1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway August/September.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Outline Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational.
Advertisements

Self-Optimizing Control of the HDA Process Outline of the presentation –Process description. –Self-optimizing control procedure. –Self-optimizing control.
1 CONTROLLED VARIABLE AND MEASUREMENT SELECTION Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
1 Outline Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational.
1 M. Panahi ’Plantwide Control for Economically Optimal Operation of Chemical Plants’ Plantwide Control for Economically Optimal Operation of Chemical.
Plantwide process control with focus on selecting economic controlled variables («self- optimizing control») Sigurd Skogestad, NTNU 2014.
Practical plantwide process control Sigurd Skogestad, NTNU Thailand, April 2014.
GHGT-8 Self-Optimizing and Control Structure Design for a CO 2 Capturing Plant Mehdi Panahi, Mehdi Karimi, Sigurd Skogestad, Magne Hillestad, Hallvard.
1 Coordinator MPC for maximization of plant throughput Elvira Marie B. Aske* &, Stig Strand & and Sigurd Skogestad* * Department of Chemical Engineering,
Part 3: Regulatory («stabilizing») control
First African Control Conference, Cape Town, 04 December 2003
1 Outline Skogestad procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step S1: Define operational objective (cost) and constraints Step S2: Identify degrees.
1 Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU)
PSE and PROCESS CONTROL
1 Feedback control theory: An overview and connections to biochemical systems theory Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University.
1 1 Economic Plantwide Control, July 2015 ECONOMIC PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and.
Outline Skogestad procedure for control structure design I Top Down
1 Outline Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational.
1 1 V. Minasidis et. al. | Simple Rules for Economic Plantwide ControlSimple Rules for Economic Plantwide Control, PSE & ESCAPE 2015 SIMPLE RULES FOR ECONOMIC.
1 Structure of the process control system Benefits from MPC (Model Predictive Control) and RTO (Real Time Optimization) Sigurd Skogestad Department of.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 Self-Optimizing Control HDA case study S. Skogestad, May 2006 Thanks to Antonio Araújo.
1 AN INTRODUCTION TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 A Plantwide Control Procedure Applied to the HDA Process Antonio Araújo and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University.
1 Practical plantwide process control. Extra Sigurd Skogestad, NTNU Thailand, April 2014.
Plantwide process control Introduction
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway.
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway 01 April.
1 Active constraint regions for economically optimal operation of distillation columns Sigurd Skogestad and Magnus G. Jacobsen Department of Chemical Engineering.
Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
Integrated Process Networks: Nonlinear Control System Design for Optimality and Dynamic Performance Michael Baldea a,b and Prodromos Daoutidis a a University.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU)
1 Outline Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational.
1 Selv-optimaliserende regulering Anvendelser mot prosessindustrien, biologi og maratonløping Sigurd Skogestad Institutt for kjemisk prosessteknologi,
1 Part 3: Regulatory («stabilizing») control Inventory (level) control structure –Location of throughput manipulator –Consistency and radiating rule Structure.
1 Decentralized control Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway.
1 ECONOMIC PLANTWIDE CONTROL How to design the control system for a complete plant in a systematic manner Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering.
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 ECONOMIC PLANTWIDE CONTROL: Control structure design for complete processing plants Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University.
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Identifying and switching between active constraints regions Sigurd Skogestad and Magnus G. Jacobsen Department of Chemical Engineering.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 II. Bottom-up Determine secondary controlled variables and structure (configuration) of control system (pairing) A good control configuration is insensitive.
1 Self-optimizing control: Simple implementation of optimal operation Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science.
1 Feedback Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL How to design the control system for a complete plant in a systematic manner Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 Plantwide process control Introduction Sigurd Skogestad, NTNU May 2014.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL ( ) Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology.
Control Structure Design: New Developments and Future Directions Vinay Kariwala and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering NTNU, Trondheim,
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 Control structure design for complete chemical plants (a systematic procedure to plantwide control) Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering.
1 A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO PLANTWIDE CONTROL ( ) Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology.
Control strategies for optimal operation of complete plants Plantwide control - With focus on selecting economic controlled variables Sigurd Skogestad,
A systematic procedure for economic plantwide control
Advanced process control with focus on selecting economic controlled variables («self-optimizing control») Sigurd Skogestad, NTNU 2016.
Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
Outline Control structure design (plantwide control)
Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure
PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
CONTROLLED VARIABLE AND MEASUREMENT SELECTION
Outline Control structure design (plantwide control)
Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure
Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure
Outline Control structure design (plantwide control)
Presentation transcript:

1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway August/September 2006

2 Summary and references We have developed a systematic procedure for plantwide control. An important part is the selection of controlled variables based on self- optimizing control. These are the controlled variables for the "supervisory" control layer. In addition, we need a regulatory control system to stabilize the plant and avoid drift. The following paper summarizes the procedure: –S. Skogestad, ``Control structure design for complete chemical plants'', Computers and Chemical Engineering, 28 (1-2), (2004).``Control structure design for complete chemical plants'', There are many approaches to plantwide control as discussed in the following review paper: –T. Larsson and S. Skogestad, ``Plantwide control: A review and a new design procedure'' Modeling, Identification and Control, 21, (2000).``Plantwide control: A review and a new design procedure''

3 Contents Overview of plantwide control Selection of primary controlled variables based on economic : The llink between the optimization (RTO) and the control (MPC; PID) layers - Degrees of freedom - Optimization - Self-optimizing control - Applications - Many examples Where to set the production rate and bottleneck Design of the regulatory control layer ("what more should we control") - stabilization - secondary controlled variables (measurements) - pairing with inputs - controllability analysis - cascade control and time scale separation. Design of supervisory control layer - Decentralized versus centralized (MPC) - Design of decentralized controllers: Sequential and independent design - Pairing and RGA-analysis Summary and case studies

4 Trondheim, Norway

5 Trondheim Oslo UK NORWAY DENMARK GERMANY North Sea SWEDEN Arctic circle

6 NTNU, Trondheim

7 Outline Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational objectives (optimal operation) Step 3: What to control ? (primary CV’s) (self-optimizing control) Step 4: Where set production rate? II Bottom Up Step 5: Regulatory control: What more to control (secondary CV’s) ? Step 6: Supervisory control Step 7: Real-time optimization Case studies

8 Main message 1. Control for economics (Top-down steady-state arguments) –Primary controlled variables c = y 1 : Control active constraints For remaining unconstrained degrees of freedom: Look for “self-optimizing” variables 2. Control for stabilization (Bottom-up; regulatory PID control) –Secondary controlled variables y 2 (“inner cascade loops”) Control variables which otherwise may “drift” Both cases: Control variables with a large gain!

9 Idealized view of control (“Ph.D. control”)

10 Practice: Tennessee Eastman challenge problem (Downs, 1991) (“PID control”)

11 How we design a control system for a complete chemical plant? Where do we start? What should we control? and why? etc.

12 Alan Foss (“Critique of chemical process control theory”, AIChE Journal,1973): The central issue to be resolved... is the determination of control system structure. Which variables should be measured, which inputs should be manipulated and which links should be made between the two sets? There is more than a suspicion that the work of a genius is needed here, for without it the control configuration problem will likely remain in a primitive, hazily stated and wholly unmanageable form. The gap is present indeed, but contrary to the views of many, it is the theoretician who must close it. Carl Nett (1989): Minimize control system complexity subject to the achievement of accuracy specifications in the face of uncertainty.

13 Control structure design Not the tuning and behavior of each control loop, But rather the control philosophy of the overall plant with emphasis on the structural decisions: –Selection of controlled variables (“outputs”) –Selection of manipulated variables (“inputs”) –Selection of (extra) measurements –Selection of control configuration (structure of overall controller that interconnects the controlled, manipulated and measured variables) –Selection of controller type (LQG, H-infinity, PID, decoupler, MPC etc.). That is: Control structure design includes all the decisions we need make to get from ``PID control’’ to “Ph.D” control

14 Process control: “Plantwide control” = “Control structure design for complete chemical plant” Large systems Each plant usually different – modeling expensive Slow processes – no problem with computation time Structural issues important –What to control? –Extra measurements –Pairing of loops

15 Previous work on plantwide control Page Buckley (1964) - Chapter on “Overall process control” (still industrial practice) Greg Shinskey (1967) – process control systems Alan Foss (1973) - control system structure Bill Luyben et al. (1975- ) – case studies ; “snowball effect” George Stephanopoulos and Manfred Morari (1980) – synthesis of control structures for chemical processes Ruel Shinnar (1981- ) - “dominant variables” Jim Downs (1991) - Tennessee Eastman challenge problem Larsson and Skogestad (2000): Review of plantwide control

16 Control structure selection issues are identified as important also in other industries. Professor Gary Balas (Minnesota) at ECC’03 about flight control at Boeing: The most important control issue has always been to select the right controlled variables --- no systematic tools used!

17 Main simplification: Hierarchical structure Need to define objectives and identify main issues for each layer PID RTO MPC

18 Regulatory control (seconds) Purpose: “Stabilize” the plant by controlling selected ‘’secondary’’ variables (y 2 ) such that the plant does not drift too far away from its desired operation Use simple single-loop PI(D) controllers Status: Many loops poorly tuned –Most common setting: K c =1,  I =1 min (default) –Even wrong sign of gain K c ….

19 Regulatory control……... Trend: Can do better! Carefully go through plant and retune important loops using standardized tuning procedure Exists many tuning rules, including Skogestad (SIMC) rules: –K c = (1/k) (  1 / [  c +  ])  I = min (  1, 4[  c +  ]), Typical:  c =  –“Probably the best simple PID tuning rules in the world” © Carlsberg Outstanding structural issue: What loops to close, that is, which variables (y 2 ) to control?

20 Supervisory control (minutes) Purpose: Keep primary controlled variables (c=y 1 ) at desired values, using as degrees of freedom the setpoints y 2s for the regulatory layer. Status: Many different “advanced” controllers, including feedforward, decouplers, overrides, cascades, selectors, Smith Predictors, etc. Issues: –Which variables to control may change due to change of “active constraints” –Interactions and “pairing”

21 Supervisory control…... Trend: Model predictive control (MPC) used as unifying tool. –Linear multivariable models with input constraints –Tuning (modelling) is time-consuming and expensive Issue: When use MPC and when use simpler single-loop decentralized controllers ? –MPC is preferred if active constraints (“bottleneck”) change. –Avoids logic for reconfiguration of loops Outstanding structural issue: –What primary variables c=y 1 to control?

22 Local optimization (hour) Purpose: Minimize cost function J and: –Identify active constraints –Recompute optimal setpoints y 1s for the controlled variables Status: Done manually by clever operators and engineers Trend: Real-time optimization (RTO) based on detailed nonlinear steady-state model Issues: –Optimization not reliable. –Need nonlinear steady-state model –Modelling is time-consuming and expensive

23 Objectives of layers: MV’s and CV’s c s = y 1s MPC PID y 2s RTO u (valves) CV=y 1 ; MV=y 2s CV=y 2 ; MV=u Min J (economics); MV=y 1s

24 Summary: The three layers Optimization layer (RTO; steady-state nonlinear model): Identifies active constraints and computes optimal setpoints for primary controlled variables (y 1 ). Supervisory control (MPC; linear model with constraints): Follow setpoints for y 1 (usually constant) by adjusting setpoints for secondary variables (MV=y 2s ) Regulatory control (PID): Stabilizes the plant and avoids drift, in addition to following setpoints for y 2. MV=valves (u). Design starts from the bottom. A good example is bicycle riding: Regulatory control: First you need to learn how to stabilize the bicycle Supervisory control: Then you need to follow the road. Usually a constant setpoint policy is OK, for example, stay y 1s =0.5 m from the right hand side of the road (in this case the "magic" self-optimizing variable self-optimizing variable is y1=distance to right hand side of road)self-optimizing variable Optimization: Which road (route) should you follow?

25 Stepwise procedure plantwide control I. TOP-DOWN Step 1. DEGREES OF FREEDOM Step 2. OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES Step 3. WHAT TO CONTROL? (primary CV’s c=y 1 ) Step 4. PRODUCTION RATE II. BOTTOM-UP (structure control system): Step 5. REGULATORY CONTROL LAYER (PID) “Stabilization” What more to control? (secondary CV’s y 2 ) Step 6. SUPERVISORY CONTROL LAYER (MPC) Decentralization Step 7. OPTIMIZATION LAYER (RTO) Can we do without it?

26 Outline About Trondheim and myself Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of freedom Step 2: Operational objectives (optimal operation) Step 3: What to control ? (self-optimzing control) Step 4: Where set production rate? II Bottom Up Step 5: Regulatory control: What more to control ? Step 6: Supervisory control Step 7: Real-time optimization Case studies

27 Step 1. Degrees of freedom (DOFs) for operation (N valves ): To find all operational (dynamic) degrees of freedom Count valves! (N valves ) “Valves” also includes adjustable compressor power, etc. Anything we can manipulate!

28 Steady-state degrees of freedom (DOFs) What can (and should) we control (CVs)? IMPORTANT! No. of steady-state CVs = No. of steady-state DOFs Three methods to obtain no. of steady-state degrees of freedom (N ss ): 1.Equation-counting N ss = no. of variables – no. of equations/specifications Very difficult in practice (not covered here) 2.Valve-counting (easier!) N ss = N valves – N 0ss – N specs N 0ss = variables with no steady-state effect 3.Typical number for some units (useful for checking!)

29 Steady-state degrees of freedom (N ss ): 2. Valve-counting N valves = no. of dynamic (control) DOFs (valves) N ss = N valves – N 0ss – N specs : no. of steady-state DOFs N 0ss = N 0y + N 0,valves : no. of variables with no steady-state effect –N 0,valves : no. purely dynamic control DOFs –N 0y : no. controlled variables (liquid levels) with no steady-state effect N specs : No of equality specifications (e.g., given pressure)

30 N valves = 6, N 0y = 2, N specs = 2, N SS = = 2 Distillation column with given feed and pressure

31 Heat-integrated distillation process

32 Heat-integrated distillation process

33 Heat exchanger with bypasses

34 Heat exchanger with bypasses

35 Steady-state degrees of freedom (N ss ): 3. Typical number for some process units each external feedstream: 1 (feedrate) splitter: n-1 (split fractions) where n is the number of exit streams mixer: 0 compressor, turbine, pump: 1 (work) adiabatic flash tank: 0 * liquid phase reactor: 1 (holdup-volume reactant) gas phase reactor: 0 * heat exchanger: 1 (duty or net area) column (e.g. distillation) excluding heat exchangers: 0 * + no. of sidestreams pressure * : add 1DOF at each extra place you set pressure (using an extra valve, compressor or pump), e.g. in adiabatic flash tank, gas phase reactor or column * Pressure is normally assumed to be given by the surrounding process and is then not a degree of freedom

36 Heat exchanger with bypasses

37 “Typical number”, N ss = 0 (distillation) + 2*1 (heat exchangers) = 2 Distillation column with given feed and pressure

38 Heat-integrated distillation process

39 HDA process MixerFEHE FurnacePFR Quench Separator Compressor Cooler Stabilizer Benzene Column Toluene Column H 2 + CH 4 Toluene Benzene CH 4 Diphenyl Purge (H 2 + CH 4 )

40 HDA process: steady-state degrees of freedom Conclusion: 14 steady-state DOFs Assume given column pressures feed:1.2 hex: 3, 4, 6 splitter 5, 7 compressor: 8 distillation: 2 each column

41 Check that there are enough manipulated variables (DOFs) - both dynamically and at steady-state (step 2) Otherwise: Need to add equipment –extra heat exchanger –bypass –surge tank