Copyright (c) 1998-2002 The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois All rights reserved.
Developed by: Large Scale Systems Research Laboratory
Professor Richard Braatz, Director Department of Chemical Engineering University of Illinois
This directory contains the Fortran 77 codes for the open-loop and the closed-loop simulations for the Tennessee Eastman process (TEP) as well as the training and testing data files used for evaluating the data-driven methods (PCA, PLS, FDA, and CVA).
The descriptions of each file is shown below:
File name | Description |
---|---|
temain.f |
open loop simulation codes for the TEP |
temain_mod.f |
closed loop simulation codes for the TEP |
teprob.f |
subprogram for the simulation codes for the TEP |
d00.dat |
training file for the normal operating conditions |
d00_te.dat |
testing file for the normal operating conditions |
d01.dat |
training file for Fault 1 |
d01_te.dat |
testing file for Fault 1 |
d02.dat |
training file for Fault 2 |
d02_te.dat |
testing file for Fault 2 |
d21.dat |
training file for Fault 21 |
d21_te.dat |
testing file for Fault 21 |
Each training data file contains 480 rows and 52 columns and each testing data file contains 960 rows and 52 columns. An observation vector at a particular time instant is given by
x = [XMEAS(1), XMEAS(2), ..., XMEAS(41), XMV(1), ..., XMV(11)]^T
where XMEAS(n)
is the n-th measured variable and XMV(n)
is the n-th manipulated variable.
Main program for demonstrating application of the Tennessee Eastman Process Control Test Problem.
James J. Downs and Ernest F. Vogel
Process and Control Systems Engineering
Tennessee Eastman Company
P.O. Box 511
Kingsport, TN 37662
Reference
- A Plant-Wide Industrial Process Control Problem, Presented at the AIChE 1990 Annual Meeting Industrial Challenge Problems in Process Control, Paper #24a. Chicago, Illinois, November 14, 1990.
- A Plant-Wide Industrial Process Control Problem, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 245-255 (1993).
Main program for demonstrating application of the modified Tennessee Eastman Process Control Test Problem.
This new version is a closed-loop plant-wide control scheme for the Tennessee Eastman Process Control Test Problem. The modifications are by:
Evan L. Russell, Leo H. Chiang and Richard D. Braatz
Large Scale Systems Research Laboratory
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
600 South Mathews Avenue, Box C-3
Urbana, Illinois 61801
Original codes of the Tennessee Eastman Process Control Test Problem written by:
James J. Downs and Ernest F. Vogel
Process and Control Systems Engineering
Tennessee Eastman Company
P.O. Box 511
Kingsport, Tennessee 37662
The modified text is Copyright 1998-2002 by The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois. All rights reserved.
Permission hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal with the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
- Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimers.
- Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimers in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
- Neither the names of Large Scale Research Systems Laboratory, University of Illinois, nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this Software without specific prior written permission.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE CONTRIBUTORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Users should cite the original code using the following references:
- J.J. Downs and E.F. Vogel, A plant-wide industrial process control problem. Presented at the AIChE 1990 Annual Meeting, Session on Industrial Challenge Problems in Process Control, Paper #24a Chicago, Illinois, November 14, 1990.
- J.J. Downs and E.F. Vogel, A plant-wide industrial process control problem, Computers and Chemical Engineering, 17:245-255 (1993).
Users should cite the modified code using the following references:
- E.L. Russell, L.H. Chiang, and R.D. Braatz. Data-driven Techniques for Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Chemical Processes, Springer-Verlag, London, 2000.
- L.H. Chiang, E.L. Russell, and R.D. Braatz. Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Industrial Systems, Springer-Verlag, London, 2001.
- L.H. Chiang, E.L. Russell, and R.D. Braatz. Fault diagnosis in chemical processes using Fisher discriminant analysis, discriminant partial least squares, and principal component analysis, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 50:243-252, 2000.
- E.L. Russell, L.H. Chiang, and R.D. Braatz. Fault detection in industrial processes using canonical variate analysis and dynamic principal component analysis, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 51:81-93, 2000.
-
Go to line
220
, changeNPTS
to the number of data points to simulate. For each minute of operation, 60 points are generated. -
Go to line
226
, changeSSPTS
to the number of data points to simulate in steady state operation before implementing the disturbance. -
Go to line
367
, implement any of the 21 programmed disturbances. For example, to implement disturbance 2, typeIDV(2)=1
. -
The program will generate 15 output files and all data are recorded every 180 seconds, see Table 1 for details.
The default path is the home directory. To change the file name and path, modify lines
346-360
accordingly.To overwrite the files that already existed, change
STATUS='new'
toSTATUS='old'
from lines346-360
.Table 1: Content of the output files
# File Name Content 1 TE_data_inc.dat
Time (in seconds) 2 TE_data_mv1.dat
Measurements for manipulated variables 1 to 4 3 TE_data_mv2.dat
Measurements for manipulated variables 5 to 8 4 TE_data_mv3.dat
Measurements for manipulated variables 9 to 12 5 TE_data_me01.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 1 to 4 6 TE_data_me02.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 5 to 8 7 TE_data_me03.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 9 to 12 8 TE_data_me04.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 13 to 16 9 TE_data_me05.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 17 to 20 10 TE_data_me06.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 21 to 24 11 TE_data_me07.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 25 to 28 12 TE_data_me08.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 29 to 32 13 TE_data_me09.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 33 to 36 14 TE_data_me10.dat
Measurements for measurement variables 37 to 40 15 TE_data_me11.dat
Measurements for measurement variable 41 -
To ensure the randomness of the measurement noises, the random number
G
in the sub program (teprob.f
, line 1187) has to be changed each time before runningtemain_mod.f
. -
Save the changes in
temain_mod.f
andteprob.f
and compile the program in unix by typingf77 temain_mod.f teprob.f
-
Run the program by typing
a.out
Revised 4-4-91 to correct error in documentation of manipulated variables
Tennessee Eastman Process Control Test Problem
James J. Downs and Ernest F. Vogel
Process and Control Systems Engineering
Tennessee Eastman Company
P.O. Box 511
Kingsport, TN 37662
Reference
- A Plant-Wide Industrial Process Control Problem". Presented at the AIChE 1990 Annual Meeting Industrial Challenge Problems in Process Control, Paper #24a Chicago, Illinois, November 14, 1990.
-
TEFUNC
- Function evaluator to be called by integrator -
TEINIT
- Initialization -
TESUBi
- Utility subroutines ($i = 1, 2, ..., 8$ )
The process simulation has 50 states (NN=50
).
If the user wishes to integrate additional states, NN
must be increased accordingly in the calling program.
The additional states should be appended to the end of the YY
vector, e.g. YY(51), ...
. The additional derivatives should be appended to the end of the YP
vector, e.g. YP(51),...
.
To initialize the new states and to calculate derivatives for them, we suggest creating new function evaluator and initialization routines as follows.
C-----------------------------------------------
C
SUBROUTINE FUNC(NN,TIME,YY,YP)
C
INTEGER NN
DOUBLE PRECISION TIME, YY(NN), YP(NN)
C
C Call the function evaluator for the process
C
CALL TEFUNC(NN,TIME,YY,YP)
C
C Calculate derivatives for additional states
C
YP(51) = ....
YP(52) = ....
.
.
.
YP(NN) = ....
C
RETURN
END
C
C-----------------------------------------------
C
SUBROUTINE INIT(NN,TIME,YY,YP)
C
INTEGER NN
DOUBLE PRECISION TIME, YY(NN), YP(NN)
C
C Call the initialization for the process
C
CALL TEINIT(NN,TIME,YY,YP)
C
C Initialize additional states
C
YY(51) = ....
YY(52) = ....
.
.
.
YY(NN) = ....
C
RETURN
END
C
C-----------------------------------------------
Differences between the code and its description in the paper:
- Subroutine
TEINIT
hasTIME
in the argument list.TEINIT
setsTIME
to zero. - There are 8 utility subroutines (
TESUBi
) rather than 5. - Process disturbances 14 through 20 do NOT need to be used in conjunction with another disturbance as stated in the paper. All disturbances can be used alone or in any combination.
Variable | Description |
---|---|
XMV(1) |
D Feed Flow (stream 2) (Corrected Order) |
XMV(2) |
E Feed Flow (stream 3) (Corrected Order) |
XMV(3) |
A Feed Flow (stream 1) (Corrected Order) |
XMV(4) |
A and C Feed Flow (stream 4) |
XMV(5) |
Compressor Recycle Valve |
XMV(6) |
Purge Valve (stream 9) |
XMV(7) |
Separator Pot Liquid Flow (stream 10) |
XMV(8) |
Stripper Liquid Product Flow (stream 11) |
XMV(9) |
Stripper Steam Valve |
XMV(10) |
Reactor Cooling Water Flow |
XMV(11) |
Condenser Cooling Water Flow |
XMV(12) |
Agitator Speed |
Variable | Description | unit |
---|---|---|
XMEAS(1) |
A Feed (stream 1) | kscmh |
XMEAS(2) |
D Feed (stream 2) | kg/hr |
XMEAS(3) |
E Feed (stream 3) | kg/hr |
XMEAS(4) |
A and C Feed (stream 4) | kscmh |
XMEAS(5) |
Recycle Flow (stream 8) | kscmh |
XMEAS(6) |
Reactor Feed Rate (stream 6) | kscmh |
XMEAS(7) |
Reactor Pressure | kPa gauge |
XMEAS(8) |
Reactor Level | % |
XMEAS(9) |
Reactor Temperature | Deg C |
XMEAS(10) |
Purge Rate (stream 9) | kscmh |
XMEAS(11) |
Product Sep Temp | Deg C |
XMEAS(12) |
Product Sep Level | % |
XMEAS(13) |
Prod Sep Pressure | kPa gauge |
XMEAS(14) |
Prod Sep Underflow (stream 10) | m3/hr |
XMEAS(15) |
Stripper Level | % |
XMEAS(16) |
Stripper Pressure | kPa gauge |
XMEAS(17) |
Stripper Underflow (stream 11) | m3/hr |
XMEAS(18) |
Stripper Temperature | Deg C |
XMEAS(19) |
Stripper Steam Flow | kg/hr |
XMEAS(20) |
Compressor Work | kW |
XMEAS(21) |
Reactor Cooling Water Outlet Temp | Deg C |
XMEAS(22) |
Separator Cooling Water Outlet Temp | Deg C |
-
Reactor Feed Analysis (Stream 6)
- Sampling Frequency = 0.1 hr
- Dead Time = 0.1 hr
- Mole %
Variable Description XMEAS(23)
Component A XMEAS(24)
Component B XMEAS(25)
Component C XMEAS(26)
Component D XMEAS(27)
Component E XMEAS(28)
Component F -
Purge Gas Analysis (Stream 9)
- Sampling Frequency = 0.1 hr
- Dead Time = 0.1 hr
- Mole %
Variable Description XMEAS(29)
Component A XMEAS(30)
Component B XMEAS(31)
Component C XMEAS(32)
Component D XMEAS(33)
Component E XMEAS(34)
Component F XMEAS(35)
Component G XMEAS(36)
Component H -
Product Analysis (Stream 11)
- Sampling Frequency = 0.25 hr
- Dead Time = 0.25 hr
- Mole %
Variable Description XMEAS(37)
Component D XMEAS(38)
Component E XMEAS(39)
Component F XMEAS(40)
Component G XMEAS(41)
Component H
Variable | Description |
---|---|
IDV(1) |
A/C Feed Ratio, B Composition Constant (Stream 4) Step |
IDV(2) |
B Composition, A/C Ratio Constant (Stream 4) Step |
IDV(3) |
D Feed Temperature (Stream 2) Step |
IDV(4) |
Reactor Cooling Water Inlet Temperature Step |
IDV(5) |
Condenser Cooling Water Inlet Temperature Step |
IDV(6) |
A Feed Loss (Stream 1) Step |
IDV(7) |
C Header Pressure Loss - Reduced Availability (Stream 4) Step |
IDV(8) |
A, B, C Feed Composition (Stream 4) Random Variation |
IDV(9) |
D Feed Temperature (Stream 2) Random Variation |
IDV(10) |
C Feed Temperature (Stream 4) Random Variation |
IDV(11) |
Reactor Cooling Water Inlet Temperature Random Variation |
IDV(12) |
Condenser Cooling Water Inlet Temperature Random Variation |
IDV(13) |
Reaction Kinetics Slow Drift |
IDV(14) |
Reactor Cooling Water Valve Sticking |
IDV(15) |
Condenser Cooling Water Valve Sticking |
IDV(16) |
Unknown |
IDV(17) |
Unknown |
IDV(18) |
Unknown |
IDV(19) |
Unknown |
IDV(20) |
Unknown |