USE OF A DIGITAL AUTOMATION SYSTEM FOR

PROCESS CONTROL OF A SIMULATED PLANT

By

Mike Ivanusic

(Student #: 60024981)

An undergraduate thesis

Submitted to

Dr. Dusko Posarac

Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering

The University of British Columbia

April 9, 2003
 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
NOMENCLATURE
ABSTRACT
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES IN THE APPENDIX
INTRODUCTION
SURVEY OF LITERATURE
A) DeltaV/HYSYS integration
B) Tubular Reactor with Gas Recycle Process
C) HDA process description
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY
LITERATURE CITED
APPENDIX
GRAPHICAL INTERFACE (added Feb 2004)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to thank Dr. Dusko Posarac for suggesting the undertaking of this thesis. His
continued enthusiasm for the project, along with his guidance, has been excellent.
I wish to thank Norpac Controls, specifically Don Umbach, for his continued support and
interest in the project, and making himself available for my questions. Also, Alden Hagerty of
Norpac for his assistance during the graphical interface implementation.
I wish to thank Guan Tien Tan, the Teaching Assistant for CHBE 474, who helped me get
a start on the HYSYS/DeltaV OPC integration process.
 3

NOMENCLATURE

HYSYS: Trade name for a software simulation program

DeltaV (dV): Trade name for a digital automation software program
HDA: Hydrodealkylation
OPC: Object link embedding for Process Control
FEHE: Feed effluent heat exchanger
Xmtr: Transmitter
PFD: Process flow diagram
LC: Level controller
FC: Flow controller
PID: Proportional Integral Derivative
FF: Feedforward (control)
MPC: Model Predictive Control
PCR: Pressure controller recorder
RCY: Recycle
Kc: Gain symbol
τI: Integral symbol
P-only: Proportional only, also known as “Gain”
Integral: Area under a curve of defined limits, also known as “Reset”
Derivative: slope of the line of interest, also known as “Rate”
PFR: Plug flow reactor
 4

ABSTRACT

Configuration of a simulated chemical plant was performed in the process

simulator software package, HYSYS, which has this main feature: the entire process, or
even the smallest stream or vessel can be configured in the HYSYS environment. HYSYS
is a powerful software simulator package which features: modelling of unit operations,
user driven input parameters, chemical reaction capabilities, and static and dynamic
modes of operation.
The modelling of the HDA (hydrodealkylation of toluene) process was
performed in HYSYS. HYSYS has two main modes of operation: the static mode, where
the steady state values are calculated, and the dynamic mode, where the process is
modelled similar to a real plant. In the dynamic mode, controllers are added to the
process, in a effort to stabilize the actual operations of the plant.
The DeltaV digital process control automation software program’s main
advantage is that the software was designed specifically to perform Process Control in
the industrial environment. The DeltaV is a large software program featuring: operator
interface windows, control strategy building blocks, input and output configurations,
alarms and events features, and a host of other advanced control features. Through its
many features, solid dynamic control of the HYSYS simulated plant was achieved.
OPC (object link embedding for process control) allows for communication
between two software packages. The DeltaV digital automation system has the
capabilities of offering advanced control and also has the facility of using the OPC link.
The OPC link was utilized in allowing real-time communications between HYSYS and
DeltaV. Thus, a line of bi-directional communications was set up between the two
software packages. Every controller that was initially in the HDA HYSYS model was
rebuilt in the DeltaV digital automation environment. As each controller was being
built, the control parameters were modified to produce the optimum control within the
plant by performing many different tests and then updating and resetting the control
parameters.
The results of this thesis show that the integration of the two software packages
offer a large flexibility for several purposes: testing of hypothetical transients,
optimization possibilities, operator training, and optimal configuration of a control
strategy in the DeltaV before the plant is ever in operation.
 5

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES IN THE APPENDIX

Table1. Table of controllers in the HDA design.

Table2. Results of controller optimization
Table3. Product stream compositions at different furnace temperatures

Appendix (all listed as figures):

HDA1. Static results, workbook copy, in english units

dV1. DeltaV Explorer
dV2. DeltaV Control Studio
dV3. HYSYS/DeltaV OPC DCS interface window
PCR1. PCR PID DeltaV control upon start-up
CC1. Initial fuzzy logic implementation
CC2. Changes in fuzzy logic parameters
CC3. Continued testing of fuzzy logic
CC4. Fuzzy logic begins to return decent control
CC5. Fuzzy logic returns optimal control
TCQ1. TCQ testing
TCQ2. Completed testing on the TCQ loop
TCQ3. dV Operator interface window
TCQ4. Lag implementation in TCQ
TCR1. Initial PID attempts at control
TCR2. Initial trial runs of fuzzy logic
TCR3. Optimal fuzzy logic control achieved
TCR4. Control studio configuration of TCR
CC_TCR1. Process response due to interaction
CC_TCR2. Response of CC loop due to furnace temperature changes
TCQ_large. Large view of dV operate window
Appendix addition: Fuzzy logic: How does it work?

Graphical interface windows (latest additions):

HDA_Aug3: Main operator window with pushbuttons leading to main areas
V1_V2_M1: Input to process (input button leading to raw materials and recycle)
FEHE_Fur_PFR: Reaction area-product formation
V11_M2: Cooling area
Comp_T2_V4: Purge/recycle
Cond_Sep_T1: Product output
 6

INTRODUCTION

The distributed control system exists in industrial control situations-these

systems are based on analog communications-signals that fluctuate. The digital
automation system is based on digital communications-sent and received signals are
delivered on a digital bus (encoding of information into 1’s and 0’s).
The advantage of this encoding is the bi-directional communication capabilities-
field devices are in contact with the main control system in real time, whereas in analog
communications the signals are either only sent or received (uni-directional). A digital
automation system now exists known as the DeltaV.
Simulation of a chemical process design (plant), may be done in a process
simulator software package, such as ASPEN, HYSYS, CHEMCAD, and PRO/II. HYSYS
also has the advantage of adding controllers to the design to simulate dynamic control.
The development of the OPC (OLE, object linking embedding for process control),
allows communications between the DeltaV digital automation system and the HYSYS
simulation environment. Previously, such a communication would not have been
possible because of the analog signals associated with the distributed process control
system. With the advent of OPC communications, the DeltaV environment can now
communicate with the HYSYS environment.
Any chemical plant design may have chemical reactions. Conditions that affect
chemical reactions are: temperature, pressure, energy transfer, and concentration. Such a
process would understandingly be difficult to control if there were fluctuations within
the process. Furthermore, since reactions may not go to completion and/or produce
other products, purge and recycle streams are used in the process. Such a plant design
would then be a good candidate for HYSYS simulation and the implementation of
advanced control features of the DeltaV digital automation system.
The purpose of this thesis was to investigate the advantages of using these two
software programs simultaneously; to have the process simulated and running in
HYSYS, and then having the control of the process originating in the DeltaV
environment.
The chemical design plant simulation is based on the “Hydrodealkylation of
Toluene” process. This process produces benzene from toluene and hydrogen; however,
a side reaction, producing diphenyl also occurs, which is also a consideration. Only a
portion of the full design is modelled in HYSYS-the feed streams, product stream, a
(methane) purge stream, a PFR, separator, and other small unit operations.
 7

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

A. DeltaV/HYSYS integration

The list of features of the DeltaV digital automation system are extensive, and the
vast resources of information for this software are readily available. Of interest is the
OPC communications link, which enables communications between the DeltaV
environment and some other software package. The DeltaV is a powerful and robust
software package designed specifically for industrial applications for the control of
processes.
HYSYS is a simulation process software, and it also has exhaustive amounts of
information available to understand how to use the software. HYSYS simulation aids
the designer in configuration, calculations, and testing. Preliminary estimates can be
made on the size and scope of the process, unit operations, process line connectivity,
and the instrumentation within the process lines.
In the case of a simulated environment, all process instrumentation is assumed to be
in good working order-never the case in a real situation since field units are under
constant scrutiny for breakdowns. However, for the purposes of simulation, the
assumption is that all devices are functioning at peak performance.

B. Tubular Reactor with Gas Recycle Process

The process to be studied is only a portion of a complete design. The complete

process is based on the hydrodealkylation, HDA, reactor plant design. Vast amounts of
information about this process, along with economic data are available-see references
(Douglas 1988). The primary purpose of this section of the plant is to produce benzene
from toluene, with the heart of the process centred around the plug flow reactor. For
this thesis, the main test unit operations are the reactor, two heat exchangers, a
compressor, and a separator drum. Figure 1. shows the configuration that will be
entered into the HYSYS environment. Energy recovery is important, so preheating the
feed by the hot reactor effluent is in the design. Since per-pass conversion is only
moderate and an excess of one of the reactants is required, there is a large gas recycle
stream (page 271, Douglas).
 8

Figure 1. HDA Reactor Section with Gas Recycle

There are two reactions occurring in this process:

1) C7H8 + H2 ⇒ C6H6 + CH4

-Toluene plus hydrogen goes to benzene and methane.
-Exothermic (-18000 Btu/lb-mol)
-This is the main reaction with the desired product being benzene.

2) 2C6H6 ⇔ C12H10 + H2
-Benzene in equilibrium with diphenyl and hydrogen.
-Endothermic (3500 Btu/lb-mol)
-Side reaction, drawing some benzene into the undesirable compound diphenyl
 9

C. HDA process description

A gaseous stream of 98 mol% hydrogen and 2 mol% methane, and a liquid

toluene stream are both fed to the mixer, M1. These two streams are combined with a
large gas recycle stream mixture of hydrogen and methane, Rgas. The mixed stream, cin,
is heated by the feed effluent heat exchanger (FEHE), and then the resulting stream,
cout, is fed to a fired furnace operating at 1150°F and 521 psia.
The heated stream goes to an adiabatic tubular plug flow reactor (PFR) with no
catalyst. The reactor feed contains 376 lb-mol/hr of toluene and 2132 lb-mol/hr of
hydrogen. The large excess of hydrogen is needed to prevent coking in the reactor due
to the high operating temperature. There is 4.8 lb-mol/hr of diphenyl produced. The
highly exothermic reaction dominates, raising the temperature to 1222°F.
The hot reactor effluent is quenched to 1130°F by adding a cold liquid stream
(also to prevent coking) in the mixer, M2. Mixer M2 combines the output of the PFR
stream, Rout, with the cooling stream, quench. The quench stream is a portion of the
product stream, liq. The bottom output of the separator, SEP, is the liquid product
stream, liq. This stream, liq, is sent through pump P1, to the splitter, T1. T1 sends the
liquid product through valve V3 to the distillation columns for further treatment (not
shown). A portion of the product stream, liq, is sent up through valve V11, where it
becomes the quenching fluid to bring the hot reactor product temperature lower.
The hot effluent stream coming out of the mixer, M2, is used to heat the incoming
reactants mixture before it enters the furnace, thus giving up some of its heat content
and cooling to 252°F. Further cooling of this stream to 113°F is by the simulated water
driven heat exchanger, Cond, which has an output stream, qcond. This stream, qcond,
controls the heat taken out of the product stream, and thus affects the temperature in the
separator.
The liquid product stream, v3out, out the bottom is mostly benzene, with some
toluene and diphenyl. This product stream delivers 511 lb-mol/hr of product with the
main constituents being benzene at 68%, and toluene at 26%. The gas stream, gas, is sent
to a compressor and then to the splitter, T2. A purge stream, v4out, is taken of 60mol%
methane and 40 mol% hydrogen. The rest of the gas (3990 lb-mol/hr) is recycled back to
the front-end mixer. The purge stream is necessary to avoid excessive build-up of
methane in the recycle stream back to the input mixer, M1.
 10

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

In HYSYS, the reactor design is implemented-see Figure1. Two kinetic

expressions governing the process are:

 − 90800 
r1 = PT PH0.5 (3.7 x10 6 ) exp ;
 RT 
 − 90800   − 90800 
r2 = PB2 (9.0 x10 4 ) exp  − PD PH (2.6 x10 ) exp
5

 RT   RT 

R=rate in lb-mol/min-ft3
P: Pressure in psia Activation energy constant: R: Rate constant
T: Temperature in Rankin (90800 Btu/lb-mol) in Btu/lb-mol.Rankin
Subscripts B, H, T, and D are benzene, hydrogen, toluene, and diphenyl respectively

During investigation of the initial HYSYS design, it was found that the reactor
volume and condenser had been re-sized. This small table updates the information
reported during the initial Thesis proposal. All other parameters of the design remained
the same (as reported Douglas):
FEHE: 500 ft3, shell Reactor volume: Condenser: 1000 ft3 Separator: 80 ft3
500 ft3 in tubes 4065 ft3

The initial HYSYS design showed these specifications:

Valves are sized at 50% open and 50 psi pressure drop. The compressor is run with
constant work. Figure 2. shows the HDA reactor design with controllers added. Note
that this figure is the same as Figure1, except the control loops have been added.

Figure 2. HDA reactor design with control loops

 11

Important control loop information (HYSYS initiation):

1) There are seven control loops:

Table1. Table of controllers in HDA design.

Controller Control function
FC1 Fresh feed of toluene, toltot
PCR Pressure of vessel SEP
TCR Temperature of furnace, Fur
TCC Temperature of vessel SEP
LC Level control of SEP
CC Concentration (of methane) control, purge stream.
TCQ Temperature of hot stream to heat exchanger, FEHE

2) Pressure control recorder (PCR) manipulates valve V1 to control separator

drum pressure.
3) Gas purge is manipulated by controlling the methane composition in the
recycle (CC). Xmtr: 40 to 70% methane.
4) Energy input to the furnace is maintained by varying the stream, qfur.
Xmtr: 1100 to 1200F. This range was later extended in DeltaV.

Three things basically affect the pressure in this gas-filled system: fresh feeds,
purge flow, and rate of condensation in the condenser. The flow rates of fresh hydrogen
and of the purge gas stream are very close (484 and 476 lb-mol/hr respectively),
however, purge rate has a direct impact on methane impurity in the gas recycle, so
hydrogen feed controls the pressure.
The power to the compressor is a steady-state fixed value, so the gas circulation rate
through the gas loop is constant. Optimum values for reactor size and recycle flow rate
are determined by balancing the reactor with the energy cost of compression.
 12

PROCEDURES

The project involves exploration of two software packages: HYSYS and DeltaV.
The reactor process is implemented in HYSYS to take advantage of the physical and
chemical parameters available to this software. The reactor process is later linked via
OPC to the digital automation system, DeltaV, where the controllers will perform tests
to optimize the response of each control loop (using many of the DeltaV advanced
control features).
Initial OPC testing began with configuration of a simulated stream, similar to the
“toltot” stream in Figure1. Once this “test” stream was successfully built and tested in
HYSYS, the OPC pipelines were configured to enable communications with DeltaV. The
test module was built in DeltaV’s Control Studio under an already working area. When
it was found that successful operation of the communication had been attained, the
entire process design conversion was begun.
DeltaV’s Control Studio is where the module is built, and all the parameters exist-
such as: set points, output and input limits, alarms, control configurations, and the
complete operating conditions. In this window, control blocks (or motors, alarms,
valves, etc.) are imported from the drop down menu list on the right hand side of the
window. The important control parameters, input and output, alarms, and operating
modes are entered on the left hand side of the window. A large picture of Control
Studio is available in the Appendix as Figure dV2.
Figure dV2. Control Studio
 13

A new area was created in DeltaV’s Explorer section: HDA. The area represents a
real scenario, where a physical portion of a plant is given a name (such as water
treatment, gas compression, etc.). In this new area, the first controller to be built was
FC1, the control of the toluene feed to the process. This stream had already been
previously successfully modelled, so the same routine could be utilized in this first
controller configuration.
The new controller was built from DeltaV’s extensive library of control modules-
see Figure dV1-DeltaV Explorer window which features Library module templates and
the newly built process area HDA. These modules contain building blocks for: analog
control, monitoring, motors, and valves. For this thesis, only analog control building
blocks were used. Analog control is further divided into: PID, FF, Cascade, fuzzy, and
MPC modules. An appropriate module is loaded into the area, renamed, and then
opened with Control Studio.
 14

Every controller’s starting parameters are based on the information pulled from
the HYSYS dynamic simulation. These were entered into the Control Studio parameters
with strict attention being paid to type of action of the controller (either Direct or
Reverse acting), process variable connections and limits of measurement, controlled
variable limits, and correct naming and references-see Figure dV2-typical Control
Studio window featuring the CC controller configuration.
Each controller was entered into the HYSYS DCS interface window-see Figure
H1-Process Variable (PV) imported information. In this window, PV Export sends
information from the HYSYS environment to the DeltaV, and PV Import expects the
control information, which it applies to the process. Although this figure represents the
entire process converted, the interface was actually built one controller at a time.
When the first controller was built, HYSYS enabled the DCS interface, and then
the process was run in dynamic mode, simulating an operating process. HYSYS has the
flexibility of running the process faster or slower than real-time, an advantage that was
used to monitor the process during controller optimization. In certain instances, running
a process too fast caused the process to upset, and running the process too slow would
require long wait times as the process responded to disturbances, updates, or changes.
 15

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Controller optimization results and analysis

The table shows the results of the many tests that were run on the process in the
deltaV environment.
Table 2. Results of controller optimization table.
Controller 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Name of controller FC1 LC TCC CC PCR TCR TCQ
HYSYS Control PI P PI P PI PI PI
strategy
dV control strategy PI PID PID Fuzzy PID Fuzzy PID
HYSYS Gain 0.3 2 0.5 2 2 0.5 4
dV Gain 0.3 4 0.5 1.18 4 2.09 0.5
HYSYS Integral 0.5 None 5 none 10 2.5 1.8
dV Integral 0.5 2 5 20.42 12 1.66 40
HYSYS Derivative None None none none none none none
dV Derivative None 1 1 0.44 2 0.21 10
Action Rev. Dir. Dir. Dir. Rev. Rev. Dir.

Eventually a systematic pattern was developed for the testing and optimization
of each controller. As described earlier in the “Procedures”, controller FC1 transfer was
undertaken first because it had successfully been rebuilt in a different area of the DeltaV
Control Studio. Also, this controller has no upstream events, since it is an input stream.
The OPC link is enabled (see Figure dV3 below) by hitting the enable button in the
HYSYS DSC interface window.
 16

A small button, similar to a green traffic light, is depressed, thus putting the
design into dynamic operations mode. If the process is operating correctly, the timer
begins to count, and the HYSYS environment is minimized. In DeltaV, the control
module is placed in the on-line mode, and by opening the AutoTune window, the
process response can be followed. A typical AutoTune will look like:

Figure PCR1. PCR PID DeltaV control upon start-up in HYSYS.

AutoTune has a wealth of features: test capabilities of the process-which returns

process parameters during a test, tuning calculations-where recommended settings can
be updated, controller-where the settings of the controller are stored. Also, the three
bottom lines in the tuning calculation, Gain, Reset, and Rate, can all be manually
adjusted. Thus, one can over-ride the recommended settings.
In the above diagram, the output is oscillating, and the process variable (PV) is in
an oscillating decay. Controller FC1 had a similar response upon start-up, using the
initial dynamic settings from HYSYS. Controller FC1, which contains the input bulk
toluene stream, needed no changes. Disturbances (set point, input flow) were initiated
and the system responded well. AutoTune became the main tool in optimizing and
controlling the HYSYS design. It was also very easy to use.
The second controller was LC. LC is controlling the output of the product stream,
v3out. Simple PI control was not found to be the best choice. Initial transfer into the
DeltaV (dV) system found negative pressure warnings, and ultimately froze the HYSYS
simulation. Simultaneously, the system would then disrupt the parameters in the
separation vessel, SEP. Using dV’s Tune features, the parameters from HYSYS were
 17

used as an initial starting point, and then the process parameters were changed until
greater stability was reached. It was found that the valve, V3, would experience large
fluctuations, rapidly opening and closing, thus the potential for extreme damage to the
valve. Several PID tests were undertaken in AutoTune, with the final settings displayed
in Table 2. It should be noted that initial PI control was expanded to PID. It was found
that to achieve best response with the control loops, several tests should be taken and
then parameters updated and accepted into the controller. The process was again
allowed to stabilize to see how the response behaved. With each iteration of this process,
superior control would be achieved.
TCC controls the temperature in the separation vessel. It was a logical choice to
proceed with optimization of this controller after LC. Had I attempted optimization of
TCC first, I most likely would have been re-starting HYSYS many times. The product
stream, v3out, is very sensitive to changes in the flow and pressure in SEP. However,
temperature control has less effect on v3out, and furthermore, if the vessel is large, then
temperature takes a long time to adjust to new level. SEP is a mid-sized vessel, and its
temperature does not vary at an alarming pace with upsets, so its optimization was a
logical choice for TCC.
In HYSYS, a valve is implied in the control of the heat duty in the condenser,
Cond. Thus, the feature of controlling the heat duty of the flow was mimicked in
DeltaV. The output scale in DeltaV’s control studio compensated for the simulated valve
by setting the controlled variable as the heat flow. (In HYSYS, the initial control was a
valve with a 0 to 100% open setting). Initially TCC was run at the HYSYS settings, but it
was found that only a one-degree setpoint change caused too much oscillation-solved by
adding derivative action.
Derivative action measures the rate of change of a variable. Because the process
was oscillating, the rate of change (slope) is large. By adding derivative action, it
counters the movement by initiating a slope of opposite value. By varying the settings of
the derivative, and monitoring the response in AutoTune, it was found that adding
derivative control (i.e. rate) of 1 min, stabilized the loop. Derivative is a good addition to
loops with temperature control, since the steadily changing temperature can be
immediately compensated. Derivative setting would be even more important if the
vessel was larger, but the rate setting would be less. Once this change had been made,
the loop stabilized.
Since the vessel, SEP, has another controller, PCR, this was investigated next. The
separator pressure is very sensitive to disturbances. Beginning with the initial settings
from the dynamic state in HYSYS, the process was turned over to the DeltaV
environment. Initial testing on the loop resulted in instability, so derivative action was
added in a attempt to reduce the ramping nature of the valve. Many instances of
backpressure, extreme valve swings, large oscillation in the condenser, and excessive
pressure deviations from setpoint were encountered. This is because the separator is at
the center of many other loops. When the pressure was too high or low, valve V3 would
lock up and the process would shut down. Also, excessive pressure fluctuations would
 18

cause the process to freeze. Similarly, when temperature and pressure were changed,
this would also disrupt the process.
To undertake tuning and optimization of this loop, dV’s AutoTune feature was
used. Several tests had to be undertaken in this feature due to the loops instability. As
the process was initialized in HYSYS, and then enabled, DeltaV would begin its attempt
to control the system. Every so often the AutoTune feature was utilized to return some
optimum settings. Using the update feature, the new controller settings were uploaded
to the control strategy parameters back in the Control Studio. After each subsequent
AutoTune, the process was allowed to reach its best state of stability. At this point,
another test was run, returning a new set of controller parameters, which were also
subsequently updated to the controller. Initial commencement of this iterative process
was not met with great response by HYSYS. Because of the interactions back in the
original process, the HDA process would repeatedly freeze if the parameters in the
separator became too excessive. Occasionally, fluctuations in the separator would also
cause other parts of the process to experience difficulties (the aforementioned valve V3,
and the condenser, COND).
After several start-up sequences, each iteration would return a healthier
response. Because of the interactions, the valve, V3, and its controller had to be re-tested
for stability. Although Table 1. shows the final settings, the first run through of tests on
this control loop did not return the listed parameters. It was only after seeing the
separator fluctuations, that it was decided to go back and re-test the valve output, and
adjust the control parameters for tightness. Once this had been achieved, the control of
PCR seemed to be easier. With tighter control on the output product, the separator
gained a bit of ease in controllability. Finally, a start-up test was taken on the control
settings, and the new PCR responded within 10 minutes, bringing the process to set
point with no fluctuations-see Appendix, Figure PCR1, which was also shown earlier.
Upon transfer to DeltaV’s control system, controller CC showed severe
oscillation-see Figure CC1.
Figure CC1.
 19

The appendix-Figure CC1 through CC5 shows the various figures, and ultimately
the results of the solutions to controlling this part of the process. Several attempts were
made to tune this loop with conventional PID, but since favourable results were not
being attained, it was decided to investigate the potential of using a special feature of
DeltaV: Fuzzy logic.
Fuzzy logic was primarily invented for use on noisy processes-where controlled
variables and the process variables have large oscillatory tendencies. Three parameters,
dE, error, and output (o/p), work together in a non-linear fashion. Thus the parameters
can more accurately model the fluctuations of a noisy process. Since the parameters can
more closely resemble the process, it was found to be advantageous for controller CC. A
more in-depth description of Fuzzy logic control is in the Appendix addition-Fuzzy
logic: How does it work?
Figure CC1 shows the results of some early testing on the loop. It was determined
that any process optimization, set-point changes, or deviance testing in the process lines
could not be initiated until the loop was properly tuned. The frequent oscillations
evident in PID control began to disappear as the tuning parameters were updated in the
fuzzy environment. Many tests were undertaken to understand the function of varying
each parameter of fuzzy logic (see Appendix addition), and seeing the response. Figure
CC2 and CC3 show how problems still existed even after new parameters were
accepted. The usual cause of this is that other parts of the process were also responding
to variances, so a continual testing and retesting procedure was adopted. After several
AutoTune test procedures, and a couple of re-starts of the process, Figure CC4 shows
the final acceptable settings. Figure CC5 clearly shows that the fuzzy logic control was
the correct choice for control of the process. The result of using this advanced feature of
DeltaV resulted in optimum performance on the loop.
Figure CC4. Fuzzy logic returns decent control.
 20

The next two loops each contained lags in their design, to more closely represent
a real process. A lag in a system occurs when there is a time delay in which the system
can respond to a change. Fortunately, DeltaV easily handled this, by having
programmable function blocks that serve as delay units. The only real difficulty was in
trying to understand how to enter the parameters correctly in the function blocks. TCQ
is a temperature control loop on the pre-heating product solution recycle line. It controls
the valve, V11, where the quench liquid from the separator is just about to enter the
mixer, M2, immediately after the plug flow reactor (PFR). Implementation of this loop
was far easier than some of the earlier loops. Again using DeltaV’s AutoTune, along
with changing and updating parameters, the transfer to control in the DeltaV
environment was efficient. Figures TCQ1 and TCQ2 recorded the testing procedures
and graphed the resulting control. Figure TCQ4 shows the block diagram design in
Control Studio.
The final loop presented several challenges. The TCR loop was extremely noisy-
see Figure TCR1.

Figure TCR1. Initial PID attempts at control. Various PID settings were tried and the resulting
display shows the difficulties in obtaining reasonable control.
 21

After several trial tests in PID configuration, the interactions in the process were
simply too much for conventional control. The main reason for all the interaction at this
point in the process is that the control of temperature here changes the kinetic
expressions, which in turn alter the production of benzene. This alteration in the
temperature in the furnace produces either more or less benzene, which requires that
the purge line, at valve V4, also changes at a rapid rate. Included in this part of the
process is the difficulty of the temperature signal delay. The temperature is measured at
the input to the plug flow reactor, but by the time the heat stream can make
compensations in the furnace, the temperature has appreciably been altered.
Due to the noise in the system, it was decided to once again utilize the fuzzy logic
option available in DeltaV. The lag block module in Control Studio was used to module
the time delay. The controlled variable is qfur, the heat to the furnace. TCR incorporated
all the new techniques that had been utilized up to this point-it would have been
difficult had the attempt been made to first try to control this section of the plant.
Several PID tests were undertaken in TCR, but none returned optimal control.
Figure TCR1 shows the results of several PID parameter trials. This Figure shows the
large oscillations and the difficulty that was experienced in trying to control the process.
Figure TCR2 shows the initial transfer into the fuzzy logic environment. It is evident
that the fuzzy logic control algorithms smoothed out the transitions. With experience
gained from previous control attempts in fuzzy, and with DeltaV’s AutoTune feature,
the process was under control after only a few iterations of the AutoTune feature. Figure
TCR3 shows the final results of the optimization process. Figure TCR4 shows the
Control Studio module. The lead/lag block is above the fuzzy logic control module,
FLC. At this point, the entire process has been updated to control by the DeltaV
environment.
A sensitivity test was taken on the TCR/CC controller configurations. It was
identified earlier that the furnace temperature affected the rate of the reaction, and
hence the residual amount of methane in the stream, v4out. Two recently generated
AutoTune windows follow this page: Figure CC_TCR1 and Figure CC_TCR2. The first
figure displays set point changes from 1250 to 1200 to 1150 and then back up to
1200°F. The spike in the diagram is the controlled variable, qfur, as it responds to a 50°F
set point change. Because of the fuzzy logic control, the process variable slowly moves
to the new set point with no oscillation-a very desirable result. In practice, it may be
difficult to achieve such a large demand on the heat duty line, qfur. Still, the control of
the upset is excellent.
It was expected that the response of CC would also be adequate, but there was
much more volatility, with the process variable requiring more time to return to setpoint
and with more oscillation. CC had previously been identified as a troublesome loop
because the control is on the methane fraction in this purge line. These two loops were
identified as being the most interactive of several combinations.
 22

Figure CC_TCR1. Process response due to interaction. Setpoint of furnace changed from
1250 to 1200 to 1150 to 1200°F.

Figure CC_TCR2. Response of CC loop due to furnace temperature setpoint changes.

A test such as this is one of many that could be undertaken in the plant to view
the response of the system. For instance, it may be desired to not have the TCR
controlled variable, qfur, spike as much as it did in Figure CC_TCR1. If this was the
case, then one could go back and perform tests to change the control parameters to
 23

optimize the control of the heat input. Also, if the desire for larger heat production has
been identified, one could go back to HYSYS and modify the heat supply. Similarly, the
CC could also be retested, as was previously done for even tighter control. As it stands,
the response to the setpoint by the CC controller was acceptable, with a decaying
oscillatory response. Also, the response returned to setpoint within one oscillation. One
other alternative that could be investigated is whether a larger valve would be of benefit
to the purge stream. A large valve would be beneficial if the process was desired to be
run at a higher operating temperature, producing more benzene. This large valve could
be implemented in HYSYS and more testing undertaken.
An optimization study was done. As in the previous discussion, it is known that
the temperature of the furnace affects the reaction rates, and hence the benzene
production.

Table 3. Product stream compositions at different furnace temperatures.

Furnace temperature= 1150 F 1200 F 1250 F
H2 0.0052 0.0047 0.0047
CH4 0.0442 0.0437 0.0431
Benzene 0.6808 0.8731 0.8861
Toluene 0.2589 0.0334 0.0006
Diphenyl 0.0109 0.045 0.0654

It can be seen what the effect of raising the furnace temperature would be on the
production of benzene. With DeltaV in control of the process, these tests took place with
no upsets. From a purely production standpoint, even though benzene production is
increased with increased furnace temperature, other undesirable conditions surfaced.
Diphenyl production continues to increase as furnace temperature increases, causing the
undesirable condition of more stringent distillation of the product stream. An increase
in temperature from 1200 to 1250°F only increased the production of benzene slightly,
but Diphenyl production increased from 4.5% to 6.5%. As a consequence of this
increased heat demand, the stream, qfur, to the furnace increased to 31.3e6 Btu/hr from
7.03 e6 for a 100°F increase. Also, the condenser before the separator is now removing
37.7e6 Btu/hr as compared to a previous value of 13.4e6 Btu/hr. So the trade-off of
increased production of benzene is increased energy costs. Also, with Diphenyl
production increasing, this causes more strain on the downstream unit operations.
Several such analysis tests could further be performed on other parts of the
process to see if more benefit would be gained in another area. Test after test could be
performed, depending on economic factors, to find the optimum operating conditions.
However, control of the process, as was the objective of this thesis has been achieved
through the integration of the HYSYS/DeltaV environments using the OPC
communications links.
 24

CONCLUSION

1) The two-tier system of DeltaV/HYSYS could be very useful in analyzing a new

process. The process is developed in HYSYS, where calculations return the static
operating conditions. Further changes can be made in HYSYS as the design
becomes updated. The OPC link between the two software packages provides
access to DeltaV’s advanced control strategies. This two-tier development allows
all of the simulations and controls to be configured long before any actual
construction begins. Further, process improvements may be realized by using the
two-tier system, or the process could be discontinued if the feasibility studies
show that an economic assessment did not show a reasonable rate of return.
2) Once optimum control is achieved, disturbances and set point changes can show
where the process may need to be re-evaluated. This would be an ongoing
feasibility study known as process optimization.
3) Developing a process in HYSYS in static mode returns acceptable results. HYSYS
dynamic control was to found to have low reproducibility, hence the need for the
integration of controls from DeltaV. HYSYS was found difficult to use, and
requires much patience.
4) DeltaV was found to be much easier to use than HYSYS. DeltaV is very well
supported by on-line information, vendor assistance, and software driven help
files. DeltaV’s dynamic control functions, controller configurations, and
advanced techniques are user-friendly.
5) The HDA process received a sensitivity analysis. It was found that after transfer
to the controllers in DeltaV that tests were much easier to perform. After the
optimization of all the controllers had been performed, the sensitivity analysis
showed the improved controllability.
6) It was identified early in the research that the reaction temperature was the main
driving force in the production rate of benzene from toluene. An increase in
furnace temperature increased the production rate of benzene, but at the cost of
increased heat energy input and removal. Also, increases in furnace temperature
increased the production of the unwanted by-product, Diphynel. In order to
completely analyze this process, an acceptable level of production would have to
be economically weighed against the cost of the energy requirements as well as
the increased cost of removing the by-product further down the line at the
distillation area.
 25

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

There are three main areas for further research: the HDA process, DeltaV, and
HYSYS.
The book by James M. Douglas, “Conceptual design of chemical processes”, has
extensive strategies and insight into optimizing every part of the hydrodealklyation of
Toluene. For example, the reactor temperature is a critical part of the design. From
Douglas it is known that temperatures above 1300°F cause a significant amount of
hydrocracking. At temperatures below 1150°F, the reaction rates become too slow.
Some time was spent learning how to use HYSYS, but possibly some optimization could
have been done by using some of the suggestions in Douglas, and trying to implement
the ideas in HYSYS. The only drawback is that HYSYS requires many hours of study to
make processes work properly. Indeed, much of the early part of this thesis was spent
understanding how HYSYS works. HYSYS, however, is a powerful tool, which delivers
valuable information.
The DeltaV digital automation system is a very large integrated software
package. In this thesis, some optimization of the design was obtained by
communications via OPC to HYSYS, but several other techniques are yet to be explored
in DeltaV. A great deal of computing power is needed to run the HYSYS program;
therefore, the graphics could be rebuilt in the DeltaV. The entire process could be rebuilt
with completely different graphics. (Note: a graphical interface was later added)
DeltaV can be configured solely for operate interface. These operator interfaces
present plant operators with faceplates showing the controller, and the ability to change
setpoints, or investigate other important information about the process-see Figure
TCQ3. In the DeltaV Operate window, no parameter changes can be made.
But much more important is the controls available through DeltaV, of which only
a few where used in this thesis. Of particular note, is the MPC control on the SEP
section, where this control might have been advantageous.
Further study could contain an economic analysis to see if the feasibility of
continued production is warranted.

LITERATURE CITED

Douglas, James, Conceptual design of chemical processes, McGraw-Hill, New York,

1988
DeltaV Product Information Compact Disc, produced by Fisher-Rosemount, Austin,
Texas, 2001
Luyben, William L, Plantwide dynamic simulators in chemical processing and control,
Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 2002
 Figure HDA1. static results, workbook copy in english units
Name FFH2 v1out v2out cin Rgas cout
Vapour Fraction 1.00 1.000 0.000 0.918 1.000 1.000
Temperature [F] 86.00 86.133 131.433 145.958 160.378 1062.368
Pressure [psia] 625.00 600.512 600.512 600.512 600.512 564.684
Molar Flow [lbmole/hr] 484.31 484.311 369.964 4840.822 3986.547 4840.822
Mass Flow [lb/hr] 1180.17 1180.173 34088.436 79101.556 43832.947 79101.556
Heat Flow [Btu/hr] -427686.49 -427686.49 2728353.29 -66806697.27 -69107364.08 -4430563.00
Comp Mole Frac (Hydrogen) 0.97 0.970 0.000 0.440 0.417 0.440
Comp Mole Frac (Methane) 0.03 0.030 0.000 0.473 0.570 0.473
Comp Mole Frac (Benzene) 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.009 0.011 0.009
Comp Mole Frac (Toluene) 0.00 0.000 1.000 0.078 0.002 0.078
Comp Mole Frac (BiPhenyl) 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Name hot in hot out Rin Rout quench tot
Vapour Fraction 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 0.000 1.000
Temperature [F] 1129.061 252.058 1150.000 1221.607 113.664 1129.151
Pressure [psia] 504.038 472.393 521.038 504.038 504.038 504.038
Molar Flow [lbmole/hr] 4974.232 4974.232 4840.822 4840.822 135.110 4975.932
Mass Flow [lb/hr] 89820.708 89820.708 79101.556 79100.530 10735.002 89835.531
Heat Flow [Btu/hr] 4316715.17 -58059419.10 2228994.86 2228984.85 2220202.54 4449187.38
Comp Mole Frac (Hydrogen) 0.375 0.375 0.440 0.386 0.005 0.375
Comp Mole Frac (Methane) 0.516 0.516 0.473 0.529 0.045 0.516
Comp Mole Frac (Benzene) 0.080 0.080 0.009 0.063 0.687 0.080
Comp Mole Frac (Toluene) 0.028 0.028 0.078 0.022 0.250 0.028
Comp Mole Frac (BiPhenyl) 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.013 0.001
Name condout Gas liq dischg grecycle purge
Vapour Fraction 0.8971 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000
Temperature [F] 113.0258 113.0258 113.0258 160.3782 160.3782 160.3782
Pressure [psia] 469.1770 469.1770 469.1770 600.5119 600.5119 600.5119
Molar Flow [lbmole/hr] 4974.2317 4462.3765 511.8552 4462.3765 3986.5469 475.8296
Mass Flow [lb/hr] 89820.7084 49064.7989 40755.9095 49064.7989 43832.9492 5231.8497
Heat Flow [Btu/hr] -70725461.74 -79078108.19 8352646.44 -77355939.99 -69107365.50 -8248574.49
Comp Mole Frac (Hydrogen) 0.3746 0.4170 0.0049 0.4170 0.4170 0.4170
Comp Mole Frac (Methane) 0.5163 0.5705 0.0437 0.5705 0.5705 0.5705
Comp Mole Frac (Benzene) 0.0798 0.0109 0.6800 0.0109 0.0109 0.0109
Comp Mole Frac (Toluene) 0.0280 0.0016 0.2586 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016
Comp Mole Frac (BiPhenyl) 0.0013 0.0000 0.0128 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Name v4out Pump o/p fquench FF Toluene v11out Product
Vapour Fraction 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Temperature [F] 158.788 113.484 113.484 130.946 113.678 113.484
Pressure [psia] 475.000 544.000 544.000 696.896 504.000 544.000
Molar Flow [lbmole/hr] 475.830 511.855 135.110 369.964 135.110 376.745
Mass Flow [lb/hr] 5231.850 40755.910 10758.006 34088.436 10758.006 29997.903
Heat Flow [Btu/hr] -8248574.49 8366979.86 2208563.72 2728353.29 2208563.72 6158416.14
Comp Mole Frac (Hydrogen) 0.417 0.005 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.005
Comp Mole Frac (Methane) 0.570 0.044 0.044 0.000 0.044 0.044
Comp Mole Frac (Benzene) 0.011 0.680 0.680 0.000 0.680 0.680
Comp Mole Frac (Toluene) 0.002 0.259 0.259 1.000 0.259 0.259
Comp Mole Frac (BiPhenyl) 0.000 0.013 0.013 0.000 0.013 0.013
Name Final Product Qfur Q from Cond Work to Comp work to pump
Vapour Fraction 0.0000 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Temperature [F] 113.6780 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Pressure [psia] 504.0000 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Molar Flow [lbmole/hr] 376.7450 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Mass Flow [lb/hr] 29997.9031 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Heat Flow [Btu/hr] 6158416.14 6659557.86 12666042.64 1722168.20 14333.42
Comp Mole Frac (Hydrogen) 0.0049 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Comp Mole Frac (Methane) 0.0437 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Comp Mole Frac (Benzene) 0.6800 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Comp Mole Frac (Toluene) 0.2586 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>
Comp Mole Frac (BiPhenyl) 0.0128 <empty> <empty> <empty> <empty>

Late evening, Jan 13

 27

Figure dV1. DeltaV Explorer

 28

Figure dV2. DeltaV Control Studio

 29

Figure dV3. HYSYS/DeltaV OPC DSC interface window, in HYSYS environment.

 30

Figure PCR1. PCR PID DeltaV control upon start-up in HYSYS.

 31

Figure CC1. Initial fuzzy logic implementation.

 32

Figure CC2. Changes in fuzzy logic parameters attempted.

 33

Figure CC3. Continued testing of fuzzy logic.

 34

Figure CC4. Fuzzy logic begins to return decent control. AutoTune process test at 17:03.

Process was run at 2, .25, .25 from an initial wide open valve. Process came up to a stable
oscillation. Tests run at 17:03 results in test process returning recommended scaling parameters.
The final test process (the test process can be seen on the bottom left hand part of the screen,
which tests for ultimate gain, period, dead time, process gain, and time constant). The
recommended scaling settings are updated to the controller and then uploaded in Control Studio.
 35

Figure CC5. Fuzzy logic returns optimal control.

Parameters accepted by upload/download in DeltaV.

 36

Figure TCQ1. TCQ testing.

 37

Figure TCQ2. Completed testing on TCQ loop, with final testing parameters accepted.
 38

Figure TCQ3. dV Operator Interface window

Figure TCQ4. Lag implementation on TCQ