INTRODUCTION AND THEORY

Basically, this experiment was about to identify the important components of the level
and flow control system and to study PID level control and PID tuning. Next aim of the
experiment is to study the Level–Flow cascade control. This model uses water to simulate
liquid phase physical processes. PID controllers control the level and flow. When the system
suffers from irregular rising or dropping of inflow and a more precise control of level is required,
the single-loop PID controllers are not enough. Cascade controller must be employed to
smoothen the fluctuating inflow by using a secondary or a slave loop. The level controller
becomes the main or primary controller and its control output remotely sets (cascades) the set
point of the slave or secondary controller. There is only one control valve which is installed at
the inflow.

The PID theory can be classify to proportional, integral and derivative response. The
proportional component just be controlled on the difference between the set point and the
process variable. The proportional gain (Kc) determines the ratio of output response to the
error signal. For instance, proportional response of 50 would be formed by a proportional gain
of 5 when the error term magnitude is 10. In general, the speed of the control system response
will be increase by increasing the proportional gain. The process variable will begin to oscillate
when the proportional gain is too large. If Kc is increased further, the oscillations will become
larger and the system will become unstable and oscillate out of control. The integral
component sums the error term over time. The integral component will increase slowly
resulted by even a small error term. Unless the error is zero, the integral response will
continually increase over time, so the effect is to drive the Steady-State error to zero. Steady-
State error is the final state to differentiate between the process variable and set point. When
the process variable is increasing rapidly, the output will decrease caused by the derivative
component. The derivative response is proportional to the rate of change of the process
variable. Increasing the derivative time (Td) parameter will cause the control system to react
more strongly to changes in the error term and will increase the speed of the overall control
system response. Most practical control systems use very small derivative time (Td), because
the Derivative Response is highly sensitive to noise in the process variable signal. The
derivative response can make the control system unstable if the sensor feedback signal is
noisy or the control loop rate is too slow. (National Instruments, 19 February 2019).
RESULT

Operation of Tank, T31: Self-Regulating Test

Table 1: Figure and observations from the experiment

FIGURE OBSERVATIONS

1. The initial MV is 60%. After

changed to MV=30%, the level
increases and exceed the
setpoint of 400mm.
2. After the adjustment to MV=25%,
the level drops to the point lower
than 400mm.
Figure 1: Self-Regulating Test Response Graph 3. Then, MV is adjusted to 24% and
the PV finally reached 400mm
thus the level condition is self-
regulating process.
Open Tank Operation: PID Single Loop Level and Level-flow Cascade Control
Table 2: Figures and observations from the experiment
FIGURES
Figure 2: The first part of the response curve
Figure 3: The second part of the response curve
Figure 4: The third part of the response curve
OBSERVATIONS
1. The initial value set is SV1=400mm
and MV=50%. When SV2 is set to
1.8m3/hr, the level increased a lot.
2. When LIC31 turned to Auto mode, the
level decreased again and reached the
set point after some time.
3. A test disturbance is applied by
changing the value of MV about 20%.
The level decreases and flow increase,
and the response are quite oscillatory
before reaching back to its set point
value.
4. After the Selector is switched to
Position 2 and both control loops are
operated as cascade controller, the
level and flow increased.
5. When SV2 reached 1.8m3/hr, the SV2
is set to 1.5m3/hr. The level keeps
increasing and steady at the maximum
point, but the flow decreased a little bit
before it reached to steady state.
6. When switched to Cascade Mode, the
flow decreased drastically and become
steady at the minimum point. The level
decreased slowly until SV1=400mm.
7. When both level and flow are at steady
state, a test disturbance is applied.
 8. MV is set to 15% for the disturbance.
The flow stays steady at the minimum
point and the level increased for the
duration time of 19s.
9. After 19s, SV1=400mm. Both level and
flow keep running on steady state until
the end of the experiment.

& DISCUSSION

There were four objectives of Level Flow Plant Control (WLF922) experiment. The first
objective is to identify the important component of the level and flow control system. As
WLF922 model used water as the main raw material to simulate liquid phase physical
processes, the PID controllers plays an important role to control the level and flow of this
model. Next, the start-up procedure had been carried out properly, and its lead to an accurate
result at the end of the experiment. During the start-up procedure, tank T32 was filled with
water up until the required level and the necessary valve was open or closed in order to make
sure the desired operation can be carried out. All of these steps were carried out based on the
lab manual provided.

Besides, the level control system using PID controller was studied throughout the
experiment. There were two part of experiment for WLF922 model. The focus point for the first
part of the experiment is the open tank operation for T31 under self-regulating test. In any
industries activities, level measurement is one of the crucial processes. Open tank operation
is the simplest application for fluid level in an open tank operation. For this operation, top vent
and overflow drain valve were opened in order to make sure that the top space of T31 is at
atm. The set point is PV = ±400mm.

The changes of level can be seen in Figure 1. When the MV is adjusted to 30%, the
level increase continuously and exceed the set point 400 mm. Due to that, try and error
process was done as the MV is adjust manually to find out the suitable value to obtain the
desired set point which is ±400 mm. When the MV was adjusted to 25%, the level dropped
lower than 400 mm. The desired set point was obtained when the MV was adjusted to 24%
and thus the operation is confirmed to be a non-self-regulating process. Non self-regulating
process will be unstable if not control as it has no self-regulating characteristic in order to
reach a stable condition or desired set point.

Finally, the level flow cascade control was studied when the second part of the
experiment was carried out. The main idea of the second part of the experiment is to focus
the PID single loop level control and level-flow cascade control. PID controller has three types
of modes. Firstly, P stands for ‘proportional gain’ which means response proportional to
magnitude of error. Next, I stand for ‘integral time’ which considers on how long the error has
existed. Whereas for D, it signifies how fast the error is changing. Single-loop level control
only uses one pressure sensor to collect the single of liquid level of a lower tank. After that, it
is transmitted to the controller after any conversion, which can control the inflow of liquid into
the upper tank through some adjustment on the valves.

From Figure 2, the adjustment was made for position 1 and 2. For position 1, SV1 was
set to 400 mm at MV=50%. Then, under position 2, SV2 was adjusted to 1.8 m 3/hr. After the
adjustment was made, the flow level increased drastically. After the second trial PID values
had been adjusted, the selector was turned to position 1 for single loop PID level controller
operation. Under auto mode, the level decreased again and reached the set point after 3.52
minutes. After a disturbance applied through changing of MV for 20%, the level drastically
decreases while the flow increases. The response curve for water level undergoes oscillation
before reach a stable condition to its set point.

Figure 3 shown the process when the selector was switched to position 2 so that both
control loops operate as cascade controller. The difference between cascade controls with
single-loop control is there are additional loops in the system as vice-loops are added. For
each loop, there is an independent transducer which allows the single to be transmitted to the
controller to make some adjustment on the valves that lead to the stabilization of a liquid level
system. Both the water level and water flow increased when position 2 was used. As SV2
reached its set point, 1.8 m3/hr, SV2 then adjusted to 1.5 m3/hr.

The water level rose until the maximum limit. However, water flow showed a decrease
before its reach the stable condition. As cascade mode was turned on, both water level and
water flow decrease simultaneously. However, the water flow decreased tremendously until
the minimum point and remains stable at the minimum value. Whereas the water level
decreased slowly until SV1 = 400 mm. For figure 4, MV was adjusted to 15% when both water
level and water flow are at a steady state.

The water flow remains steady at the minimum point while the level increased for 19s.
After 19s both water level and flow level were at a stable condition until the experiment ended.

Based on the obtained result, better performance of the controller is achieved when using
cascade controller, where the fluctuation in the level was lower and lesser time was taken for
the water level to be stable (Festo, 2008). This occur due to the dynamic performances of
cascade controller by adding vice-loops that can reduces the time constant to reach a stable
condition (Zhong & Luo, 2011)
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This experiment is about Liquid Level Flow Process Control (Cascade). The objectives
of this experiment are to identify the important components of the level and flow control
system, to study PID level control and PID tuning and to study Level-Flow Cascade control.
The focus point for the first part of the experiment is the open tank operation for T31 under
self-regulating test while the main idea of the second part of the experiment is to focus the PID
single loop level control and level-flow cascade control. From Figure 1, the desired set point
which is ±400 mm was obtained when the MV was adjusted to 24%. From Figure 2, after the
adjustment was made, the flow level increased drastically. For under auto mode, the level
decreased again and reached the set point after 3.52 minutes. After a disturbance applied
through changing of MV for 20%, the level drastically decreases while the flow increases.
From Figure 3, both the water level and water flow increased when position 2 was used. As
SV2 reached its set point, 1.8 m3/hr, SV2 then adjusted to 1.5 m3/hr. As cascade mode was
turned on, both water level and water flow decrease simultaneously. However, the water flow
decreased tremendously until the minimum point and remains stable at the minimum value.
Based on the obtained result, better performance of the controller is achieved when using
cascade controller, where the fluctuation in the level was lower and lesser time was taken for
the water level to be stable (Festo, 2008). This occur due to the dynamic performances of
cascade controller by adding vice-loops that can reduces the time constant to reach a stable
condition.

There are a few recommendations to be carried out in this experiment. The students
should prepare and fully understands about the purpose of the experiment and how to conduct
the experiment flow control process beforehand. This allows the students to be able to conduct
the experiment smoothly without any problem rises such as confusion of what the next step to
be done in the experiment process. Furthermore, throughout the experiment will enable the
student to identify the equipment and its function. During the experiments process, students
should not play around and be serious in order to get the most accurate results. Students
should conduct the experiments without causing any accidents and disturbing other person.
Any wrong step will result the repeating the experiment from the beginning. This will cause the
waste of time. This also helps in eliminating the human error that could happen due to the
students misconduct the experiment flow control process.
REFERENCES

Festo. (2008). ƒ Cascade control ƒ Tuning a cascade control system, 91–102. Retrieved from
http://www1.labvolt.com/publications/Exercises/86006-00_2-4.pdf

Zhong, Y., & Luo, Y. (2011). Comparative study of single-loop control and cascade control of
third-order object. Procedia Engineering, 15, 783–787.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.08.146