IC 401 LOGIC AND DISTRIBUTED CONTROL

SYSTEMS

Unit 1

For internal circulation only

IC 401 LOGIC
SYSTEMS

AND

DISTRIBUTED

CONTROL

Course Objectives: This course is designed to

expose students to understand the process
automation concepts like Programmable logic
controller and Distributed control system.
Prerequisite: Fundamental knowledge of process
control.

IC 401 LOGIC
SYSTEMS

AND

DISTRIBUTED

CONTROL

Unit 1: Review of PC based control design for

process automation: Functional Block diagram of
Computer control of process - Mathematical
representation Sampling Consideration - Data
Acquisition system (DAS) and SCADA, Hybrid,
Direct Digital Control System, Distributed Control
system architecture and Comparison with respect to
different performance attributes.

IC 401 LOGIC AND DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEMS

Text Books:
1. John W. Webb and Ronald A Reis, Programmable
Logic Controllers - Principles and Applications, 4th
Edition, Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey, 1998.
2. Lukcas M.P Distributed Control Systems, Van
Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1986.
3. Frank D. Petruzella, Programmable Logic Controllers,
2nd Edition, McGraw Hill, New York, 1997.
Reference Books:
1. Deshpande P.B and Ash R.H, Elements of Process
Control Applications, ISA Press, New York, 1995.
2. Curtis D. Johnson, Process Control Instrumentation
Technology, 7th Edition, Prentice Hall, New Delhi,
2002.
3. Krishna Kant, Computer-based Industrial Control,
Prentice Hall, New Delhi, 1997.

Introduction
The way many industrial processes look today, is the
result of many years of research and hard work of
people committed to improve their functionality,
management, and organization.

One could recall the phrase necessity is the mother

of invention, and certainly this would fit the everyday
work of control engineers and technicians working in
industrial processes during the 50s and 60s.
This necessity was the origin of devices such as the
Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) and the
Distributed Control System (DCS).

 What is Logic diagram?

Leading I &C vendors in India / world.

I&C Vendors

Honeywell
Fisher-Rosemont
Bailey
Foxboro
Yokogawa
Siemens
ABB
Metso
BHEL

Relay based panel

Pneumatic Instruments

Ship with pneumatic instrumentation for boilers

INS Viraat - the aircraft carrier has served for over 56 years. It
served as HMS Hermes in the Royal British Navy for 27 years. It
was commissioned as INS Viraat on May 2 1987. The aircraft
carrier will be decommissioned after its participation in
International Fleet Review in 2016.

Control room of a TPS

Transition in Instrumentation.
Early 1900s..

Transition in Instrumentation.
Around 1950s..

CONTROL ROOM - Late 1970s

Control Room mid 1980s

Control Room Late 1980s

NTPC - SIMHADRI

NTPC - TALCHER

MODERN CONTROL ROOM

Introduction

The term Industrial Control System (ICS) refers to a

broad set of control systems, which include:

SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition)

DCS (Distributed Control System)
PCS (Process Control System)
EMS (Energy Management System)
AS (Automation System)
SIS (Safety Instrumented System)
PLC (Programmable Logic Controller)

Any other automated control system

Evolution of Control system

Instrumentation & Control
Manual
Control

DCS
Distributed
Control
System

Pneumatic
Control
(local)

Data Acquisition
System DAS
Pneumatic
Regulation
(centralised)

Analog
Electronic

Output

Evolution of Control system

Design limit

Yesterday

Today
with
DCS

Tomorrow
Latest control
And
Information
Technologies

DCS

Time
DAS

Analog 4-20 mA
Pneumatic Centralised
Pneumatic Local

Manual Control

Evolution of Control system

The evolution of the system architecture from Direct
Digital Control (DDC) to Distributed Control Systems
(DCS) and now to Field Control Systems (FCS) is
illustrated in Figure 1.

The y axis indicates when the normal distribution of

the adoption of the different system architectures
peaked in use.
In every step of the evolution, the control of the
process has moved closer to the sensors and
actuators.

Evolution of Control system

Figure 1 : Control Evolution

Evolution of Control system

Figure 2 also illustrates the shift of the proportionalintegral-differential (PID) function from the primary
system computer to the sensors and actuators at the
point of measurement and control.
This movement of the control process, while more
costly initially, reduces wiring, aids in troubleshooting,
and decreases maintenance costs of the industrial
control network.

Evolution of Control system

Figure 2 : Control Architecture

Recipe for control systems

Success in control engineering depends on
making judicious choices regarding the
following:

plant, i.e. the process to be controlled

objectives
sensors
actuators

Plant
The physical layout of a plant is an intrinsic
part of control problems.
A control engineer needs to be familiar with
the "physics" of the process under study.
This includes a rudimentary knowledge of
the basic energy balance, mass balance and
material flows in the system.

Typical Objectives of Plant Operation

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Protect people
Protect Environment
Protect Equipment
Maintain Smooth operation
Achieve Product rates and quality
Profit = optimising first five
Monitoring & diagnosis

Objectives
Before designing sensors, actuators or
control architectures, it is important to know
the goal, that is, to formulate the control
objectives. This includes
what does one want to achieve (energy
reduction, yield increase,...)
what variables need to be controlled to
achieve these objectives

what level of performance is necessary

(accuracy, speed,...)

Sensors
Sensors are the eyes of control enabling one
to see what is going on. Indeed, one
statement that is sometimes made about
control is:
If you can measure it, you can usually control
it.

Actuators
Once sensors are in place to report on the
state of a process, then the next issue is the
ability to affect, or actuate, the system in
order to move the process from the current
state to a desired state.

23-07-15 & 27-07-15

History of Process Control

History of Process Control

Early Process Control
In the early days of process control, i.e. in the 1950s and
before, the control system implementation consisted of
analog devices - connected by wiring them together by
hand.

If the control was to be redesigned, the devices had to

be rewired - typically would take a considerable amount
of time, during which the process had to be stopped.
Larger changes involving extensive rewiring would
require the process to stand still for a long time,
meaning less production and consequently less sales
and less profit. Thus, with an analog control system,
production companies were less flexible and much
more reluctant to make changes than today.

History of Process Control

Early Process Control
The largest part of the cost of analog control systems
were the analog devices themselves - the cost of
adding a control loop was practically independent of
the number of already existing control loops.

Adding more control loops also meant that the analog

devices would consume more space, and the space
required would practically grow linearly with the
number of control loops.
Also, with each control loop added, additional analog
indicators, buttons, and knobs had to be added to the
operator supervision panel to facilitate convenient
process operator supervision.

History of Process Control

Early Process Control

An analog control room.

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period
In 1956, the automotive and aerospace company
Thomson Ramo Wooldridge (TRW) & the oil company
Texaco initiated a study to evaluate if it was possible
to make use of computers for process control.

Three years and 30 man years later a computer

controlled system based on TRWs RW-300 computer
was online.
To get a feel on the state of art of computers at this
time, an addition could take 1ms, a multiplication
20ms, and the mean time between failure (MTBF), i.e.
how often the CPU performed incorrectly, was 50 100h.

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period
In 1959, the Texaco Company used the first digital
computer based control system, called the RamoWooldridge 300. The RW - 300 had the capacity for
103 process measurements and 14 control outputs
(five of these were direct digital control outputs, and
the others were setpoint adjustments for analog
controllers).

The
(Thompson)
Ramo-Wooldridge
company
remained one of the top computerized control
system manufacturers until the mid-1960s, and was
more commonly known as the TRW Products
Company (TRW Inc).
(Brochure) Thomson

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period
The first use of a digital computer for fully direct
control of a process was initiated by Imperial Chemical
Industries who began work in 1959 with the Ferranti
Company on a Direct Digital Control (DDC) scheme for
a soda ash plant at Fleetwood, Lancashire UK.
The computer could handle 256 input measurements
and 120 control loops which went live in November
1962 and ran for three years.

Brochure - Honeywell series

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period
The outcome of these studies were improved
understanding of the processes, as well as
specialized computers for process control.
One such computer that was widely used in paper
mills and oil refineries for quality control and process
optimization was the IBM 1710 which was launched in
1961 and consisted of the IBM 1620 general purpose
computer and an IBM 1711 A/D converter.
It had support for interrupts, which was a contribution
from the studies due to special requirements for
process control, and was something that did not exist
in the general purpose computers at the time.

History of Process Control

The 1950s - The Pioneering Period

The IBM 1710 from 1961

History of Process Control

The 1960s - Direct Digital Control
The next leap in process control was made in 1962
when the British chemical company Imperial Chemical
Industries (ICI) replaced a complete analog control
system in an ammonia/soda plant by an Argus
computer.

Instead of just being used for supervisory tasks for the

analog control system, a computer was now actually
performing the control.
This form of pure digital control would come to be
called Direct Digital Control (DDC). There were several
advantages with replacing the analog control system
by a computer, e.g. lower cost, improved operator
interfaces and better flexibility.

History of Process Control

The 1960s - Direct Digital Control
An Argus computer was fairly expensive but if it was
used to replace a large heap of analog equipment, then
for sufficiently large systems the total cost would be
lower.
Computer based digital operator panels instead of
large analog indicator boards also made the operator
supervision more convenient. Finally, instead of having
to rewire the analog equipment one could simply
replace the program.
Switching between and evaluating new control
strategies could now be done much faster, and it was
also easy to roll back if the new program was incorrect
or had poor performance.

History of Process Control

The 1960s - Direct Digital Control

No programming was required, one simply organized

I/O configurations and connections in tables and the
DDC system would then execute the control based on
these tables.
This made it very easy to implement the common
control schemes that were implemented in the DDC
system, but very difficult to do anything else.

History of Process Control

The 1960s - Direct Digital Control
In a way this held back the development of more
sophisticated control schemes, as implementing
these required a huge effort compared to the
common control schemes.
Due to its simplicity and efficiency, DDC is still widely
used for building automation, i.e. for heating,
ventilation and air conditioning systems.
The most used building block of todays DCS
systems, i.e. the Function Block, also has its roots in
the table oriented DDC languages.

History of Process Control

The 1970s - Cheaper computers
With the birth of the minicomputers in mid 60s computers became cheaper, faster, and more
reliable.
Cheaper meant that it became profitable to
implement smaller systems with computers instead
of analog control systems. Faster computers meant
that computers could be used to control faster
processes.
More reliable meant that more critical processes
could be implemented safely using computers. This
resulted in an explosion in the no. of computers used
for process control, from 5000 in 1970 to 50000 in
1975.

History of Process Control

The 1970s - Cheaper computers
One popular minicomputer was the IBM 1800 Data
Acquisition and Control System, a process control
variant of the IBM 1130 which was released in 1964.

It was described as a computer that can monitor an

assembly line, control a steel-making process, or
analyze the precise status of a missile during test
firing..
The last operating IBM 1800s were decommissioned
in June 2010. A video showing how to boot the IBM
1800 is available on Youtube.

History of Process Control

The 1970s - Cheaper computers

An IBM 1800 minicomputer from 1964

History of Process Control

The 1970s - Cheaper computers

The invention of the microcomputers in the early 70s

was the final blow to the analog control systems. The
price
was
brought
down
drastically
from
approximately $10000 for a minicomputer to
approximately $500 for a microcomputer.

Computers were now so cheap that no matter how

small the control system, it was cheaper to implement
it with a computer than with analog devices.

History of Process Control

The 1980s - DCS Emerges
Up until now, the technological advances for
process control was primarily concerned with
replacing the analog control system with computers.
The next big step forward was when truly distributed
control systems were introduced. In the early 1980s,
the Australian company R-Tec got a contract to
deliver an advanced building automation system for
the University of Melbourne. When R-Tec closed
down due to not being able to fulfill its commitments,
the project was taken over by Midac (Microprocessor
Intelligent Data Acquisition and Control).
The outcome was one of the first successful
implementations of a distributed DDC system.

History of Process Control

The 1980s - DCS Emerges

The system consisted of a central system with 11 Z80

microprocessors sharing tasks and memory which
coordinated distributed controllers over a serial
network.
Inspired by Midac, some of the larger vendors like
Honeywell and Johnson Controls were quite fast in
making their own solutions based on the same idea.

History of Process Control

The 1980s - DCS Emerges
The typical network of choice for this time period
was the IEEE 802.4 Token Bus Network. The network
contains a token which is owned by one node at a
time. Only the node owning the token may transmit
and when it is done transmitting, the token is passed
to the next node.

A Z80 microprocessor

History of Process Control

The 1980s - DCS Emerges
29-07-15
This kind of networks is very sensitive to failures, e.g.
consider the case when the node owning the token
goes down, then it cannot pass on the token and no
more transmissions will be made in the network.
Handling this kind of situations is very hard with this
kind of network communication and when the control
was beginning to get distributed, more reliable
networks were required, which meant that a lot of
effort was put into developing networks with support
for redundancy and real-time communication.

History of Process Control

The 1980s - DCS Emerges
Another big topic during the 80s was the
development of new control languages. Up until now,
DDC languages were basically the only ones used.
Inspired by the object oriented concepts in computer
science, object orientation was also introduced for
process control by Midac in 1982.

History of Process Control

The 1990s - The Fieldbus Wars
With the introduction of distributed control came the
necessity to communicate between the devices and
the controllers.
One issue was that the systems were closed and that
there was no standard communication protocol to
connect them with.
Another issue was that even though the controllers
were
now
digitalized,
the
controller
still
communicated with the devices using analog signals.

A large drive was thus towards digitalization of the

communication with the devices and standardization
of the communication.

History of Process Control

The 1990s - The Fieldbus Wars
Several organizations strived to develop the dominating
fieldbus and some DCS vendors also created their own
fieldbuses.
None of them became the dominant one and the result
of this was instead an abundance of fieldbuses, of
which practically all are still present and used today,
e.g. Profibus PA, FOUNDATION, ControlNet, DeviceNet,
and ModBus.
Reducing the no. of used fieldbuses and converging
towards a dominant one is something that does not
seem to be happening.

History of Process Control

The 1990s - The Fieldbus Wars
Quite on the contrary many new fieldbuses have
recently been developed or are under development,
motivated by moving away from custom cable
installations towards much cheaper ethernet based
equipment, which also has the advantage that one will
be able to make use of the continuous improvements of
the ethernet technology.

DCS
DCS Company History
Many companies have contributed to making the DCS
industry what it is today. However, due to this large
number of companies, it has been considered beyond
the scope of this presentation go into details about
each specific company.
Instead the focus has been on outlining the company
history tree, specifically related to the leading
companies in the DCS business today; ABB, Emerson,
Honeywell, Invensys, Rockwell, Siemens, and
Yokogawa.

DCS
DCS Company History

ABB

ABB
(ASEA
Brown
Boveri)
is
a multinational corporation headquartered
in Zurich, Switzerland,

DCS
DCS Company History

Emerson

Emerson
Electric
Company
is
an
American multinational corporation headquartered
in Ferguson, Missouri,

DCS
DCS Company History

Honeywell International, Inc. is an

American multinational company with
headquarters in Morristown, New
Jersey

Honeywell

DCS
DCS Company History

Siemens

Siemens AG is a German multinational with

HQ in Berlin and Munich

DCS
DCS Company History

Yokogawa Electric Corporation is a

Japanese company with HQ in Tokyo.

Yokogawa

Evolution of Industrial Control Technology

Major advances in integrated control system
architectures as compared to individual controllers,
have taken place over the last fifty years.
Control systems have developed from the 1930s to
the present day in response to two intertwined
influences: user needs and technological advances.
One factor that has influenced the control needs of
the user is the continual growth in the size and
complexity of industrial processes over the past fifty
years. Also, the costs of raw materials and energy
required to process these materials have increased
substantially in this time. Finally, the labor costs
involved in plant startup, operation and maintenance
have grown substantially.

Evolution of Industrial Control Technology

These influences have motivated the owners and
operators of the industrial processes to place a
greater amount of emphasis on automation and on
efforts to optimize their operations.
In response to these user needs, the suppliers of
industrial controls have been motivated to develop
totally integrated plant management systems that are
more than the combination of individual control,
monitoring and data logging systems.
Fortunately. the explosive advances in technology
that have taken place over the past fifty years have
provided the capabilities needed for the evolution or
such plant management systems.

Evolution of Industrial Control Technology

For example, the development of transistors,
integrated analog circuits, and solid state relays
resulted in growth in capability and an increase in
reliability of electronic control systems that enabled
them to largely replace the pneumatic control
systems.
Similarly, the development of digital technology in the
form of improved large-scale integrated logic circuits,
microprocessors. semiconductor memories, and
cathode ray tube (CRT) displays has led to even more
impressive improvements in digital control system
capabilities. These improvements have allowed
control systems based on digital technology to
replace electronic analog systems in many
applications.

Evolution of Industrial ControlTechnology

DCS Historical Background

The lines of technological development can be divided
into two separate streams, as illustrated in Figure. The
upper Stream with its two branches is the more
traditional one, and includes the evolution of analog
controllers and other discrete devices such as relay
logic and motor controllers.
The second stream is a more recent one that includes
the use of large-scale digital computers and their mini
and micro descendants in industrial process control.
These streams have merged into the current
mainstream of distributed digital control system. The
dates of several key milestones In this evolutionary
process are shown in Table to illustrate the pace of
these advances.

Key Milestones in Control System Evolution

1934

Direct-connected pneumatic controls dominate

the market.

1938

Transmitter type pneumatic controls emerge,

making centralized control rooms possible.

1958

First computer monitoring in electric utility.

1959

First supervisory computer in refinery.

1960

First solid-state electronic controllers on market.

1963

First direct digital control (DDC) system installed

1970

First programmable logic controllers (PLCs) on

market.

1970

Sales of electronic controllers surpass pneumatic

1975

First distributed digital control system on market.

Traditional Control System Developments

The concept of distributed control systems is not a new
one. In fact, the early discrete device control systems
listed in Figure were distributed around the plant.
Individual control devices such as governors and
mechanical controllers were located at the process
equipment to be controlled.
Local readouts of set points and control outputs were
available and a means for changing the control mode
from manual to automatic (or vice versa) usually was
provided.
It was up to the operator (actually, several operators) to
coordinate the control of the many devices that made
up the total process.

Traditional Control System Developments

They did this by roaming around the plant and making
corrections to the control devices as needed and using
the "Hey, Suresh! method of communications to
integrate plant operations.
This was a feasible approach to the control of early
industrial processes because the plants were small
geographically and the processes were not too large or
complex.

Traditional Control System Developments

The same architecture was copied when directconnected pneumatic controllers were developed in the
late 1920s. These controllers provided more flexibility
in selection and adjustment or the control algorithms,
but all of the elements of the control loop (sensor,
controller, operator interface, and output actuator) were
still located in the field.
There was no mechanism for communication between
the controllers other than that provided by each
operator in the plant using visual and vocal means.

This situation changed of necessity in the late 1930s

due to the growth in size and complexity of the
processes to be controlled.

Traditional Control System Developments

It became more and more difficult to run a plant using
the isolated loop control architecture described above.
The emphasis on improving overall plant operations led
to the movement towards centralized control and
equipment rooms.
It was made possible by the development of transmitter
type pneumatic systems. In this architecture,
measurements made at the process were converted to
pneumatic signals at standard levels, which were then
transmitted to the central location.

The required control signals were computed at this

location, then transmitted back to the actuating devices
at the process.

Traditional Control System Developments

The great advantage of this architecture was that all of
the process information was available to the operator
at the central location. Thus, the operator was able to
make better control decisions and operate the plant
with a greater degree of safety and economic return.

This centralized control structure is still the dominant

one in plants operating today. In the late 1950s and
early 1960s, the technology used to implement this
architecture started to shift from pneumatics to
electronics.
The key objective of this shift was replacing the long
runs of tubing used in pneumatic systems with the
wires used in electronic ones. This change reduced
the cost of installing the control systems and also
eliminated the time lag inherent in pneumatic systems.

Traditional Control System Developments

Both of these advantages became more significant as
plant sizes increased. Another consequence of the
centralized control architecture was the development
of the split controller structure.
In this type of controller, the operator display section
of the controller is panel mounted in the control room
and the computing section is located in a separate
rack in an adjoining equipment room. The split
controller structure is especially appropriate for
complex, interactive control systems (e.g., for boiler
controls) in which the number of computing elements
greatly exceeds the number of operator display
elements.

Traditional Control System Developments

So far we focused on continuous or analog control
devices in which both the inputs and outputs to the
controllers vary continuously over a selected range
(e.g., 1-5 volts or 3-15 psi).
Similar developments have taken place in the realm of
sequential logic control devices in which the inputs
and outputs to the controllers take on only one of two
discrete states (e.g On/Off, 0/24 volt). Similar devices
generally are used in controlling certain types of
pumps, motors. or valves in a process. They also are
used in safety override systems that operate in parallel
to and back up the continuous systems. The original
versions of these logic systems were implemented
using simple electronic devices such as relays and
stepping switches.

Traditional Control System Developments

Later, the development of solid-state electronic
modules allowed logic systems to be implemented
using the same level technology as the corresponding
electronic analog controllers.
In the early 1970s, a sophisticated device known as
the programmable logic controller (PLC) was
developed to implement sequential logic system. This
device is significant because it was one of the first
special purpose, computer-based devices that could
be used by someone who was not a computer
specialist.

Computer-based Control System Developments

In addition to the evolution of the traditional types of
control systems described above, a more recent
evolution of computer based process control systems
has been taking place, as shown in the lower part of
Figure.
The first application of computers to industrial
Processes was in the areas of plant monitoring and
supervisory control.
In Sep. 1958. the first industrial computer system for
plant monitoring was installed at an electric utility
power generating station. This innovation provided an
automatic data acquisition capability not available
before and freed the operator from much drudgery by
automatically logging plant operating conditions on a
periodic basis.

Computer-based Control System Developments

In 1959-60, supervisory computer control systems
were installed in a refinery and in a chemical plant. In
these applications analog controllers were still the
primary means of control.

The computer used the available input data to calculate

control set points that corresponded to the most
efficient plant operating conditions. These set points
then were sent to the analog controllers, which
performed the closed loop control. The ability of
supervisory control computers to perform economic
optimization as well as to acquire, display and log plant
data provided the operator with a powerful tool for
significantly improving plant operations.

Computer-based Control System Developments

The next step in the evolution of computer process
control was the use of the computer in the primary
control loop itself, in a mode usually known as direct
digital control or DDC.
In this approach, process measurements are read by the
computer directly, the computer calculates the proper
control outputs, then sends the outputs directly to the
actuation devices.
The first DDC system was installed in 1963 in a
petrochemical plant. For security, a backup analog
control system was provided to ensure that the process
could be run automatically in the event of a computer
failure.

Computer-based Control System Developments

This proved to be a wise precaution, because this early
DDC installation (as well as many others) was plagued
with computer hardware reliability problems.
Despite these problems, it demonstrated many of the
advantages digital control has over analog control:
tuning parameters and set points do not drift,
complex control algorithms can be implemented to
improve plant operation and
control loop tuning parameters can be set
adaptively to track changing operating conditions.

Resulting System Architectures

As a result of the developments described above, two
industrial control system architectures came to
dominate the scene by the end of the 1970s.
While there are many variations, typical examples of
these architectures are shown in Figures. The first
architecture is a hybrid one, making use of a
combination of discrete control hardware and
computer hardware in a central location to implement
the required control function.

Hybrid System Architecture

Resulting System Architectures

Hybrid System Architecture
In this approach, first level or local control of the plant
operations is implemented by using discrete analog
and sequential logic controllers (or PLCs).

Panel board instrumentation connected to these

controllers is used for operator interfacing and is
located in the central control room area.
A supervisory computer and associated data
acquisition system are used to implement the plantmanagement functions including operating point
optimization, alarming, data logging and historical
data storage and retrieval.

Resulting System Architectures

Hybrid System Architecture

The computer also is used to drive its own operator

interface usually consisting of one or more video
display units (VDUs). A substantial amount of
interfacing hardware is required to tie the analog and
sequential control equipment to each other as well as
to the supervisory computer.

Resulting System Architectures

Central Computer System Architecture
The other dominant architecture, shown in Figure is
one in which all system functions are implemented in
high performance hardware in a central location.
In general, redundant computers are required so that
failure of a single computer does not shut the whole
process down. Operator interfacing for plant
management function is provided using computer
driven VDUs, just as in the hybrid control system
architecture.
Operator interfacing for first level continuous and
sequential closed-loop control also may be
implemented using VDUs.

Central Computer System Architecture

Central Computer System Architecture

Centralized Control System

Centralized Control , Centralized Monitoring
PV1

Input
Signals
from
Field

PV2
PV3

MV1

Centralized
Processing

MV2
MV3

Unit
PVn

MVn

CPU

SV1 SV2 SV3

Set Points

SVn

Output
Signals
to
Field

Central Computer System Architecture

Drawbacks Of CCS:
If the CPU fails the entire plant gets affected.
Redundancy concept is not available.
Redundancy is having two controllers. One would be
active and the other would be standby. If the active
controller fails, the standby controller takes over.

Resulting System Architectures

Central Computer System Architecture
The main difference between the two systems is the
location of the implementation of the first level
continuous and sequential logic control functions. By
the late 1970s, the hybrid system became by far the
more prevalent approach in industrial Control practice.
The chemical and petroleum process industries
heavily favored this approach, perhaps as a result of
their disappointing experiences using early versions
of direct digital control systems. In contrast. the use of
large centralized computer systems to implement
almost all plant control functions was limited primarily
to the electric utility industry.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
While the central computer and hybrid system
architectures provide significant advantages over
earlier ones, they also suffer from a number of
disadvantages.
The biggest disadvantage of the centralized computer
control architecture - the central processing unit (CPU)
represents a single point of failure that can shut down
the entire process if it is lost.

Since early industrial computer hardware was

notoriously unreliable, two approaches were developed
and have been used to attack the reliability problem:
either a complete analog control system is used to
back up the computer system, or

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
another computer is used as a "hot standby" to take
over if the primary control computer fails.
Either approach results in a system significantly more
expensive than an analog control system that performs
a comparable set of functions.
Another problem with these computer-based systems
has been that the software required to implement all
the functions is extremely complex, and requires a
group computer experts to develop the system, start it
up and keep it running.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
This is the natural result of an architecture in which a
single CPU
is required to perform a variety of
functions in real time:
input scanning:
database updating:
control algorithm computation:
logging, long term storage and retrieval of data and
man-machine interfacing (among others).

Finally, the centralised system is limited in its

capability to accommodate change and expansion.
Once the loading on the computer approaches its limit,
it becomes very difficult to add on to the system
without a significant decrease in performance or
increase in cost.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
The hybrid system architecture also has its
deficiencies. One of the worst is simply that it is
composed of many different subsystems, often
manufactured by different vendors.
Just interlacing the subsystems to one another is a
significant challenge, given the variety of different
signal levels and conventions that exists in each.
Starting them up and making them work as an
integrated whole is no less difficult a task.
The hybrid approach also is functionally limited
compared to the central computer based system. The
benefits of digital control outlined are lost, since the
closed-loop control is done by discrete analog and
sequential devices.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Also, the speed and accuracy of plant performance
computations suffer due to the limitations of the
analog input equipment and the problems in accessing
the database, which is no longer centralized as in the
computer implementation approach.
Because of these problems, it became clear to both
users and system designers that a new architectural
approach was needed.
Control system engineers had been sketching out
concepts of distributed systems composed of digital
control and communication elements since the middle
1960s.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Unfortunately, the technology to implement these
concepts in a cost-effective manner was not available
at that time. It was not until the microprocessor was
introduced in 1971 that the distributed system
architecture became practical.
(Supporting technology also became available during
the early 1970s: inexpensive solid-state memories were
developed to replace magnetic core memories:
integrated circuit chips to implement standard
communication protocols were introduced; display
system technology flourished with the emergence of
light-emitting diode (LED) and color CRT displays: In
the software area. structured design techniques,
modular software packages and new on-line diagnostic
concepts were developed.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
The result of this fortunate confluence of user needs
and technological developments was the introduction
of a large number of distributed digital control system
product lines by vendors in the late 1970s and early
1980s.
While each system has a unique structure and
specialized features, the architectures of most of
these systems can be described in the context of the
generalized one shown in figure.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

First few
DCS was introduced by Honeywell (TDC 2000) and
Yokogawa (Centum) in 1975 about the same time.
Interestingly, the Centum system still exists and is
commercially successful.
In the same year Bristol company introduced
system named UCS 3000 and in 1980 Bailey
Controls Company introduced its system
NETWORK 90.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

First generation DCS
First generation systems - welcomed by utility and
process industry segments as the DCS offered, at the
time, something completely new - the ability to execute
complex control strategies within a reliable and
redundant microprocessor based digital controller.
First generation DCS innovations also included,
modular packaged hardware for powering and
processing all the necessary I/O types, an integrated
operator interface station with ability to display control
faceplates, process control graphics, trends, alarms,
logs, reports, control system health and other data for
operations. First Generation systems were built using
proprietary technologies.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example : First Generation DCS

03-08-15

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Second Generation DCS
Around the early 1990s, DCS systems began to be
recognized as an optimum strategy for gathering and
integrating data from the various automation systems
within a plant.
The plant DCS served as the single point of integration
for other sub system controls.
Second Generation DCS provided several other
innovations.
These included:
integrated
distributed
sequence
of
events
recording,
fiber optic operator and control network
communications,
integrated combustion and steam turbine controls,

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Second Generation DCS
advanced process modeling function codes (i.e.
inferential Smith controller),
single pushbutton plant startup and shutdown,
web server for HMI process displays,
3D graphic elements, and
several others.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example : Second Generation DCS

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example: Third Generation DCS
Third Generation DCS control processors have been
expanded to support many new options for
connecting plant process control equipment.

HART, OPC, Modbus TCP, Modbus RTU, Profibus,

Foundation Fieldbus and Device Net are supported
for redundant controller applications.
This provides plant designers with a high degree of
flexibility for control system layout as well as final
control element device selection.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example: Third Generation DCS
Allows any O&M information to be linked to DCS
graphical objects, thus affording all users from plant
operators to executive managers with individual views
into their plant processes.

Similarly, links provided for I&C personnel include

trouble-shooting information such as plant P&IDs,
owners manuals, equipment specifications and
application guides. Links used by maintenance include
work orders, fault reports, spare parts.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example: Third Generation DCS
Third Generation DCS is built upon open standard
technologies and makes extensive use of Windows
OS, Ethernet and OPC. Windows client/server is used
for the HMI applications and can be expanded to
support remote terminal server, remote operator
workplaces, thin client and remote access for history
and asset management.

Providing the right information to the right person at

the right time for informed decision making is the
premise and an effective time saver that increases
operational efficiency.

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

Example: Third Generation DCS

Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

The devices in the architecture grouped into three

categories:
those that interlace directly to the process to be
controlled or monitored,
those that perform high level human interfacing
and computing functions, and
those that provide the means of communication
between the other devices.

A brief definition of each device is given below:

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture
1. Local control unit (LCU) - The smallest collection of
hardware in the system that can do closed-loop control.
The LCU interfaces directly to the process.

2. Low level human interface (LLHI) - A device that

allows the operator or instrument engineer to interact
with the Local control unit (e.g. To change set points,
control modes, control configurations or tuning
parameters) using a direct connection. LLHIs can also
interface directly to the process.
Operator-oriented hardware at this level is called a Low
level operator interface;
instrument engineer-oriented hardware is called a Low
level engineering interface.

Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture
3. Data input / output unit (Dl/OU) - A device that
interfaces to the process solely for the purpose of
acquiring or outputting data. It performs no control
functions.
4. High level human interface (HLHI) - A collection of
hardware that performs functions similar to the LLHI but
with increased capability and user friendliness. It
interfaces
to other devices only over the shared
communication facilities.
Operator-oriented hardware at this called a High level
operator interface.

Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

5. High level computing device (HLCD) - A collection

of micro processor based hardwares that perform
plant management functions traditionally performed
by a plant computer. It interfaces to other devices
only over the shared communication facilities.
6. Computer interface device (CID) A collection of
hardware that allows an external general purpose
computer to interact with other devices in the
distributed control system using the shared
communication facilities.

Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

EMERGENCE OF THE DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM

ARCHITECTURE
Generalized Distributed Control System Architecture

7. Shared communication facilities - One or more

levels of communication hardware and associated
software that allow the sharing of data among all
devices in the distributed system. Shared
communication facilities do not include dedicated
communication channels between specific devices
or between hardware elements within a device.
Not included in the architecture in Figure but of vital
importance to the design of a distributed control
system are the packaging and electrical power
systems.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

05-08-15

One of the main objectives in the development of

distributed control systems has been to maintain the
best features of the central computer control and
hybrid architecture described in the previous section.

Most importantly, the new systems have been

structured to combine the power and flexibility of
digital control with the user-oriented familiarity of the
traditional analog and sequential control systems.
A summary of some of the key features of distributed
control systems compared to previous ones is given
in Table.

Comparison of Architectures
FEATURES

HYBRID
ARCHITECTURE

1. Scalability Good due to

modularity
and
expandability

CENTRAL COMPUTER
ARCHITECTURE

DISTRIBUTED
ARCHITECTURE

Poor-very limited range

of system size

Good due to
modularity

Full digital control

capability

Full digital control

capability

2. Control
capability

Limited by
analog and
sequential
control
hardware

3. Operator
interfacing
capability

Limited by panel Digital hardware

board
provides
instrumentation significant
improvement for large
systems

Digital hardware
provides
improvement tor
full range of system
sizes.

Comparison of Architectures
FEATURES

HYBRID
ARCHITECTURE

CENTRAL COMPUTER
ARCHITECTURE

4. Integration
of system
functions

Poor due to
variety of
products

All functions performed Functions integrated

by central computer
in a family of
products

5. Significance
of single-point
failure

Low due to
modularity

High

Low due to
modularity

6. Installation
costs

High due to
discrete wiring
and
large volume of
equipment

Medium -saves control

room
and equipment room
space but
uses discrete wiring

Low - savings in both

wiring
costs and
equipment space

Medium requires
highly trained
computer maintenance
personnel

Excellent - automatic
diagnostics and
module replacement

Poor - many
7.
Maintainability module types,

few diagnostics

DISTRIBUTED
ARCHITECTURE

Comparison With Previous Architectures

Following details expands upon the table:

1. Scalability and expandability - Refers to the ease

with which a system can be sized for a spectrum
of applications, ranging from small to large, and
the ease with which elements can be added to the
system after initial installation.
The hybrid system is quite modular so it ranks
high on both counts; the same holds for the
distributed system architecture.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

Following details expands upon the table:

1. Scalability and expandability

On the other hand, the central computer
architecture is designed for only a small range of
applications. It is not cost-effective for applications
much smaller than its design size and it cannot be
expanded easily once its memory
and
performance limits are reached.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

2. Control capability - Refers to the power and
flexibility of the control algorithms that can be
implemented by the system.
The capability of the hybrid architecture is limited
by the functions available in the hardware modules
that make up the system. To add a function
involves both adding hardware and rewiring the
control system.
Central computer and distribute architecture both
provide the full advantages of digital control:
driftless set points and tuning parameters,
availability of complex control algorithms, ability
to change algorithms without changing hardware,
remote and adaptive tuning Capabilities and many
others.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

3. Operator interfacing capability Refers to the
capability of the hardware provided to aid the
operator in performing plant monitoring and control
functions.

The operator interface in the hybrid system consists

of conventional panelboard instrumentation for
normal control and monitoring functions and a
separate video display unit (VDU) for supervisory
control.
In the central computer and distributed architectures,
VDUs generally are used as the primary operator
interface for both the normal and supervisory control
functions.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

3. Operator interfacing capability

The VDUs
operator:

provide

significant

benefits

to

the

reduction in time needed to access control

stations,
flexibility of station grouping,
graphics displays that mimic the process layout
and others.
Since the VDUs in the distributed system are driven
by microprocessors rather than by a large computer,
they can be applied in a cost-effective way to small
systems as well as large ones.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

4. Integration of system functions - Refers to the
degree with which the various functional subsystems
are designed to work with one another in an integrated
fashion. A high degree of integration minimizes user
problems in procuring, interfacing, starting up, and
maintaining the system.
Since the hybrid system is composed of a variety of
individual product lines, it is usually poorly integrated.
The central computer architecture is well integrated
because all of the functions are performed by the
same hardware. The distributed system lies
somewhere in between, depending on how well the
products that make it up are designed to work
together.

Comparison With Previous Architectures

5. Significance of single-point failure - Refers to the
sensitivity of the systems performance to a failure of
any of Its elements.
In the central computer architecture, the failure of a
hardware element in the computer can cause the
system to stop performing completely unless a
backup computer is used. Therefore, this system is
very sensitive to single-point failures.
On the other hand, both the hybrid and distributed
architectures arc relatively insensitive to single-point
failures due to the modularity of their structure.

Comparison of Architectures
6. Installation costs - Refers to the cost of system wiring
and the cost of control room and equipment room space
needed to house the system.
The installation costs of hybrid system are high due to :

much custom wiring needed for internal system

interconnections,
long wiring runs needed from sensors to control
cabinets,
much control room space required to house the
panelboard instrumentation,
large volume of control modules needed to implement
the system, take up a lot of equipment room space.

Comparison of Architectures
6. Installation costs :
The central computer architecture cuts down on this
cost by eliminating the module interconnection wiring
and by using the VDUs to replace much of the
panelboard instrumentation.

The distributed system reduces costs further by using

a communication system to replace the sensor wiring
runs and by reducing required equipment room space
through the use of space efficient microprocessor
based modules.

Comparison of Architectures
7. Maintainability Refers to the ease with which a
system can be kept running after installation. Low
maintainability implies high maintenance costs,
including the cost of spares, costs of process
downtime while repairs are being made and personnel
training costs.
The hybrid system is particularly poor in this area
because of the large number of spare modules
required, the lack of failure diagnostics in the system,
and the personnel training required to cover the
diverse subsystems.

The central computer architecture is somewhat better:

the range of module types is reduced and a certain
number of failure diagnostics are provided.

Comparison of Architectures
7. Maintainability

However, relatively sophisticated personnel are

required to maintain the complex computer hardware
and software.
On the other hand, the maintainability of the
distributed system architecture is excellent. Since
there are only a few general-purpose control modules
in the system, spare parts and personnel training
requirements are minimal.
Automatic on-line diagnostics are available to isolate
failures to the module level and module replacements
can be made without disrupting a major portion of the
process.

Comparison of Architectures
It can be seen from the Table that the distributed
control system architecture provides the user with
many benefits over the hybrid and central computer
architectures.
The comparison is not all one-sided. As with any new
venture, moving from a conventional analog control
system to a distributed one requires the user to deal
with a number of potential difficulties and changes in
operation.
One of the most obvious changes is that a
microprocessor-based control system represents a
new technology that plant personnel must learn.

Comparison of Architectures
A certain amount of retraining of operating, instrument
and maintenance people is required to ensure the
success of any first installation of a distributed control
system in a plant.
Operating procedure will change: the operators will be
spending a greater percentage of their time monitoring
the process from the control room than patrolling the
plant. When in control room, they will be running the
process from a VDU instead of from panelboard
instrumentation.
During the early introduction of VDUs in the control
room, the switch was expected to be traumatic for the
operators. However, the transition turned out to be
relatively painless - may be due to the pretraining
effects of video games & home computers.

Comparison of Architectures

10-08-15

The new distributed systems offer the user a

tremendous amount of flexibility in choice of control
algorithms and location of equipment in the plant.
While this is an advantage in most ways, it also
requires that the user plan the installation carefully
so that the control system is partitioned properly and
that there is appropriate space and protections in the
remote locations for the control hardware. These
decisions must be well documented so that the
installation and startup process proceeds smoothly.
When partitioning the control strategy, the user must
be aware of the consequences of the various
processing and communication delays that are
inherent in a distributed control system.

Comparison of Architectures
While the rapid advances in digital system hardware
are fast making these delays negligible in most
situations, the user must be aware of the needs of his
or her particular application.
If the control system is distributed geographically as
well as functionally, the user must make sure that in
the remote-locations the installed hardware can
survive the environment and the proper backup
hardware is provided to accommodate any equipment
failure.

Distributed Control System - Definition

A distributed control system (DCS) refers to a control
system usually of a manufacturing, or process or
any kind of dynamic system, in which the controller
elements are not central in location (like the brain)
but are distributed throughout the system with each
component sub-system controlled by one or more
controllers.
The entire system of controllers is connected by
networks for communication and monitoring.
DCS is a very broad term used in a variety of
industries, to monitor and control distributed
equipment.

Distributed Control System

Advantages for the users of this kind of technology:

flexible hardware architecture and software tools

which come with advanced algorithms of
optimization, modeling and control;

robust communication systems between hardware

components such as workstations, smart devices,
sensors;

capabilities which manage alarms and abnormal

events; integrated diagnostic features in hardware,
communications and control;

capacity to have redundancy in the design of the

systems in both hardware and software levels;

Distributed Control System

Advantages for the users of this kind of technology:

ability to create historical data bases & efficient

manipulation;

security by having limits on the access to the parts of

the control system;

user friendly graphic tools in manipulating the

system.

Instruments & interlocks are created by software.

Generation & modifications of the interlocks are very

flexible and simple.

Information on the process presented to the user in

various formats.

Review of PC based control design for

process automation

Computer Process Control

Origins in the 1950s in the process industries
Mainframe computers slow, expensive,
unreliable
Set point control
Direct digital control (DDC) system installed
1962
Minicomputer
introduced
in
late
1960s,
microcomputer introduced in early 1970s
Programmable logic controllers introduced early
1970s for discrete process control
Distributed control starting around 1975
PCs for process control early 1990s

Use of computer for measurement and control (in real-time)

application were conceived as early as 1950

Digital computer
industry may be:

application

in

Passive or Active
Passive
application
involves
acquisition of process data
acquisition / data logging)

process

only
(data

Active application involves acquisition

and manipulation of data and uses it
for (real time) process control.

Two Basic Requirements for

Real-Time Process Control
1. Process-initiated interrupts
Controller must respond to incoming signals
from the process (event-driven changes)
Depending on relative priority, controller may
have to interrupt current program to respond
2. Timer-initiated actions
Controller must be able to execute certain
actions at specified points in time (time-driven
changes)
Examples: (1) scanning sensor values, (2)
turning switches on and off, (3) re-computing
optimal parameter values

Other Computer Control Requirements

3. Computer commands to process
To drive process actuators

4. System- and program-initiated events

System initiated events - communications
between computer and peripherals
Program initiated events - non-process-related
actions, such as printing reports

5. Operator-initiated events to accept input

from personnel
Example: emergency stop

Capabilities of Computer Control

Polling (data sampling)

Interlocks
Interrupt system
Exception handling

Polling (Data Sampling)

Periodic sampling of data to indicate status of process.
Issues:
1. Polling frequency reciprocal of time interval
between data samples
2. Polling order sequence in which data collection
points are sampled
3. Polling format alternative sampling procedures:
All sensors polled every cycle
Update only data that has changed this cycle
High-level and low-level scanning

Interlocks
Safeguard mechanisms for coordinating the
activities of two or more devices and preventing one
device from interfering with the other(s)
1. Input interlocks signal from an external device
sent to the controller; possible functions:
Proceed to execute work cycle program
Interrupt execution of work cycle program
2. Output interlocks signal sent from controller to
external device

Interrupt System
Computer control feature that permits the execution
of the current program to be suspended in order to
execute another program in response to an incoming
signal indicating a higher priority event

Internal interrupt generated by the computer itself

Examples: timer-initiated events, polling, systemand program initiated interrupts
External interrupts generated external to the
computer
Examples: process-initiated interrupts, operator
inputs

Exception Handling
An exception is an event that is outside the normal or
desired operation of the process control system
Examples of exceptions:
Product quality problem
Process variable outside normal operating range
Shortage of raw materials
Hazardous conditions, e.g., fire
Controller malfunction
Exception handling is a form of error detection and
recovery

Forms of Computer Process Control

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Computer process monitoring

Direct digital control (DDC)
Programmable logic control
Supervisory control
Distributed control systems and personal
computers

Enterprise-Wide Integration of Factory Data

Managers have direct access to factory operations
Planners have most current data on production
times and rates for scheduling purposes
Sales personnel can provide realistic delivery
dates to customers, based on current shop
loading
Order trackers can provide current status
information to inquiring customers
QC can access quality issues from previous
orders
Accounting has most recent production cost data
Production personnel can access product design
data to clarify ambiguities

Enterprise-Wide PC-based Distributed Control

System

Thanks