Feedforward and feedback control

A feedback controller responds only after it detects a deviation in the value of the controlled
output from its desired set point. On the other hand, a feedforward controller detects the
disturbance directly and takes an appropriate control action in order to eliminate its effect on
the process output.

Consider the distillation column shown in Fig (V.1) The control objective is to keep the
distillate concentration at a desired set point despite any changes in the inlet feed stream.

Fig V.1: Feedback and Feedforward control configuration of a distillation column

Fig V.2: The comparative schematic of feedback and feedforward control structure

Fig V.2 shows the general form of a feedforward control system. It directly measures the
disturbance to the process and anticipates its effect on the process output. Eventually it alters
the manipulated input in such a way that the impact of the disturbance on the process output
gets eliminated. In other words, where the feedback control action starts after the disturbance
is “felt” through the changes in process output, the feedforward control action starts
immediately after the disturbance is “measured” directly. Hence, feedback controller acts in
a compensatory manner whereas the feedforward controller acts in an anticipatory manner.

I Design of feedforward controller

Let us consider the block diagram of a process shown in Fig V.3. The Fig V.3(a) presents the
open-loop diagram of the process. The process and disturbance transfer functions are
represented by and respectively. The controlled output, manipulated input and the
disturbance variable are indicated as and respectively

(a) Open-loop process diagram (b) Process diagram with feedforward controller

(c) Process diagram with feedforward controller, sensor and valve

Fig V.3: The schematic of a feedforward controller mechanism

The process output is represented by

(V.1)

The control objective is to maintain at the desired setpoint . Hence the eq (V.1) can be
rewritten as

(V.2)

The eq. (V.2) can be rearranged in the following manner:

or

(V.3)

The eq. (V.3) can be schematically represented by Fig V.3(b).

For the sake of simplicity, measuring element and final control element were not considered
as parts of the feedforward control configuration as shown in Fig V.3(b). In a more
generalized case, when such elements are added in the controller configuration, the resulting
control structure takes the form of Fig V.3(c). A generalized form of controller equation can
be written as

(V.4)

And

(V.5)

In case of regulatory problem (disturbance rejection) i.e. when , the controller should
be able to reject the effect of disturbance and ensure no deviation in the output, i.e. . In
other words,

................................................................................................................(V.6)

or
.........................................................................................................................(V.7)

In case of servo problem (setpoint tracking), i.e. when , the controller should be able to
ensure that output tracks the setpoint, i.e. . In other words,

.......................................................................................................................(V.8)

or

....................................................................................(V.9)

V.I.3 Combination of Feedforward-Feedback Controller

The following table provides a comparative assessment of feedforward and feedback

controllers.

Table V.1: Merits and demerits of feedforward and feedback controllers

Merits Demerits

Feedforward controllers
Takes corrective action before the process Requires measurement of all disturbances
“feels” the disturbance affecting the system

Good for sluggish systems and/or system Sensitive to variation in process parameters
with large deadtime

Does not affect the stability of the process Requires a “near perfect” model of the
process

Feedback controllers
Does not require disturbance measurement Acts to take corrective action after the
process “feels” the disturbance

Insensitive to mild errors in modeling Bad for sluggish systems and/or system with
large deadtime

Insensitive to mild changes in process May affect the stability of the process
parameters
The performance of three controllers, viz., feedforward, feedback and feedforward-feedback,
are presented in Fig V.7

 the feedforward controller ideally does not get any feedback from the process output.
Hence, it solely works on the merit of the model(s). The better a model represents the
behavior of a process,the better would be the performance of a feedforward controller
designed on the basis of that model. Perfect control necessitates perfect knowledge of
process and disturbance models and this is practically impossible. This inturn is the main
drawback of a feedforward controller.
 The feedforward control configuration can be developed for more than one disturbance in
multi-controller configuration. Any controller in that configuration would act according to
the disturbance for which it is designed.
 External characteristics of a feedforward loop are same as that of a feedback loop. The
primary measurement (disturbance in case of feedforward control and process output in
case of feedback control) is compared to a setpoint and the result of the comparison is
used as the actuating signal for the controller. Except the controller, all other hardware
elements of the feedforward control configuration such as sensor, transducer, transmitter,
valves are same as that of an equivalent feedback control configuration.
 controller cannot be expressed in the feedback form such as P, PI and PID controllers. It is
regarded as a special purpose computing machine .

Fig V.7: Comparative performance analysis of three controllers.

It is clearly observed that the performance of feedforward-feedback controller is far better

than the other two individual controllers.
 Ratio Control

A ratio controller is a special type of feedforward controller where disturbances are measured
and their ratio is held at a desired set point by controlling one of the streams. The other
uncontrolled stream is called wild stream. Fig V.11 shows the schematic of a ratio controller.
The ratio of flow rates of two streams are being held at a desired ratio by controlling the flow
rate of one stream. The flow rates are measured through flow transmitters (FTs).

Fig V.11: The schematic of a ratio control structure

The chemical process industries have various applications for ratio controllers. Following are
a few such examples:

• Reflux ratio and reboiler feed ratio in a distillation column

• Maintaining the stoichiometric ratio of reactants in a reactor

• Keeping air/fuel ratio in a combustion process

Advantages

 allows user to link 2 streams to produce and maintain a defined ratio between the streams
 simple
 no need of a complex model

Disadvantages

 not as useful for variables other than flow rates

 requires a ratio relationship between variables that needs to be maintained

Override Control

During the operation of a process plant it is possible that a dangerous situation may arise due
to unacceptable process conditions which may destruct the process or its personnel. In such
case the normal operation should temporarily be stopped and preventive measures should be
initiated to avert the unacceptable situation. In order to facilitate such measures, a single-
purpose “switch” can be used that can take preferential instruction from one controller over
the others to manipulate the final control element in such a way that the dangerous situation
can be averted. This is called override control. The technique can be illustrated with the
following example.

Fig. V.12: Override control of a boiler

Consider a boiler shown in the Fig V.12 It has one water inlet and one steam outlet. The
steam outlet is regulated by the valve in the discharge line that takes the control signal from
the control mechanism in Loop1 (pressure transducer and pressure controller). In other
words, the discharge of steam is regulated on the basis of its pressure desired in the supply
line elsewhere. However, the water is boiled using a heating coil that needs to be always
submerged below the water level so that the heating coil does not burn out. Hence, in order to
ensure a certain minimum level of water inside the boiler, the control Loop 2 is set in place
that contains a level transducer and a level controller. Both level controller and pressure
controller give the control signal to the valve through an intermediate switch LSS (Low
Selection Switch) that takes the preferential signal from the level controller.

Split Range Control

This type of control is used, where there are several manipulated variables, but a single
output variable. The coordination among different manipulated variables is carried out by
using Split Range Control. ther words, Loop 2 remains inactive during the normal operation
and the Loop 1 regulates the process. Nevertheless, at critical situation when the water level
drops below the minimum allowable limit, the Loop 2 takes over and takes corrective
measures.
Fig. 8 shows an example of a typical split range control scheme. The steam discharges from
several boilers are combine at a steam header. Overall steam pressure at the header is to be
maintained constant through a pressure control loop. The command from the pressure
controller is used for controlling simultaneously the steam flow rates from the boilers in
parallel. Clearly, there is a single output variable (steam header pressure) while there are a
number of manipulating variables (discharge from different boilers).