Lag Time

Instrumentation Tools
Learn Instrumentation and Control Engineering. Inst Tools covers topics of Industrial
Instrumentation, PLC, DCS, SCADA, Field Instruments, Analyzers and so on.
https://instrumentationtools.com
Author: Instrumentation Tools
Categories: Common
Lag time
om
s .c
ol
To
i on
at
nt
me
ru
st
If a square-wave signal is applied to an RC passive integrator circuit, the output signal will
appear to have a “sawtooth” shape, the crisp rising and falling edges of the square wave
In
replaced by damped curves:
In a word, the output signal of this circuit lags behind the input signal, unable to keep pace with
the steep rising and falling edges of the square wave.
Most mechanical and chemical processes exhibit a similar tendency: an “inertial” opposition to
rapid changes. Even instruments themselves naturally (Note) damp sudden stimuli. We could
have just as easily subjected a pressure transmitter to a series of pressure pulses resembling
square waves, and witnessed the output signal exhibit the same damped response:
InstrumentationTools.com
om
.c
Note : It is also possible to con?gure many instruments to deliberately damp their response to
s
input conditions. This is called damping.
ol
To
The gravity-drained level-control process highlighted in an earlier subsection exhibits a very
similar response to a sudden change in control valve position:
i on
at
nt
me
ru
st
In
om
s .c
ol
To
i on
at
nt
me
For any particular ?ow rate into the vessel, there will be a ?nal (self-regulating) point where the
liquid level “wants” to settle (Note) . However, the liquid level does not immediately achieve that
ru
new level if the control valve jumps to some new position, owing to the “capacity” of the vessel
st
and the dynamics of gravity ?ow. Any physical behavior exhibiting the same “settling” behavior
over time may be said to illustrate a ?rst-order lag. A classic “textbook” example of a ?rst-order
In
lag is the temperature of a cup of hot liquid, gradually equalizing with room temperature. The
liquid’s temperature drops rapidly at ?rst, but then slows its approach to ambient temperature
as time progresses. This natural tendency is described by Newton’s Law of Cooling,
mathematically represented in the form of a di?erential equation (an equation containing a
variable along with one or more of its derivatives). In this case, the equation is a ?rst-order
di?erential equation, because it contains the variable for temperature (T) and the ?rst derivative
of temperature ( dT/dt ) with respect to time:
Note : 11 Assuming a constant discharge valve position. If someone alters the hand valve’s
position, the relationship between incoming ?ow rate and ?nal liquid level changes.
Where,
T = Temperature of liquid in cup
Tambient = Temperature of the surrounding environment
k = Constant representing the thermal conductivity of the cup
t = Time
All this equation tells us is that the rate of cooling ( dT/dt ) is directly proportional (?k) to the
di?erence in temperature between the liquid and the surrounding air (T ?Tambient ). The hotter
the temperature, the faster the object cools (the faster rate of temperature fall):
The proportionality constant in this equation (k) represents how readily thermal energy escapes
the hot cup. A cup with more thermal insulation, for example, would exhibit a smaller k value
(i.e. the rate of temperature loss dT/dt will be less for any given temperature di?erence between
the cup and ambient T ? T ambient ).
A general solution to this equation is as follows:
om
Where,
.c
T = Temperature of liquid in cup at time t
Tinitial = Starting temperature of liquid (t = 0)
s
Tfinal = Ultimate temperature of liquid (ambient)
ol
e = Euler’s constant
? = “Time constant” of the system To
on
This mathematical analysis introduces a descriptive quantity of the system: something called a
time constant. The “time constant” of a ?rst-order system is the amount of time necessary for
i
the system to come to within 36.8% (e?1 ) of its ?nal value (i.e. the time required for the system
at
to go 63.2% of the way from the starting point to its ultimate settling point: 1 ? e?1 ). After two
time-constants’ worth of time, the system will have come to within 13.5% (e?2 ) of its ?nal value
nt
(i.e. gone 86.5% of the way: 1 ?e?2 ); after three time-constants’ worth of time, to within 5% (e )
of the ?nal value, (i.e. gone 95% of the way: 1 ? e?3 ). After ?ve time-constants’ worth of time,
me
the system will be within 1% (e?5 , rounded to the nearest whole percent) of its ?nal value, which
ru
is often close enough to consider it “settled” for most practical purposes.

st
In
The concept of a “time constant” may be shown in graphical form for both falling and rising
variables:
Students of electronics will immediately recognize this concept, since it is widely used in the
analysis and application of capacitive and inductive circuits. However, you should recognize the
fact that the concept of a “time constant” for capacitive and inductive electrical circuits is only
one case of a more general phenomenon. Literally any physical system described by the same
?rst-order di?erential equation may be said to have a “time constant.” Thus, it is perfectly valid
for us to speak of a hot cup of co?ee as having a time constant (? ), and to say that the co?ee’s
temperature will be within 1% of room temperature after ?ve of those time constants have
elapsed.
In the world of process control, it is more customary to refer to this as a lag time than as a time
constant, but these are really interchangeable terms. The term “lag time” makes sense if we
consider a ?rst-order system driven to achieve a constant rate of change. For instance, if we
subjected our RC circuit to a ramping input voltage rather than a “stepped” input voltage – such
that the output ramped as well instead of passively settling at some ?nal value – we would ?nd
that the amount of time separating equal input and output voltage values was equal to this time
constant (in an RC circuit, ? = RC):
om
s .c
ol
To
Lag time is thus de?ned as the di?erence in time between when the process variable ramps to a
on
certain value and when it would have ramped to that same value were it not for the existence of
i
?rst-order lag in the system. The system’s output variable lags behind the ramping input
at
variable by a ?xed amount of time, regardless of the ramping rate. If the process in question is
an RC circuit, the lag time will still be the product of (? = RC), just as the “time product” de?ned
nt
for a stepped input voltage. Thus, we see that “time constant” and “lag time” are really the
exact same concept, merely manifesting in di?erent forms as the result of two di?erent input
me
conditions (stepped versus ramped).

ru
st
In
When an engineer or a technician describes a process being “fast” or “slow,” they generally
refer to the magnitude of this lag time. This makes lag time very important to our selection of
PID controller tuning values. Integral and derivative control actions in particular are sensitive to
the amount of lag time in a process, since both those actions are time-based. “Slow” processes
(i.e. process types having large lag times) cannot tolerate aggressive integral action, where the
controller “impatiently” winds the output up or down at a rate that is too rapid for the process to
respond to. Derivative action, however, is generally useful on processes having large lag times.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Lag Time

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lag Time

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Instrumentation Tools

Author: Instrumentation Tools

replaced by damped curves:

A general solution to this equation is as follows:

is often close enough to consider it “settled” for most practical purposes.

conditions (stepped versus ramped).

You might also like