Instrument & Control Training

Process Control
In a simple control system, a process variable (PV) is measured and
compared with a setpoint value (SP). A manipulated variable (MV, or output)
signal is generated by the controller and sent to a final control element,
which then influences the process variable to achieve stable control.

2.1 Basic process control strategies

The algorithm by which the controller develops its output signal is typically
PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative), but other algorithms may be used as
well. This form of simple control may be improved upon and expanded for a
greater range of process applications by interconnecting multiple controllers
and/or redirecting measurement and control signals in more complex
arrangements. An exploration of some of the more common control system
configurations is the subject of this chapter.

2.1.1 Single-loop Process Controller “Feedback control loop”

In a manually-controlled process, a human operator directly actuates some

form of final control
element (usually a valve) to influence a process variable. Simple automatic
“regulator” control relieves
human operators of the need to
continually adjust final control
elements by hand, replacing this
task with the occasional
adjustment of setpoint values.
The controller then manipulates
the final control element to hold
the process variable at the
setpoint value determined by the
 Instrument & Control Training

operator. A simple control system drawn in block diagram form looks like the
figure on the left. Information from the measuring device (e.g. transmitter)
goes to the controller, then to the final control device (e.g. control valve),
influencing the process which is sensed again by the measuring device. The
controller’s task is to inject the proper amount of negative feedback such
that the process variable stabilizes over time. This flow of information is
collectively referred to as a feedback control loop.
Before we begin our brief discussion on different process control strategies,
we must know the details of the basic feedback control principle. First, we
have what is known as the process. This is the physical system we wish to
monitor and control. For the sake of illustration, consider a heat exchanger
that uses high-temperature steam to transfer heat to a lower-temperature
liquid. Heat exchangers are used frequently in the chemical industries to
maintain the necessary temperature of a chemical solution, so the desired
blending, separation, or reactions can occur. A very common design of heat
exchanger is the “shell-and-tube” style, where a metal shell serves as a
conduit for the chemical solution to flow through, while a network of smaller
tubes runs through the heating space, carrying steam or some other heating
medium. The hotter steam flowing through the tubes transfers heat energy
 Instrument & Control Training

to the cooler process fluid surrounding the tubes, inside the shell of the heat
exchanger.

In this case, the process is the entire heating system, consisting of the fluid
we wish to heat, the heat exchanger, and the steam delivering the required
heat energy. In order to maintain steady control of the process fluid’s exiting
temperature, we must find a way to measure it and represent that
measurement in signal form so it may be interpreted by other instruments
taking some form of control action. In instrumentation terms, the measuring
device is known as a transmitter, because it transmits the process
measurement in the form of a signal. Transmitters are represented in
process diagrams by small circles with identifying letters inside, in this case,
“TT,” which stands for Temperature Transmitter. The signal coming from the
transmitter (shown in the following figure by the dashed line), representing
the heated fluid’s exiting temperature, is called the process variable.
Likewise a variable in a mathematical equation that represents some
quantity, this signal represents the measured quantity we wish to control in
the process.
 Instrument & Control Training

In order to have control over the process variable, we must have some way
of altering fluid flow through the heat exchanger, either of the process fluid,
the steam, or both. Generally, it makes more sense to alter the flow of the
heating medium (the steam), and let the process fluid flow rate be dictated
by the demands of the larger process. If this heat exchanger were part of an
oil refinery unit, for example, it would be far better to throttle steam flow to
control oil temperature rather than to throttle the oil flow itself, since altering
the oil’s flow will undoubtedly affect other processes upstream and
downstream of the exchanger. Ideally, the exchanger will act as a device
that provides even, consistent temperature oil out, for any given
temperature and flow-rate of oil in.
One convenient way to throttle steam flow into the heat exchanger is to use
a control valve (labeled “TV” because it is a Temperature Valve). In general
 Instrument & Control Training

terms, a control valve is known as a final control element. Other types of

final control elements exist (servo motors, variable-flow pumps, and other
mechanical devices used to vary some physical quantity as will), but valves
are the most common, and probably the simplest to understand. With a final
control element in place, the steam flow becomes known as the manipulated
variable, because it is the quantity we will manipulate in order to gain control
over the process variable.
Valves come in a wide variety of sizes and styles. Some valves are hand-
operated: that is, they have a “wheel” or other form of manual control that
may be moved to “pinch off” or “open up” the flow passage through the
pipe. Other valves come equipped with signal receivers and positioned
devices, which move the valve mechanism to various positions at the
command of a signal (usually an electrical signal 4 -20 mA, like the type
output by transmitter instruments). This feature allows for remote control, so
a human operator or computer device may have control over the
manipulated variable from a distance. The following figure shows now both
elements but still missing the link between them.
 Instrument & Control Training

Now, this brings us to the final, and most critical, component of the heat
exchanger temperature control system, the controller. This is a device
designed to interpret the transmitter’s process variable signal and decide
how far open the control valve needs to be in order to maintain that process
variable at the desired value.
Hereunder in the following figure, the circle with the letters “TC” in the
center represents the controller. Those letters stand for Temperature
Controller, since the process variable being controlled is the process fluid’s
temperature. Usually, the controller consists of a computer making
automatic decisions to open and close the valve as necessary to stabilize the
process variable at some predetermined setpoint. Note that the controller’s
 Instrument & Control Training

circle has a solid line going through the center of it, while the transmitter and
control valve circles are open. An open circle represents a field-mounted
device according to the ISA standard for instrumentation symbols, and a
single solid line through the middle of a circle tells us the device is located
on the front of a control panel in a main control room location. So, even
though the diagram might appear as though these three instruments are
located close to one another, they in fact may be quite far apart. Both the
transmitter and the valve must be located near the heat exchanger (out in
the “field” area rather than inside a building), but the controller may be
located a long distance away where human operators can adjust the setpoint
from inside a safe and secure control room.
 Instrument & Control Training

2.1.2 Supervisory control

The next step in complexity after simple automatic control is to automate

the adjustment of the setpoint for a process controller. A common
implementation of this concept is the automatic cycling of setpoint values
according to a timed schedule. An example of this is a temperature controller
for a heat-treatment furnace used to temper metal samples.

Here, a computer communicates setpoint values to the temperature

indicating controller (TIC) over a digital network interface such as Ethernet.
From the temperature controller’s perspective, this is a remote setpoint
signal, as opposed to a local setpoint value which would be set by a human
operator at the controller faceplate. Since the heat-treatment of metals
requires particular temperature ranges and rates of change over time, this
control system relieves the human operator of having to manually adjust
setpoint values again and again during heat-treatment cycles. Instead, the
computer schedules different setpoint values at different times (even
setpoint values that change steadily at a certain rate over a period of time)
according to the needs of the particular metal type and treatment type. Such
 Instrument & Control Training

a control scheme is quite common for heat-treating processes, and it is

referred to as ramp and soak. Nowadays, many single-loop process
controllers have the ability to perform ramp-and-soak setpoint scheduling
without the need of an external “supervisory” computer.

2.1.3 Cascade Control

To have a cascade control loop means to cascade controllers together in the
way that the output signal of one controller to the setpoint of another
controller, with each controller sensing a different aspect of the same
process. The first controller (called the primary, or master) essentially “gives
orders” to the second controller (called the secondary or slave) via a remote
setpoint signal. The following figure in the next page is a block diagram for
this schematic.

Thus, a cascade control system consists of two feedback control loops, one
nested inside the other. A very common practical example of cascade control
is a valve positioner, which receives a command signal from a regular
process controller, and in turn works to ensure the valve stem position
 Instrument & Control Training

precisely matches that command signal. The control valve’s stem position is
the process variable (PV) for the positioner, just as the command signal is
the positioner’s setpoint (SP). Valve positioners therefore act as “slave”
controllers to “master” process controllers controlling pressure, temperature,
flow, or some other process variable.
The purpose of cascade control is to achieve greater stability of the primary
process variable by regulating a secondary process variable in accordance
with the needs of the first. An essential requirement of cascaded control is
that the secondary process variable be faster-responding (i.e. less lag time)
than the primary process variable. A common implementation of cascade
control is where a flow controller receives a setpoint from some other
process controller (pressure, temperature, level, analytical, etc.), fluid flow
being one of the fastest-responding process types in existence. A feedwater
control system for a steam boiler – shown here in pneumatic form – is a good
example. This example is shown in the following figure.
 Instrument & Control Training

A necessary step in implementing cascade control is to ensure the

secondary (“slave”) controller is well-tuned before any attempt is made to
tune the primary (“master”) controller. We will talk about tuning a PID
controller later on, just a moment’s thought is all that is needed to
understand why this precedence in tuning must be: it is a simple matter of
dependence. The slave controller does not depend on good tuning in the
master controller in order to control the slave loop. If the master controller
were placed in manual (effectively turning off its automatic response), the
slave controller would simply control to a constant setpoint. However, the
master controller most definitely depends on the slave controller being well-
tuned in order to fulfill the master’s “expectations.” If the slave controller
were placed in manual mode, the master controller would not be able to
exert any control over its process variable whatsoever. Clearly then, the
slave controller’s response is essential to the master controller being able to
 Instrument & Control Training

control its process variable, therefore the slave controller must be the first
one to tune.

2.1.4 Ratio control

Although we may not have given it much thought while taking a shower, we
are engaged in a control strategy known as ratio control, how? Simply by
adjusting water temperature with dual taps “valves”: one valve controlling
hot water and one valve controlling cold water. In order to adjust water
temperature, the proportion of one valve opening to the other must be
changed. Increasing or decreasing total water flow rate without upsetting the
outlet temperature is a matter of adjusting both valves in the same direction,
maintaining that same proportion of hot to cold water flow.
Many industrial processes also require the precise mixing of two or more
ingredients to produce a desired product. Not only do these ingredients need
to be mixed in proper proportion, but it is usually desirable to have the total
flow rate subject to arbitrary increases and decreases so production rate as a
whole may be altered at will.
A simple example of ratio control is in the production of paint, where a base
liquid must be mixed with one or more pigments to achieve a desired
consistency and color. A manually controlled paint mixing process, similar to
the hot and cold water valve “process” in some home showers, is shown
here. Two flowmeters, a ratio calculating relay, and a display provide the
human operator with a live measurement of pigment-to-base ratio.
 Instrument & Control Training

A more automated approach to the general problem of ratio control involves

the installation of a flow control loop on one of the lines, while keeping just a
flow transmitter on the other line. The signal coming from the uncontrolled
flow transmitter becomes the setpoint for the flow control loop, this is shown
in the following figure.
 Instrument & Control Training

Another example of ratio control at work is in a process whereby

hydrocarbon gases (usually methane) are converted into hydrogen gas and
carbon dioxide gas. This is known as the steam-hydrocarbon reforming
process, and it is one of the more popular ways of generating hydrogen gas
for industrial use. The overall reaction for this process with methane gas
(CH4) and steam (H2O) as the reactants is as follows:
CH4 + 2H2O → 4H2 + CO2
 Instrument & Control Training

In the previous figure note how the methane gas flow transmitter signal goes
both to the methane flow controller and to a multiplying relay that multiplies
this signal by a constant value (k) before passing it on to the steam flow
controller as a setpoint. This k value sets the ratio of steam flow to methane
flow. Although this might appear to be a cascade control system at first
glance, it is actually quite different. In a cascade system, the output of one
controller becomes the setpoint for another. Here in a ratio control system,
the process variable of one controller becomes the setpoint for another, such
that two process variables remain in constant proportion (ratio) to one
another. In Sorfert we have a steam to carbon ratio control, our control
philosophy is a little different, we are not using a constant ratio to control the
flows but we are controlling the flows to keep the ratio within a predefined
 Instrument & Control Training

range. An assignment for you; is to get all the instrumentation and control
details about it from our P&I Diagrams.
2.1.5 PID

The difference between the process variable signal and the setpoint signal is
called the error. This is a measure of how far off the process is deviating
from its setpoint, and may be calculated as SP−PV or as PV−SP, depending
on whether or not the controller has to produce an increasing output signal
to cause an increase in the process variable, or output a decreasing signal to
do the same thing. This choice in how we subtract determines whether the
controller will be reverse-acting or direct-acting. The direction of action
required of the controller is determined by the nature of the process,
transmitter, and final control element. Here is an example to show the
difference: let’s assume that an increasing output signal sent to a results in
increased steam flow through this valve, and consequently higher
temperature, if we measuring the temperature to control it, so our algorithm
will need to be reverse-acting (i.e. an increase in measured temperature
results in a decrease in output signal; error calculated as SP−PV). This error
signal is then multiplied by a constant value called the gain, which is
programmed into the controller. The resulting figure, plus a “bias” quantity,
becomes the output signal sent to the valve to proportion it.
m = Kpe + b
Where,
m = Controller output (Manipulated Value)
e = Error (difference between PV and SP)
Kp = Proportional gain
b = Bias

Often, the response of a proportional controller is shown graphically as a

line, the slope of the line representing gain and the y-intercept of the line
representing the output bias point. When there is no error (PV precisely
equals SP), the output will be equal to the bias according to the figure below.
 Instrument & Control Training

In the above graph the bias value is 50% and the gain of the controller is 1.
Proportional controllers give us a choice as to how “sensitive” we want the
controller to be to changes in process variable (PV) and setpoint (SP). The
gain value (Kp) of a controller is something which may be altered by an
engineer. In pneumatic controllers, this takes the form of a lever inside the
controller, in analog electronic controllers, a potentiometer adjustment, and
in digital control systems, a programmable parameter.
If the controller could be configured for infinite gain, its response would
duplicate on/off control. That is, any amount of error will result in the output
signal becoming “saturated” at either 0% or 100%, and the final control
element will simply turn on fully when the process variable drops below
setpoint and turn off fully when the process variable rises above setpoint.
Conversely, if the controller is set for zero gain, it will become completely
unresponsive to changes in either process variable or setpoint, the valve will
 Instrument & Control Training

hold its position at the bias point no matter what happens to the process.
Obviously, we must set the gain somewhere between infinity and zero for
proper function. Normally the loop gain depends on the process and all the
other instruments in the control loop. We have the following cases depending
on the value of the loop gain.
1) If the gain is set too high, there will be oscillations as the PV converges
on a new setpoint value.

2) If the gain is set too low, the process response will be stable under
steady-state conditions, but “sluggish” to changes in setpoint because
the controller does not take aggressive enough action to cause quick
changes in the process.
 Instrument & Control Training

3) If the gain is high enough (optimized between case 1 and 2) some

overshoot will result and we obtain fast-acting response.

All the above is talking only about proportional control. To enhance the
control algorithm we must use Integral and derivative algorithms along with
proportional. The process control is a continuous operation so; we have to
look at PV, SP and MV as a function in time (t).
 Instrument & Control Training

A proportional-integral-derivative or 'PID' controller looks at the current value

of the error, e(t) = SP(t) - PV (t), the integral of the error over a recent time
interval, and the current derivative of the error signal to determine not only
how much of a correction to apply, but for how long. Those three quantities
are each multiplied by a tuning constant and added together to produce the
current controller output MV(t).
Now we will explain briefly the INTEGRAL “reset control”: The error is being
integrated. Thus the integral mode of the controller ramps the output either
up or down over time, the direction of ramping determined by the sign of the
error (PV greater or less than SP). The rate of ramping determined by the
magnitude of the error (how far away PV is from SP). Once the error is zero
(PV = SP), the integral action stops ramping, leaving the controller output
(valve position) at its last value. Here is the mathematical form for the
integral part.

m =
Where:

m = Controller output
e = Error
τi = Integral time constant (minutes)
t = Time
b = Bias

Now, the DERIVATIVE “rate control”: The ratio of error change per unit of
time is calculated. A controller with derivative action looks at how fast the
error changes per unit of time, and takes action proportional to that rate of
change. If the process variable starts to change at a high rate of speed, the
job of derivative action is to move the control valve in such a direction as to
counteract this rapid change.
 Instrument & Control Training

The derivative action is explained by the following equation

m=
Where:

m = Controller output
e = Error
τd = Derivative time constant (minutes)
t = Time
b = Bias

To summarize the PID we can say, the proportional action is where the error
tells the output how far to move. Integral action is where the error tells the
output how fast to move. Derivative action tells the output how much offset
is needed to compensate the expected change. Another simple way to
explain the PID: proportional (P) action acts on the present and integral (I)
action acts on the past, derivative (D) action acts on the future. The following
graphic illustrates the three effects.
 Instrument & Control Training

The illustrations of P, I, and D actions focus only on the shapes of the

responses, not their exact numerical.