What’s all the fuss about Bumpless

Transfer?
Home>News>Articles>What’s all the fuss about Bumpless Transfer?
Methods for implementing Bumpless Transfer are widely used in process automation
systems. However the concepts and the rationale behind the methods are many times
a mystery to process operators and automation engineers alike. Let’s explore this
subject in greater detail to unveil the underlying issues and gain better system
awareness and insights.

WHAT IS BUMPLESS TRANSFER?

What is Bumpless Transfer (BT) and why do controllers need it? Our definition
is as follows:
Bumpless Transfer is the method by which a controller can be
transitioned from Manual mode to Automatic mode without disrupting the
process.
Why do plant operators place control loops in Manual mode in the first place?
There are many reasons why plant operators place control loops in Manual
mode: following procedures for plant start-up, troubleshooting valve problems
and improper tuning of controllers are the most common. When the plant
operator decides to transfer a control loop from Manual mode to Automatic
mode they would like this transfer to occur without disturbing the process.
Without bumpless transfer this transition could create major process upsets
due to a large bump (or movement) of the valve. This bump could also be
responsible for setting off multiple alarms and in general erodes the
confidence that the operator has in the control system. The reason for these
bumps when transferring from Manual to Automatic mode is illustrated in the
following sections.
WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE BUMPS?

As most folks are aware a PID controller takes the difference between the
setpoint (SP) and the process variable (PV), referred to as the Error, and
calculates a valve position change to “drive the PV toward the SP”. The
amount and the speed at which the controller moves the control device (valve,
damper) is dependent upon the tuning parameters of the controller. When a
control loop is placed in Manual the PID controller is no longer determining the
position of the control device. That decision is now being made by the plant
operator. If the PID controller is not “informed” that the operator has taken
direct control over the device the PID controller will still think that it is in control
of the device. While the loop is in Manual there is only a very small chance
that the SP and the PV will have the same value. If there is an Error which
exists during the time that the loop is in Manual, and if the PID controller is not
informed that the loop is in Manual, the integral component of the PID
controller will continue calculate control moves to try and “drive the PV toward
the SP”. This integral action will “wind up” to either the completely open or
closed position of the control device. If this is allowed to occur there will be a
major disturbance when the transfer from Manual back to Automatic mode is
made.
Let’s look at an example of this:
At 10:00 a.m. the operator places a temperature control loop in Manual. The SP = 280°F at the
time of this transition. The operator decides to manually decrease the control valve position from
40% to 30%. The PV, after several minutes, settles out at 220°F. At 11:00 a.m. the operator
decides to switch the loop back in Automatic mode. At that time the SP = 280°F and the PV =
220°F. As soon as the operator flips the switch, the control valve goes to 100% open (from
30%). Alarms start going off, levels and pressures start swinging and, in general, everyone
associated with operating the plant gets very upset.

Manual to auto transfer with bump due to CO wind-up.

The remedy here is quite straightforward. The control logic should be

designed to 1) Inform the PID controller when the loop has been placed in
Manual mode, and 2) Have the PID controller track the value of the control
valve position that is being established by the plant operator.  By having the
PID controller track the actual valve position, we will prevent it from winding
up to either the completely Closed or Open position.  So we’re done right? 
Well not quite.

PROPORTIONAL BUMP AT THE TIME OF TRANSFER FROM

MANUAL TO AUTO

Assuming that we did our job and properly designed a PID tracking system
that prevented the PID controller from “winding up” when the control loop was
in Manual.  So let’s take a look at what could happen in our previous example:
At 10:00 a.m. the operator places a temperature control loop in Manual.  As before, the SP =
280°F at the time of this transition.  The operator decides to manually decrease the control valve
position from 40% to 30%.  The PV, after several minutes, settles out at 220°F.  At 11:00 a.m.
the operator decides to switch the loop back in Automatic mode.  At that time the SP = 280°F
and the PV = 220°F.  As soon as the operator flips the switch the control valve goes to 50%
open (from 30%).  Alarms may still trigger and disturbances to the process may still occur. 
Maybe not quite as bad as without tracking, but still very disruptive.  What happened?

Manual to auto transfer with bump due to P-action.

Note in the above example that at the time that the switch from Manual to
Automatic occurred there was an Error present (SP-PV;  280°F -220°F = 60
°F).  So even though we had the PID Controller tracking the position of the
Control Valve the first time it calculated a control valve position the
Proportional Term of the PID controller would “bump” due to the presence of
the Error.  The positive aspect is that the “bump” was less than that which
occurred without PID Tracking; but there was a substantial “bump”
nonetheless.  So now what should we do?  Well there are two options:

1. Design the SP to track the PV when the control loop is placed in Manual.
Most modern control systems today will give you the option to have the SP track the PV when
the control loop is placed in Manual.

Pros:  Since the SP tracks the PV when in Manual the value of the Error at the time the operator
“flips the switch” will be zero.  As such there will be no “proportional bump” at the time of the
switch.

Cons:  Operators will have to “remember” what the normal SP should be for the control loop
when it is returned to Automatic mode.  By having the SP track the PV the operator no longer
has the SP pegged at its normal value. There could still be a bump due to P action if large
change in SP is made after transferring to Auto mode.

Option 1 – Bumpless Transfer by SP tracking PV

2. Suppress the Proportional Action at the instant that the switch from Manual to Auto is
made.
Some modern control systems provide the option of “suppressing” the Proportional action at the
time the operator “flips” the switch from Manual to Automatic.
 Pros:  The SP remains at its nominal value during the period of time that the control loop is in
Manual thus preventing the operator from having to remember where the SP should be during
normal operations.  Eliminates the Proportional Bump.

Cons:  If there is an Error present at the time the operator “flips the switch” it may take a
considerable amount of time to “drive the PV to the SP” since the proportional action of the
PID controller has been suppressed.

Bumpless transfer by suppressed P-action

OPTIMAL SOLUTION

The best method of providing bumpless transfer is dependent on a variety of

factors, the most important of which is the process itself. The optimal solution
is to have your PID controllers tuned so well that the operators never feel the
need to place the control loops in Manual due to improper tuning. And the
most cost-effective way to ensure this is by tuning your loops with
ControlSoft’s INTUNE PID tuning tools software.