Session T2G

Process Control Kits: A Hardware and Software

Resource
S. Scott Moor 1, Polly R. Piergiovanni 2, and Mathew Metzger 3
Abstract - We have developed inexpensive and flexible
process control kits including both hardware and software
that allow students to design, implement and test their own
control systems in the classroom. Each kit requires
approximately $1200 in parts not including a personal
computer for the control system. The kits use the LEGO
RCX brick for A/D and D/A conversion and some
distributed computing tasks. Students construct simple
processes using quick release instant fittings and the
kits process, sensor and control components. The process
is controlled by an application written in ROBOLABTM for
LabVIEWTM. Students are able to carry out a range of
level, flow and temperature control experiments. Using
two kits multivariable control experiments can be carried
out. In addition, the kit is capable of sequence logic
control. Student response to the Lego kit has been positive
during the first three semesters of its use.
Index Terms - hands-on, LEGO RCX, laboratory kits, process
control
INTRODUCTION
Helping undergraduate students to understand the connection
between process control theory and the practice of process
control is a difficult task. Lant and Newell [1] note that most
students find process control conceptually difficult, perceive it
as peripheral and have trouble integrating it with other
material. As a result they find it more of a chore than fun to
learn. Stephanopolous [2] suggests that in process control
instruction we are preoccupied with the analytical leg of
process control largely because we do not know how to teach
other issues involved in the synthesis of process control
systems.
Instructors attempt to address these issues of student
interest, connection of theory to practice and the teaching of
control system synthesis by using three approaches: 1.
computer simulations, 2. laboratory experiences and 3. case
studies [3-6]. These components are often used at a time
separate from the lecture portion of the course due to logistical
limitations. In addition these approaches usually are designed
around a fixed hardware or conceptual setup that does not
allow students to explore varied control configurations.
We have developed a flexible control system kit that
allows experiments to be brought into a slightly modified
classroom. These kits also are modular in nature and flexible
in how they are set up. The kits are relatively portable and

require only 110-volt power, a bucket of water and a PC

computer.
Because these kits can be brought into the classroom they
can be used as part of a range of teaching approaches [7]. The
fit very nicely in an inductive approach [8] or in a Kolb Cycles
approach [9]. Students are introduced to important control
synthesis ideas because of the flexibility of these kits, which
require that students assemble each experiment and allow for
open-ended projects.
The purpose of this paper is to provide details on our kit
design and the experiments that can be completed with the
kits. It builds on design details presented in previous papers
[10]. This paper includes:
1. a description of the experiments that can be completed
with the kits including a summary of the status of the
development of each of these experiments,
2. a review of the kit design including a parts list.
3. a summary of our classroom experience over three
semesters of use including student response.
Additional details on the kit designs will be available on the
web at the time of the conference.
EXPERIMENTS
The kits are based on the Lego RCX brick and quick release
instant fittings. They are simple water-flow systems
including a submersible pump, 3/8 inch tubing and fittings,
two tanks, a control valve, and pressure, temperature, level
and flow sensors. The control system is implemented in
software and is split between the PC and the RCX brick.
With a single kit, 17 standard experiments can be
completed and a range of additional experiments are possible.
If two kits are used together, an additional ten standard
experiments are available.
Table I lists the standard experiments that can be
completed with a single kit and includes the current level of
development and testing of that particular experiment. The
first column, hardware, indicates the status of hardware
development. Boxes that are filled in and checked indicate the
hardware for that experiment has been developed and
constructed.
The cross-hatched area indicates that the
hardware is partially complete. The second column, software,
similarly indicates the status of software development for each
experiment. The final two columns present the status of
testing of the experiments. Experiments are first tested in the
laboratory by the developers. They are then tested in the

S. Scott Moor, Department of Engineering, Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne, moors@ipfw.edu
Polly R. Piergiovanni, Chemical Engineering, Department Lafayette College, Easton, PA, piegerop@lafayette.edu
3
Mathew Metzger, c/o Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, metzgerm@lafayette.edu.edu
2

0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-27

Session T2G
classroom setting. In some cases, implementation issues are
noted in these testing columns.
The hardware and software has been developed for most
of the single kit experiments. For these experiments we are
refining the resistance between tanks. The single tank
experiments have been the most extensively used. These
single kit experiments use a single control valve.
TABLE I:
EXPERIMENTS WITH A SINGLE KIT
Set Up

Experiment

Single Tank:
Level
Control

Two Tanks
in series

Flow
Control

Static
Mixer:
Temperature
Control
Only

lab
test

software

First Order
Dynamics
Level Control
on/off
Level Control
P only
Level Control PID
Controller
Tuning
Safety Controls

v.
slow

Accumulation
Control

Series
Interacting
Level Control
Second Order
Dynamics
Series
NonInteracting
Measure Valve
Coefficient
(Cv)
Simple Flow
Control
Controller
Tuning
Thermal
Modeling
Simple Control
Loop
Dead Time
effects
Dead Time
Compensation

The kits are built around the LEGO RCX brick, ROBOLAB
software and instant fittings. Table III is a parts list for the
components required to assemble one kit. The materials to
build a kit can purchased for a little over $1100. In addition a
personal computer would be required. A copy of LabVIEW
and ROBOLAB is currently required for the software system.
ROBOLAB is a few hundred dollars for a site license and the
TABLE II:
EXPERIMENTS WITH TWO KITS

class
test

hardware

KIT DESIGN

When two kits are put together, two control valves are
available as well as additional sensors and fittings available.
This allows the experiments shown in Table II to be
completed. This table shows the state of development of each
of these experiments in the same format as Table I. Except
for the cascade control experiment, these experiments include
the use of two control valves to demonstrate in multi-variable
control systems.
The hardware development for all of these experiments is
complete and software development has been completed for
approximately half the experiments. Classroom testing has
been conducted for only a couple of experiments. However,
these sessions were especially effective and well received.

class
test

Separate Flow
and Temp.
Control
Ratio Control

Feed-forward
Control
Multi-Variable
Process
Modeling
Flow, Level
and Temp
Ratio Control

Feed Forward
Control

Experiment

hardware

software

Single
Tank
Flow and
Level
Control
Two Tanks

Two
Independent
Loops
Cascade
Control
Parallel Tanks

Static
Mixer
Multivariable
Control

Stirred
Tank
Multivariable
Control

v.
fast
v.
fast

lab
test

Set Up

R
R
R

software we have developed will run on the student edition of

LabVIEW.
Several components in Table III are listed as custom.
These parts require some shop assembly. Except for the
orifice meter this can be done with simple tools. Details of
these components have been described elsewhere [10]. The
developed software is freely available from the authors.
The LEGO RCX brick provides an inexpensive interface
between the sensors and control valves, and a personal
computer. The RCX brick includes three 0-5 volt 10-bit A/D
inputs. The input connections include a multiplexed supply
voltage for active sensors. In addition there are three pulse
width modulated 0-5 volt outputs. The control software is
split between the PC and the Hatchii microprocessor in the
RCX Brick. The RCX was chosen because it provides an
inexpensive A/D interface with a wide range of sensors and
software options. In addition the sensor connections include a
multiplexed power supply for active sensors and the presences
of LEGOs in the classroom is attractive to students.
The process side of the kits is based on 3/8 inch tubing
and instant fittings.
These fittings create a sealed
connection with the tubing just by pushing the tubing into the
fitting. The tubing is removed by pulling back a release ring
and pulling the tubing out. These fittings allow the process

0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-28

Session T2G
Description

TABLE III:
COMPONENTS FOR A SINGLE KIT
Oty
Supplier

Item #

$/ unit

total $

Major Flow components

Tanks

3 in & 4 in diameter, one 4 in 8 in high

custom

145

Control Valve

3/8 in. control valve

custom

167

Orifice Meter

3/8 in oriface meter

custom

43

Pump

Submersible Pump, 5.4 GPM, 115 VAC

Cole-Parmer

EW-0714740

82

82

122

122

Electronic components
Switch Box

110 V power switching

custom

RCX Brick

RCX programmable brick

Pitsco

41

Batteries

AA Batteries, 4-Pack

RCX Plug

AC Adapter for RCX

Pitsco

W979833

23

23

Pressure & Level

interface
Temperature Sensor

Four wire adaptor to RCX brick

Techno-Stuff

50

100

Temperature Sensor

Pitsco

W979889

29

29

Leads

2x2 Electrical Plate

Lego

10043

24

GFCI

Shock Buster - Plug-In GFCI Adapter

Lowe's

145275

10

10

Pressure Sensors

Honewell Microswitch PC25

20

40

13

13

0.20

P979709
-

Tubing
Tubing

Brass Tubing .311" ID, 3/8" OD, 6' L.

Flexitubing

PVC Lab Tubing 1/4"x3/8"x1/16"

McMaster

8950K581

20 ft

McMaster

5231K53

Plugs

Alloy 360 Brass Rod 3/8" D., 6' L.

McMaster

8953K49

Static Mixer

In-line mixer; 3/8" tube OD

Cole-Parmer

EW-0466814

45

45

Outlet Valve

Brass Needle Valve; 1/4" NPT

McMaster

4982K72

22

22

Elbows

Brass Instant Tube Fittings - 3/8" Elbow

McMaster

51025K236

29

Union

Brass Instant Tube - 3/8" Coupling

McMaster

51025K196

16

Tee

Brass Instant Tube Fittings - 3/8" Tee

McMaster

51025K226

Fittings

Threaded Tees

Brass Threaded Pipe Tee 3/8" NPT

McMaster

50785K73

Threaded Plugs

McMaster

4596K72

McMaster

Flex tube fittings

PVC Threaded Pipe Hex Head Hollow

Plug- 3/8" NPT,
1/4"NPT to 3/8" Instant Tube Brass
connectors
Brass Hose Nipples Female (pk of 10)

Teflon Tape

Tape 50-ft, 1/2" Width, .0025" Thick

Small Bricks

2x2 Red Bricks

Large Bricks

2x4 Red Bricks

Baseplate
Tower Blocks
People

Community Workers (enough for

several kits)
large tackle box for storage of parts,
TackleLogic
Plastic Container at least 7" x 7" base
and 4" high

Male Fittings

1.5

51025K184

10

McMaster

5346K42

McMaster

4591K12

Lego

3457

Lego

3462

Large Green Baseplate

Lego

626

10

Duplo Tub

Lego

3099

20

20

Lego

9293

34

34

Wal-Mart

30

30

Various

Miscellaneous

Tackle Box
Reservoir

Total

.
configurations to easily be rearranged, matching the modular
nature of the LEGO system. Both brass and flexible PVC
tubing are used with these fitting. The ends of the brass

1116

tubing must be chamfered to prevent tearing the O-rings in the

instant fittings.
In addition to working together the software and hardware
components of these kits can be used separately. The software
0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE
October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-29

is designed to work as a general control program for the Lego

RCX brick and can be used with our hardware or with other
RCX based systems. It will work with any sensors and many
control elements that can be interfaced with the RCX brick.
The major limitation of this control system is that it cannot be
used with very fast systems.
Because of the IR
communication link from the PC to the RCX loop times are on
the order of one second.
The control system presents a simple front panel is
immediately accessible and understandable to the students,
but, as they learn more process control theory, they can study,
understand and modify the subpanels, which perform the
control actions. Our software is programmed in RoboLAB for
LABVIEW because of its ability to create this layered
interface with the simple front panel and the ability to look
under the hood. The hardware components including the
level sensor, the pressure sensor, the switch box and the
control valve could be used with other control software.
RESULTS OF CLASSROOM USE
These kits have been used during three different semesters
(Fall 2003, Spring 2004, Spring 2005) to teach a process
control class to junior year chemical engineering students at
Lafayette College. In the Fall 2003 semester, 27 students took
the course in two sections. In the Spring 2004 semester 14
students took this process control class. In the Spring of 2005
20 students took the course. At the end of each semester
students filled out a questionnaire on the use of the Lego Kits.
The surveys consisted of two parts. First were four openended questions where students wrote about understanding
and experience from using the kits. Second were five Likert
scale questions about the kits (this questions were not included
for the Spring 2005 semester). A traditional five point Likert
scale was used where five was strongly agree and one was
strongly disagree. Figure 1 shows the results for these Likert
questions. The five statements were:

Session T2G

The Lego kits helped me picture what was happening in

class (Helped Picture)
Remembering back to the first week, the kits provided a
good introduction to the subject (Good Intro).
I did not find the kits to be very helpful (Helpful).
The kits were fun to use (Fun).
I wish we could have used the kits more (Use More).
Notice the third statement is worded in the negative to vary the
response pattern. In order to make Figure 1 responses
consistent, the response numbers in the figure have been
reversed for the third statement, i.e., 5 represents someone
who choose strongly disagree for this particular statement.
Thirty three students completed the survey (out of the 41 who
were enrolled these two terms). For the first four questions
over 80% of the students choose the strongly agree or agree
choices (again recoding the data as though all the statements
were positive). The response to the use more question was
more centered on the neutral response. This may indicate that
the kits were used the right amount (at least for the
experiments that were classroom ready for those semesters).
Overall the data indicates a very positive response of the
students to use of these kits.
For each semester the open-ended questions that started
the questionnaire were analyzed using a simple content
analysis approach. The common themes in the responses were
identified and then a count was made of number of students
who mentioned a specific idea. Table IV summarizes this
content analysis.
When asked what they remembered most students
remembered positive lessons that the kits were intended to
facilitate.
Most noting that the kits provided an handson/concrete example of what they were learning, a connection
that is often a difficult to get across in undergraduate process
control.
Over a quarter of the students did remember
operational problems or issues (leaking tanks, miss connected
wires or piping ). However, in many cases they were
remembering lessons about the importance of being careful

FIGURE 1
. RESPONSE TO THE LIKERT -SCALE SURVEY QUESTIONS FOR FALL 2003 AND SPRING 2004

0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-30

Session T2G
TABLE IV:
CONTENT ANALYSIS OF COMMENTS ON OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS
Categories

Number of Comments
Term:
Number of surveys completed:

F03

S04

S05

total

20

13

41

Linking math and theory to practice

Being able to see the control loop

They were fun and interesting

Usage issues: Connections must be tight or the kits are messy & other operational issues

11

Seeing the control valve adjust after a set point change

They helped understand the objective of the class

The process was slow, but small tank has a faster response

Wiring must be done correctly to work

The control valve has direction

1. What do you remember about using the kits?

Easy to use

2. What do you see as the purpose of the Lego kits in the class?
As a hands on example of complex material

10

21

To relate abstract theory to concrete example

13

Relate the process to the graphs (showing current level)

To see the effects of disturbances and changing parameters

To have experience setting up an actual system

To help grasp concepts such as dead time, gain and time constant
To see how the valve, sensor, process and controller are interconnected
3. What was most helpful about using the kits?
Seeing the controller in action

Seeing the effects of set point changes, disturbances and parameters

10

Seeing the pieces of the process (sensor, controller, valve)

Since they were fun, we could concentrate more

Understanding the initial concepts

Uncertain

Hands on learning/seeing a physical process

Being able to visualize the control process as a whole

10

4. What improvements would you like to see in the kits or their use?
More variation in processes

Use the kits more, especially after theory

More structure to the workshops

Have a chance to alter the PID equation, and see the effect

More robust equipment (towers, control valves)

Let us design the processes more often

Miscellaneous specific equipment or experiment suggestions

Explain more before using kits

Put questions about the kits on homework and tests

when implementing a system. Most students saw the purpose

of the kits in linking abstract or complex material to a concrete
example.

Their responses to the third open-ended question, what

they found helpful, were more varied but covered the range of
things we were we were trying to teach. It was interesting

0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-31

Session T2G
how often the words see or visualize came up in answer to this
question.
The most common student suggestion in question 4 was
to have more processes to study. Other processes were used
but a simple draining tank was the main focus at this stage in
the development of the kits. Only one student mentioned this
issue in the most recent survey. However, this could simply
be a result of the small sample size for this semester.
Students also suggested that the kits be used particularly
after presenting the theory. The approach used in class for
these semesters was to introduce topics with a kit experiment
or simulation and then to build up the background theory.
Students liked that approach but were indicating that they
would like to see the experiments again after they had studied
the theory. This is a very good suggestion to then come back
and look at the kit experiments in the light of the new insight
from the theory development.
Coauthor Matt Metzger is an undergraduate who has
worked on the development of these kits, was a student in the
class and a TA for the class. He made the following
comments: The kits are extremely helpful in providing a
connection between the theory and the implementation. The
kits answer the question of how does the control system
physically connect to the process. It is difficult to teach how
each part of the control system interacts with the others, but
the kit shows this in a very easy to see fashion. The kits also
provide a break from the dense lecture material and give the
students a chance to get their hands on something. The most
important thing for me was that the kits stuck in my head as an
example of what each of the terms means: actuator, final
control element, controller, feedback, etc. It made it a lot
easier to read a word, associate it with the LEGO project, and
then apply it to the particular case or application.
We continue to work on several weaknesses that have
been pointed up in laboratory and classroom trials. The kits
still have a few minor irritations in use that we are trying to
resolve. The control valves work best when connected with
flexible tubing. However, the flexible tubing we currently use
leaks at the connections more often than desirable. We are
evaluating alternative tubing and fittings for the control valve.
Some of the LEGO supports tend to come apart too easily. It
may be best to permanently bond some LEGO parts together
for easier assembly. We are also working on improvements
to the software to simplify the instillation and avoid
operational errors.
In the most recent semester, students designed their own
temperature control loop. Because of the variety in the
systems, the groups learned different things. For example, if
you put a long tube after the mixer, and then put the
temperature sensor, there is more dead time, and control isn't
very good. Or, if the flows arent balanced so that mixing
occurs at the tee, water is just pumped from one bucket to the
other and the mixer is bypassed. From the graphs on the
computer screen, they saw that adding derivative control
improved the control. One group switched the pumps (putting
the one from the hot water bucket into the cold water, and vice
versa) and saw the controller gain go from direct to reverse.

Additional open-ended projects completed by students

included developing a logic control system, controlling both
temperature and level in a tank, developing a proposal for
using a Lego-DCP sensor adaptor to control pH for an ion
exchange column and doing high school outreach with the
kits.
The kits offer a range of future possibilities. In addition
to the experiments described here, experiments involving
mixing, reaction and/or heat exchange could easily be
developed. We also have plans to develop a series of Bernulli
equation fluid mechanics experiments using variations on the
kit.
Overall the kits provided a flexible base for adding a
hands-on component to a process control class. Students
enjoyed working with the kits and seemed to gain an
appreciation for the application of process control. These kits
could easily be reproduced in another setting.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This material is based upon work supported by the National
Science Foundation under Grant No. 0127231. Any opinions,
findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in
this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
REFERENCES
[1]

Maczka, W.J., Synthetic Skills in Process Control Education, InTech,

Vol. 35, April 1988, pp. 39-40.

[2]

Lant, P. and Newell R.B., Problem Centered Teaching of Process

Control and Dynamics, Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 3, No. 2
Summer 1996, pp. 252-257.

[3]

Cooper, D., and Dougherty, D., A Training Simulator for ComputerAided Process Control Education, Chemical Engineering Education,
Vol. 34, no. 3, Summer 2000, pp. 252-257.

[4]

Bequette, B.W., Schott, K.D., Prasad, V., Natarajan, V., and Rao, R. R.,
Case Study Projects in an Undergraduate Process Control Course,
Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 32, No.3, Summer 1998, pp.
214-219,

[5]

Woo, W. W., A Motivational Introduction to Process Control,

Chemical Engineering Education, Vol. 31, No. 1, Winter 1997, pp.5859,63.

[6]

Johnson, S. H., Luyben, W. L. and Talhelm, D.L., Undergraduate

Interdisciplinary Controls Laboratory, Journal of Engineering
Education, Vol. 84, No. 2, April 1995, pp.133-136.

[7]

S. Moor, and P. Piergiovanni , Experiments in the Classroom:

Examples of Inductive Learning with Classroom-Friendly Laboratory
Kits, Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering
Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Nashville, TN, June
2003.

[8]

Moor, S.S., Piergiovanni, P.R., Inductive Learning in Process Control,

Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education
Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT., June 2004.

[9]

D. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning

and Development, Prentice-Hall, 1984.

[10] SS. Moor, P. R. Piergiovanni and M. Metzger, Learning Process

Control with LEGOs, Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for
Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake
City, UT., June 2004.

0-7803-9077-6/05/$20.00 2005 IEEE

October 19 22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN
35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
T2G-32