Nah. What's happening is that when you get a disturbance the secondary process reads it and sends the signal to its controller to minimize the upset it would have caused. As the secondary process is initially disturbed, the primary process would also be affected and in turn its transmitter would send a signal back to the primary controller where it would try to compensate for the upset in the entire process.
This is a way to correct a big spike in temperature or an overflow of a particular input especially if product specification is important. It's also just one way of doing this. There are many other ways like inferential, feedforward and ratio instrumentation control. Cascade is basically having more than one feedback control loop.
If anyone even gets that.
zabu of nΩd;9798778 said:I had to do some reading here to catch up on the terminology but at least it makes a little sense now.
It seems to me that the only time you would have multiple control loops (i.e. a cascade architecture) is if you have multiple disturbances in the system, right? Like for the water tank example they have, the first disturbance that's being corrected in the primary control loop is the drainage of water from the tank, and the second disturbance is the water pressure from the pipes.
Is there any way it would make sense to have a cascade architecture for a system like the A/C in a house? I can only think of one disturbance in that instance, the inflow of heat from outside.
Your main disturbance in an air conditioning system would be the hot air from the outside, I believe. You don't need to have multiple disturbances to be able to set up a cascade control system because as long as there is an external force that induces changes in the system, many other factors could be affected as well.
For example, the flow rate and pressure of freon gas within the coils, the operating conditions of the motor for the fans and compressor. All these and more probably factor in and to have a system that works at close to 100% efficiency it's probably best to set up a control system for it. It really is though up to capital and operating costs. All these things cost money and that's where design optimization comes in. That's another story.
Your main disturbance in an air conditioning system would be the hot air from the outside, I believe. You don't need to have multiple disturbances to be able to set up a cascade control system because as long as there is an external force that induces changes in the system, many other factors could be affected as well.
For example, the flow rate and pressure of freon gas within the coils, the operating conditions of the motor for the fans and compressor. All these and more probably factor in and to have a system that works at close to 100% efficiency it's probably best to set up a control system for it. It really is though up to capital and operating costs. All these things cost money and that's where design optimization comes in. That's another story.
So essentially an example of a cascade control system could be that of a cars on-board diagnostics system. It accounts for external and internal variables and adjusts accordingly. Also, one fucking thing goes wrong and you may be shit out of luck in regards to a few other things.