1.

0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Experimental background

Liquid level control system in the tank is one of the most important aspects applied to
many plants in the process industry such as petroleum and gas industries, chemical industry,
environmental protection, water treatment, metallurgy and other industries (Setiawan, 2018).
Liquid enters the tank using a pump, and after some processing within the tank the liquid leaves
from the bottom of the tank. It’s important for this system to control the rate of liquid delivered
by the pump so that the level of liquid within the tank is able to be maintained at desired value
and be able to accept new set point. The conventional proportional- integral- derivative (PID)
is commonly utilised in controlling the liquid level (Thompson et al, 1997).

PID controllers has proven to be a perfect controller for simple and linear processes,
but when it comes to controlling of non-linear and multivariable processes, the controller
parameters have to be continuously adjusted (Bhuvaneswari et al., 2008). In process control
systems, nonlinearity is the rule rather than the exception. Most control loops such as pressure,
temperature, composition and etc. are significantly nonlinear. This may be because of
nonlinearity due to control valves, or on account of variations in process gain, time constant,
and disturbance time as discussed in (Miller and Oravetz, 2004). Therefore, the study of control
system has positive huge impact on our modern day development.

Single-loop control system only uses one pressure sensor to collect the signal of liquid
level of the lower-tank, and then the signal is transmitted to the controller after A/D conversion,
which can control the liquid flow entering the upper-tank through changing the opening of
electric magnetic valve. Finally, liquid flow will have an influence on the liquid level of the
lower-tank indirectly. Block diagram of single-loop control is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Classical form of single loop level control

 A PID controller is a control loop feedback mechanism (controller) commonly used in
industrial control systems (Astrom and Hagglund, 1995). It continuously calculates an error
value as the difference between a measured process variable and a desired set point. As a PID
controller relies only on the measured process variable, not on knowledge of the underlying
process, it is broadly applicable. By tuning the three parameters of the model, a PID controller
can deal with specific process requirements. The use of the PID algorithm does not guarantee
optimal control of the system or even its stability. Some applications may require using only
one or two terms to provide the appropriate system control. This is achieved by setting the other
parameters to zero. A PID controller will be called a PI, PD, P or I controller in the absence of
the respective control actions.

Figure 2: PID Controller Structure

The proportional influence is proportional to the generated error. The proportional

term is given by:
𝑃𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝑘𝑝 𝑒(𝑡)

The higher the error the higher the proportional control which is clearly seen in the equation.
That conclusion leads us to another one that is that: the proportional control leads the system
to a fast set-point. But it has a disadvantage, it has steady-state error, and that error can lead to
an overshoot when the system gets to the set-point. One way to avoid it is to increase the
proportional term, but that can led to an unstable system (Adian, 2009).

The integral influence is proportional to the variation of the error on time. The
integral term is given by: 𝑡
𝐼𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝑘𝑖 ∫ 𝑒(𝜏) 𝑑𝜏
0
The most important benefit is that this term eliminates the steady-state error, but it has a
disadvantage which is the fact that the stability of the system is affected to. Regarding the upper
equation we can conclude that this integral term depends on pass values of the error.

The derivative term is proportional to the rate of change of the error, as we can see on
the equation below. The derivative term is given by:
𝑑
𝐷𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 𝑘𝑑 𝑒(𝑡)
𝑑𝑡
This term makes an estimation of the future error and by that it can increase or decrease the
speed of correction, because it can work in an early way when there are detected any changes
on the error. This term is very sensitive to disturbances. If the derivative term only changes
with the rate of change of the error, if the error do not change then we don’t have derivative
influence.

1.2 Objective
 To understand the behaviour of liquid level process and plant operation.
 To understand the process flow of the liquid level process control (single loop level
control).
 To interpret the Piping & Instrument Diagram (P&ID).
 To demonstrate proportional action, proportional and integral action and proportional,
integral and derivative action on liquid level process.
 To gain fundamental concept of process control system.

1.3 Experimental scope

The main objectives for this experiment are to understand the concept of process control
system and to perform the liquid level control test in order to determine the P, I and D behaviour.
The experiment is started for single loop liquid level control using MV (%) = 0, 20, 40, 60, 80
and 100 for 30 seconds respectively in manual mode and later 0% in auto mode. Then, the
experiment is conducted for P control by inserting the value: Gain = 0.5, Integral = 0 and
Derivative = 0. After that, the experiment is repeated for PI control by inserting the value: Gain
= 0.5, Integral = 40 and Derivative = 0. The experiment is further carried out by changing the
value: Gain = 0.5, Integral = 40 and Derivative = 5. .Each after the MV, P, I or D value is
changed, the students observe the process response graph to determine the P, I and D mode
behaviour. Since flow process is self-regulated process, the response curve stabilize after some
time. After the process becomes stabilize, the graph of the response curve is printed. The
students conclude that the higher value of P, the process and control value make less oscillation
while the lower P value, the process and control value make more oscillation and the higher
value of I, the time taken for the process and control value to be stabilize is faster while the
lower I value, the time taken for the process and control value to be stabilize is slower.

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Equipment and materials

 Equipment:

Figure 3: DIDAKTIK SAPP (MPC-01-C01-VH) Liquid Level Process Control Plant

 Material: Water
2.2 Experimental procedure/ methodology

Part 1: Start-up procedure

Facility air
The
supply was PLC was
emergency
The main turned on and chosen and
stop button
power supply the flash drive the start
was released
was switched was inserted button on the
and the main
on into the home screen
switch was
available USB was pressed
turned on
port

The valves positions

were set accordingly :
101HV-001 - Open The data logging
Process History
101HV-002- 45 start icon was
View button was
degrees clicked to
pressed on the
102HV-001 - Fully open download the data
bottom menu
102HV-002(Inlet) - Close when to the drive.
tank full
102HV-003(Drain)- Close

Part 2: Understanding the Process Behaviour-Liquid Level Control (MANUAL MODE)

The valve The

positions were The manual manipulated
The process set accordingly button was value (MV)
plant was set and pumps clicked to put was set to 0%
up with power, 201-P001 was the controller for 30
compressor turned on. (101LIC-01) seconds.The
and water Then, the int manual level trending
graph button mode graph was
was clicked observed.

The steps above

were repeated
for another MV The process
The data was
setting (20- behaviour data
collected and
100%) (101 was observed
plotted
LCV 001 and recorded.
MANUAL
VALVE)
Part 3: Understanding the Process Behaviour-Liquid Level Control (AUTO MODE)

The pump was

The The auto
turned on and
manipulated button was The P
the process
value was set clicked to controller
history view
to 0%.The place the parameter was
button was
setpoint(SP) controller(101 set according
clicked to
value was set LIC-001) into to the table.
display the
to 0mmH2O auto mode.
trending graph.

Steps 4-6 were

repeated for PI and
The setpoint(SP)
PID controllers
The disturbance value of
according to the
was introduced by 300mmH2O was
parameter given.
manually closing entered and the
The graph was
valve 101HV-002 process was
plotted based on
for 10 seconds. allowed to stabilize
the data collected
for a few minutes
and the findings
were discussed.

Part 4: Shut-down Procedure

The MV was set

to 0% and the PV
was allowed to
measure
The controller 0mmH2O by The air supply
The pump 102-P-
101LIC-001 was fully closed and the
01 was switched
put to manual valve 101HV- instrument air
off
mode 002 when it was switched off
approached
0mmH2O
through sight
glass
The pump 102-P-01 was switched off

The emergency
stop button was The home button
The main power pushed and the was pressed and
was switched off panel power then the exit
supply was button.
switched off
3.0 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Data analysis and discussion
Time Observation At Control Panel At Plant
Time (s) MV (%) PV (mm𝐇𝟐 𝐎) 101LT – 001
(mm𝐇𝟐 𝐎)
9.25.38 30 0 672.43 740.27
9.26.19 30 20 672.41 844.20
9.27.04 30 40 672.20 863.00
9.27.56 30 60 672.43 873.07
9.28.40 30 80 672.53 863.10
9.30.20 30 100 672.50 863.80
Table 1: Process behaviour data for Manual Level Process Controller

P Control PI Control PID Control

Gain 0.5 0.5 0.5
Integral 00 40 40
Derivative 0 0 5
Time Started 9.33.16 9.35.05 9.36.36
Time Ended 9.34.13 9.35.50 9.37.07
Disturbance Time 9.33.40 9.35.26 9.36.46
Table 2: PID Controller Setting for Level Process Controller (Auto)

In this experiment, we are able to interpret the Piping & Instrument Diagram (P&ID) as a first
step to understand the liquid level control system. In the P&ID, we had been introducing to
new system such as bypass system to avoid overflow in the tank. 2 bypass in the control system
which are located at TK-101 (storage tank) and TK-102 (storage tank) that basically a safety
solution to avoid overflow. We conclude that we had achieve first and second objective as all
our groupmate are able to understand and can interpret P&ID for liquid level control system.

Before starting the experiment, we discuss first how the control system works by
checking the instrument and with the guidance of P&ID we able to understand which pipeline
and how the flow works from the beginning until it reaches TK-101.

In the manual control mode, the set point is fixed to 200 mmH2 O, then we observed the
time, PV at the control panel and at 101LT-001 by changing MV from 0% to 100%. While for
Auto mode, we change the value for gain, integral and derivative for P, PI and PID controller
and observed the time started, ended and disturbance time.
 Figure 4: Manual Level Process Controller Graph

In manual level process control, we started the experiment by changing the MV from
0% to 100% while observing the time and PV. Supposedly, in increasing the value of MV, the
value of PV must increase also, but in the actual experiment, we observed that our PV value
increase and decrease at the control plant.

At plant 101LT-001, the value that we observed increasing just like the hypothesis. In
figure 1, we can see that the value of MV increase until 100% while the value of PV stays
above 600 mmH2 O. From this experiment we can see that the level process control responded
to changes and are affected by any control action such as changing the MV.

SP Controller Actuator Process

PV
C A P

Sensor

From the figure, we can easily understand how the level process control plant works. We
introduce the SP, then it will send signal to controller to control the level by opening or closing
the valve (actuator). Then it will send signal to sensor (transmitter) and back to SP again.
 Figure 5: P Control for Level Process Controller

Proportional control, in engineering and process control, is a type of

linear feedback control system in which a correction is applied to the controlled variable which
is proportional to the difference between the desired value SP and the measured value PV (PID
Controller, 2006). P controller is mostly used in first order processes with single energy storage
to stabilize the unstable process. The main usage of the P controller is to decrease the steady
state error of the system (Sena Temel, 2006).

We can use this controller only when our system is tolerable to a constant steady state
error. In addition, it can be easily concluded that applying P controller decreases the rise time
(Sena Temel, 2006). For this experiment, the gain is set for 0.5 while the derivative and integral
value remains 0. The figure shows that PV getting closer to achieve SP gradually in time. If
the experiment continue PV will achieve SP eventually but it takes longer time.

Figure 6: PI Control for Level Process Controller

 PI controller is mainly used to eliminate the steady state error resulting from P
controller. However, in terms of the speed of the response and overall stability of the system,
it has a negative impact (Sena Temel, 2006). This controller is mostly used in areas where
speed of the system is not an issue. Since PI controller has no ability to predict the future errors
of the system it cannot decrease the rise time and eliminate the oscillations (Sena Temel, 2006)

For PI controller, we set the gain value for 0.5, integral equal to 40 and derivative for
0. From figure 3, we can see that PV are getting closer to SP in time. We can compare with P
controller that have big gap or slower to achieve SP. In our observation, PI controller are much
faster and better than P controller.

Figure 7: PID Control for Level Process Controller

PID controller has the optimum control dynamics including zero steady state error, fast
response (short rise time), no oscillations and higher stability. The necessity of using a
derivative gain component in addition to the PI controller is to eliminate the overshoot and the
oscillations occurring in the output response of the system (Sena Temel, 2006)

One of the main advantages of the PID controller is that it can be used with higher order
processes including more than single energy storage. In this experiment, we change the gain
value to 0.5, integral 40 and derivative to 5. We observe that PID controller are faster than P,
PI controller in achieving SP. From the figure 4, it’s so obvious that PV and SP are in stabilize
situation which means the value of PV are approaching SP.
3.2 Answer to the questions in the experiment module
1. Based on the process behaviour graph, discuss the process response of PV as MV
increases.

-In the manual experiment, we insert the value for MV from 0% to 100% and as result, the
value of PV increasing and decreasing. Supposedly, PV must also increase as MV increase.
Few recommendations had been stated to overcome this problem so that it will not repeat again

2. Identify the elements of the level control loop

Element Tag Unit

Process 102CV - 001 mmH2 O
Measurement 101LT – 001 mmH2 O
Controller 101LCV - 001 mmH2 O
Final Control Element 102P – 01 KW

3. Why does the PV remain unchanged when the MV is set to 100% for Manual Mode?

-Because it has reach the maximum input from MV. PV will start to become constant when
MV has reach it limit.

4.0 CONCLUSION
From the experiment, we can said that the objectives of this experiment have been
achieved. The aim of this experiment is to gain fundamental concept of liquid level process
control system. The experiment was conducted by using manual and automatic controller. At
the end of the experiment, we can study the behavior of P, PI and PID mode towards the process
response curve for the control system. Piping & Instrument Diagram (P&ID) are a schematic
illustration of the functional relationship of piping, instrumentation and system equipment
components used in the field of instrumentation and control or automation as shown in the
discussion. P&IDs are originally drawn up at the design stage from a combination of process
flow sheet data, the mechanical process equipment design, and the instrumentation engineering
design. During the design stage, the diagram also provides the basis for the development of
system control schemes, allowing for further safety and operational investigations.
 This experiment shows that level control system is a self-regulating process based on
the process response curve which shows that the process will stabilize after some time. For the
manual control system, the value of process variable (PV) stays above 600mm H2O. From this,
it can be seen that the liquid level process control responded to the changes and are affected by
any control action such as changing the manipulated variable (MV). In automatic P-Controller,
the PV getting closer to achieve set point (SP) gradually in time. In automatic PI Controller,
the PV getting closer to achieve SP in lesser time compare to the P-Controller while in PID-
Controller the time taken to achieve SP is even lesser. From this it can be said that the PID-
Controller is better compared to the P and PI Controller due to its response time. This PID
controller performs much the same function as a thermostat but with a more elaborate algorithm
for determining its output. It looks at the current value of the error, the integral of the error over
a recent time interval, and the current derivative of the error signal to determine not only how
much of a correction to apply, but for how long.

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
As a recommendation, to prevent physical errors (caused by experiments) from
occurring, experimenters have to focus and be patient for the readings to stabilize before
recording any data. Also, work together to record data, and not just be dependent on just a team
member. Besides that, completely turn off the power supply before loading or unloading the
module. This is because if not doing so could result in electric shock or damage to the product.
The damage also will cause many injured and death. Thus, make sure that all the electric current
turning off before all the student out of the site experiment. Other than that, in order to prevent
recording the wrong data, team members should reconfirm with each other on the results to
acquire the readings which best fit. Furthermore, to prevent conducting a slow process, those
who conduct the experiment should read the lab manual prior to conducting the experiment.
Lastly, even before conducting the experiment, each team should request assistance from
available technicians to check whether the experiment is faulty or not, to avoid unwanted
results.
6.0 REFERENCES
 Adian, O.D. (2009). “Handbook of a PI and PID Controller Tuning Rules”, 3rd edition,

Imperial College Press, London.

 Åström, K. J. and Hägglund, T. (1995). PID Controllers: Theory, Design and Tuning,

2nd edition, pp 59, Instrument Society of America, North Carolina.

 Bhuvaneswari, N.S., Uma, G. and Rangaswamy, T.R. (2008). Adaptive and optimal

control of a non-linear process using intelligent controllers. Applied Soft Computing

[journal] (9) pp.182-190.

 Miller, R. and Oravetz, J. (2004). Audel Questions and Answers for Plumbers’

Examinations. Wiley Publishing, New York.

 PID Controller. (2006). Retrieved on 14 October 2019 from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PID_controller

 Sena Temel, S. Y. (2006). DISCRETE TIME CONTROL SYSTEMS: 8-bit efficient

digital PID controller architecture with parallelism. Retrieved on 14 October 2019 from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322511910_8-

bit_efficient_digital_PID_controller_architecture_with_parallelism

 Setiawan, I.R. (2018). Characterization of Simulator for Water Level Control

in the Tank – Single Loop. International Journal of Engineering and Techniques -

Volume 4 Issue 1, Jan – Feb 2018.

 Thompson, S., Dutton, K. and Barraclough, B. (1997). The art of control engineering.

Harlow; Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley.