Modeling, Simulation and Control of a Double Effect Evaporator as a Didactic Tool for Process Control

• Published in: Dominio de las Ciencias Vol. 8; no. 2
• Main Authors: Guamán Lozada, Darío Fernando, Rodríguez Pinos, Adrián Alejandro, Tierra Ayala, Brayan Stiven, Santiana Espín, Cristian Germán
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Spanish
• Published: 2022
• Subjects: didactics; modeling; processes; simulation
• ISSN: 2477-8818

The present research work models, simulates and controls a double effect evaporator as a didactic tool for the chair of process control through software. The mathematical modeling of the behavior of the double effect evaporator was carried out by means of mass and energy balances for the first and second effect, obtaining the respective differential equations, which are entered in a model in Simulink. In addition, to meet the set control objectives, it was necessary to control the variables concentration of the product (Xp), accumulation in the first effect and second effect (M1 - M2) so that they remain below or at the set point. The creation of the didactic interface was developed from the basic components of the Matlab application "App Designer", including commands within the code lines so that there is interaction between the Simulink model and the interface created. This command is processed by the Simulink Compiler and was packaged as a separate application thanks to Matlab Compiler. As a result, a graphical interface that operates independently was obtained, where the different adjustment values (SET-POINTS) can be defined. The mathematical model used for the simulation was validated with the article "Simulation and Control of a Commercial Double Effect Evaporator: Tomato Juice" presented by Yadav & Jana (2010) whose results show setpoint values of: 0.2609 kg solute / kg solution for the product concentration and 2268 kg for accumulation in the first effect. Comparing these results with the present work, the following data were obtained: 0.26067 kg solute / kg, and 2268.07 kg respectively, showing a relative percentage error of 0.088% and -0.003% respectively, being acceptable error values.