16

OTHER CONTROL TECHNIQUES

This chapter discusses a number of useful control techniques that are not covered in previous chapters. The topics included are: Split-range control Cross-limiting control Floating control Techniques for increasing effective valve rangeability Time proportioning control

SPLIT-RANGE CONTROL
A common application for split-range control is when a temperature control loop must at times apply heat to a process and at other times must apply cooling. This is normally accomplished by using two valves, one called the heating valve, the other the cooling valve. In the usual installation, each valve operates through one-half of the controllers output range, applying the maximum heating or cooling at the extremes of the controllers output range. At the midpoint of the range, neither heating nor cooling is applied. Figure 16-1 shows a traditional installation using pneumatic instrumentation. The 315 psi controller output goes to both valves in parallel. From 39 psi (0 50%), the cooling valve strokes from open to closed. From 915 psi (50 -100%), the heating valve strokes from closed to open. If valve-spring ranges alone are used to achieve this schedule, then the heating valve is selected to be fail-closed and the cooling valve to be fail-open. Alternatively, valve positioners can be used, rather than relying on the valve-spring ranges to achieve the schedule. Not only will this provide more accurate and precise range splitting, but it will also make the overall design of the installation more flexible. For instance, if the application requires that both valves be fail closed and also operate in split-range fashion during normal operation, then one of the positioners can be reverse-acting, as shown in Figure 16-2.

CHAPTER 16 335

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-1. Typical Split-range Control Application

Figure 16-2. Split-range Control with Positioners and Fail-closed Valves

336 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Both Figures 16-1 and 16-2 are based on the traditional method of designing split-range applications and on the use of traditional hardware. Let us rethink both of these. First, consider the way the controller output signal is split. Many control engineers have never considered anything other than a 050 and 50100 split. But suppose the strength of the heating valves control effect is much greater than that of the cooling valve. For example, suppose the maximum flow rate through each valve is the same, but the temperature differential between the heating fluid and the process is much greater than the temperature differential between the cooling fluid and the process. In this case, the process gain when the controller output is in the heating valve range is much greater than when it is in the cooling valve range. If one-size-fits-all tuning is used, then the temperature controller will have to be tuned for the worst case, that is, for the temperature range when the process gain is the highest. In the cooling range, the control loop may be too sluggish. A preferred method for scheduling the valve operation would be to shift the split point toward the cooling side. For example, let the cooling valve operate from 0% (valve open) to 33% (valve closed) and the heating valve from 33% (valve closed) to 100% (valve open). This will reduce heating range process gain by 25% and increase the cooling range process gain by 50%. Some other split point may be chosen experimentally. The objective is for the process gains to be approximately the same for both the heating and cooling regime, and for transition between the heating and cooling regimes to be transparent to the control loop behavior. In general, the split can be made in the field, using one analog output and adjustments to the valves or positioners. However, it may be very difficult, if not impossible, to shift the split point to some arbitrary value as described above. With a digital processor (DCS or PLC), however, the split can be performed in software, for instance by the use of characterizer function blocks as shown in Figure 16-3. There are significant advantages to using two analog outputs and performing the split in the software. It is much easier to adjust in software than on field equipment. Also, by not adjusting the field equipment maintenance personnel can more easily replace valves and positioners without having to readjust for the split. There are undoubtedly other configurations which will achieve the same concept shown in Figure 16-3, depending upon the type of function blocks available in a particular processor and also upon whether or not valve positioners are used. The split could even be performed in fieldbus function blocks in the valve actuators, if a fieldbus communication architecture is used. One further point: Some control engineers prefer that there be a slight overlap in the valve operation, as shown in Figure 16-4. The advantages of an overlap are that it insures that there will not be a dead band between operation of the valves and that it provides an artificial live load on the control loop when the valves are operating near the closed position. The disadvantage is the cost of the additional utilities as the price being paid for improved controllability in the transition region.

CHAPTER 16 337

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-3. Flexible Split Range Control Implemented in a Digital Processor

CROSS-LIMITING CONTROL
Cross-limiting control (often called lead-lag control) is a technique applied to large combustion units such as steam generators and process heaters. During steady operation, a nominal fuel-to-air ratio is maintained. This ratio can be manually set; more than likely, however, it will be set from a stack analyzer control system (see chapters 9 and 11). During transient con338 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-4. Split Range Control with Overlap

ditions, the objective is to avoid a fuel-rich situation, which could be a safety hazard. Thus on an increase in firing demand, the air flow is increased first (air leads). When there has been a proven increase in air, the fuel rate is increased (fuel lags) to satisfy the air-to-fuel ratio control requirements. On a decrease in firing demand, the fuel is decreased first; when there has been a proven decrease in fuel, the air flow rate is decreased. The configuration shown in Figure 16-5 will accomplish this objective. The scaling of the components in the output of the O2 controller should be such that when its output is 50%, it is requesting a 1-to-1 nominal air-to-fuel ratio. Its allowable range of request should be limited. For instance, at 0% output, the required air-to-fuel ratio could be 80% of nominal; at 100% output, the ratio could be 120% of nominal.

FLOATING CONTROL
Floating control refers to a technique whereby the set point of a process controller is varied automatically in response to changes in demand on the control loop. The usual objective is energy savings. This technique is closely related to sliding pressure control for steam boilers. We will first illustrate the concept for pressure control of a distillation column, and then cite several additional candidate applications. Our objective is not to provide complete details for implementation, but to provide a sufficient number of examples so as to provoke thought as to how this concept can be utilized, possibly in completely different applications.

Floating Pressure Control for Distillation Columns

Traditionally, distillation columns are operated at a constant pressure, perhaps by varying the rate of condensation of overhead vapors. If there is a water-cooled condenser, then there may be a considerable variation in cooling water temperature, say, between summer and winter. If the condenser and control valve are sized for worst-case conditions, then when the cooling water temperature is high, the valve will be essentially wide open. At lower cooling water temperatures, the pressure controller will maintain the valve in a partially closed position. In other
CHAPTER 16 339

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-5. Cross-limiting Control

words, during times when the cooling water temperature is less than maximum, only a portion of the condensing capacity is being utilized. For many hydrocarbon feedstocks, it is economically advantageous to operate at the lowest possible pressure. At lower pressures, there is an increase in relative volatility of the components so that the material can be separated to the same product specifications with less energy input (see Ref. 16-1). One possible strategy would be to arbitrarily decide upon a nearly wide open valve position (say, 95%), then issue instructions to the operator to gradually lower the pressure controller set point when the controller output is running less than 95%, and gradually increase the set point tends to run more than 95%. The reasons for choosing a value less than 100% are that we want to have some valve movement available for short-term pressure control, and we also want to be able to detect when there is a need to increase the set point. If this strategy were dil-

340 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

igently followed, we would be operating at all times at the lowest pressure consistent with available condensing capacity; hence, we would be operating at minimum utility usage. Rather than relying upon operator diligence, however, we can automate this strategy by employing another controller called a valve position controller. Its process variable is the output of the pressure controller; its output adjusts the set point of the pressure controller. The set point of the valve position controller is the desired long-term valve position, say 95%. The valve position controller should have integral-only control action to prevent passing proportional steps back to the pressure controller. It should also be tuned for very slow response so that, in the short term, the pressure controller reacts as if it had a constant set point. These requirements, an integral action controller and tuning for slow response, are common to all floating control applications. Figure 16-6 depicts a control loop configuration for floating pressure control.

Figure 16-6. Floating Pressure Control for a Distillation Column

Two other points should be made regarding floating pressure control for distillation. The technique will only have economic benefit if the product quality for all draw streams is maintained constant. If the composition of one stream, say the bottom product stream, is not controlled,
CHAPTER 16 341

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

then at reduced column pressure, the purity of that stream will merely increase with no savings in utilities. The other point is that if temperature measurements are used as indicators of composition, these measurements must be pressure compensated.

Floating Pressure Control for Steam Systems

If a utility steam boiler is serving a number of process users, for example, heat exchangers, reboilers and turbine-driven equipment, the steam pressure need be no higher than that required by the most demanding user. Take-off signals from all the process controller outputs can be collected and passed through a high signal selector, as shown in Figure 16-7. The output of the high selector represents the most demanding user; this becomes the process variable for a valve position controller whose output adjusts the set point of the master pressure controller. Energy conservation derives from the elimination of energy loss due to excessive throttling (see Ref. 16-1).

Figure 16-7. Floating Pressure Control for a Simple Steam System

The choice of set point for the valve position controller (VPC) must be made judiciously. Since the pressure controller set point will be adjusted rather slowly, there must be enough room above the set point of the VPC to accommodate rapid increases in load on a particular process unit. For example, if the set point for the VPC is set at 70%, then the most demanding user would have an additional 30% valve travel to accommodate short term load increases. If a few of the users are more susceptible to large load increases than the others, then the demand signal from those users can be artificially biased, thus allowing a higher set point for the valve position controller. This concept can be extended to systems with multiple headers, where low pressure headers are provided by exhaust steam from a higher pressure header, plus supplemental steam from a pressure reducing station. The output of a reducing station pressure controller, along with the
342 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

demand signal from other users is auctioneered through a high signal selector to determine the demand of the most demanding user; this becomes the PV for the VPC setting the pressure set point for the higher level header (see Figure 16-8).

Figure 16-8. Floating Pressure Control Extended to Multiple Header Steam Systems

HOT OR CHILLED WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS

If a central utility supplies heated (or chilled) water, it will be more economical if the water is supplied at a temperature no higher (or lower) than that required by the most demanding user.
CHAPTER 16 343

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

A floating temperature control concept, very similar to the floating pressure control concept described for steam systems, can be employed. The demand signals (process controller output signals) from all users of the utility is collected and auctioneered through a high selector. The output, representing the demand of the most demanding user, becomes the PV for the valve position controller, which in turn adjusts the temperature controller set point. The same considerations apply here as stated previously: The VPC should be an integral only controller, and tuned for slow response. The set point for the VPC should be chosen judiciously so as to allow for rapid increases in demand.

COOLING TOWER SYSTEMS

Liptk (Ref. 16-2, p. 1151) describes a control scheme for minimizing the sum of fan and pump operating costs. The essence of this scheme is shown, in Figure 16-9, depicts the use of both floating control and override control (see chapter 12). For this discussion, it is assumed that both the fan and pump speeds can be modulated. Fan speed is modulated by controlling the difference between ambient wet bulb temperature and cooling water supply temperature. Pump speed is normally controlled by the difference between cooling water return and supply temperatures. As subsequently described, however, the differential temperature controller can be overridden by a differential pressure controller sending supply and return cooling water pressures. For a given ambient wet bulb temperature, an increase in cooling water supply temperature would result in a decrease in fan speed, consequently a decrease in fan operating cost. However, this increase in cooling water supply temperature would cause each of the utility users to open its temperature control valve. Consequently, a selector, selecting the most demanding user, would cause the valve position controller to raise the differential pressure controller set point, which in turn would increase the pump speed to maintain the most demanding user valve position at some desired maximum (say 90% open). This increase in pump speed results in an increase in pumping cost. An optimization program calculates the minimum of the sum of fan and pump operating cost, and sets the optimum set points for both the approach temperature controller (difference between ambient wet bulb and cooling water supply temperature) and the range temperature controller (difference between return and supply temperature). In normal operation the range temperature controller sets the pump speed. If, however, the most demanding users valve position becomes excessively open, the differential pressure controller will increase pump speed, thus insuring that the demand of the users is given priority over the optimization program. Additional details, as well as alternatives, may be found in Ref. 16-2.

344 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-9. A Cooling Tower Optimization Control Scheme (Adapted from Ref. 16-2, Figure 8.10k.)

CHAPTER 16 345

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

INCREASING VALVE RANGEABILITY

The term rangeability refers to the ratio of the maximum-to-minimum Cv of a process control valve. The most common rangeability stated by manufacturers is 50. Some valves have a stated rangeability of 33, and there are special-purpose valves with stated rangeability much greater than 50. The installed characteristics of the valve, determined by other restrictions to flow in series with the valve, will cause the actual rangeability to be less than the manufacturers stated rangeability (see chapter 3). Occasionally the turndown requirements of the process require an effective valve rangeability greater than can be provided by a standard control valve. Two possible solutions to this problem include: Install a small valve and a large valve to operate in parallel Install a small valve and a large valve to operate in sequence

Small and Large Valves Operating in Parallel

Figure 16-10 depicts a valve configuration in which a small valve and a large valve are used in parallel. The small valve is used for moment-to-moment control of the process. The large valve, operated by a valve position controller, attempts to keep the small valve within its operating range by increasing (decreasing) its position whenever the small valve approaches the upper (lower) end of its range. The valve position controller is an integral-only controller with a set point of 50%. In addition to the integral-only control feature, it is recommended that the control algorithm should have a gap (see chapter 4), centered on either side of 50%, in which the effective error is zero. Reasonable limits for the gap are 20% and 80%. If the small valve position is within these limits, the large valve remains stationary; if the position of the small valve encroaches on either of these limits, then the effective error will become non-zero; the integral action of the valve position controller will cause the large valve to move gradually. In doing so, the action of the process controller will be to move the small valve back to within the limits, thus stopping the large valve at the new position until the small valve position again encroaches on a limit. The purpose of the gap is to permit the small valve to have a reasonably wide range of travel without causing a hunting movement of the large valve. If the digital processor used for controls strategy implementation does not have a standard gap action algorithm, the action can be duplicated by configuration of other function blocks. An alternative method of implementation would be to use pressure switches, set at the limits and with low differential. The pressure switches could energize solenoid valves which, operating through supply and bleed restrictions, would cause the large valve to slowly open or close. This would be an especially attractive scheme if the large valve were operated by a hydraulic cylinder, rather than an airoperated actuator.

346 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-10. Parallel Valve Operation for Increased Rangeability

Small and Large Valves Operating in Sequence

If the requirements call for equal percentage (see chapter 3) valve characteristics with wider rangeability than can be provided by a standard control valve, then two equal percentage valves, one large and the other small, can be operated in sequence. With a standard rangeability of 50, two valves together can theoretically provide a maximum rangeability of 2500. In practical applications, it is rarely necessary, nor desirable, to go to that extreme. Suppose an application requires an equal percentage valve with a rangeability that is considerably in excess of that available in a standard control valve. A large valve is chosen with a maximum Cv exceeding the maximum of the application requirement. A small valve is then chosen so that its minimum Cv (maximum Cv divided by its rangeability) is less than the minimum Cv of the application requirement. There should be a significant overlap between the minimum Cv of the larger valve and the maximum Cv of the smaller valve. For example, suppose an application requires a maximum Cv of 650 and a rangeability of 500. For the chosen family of valves, suppose that the nearest size which includes the required Cv of 650 has a maximum Cv of 808 and a rangeability of 50. The minimum Cv required by the application is 1.3. The small valve should have a minimum Cv less than 1.3, or a maximum Cv less than 1.3 x 50, or 65. The nearest listed size with a Cv less than 65 has a tabulated Cv of 56.7. Thus we have the ranges of Cvs shown in Figure 16-11.

CHAPTER 16 347

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-11. Ranges of Cvs for Application and for Valves

To determine the operating ranges for the valves, the Cvs versus valve positions can be plotted on a semi-log graph, as shown in Figure16-12. The objective is for the valves to appear to have one continuous, equal percentage operating range. To determine the extremes for the operating range for each valve, use the following equation:

CV
where: CV R

CV max R

m 1

is the actual value at any position of the valve; is the rangeability.

CV max is the maximum value (tabulated value in vendors catalog)

For this application, the required rangeability is given by:

R =

808 1.13 = 715

Hence, calculating m from the equation above gives the following: The small valve should operate over a range of 0 to 59.6%, resulting in its Cv varying from 1.12 to 56.7 The large valve should operate over a range of 40.5% to 100%, resulting in its Cv varying from 16.2 to 808.

At any value of controller output, only one of the valves should be open. As the controller output rises from 0%, the small valve should open and the large valve should remain closed until the controller output reaches to just below 59.6%. At that point switching logic should open the large valve to approximately 32.2% and close the small valve. If the switching logic were
348 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

not present, the large valve would have started to open when the controller output was 40.5%. When the controller output is falling from 100%, the small valve should be closed and the large valve stroked closed until the controller output reaches just above 40.5%. At that point, the switching logic should close the large valve and open the small valve to approximately 68%. Alternatively, the lower switching point could be raised, thus avoiding operating the large valve in the lower portion of its range, a region where its positioning resolution is likely to be poor.

Figure 16-12. Example of Operating Ranges for Sequenced Valves

If a valve characteristic other than equal percentage is required, Ref. 16-3, p. 64, recommends configuring a characterizer function block in the output signal of the controller.

TIME PROPORTIONING CONTROL

In some applications, primarily temperature control, final control is provided by an electric heater which is controlled in an on-off fashion through contactors or solid-state relays. A typi-

CHAPTER 16 349

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

cal application is that of plastic extrusion, where the extruder barrel is heated by one or more zones of electric heating elements. Rather than a simple on-off temperature controller, the controller has normal proportionalintegral-derivative functions. Its output, a 0 to 100% analog (or digital modulating) signal, is then converted to a time proportioning signal, as shown in Figure16-13. The time proportioning signal is an on-off signal with a fixed cycle time, such as 10 seconds. The on time is a fraction of this time cycle, determined by the controller outputs analog value, as shown in Figure 16-14. For instance, if the controller output is 36%, then the electric heaters would be on for 36% of the cycle time and off for 64%. The mass of the extruder barrel provides a filtering effect so that the heat delivery to the product is a relatively even 36% of maximum.

Figure 16-13. Functional Equivalent of a Time Proportioning PID Controller

In commercial time proportioning controllers, the PID controller and the analog-to-time proportioning converter may be integrated into one element, so that the analog signal is not externally accessible. Simulation results indicate that the controller can be tuned using any of the tuning techniques discussed in chapter 6. Prior to controller tuning, however, the time cycle must be set. If the time cycle is too long, the process filtering device (for instance, the extruder barrel in plastic extrusion applications) will be unable to adequately filter the signal and a ripple will be produced in the measured temperature. If the process exhibits an underdamped response to a set point or disturbance, then there should be, at a minimum, 12 to 15 time cycles per process cycle. On the other hand, there will likely be a minimum time resolution of the digital processor containing the time proportioning controller. If the time cycle is too short, the control loop will exhibit a ripple due to time resolution error. As a general guide, the time cycle should be at least 100 times as long as the minimum time resolution of the digital processor. For instance, if the cycle time of the digital processor is 100 ms, then the time cycle for time proportioning control should be 10 seconds or longer.
350 CHAPTER 16

BASIC AND ADVANCED REGULATORY CONTROL: SYSTEM DESIGN AND APPLICATION

Figure 16-14. Typical Analog Output and Its Corresponding Time Proportioning Signal

REFERENCES
16-1. 16-2. 16-3. F. G. Shinskey. Energy Conservation Through Control. Academic Press, 1978. Bela G. Liptk, ed. Instrument Engineers Handbook. Process Control. 3d ed. Chilton Book Co., 1995. F. G. Shinskey. Process Control Systems: Application, Design and Tuning. 4th ed. McGraw Hill, 1996.

CHAPTER 16 351