to 'FILL A'
Valve control switch for SOL5 to 'STOP'

2. The PCT23 console was powered up. The 3 circuit breakers and the RCCB on the rear end
was checked to ensure that they were in the up position. The computer was then turned on.
3. It was ensured that the flow control valve V1 and the pressure reducing valve PRV1 were fully
opened (and that valves V2, V3, V4 and V5 were closed).
4. The water supply valve mounted on the south wall of the Reactions and Control laboratory
was gradually opened. The makeup water was allowed to flow into feed tank A until it was
approximately half-full. The supply valve was then closed.
5. The PCT23 icon on the Windows desktop was double-clicked and experiment B - "1 loop
(level L1 to pump N1)" was set to load. Experimenter was then familiarized with the basic
features of the Armsoft package, especially the mimic diagram, graph and table functions
available on the toolbar.
6. The flexible tubing was loaded into peristaltic pump N1 and the pump head was clamped onto
the tubing. The feed pump was switched on and the feed pump function switch was set to "USB
I/O".
7. The mimic diagram was opened and a value of 40 was entered in the "N1" box.
8. The water supply valve was gradually opened until a slow stream of makeup water began to
flow into the feed tank. Valve V1 was adjusted until the inflow balanced the effluent flowrate so
that the vessel level was constant at approximately 50% of scale.
9. The following were selected: "View", "graph" then "Configure the graph data". The variables
"Run 1 Tank A Level L1 (mm)" and "Run @ Setpoint Term (Loop 1) (mm)" was plotted on the
primary y-axis and "Run 1 Feed Pump Speed (N1) (%)" on the secondary y-axis. The range of
the primary axis was set to 0-250mm and that of the secondary axis to 0-100%. The data

sampling for a sample interval of 2 seconds was configured and the data collection was
commenced by clicking the green "Go" icon.
10. The controller output was increased from 40% to 50% and the water level was allowed to fall
by 25mm (10% of scale).
11. The controller output was then returned to 40%.
12. Controller output was decreased by 10% and the level was allowed to rise by 25mm.
13. The controller output was increased by 10%.
14. The current value of L1 in the "set point" field was entered by Left-clicking on the PID 1 box
on the mimic diagram. (This was done to prevent the controller from "bumping" the process
when it was switched from manual to automatic.) A Proportional-only controller was configured
by entering a proportional band of 50%, and integral time of 0 seconds and a derivative time of 0
seconds. "Apply" was then selected and the controller was switched to automatic. The system
was allowed to run at this operating point for a few minutes, then the set point was increased by
25mm and "OK" was selected. The process was allowed to move to the new steady state.
15. The results of step 10 and 12 was used to derive an estimate of the overall velocity gain, K.
with engineering units (% increase in level per minute)/ (% increase in controller output). A new
value for the controller gain Kc was then computed by means of the IMC tuning rule (Rivera et
al., 1986):
K
1
Kc =

The user-specified parameter was interpreted as the desired closed-loop time constant (in
minutes). PID 1 box was reopened and the corresponding proportional band was entered. The
level set point was then decreased by 25mm, "OK" was clicked and the process variables were
permitted to line out.
16. Step 15 was then repeated for a different value of .
17. Approximately 1 litre of water was dumped into the tank and the system was allowed to
return to steady-state operation.
18. Valve V1 was closed by a few turns but the inlet flow was not shut off completely. Steadystate was achieved and the data collection then ended.
19. Results were saved ("File", "Save As") in Formula One and Excel formats and these files
were copied to a diskette. The makeup water valve was closed and the controller was switched to
manual, controller output was set to 0% (system was exited.)

20. All controls on the console were set to minimum/OFF and all function switches to
MANUAL. The console and computer were turned off. The clamps on the peristaltic pump head
was released to prevent distortion of the flexible tubing.

RESULTS/ CALCULATIONS
160

60.00

140

50.00

120
40.00

100
80
water level (mm)

30.00

60

20.00 pump speed (%)

pump speed
10.00

water
40 level
20
0

0.00

sample time

Figure 2. Open loop data collected in steps 3(x) through 3(xiii).

Velocity Gain, K =

Final Process VariableInitial Process Variable

100
Initial Process Variable
Percentage c h angeController Output
time

From step 10 in the procedure:

Final height = 102mm
Initial Height = 127mm
Percentage change in controller output = 40 - 50
Time = 8.2mins

K1 =

(102127)
100
127
4050
8.2

K1 = 0.240% increase in level per min

From step 12 in the procedure:
Final height = 135mm
Initial Height = 110mm
Percentage change in controller output = 31-41
Time = 12.9-7.35mins

K2=

135110
100
110
3141
12.97.35

K2=0.409% increase in level per min

Kavg

K 1+ K 2
2

0.240+ 0.409
2

= 0.325% increase in level per min

When the dynamics of the sensor/ transmitter and final control element are negligible, the openloop response of the measured % level (PV) to changes in controller output (CO) can be
modelled as
'

d P V (t)
= K CO' (t)
dt

given that:
PV'(t) = PV(t) - PVss
CO'(t) = CO(t) - COss = m
where m is the percentage increase in CO(t) when t=0
d P V ' (t)
= Km
dt
Separating Variables and integrating both sides:
dPV'(t) = Km dt

PV'(t) = Km(t) + c
where c is a constant
Since the system was initially at steady state:
PV'(0) = Km(0) + c
c=0
PV'(t) = Km(t)
recall: PV'(t) = PV(t) - PVss
PV(t) = Km(t) + PVss
Therefore, for step changes in setpoint under IMC proportional control, the transient response of
the measured level follows a first-order linear differential equation with time constant .

level and setpoint valuestank level

set point
pump speed

Sample time

Figure 3. Closed loop data recorded in steps 3(xiv)-(xviii).

Controller gain, Kc

K
1
=

Theoretical values of = 0.5 and 2.5

when = 0.5
0.50.325
1
Kc1 =
= 6.15

Proportional Band =
100
6.15

= 16.26

100
Kc

when = 2.5
2.50.325
1
Kc2 =
= 1.23

Proportional band =

100
1.23

= 81.30

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS:
Actual value of 1:
Initial tank level, L1 = 168mm
Initial time, T1 = 10:20:02
Final tank level, L2 = 140mm
Final time, T2 = 10:27:46
L1 + 0.632 (L1 - L2) = 168 + 0.632(140-168)
= 150.30mm
150.30mm occurs at T3 = 10:21:02
Actual value of 1

= T3 - T1
= 10:21:02 - 10:20:02
= 1.0 min

Table 1. Actual and theoretical values of the closed loop time constant.

Closed loop time constant,

Actual Value
Theoretical value
1.0
0.5
4.4
2.5

DISCUSSION
There are many applications of level control in the chemical industry, an application of
such would be a hot water tank where water is removed, perhaps for washing down, and the level
needs to be restored ready for the next wash cycle.
Some advantages of including liquid inventories in the design of a chemical plant are:
1. They allow plant operation to continue when some flows are temporarily disabled.
2. They ensure liquid flow to a pump - if the vessel were to empty, liquid flow would be
interrupted to the pump which may result in damage of the pump (if it remains in operation
without flow)

3. Allows the plant to operate more efficiently - they can be placed between a disturbance source
and a sensitive unit to reduce variation in stream properties and flow rate in input flows. (the
disturbance magnitude is significantly decreased)
Some disadvantages of including liquid inventories in the design of a chemical plant are:
1. They can be costly to the company- cost of vessels, land or building space and maintenance
2. Cost of material inventory - money invested in feed stock rather than distributed as profit
3. Potential quality degradation from storing material
4. Reduces safety - the net effect of any accident can be much worse when a large inventory of
flammable or hazardous material is involved.
In order to accomplish the objectives of the experiment ( to develop an open-loop
dynamic model between tank level and pump speed from step response data and to study the
transient behaviour of proportional-only level control loops) steady state is required. Steady state
can be defined as a process which doesn't change with time, in this case: inlet flow = outlet flow.
In order to achieve this, the level controller was configured for direct action. Direct action means
that the process variable would vary directly proportional to the controller output (i.e. the tank
level would be directly proportional to the pump speed). Hence, during the experiment direct
action was used as opposed to reverse action. This allowed the pump speed to increase (remove
water from the tank at a faster rate) as the tank level was increased, therefore, achieving steady
state.
The IMC tuning rule was used to (Rivera et al., 1986) was used to compute a new value
K
1
for the controller gain, Kc. This rule states that Kc =
. It can be observed from this

equation that the controller gain is inversely proportional to the tuning parameter, . Hence, an
increase in would result in a decrease in the controller gain. The controller gain is then used to
find the proportional band from the following equation:
Proportional band =

100
Kc

Now, relating the tuning parameter to the proportional band gives a proportional relationship
whereas an increase in would lead to an increase in the proportional band. An increase in
upon the closed-loop response of the controlled level and manipulated flow rate would therefore
lead to a large proportional band which gives a longer time period for the tank level to approach
the set point.
With reference to figure 2, an offset can be observed for step changes in the setpoint
(decreasing the tank level by 25mm). The offset observed was approximately 4mm. For pulse
disturbances in inlet flowrate, when 1L of water was dumped into the tank, an offset of 3mm is
observed. This is shown in figure 2 around the 11:06:42 sample time where it can be observed

that set point and tank level lines do not meet. Also, with respect to figure 2, for step
disturbances in inlet flow rate (step 18 in the procedure), an offset of 12mm is observed. Hence,
from these results, a proportional level controller would be expected to exhibit offset following:
-

step changed in set point

pulse disturbances in inlet flowrate
step disturbances in inlet flowrate

With reference to table 1, the actual closed loop time constants were found to be 1.0 and
4.4 whereas the theoretical values were 0.5 and 2.5 respectively. Overall, the actual values are
larger than the theoretical values, therefore, it can be deduced that a longer time was taken for the
water level to decrease by 63.2% of the overall decrease.
Even though an offset was shown in the results, the equipment used was appropriate for
the illustration of the relevant engineering principles. The offset in readings may have been as a
result of the equipment not being calibrated. Also, the actual tank level had a 10mm difference
from the tank level noted by the computer. A recommendation for this experiment would be to
perform regular maintenance on the equipment as well as to ensure the equipment is properly
calibrated.
SOURCES OF ERROR:

Parallax error when reading the tank level

Incorrect calculations
Incorrect data may have been inputted into the computer
Equipment was not calibrated resulting in inaccurate results.

PRECAUTIONS:

Water levels were read at eye level to the meniscus

Calculations were done twice to ensure the correct value was found

CONCLUSIONS

An inversely proportional relationship is observed between pump speed and tank level
An open loop dynamic model between tank level and pump speed from step response
data was developed.
An average velocity gain, Kavg of 0.325% increase in level per min was obtained
A proportional level controller will be expected to exhibit offset following step changes
in setpoint, pulse disturbances in inlet flowrate and step disturbances in inlet flowrate.
Actual closed loop time constants were 1.0 and 4.4 whereas the theoretical values were
0.5 and 2.5 implying that a longer time was taken for the water level to decrease by
63.2% of the overall decrease.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Equipment should be regularly cleaned and maintained

Equipment should be calibrated
Internet should be provided in the lab so that the results can be emailed to the students.
A longer time period should be allowed to ensure the process has attained steady state.

REFERENCES
Level and Flow Control Applications. (2014). Retrieved from Spirax Sarco:
http://www.spiraxsarco.com/resources/steam-engineering-tutorials/control-applications/leveland-flow-control-applications.asp
Marlin, T. (1995). Process Control: Designing Processes and Control Systems for Dynamic
Performance. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Rivera, D.E., M. Morari and S. Skogestad (1986). "Internal Model Control. 4. PID controller
design". Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. & Dev., 25, 252-265
Laboratory Manual: CHNG 2009/2010. Chemical Engineering Laboratory (2014-2015)

APPENDIX
See attached CD for results.