1 Feedback: The simple and best solution. Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Optimal operation and self-optimizing control Sigurd Skogestad NTNU, Trondheim Norway.
Advertisements

1 Plantwide control Control structure design for complete chemical plants Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science.
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 Operation of heat pump cycles Jørgen Bauck Jensen & Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
PID Tuning and Controllability Sigurd Skogestad NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
1 Feedback: The simple and best solution. Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department.
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,
First African Control Conference, Cape Town, 04 December 2003
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.
Department of Chemical Engineering,
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 Plantwide Control Procedure Applied to the HDA Process Antonio Araújo and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University.
1 Outline About Trondheim and myself Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of.
1 E. S. Hori, Maximum Gain Rule Maximum Gain Rule for Selecting Controlled Variables Eduardo Shigueo Hori, Sigurd Skogestad Norwegian University of Science.
1 Anti-slug control on a small-scale two-phase loop Heidi Sivertsen and Sigurd Skogestad Departement of Chemical Engineering, Norwegian University of Science.
1 Feedback: The simple and best solution. Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department.
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
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 Decentralized control Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway.
1 From process control to business control: A systematic approach for CV-selection Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University.
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 1 Vinicius de Oliveira | an intelligent adaptive anti-slug control system for production maximization Vinicius de Oliveira Control and Automation Engineering.
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Identifying and switching between active constraints regions Sigurd Skogestad and Magnus G. Jacobsen Department of Chemical Engineering.
Anti-Slug Control Experiments Using Nonlinear Observers
Control limitations for unstable plants
1 Feedback: The simple and best solution. Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department.
1 II. Bottom-up Determine secondary controlled variables and structure (configuration) of control system (pairing) A good control configuration is insensitive.
1 Feedback Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
Stabilizing control and controllability:
1 Self-optimizing control Theory. 2 Outline Skogestad procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step S1: Define operational objective (cost) and.
Control Structure Design: New Developments and Future Directions Vinay Kariwala and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering NTNU, Trondheim,
1 Outline About Trondheim and myself Control structure design (plantwide control) A procedure for control structure design I Top Down Step 1: Degrees of.
1 Effective Implementation of optimal operation using Self- optimizing control Sigurd Skogestad Institutt for kjemisk prosessteknologi NTNU, Trondheim.
1 Self-optimizing control From key performance indicators to control of biological systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian.
1 Effect of Input Rate Limitation on Controllability Presented at AIChE Annual Meeting in Austin, Texas November 7 th, 2002 Espen Storkaas & Sigurd Skogestad.
1 Combination of Measurements as Controlled Variables for Self-optimizing Control Vidar Alstad † and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering,
1 PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim, Norway August/September.
1 Controllability of feedback systems Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Tecnology (NTNU) Trondheim,
1 Feedback: Still the simplest and best solution Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
Control strategies for optimal operation of complete plants Plantwide control - With focus on selecting economic controlled variables Sigurd Skogestad,
1 1 Sigurd Skogestad | Closed-loop model identification and PID/PI tuning for robust anti-slug control Closed-loop model identification and PID/PI tuning.
1 Sammenligning av lineære og ulineære metoder for robust Anti-slug regulering Slug (liquid) buildup Two-phase pipe flow (liquid and vapor) Sigurd Skogestad.
Coordinator MPC with focus on maximizing throughput
Comparison of nonlinear model-based controllers and gain-scheduled Internal Model Control based on identified model Esmaeil Jahanshahi and Sigurd Skogestad.
Feedback: The simple and best solution
Feedback: The simple and best solution
Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure
PLANTWIDE CONTROL Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering
CONTROLLED VARIABLE AND MEASUREMENT SELECTION
Economic plantwide control: A systematic approach for CV-selection
Presented at AIChE Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, USA
Vidar Alstad† and Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering,
Example regulatory control: Distillation
Plantwide control: Towards a systematic procedure
Presented at AIChE Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, USA
Example regulatory control: Distillation
Example regulatory control: Distillation
Optimal measurement selection for controlled variables in Kaibel Distillation Column: A MIQP formulation Ramprasad Yelchuru (PhD Candidiate) Professor.
Outline Control structure design (plantwide control)
Espen Storkaas and Sigurd Skogestad
Presentation transcript:

1 Feedback: The simple and best solution. Applications to self-optimizing control and stabilization of new operating regimes Sigurd Skogestad Department of Chemical Engineering Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Trondheim December 2004

2 Outline About myself I. Why feedback (and not feedforward) ? II. Self-optimizing feedback control: What should we control? III. Stabilizing feedback control: Anti-slug control Conclusion

3 Abstract Feedback: The simple and best solution Most chemical engineers are (indirectly) trained to be ``feedforward thinkers" and they immediately think of ``model inversion'' when it comes doing control. Thus, they prefer to rely on models instead of data, although simple feedback solutions in many cases are much simpler and certainly more robust. In the seminar two nice applications of feedback are considered: - Implementation of optimal operation by "self-optimizing control". The idea is to turn optimization into a setpoint control problem, and the trick is to find the right variable to control. Applications include process control, pizza baking, marathon running, biology and the central bank of a country. - Stabilization of desired operating regimes. Here feedback control can lead to completely new and simple solutions. One example would be stabilization of laminar flow at conditions where we normally have turbulent flow. In the seminar a nice application to anti-slug control in multiphase pipeline flow is discussed.

4 Trondheim, Norway

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

6 NTNU, Trondheim

7 Sigurd Skogestad Born in : Siv.ing. Degree (MS) in Chemical Engineering from NTNU (NTH) : Process modeling group at the Norsk Hydro Research Center in Porsgrunn : Ph.D. student in Chemical Engineering at Caltech, Pasadena, USA. Thesis on “Robust distillation control”. Supervisor: Manfred Morari : Professor in Chemical Engineering at NTNU Since 1994: Head of process systems engineering center in Trondheim (PROST) Since 1999: Head of Department of Chemical Engineering 1996: Book “Multivariable feedback control” (Wiley) 2000,2003: Book “Prosessteknikk” (Norwegian) Group of about 10 Ph.D. students in the process control area

8 Research: Develop simple yet rigorous methods to solve problems of engineering significance. Use of feedback as a tool to 1. reduce uncertainty (including robust control), 2.change the system dynamics (including stabilization; anti-slug control), 3.generally make the system more well-behaved (including self-optimizing control). limitations on performance in linear systems (“controllability”), control structure design and plantwide control, interactions between process design and control, distillation column design, control and dynamics. Natural gas processes

9 Outline About myself I. Why feedback (and not feedforward) ? II. Self-optimizing feedback control: What should we control? III. Stabilizing feedback control: Anti-slug control Conclusion

10 Model-based control = Feedforward (FF) control G GdGd u d y ”Perfect” feedforward control: u = - G -1 G d d Our case: G=k (=10 nominal), G d = 10 → Use u = -d

11 G GdGd u d y Feedforward: sensitive to gain error Feedforward with perfect model (k=10) (smaller process gain )

12 Measurement-based correction = Feedback (FB) control d G GdGd u y C ysys e

13 Feedback PI-control: Nominal case d G GdGd u y C ysys e Input u Output y Feedback generates inverse! Resulting output

14 G GdGd u d y C ysys e Feedback PI control: insensitive to gain error

15 Conclusion: Why feedback? (and not feedforward control) Simple: High gain feedback! Counteract unmeasured disturbances Reduce effect of changes / uncertainty (robustness) Change system dynamics (including stabilization) Linearize the behavior No explicit model required MAIN PROBLEM Potential instability (may occur suddenly) with time delay / RHP-zero

16 DISTILLATION AND THE MYTH ABOUT SLOW CONTROL

17

18 Outline About myself Why feedback (and not feedforward) ? Distillation control II. Self-optimizing feedback control: What should we control? Stabilizing feedback control: Anti-slug control Conclusion

19 Optimal operation (economics) Define scalar cost function J(u 0,d) –u 0 : degrees of freedom –d: disturbances Optimal operation for given d: min u0 J(u 0,x,d) subject to: f(u 0,x,d) = 0 g(u 0,x,d) < 0

20 Estimate d and compute new u opt (d) Probem: Complicated and sensitive to uncertainty ”Obvious” solution: Optimizing control = ”Feedforward”

21 Engineering systems Most (all?) large-scale engineering systems are controlled using hierarchies of quite simple single-loop controllers –Commercial aircraft –Large-scale chemical plant (refinery) 1000’s of loops Simple components: on-off + P-control + PI-control + nonlinear fixes + some feedforward Same in biological systems

22 Process control hierarchy y 1 = c ? (economics) PID RTO MPC

23 Hierarchical decomposition with separate layers What should we control?

24 Implementation of optimal operation Optimal solution is usually at constraints, that is, most of the degrees of freedom are used to satisfy “active constraints”, g(u 0,d) = 0 CONTROL ACTIVE CONSTRAINTS! –Implementation of active constraints is usually simple.

25 Self-optimizing Control – Sprinter Optimal operation of Sprinter (100 m), J=T –Active constraint control: Maximum speed (”no thinking required”)

26 Implementation of optimal operation Optimal solution is usually at constraints, that is, most of the degrees of freedom are used to satisfy “active constraints”, g(u 0,d) = 0 CONTROL ACTIVE CONSTRAINTS! –Implementation of active constraints is usually simple. WHAT MORE SHOULD WE CONTROL? –We here concentrate on the remaining unconstrained degrees of freedom u.

27 Optimizer Controller that adjusts u to keep c m = c s Plant cscs c m =c+n u c n d u c J c s =c opt u opt Feedback implementation Issue: What should we control?

28 Self-optimizing Control –Self-optimizing control is when acceptable loss can be achieved using constant set points (c s ) for the controlled variables c (without re- optimizing when disturbances occur). Define loss:

29 Effect of implementation error BADGood

30 Self-optimizing Control – Marathon Optimal operation of Marathon runner, J=T –Any self-optimizing variable c (to control at constant setpoint)?

31 Self-optimizing Control – Marathon Optimal operation of Marathon runner, J=T –Any self-optimizing variable c (to control at constant setpoint)? c 1 = distance to leader of race c 2 = speed c 3 = heart rate c 4 = level of lactate in muscles

32 Further examples Central bank. J = welfare. u = interest rate. c=inflation rate (2.5%) Cake baking. J = nice taste, u = heat input. c = Temperature (200C) Business, J = profit. c = ”Key performance indicator (KPI), e.g. –Response time to order –Energy consumption pr. kg or unit –Number of employees –Research spending Optimal values obtained by ”benchmarking” Investment (portofolio management). J = profit. c = Fraction of investment in shares (50%) Biological systems: –”Self-optimizing” controlled variables c have been found by natural selection –Need to do ”reverse engineering” : Find the controlled variables used in nature From this possibly identify what overall objective J the biological system has been attempting to optimize

33 Good candidate controlled variables c (for self-optimizing control) Requirements: The optimal value of c should be insensitive to disturbances c should be easy to measure and control The value of c should be sensitive to changes in the degrees of freedom (Equivalently, J as a function of c should be flat) For cases with more than one unconstrained degrees of freedom, the selected controlled variables should be independent. Singular value rule (Skogestad and Postlethwaite, 1996): Look for variables that maximize the minimum singular value of the appropriately scaled steady-state gain matrix G from u to c

34 Outline About myself Why feedback (and not feedforward) ? Self-optimizing feedback control: What should we control? III. Stabilizing feedback control: Anti-slug control Conclusion

35 Application stabilizing feedback control: Anti-slug control Slug (liquid) buildup Two-phase pipe flow (liquid and vapor)

36 Slug cycle (stable limit cycle) Experiments performed by the Multiphase Laboratory, NTNU

37

38 Experimental mini-loop

39 p1p1 p2p2 z Experimental mini-loop Valve opening (z) = 100%

40 p1p1 p2p2 z Experimental mini-loop Valve opening (z) = 25%

41 p1p1 p2p2 z Experimental mini-loop Valve opening (z) = 15%

42 p1p1 p2p2 z Experimental mini-loop: Bifurcation diagram Valve opening z % No slug Slugging

43 Avoid slugging? Design changes Feedforward control? Feedback control?

44 p1p1 p2p2 z Avoid slugging: 1. Close valve (but increases pressure) Valve opening z % No slugging when valve is closed Design change

45 Avoid slugging: 2. Other design changes to avoid slugging p1p1 p2p2 z Design change

46 Minimize effect of slugging: 3. Build large slug-catcher Most common strategy in practice p1p1 p2p2 z Design change

47 Avoid slugging: 4. Feedback control? Valve opening z % Predicted smooth flow: Desirable but open-loop unstable Comparison with simple 3-state model: Simplified model (Storkaas, 2003)

48 Avoid slugging: 4. ”Active” feedback control PT PC ref Simple PI-controller p1p1 z

49 Anti slug control: Mini-loop experiments Controller ONController OFF p 1 [bar] z [%]

50 Anti slug control: Full-scale offshore experiments at Hod-Vallhall field (Havre,1999)

51 Analysis: Poles and zeros y z P 1 [Bar]DP[Bar]ρ T [kg/m 3 ]F Q [m 3 /s]F W [kg/s] Operation points: Zeros: z P1P1 DPPoles ±0.0067i ±0.0092i P1P1 ρTρT DP FT Topside Topside measurements: Ooops.... RHP-zeros or zeros close to origin

52 Stabilization with topside measurements: Avoid “RHP-zeros by using 2 measurements Model based control (LQG) with 2 top measurements: DP and density ρ T

53 Summary anti slug control Stabilization of smooth flow regime = $$$$! Stabilization using downhole pressure simple Stabilization using topside measurements possible Control can make a difference! Thanks to: Espen Storkaas + Heidi Sivertsen and Ingvald Bårdsen

54 Conclusions Feedback is an extremely powerful tool Complex systems can be controlled by hierarchies (cascades) of single- input-single-output (SISO) control loops Control the right variables (primary outputs) to achieve ”self- optimizing control” Feedback can make new things possible (anti-slug)