CONTROL OF A NONLINEAR LEVEL PROCESS USING

DYNAMIC MATRIX CONTROLLER

XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X/XX/$XX.00 ©20XX IEEE

 M.Mirudubaashini
PG Scholar
Department of Instrumentation and Control Engineering,
PSG College of technology,
Coimbatore, India
mirudubaashinibarbie@gmail.com
Dr. Jayaprasanth D.
Assistant professor (Sr. Gr),
Department of instrumentation and control engineering,
PSG College of technology,
Coimbatore, India
djp.ice@psgtech.ac.in
Abstract— The nonlinear
level process is widely used
in many process industries
for storing the liquids for
mixing purpose in sugar
mills, as settling tank and
for water treatment plants.
Most of the chemical plants
are multivariable processes
which exhibit nonlinear
behaviour due to the
existence of interactions
between the input and
output variables. The level
control of the cylindrical
tank is difficult because of
its nonlinearity. Linear
PID (Proportional Integral
Derivative) controllers are
generally used in many
industrial control systems
because of its simple
structure and robustness,
but when it comes to the
control of nonlinear and
multivariable processes,
the controller parameters
have to be continuously
adjusted in order to deal
with up with the
nonlinearities,
uncertainties and
interaction between the
variables.
The main object of
this project is to control the
level of a nonlinear tank
process. This is achieved by
modelling a nonlinear
controller which can adapt
the nonlinear deeds of the
process by adjusting its
controlled input. To
achieve this goal, the
mathematical modelling of
a tank process is obtained.
Dynamic Matrix Control
(DMC) Controller is
designed using the
mathematical model to
control the tank system.
The performance of the
controller can be analysed
through extensive studies.
Keywords—DMC, PID etc.
I.
INTRODUCTION
The control
algorithm is quite
complicated for the
MIMO system due to
variation in process
dynamics that occurs
due to changes that
occur in the operating
point and the
characteristics of
nonlinear dynamic
coupling. Most of the
real time systems are
found to be nonlinear.
The Tank Level System
is widely used in many
process industries for
storing the liquids.
Most of the chemical
plants are multivariable
processes which exhibit
nonlinear behaviour due
to the existence of
interactions between the
input and output
variables. The level
control of the
cylindrical tank is
difficult because of its
nonlinearity.
The Model
Predictive Control is used
to find the input signal that
best corresponds to some
criterion which predicts the
system how it behaves
applying the signals.MPC
is widely used for a long
time in process industries.
MPC has established itself
in industries an important
form of advanced
multivariable control. The
use of MPC algorithm is
used from early 1970’s. The
first MPC algorithm
designed was Model
Predictive Heuristic
Control (MPHC), Rich letet
al (Rich let 1978) in 1976,
and during 1979 Cutler and
Remaker presented their
version called Dynamic
Matrix Control (DMC), the
control outputs were
computed by applying
receding horizon principle.
DMC is designed for the
control of level for the two
conical tank interacting
system and being
implemented for the same
[1]. Takagi Sugeno fuzzy
expert model based soft
fault diagnosis for two tank
interacting system from
where the mathematical
model is obtained [2].
A nonlinear
Hammerstein-Wiener
model predictive controller
based on LSSVM is built to
describe the dynamic
characteristic of a reservoir into the tanks
continuous stirred tank
reactor (CSTR) from [3].
The MPC algoritm is being
designed for the
mathematical model of the
coupled tank system, which
is a Multiple Input Multiple
Output (MIMO) system on
a flow controller valve
Dynamic Matrix Control
(DMC) of Quadraple-Tank
Process, which deals with
the Model Predictive
Control(MPC) known as
DMC applied to a non
linear multivariable
laboratory for interacting
tank systems [5-7].
II. SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION
NONLINEAR
CYLINDRICAL
TANK SYSYEM
Cylindrical tanks
are broadly used in
industries for storing the
liquids (kerosene, petrol,
water, diesel etc.,), mixing
purpose in sugar mills,
reactors for mass chemicals
separation, as settling tank
and as well as for water
treatment plants. While
most of the chemical plants
are multivariable processes
which reveal nonlinear
behaviour due to the
continuation of interactions
between input and output
variables. The control of
these processes is a exigent
task when compared to
SISO processes.
The schematic
diagram of the nonlinear
tank process set-up is
shown in Figure 1. It
consists of a cylindrical.
The pneumatic control
valves fine-tune the flow of
water pumped from the
(Fin). Rotameters are set at
the inlet the tank to
measure the inflow of the
tank. The tank is provide
with a Differential Pressure
Transmitter (DPT) to
measure the pressure of the
liquid column and
transformed into the water
level.
The discharge
flow of the tank is shown in
the dynamic model, the
inward mass flows Finare
defined as inputs, while the
measurements H(t)the
height of fluid in tank are
considered as output. The
dynamic model is derived
using the inward and
extrovert mass flows and is
described by the following
differential equation (1)
which is obtained from the
reference [2].

Fig 1 Nonlinear
Cylindrical Tank System
III. MATHEMATICAL
MODEL OF
NONLINEAR
CYLINDRICAL TANK
SYSTEM
The equation of the
Nonlinear Tank process is
given by,
(1)
(2)
Table 1 Cylindrical Tank
system parameters value
No. Description
1 Area of the tanks (A) 0.0154 m
2 Acceleration due to gravity
9.81 controller
(g)
3 Maximum permissible
height of water levels
(h max)
4 Cross section of the 0.005 m
connecting pipes (a)
5 Co-efficient of the
connecting pipes(s)
6 Nominal operating Nominal inflow rate
condition
h = 0.4 (m)
The transfer function for
tank obtained from the
above parameters is given
as,
move vector (Δuf) is
proportional to the unforced
} …(ii) error vector (E). That is, a
controller gain matrix, K,
multiplies the unforced
} …(iii) (5) error vector (the future
errors that would occur if
(i) effect of there were no control move
current & changes implemented).
future moves
Because only the current
(ii) effect of past control move is actually
(3) moves implemented, we use the
first row of the K matrix in
(iii) correction
DMC CONTROLLER equation (7) and (8).
term
DESIGN
A prediction horizon
The Model V. SIMULATION
of P steps and a control
Predictive Control is the RESULT
horizon of M steps, are
backbone of Dynamic LINEARIZATION:
written in matrix-vector
Matrix Control In this
form, using matrix-vector
controller the model which Linearization is
notation.
are used, determine the usually done for the system
behaviour of complex that is being non-linear to
dynamical systems. The obtain the characteristic
effect of nonlinearities (6) linear form of equation.
present in variables and the TAYLOR SERIES:
complexity caused by non- The most common The tank
assumption that made is the process of the system is
coherent process
degeneration. Hence the correction term is constant been linearized by Taylor
process model are used to in the future. The forced Series for the tank equation.
response and the free
predict the behaviour of the The Taylor series for the
response which for forced
dependent variables or equation (1) of the tank
outputs of the modelled responds corresponds to process is been linearized
contributions of the current
dynamic system with and the transfer function is
respect to changes in the and future control moves been obtained as shown in
process independent and for free response it equation (3) and the Taylor
corresponds to the output series for the system to be
variables as input. In this
changes that are predicted if obtained because the steady
m/ sec the transfer
function need to be there are no future control state point of operation is
specified in order. The moves.Hence the minimized
solution for this objective about .
designing is first based on
the step response which is function is given as, The equation (9) is
given in the form, a nonlinear equation and
(7) hence this needs to be
linearized before a Laplace
Transform can be used.
(4) (8)
Hence, in order to linearize
From the equation (7) and
The past control
(8) the value of the nonlinear term of
moves and the future
the equation (1),Taylor
control moves are seperated represents the first row of
series expansion is carried
by the following equation, the K matrix which is taken
from [8]. out as the following
Hence from these equations
the DMC is designed for
}…(i)
the process model. The
current and future control
 In future, the two
VI. CONCLUSION tank nonlinear interacting
Fig 4 Closed loop
Response of Tank1
AND FUTURE system can be carried out as
Set Point
Tank 1 WORK a future work using DMC
0.5 by selecting appropriate
The design of prediction horizon, control
0.4

DMC was done using horizon and the model

MATLAB and response for length. Then this work can
Height

0.3

0.2
a simple first order system be extended to the real time
was obtained with different process.
0.1
values of Prediction
REFERENCES
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
horizon (P), Control
Time(sec)
horizon (M) and Model [1] V. R. Ravi, T.
(9) response of Tank with P = Length (N). The P should Thyagarajan and G. Uma
5, N = 6 be lower than N otherwise Maheshwaran, “Dynamic
Fig 2 Closed Loop
the response reaches the Matrix Control of Two
Response of Tank with P
Conical Tank Interacting
= 5, N=25
Response of Tank1 Level System”,
The closed-loop response at
Setpoint
Tank 1 Response
International Conference
step set point h = 0.4 (m);
0.5
on Modelling
prediction horizon, P = 5; 0.4
Optimization and
control horizon, M = 1; no Computing (ICMOC-
ht(m)

weighting on inputs and

0.3
2012)., Procedia
Heig

model length, N = 25 is 0.2

Engineering Elsevier.,
shown in the Fig.2. The vol. 38, pp. 2601-2610,
response is reached at a
0.1
2012.
nominal speed. 0
[2] Pandiyan
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time(sec)
Manikandan, Mani
Geetha, “Takagi sugeno
Response of Tank1

Setpoint fuzzy expert model based

Tank 1 Response
0.5 soft fault diagnosis for two
tank interacting system “,
0.4
International journals on
Height (m)

0.3
Achieves of Control
0.2 science., vol. 24, no. 3, pp.
0.1
271-287, 2014.
[3] Man Hong and
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Shao Cheng,
Time(sec)
“Hammerstein-Weiner
Fig 5 Closed loop steady state slowly. The
Model Predictive Control
response of tank with P = same controller design was
Fig 3 Closed loop of Continuous Stired Tank
1; N = 6. carried for the Tank process
response of Tank with P = Reactor”, Electronics and
and the different values of P
50, N = 100 Signal Processing,
and N was given for the
Springer, vol. 97, pp. 235-
unit M value but with no
242, 2011.
weighting. It was observed
The closed loop response of [4] Liankui Dai and
that the P having higher
the tank process is obtained Karl Johan Astrom,
value gives a slower
using the DMC are “Dynamic Matrix Control
settling time and the
discussed in the following of a Quadruple-Tank
importance of model length
Process”, 14 World
Response of Tank1 is also observed that for
Conference of
Setpoint lower values of N it does
Tank1 Response International Federation of
0.5 not obtain the complete
Automatic Control,
dynamics of the process
0.4
,Procedia Engineering
dynamics which results in
Elsevier,Vol. 32, no. 2, pp.
Height(m)

0.3
poor performance.
6902-6907, 1999.
0.2

0.1
Fig 6 Closed loop response of tank with P = 1; N = 25
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time(sec)
 Response of Tank1

Setpoint
Tank 1 Response
0.5

0.4

Height(m)
0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time(sec)

[5] L. ThillaiRani, N.
Deepa and S. Arulselvi,
“Modelling and Intelligent
Control of Two-Tank
Interacting Level Process”,
International Journal of
Recent Technology and
Engineering. vol. 3, no.1,
pp. 277-3878, March
2014.
[6] Nayanmani Deka
and Dr. Lini Mathe”PID
Controller for two tank
liquid process using
LabVIEW”, International
Research Journal for
Science and Computing.
vol. 7, no. 5, 2017.
[7] Damrudhar and Dr.
D.K. Tanti, “Comparitive
Performance Analysis for
Two Tank Liquid Level
Control System with
Various Controllers using
Matlab”, vol. 7, no. 2,
July, 2016.
[8] B. Wayne Bequette
(3rded.), Process Control:
Modeling, Design and
Simulation, Pearson
Education Inc, USA, 2003.