6 59 1 PB
6 59 1 PB
6 59 1 PB
19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
T. Mulyana
Study Program of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Industry, Telkom University (Tel-U), Bandung,
Indonesia
Abstract
In this article, a nonparametric identification system based on transient analysis has been reviewed, by taking
the case in some of the data plant process of heat exchanger. Results of the study found that the first-order
transfer function without time-delay the proposed model to the data with a temperature constant value is 35.20
ºC and the time constant is 7200 seconds. This model has been fit to meet the existing data proving that the
results of the calculation error do not exceed 2%.
Keywords: nonparametric identification systems, transient analysis, process plant heat exchanger, temperature
constant, time constant, calculated error
19
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
(1)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Fig. 1 Step response first order system with time delay
The relationship between the overshoot and
Physically, this equation describes a damped
the relative damping is illustrated in Fig. 3. The
oscillator. After some calculations, the step response
parameters , ζ and can be determined based on
is found to be as expressed by Eq. (4). The output
response, y(t), in Eq. (4) for various ζ is illustrated values obtained in Fig. 4. The gained is easily
by Fig. 2 [1]. obtained as the final value once convergence is
achieved. The overshoot has been determined in
several ways. One possibility is to use the first
(4) maximum. An alternative is to use several extreme
and the fact as given by Eq. (6). The amplitude of
the oscillations in Eq. (5) is reduced by a factor
for every half-period. Once is determined; ζ can
20
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
be derived from Eq. (7), and will produce Eq. (8) 3. Nonparametric Model
[1]. A transfer function of shell and tube heat
exchanger is described as Eqs. (11) up to (17). It has
complex forms and it is difficult to apply to the
design of practical controllers. In some cases, it is
found that the outlet responses are well
approximated by using the first- or second-order
system to replace the complicated forms of the
transfer functions obtained directly from the
transformed solutions. This transfer functions are a
model form based on the Laplace transform and it is
very useful in analysis and design of a linear
dynamic shell and tube heat exchanger.
To obtain a nonparametric model, a step
response analysis is used in this case. The dynamic
model in Eq. (11) can be simplified as Eq. (12). The
obtained transfer function which assumes
Fig. 3 Overshoot M versus relative damping ζ damped is shown in Eq. (13)
oscillator
where is the transfer function, is the
output signal from the cold water temperature outlet
in shell side heat exchanger, , and is the
input signal from the hot water flow rate inlet in tube
side heat exchanger, .
(11)
(12)
Fig. 4 Determination parameters damped oscillator from
the step response
(13)
(8)
(14)
From the step response, the period of the
oscillations has also been determined. From (6), the (15)
period is given by Eq. (9) [1]. Then is given by
Eq. (10) [1].
(9)
(16)
(10) (17)
21
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
order transfer function in Eq. (18) has the following is the Padé-approximation as given in Eq. (21),
characteristics, which are demonstrated by Fig. 5 [7]. where n is the order of the approximation and this
order must be chosen [7]. The coefficients are
functions of n.
(18)
(20)
The first order transfer function with time delay
is given by Eq. (19), where is the gain, is the (21)
time constant and is time delay.
(19)
(22)
(23)
(24)
(25)
22
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
The step and phase responses of the first order Table 3: Type of step response for various value of
Padé-approximation is shown in Fig. 7. Fig. 8 shows zeta
the step and phase responses of the second order
Padé-approximation. A second order transfer
functions is given by Eq. (28). Where , and
refer to system gain, relative damping factor and
undamped resonance frequency [1,2]. Table 2 shows
type of step response for various values of .
When and the poles are real and distinct, it is
given by Eq. (29).
(28)
(29)
0.5
Amplitude
-100
-150 The candidate of nonparametric model has been
-200 described. When the experimental data obtained are
-250
observed, the data are apparently similar to the step
-2 -1 0
10 10
Frequency (rad/s)
10 response of the first order transfer function. This
model is candidate model and has been expressed by
Fig. 7 Step and phase’s responses order-1 Padé-
approximation
Eq. (30). Therefore, the candidate model chosen is
the first order transfer function. The error of this
Pade approximation of order 2: step response comparison
model is calculated after offset, where the time of
1.5 offset is determined according to time constant that
1 occurred. The error is given by Eq. (31), where
Amplitude
-200
-400
-600
(30)
-1 0 1
10 10 10
Frequency (rad/s)
(32)
23
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
The step response of the resulted nonparametric model because the error is smaller than 2%. In other
model for dataexp1 is shown in Eq. (33). words, it should be accepted.
Error calculation of nonparametric model dataexp1 measured
(33) 1
0.8
0.6
0.2
measured dataexp1 is shown in Fig. 9.
Error E (C)
0
-0.2
Output signals of cold water temperature outlet nonparametric model and dataexp1 measured -0.4
55 -0.6
-0.8
50 -1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Time (seconds)
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) 50
Fig. 10 shows these facts based on the error Fig. 11 Nonparametric model output and data measured
values in Table 3. The error has been calculated of dataexp2
using Eqs. (31) and (32) which takes 8 samples time
between 0 and 7000 s. From Table 3, it is obvious
that the error is and the percentage of the
error is . According to these results, therefore,
the model which is shown in Eq. (33) is an excellent
24
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
measured dataexp2
50
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0 29.0 29.0 0.0 40
Temperature Ts (C)
1000 34.0 34.0 0.0
2000 37.5 37.5 0.0 30
dataexp3 measured
3000 41.5 41.0 0.5 nonparametric model
20
4000 44.0 44.0 0.0
5000 47.0 46.5 0.5
10
6000 49.5 48.5 1.0
7000 52.0 52.0 0.0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Time (seconds)
-0.8
-1
From Fig. 13, it is apparent that the trend of the
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time (seconds)
5000 6000 7000
model output which is given by Eq. (35) is similar to
Fig. 12 Error calculation nonparametric model dataexp2 the measured dataexp3. The data and the model start
with the same values, i.e. . From the start time
From Table 4, it is apparent that the error is of 0s until to the final time of 7000s, the difference
and the percentage of the error is . of both temperatures reaches the smallest value that
Based on these results, therefore, the model which it is presented in Table 5. Fig. 14 shows these facts
has been given by Eq. (34) is an excellent model based on the error values in Table 5. The error has
because of the error is smaller than . Therefore, it been calculated using Eqs. (31) and (32) with 8
samples of time between 0 and 7000 s. From Table
should be accepted.
5, it is obvious that the error is and the
The step response of the nonparametric model
resulted from dataexp3 is shown in Eq. (35). The percentage of the error is . Referring to these
comparison of the model output and the measured results, therefore, the model which is given by Eq.
data is given in Fig. 13. The error calculation to (35) is a sufficiently good model because the error is
validate this model is presented in Table 5. Fig. 14 less than . Therefore, it may be accepted.
shows the obtained error.
(35)
25
International Journal of Vol.1 (No.1). 2015. pp. 19-26
Innovation in Mechanical Engineering & Advanced Materials (IJIMEAM) Published online: December 1, 2015
www.umb-intl-journal.com ISSN: 2477-541X
3
Error calculation of nonparametric model and dataexp3 measured temperature each the data is different. Based on
these results, it can be concluded that the first order
2 without time delay could be taken as nonparametric
model with the gain is 35.2 ºC, and the time constant
1 of 7200 s.
Error E (C)
0
References
-1
[1] Soderstrom, T. & Stoica, P. System
Identification. New York: Prentice Hall; 2001.
-2 [2] Knudsen, M. Experimental Modelling of
Dynamics Systems. Department of Control
-3
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Engineering, Aalborg University, 2004.
Time (seconds)
[3] Ljung, L. Approaches to Identification of
Fig. 14 Error calculation nonparametric model dataexp3 Nonlinear System. Sweden, Division of
Automatic Control, Linkoping University,
The comparison results of the nonparametric 2011.
models are presented in Table 6. It is shown that all [4] Nithya, S. et al. Model Based Controller Design
time constant or offset and the gain of the all for Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger. Sensors &
experimental data is the same, i.e., 7200 s and 35.2 Transducers Journal 2007; 84(10): p. 1677-
while the initial temperature for each 1686.
experimental data is different. They are 30 for [5] Sharma, C. Gupta, S. & Kumar, V. Modeling
dataexp1, 29 for dataexp2 and 26 for dataexp3. and Simulation of Heat Exchanger used in Soda
The percentage of the error for each experimental Recovery. Proceeding of the World Congress
data is different too. The dataexp1 has the error on Engineering (WCE) 2011; 2.
percentage of 1.3%, dataexp2 is 1.1% and dataexp3 [6] Sivakumar, P. Prabhakaran, D. & Kannadasan,
is 6.8%. Based on these results, it concludes that the T. Comaparative Analysis of Advanced
first order without time delay could be taken as Controllers in a Heat Exchanger. American
nonparametric model with the gain and time constant Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 2013;
have same values, i.e. 35.2 and 7200 s, while the 02(01): p. 01-06.
[7] Halvorsen, H. P. Control Theory with
initial temperature is different depend to state of the MathScript Examples. Telemark University
experimental began. College, Norway, 2012.
[8] Mulyana, T. Parametric and Nonparametric
Table 7. The comparison results of nonparametric
models
Identification of Shell and Tube Heat
dataexp Gain Gain Time Exchanger Mathematical Model. Thesis
( ) Constant ( ) UTHM, 2014.
( ) ( )
dataexp1 30 35.2 7200 0.31 1.3
dataexp2 29 35.2 7200 0.25 1.1
dataexp3 26 35.2 7200 1.5 6.8
5. Conclusion
The nonparametric model equation is generated
from the dynamic model equation through step
response analysis being used. This equation is
represented in a transfer function form. The output
signal is the cold water temperature outlet in shell
side heat exchanger, whilst the input signal is the hot
water flow rate inlet in tube side heat exchanger. A
first order without time delay transfer function has
been selected as candidate model chosen since it has
a response which is similar to the three set of the
experimental data. It can be observed that the all-
time constant and the gain of the all experimental
data is the same although the starting of the
26