Manipal University

Department of Chemical Engineering

CE 1831- PROCESS CONTROL LABORATORY

IV YEAR, 8th SEMESTER, 2020

EXPERIMENT # 4

To study the dynamic response of a 2nd order system subjected to step change

INSTRUCTOR:
Dr. Anees Ahmed Yunus Khan
Dr. Gaurav Kataria

GROUP #F
MEMBERS:
1. Tanya Priyadarshni 169102030
2. Akshay Srivastava 169102004
3. Mukund Sai Teja PB 169102015
4. Dipinder Singh Bagga 169102011
5. Jai Gupta 159110007

Experiment carried on: February 06, 2020

Report submitted on : February 13, 2020
PRELAB (10) ______
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (10) ______
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES/SCOPE/PROCEDURE (30) ______
RESULTS & DISCUSSION (30) ______
CONCLUSIONS (5) ______
REFERENCES (5) ______
APPENDIX
a) Original data, sample calculations, other information (5) ______
GENERAL COMPLETENESS
a) Conciseness and neatness (5) ______

TOTAL (100) ______

 Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 2

2. Introduction. .................................................................................................................... 3
3. Experimental Set-up: ....................................................................................................... 5
(a) Apparatus description: ................................................................................................. 5
(b) Diagram:...................................................................................................................... 5
4. Objectives. ....................................................................................................................... 6
(c) Scope. .......................................................................................................................... 6
5. Procedure......................................................................................................................... 6
6. Results and Discussions. .................................................................................................. 7
7. Conclusions and Recommendations. ................................................................................ 8
8. References. ...................................................................................................................... 8
9. Appendix. ........................................................................................................................ 9
(d) Observation Table: ...................................................................................................... 9
(e) Formula Used: ........................................................................................................... 11
(f) Sample calculations: .................................................................................................. 12

10. List of figure

a. Figure 1: Apparatus for studying 2nd order system subjected to step change. ....... 5
b. Figure 3: Response curve for mercury manometer - height vs. time ...................... 7
c. Figure 4: Response curve for water manometer - height vs. time ................ Error!
Bookmark not defined.7
11. List of figure
a. Table 1: Observation table for mercury manometer height and time data. ............. 9
b. Table 2: Observation table for water manometer height and time data. ............... 10

-1-
Executive Summary

The motive for conducting this experiment was to learn the dynamic response of a second order
system subjected to a step change. We studied a U shaped manometer system, which served as a
second order system. Two cases were taken in consideration for two fluids – case one was for
mercury and case 2 was for water. We then recorded the response of the manometer along with
time and used this data to generate a response curve in respect with time. The ζ term indicated or
measured the degree of damping, or the oscillatory character. It was also observed that the τ term
indicated or measured the period, or speed, of the response of a second-order system. Both the
plotted curve shows oscillatory nature implying that the system is underdamped 2nd order system.
From both the curves we observed that ξ < 1, and all the response curves are oscillatory in nature
and become less oscillatory as ξ is increased. Also, the period of oscillation for mercury and water
manometer were found to be 1.7 and 1.9 sec/cycle respectively.

-2-
Introduction.
A second order linear system is a common description of many dynamic process. The responses
depend on whether it is an over damped, critically damped or under damped second order system.

𝑑2 𝑦 𝑑𝑦
𝜏𝑠2 𝑑𝑡 2 + 2𝜉𝜏𝑠 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑦 = 𝑘𝑝𝜇(𝑡 − 𝜃𝑝 ) [1]

Has output y(t) and input u(t) and four unknown parameters. The four parameters are the gain kp,
damping coefficient, second order time constant and dead time.
In 2nd order system an input step change leads to overshoot which is not obtained in 1 st order
system. [1]
The percent overshoot is the percent by which a system’s step response exceeds its final steady
state value. For a second order underdamped system, the % overshoot is directly related to the
ratio.
For this experiment we are studying a system containing manometers. The system consists of U-
shaped glass manometer filled with water and mercury. We have assumed that the resulting flow
in the manometer is laminar and the steady state friction law of drag force in laminar flow is
applied at each instant, from which we will determine the transfer function between the applied
pressure and manometer height.

The dynamic response of 2 nd order in a step change can be determined by a 2nd order differential
equation and the solution of these equation involves 3 cases which are –

1. When 𝜉 < 1, under-damped condition

2. When 𝜉 > 1, over-damped condition
3. When 𝜉 = 1, critically damped condition.

Mathematical Expression: −
For 2nd order differential equation: - [2]
𝑑2 𝑦 𝑑𝑦
A( 2
)+𝐵 + 𝐶𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑡) .........(1)
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
For manometer = y(t) = response at time t
8𝐿𝜇 2𝐺
Damping coefficient : 𝜉 = √
𝜌𝐺𝐷2 𝐿
Standard form: -
2𝐿 𝑑2 ℎ 16𝜇𝐿 𝑑ℎ 𝜌1 −𝜌2 ∆𝑃
( )( )+( )( ) + ℎ = ( )= .........(2)
3𝑔 𝑑𝑡 2 𝜌𝐷2 𝑔 𝑑𝑡 𝑔𝜌 2𝑔
𝑑2 𝑦 𝑑𝑦
 𝜏2 ( ) + 2𝜏𝜉 ( ) + 𝑦 = 𝑥(𝑡)
𝑑𝑡 2 𝑑𝑡
For step change response: -
1
x(s) =
𝑠

2nd order system equation will be as follows: -

-3-
 1 1
y(s) = × .........(3)
𝑠 𝑦 2 𝑠 2 +2𝑦𝜉𝑠+1

For ξ we have – [3]

 Case 1: Under-damped system –
𝜉<1
𝜉𝑡
1 1 𝑡𝑎𝑛 −1 √1−𝜉
 y(t) = 1− 2
𝑒 − 𝜏 × sin (√1 − 𝜉 2 + )
√1−𝜉 𝜏 𝜉

 Case 2: Over-damped system –

𝜉>1
𝜉𝑡
𝑡 𝜉 𝑡
 y(t) = 1−𝑒 − 𝜏 × (𝑐𝑜𝑠√𝜉 2 − 1 𝜏 + sin ℎ √𝜉 2 − 1 𝜏)
√𝜉 2−1

 Case 3: Critically-damped system –

𝜉=1
𝑡
𝑡
 y(t) = 1− (1 + 𝜏) 𝑒 −𝜏

𝟐𝑳
Time constant (Ʈ) =√ .......(4)
𝟑𝒈

𝟖𝛍 𝟑𝑳
Damping coefficient (ζ) = √𝟐𝒈 .......(5)
𝛒𝑫𝟐

In this particular experiment it is expected that the system will be under damped, therefore for an
underdamped system:

−πζ
Overshoot = exp ( ) ..........(6)
√1− ζ2

Decay ratio = (Overshoot)2 ...........(7)

√1− ζ2
Radian Frequency (ω) = (rad/sec) ...........(8)
Ʈ

1
Cyclical frequency (𝑓) = ω (cycles/sec) ...........(9)
2π

Period of oscillations (T) = 1/f (sec/cycle) ...........(10)

-4-
Experimental Set-up:

(a) Apparatus description:

The experimental setup consists of two manometers, which are U-shaped. One of which has a
larger diameter, which is the water manometer while the one with smaller diameter is the mercury
manometer. Valves are also provided along with air vents which are responsible for changing the
pressure inside the manometers. In the starting the pressure across both sides of the manometer is
equal. But at t = 0 a pressure difference is imparted across the legs of the manometer. We need to
find the transfer function between applied pressure difference i.e. ∆P and manometer reading
(height h). The opening of respective manometers is connected to a compressed air supply that
provides desired pressure in manometer.

(b) Diagram:

Figure 1: Apparatus for studying 2nd order system subjected to step change.

-5-
Objectives. To study the dynamic response of a second order system subjected to a step change.

Scope.
1. Find the transfer function for the mercury manometer system and draw a graph between
the system’s response and time.
2. Find the transfer function for the water manometer system and plot the response time graph.
3. Calculate the overshoot, percent overshoot, decay ratio, radian frequency, cyclic frequency
and period of oscillation for both the cases.

Procedure.

1. Switch on the main power supply and turn on the compressor.

2. Open the compressor partially for the air supply.

For the mercury manometer:

1. ensure that the manometer level is at 0.
2. close went connection and adjust the needle value and vent in order to raise the mercury
level.
3. Note down the mercury level reading and quickly open the vent to apply step change,
4. Start the recorder and record the oscillations.
5. Note down the top peak and bottom peak reading, Also, simultaneously note the period of
oscillation and ten calculating for each oscillation.
6. Repeat steps 1 to 6 for different magnitude of step change.

For the water manometer:

1. Now, for the water manometer, make sure that water level in manometer is at steady state.
2. Close the vent to deflect the water column in order to provide impulse change.
3. Note down the water level reading and quickly open the vent.
4. Start the recorder and record the oscillations.
5. Note down the top and the bottom peak readings. Also, simultaneously note the period of
oscillation.
6. Repeat steps 1 to 5 at different magnitude of step change.
7. After completing the experiment, stop the inlet flow of air by closing the compressor supply
valve.
8. Turn off the air compressor and switch off the main power supply.

-6-
Results and Discussions.

Mercury manometer response

(for height and time)
100

50
Height (cm)

0
1 3 5 7 9 11

-50

-100

-150
time (sec)

Response (cm) (SET1) Response (cm) (SET2)

Figure 2: Response curve for mercury manometer - height vs. time

Water Manometer response curve

190

140

90
Height (cm)

40

-10
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15

-60

-110

-160
time (sec)

Height (cm) (S1) Height (cm) (S2)

Figure 3: Response curve for water manometer - height vs. time

-7-
For this experiment at initial time t = 0 a pressure difference is imparted across the legs of the
manometer. As we close the air vent it deflect the fluid column and provides impulse change we
then observed the pressure difference i.e. ∆P and manometer reading (height h).
From figure 2 we can interpret that for the case of mercury manometer the response curve has the
trends of a system undergoing an under-damped condition (nature for which 𝜉 < 1) since its
oscillatory in nature. After 10 second the oscillation gets stabilized. The period of oscillation
calculated for the system is 1.7 sec/cycle. The system is a second order underdamped system.
From Figure 3, which is the case for water manometer the response curve shows the similar
oscillatory nature therefore implying that the system is under-damped 2nd order system. It took
about 15.75 seconds for the system to get stabilized. The calculated value of oscillation period
came out to be 1.9 sec/cycle.
From both the curves we observed that ξ < 1, hence all the response curves are oscillatory in nature
and become less oscillatory as ξ is increased.

Conclusions and Recommendations.

In this experiment we studied the dynamic response of a second order system subjected to a step
change. We observed that the response curve for the water manometer showed more oscillations
than that of the mercury manometer as the damping coefficient for water is lower than that of
mercury. We furthermore observed that the response shows less oscillations as ζ increases. We
also concluded that by keeping the value of ζ high we can minimize the oscillation.

For a better result following things should be kept in consideration in order to achieve accurate
results –

While taking reading make sure to take reading at every second and better to use a slow motion
camera for recording the experiment. Before stating the experiment ensure that the system is in
steady state. Do not close the air vent suddenly with a lot of force as it may cause the fluid inside
the manometer scatter. Also it is recommended to check the sensitivity of the manometer before
starting the experiment. Take the reading properly avoiding parallax errors. Safety is the priority
so while conducting the experiment ensure to wear proper safety gear.

References.

1. Andreiev N.; “A Process controller that adapts to signal and Process conditions, control
engineering”; Volume 38; 1997.
2. Schmidt, Lanny D.; “The engineering of chemical reactions.”; Oxford University; New
York; 1998.
3. Smith, R. M.; “Chemical Process: Design and Integration”; John Wiley and Sons;
Chichester; 2005.

-8-
Appendix.
a) Observation Table:

Table 1: Observation table for mercury manometer height and time data.

Initial Value Time Height (S1) Height (S2)

Sr. no.
(cm) (sec) (cm) (cm)
1 -100 1 60 48
2 -100 1.25 47 36
3 -100 1.5 29 15
4 -100 1.75 10 2
5 -100 2 -10 -9
6 -100 2.25 -29 -24
7 -100 2.5 -60 -36
8 -100 2.75 -80 -50
9 -100 3 -100 -67
10 -100 3.25 -113 -88
11 -100 3.5 -120 -102
12 -100 3.75 -128 -111
13 -100 4 -125 -120
14 -100 4.25 -118 -117
15 -100 4.5 -97 -115
16 -100 4.75 -80 -107
17 -100 5 -62 -97
18 -100 5.25 -54 -85
19 -100 5.5 -50 -79
20 -100 5.75 -54 -77
21 -100 6 -79 -82
22 -100 6.25 -120 -90
23 -100 6.5 -125 -104
24 -100 6.75 -96 -105
25 -100 7 -75 -90
26 -100 7.25 -70 -85
27 -100 7.5 -72 -87
28 -100 7.75 -81 -98
29 -100 8 -94.4 -111
30 -100 8.25 -105 -99
31 -100 8.5 -108 -95.5
32 -100 8.75 -96 -90
33 -100 9 -89 -92

-9-
 34 -100 9.25 -92 -94
35 -100 9.5 -90 -99
36 -100 9.75 -90 -89.8
37 -100 10 -90 -89.8

Table 2: Observation table for water manometer height and time data.

Sr. no. Initial Value Time Height (S1) Height (S2)

(cm) (sec) (cm) (cm)
1 10 1 180 190
2 10 1.25 -130 -147
3 10 1.5 85 98
4 10 1.75 87 110
5 10 2 90 93
6 10 2.25 -82 -72
7 10 2.5 40 54
8 10 2.75 38 47
9 10 3 -50 -43
10 10 3.25 30 44
11 10 3.5 -15 -10
12 10 3.75 -10 -4
13 10 4 21 25
14 10 4.25 32 40
15 10 4.5 20 18
16 10 4.75 -12 -5
17 10 5 1 7
18 10 5.25 15 11
19 10 5.5 20.5 25
20 10 5.75 26 30
21 10 6 19 12
22 10 6.25 0 -4
23 10 6.5 -5 -9
24 10 6.75 -7 -1
25 10 7 3 10
26 10 7.25 17 18
27 10 7.5 8 15
28 10 7.75 5 10
29 10 8 2 2

- 10 -
 30 10 8.25 15 -3
31 10 8.5 20 11
3233 10 8.75 17.2 15
34 10 9 10 13
35 10 9.25 8 7
36 10 9.5 10 6
37 10 9.75 16 10
38 10 10 10 8
39 10 10.25 9.5 7
40 10 10.5 7 14
41 10 10.75 8 10
42 10 11 9.5 8
43 10 11.25 11 7
44 10 11.5 10 6
45 10 11.75 8 15
46 10 12 9.2 13
47 10 12.25 9.7 12
48 10 12.5 10 11.5
49 10 12.75 9.7 11
50 10 13 9.6 10
51 10 13.25 9.3 9
52 10 13.5 9 11
53 10 13.75 9.5 10
54 10 14 9.9 10.5
55 10 14.25 10 11
56 10 14.5 10.1 11.4
57 10 14.75 10.2 11.2
58 10 15 10.3 11.1
59 10 15.25 10.4 11
60 10 15.5 10.5 11
61 10 15.75 10.5 12

b) Formula Used:
𝟐𝑳
1. Time constant (Ʈ) =√𝟑𝒈
𝟖𝛍 𝟑𝑳
2. Damping coefficient (ζ) = 𝛒𝑫𝟐 √𝟐𝒈
−πζ
3. Overshoot = exp.( )
√1− ζ2
4. Decay ratio = (Overshoot)2

- 11 -
 √1− ζ2
5. Radian Frequency (ω) = (rad/sec)
Ʈ
1
6. Cyclical frequency (𝑓) = 2π ω (cycles/sec)
7. Period of oscillations (T) = 1/f (sec/cycle)

c) Sample calculations:
A. Calculated for mercury manometer:

1. Dynamic Viscosity (µ) = 0.0015 kg/m.s

2. Mass density (ρ) = 13545 kg/m3
3. Column length (L) = 0.75 m (approx.)
4. Tube diameter (d) = 0.005m
5. Time constant (τ) = 0.225 sec
6. Damping coefficient (ζ) = 0.012
7. Overshoot (calculated) = 0.96
8. Decay Ratio (calculated) = 0.92
9. Radian frequency (ω) = 4.44 rad/sec
10. Cyclical frequency (𝑓) = 0.70 cycle/sec
11. Period of oscillation (calculated) = 1.41 sec/cycle

B. Calculated and observed Parameters for Water:

1. Dynamic Viscosity (µ) = 0.001 kg/m.s

2. Mass density (ρ) = 998 kg/m3
3. Column length (L) = 1.5 m (approx.)
4. Tube diameter (d) = 0.022m
5. Step change (mm) = 169.3 mm
6. Time constant (τ) = 0.32 sec
7. Damping coefficient (ζ) = 0.009
8. Overshoot (calculated) = 0.97
9. Decay Ratio (calculated) = 0.94
10. Radian frequency (ω) = 3.12 rad/sec
11. Cyclical frequency (𝑓) = 0.54 cycle/sec
12. Period of oscillation (calculated) (sec) = 1.9 sec/cycle

- 12 -