Exhibit 2007
`Exhibit 2007
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`System Dynamics
`and Control
`
`Eronini Umez—Eronini
`Morgan State University
`
`
`
`An imprint of Brooks/Cole Publishing Company
`I":_._i_t_i-‘P An International Thomson Publishing Company
`i3acific Grove - ‘Albany; Beirnont - Bonn - Boston - Cincinnati - Detroit
`Johannesburg - London - Madrid - Melbourne - Mexico City -= New York
`Paris - Singapore - Tokyo ° Toronto - Washington
`
`
`
`PWS Publishing
`
`

`
`Sponsoring Editor: Miduiei J. Sugnrman
`Marketing Team: Nathan Wilbur. Jean
`Thompson
`Production: Cloriitdo Publication Services
`Cover Design: Julie Gecha
`Cover Photo: Corbis
`
`Photo Research: Judith Wciber
`Typesetting: The Clarinda Company
`Cover Printing: Phoenix Color
`Corporoi‘ion
`Printing and Binding: R. R. Donneliey &
`Sons——Crtm»ford.r ville
`
`COPYRIGHT © I999 by BrooksiCole Publishing Company
`A Division of International Thomson Publishing Inc.
`I®P The ITP logo is a registered trademark used herein under license.
`For more information. contact PWS Parbfisiiiitg or Brooks/Cafe Publisiiing Company:
`
`BROOI(SiCOLE PUBLISHING COMPANY International Thomson Editors
`Seneca 53
`5]] Forest Lodge Road
`Col. Polanco
`Pacific Grove. CA 93950
`I [560 Mexico, D. F.. Mexico
`USA
`
`International Thomson Publishing Europe
`Berkshire House I68-I73
`High Holbom
`London WCIV TAA
`England
`
`Thomas Nelson Australia
`102 Dodds Street
`South Melbourne, 3205
`Victoria, Australia
`
`Nelson Canada
`1120 Birchmount Road
`Scarborough. Ontario
`Canada MIK 5G4
`
`International Thomson Publishing GmbH
`Konigswinterer Strasse 418
`53227 Bonn
`Germany
`
`lntemational Thomson Publishing Asia
`60 Albert Street
`#l5—0l Albert Complex
`Singapore [S9969
`International Thomson Publishing Japan
`Hirakawacho Kyovva Building, 3F
`2-2-1 Hirakawacho
`Chiyoda—l-cu. Tokyo [02
`Japan
`
`All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced. stored in a retrieval
`system, or transcribed. in any form or by any means-—electronic, mechanical,
`photocopying, recording. or otherwise—-without the prior written permission of the
`Pacific Grove. California 93950.
`publisher. Brooksi'Coie Publishing Company,
`
`Printed in the United States of America.
`
`10987654321
`
`Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
`
`Umez-Eronini. Eronini,
`System dynamics and control I Eronini Umez—Eronini.
`p.
`cm.
`Includes index.
`ISBN 0-534-94451-5
`2. Dynamics——Mathematical models.
`1. Automatic control.
`3. System analysis.
`1. Title.
`TJ2l3.U-453
`I998
`629.8~dc2l
`
`98- [8838
`CIP
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`10
`
`Chapter 1
`
`Introduction
`
`
`
`time the aggregate volume of water used at the various sites is fairly uniform and pre-
`dictable, and that some variation in pressure and therefore performance can be tolerated
`in the applications. is to operate the pump and fill the tank from the well on some sort
`of time schedule.
`
`Figure 1.4a shows the way the actual tank water level depends on the scheduled
`pump operation or the desired tank level. Although the pump operating schedule could
`have been deduced from, say, statistica! analysis of past data on water use on the farm,
`there is nothing in the control scheme of Fig. l.4a that prescribes any relationship be-
`tween one variable of the tank and the other (the variables in this case being Q," and
`ii. The term Q0", is related to It through the valve opening parameter C, which is taken
`here as a perturbation of the system or a disturbance input). Indeed. if at any time the
`pattern of water use (equivalent valve opening) should deviate significantly from that
`on which the pump Schedule is based, the control system could break down or perform
`very poorly. This type of control scheme is referred to as open-loop control.
`The structure of an open—loop control system is shown in Fig. l.4b. The specific
`characteristic or variable of the system. the output. that we wish to control is referred
`to as the coiirmit'ed variab.-‘e. whereas the characteristic or variable that is determined
`
`by the control action is called the connrn’ input. The control elements can collectively
`be called the con.=‘r0Her, although, as we shall see later, the control elements can be con-
`tained in other subgroups. The i‘e,I‘erenr.‘e input generally implies the desired value of the
`controlled variable.
`In Fig.
`l.4b the loop is open in the sense that there is no path
`through which the control input can be determined in terms of the controlled variable,
`that is, the controller does not prescribe a relationship between the control input and the
`controlled variable.
`
`Figure 1.4
`
`Open-loop Control of Water
`Supply System
`
`Valve Opening
`C
`
`Desired
`
`ye Tank
`inflow
`
`Actual
`
`Tank Level
`T-——»
`
`PtII1Ip.I'Wt-_'ll
`tSwilch]
`
`Qin
`T-———v
`
`Tank Level
`.I
`!
`Tank T» h
`
`(Pump Schedule}
`
`1
`
`{a} Simple Control Scheme for the Water Tank Level
`
`Disturbance Input
`
`Control
`input
`
`System
`
`tC'onI.rol Object]
`
`Controlled
`Variable
`
`
`
`Cont rol Elements
`IC.‘nnlrnI1crl
`
`__
`
`Reference
`Input
`
`(1)) Open-Loop Control Structure
`
`
`
`

`
`Feedback Control
`Structure
`
`1.‘)
`
`Feedback Control Concept
`
`11
`
`Another approach to the control of the water tank level is to have the pump operator
`turn the pump on whenever the tank water level drops below the reference value and
`to turn it off again when the tank fills beyond the reference level. To facilitate the work
`of the operator, a level measuringltransmitting and indicating system (LT and LI} can
`be connected to the tank and used to display the tank level at a location where it can
`conveniently be observed (see Fig.
`l.5a). The result is a closed—lor)_p control system,
`since there is a prescribed (albeit switching) relationship between the tank level and in—
`put flow. The operator observing the tank level provides the path that closes the loop.
`However, a control system with a human operator as an element of the controller is
`manual, that is, not automatic. On a busy farm or where it is not feasible to dedicate
`an employee to operation of the pump only. such manual control would clearly be in-
`
`Figure 1.5
`
`Manual and Automatic
`Control of Water Tank Level
`
`Level
`Transmitter
`
` Operator
`
`{a} Manual Closed—Loop Control of Tank Level
`
`—"' Qtllll
`
`
`
`Level
`Trmtslnittcr
`
` Comparator
`
`and Power
`Sctpoim
`(Desired Level} —y Swim-.
`l"l'l'thc.~.'l'Iold
`
`Logic )
`
`
`
`
`
`(b) Automatic C |oscd—Loop Control of Tank Level
`
`

`
`12
`
`Chapter 1
`
`Introduction
`
`
`
`adequate or unsatisfactory. An example of an automatic {closed-loop) control system
`for the tank level is shown in Fig.
`l.5b. Here the comparison of the tank level signal
`with the desired value of the tank level (entered into the system as a setpoint setting)
`and the turning of the pump on or off are all performed by appropriate hardware in the
`controller. However, note that both the manual and automatic level control systems. just
`described, involve
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`the maintenance (in spite of external disturbances} of some prescribed relationship
`of one system variable to another using the result ofa comparison of these variables;
`the transmission of some signal or information from a later (output) stage to an ear-
`lier (input) stage of the system, that is, loop closure through feedback.
`
`The concept involved here is that of feedback control.
`In feedback control, a measurement of the output of the system is used to
`modify its input in such a way that the output stays near the desired value (see [2]).
`There are very many systems both naturally occurring and man-made that rely on
`feedback control for proper operation. in all cases there is usually a sensory instrument
`(sen.s'or,i orfeedback element that measures the output or system variable of interest and
`relays this measurement to a conrnolletr. The controller compares the signal with the de-
`sired value or setpoinr and sends appropriate instructions to the Etctootor or “effector"
`mechanism (orfinal control element), which then acts on the system or control object
`(or plant) to bring subsequent outputs into agreement {prescribed relationship) with the
`setpoint. What we have described is the typical feedback (or closed-loop) control struc-
`ture (see Fig. 1.6). In comparing the feedback control structure shown in Fig. 1.6 with
`the open—loop control structure shown in Fig.
`l.4b, note that the actuator could, de-
`pending on the circumstances, be considered part of the controller or part of the plant.
`The input to the actuator from the controller is called the manipulated variable.
`With the feedback control structure as a guide. we can analyze systems suspected
`of operating as feedback control processes. The idea is to identify components or
`groups of components of the system that function as the various elements in the feed-
`back control structure——controller, actuator. control object, and sensor—as well as to
`
`Manipulated Variable
`
`Control
`
`Disturancc
`input
`
`
`
`
` Actuator
`or Efiector
`
`
`Output
`Mechanism
`01' Final Control
`(Controlled
`
` Elernenl
`Variable)
`
`
`
` Feedback Element
`or Sensor
`
`Measurement
`or Feedback Signal
`
`Figure 1.6
`
`‘Typical Feedback
`Control Structure
`
`
`
`

`
`1.2 Feedback Control Concept
`
`13
`
`establish the controlled variable and the setpoint. If all this can be done, then the sys-
`tem under study is a feedback control system. Consider the case of the so-called human
`thermostat. This remarkable system maintains the body temperature at around 37°C
`(98.6”F} give or take about one degree, whether one is in Alaska in the middie of win~
`ter or in Florida in the middle of summer. In the latter case, that is, prevention of over-
`heating, the actuation (control input) is the dilation of the blood vessels in the skin,
`which increases heat transport from the interior of the body to the surface; and sweat-
`ing, which increases the rate at which this heat is lost from the surface to the environ~
`ment, through evaporation {see [3]). The controller is located in the hypothalamus, an
`area at the base of the brain stem above the crossing of the optic nerves. But where are
`the sensors‘? For a while it was thought that the skin was the predominant measurement
`device for overheat protection. An experiment was performed in which (I) the skin
`temperature. (2) the internal temperature {as measured by a thermocouple held against
`the ear drum, which is near the hypothalamus}, and (3) the rate of sweating were all re-
`corded for a subject white at rest and during exercise. The results showed that the main
`sensors for overheat protection are located in the controller (in the hypothalamus) it-
`self! In Fig. [.73 the skin temperature (as a candidate feedback signal} shows no con-
`sistent relationship with the rate of sweating (a control input). Figure l.7b. on the other
`I’
`
`80
`
`80
`
`
`
`RateofSweating(Calls)
`
`7'0
`
`4-»
`
`LH -.-
`
`20
`
`
`
`RateofSweating(Cults;
`
`I0
`
`3|
`
`3?
`
`33
`
`34
`
`T5
`
`36
`
`3?
`
`38
`
`318.4
`
`36.15
`
`36.8
`
`_Ti'.ll
`
`37.2
`
`_’tT.4
`
`_’u7.t‘a
`
`fl
`36.2
`
`{:1} SkinTemperature("C)
`
`(ti)
`
`lntcrn:1lTemperature(°C)
`
`0 Rest
`0 Work to Calais]
`I Work ( I2 Cal.-"s}
`
`Figure 1.1
`
`Heat Dissipation as 3 Function
`of Skin and Internal
`Temperatures. From
`“The Human Thermostat,” by
`T. H. Benzinger. Copyright ©
`1960 by Scientific American,
`Inc. All rights reserved.