Editor's Choice


Case History 154: What happens to the process if the valve jumps?

May 2017 Editor's Choice System Integration & Control Systems Design

I recently wrote a Case History about control problems in a minerals extraction plant in Portugal, which was experiencing great difficulty with the control on their flotation banks. I have also written quite a few other articles in the series about control problems on this type of plant.

In some of those articles I described the importance of the individual level control in each of the cells of a bank, and how difficult it is for feedback controls to deal with changes of flow through the system. I also mentioned the necessity of trying to keep as constant a flow as possible through the bank, and that if there were changes, they should be as slow as possible to allow all the downstream level controls time to deal with them, as the dynamics of these particular level loops only allow the controllers to be tuned really slowly. Sudden changes can cause huge upsets in the levels downstream, and can easily result in permanent instability with huge cycles getting increasingly larger down the bank.

Consider the problem

Figure 1 is a basic depiction of a small flotation bank with only four cells. In real life, the bank can contain many more cells. The level is measured in each cell and the outlet valve of the cell is used to try and keep the level constant at setpoint. (The level and other controls have not been shown in the diagram.)

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

One of the problems encountered in a float bank in the Portuguese plant was that every now and then the levels below one of the cells near the top of the bank would start cycling badly. The operators would then have to put the controls into manual and try and restore the level to stability and get it back to setpoint. Getting levels under control in manual can be very difficult for operators, and the plant was losing a lot in productivity and recovery due to this problem.

What the tests showed

Tests were performed on the level loop in the cell immediately upstream of the ones that were going unstable. The initial closed loop test using the existing tuning parameters showed the control seemed to be working quite well, although the tuning was very slow.

An open loop test was then performed. Part of this is shown in Figure 2. This is a typical type of open loop test that one performs on integrating processes like levels. You get the process into balance, put the controller into manual, and make steps changes on the output of the controller to get the process into ramps, either filling or emptying the vessel. This is used for problem analysis, and also to obtain the process dynamics to be able to do the tuning.

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Unfortunately, identifying problems on integrating processes using this test is very limited, far more so than the equivalent tests on self regulating processes such as flows, where the test provides you with virtually all the information you need to find out what is wrong.

In this case the test looks quite good. It looks like the valve is doing what is required of it, i.e. responding to the signal from the controller and moving quickly to the correct place. However, one thing that should always be remembered when doing these tests is that one is making relatively large changes in controller output, and this comes into the positioner/valve combination as a big and fast step change, which allows the valve to get moving quickly and it hides possible small problems such as sticking that may occur when small and maybe slow changes are being sent from the controller’s output. Thus the open loop test does not always display problems that can affect the control.

The final closed loop test was then done using new tuning parameters determined from the open loop test. In this case the new tuning was approximately three times faster than the original. They were not the fastest available, but one must always make a compromise between speed, effects on the process and also downstream processes, and stability. This test is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

At the start of the test a small 5% setpoint step change was made downwards to lower the level. The response is quite good. Note the typical output recording from the controller tuned with P and I, and how the output comes back to the balance point.

The problem becomes evident

Once the level was stable at the new setpoint, this was moved up 5% to the original level. In this case nothing happened to the level immediately and it just stayed at the same value, and the integral action in the controller started moving the output even further down in an effort to get the level moving. Now what had happened is that the valve was sticking, and remained where it was for about 45 seconds from the time the setpoint change was made. By the time the valve started moving the controller output was at zero percent. Once the valve got through the sticking and could start moving it jumped immediately from where it was at about 38%, to virtually fully closed. This is a huge jump and caused an immediate disturbance in the output flow which of course is the input flow into the next cell downstream and this would have caused big and fast changes to its level. This in turn would result in a violent response by that cell’s controller, which in turn would cause surges in its output, and so on down the bank.

This explains why they were having this problem on the bank. It is interesting to see how just a small amount of sticking in a valve, especially on an intermittent basis can cause havoc on a control system.

Very few people realise how important it is for control valves to operate properly, and how many problems can result if they do not. Many plants, particularly in the mining industry, skimp on costs, and try and get away with inferior equipment. They always think any control problem can be solved by tuning.

Michael Brown is a specialist in control loop optimisation with many years of experience in process control instrumentation. His main activities are consulting, and teaching practical control loop analysis and optimisation. He gives training courses which can be held in clients’ plants, where students can have the added benefit of practising on live loops. His work takes him to plants all over South Africa and also to other countries. He can be contacted at Michael Brown Control Engineering cc, +27 (0)82 440 7790, michael.brown@mweb.co.za, www.controlloop.co.za



Credit(s)



Share this article:
Share via emailShare via LinkedInPrint this page

Further reading:

Loop Signatures 1: Introduction to the Loop Problem Signatures series
May 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , Editor's Choice
Over the years I have had many requests to write a book giving more detailed explanations of some of the problems I have encountered in my work on practical loop optimisation. I am by nature and inclination ...

Read more...
Advanced new Festo valve portfolio gains immense popularity in industrial automation
November 2020, Festo South Africa , Editor's Choice
Kershia Beharie talks to SA Instrumentation and Control about choosing the right valves for machine applications from the popular Festo range.

Read more...
Michael Brown now offering control courses to individuals
November 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , News
Michael Brown is now offering training courses to individuals via online Zoom sessions. The first session of the Part 1 practical control course – Troubleshooting and Loop Tuning – will commence on Monday 1 February 2021.

Read more...
Loop Signatures 4: Process dynamics – deadtime and simple lags
November 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , Editor's Choice
Two important dynamic factors occurring in the majority of process responses are deadtime, and the first order lag.

Read more...
Case History 174: The importance of setting up your controller properly
October 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , Editor's Choice
It always amazes me that so few people really understand the workings of their feedback controllers. I have met only a few who really understand the practicalities of control blocks.

Read more...
Loop Signatures 3: Process Dynamics – process gain
September 2020, Leaderware , Editor's Choice
If one wishes to control a process, then it is important to have a reasonable understanding of the process itself and certainly one should also be aware of the external influences that can act on it.

Read more...
Loop signatures: Case History 173
August 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , Editor's Choice
More control problems in a copper extraction plant.

Read more...
Virtual commissioning evolves into a model-driven digital twin
August 2020 , Editor's Choice
The primary goal of the commissioning process, whether physical or virtual, is to bring a completely integrated, assembled, and validated mechanical, electrical, and controls software production system into operation.

Read more...
Loop Signatures 2: The two classes of processes.
July 2020, Michael Brown Control Engineering , Editor's Choice
This article will discuss the two classes of processes called self-regulating and integrating (or ramping) processes. This subject is absolutely vital to regulatory control, but strangely is seldom taught ...

Read more...
From the editor's desk: The virtual business assistant
May 2020, Technews Publishing (SA Instrumentation & Control) , Editor's Choice
Have you ever wished someone would automate the daily grind of routine tasks and set you free to focus on the more engaging aspects of your job?

Read more...