MANIPAL UNIVERSITY Jaipur

Department of Biotechnology & Chemical Engineering

PROCESS DYNAMICS & CONTROL LAB
III YEAR, SEM VI

EXPERIMENT #4

SINGLE TANK SYSTEM

INSTRUCTOR-Dr. Anees Ahmed Yunus Khan

PERFORMED BY- SHASWAT GOYAL (229101002)

EXPERIMENT CARRIED ON: 6 t h February 2025
REPORT SUBMITTED ON: 13 t h February 2025
PRELAB ___________ (10)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ___________ (10)
OBJECITIVES/INTRODUCTION/SCOPE/PROCEDURE ___________ (30)
RESULTS & DISCUSSION ___________ (30)
CONCLUSION ___________ (5)
REFERENCES ___________ (5)
APPENDIX
a) Original data, sample calculations, other information ____________ (5)

GENERAL COMPLETENESS
a) Conciseness and neatness ____________ (5)

TOTAL (100) ____________

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................
2. OBJECTIVE..........................................................................................................
3. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................
4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP…………………………………………………………
5. PROCEDURE………………………………………………………………………
6. OBSERVATIONS.................................................................................................................
7. RESULTS & DISCUSSION ...............................................................................
8. CONCLUSION....................................................................................................
9. PRECAUTIONS...................................................................................................
10.REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This experiment aimed to analyze the dynamic response of a single tank system when
subjected to step and impulse changes. The system operates as a first-order process, where
liquid enters at a controlled flow rate and exits through a small opening at the bottom. The
experiment involved introducing a step change by increasing the inlet flow rate from 30 LPH
to 40 LPH and an impulse change by adding 100 mL of water to the tank. The response was
recorded and compared with theoretical predictions.

For the step change, the initial steady-state height was 39 mm, which increased to a final
steady-state height of 80 mm. The experimentally determined time constant from the graph
was 95 seconds, closely matching the theoretical value of 95.78 seconds obtained from
sample calculations. The recorded experimental data closely followed the simulated response
from Simulink, validating the accuracy of the model equation used for the tank system.

For the impulse change, the system exhibited an immediate peak in the deviation variable,
followed by an exponential decay. The initial steady-state height was 41 mm, which
increased to 44 mm after the impulse. The gradual return to steady state confirmed the first-
order dynamic nature of the system. The findings demonstrated the predictability of first-
order systems and their significance in process control applications.
OBJECTIVE:

To analyze the dynamic response of a single tank system when subjected to both step and
impulse changes.

INTRODUCTION:

This experiment is conducted to analyze the dynamic behavior of a single tank system when
subjected to both step and impulse changes. A single liquid tank functions as a first-order
system, where liquid enters the tank from a source at a defined flow rate (q) and exits through
a small opening at the bottom. The outlet flow rate (qₒ) is controlled by a valve that acts as a
resistance (R), influencing the discharge rate. The tank itself has a uniform cross-sectional
area (A), ensuring a consistent relationship between liquid level and flow rate. Understanding
the response of such a system to variations in inlet flow (step change) and sudden
disturbances (impulse change) is crucial for characterizing system dynamics and optimizing
control strategies.

A step change involves a sudden increase or decrease in the inlet flow rate, allowing us to
observe how the tank level gradually adjusts to the new steady-state condition. On the other
hand, an impulse change introduces a brief but significant disturbance, revealing how quickly
the system stabilizes back to its original state. These responses provide valuable insights into
the system’s time constant, resistance, and overall stability, which are fundamental
parameters in process control and automation.

For accurate analysis, a few key assumptions are made: the liquid density remains constant
throughout the experiment, the tank maintains a uniform cross-sectional area, and the flow
resistance follows a linear relationship. These assumptions help simplify the mathematical
modelling of the system while ensuring that the observed behavior aligns closely with
theoretical predictions. This experimental setup offers a controlled environment to study first-
order system dynamics, making it highly relevant for real-world applications in chemical,
mechanical, and industrial process control systems.

The overall transfer function for a step change;

A R
H 2 ( s )=
s (τs+1)

Taking Laplace Transform of equation;

−t
H ( t ) =A (1−e τ )

The overall transfer function for an impulse;

V ∗1
H ( s )=
( τs+ 1 )

Taking Laplace Transform of equation;

( )
−t
V τ
H (t)= e
τ
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP:

FIG 1: SINGLE TANK SYSTEM

The experimental setup consists of a single liquid tank with a controlled inlet and outlet
flow. The inlet system regulates liquid entry, allowing for step changes by suddenly altering
the flow rate. The outlet system, controlled by a valve acting as resistance (R), governs
discharge. Level sensors or graduated markings track liquid height, while a flow meter
measures flow rates. In a step change, the inlet flow is abruptly adjusted, and the response is
recorded until a new steady state is reached. For an impulse change, a brief disturbance is
introduced, and recovery time is analyzed. This setup helps study first-order system
dynamics, time constants, and process stability for control applications.

PROCEDURE:

Starting:

1. Switch on the main power supply.

2. Check and secure all pipe fittings and connections between Tank 1 and the rotameter.
3. Partially close outlet valve R1, fully open R2, and keep R3 completely closed.
4. Start the pump and adjust the flow rate to the desired level.
5. Allow the liquid level in Tank 1 to reach a steady state.

For a Step Change:

1. Once the system reaches steady state, introduce a step change by increasing the inlet
flow rate.
2. Record the water level at regular time intervals until a new steady state is achieved.
3. Note the final water level after stabilization.
4. Repeat the process for additional readings.

For an Impulse Change:

1. After achieving steady state, introduce an impulse change by adding 200 mL of

water directly into the tank.
2. Immediately record the water level.
 3. Continue recording the level at fixed time intervals until the system returns to steady
state.
4. Note the final water level after stabilization.
5. Repeat the process for additional readings.

Closing:

1. After completing all readings, turn off the pump and main power supply.
2. Drain the tank and clean the apparatus thoroughly.

APPENDIX & RESULTS:

FOR STEP CHANGE ON TANK:

Initial Flowrate: 30 lph initial steady state height(hs1): 39mm

Final Flowrate: 40 lph final steady state height(hs2): 80mm

Time (seconds) height of tank (mm) Hs (mm)

0 39 0
10 43 4.5
20 48 9
30 50 12
40 54 15
50 56 17
60 58 19
70 60 21
80 62 23
90 64 25
100 66 27
110 67 28
120 68 29.5
130 70 31
140 71 32
150 71.5 32.5
160 72 33
170 72.5 34
180 74 35
190 75 36
200 76 37
210 76 37
220 76.5 37.5
230 77 38
240 78 39
250 78 39
260 78 39
270 78.5 39.5
280 79 40
290 79 40
 300 79.5 40.5
310 80 41
320 80 41
330 80 41
340 80 41
350 80 41
360 80 41

Step change in single tank system

45
Experimental step change simulink data

40

35

30
Deviation variable

25

20

15

10

Time (seconds)
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS:

Initial Height of Tank 1 = 39mm

Final Height of Tank 1 = 80mm

Value of 63.2% of step (t = τ ¿ = 0.632 * (80-39) =25.912

At 25.912, from the graph we got the value of τ =¿95 (approx.)

From experimental data: -

Area of Tank 1 = 68.22 cm2

H =39mm

Q = 40-30 lph=10
 H 39 mm 2
R= = =0.01404 sec /mm
Q 2777.78 mm / sec
3

τ =A∗R=¿ 6822 * 0.01404= 95.78 sec

∴ τ =95.78 sec

From experimental data we got the value of time constant ( τ ) to be 95.78 seconds, but we get
the value of (τ) from graph to be 95 seconds.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ( STEP CHANGE):

 The experiment aimed to analyze the dynamic response of a single tank system
subjected to a step change in inlet flow rate.
 Initial steady-state conditions:

 Flow rate: 30 LPH

 Steady-state height (hₛ₁): 39 mm

 A step change was introduced by increasing the flow rate to 40 LPH, and the system was
observed until it reached the new steady-state height of 80 mm.

Analysis of Experimental Data

 The blue line on the graph represents experimental readings, showing a first-order
response as expected.
 The yellow line represents Simulink-generated data using the general model
equation for a tank system.
 Time constant (τ) values:
o Experimental value: 95 seconds (from the graph)
o Theoretical value: 95.78 seconds (from sample calculations)
o The close agreement validates the first-order system behavior of the tank.

Observations and Interpretation

 The response curve follows an exponential trend, with an initial rapid rise followed
by a gradual approach to the final steady state.
 This behavior confirms that the single tank system follows first-order dynamics,
where the time constant governs the rate at which the system reaches equilibrium.
 The slight difference between experimental and theoretical values can be attributed to:
o Minor fluctuations in flow rate
o Measurement errors in recording liquid levels
o External disturbances during the experiment
FOR IMPULSE CHANGE:

Initial Flowrate: 30 lph initial steady state height(hs1): 41mm

Added 100 ml water final steady state height(hs2): 44mm

Time (seconds) height of tank (mm) Hs (mm)

0 41 0
5 56 15
10 54 13
15 53.5 12.5
20 53 12
25 52.5 11.5
30 52 11
35 51.5 10.5
40 51 10
45 50.5 9.5
50 50 9
55 49.5 8.5
60 49 8
65 49 8
70 48 7
75 48 7
80 48 7
85 47.5 6.5
90 47.5 6.5
95 47 6
100 46 5
105 46 5
110 45.5 4.5
115 45.5 4.5
120 45 4
125 45 4
130 44.5 3.5
135 44 3
140 44 3
145 44 3
150 44 3
 Impulse change Impulse change

16

14

12
Deviation variable

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Time (seconds)

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ( IMPULSE CHANGE):

The objective of this experiment was to analyze the dynamic response of a single tank system
when subjected to an impulse change in inlet flow. Initially, the system was operating at a
steady-state condition with an inlet flow rate of 30 LPH and a corresponding liquid height of
41 mm. To introduce an impulse change, 100 ml of water was suddenly added to the tank,
causing a temporary disturbance in the system. The response of the tank was recorded until
the system stabilized at a final steady-state height of 44 mm.

The experimental data, represented by the blue line on the graph, shows a characteristic
impulse response. The immediate sharp peak in the deviation variable (Hₜ) corresponds to
the sudden addition of water, after which the system undergoes an exponential decay as the
excess liquid exits the tank. Eventually, the system stabilizes at the new steady-state level.
This behavior is typical of a first-order system, where the time constant governs the rate at
which the system returns to equilibrium.

Observations indicate that the impulse response follows the expected theoretical trend, with
the system naturally self-regulating and returning to a steady state after a disturbance.
However, slight deviations between theoretical and experimental values may arise due to
factors such as measurement inaccuracies, external disturbances, or uncertainties in flow
resistance affecting the outlet flow. Despite these minor discrepancies, the experiment
successfully demonstrates the impulse response of a single tank system, confirming its
first-order behavior. This understanding is crucial for process control applications, where
systems must be designed to recover quickly and efficiently after disturbances.
PRECAUTIONS:
 Ensure Proper Setup – Verify that all pipe fittings and connections are secure to prevent
leaks or unexpected disturbances in the system.
 Calibrate Measuring Instruments – Check the accuracy of flow meters, rotameters, and
level indicators before starting the experiment.
 Maintain Steady-State Conditions – Allow the system to reach a steady state before
introducing step or impulse changes to ensure accurate observations.
 Introduce Changes Gradually – When applying a step change, adjust the inlet flow
smoothly to minimize external disturbances.
 Avoid Splashes During Impulse Change – Add water carefully to prevent excessive
turbulence, which may affect the recorded data.
 Monitor Flow Control Valves – Ensure the outlet control valve remains in the correct
position to maintain system stability.

CONCLUSIONS:

The experiment successfully demonstrated the first-order dynamic response of a single tank
system under both step and impulse changes. The time constant obtained from experimental
data (95 seconds) closely matched the theoretical value (95.78 seconds), confirming the
system's predictable transient behavior. The step response showed an exponential rise to a
new steady-state level, while the impulse response exhibited a sharp peak followed by a
gradual decay.

The comparison between experimental and simulated results further reinforced the accuracy
of theoretical models used for tank dynamics. The minor deviations observed could be
attributed to measurement errors, environmental disturbances, or system imperfections.
Overall, the experiment validated key process control concepts, particularly in understanding
transient behavior and system stabilization, which are crucial for industrial applications in
fluid dynamics and automation.

REFERENCES:

1. Coughanowr, D. R., & LeBlanc, S. (2017). Process Systems Analysis and Control (3rd
ed.). McGraw-Hill.

2. Seborg, D. E., Edgar, T. F., & Mellichamp, D. A. (2016). Process Dynamics and
Control (4th ed.). Wiley.

3. Lab Manual, Process Dynamics & Control Lab.