Process Instrumentation Dynamics and Controls Lab
Lab Report
Experiment:
Pressure Control Trainer
Submitted by:
Jitya Varshney
2022UCH0051
AIM
To study the Pressure control experiment
THEORY
1. Fundamentals of Process Control
Process control is the application of engineering and statistical methods to regulate
industrial processes so that they operate within safe, efficient, and desired limits. The
ultimate aim is to maintain a process variable (PV) close to a setpoint (SP), despite
disturbances.
Objectives of Control:
a. Maintain process stability and setpoints.
b. Smoothly transition between different operating conditions.
c. Reduce deviations, minimize offsets, and prevent oscillations.
2. Variables in Process Control
a) Input Variables: External factors affecting the process.
a. Manipulated Inputs (MV): Can be adjusted by the control system (e.g., valve
opening).
b. Disturbances: Cannot be controlled; can be measurable (e.g., feed flow change)
or immeasurable (e.g., temperature fluctuation).
b) Output Variables (CV): Process results influencing surroundings (e.g., tank pressure,
outlet concentration).
3. Control Structures
a. SISO (Single Input–Single Output): One manipulated variable affects one controlled
variable.
b. MIMO (Multiple Input–Multiple Output): Multiple manipulated inputs affect several
outputs (common in chemical plants).
4. Controller Modes
a. Proportional (P): Output proportional to error. Fast response but leaves offset.
b. Integral (I): Removes offset by integrating error over time. May cause oscillations.
c. Derivative (D): Responds to rate of error change, improving stability by damping
oscillations.
Combinations:
a. PI: Eliminates offset, but may oscillate.
b. PD: Improves stability but offset remains.
c. PID: Most versatile; balances offset removal and oscillation control.
5. Feedback Control Loop
a. Components: Sensor → Transmitter → Controller → I/P Converter → Control Valve →
Process.
b. The error signal is defined as:
e(t)=SP−PV
This error is processed by the controller to adjust the manipulated variable.
6. Practical Considerations
a. Controller Action: Direct vs. reverse action depending on process nature.
b. Auto/Manual Mode: Allows switching between automatic control and manual operation.
c. Bump less Transfer: Prevents sudden jumps in output when switching modes.
d. Anti-Reset Windup: Prevents excessive overshoot due to integral accumulation.
e. System Responses:
▪ First-order lag: Smooth approach to new steady state.
▪ Second-order response: May oscillate depending on damping.
▪ Dead-time and Inverse Response: Cause control difficulties.
▪ Unstable responses: Need strict control (e.g., reactor runaway).
This theory explains why PID controllers are widely used in industries—they combine
proportional, integral, and derivative actions to provide both stability and accuracy.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
1. Open the software, select the experiment, then click PID to load the control screen.
2. Set Integral (I) = 0 and Derivative (D) = 0 to begin with proportional-only control.
3. Set Proportional (P) = 100% (max) and observe the controller response.
4. Reduce P to 0.1 (minimum) and observe changes in behaviour.
5. From the observations, choose an optimum P that yields minimum offset while
remaining stable.
6. To eliminate/minimize offset, introduce Integral (I) gradually (trial-and-error); note
that small oscillations may appear around the setpoint.
7. To dampen oscillations, introduce Derivative (D) gradually (trial-and-error).
8. After reaching steady state, apply a step change in setpoint (e.g., 50% → 60%) and
observe the transient and settling behaviour.
9. If needed, fine-tune proportional band, integral time, and derivative time and
observe the step response for each change.
10. (Wrap-up) Save the report and return to the main page when finished.
PLOTS
OBSERVATONS
SET POINT 50% 60%
PB 20 21
IT 10 12
DT 0.2 0.1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1. At the 50% setpoint, the optimal tuning values were PB = 20, IT = 10, DT = 0.2,
providing a stable response with balanced proportional control and minimal derivative
action.
2. At the 60% setpoint, slightly higher values (PB = 21, IT = 12) were required, indicating
that higher setpoints demand stronger corrective control.
3. The increase in integral time (10 → 12) reflects the need for enhanced integral action
to eliminate offset and ensure steady-state accuracy.
4. The reduction in derivative time (0.2 → 0.1) suggests that less damping was needed
at the higher setpoint, as the process dynamics became smoother.
5. These findings highlight that tuning parameters shift with setpoint changes, making
it essential to balance PB, IT, and DT for effective overshoot and offset control.
6. Overall, the PID controller maintained reliable pressure control at both setpoints,
with minor adjustments required at the higher operating condition.
