Table of Contents

1.0 ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 2
3.0 OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................... 4
4.0 THEORY ........................................................................................................................ 5
5.0 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 9
6.0 SAMPLE CALCULATION AND RESULT .................................................................... 12
Sample Calculation for Emmerson ................................................................................... 12
Tuning Rules ........................................................................................................................ 14
Sample Calculation for Foxboro ....................................................................................... 17
Graphical method ................................................................................................................. 17
Tuning Rules ........................................................................................................................ 18
Numerical method ................................................................................................................ 20
7.0 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................... 24
8.0 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 27
9.0 RECOMMENDATION ..................................................................................................... 28
10.0 REFERENCE ................................................................................................................... 29
11.0 APENDIX .................................................................................................................. 30-38

0
1.0 ABSTRACT

Process control laboratory is to run an open and closed loop process. An open loop
is run in manual mode while closed loop is run in automatic mode. For this experiment, there
are three closed loop analysis are involved which comprises of Level Control Process (LIC 11),
Air Flow Control (FIC 21) and Liquid Flow Process (FIC 31). Using the response curve from
the loop analysis that we get from the experiment, Time delay (Td), Time constant (Tc) and
Response Rate (RR) are calculated by using Tangent Method and Reformulated Tangent
Method. After that, for calculating the optimum value, Ziegler-Nichols tuning rule formula are
used. The Proportional (P) and Integral (I) optimum value is calculated because of it the suitable
value to be calculated when it comes to flow control. Using the calculated value, open loop test
is running. For the open loop test, the processes is run in automatic mode. Three main tests
have been conducted in each of the open loop which includes tuning test, set point change test
and load disturbance test. When we increase the changing in MV value, the value of controller
gain, Kc will increase and can affect the respond of the process to become more faster and the
process become more stable. By decreasing the controller gain, Kc it also reduces the
oscillatory and make the process become more stable. The integral time, I value is decreased,
and it accelerates the process to the set point

1
2.0 INTRODUCTION

Process control is the action of controlling the process depends on the observation of results.
The parameters that may be controlled are pH, level, temperature, flow and pressure. Whenever
the plant process upsets, the monitoring tools will detect the problem and the person in charge
will control the process [1]. This is very efficient because the system will response in a quick
time and the controlling action can be done by using the computer connected to the device.

Nowadays, process control has been widely used in industry. This is because process
control technology allows manufacturers to keep their operations running within specified
limits and to set more precise limits to maximize profitability, ensure quality and prioritize
safety [2]. The most popular industry that uses process controls are BioPharm, food and diary,
and even oil and gas.

In order to run the automation and control, the right hardware and software is needed.
All the time, the process control system will monitor and measure the required parameters,
make decisions that maintain the overall quality, reduce the amount of rework and reject non-
conforming products before it moves to the next step in the process.

This can be achieved with PC based or distributed I/O systems and suitable software
such as a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) package running
Modbus or Open Process Control (OPC) protocols on reliable communication backbones such
as redundant Ethernet [3]. The figure below shows the equipment used for process control.

2
 Figure 2.1 Hardware for Process Control

According to Abdul Aziz, SCADA is a control system configuration suitable for

medium scale industry which used computer to monitor the process variable. But, the process
and set point can also be controlled and changed manually through the valves. Distributed
control system (DCS) is unlikely the same as SCADA as they can run the processes when
computer breakdown as DCS system is the same as the computer system [4].

3
3.0 OBJECTIVE

1. To gain fundamental concept of the Process Control system.

2. To study the open and closed loop for flow control. We conduct the experiment by
using manual control and automatic control.
3. To conduct the experiment on Flow Control System for Close Loop Proportional Flow
Control and Close Loop Proportional plus Integral Flow Control.
4. To study the behavior of the P and I mode towards the process response curve for the
flow control system.

4
4.0 THEORY

PID controllers are a method to stabilizing processes at any set point by utilizing a
mathematical function in the form of the control algorithm [1]. This process stability of a PID
control loop is depending on proportional (P), integral I) and derivative (D) constants used [5].
An optimum proportional (P), integral (I) and derivative (D) values can be determine by using
several techniques performed on an open loop test. Open loop test is done with some steps that
are, by stabilizing the process in manual mode. Then, making step change (ΔMV) of 5 to 20%
to the controller’s output and record the initial as well as the final MV value. Finally, response
of the process variable is recorded until the process reaches a new steady state level. An open
loop test is self-regulating process or non-self-regulating process.

In open loop process identification, there are several easy techniques that can be
approached. There are three method can be used such as tangent method, reformulated tangent
method and numerical method. Using all these three methods we can find the time constant
(Tc), dead time (Td) and the response rate (RR). After that, all his information then is used in
the tuning rules, such as Zieglar-Nichols in order to estimate the optimum P, I and D
for the controller.

In the tangent method, an optimum PB, I and D is found at the maximum slope. The
process dead time (Td) and the response rate (RR) are analyzed by drawing a tangent line to
the steepest point of the response curve. By the definition, the process dead time (Td) is a
period of time between starting point of step input and the intersection of old steady state
baseline and tangent line [4]. Figure 4.1 shows the step change made (ΔMV), the drawn
tangent line and the estimated process dead time (Td).

5
 Figure 4.1

Based on Figure 4.1 the process response rate (RR) can be calculated using this formula:

ΔPV/Δt 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑛 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒

RR = = - - - - - (1)
∆𝑀𝑉 ∆𝑀𝑉

Where,
RR = response rate, 1/time
Δ𝑃𝑉 = change in measurement, %
Δ𝑡 = change in time, time
Δ𝑀𝑉 = change in controllers’ output, %

Td and RR are incorporated in the tuning rule for the optimum PID calculation [5]. In
the reformulated tangent method, the open loop response curve is analyzed and viewed in
different perspective. This method is based on tangent method but utilized trigonometry to
estimate the gradient [4]. Figure 4.2 shows the same response curve as in Figure 4.1 but is
being analyzed in different perspective.

6
 Figure 4.2

Based on the Figure 4.2, the process response rate (RR) of equation (1) is then reformulated to
be this equation,

∆𝑃𝑉/∆𝑡 tan 𝜃 𝑎
RR = = - - - - - (2)
∆𝑀𝑉 ∆𝑀𝑉 𝑏

Where,

RR = response rate, 1/time

tan 𝜃 = angle between tangent line and inertial line
a = scaling factor for y-axis, % / length
b = scaling factor for x-axis, time / length
Δ𝑀𝑉 = change in controllers’ output, %

After that the formula for dead time and time constant are respectively;

Td (time) = Td (length) × b - - - - - (3)

Tc (time) = Tc (length) × b - - - - - (4)

7
When the data is collected and recorded numerically, the response rate, dead time and time
constants can be calculated by using these formula:

Response rate;

𝑃𝑉1 −𝑃𝑉−1
𝑅𝑅 = -------------------- (5)
2∆ℎ∆𝑀𝑉

Dead time,

𝑃𝑉 −𝑃𝑉
𝑇𝑑 = 𝑡1 − 2∆ℎ [𝑃𝑉 1−𝑃𝑉 𝑖 ] -------- (6)
1 −1

Time constant,

𝑃𝑉 −𝑃𝑉
𝑇𝐶 = 2∆ℎ [𝑃𝑉 𝑓−𝑃𝑉 𝑖 ] -------------- (7)
1 −1

Where ∆h = step size

For when there is tuning rules applied, the calculated optimum P, I and D values shall optimally
control the process towards the desired set point. The tuning rules used is by Ziegler-Nichols

Table 1 – Tuning Rules by Ziegler-Nichols:

Settling criteria – QAD
Performance test – Set point & disturbance in load variable

Mode P I D
P 100 RR Td
PI 111.1 RR Td 3.33 Td
PID 83.3 RR Td 2 Td 0.5 Td

8
5.0 METHODOLOGY

Performing open loop test (Self-regulating process)

1. The process was stabilised either in manual or automatic mode.

2. If the controller is in automatic mode and the process has stabilised, the controller was
switched into manual mode.
3. The initial value of manipulated variable (MVi) and the initial value of process variable
(PVi) was recorded.
4. A step change between 3 to 20% was make to the manipulated variable (MV).
5. Once the process was stabilised at a new steady state, the final MVf and PVf was
recorded.

Performing open loop test (Non self-regulating process)

1. The process was stabilised either in manual or automatic mode.

2. If the controller in automatic mode and the process has stabilised, the controller was
switched into the manual mode.
3. The initial value of manipulated variable (MVi) and the initial value of process variable
(PVi) was recorded.
4. A step change between 3 to 20% was make to the manipulated variable (MV).
5. Once the process has increased around 7 to 10% of the process span, the MV was set
to the initial MV or the controller was set to the automatic mode and let the process to
stabilise to the original operating conditions.
6. The entire event was printed.

When making a changes in the manipulated variable, observe the change in the process
response by starting with the smaller percentage (7 to 10%). If the process does not change or
the change in process (∇𝑃𝑉) too small, the percentages of change in manipulated variable was
increased slightly.

9
 There are some precautionary action on non-self-regulating process was made. When the
manipulated variable was changed, the process will keep increasing / decreasing until the
maximum / minimum process limit. The manipulated variable was set to the initial value to
avoid the process from reach the process limit.

Performing test (Tuning rules)

Change in set point. (Set point test)

1. The controller was set to automatic mode.

2. A change in set point was make to less than 10% of the process span.
3. If the process become oscillatory or unstable, the controller was set to manual mode.
The MV was set to the last stable value for self-regulating process. For non-self-
regulating process, the set point was changed back to SPi and the last stable values of
P, I and D was inserted.

Change in process loading of load variable (Disturbance test)

1. The controller was set to manual mode.

2. A change to MV was made about 5 to 10%.
3. Then wait for 3 s.
4. After 3 s, the controller was set to the automatic mode.
5. If the process becomes oscillatory or unstable, the controller was set back to manual
mode and the MV was set to the last stable value.

Performing close loop test (EMERSON)

1. The controller was set to automatic mode.

2. The PI controller setting (Kc and I) value was inserted at the Gain and Reset section.
3. If the response oscillates, do the fine tuning to achieve the stable condition by :
i) The Kc value was reduced because an excessively large proportional gain will lead
to process instability and oscillates.
ii) The I value was increased because an excessively small integral term can cause the
present value to overshoot the setpoint value.
4. The optimum PI controller setting was recorded.

10
Performing closed loop test (FOXBORO)

1. The controller was set to automatic mode.

2. The PI controller setting (PB and I) value was inserted at the PBand and INT section.
3. If the response oscillates, do the fine tuning to achieve the stable condition by :
i) The Kc value was reduced because an excessively large proportional gain will lead
to process instability and oscillates.
ii) The I value was increased because an excessively small integral term can cause the
present value to overshoot the set point value.
4. The optimum PI controller setting was recorded.

11
6.0 SAMPLE CALCULATION AND RESULT
Sample Calculation for Emmerson

LIC11

𝑀𝑉𝑖 = 20% , 𝑀𝑉𝑓 = 30% ,

∆𝑀𝑉 = 𝑀𝑉𝑓 − 𝑀𝑉𝑖

= 30% − 20%

= 10%

Process span = 6𝑚3 /ℎ

10𝑚3 /ℎ
𝑎 = × 100% ÷ 13𝑚𝑚
6𝑚3 /ℎ

= 5.917%/𝑚𝑚

1𝑠
𝑏 = 45𝑚𝑚

= 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

∆𝑥 = 80 𝑚𝑚

∆𝑦 = 19 𝑚𝑚

𝜃 = 14°

Tangent Method

𝑇𝑑 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 6 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑑 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 6 𝑚𝑚 × 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 0.132 𝑠

𝑇𝑐 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 80 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑐 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 80 𝑚𝑚 × 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 1.76 𝑠

12
 ∆𝑦/∆𝑥 𝑎
𝑅𝑅 = ∆𝑀𝑉 𝑏

(19 𝑚𝑚/80 𝑚𝑚 ) 5.917%/𝑚𝑚

= 10% 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 6.39 𝑠 −1

Reformulated Tangent Method

𝑇𝑑 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 6 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑑 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 6 𝑚𝑚 × 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 0.132 𝑠

𝑇𝑐 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 80 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑐 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 80 𝑚𝑚 × 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 1.76 𝑠

𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜃 𝑎
𝑅𝑅 = ∆𝑀𝑉 𝑏

𝑡𝑎𝑛(14°) 5.917%/𝑚𝑚
= 10% 0.022 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 6.71 𝑠 −1

13
Tuning Rules
Ziegler-Nichols
Level tuning PI
i) Tangent Method
𝑇𝑑 = 0.132 𝑠 , 𝑅𝑅 = 6.39 𝑠 −1
𝑃𝐵 = 111.1 𝑅𝑅 𝑇𝑑
= 111.1 (6.39 𝑠 −1 )(0.132 𝑠)

= 93.71 %

𝐼 = 3.33 𝑇𝑑

= 3.33(0.132 𝑠)

= 0.44 𝑠

100
𝐾𝑐 = 𝑃𝐵

100
= 93.71

= 1.07

ii) Reformulated Tangent Method

𝑇𝑑 = 0.132 𝑠 , 𝑅𝑅 = 6.71 𝑠 −1
𝑃𝐵 = 111.1 𝑅𝑅 𝑇𝑑
= 111.1 (6.71 𝑠 −1 )(0.132 𝑠)

= 98.40%

𝐼 = 3.33 𝑇𝑑

= 3.33(0.132 𝑠)

= 0.44 𝑠

100
𝐾𝑐 = 𝑃𝐵

100
= 98.4

= 1.02

14
RESULT EMMERSON

Control Loop Method Parameters Value

Respond Rate, RR (𝑠 −1 ) 6.39
Tangent method Deadtime, 𝑇𝑑 (𝑠) 0.132
Level Control Time Constant, 𝑇𝑐 (𝑠) 1.76
(LIC 11) Respond Rate, RR (𝑠 −1 ) 6.71
Reformulated
Deadtime, 𝑇𝑑 (𝑠) 0.132
method
Time Constant, 𝑇𝑐 (𝑠) 1.76
Respond Rate, RR (𝑠 −1 ) 19.99
Tangent method Deadtime, 𝑇𝑑 (𝑠) 0.02
Flow Control Time Constant, 𝑇𝑐 (𝑠) 0.5
(FIC 21) Respond Rate, RR (𝑠 −1 ) 26.64
Reformulated
Deadtime, 𝑇𝑑 (𝑠) 0.02
method
Time Constant, 𝑇𝑐 (𝑠) 0.5

15
 Control
Method Parameters Value
Loop
Proportional Band, PB (%)
93.71
Tangent method
Control Gain, 𝐾𝑐 1.07
Level
Integral Time, I (s) 0.44
Control
Proportional Band, PB (%)
(LIC 11) 98.40
Reformulated
method Control Gain, 𝐾𝑐 1.02
Integral Time, I (s) 0.44
Proportional Band, PB (%)
44.418
Tangent method
Control Gain, 𝐾𝑐 2.25
Flow Control Integral Time, I (s) 0.067≈ 0.1
(FIC 21) Proportional Band, PB (%)
59.19
Reformulated
method Control Gain, 𝐾𝑐 1.69
Integral Time, I (s) 0.067

Tuning Kc and I

Control Parameters Value Tuning New Tuning New Tuning New

Loop times value times value times value
Control
Level 1.07 ÷4 0.2675 ÷4 0.06688
Gain, 𝐾𝑐
Control
Integral
(LIC 11) 0.44 x4 1.76 x2 3.52
Time, I (s)
Control
Flow 2.25 ÷4 0.5625 ÷4 0.1406 - -
Gain, 𝐾𝑐
Control
Integral 0.067
(FIC 21) x4 0.4 x2 0.8 x2 1.6
Time, I (s) ≈ 0.1

16
Sample Calculation for Foxboro

Time (s) PV (𝒎𝟑 /𝒉) PV (%)

0 0.719707 23.9902
1 0.719707 23.9902
2 0.833789 27.7930
3 0.983789 32.7930
4 1.0609 35.3633
5 1.0987 36.6233
6 1.1176 37.2533
7 1.1279 37.5967
8 1.1279 37.5967
9 1.1279 37.5967
10 1.1379 37.9300
11 1.1379 37.9300
Table 6.1 data collected

Graphical method

Tangent Method

FIC 31

𝑀𝑉𝑖 = 35% , 𝑀𝑉𝑓 = 45% ,

∆𝑀𝑉 = 𝑀𝑉𝑓 − 𝑀𝑉𝑖

= 45% − 35%

= 10%

Process span = 3𝑚3 /ℎ

(0.8−0.6)𝑚3 /ℎ
𝑎 = × 100% ÷ 11𝑚𝑚
3𝑚3 /ℎ

= 0.6061%/𝑚𝑚

2𝑠
𝑏 = 19 𝑚𝑚

= 0.1053𝑠/𝑚𝑚

∆𝑥 = 25 𝑚𝑚

∆𝑦 = 22 𝑚𝑚

17
𝑇𝑑 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 10 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑑 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 10 𝑚𝑚 × 0.1053 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 1.05 𝑠

𝑇𝑐 (𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ) = 25 𝑚𝑚

𝑇𝑐 (𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒) = 25 𝑚𝑚 × 0.1053𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 2.63𝑠

∆𝑦/∆𝑥 𝑎
𝑅𝑅 = ∆𝑀𝑉 𝑏

(22 𝑚𝑚/ 25 𝑚𝑚 ) 0.6061 %/𝑚𝑚

= 10 % 0.1053 𝑠/𝑚𝑚

= 0.5065𝑠 −1

Tuning Rules
Ziegler-Nichols
Level tuning PI
𝑇𝑑 = 1.05 𝑠 , 𝑅𝑅 = 0.5065 𝑠 −1

𝑃𝐵 = 111.1 𝑅𝑅 𝑇𝑑

= 111.1 (0.5065 𝑠 −1 )(1.05 𝑠)

= 56.27 %

𝐼 = 3.33 𝑇𝑑

= 3.33(1.05 𝑠)

= 3.5𝑠

100
𝐾𝑐 = 𝑃𝐵

100
= 0.5065

= 197.43

18
 PV (%) vs. Time (s)
40

35

30

25
PV (%)

20

15

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time (s)

19
Numerical method

𝑃𝑉𝑖 = 23.9902% , 𝑃𝑉𝑓 = 37.9300%

∆ℎ = 1

∆𝑀𝑉 = 10

PV = 0.719707 𝑚3 /ℎ

Process span = 3𝑚3 /ℎ

0.719707 𝑚3 /ℎ
𝑃𝑉 = × 100%
3𝑚3 /ℎ

= 23.9902%
𝑃𝑉1 −𝑃𝑉−1
𝑅𝑅 = 2 ∆ℎ ∆𝑀𝑉

27.7930−23.9902
= 2∗1∗10

= 0.1901

𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.4401 𝑠 −1

𝑡1 = 3

𝑃𝑉1 = 27.7930 𝑚3 /ℎ , 𝑃𝑉−1 = 23.9902 𝑚3 /ℎ

𝑃𝑉 −𝑃𝑉
𝑇𝑑 = 𝑡1 − 2∆ℎ (𝑃𝑉 1−𝑃𝑉 𝑖 )
1 −1

27.7930 −23.9902
= 3 − (2 × 1) ( 27.7930−23.9902 )

= 0.9999 s
𝑃𝑉 −𝑃𝑉
𝑇𝑐 = 2∆ℎ (𝑃𝑉 𝑓−𝑃𝑉 𝑖 )
1 −1

37.93 −23.9902
= (2 × 1) (27.7930−23.9902)

= 3.1672 s

20
𝑃𝐵 = 111.1 𝑅𝑅 𝑇𝑑

= 111.1 (0.4401 𝑠 −1 )(0.9999 s)

= 171.2177%

𝐼 = 3.33 𝑇𝑑

= 3.33(0.9999 s)

= 11.6598𝑠

100
𝐾𝑐 = 𝑃𝐵

100
= 171.2177

= 0.5841

21
RESULT FOXBORO

Numerical method

FIC 31

Time (s) Tangent Ziegler-Nichols

PV (𝒎𝟑 / Method
PV (%) RR (1/s) 𝑻𝒅
𝒉) 𝑻𝒄 PB (%) I (s) 𝑲𝒄
15:26:24 0 0.719707 23.9902 -
15:26:25 1 0.719707 23.9902 0.1901
15:26:26 2 0.833789 27.7930 0.4401 0.9999 3.1672 171.2177 11.6598 0.5841
15:26:27 3 0.983789 32.7930 0.3785
15:26:28 4 1.0609 35.3633 0.1915
15:26:29 5 1.0987 36.6233 0.0945
15:26:30 6 1.1176 37.2533 0.0487
15:26:31 7 1.1279 37.5967 0.0172
15:26:32 8 1.1279 37.5967 0
15:26:33 9 1.1279 37.5967 0.0167
15:26:34 10 1.1379 37.9300 0.0167
15:26:35 11 1.1379 37.9300 -

22
Tangent Method

Control Loop Parameters Value

Respond Rate, RR (𝑠 −1 ) 0.5065

Flow Control
Deadtime, 𝑇𝑑 (𝑠) 1.05
(FIC 31)
Time Constant, 𝑇𝑐 (𝑠) 2.63

Tuning PB and I

Tuning New Value

Control Loop Parameters Value
times
Proportional Band, 56.27 x2 95.1
Flow Control
PB (%)
(FIC 31)
Integral Time, I (s) 0.048 x4 0.192

23
7.0 DISCUSSION
In this experiment, we both did perform open loop test and close loop test. In an open
loop test, the outcome that will be analysed are response rate (RR), dead time (Td) and time
constant (Tc). These three parameters are the essence to the optimum controller setting. The
method of data extraction depends on the open loop process response whether it is plotted on
a paper or recorded numerically. In graphical analysis, there are two methods which are;
Tangent Method and Reformulated Tangent Method.

Figure 1

Open loop process does not possess any feedback loop mechanism. It consists of only
the process together with the two inputs and one output. Input u is for manual manipulation
that is needed for modelling exercise. In contrast to an open loop process, closed loop process,
it has a feedback loop mechanism that consists of measuring device, controller, and final
control element (Process Control and Instrumentation, 2013). A feedback control system is a
control system that tends to maintain a relationship of one system variable to another by
comparing functions of these variables and using the difference as a means of control
(Introduction to Control Systems).

In the first part, the objective of this experiment is basically to determine the values of
response rate (RR), time delay (Td) and time constant (Tc) from the process curve by using
Tangent Method. Open and closed loop test were conducted for FIC21, LIC11 and FIC31.
Upon after that, Ziegler-Nichols tuning rules was chosen and calculated using the parameters
of RR and Td calculated before. From the experiment, automatic controller that only use
Proportional and Integral (PI) mode for flow of water was applied.

24
 The values of P, I and Kc after using the tuning rules were used for closed loop. The
values were set up and the process were run in automatic mode. Those three values were
inserted in the control system in order to observe the result or the process curve. The effect of
proportional of P+I is by increasing the value of P and the controller action becomes slower,
which in turn slows down the process response. For LIC11, the value of RR, Td and Tc were
6.39 s-1, 0.132 s and 1.76 s respectively by using Tangent Method under graphical analysis.
The value of RR would be 6.71 s-1 if Reformulated Tangent Method was used.

In case for the value of P, I and Kc, under the tangent method, the values would be
93.71 %, 0.44 s and 1.07 respectively. On the other hand, under the reformulated tangent
method, the values of P, I and Kc were 98.4 %, 0.44 s and 1.02 respectively. All values obtained
after the substitution in the formula for PI mode. For FIC21, the values of RR, Td and Tc by
using the Tangent Method were 19.99 s-1, 0.02 s and 0.5 s respectively. Under the Reformulated
Tangent Method, the values were 26.64 s-1, 0.02 s and 0.5 s respectively. For the case of tuning
rules, values of P, I and Kc under the Tangent Method would be 44.418 %, 0.067 s and 2.25
respectively. Apart from that, under Reformulated Tangent Method, the values were 59.19 %,
0.067 s and 1.69 respectively. For FIC31 using Foxboro, the value of RR, Td and Tc were
0.5065 s-1, 1.05 s and 2.63 s respectively. The value of PB and I were 56.27 % and 0.048 s.

For LIC11, for the tuning of Kc and I, Kc value (1.07) were divided by 4 because there
was an oscillation in the process curve. Then, the new value was divided again as there was
still an oscillation resulting the latest value of Kc was 0.06688. As there was no more
oscillation, but yet the process was too fast, so the value of I need to be multiple by 4. From
0.44 s became 1.76 s and multiple by 2 became 3.52 s. After tuning rules, there are set point
test and disturbance test. In the set point test, the system was set in automatic mode and the
value of the set point was added with 10% of the process span. After inserting the new set point,
wait for 3 seconds to observe the process curve. If there is no oscillation and the process was
stable, then can proceed to disturbance test. If the process was not stable yet and there still
experiencing oscillation, repeat the test by following the procedure that have been given.

For FIC21, the value of Kc was divided by 4 as there was oscillation there resulting in
the new value of Kc became 0.5625 and was divided again, resulting in the last value of Kc
was 0.1406. The same goes to LIC11, the process was already stabilized but the response was
too fast so the value of I need to be multiple by 4. From 0.067 ≈ 0.1 became 0.4 then was
multiple again by 2 for two times as the response was not too fast anymore resulting in the

25
latest value of I was 1.6 s. for the set point test, the new value of the set point after being added
with 10% of the process span which was 6 m3/hr was 2.9 m3/hr. The process was waited to
stabilized. If there is no oscillation, then it stable. In disturbance test, the system was changed
to manual mode. The value of manipulative variable, MV was added with 10% becoming
64.6%. After inserting the value of the new MV, we changed back to automatic mode. And the
process was waited. In this experiment, there is no oscillation so this process can control any
disturbance afterward.

Lastly, for FIC31, the value of PB was multiplied by 2 becoming 95.1 % as there was
a little oscillation occurred in the process curve upon reaching the set point. After that, the
value of I was multiplied by 4 from 0.048 s became 0192 s as the process was too fast.

26
8.0 CONCLUSION

The outcome for this process response was to analyse the response rate (RR), dead time
(Td) and time constant (Tc) and to determine the effect of the tuning by performed set point
test and disturbance load test using Tuning rules by Ziegler-Nichols. For open loop process
response, the value of response rate (RR), dead time (Td) and time constant (Tc) was determine
by Tangent Method through graphical and numerical analysis. The value of RR, Td and Tc was
then substituted into the Tuning rules by Ziegler-Nichols for used in the close loop process
response to obtain the optimum control value of the process.

For close loop process response, the values of Kc and I was inserted into the gain and
reset section in order to run the process. If the process response oscillates or in not stable
condition, the Kc value was reduced by divided to 4 and I was multiplied with 4 also. After
that, the process will become stable and near to the set point. From this two open and close
loop test, the effect of proportional and integral of PI controller settings will be determine. The
higher the value of P, the MV will action in slower process response. For this experiment, the
graph for the close and open loop test shown the fast response neither the slow response. The
effect of integral also observed that, the decrease the value of I makes the results in faster
response. Basically, the relationship was observed by using the controller algorithm itself.

27
9.0 RECOMMENDATION
There are a few recommendation or precaution that can be put into consideration upon and
during running this experiment basically. Below is a list of recommendations:

1. The Proportional and Integral instrument should be installed at the right and correct
location or place. If there is anything or problem rises up suddenly, there will be an
instant detection upon that. Thus, any improvement could be made and any alteration
can be taken into consideration and discussion before any upcoming bad situations that
might be happen afterward. If the instrument was not installed correctly, the quality of
the production of product will not achieve the target of production.
2. The control of the system shall be make sure to work accordingly to the procedure or
the flow of the process. This is important for the smooth and good streamline of
production in process.
3. Last but not least, in order to ensure the smooth production line of the process, the flow
of the stream in the system must always be keep an eye upon. However, the process can
be controlled manually by operating the process in open loop process.

28
10.0 REFERENCE

1. Process Control (n.d). Retrieved from

https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section1/pmc13.htm
2. 5 Things You Need to Know about the Process Control Industry (2017). Retrieved
from https://www.aci-controls.com/blog/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-
process-control-industry/
3. Process Control (n.d). Retrieved from https://www.amplicon.com/Process-
Control/motion-control.cfm
4. Abdul Aziz Ishak (2011), Process Control Practices note.
5. Abdul Aziz Ishak & Muhammed Azlan Hussain, (2000). “Reformulation of the
tangent method for PID controller tuning”. Process Control Engineering Online, May
2013, http://aabi.tripod.com

6. Introduction to Control Systems. (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.ent.mrt.ac.lk/~rohan/teaching/EN5001/Reading/DORFCH1.pdf

7. Process Control and Instrumentation. (13 June, 2013). Retrieved from NPTEL:
https://nptel.ac.in/courses/103103037/17

29
11.0 APENDIX

30