MIMO-02

Some instructions
This Part-02 is in four different sessions
Complete the sessions ONLY one at a time..
Please do not try to attempt all four sessions in one sitting
Ideally, you should keep aside an hour and half, to go
through one session…
You may need two hours for every session if you do all hand
calculations while going through the slides….
Once you are through all four sessions….go through a
TextBook and solve the problems for similar cases….
MIMO-02
Part-I
 Dealing with MIMO systems
In this session we will learn……
To quantify the interaction between different loops

to pair the manipulated variable with a controlled variable

when there is choice
Pairing of controlled(C) and manipulated (m)
variables in MIMO systems
In the case of mixer from MIMO-01 presentation,
The temperature of output stream can be controlled by changing
Hot water caustic
110°C 50°C Flowrate of water (m1)
500 kg/h. 200 kg/h.
OR

Flow rate of caustic solution (m2)

Now the question is………

Which manipulated variable should we use for temperature control?

(m1 ) OR (m2)
Pairing of Variables

In some cases, the choice may be obvious

In a 2x 2 system, it may be easy to check the effect of combination

But for a m x m system….

…….it may not be easy to check the effect of combination

Fortunately…….there are methods to just do that..

Pairing of variables to be used within the control strategy.

The most common method is …..

Bristol’s Relative gain Array (RGA) method

It is a method of quantifying the process interactions

…and provides a recommendation…

concerning the most effective pairing of controlled and manipulated variables…

You are familiar now with the term
Gain of the process….(Kp)

We will now define a new term

….

Relative Gain….
Relative gain
C 
 i 
M 
 j M open
loop
gain

ij  
C  closed
 loop
gain
 i 
M 
 j C
• M means all the M’s are kept constant except Mj.

C means all the C’s are kept constant except Ci.

This is mathematical definition of relative gain

Let us understand, what relative gain, really means..

Let us take the Example of Mixer…..
The controlled variable C1( i.e. total flow rate) in case of mixer is affected by M1 and M2
At steady state conditions, the effect of change in M1 and M2
is given by corresponding gains, K11, and K12

Similarly, temperature depends on M1 and M2

C
(
1s
)K
1M
1(
1s
)KM
12
2(
s)
The Kij 's are Steady State gains
C
(
2s
)KM
(
21
1s
)KM
22
2(
s)

 C1 
   K11 When there is no change in m2 i.e. Dm2= 0
 M 1  M 2
 C1 
   ? When there is no change in C2 i.e. DC2= 0
 M 1  C 2
or the second loop in in perfect controlled state
For the mixer case

𝑚=𝐶 1=𝑚1 +𝑚2

𝑚1 𝑇 1 +𝑚2 𝑇 2
𝑇 =𝐶 2=
𝑚1 +𝑚2

𝜕 𝐶1 𝜕𝑚 𝑑 ( 𝑤h𝑒𝑛𝑚2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡)
𝐾 11 = = =
𝜕 𝑚1 𝜕 𝑚1 𝜕 𝑚 1
( 𝑚1+𝑚 2 )=1

𝜕 𝐶1 𝜕𝑚 𝑑
𝐾 12= = =
𝜕 𝑚2 𝜕 𝑚2 𝜕𝑚 2
( 𝑚1 +𝑚2 )=1 ( 𝑤h𝑒𝑛𝑚1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 )

Derive the expressions for K21 and K22 before moving on….
For the mixer case
𝜕𝑚 𝜕 𝐶1 𝑑 ( 𝑤h𝑒𝑛𝑚2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡)
𝐾 11 = = = ( 𝑚1 +𝑚2 )=1
𝜕 𝑚1 𝜕 𝑚1 𝜕 𝑚1

𝜕𝑚 𝜕 𝐶1 𝑑
𝐾 12 = = =
𝜕 𝑚 2 𝜕 𝑚2 𝜕 𝑚2
( 𝑚1 +𝑚2 ) =1 ( 𝑤h𝑒𝑛𝑚1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 )

)=

)= -
If the values of T1, T2, m1 and m2, at steady state, are plugged in….

you get the steady state gains, K ij ’s

Estimate the values, before going to next slide…….

For the mixer case
𝐾 11=1 𝐾 12=1
𝐾 21=0.0245 𝐾 22 =− 0.0612

The steady state gain matrix is then…

𝐾 11 𝐾 12 1 1
𝐾 21 𝐾 22
= 0.0245 −0.612
For the mixer case

The steady state effect of changes in manipulated variables can be estimated using

[ ]
∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚1 𝑚 2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑡
=𝐾 11 When = 0

?????
When = 0

Find the expression for the second case, before going further……
Continued…..

when =0 in the second equation

+
𝐾 21
∆ 𝑚2 =− ∆ 𝑚1 Substituting it in the first equation
𝐾 22

[
∆ 𝑐 1= 𝐾 11 − 𝐾 12
𝐾 21
𝐾 22]∆ 𝑚1

𝜕 𝐶1 ∆ 𝑚 𝐾 11 𝐾 22 − 𝐾 12 𝐾 21
= = When C2 is constant; i.e. No change in C2
𝜕 𝑚 1 ∆𝑚 1 𝐾 22

We have already derived….

𝜕 𝐶1
= 𝐾 11 When m2 is constant; i.e. No change in m2
𝜕 𝑚1

Therefore, by the definition of Relative Gain between C1 and M1 is

=
Significance of relative gain

𝜆11 = 
[ ∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚1 ] 𝑚 2= 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

[ ∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚1 ] 𝑐 2= 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

This value gives the impact of presence of other control loops

in the same system

The numerator indicates effect of m1 on C1 when all other control loops are open

The denominator indicates effect of m1 on C1 when all other control loops are closed
 If the value is 1……. the pairing of C1 with m1 is perfect

i.e. The effect of given manipulated variable on related

controlled variable is independent of presence of other control
loops

If the value is 0…

you have no idea of what control means!!!

Because you are trying to operate the system with completely unrelated variables..
Find the relative gains of other pairs

= 𝜆12 =
[ ∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚2 ]𝑚 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

[ ∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚2 ] 𝑐 2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

𝜆21 =
[ ∆ 𝐶2
∆ 𝑚1 ]𝑚 2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
𝜆22 =
[ ∆ 𝐶2
∆ 𝑚2 ]𝑚 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

[ ∆ 𝐶2
∆ 𝑚1 ] 𝑐 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
[ ∆ 𝐶2
∆ 𝑚2 ] 𝑐 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡

Find the expressions for three other gains first, before going further……
 + For the relative gain between the first
+ controlled variable (C1) and the
second manipulated variable (m2)
[ ]
∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚2 𝑚 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑡
=𝐾 12 When = 0, i.e. no change in m1

????? When = 0

Substituting = 0 in the second equation, we get

+
𝐾 22
Solving for m1, we get ∆ 𝑚1 =− ∆ 𝑚2 Substituting it in equation for C1
𝐾 21

+ [
∆ 𝑐 1= 𝐾 12 − 𝐾 11
𝐾 22
𝐾 21]∆𝑚 2

Thus

𝜕 𝐶 1 ∆ 𝑚 𝐾 12 𝐾 21 − 𝐾 11 𝐾 22
= =
𝜕 𝑚 2 ∆ 𝑚2 𝐾 21
 Continued…..

[ ]
∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚2 𝑚 1=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
=𝐾 12
[ ]
∆ 𝐶1
∆ 𝑚2 𝑐 2=𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
=
𝐾 12 𝐾 21 − 𝐾 11 𝐾 22
𝐾 21

=
Substituting…

=-

Verify that = 1

= -
Similarly,

Verify that = 1

Verify that = 1
Bristol’s Relative Gain Array (RGA)
Now you can write all Relative Gains in a matrix form

 K K
1122 K K
1221 
KK   
1122 K K
1221 K K
1122K K
1221
 
 K K
1221 K
11K22 
 
K K K K K K  K K
 1122 1221 1122 1221

Estimate this array of relative gains for the Mixer case….before going further
RGA for the Mixer is

 K K
1122 K K
1221 
KK   
1122 K K
1221 K K
1122K K
1221
 
 K K
1221 K
11K22 
 
K K K K K K  K K
 1122 1221 1122 1221

0.714 0.286
L=
0.286 0.714

The RGA indicates relative impact of a manipulated variable on a controlled variable when the
second control loop is closed. Higher is the value, better is the response.
Non-Zero values indicates interaction between two loops.

Note that summation of all elements in a row OR a column equals to 1.0

MIMO-02
Part-II
In this session….
we will spend a little more time in understanding
Relative Gains
A typical RGA may look like this L=
0.714 0.286
0.286 0.714

2
.28
1.28

OR   OR 0 1

1.
282
.28 L=
even
1 0

How do we interpret these numbers???

INTERPRETING THE RGA ELEMENTS

λ ij = 1, the open-loop gain and closed-loop gain between yi and mj are identical

Implication for loop interactions

- Loop i will not be subject to retaliatory action from other loops when they are closed,

- m j can control yi without interference from the other control loops.

- If any of the g ik elements in the transfer function matrix are nonzero, then the i th loop will
experience some disturbances from control actions taken in the other loops, but they are
not provoked by control actions in the i th loop

Pairing recommendation:
pair yi with mj
INTERPRETING THE RGA ELEMENTS
λ ij = 0, the open-loop gain between yi and mj is zero

Implication for loop interactions:

mj has no direct influence on yi

even though it may affect other output variables.

Pairing recommendation
: do not pair yi with mj
INTERPRETING THE RGA ELEMENTS
If 0 < λ ij < 1

The open-loop gain between yi and mj is smaller than the closed-loop

Implication for loop interactions

As the closed-loop gain is the sum of the open-loop gain and the
retaliatory effect from the other loops:

The loops are definitely interacting, but the retaliatory effect from
the other loops is in the same direction as the main effect of mj on yi

The extent is indicated by how close λ ij is to 0.5

(1) If λ ij = 0.5,
the main effect of mj on yi is exactly identical to the retaliatory effect from other loops

(2) If 0.5 < λ ij <1

The retaliatory effect from other loops is lower than the main effect of mj on yi

(3) If 0 < λ ij <0.5

The retaliatory effect from other loops is substantial than the main effect of mj on yi

Pairing recommendation

Avoid pairing mj on yi if λ ij ≤ 0.5.

INTERPRETING THE RGA ELEMENTS

λ ij > 1, the open-loop gain between yi and mj is larger than the closed-loop gain

Implication for loop interactions:

The loops interact,
and the retaliatory effect from other loops acts in opposition to the main effect of mj on yi

This could cause loop i to become unstable when other loops are closed

Pairing recommendation
do not pair yi with mj
INTERPRETING THE RGA ELEMENTS

λ ij < 0,
the open-loop and closed-loop gains between yi and mj have opposite signs

Implication for loop interactions:

The loops interact,
The retaliatory effect from the other loops is not only in opposition to the main effect of mj
on yi
but it is also the more dominant
This is a dangerous situation because opening the other loops will likely cause loop i to
become unstable

Pairing recommendation
do not pair yi with mj
Summary of How to use RGA for pairing
variables
 ij  1 Ci should be paired with Mj

 ij  0 Ci should not be paired with Mj

0   ij  1 Indicates interaction between loops, worst interaction l=.5, decoupling will

be required

Too much interaction,

 ij  1 closed loop gain is reduced by closing the other control loops

Pairing these two variables causes severe interaction

 ij  0 The effect of manipulated variable is reversed…
When other loop is closed…!!!!!
RGA for the Mixer is

 K K
1122 K K
1221 
KK   
1122 K K
1221 K K
1122K K
1221
 
 K K
1221 K
11K22 

 KK  
K K K K  K K
 1122 1221 1122 1221
m T
M1
0.714 0.286
L=
M2 0.286 0.714

The RGA values indicate that the total flow rate can be paired with water flowrate
while temperature controller should be paired with flow rate of the caustic solution
 Example-2
K11 K12
 2 1.5 
10s 1 s 1 
Gp(s) 
1.5 2 

s 1 10s 1

K21 K22

Find the steady state gains of the system first and the relative gains

 K K
1122 K K
1221 
KK   
1122 K K
1221 K K
1122K K
1221
 
 K K
1221 K
11K22 

 KK  
K K K K  K K
 1122 1221 1122 1221
Example
 22 1.51.5 
22  
1.5 1.5 22 1.51
.5
 
 1 .51 .5 22 

 22 1.5 1
.5 221.51.5 


2
.281
.28

 

1.28
2
.28

This shows severe interaction and control systems when

designed independently, the overall system will be unstable.
General Method of RGA evaluation
If the Steady State Gain matrix is

𝐾=
[ 𝐾 11
𝐾 21
𝐾 12
𝐾 22 ]
Get a matrix R which is transpose of inverse of K

𝑅=[ 𝐾 ¿ ¿−1]𝑇 ¿

The RGA is obtained

by element by element multiplication of two matrices

𝜆𝑖 , 𝑗 =𝑘𝑖, 𝑗 . 𝑟 𝑖, 𝑗
Find the RGA for the binary distillation column whose transfer
function matrix is given as:
Assignment:
A stirred mixing tank is a multivariable system in which the cold and
hot stream flowrates are to be used in controlling the liquid level and
tank temperature
An approximate transfer function, obtained by linearizing around some
nominal steady-state liquid level hs and temperature Ts was given as

L(s) FH(s)

T(s) FC(s)

Obtain the RGA for this system and use it to recommend which of the
input variables should be used to control the liquid level and the tank
temperature, for different sets (at least 4) of temperatures of hot and cold
streams.
Assignment

steady-state gain matrix

RGA for this system

MIMO-2
Part-III
In this session…..
We will look into additional ways of quantifying the
interactions
And
To pair the variables properly…
ADDITIONAL RULES : NIEDERLINSKI THEOREM

Consider an n x n multivariable system

whose input and output have been paired as follows:
y1  m1 ,
y2  m2 ,
... ,
Yn mn,
This results in a transfer function model of the form

( )
𝑦1 𝑔 11 ⋯ 𝑔1 𝑛 𝑚1
… =¿ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ …
𝑦𝑛 𝑔𝑛1 ⋯ 𝑔𝑛𝑛 𝑚𝑛

Y(s)= G(s)u(s)
Transfer function model: Y(s)= G(s)u(s)

With g ij (s) be Rational, and Open-loop stable transfer functions of G(s)

let n individual feedback controllers (with integral action) be designed for each loop

Each of the resulting n feedback control loops is stable when all the other n-1 loops are open

Under closed-loop conditions in all loops,

The system will be unstable for all possible values of controller parameters, if…..

If the Niederlinski index (NI) defined below is negative

Determinant of Steady State gain matrix K
<0

Product of diagonal elements of K

It is necessary and sufficient only for 2 x 2 systems, but sufficient for larger systems
NIEDERLINSKI PAIRING RULE
Any loop pairing is unacceptable if it leads to a control system configuration for which
the Niederlinski index (NI) is negative.

1. Given G(s), obtain steady-state gain matrix K = G(0),  obtain the RGA matrix Λ;
Obtain the determinant of K, and the product of the elements on its main diagonal

2. Obtain tentative loop pairing suggestions from the RGA, by pairing on positive
elements which are closest to 1.0

3. Use Niederlinski’s condition to verify the stability status of the control configuration
resulting from 2; if the pairing is unacceptable, select another

4. Variables should be paired in such a way that the resulting pairing corresponds to an NI
closest to 1.0

5. The NI interaction rule is based on empirical observations of the definition of the NI

and is justified largely from the relationship between the size of the RGA and that of
the NI
NIEDERLINSKI PAIRING RULE

Let us check it with an example

Example: Loop pairing for a 3 x 3 system

Calculate RGA for a system with steady-state gain matrix

By taking the inverse, and calculating the RGA

Suppose, 1-1/2-2/3-3 pairing is recommended from this RGA

According to this pairing, estimate the determinant of the steady-state gain matrix, |K|

|K| = -0.148

Estimate the product of the diagonal elements of K:

This pairing will lead to a negative Niederlinski index and an unstable configuration
An alternative pairing

Suppose a possible pairing of 1-1/2-3/3-2 is suggested

New steady-state gain matrix is obtained by interchanging columns

For which RGA is

with determinant |K| = 4/27 and Niederlinski index = 4/25

with this pairing, the system is no longer structurally unstable

MIMO-02
Part-IV
In this session…

We will add more to our knowledge of MIMO systems and interactions

Dynamic Relative Gain Array
Bristol’s RGA is based on steady State gains and does not consider dynamics of the system

The transfer function matrix of the system can be used for dynamic relative gain

For each Gij, estimate the AR as a function of

frequency i.e. Gain ~ AR(w)

For each frequency, we get values of ARs as the

G11 G12
dynamic gains, one can estimate dynamic gain(s) of
 2 1.5  all four transfer function elements…….
10s1 s 1 
Gp(s)  As an exercise, estimate AR’s for different value of w
1.
5 2 
  for all four elements
s 1 10s1
G21 G22 Thus DRGAs can be estimated for each frequency and
relative gains can be estimated for each value of w
…..i.e. one RGA for every w!!!!

For a proper pairing of controlled variables and manipulated variables, dominant transfer
functions, i.e. with highest gains, must be on the diagonal of the matrix
If you have calculated AR’s at different values of w, then there is an interesting way of
plotting

Draw the Nyquist plot for the diagonal elements first,

i.e. for say, G11(s), estimate AR and phase lag for different values of frequency w .. ...

And plot these values in the (r=AR, f) plane…

f
AR

Nyquist plot for diagonal element

 AR(w1)

AR(w2)
AR(w3)

Now consider off-diagonal elements of the matrix, say in a row. i.e. G12(s)
Estimate AR and f for the non-diagonal element, as function of frequency (w).
On the above curve, draw a circle of radius of AR(w), for each frequency.

This can be repeated for more values of frequency

If these secondary circles, do not encircle origin, then selected diagonal element of
matrix is dominant
Singular Value Decomposition of the Gain
Matrix

Singular value decomposition is a mathematical way

-To determine if a system will be prone to interactions due to sensitivity problems

that result from small errors in process gains.

It is a technique that determines if a system can to be decoupled

For a m x m system

The m x m steady state gain matrix [G] of the form is broken down into the form :

G = U Σ VT
Where:
U is an m x m matrix , the column vectors of which are the unit eigenvectors of the m x m
matrix GGT, GT being the transpose matrix of G.

Σ is an m x m diagonal matrix containing singular values, where the values are arranged
in descending order from the top left most corner to the bottom right corner.

V is an m x m matrix, the column vectors of which are the unit eigenvectors of the m x m
matrix GTG.
Conditional Number (CN)

The CN number is determined by

the ratio of the largest value in Σ to the smallest value
If the CN number is less than 50, then
decoupling of interacting control loops is possible
For a 2x2 system
If the Transfer Function matrix is
[ 𝐺11 𝐺 12
𝐺 21 𝐺 22 ]
The corresponding Steady State Gain Matrix is [ 𝐾 11 𝐾 12
𝐾 21 𝐾 22 ]
The following method can be used for obtaining eigenvalues of the system
Method of obtaining the eigen values of a 2x2 matrix
Estimate b, c and d
𝑏=𝐾 112 + 𝐾 122
𝑐=𝐾 11. 𝐾 21+𝐾 12 . 𝐾 22
𝑑= 𝐾 212 + 𝐾 222

Eigenvalues of the system are given as

2
𝜆1 =𝑠 1=
( 𝑏+ 𝑑 ) + √ (𝑏 − 𝑑)2
+ 4 𝑐 2

And

2𝑏 . 𝑑 −𝑐 2
𝜆2 =𝑠 =2
𝑠 21
The condition number (CN) is defined as the ratio of the larger of the
two values to the smaller value:
𝑠1 𝑠2
𝐶𝑁 = If S1 > S2 𝐶𝑁 = If S2 > S1
𝑠2 𝑠1

An ideal system would have a CN number of one,

where each control variable controls a single distinct output
variable
The greater the CN value, the harder it is for the system in
question to be decoupled.

As a rule of thumb,
a system with a CN number of more than 50 is impossible to
decouple.
Example of mixer
Steady State Gain Matrix

2
𝑏= 𝐾 11 + 𝐾 212 =12 +12=2

𝑐= 𝐾 11 . 𝐾 21 + 𝐾 12 . 𝐾 22=( 1 ) ( 0.0245 ) + ( 1 ) ( − 0.0612 ) =− 0.0367

𝑑= 𝐾 221 + 𝐾 222 =0.0245 2+(− 0.0612)2= 0.004346

( 𝑏+ 𝑑 )+ √ (𝑏 − 𝑑)2 +4 𝑐2
𝜆1 =
2 = 2

= 0.003673

Thus S1= 1.414; S2= 0.0606

1.414
𝐶𝑁 = =23.33 CN is less than 50, therefore decoupling for this system is feasible
0.0606
Consider the binary distillation column has its sidestream draw-off rate set at a fixed amount,

Remaining manipulated variables The process model

m1 = overhead reflux rate
m2 = reboiler steam pressure

Three output variables are to be controlled:

overhead mole fraction of ethanol(y1),
sidestream mole fraction of ethanol(y2),
Tray #19 temperature(y3)

deemed the least important!!!

Find the correct pairing of the controlled variables and manipulated variables, using
RGA and NI, including possibility of decoupling….by CN.
Check if interaction would differ under dynamic conditions using dynamic RGA.