Temperature Controller A model predictive controller (MPC) based on the controller proposed by Muske and Rawlings (1993) is used. For the predictions we.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Implementation of MPC in a deethanizer at the Kårstø Gas plant
Advertisements

Dynamic Behavior of Closed-Loop Control Systems
Automation I. Introduction. transmitter actuator Structure of control system Process or plant Material flow sensorstransducers actuating units actuating.
ORDINARY DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS (ODE)
Process Control: Designing Process and Control Systems for Dynamic Performance Chapter 6. Empirical Model Identification Copyright © Thomas Marlin 2013.
CHAPTER V CONTROL SYSTEMS
Chapter 3 Dynamic Modeling.
Robust control Saba Rezvanian Fall-Winter 88.
1 Finding good models for model-based control and optimization Paul Van den Hof Okko Bosgra Delft Center for Systems and Control 17 July 2007 Delft Center.
280 SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION The System Identification Problem is to estimate a model of a system based on input-output data. Basic Configuration continuous.
INTEGRATED DESIGN OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES USING MODEL PREDICTIVE CONTROL Mario Francisco, Pastora Vega University of Salamanca – Spain European.
Development of Dynamic Models Illustrative Example: A Blending Process
Transfer Functions Convenient representation of a linear, dynamic model. A transfer function (TF) relates one input and one output: The following terminology.
NORM BASED APPROACHES FOR AUTOMATIC TUNING OF MODEL BASED PREDICTIVE CONTROL Pastora Vega, Mario Francisco, Eladio Sanz University of Salamanca – Spain.
Dynamic Behavior and Stability of Closed-Loop Control Systems
Controller Tuning: A Motivational Example
Development of Empirical Models From Process Data
Transfer Functions Convenient representation of a linear, dynamic model. A transfer function (TF) relates one input and one output: The following terminology.
Certifying the robustness of model predictive controllers W. P. Heath and B. Lennox Control Systems Centre The University of Manchester.
Chapter 11 1 Closed-Loop Responses of Simple Control Systems In this section we consider the dynamic behavior of several elementary control problems for.
Overall Objectives of Model Predictive Control
1 Operation of heat pump cycles Jørgen Bauck Jensen & Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
CHAPTER II PROCESS DYNAMICS AND MATHEMATICAL MODELING
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,
Control Loop Interaction
1 Modelling, Operation and Control of an LNG Plant Jens Strandberg & Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science.
A Shaft Sensorless Control for PMSM Using Direct Neural Network Adaptive Observer Authors: Guo Qingding Luo Ruifu Wang Limei IEEE IECON 22 nd International.
Offset Free Tracking with MPC under Uncertainty: Experimental Verification Audun Faanes * and Sigurd Skogestad † Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
PSE and PROCESS CONTROL
DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR AND STABILITY OF CLOSED-LOOP CONTROL SYSTEMS
Dynamic Response Characteristics of More Complicated Systems
Chapter 6 Model Predictive Control Prof. Shi-Shang Jang National Tsing-Hua University Chemical Engineering Department.
Chapter 8 Model Based Control Using Wireless Transmitter.
Model Reference Adaptive Control (MRAC). MRAS The Model-Reference Adaptive system (MRAS) was originally proposed to solve a problem in which the performance.
PID Controller Design and
1 E. S. Hori, Maximum Gain Rule Maximum Gain Rule for Selecting Controlled Variables Eduardo Shigueo Hori, Sigurd Skogestad Norwegian University of Science.
Chapter 20 1 Overall Objectives of Model Predictive Control 1.Prevent violations of input and output constraints. 2.Drive some output variables to their.
Abstract An important issue in control structure selection is plant ”stabilization”. The paper presents a way to select measurement combinations c as controlled.
1 Decentralized control Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway.
CONTROL OF MULTIVARIABLE SYSTEM BY MULTIRATE FAST OUTPUT SAMPLING TECHNIQUE B. Bandyopadhyay and Jignesh Solanki Indian Institute of Technology Mumbai,
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
Matlab Tutorial for State Space Analysis and System Identification
Controllability Analysis for Process and Control System Design
1 Chapter 20 Model Predictive Control Model Predictive Control (MPC) – regulatory controls that use an explicit dynamic model of the response of process.
1 Unconstrained degrees of freedom: C. Optimal measurement combination (Alstad, 2002) Basis: Want optimal value of c independent of disturbances ) – 
ERT 210/4 Process Control & Dynamics DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF PROCESSES :
TRANSFER FUNCTION Prepared by Mrs. AZDUWIN KHASRI.
President UniversityErwin SitompulSMI 1/1 Dr.-Ing. Erwin Sitompul President University Lecture 1 System Modeling and Identification
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
MISS. RAHIMAH BINTI OTHMAN
Computational Approach for Adjudging Feasibility of Acceptable Disturbance Rejection Vinay Kariwala and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering.
Coordinator MPC with focus on maximizing throughput
Transfer Functions Convenient representation of a linear, dynamic model. A transfer function (TF) relates one input and one output: The following terminology.
Chapter 4 Dynamical Behavior of Processes Homework 6 Construct an s-Function model of the interacting tank-in-series system and compare its simulation.
Chapter 1: Overview of Control
Chapter 4 Dynamical Behavior of Processes Homework 6 Construct an s-Function model of the interacting tank-in-series system and compare its simulation.
Transfer Functions Chapter 4
Presentation at NI Day April 2010 Lillestrøm, Norway
Modeling and Control of Heat Networks with Storage:
Improved Speed Estimation in Sensorless PM Brushless AC Drives
Overall Objectives of Model Predictive Control
Controller Tuning: A Motivational Example
Model-based Predictive Control (MPC)
Model-based Predictive Control (MPC)
Multirate Output Feedback
Homework 9 Refer to the last example.
Kalman Filter: Bayes Interpretation
PID Controller Design and
Outline Control structure design (plantwide control)
Presentation transcript:

Temperature Controller A model predictive controller (MPC) based on the controller proposed by Muske and Rawlings (1993) is used. For the predictions we use a discrete state space model The manipulated variable at time k, u k, is determined by taking the first element of the vector of N future control moves,, that optimizes the infinite criterion u is assumed held constant in each sample interval, and we assume u=0 after the N moves. Muske and Rawlings (1993) demonstrated how to derive an equivalent finite optimization criterion. Assuming no active constraints (this assumption is for this case verified by the results), the controller can be expressed as state feedback: To handle non-zero references and obtain integral action: where x s and u s are functions of the reference and the disturbances, d. x and disturbance estimates are found by a Kalman filter, assuming that the disturbance(s) are integrated white noise (with covariance 0.05). The other states have a covariance of 1, whereas the measurements are assumed to have a covariance of For details, see Faanes (2003) or Chapter 5 in Faanes and Skogestad (2003). The use of input disturbance estimates is recommended by Muske and Rawlings (1993), Lee et al. (1994), Lundström et al. (1995) and Muske and Badgwell (2002) when the process time constants are long and the actual disturbances are not directly influencing the outputs. Offset Free Tracking with MPC under Uncertainty: Experimental Verification Audun Faanes * and Sigurd Skogestad † Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology N-7491 Trondheim N, Norway *Also affiliated with Statoil ASA, TEK, Process Control, N-7005 Trondheim, Norway † Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed. Tel. : , Fax.: Abstract A laboratorial experiment is used to investigate some aspects related to integral action in MPC. MPC is used for temperature control of a process with two tanks in series. Since this often improves performance, an extra the temperature measurements was applied. To avoid outlet temperature steady-state offset, estimates of input disturbances have been used in the calculation of the steady-state control input. Simulations may indicate that integral action is present and that disturbances are handled well, but in practice unmodelled phenomena may give a poor result in the actual plant, also at steady-state. If should be verified that integral action (feedback) is actually present and not an apparent effect of perfect feedforward control. The experiments verify that output feedback through input disturbance estimation is efficient, provided that it is correctly done. To obtain integral action, care must be taken when choosing which input disturbance estimates to include. It is not sufficient to estimate a disturbance or bias in the control input(s), even if the control input(s) are sufficient to control the process. The present work verifies that the number of independent disturbance estimates must equal the number of measurements. In our experiment the use of estimates of input disturbances to both tanks gave satisfactory performance with no steady-state error. Experimental set-up Hot and cold water are mixed in two tanks in series, and the temperature of the outlet water (y) shall be kept constant despite disturbances d 1 (variation in hot water flow rate) and d 2 (cold water addition in main tank). Manipulated variable, u, is cold water flow rate. In the main tank there is a loop where the water is circulated with a pump. y is measured in this loop, and therefore we get a delay. The circulation loop also gives mixing. The levels are controlled with an overflow drain (in the mixing tank) and an on-off drainage valve (in the main tank). Conclusions Experiment: temperature control in a process with two tanks in series Model predictive control, MPC Non-square case: two measurements, one manipulated variable Offset-free steady state obtained by input disturbance estimates for the determination of the manipulated variable steady-state Simulation indicates that estimation of one disturbance is sufficient The experiment shows that two disturbance estimates are needed, i.e., the number of disturbance estimates must equal the number of measurements (in accordance with Pannocchia and Rawlings (2003) and Faanes and Skogestad (2003)) Offset free steady state in the simulation is an apparent effect of perfect “feedforward control” Estimates of input disturbances have been described in the literature as efficient for a quick response back to the desired steady state. The present work confirms this (provided that it is correctly done). Acknowledgements The experimental equipment has been set up at Norsk Hydro Research Centre, and was originally designed by Jostein Toft, Arne Henriksen and Terje Karstang. Norsk Hydro ASA has financed the experiments. References Faanes, A. (2003). Controllability Analysis for Process and Control Structure Design. PhD thesis. Department of Chemical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Faanes, A. and Skogestad, S. (2003). On MPC without active constraints. Submitted to Modeling, Identification and Control, MIC. Lee, J. H., M. Morari and C. E. Garcia (1994). State-space interpretation of model predictive control. Automatica 30(4), Lundström, P., J. H. Lee, M. Morari and S. Skogestad (1995). Limitations of dynamic matrix control. Comp. Chem. Engng. 19(4), Muske, K. R. and Badgewell, T. A. (2002). Disturbance modeling for offset-free linear model predictive control. Journal of Process Control. 12, Muske, K. R. and J. B. Rawlings (1993). Model predictive control with linear models. AIChE Journal. 39(2), Pannocchia, G. and J. B. Rawlings (2003). Disturbance Models for Offset-Free Model-Predictive Control. AIChE Journal. 49(2), Experimental procedure Each experiment started from a steady state. Disturbances d 1 and d 2 were then introduced the following way: d 1 : 1. Reduce hot flow rate from 500 to 400 ml/min. 2. Increase hot flow rate back from 400 to 500ml/min. d 2 : 1. Start addition of cold water to main tank by pouring from a jug (approximately 60 ml/min). 2. Stop addition of cold water to main tank In addition to the experiments we also performed simulations on the nonlinear model implemented in Simulink. The following simulations and experiments were performed: Simulation 1. Introduce only disturbance 1. No control (open loop) Simulation 2. Introduce only disturbance 1. MPC with estimation of disturbance 1 only. Experiment 1. Introduce disturbances 1 and 2. MPC with estimation of disturbance 1 only. Experiment 2. Introduce disturbances 1 and 2. MPC with estimation of disturbance 1 and 2. Results °C°C ml/min Time [min] Simulation 1: Open loop Simulation 2: MPC with estimation of d 1 °C°C ml/min Time [min] No steady state offset °C°C ml/min Time [min] Experiment 2: MPC with estimation of d 1 and d 2 No steady state offset. Integral action °C°C ml/min Time [min] Experiment 1: MPC with estimation of d 1 Steady state offset despite what was expected from Simulation 2. No integral action. Frequency analysis We express the controller by the (1  2) transfer function matrix K: and introduce scaled variables, u´ and y´, such that the variation in the scaled variables is  1. u´=u/u max and y´=y/y max. u max = 500 ml/min and y max = 0.3°C. Then We plot the magnitude of the elements of K´(j  ): MPC with estimation of d 1  [rad/min] MPC with estimation of d 1 and d 2 Integral action: High gain at low frequencies Model We assume perfect mixing and model the main tank with circulation loop as one tank. Combination of mass and energy balance for the mixing tank (labelled 1) and the main tank (labelled 2) yields In addition there is a delay in tank 1 of  1 and a delay in tank 2 of  2 (these represents transportation delays and neglected higher order dynamics). This model is used in the simulations. Linearization around a nominal point, denoted with an asterisk, yields: Discretization with cd2 (Matlab Control Toolbox) with 1s sampling time and implementation of delays as extra poles in the origin (with delay2z) yields state space model with 27 states: where subscript k denotes sample number. This model is used in the MPC. Values: