Constraint equation

For each experiment, the true values of the measured variables are related by one or more constraints. Because the number of data points exceeds the number of parameters to be estimated, all constraint equations are not exactly satisfied for all experimental measurements. Exact agreement between theory and experiment is not achieved due to random and systematic errors in the data and to "lack of fit" of the model to the data. Optimum parameters and true values corresponding to the experimental measurements must be found by satisfaction of an appropriate statistical criterion. 

The algorithm employed in the estimation process linearizes the constraint equations at each iterative step at current estimates of the true values for the variables and parameters. 

Dmbining this with the constraint equation enables us to identify the stationary point, hich is at (-59/72, -23/18). 

This constraint equation is expressed in terms of z and y rather than their second derivative However, as cr(z,y) = 0 holds for all z, y, it follows that da = Q and (fa = 0 also. Co sequently, the constraint equation can be written ... 

In the case of a triatomic molecule with two bonds (between atoms 1,2 and 2,3), twi constraint equations are obtained ... 

Reconciliation Result The actual measurements do not close the constraint equations. That is,... 

There are various ways to obtain the solutions to this problem. The most straightforward method is to solve the full problem by first computing the Lagrange multipliers from the time-differentiated constraint equations and then using the values obtained to solve the equations of motion [7,8,37]. This method, however, is not computationally cheap because it requires a matrix inversion at every iteration. In practice, therefore, the problem is solved by a simple iterative scheme to satisfy the constraints. This scheme is called SHAKE [6,14] (see Section V.B). Note that the computational advantage has to be balanced against the additional work required to solve the constraint equations. This approach allows a modest increase in speed by a factor of 2 or 3 if all bonds are constrained. 

The constants Aj and A2 are known as Lagrange multipliers. As we have already seen two of the variables can be expressed as functions of the third variable hence, for example, dxx and dx2 can be expressed in terms of dx3, which is arbitrary. Thus Ax and A2 may be chosen so as to cause the vanishing of the coefficients of dxx and dx2 (their values are obtained by solving the two simultaneous equations). Then since dx3 is arbitrary, its coefficient must vanish in order that the entire expression shall vanish. This gives three equations that, together with the two constraint equations gt = 0 ( = 1,2), can be used to determine the five unknowns xx, x2, Xg, Xx, and A2. 

Now, consider independently small changes in e(r), / and x- These variations are now allowed to be independent because of the use of the Lagrange multiplier, x(0 to impose the constraint equation. 

Solution of the above constrained least squares problem requires the repeated computation of the equilibrium surface at each iteration of the parameter search. This can be avoided by using the equilibrium surface defined by the experimental VLE data points rather than the EoS computed ones in the calculation of the stability function. The above minimization problem can be further simplified by satisfying the constraint only at the given experimental data points (Englezos et al. 1989). In this case, the constraint (Equation 14.25) is replaced by... 

From the above species constraints (Equations 17.4i to 17.4iii), we also notice that we have four unknown variables, and that the constraints provide us with only three equations we therefore have one degree of freedom in our process. This allows us to evaluate various options for the process. From the above equality constraints (Equations 17.4i to 17.4iii), we also note that the amount of water is fixed simply by the species balance, and that these species (constraints) relationships are linear. 

One method of handling just one or two linear or nonlinear equality constraints is to solve explicitly for one variable and eliminate that variable from the problem formulation. This is done by direct substitution in the objective function and constraint equations in the problem. In many problems elimination of a single equality constraint is often superior to an approach in which the constraint is retained and some constrained optimization procedure is executed. For example, suppose you want to minimize the following objective function that is subject to a single equality constraint... 

To this point we isolated four variables D, v, Ap, and/, and have introduced three equality constraints—Equations (d (e), and (/)—leaving 1 degree of freedom (one independent variable). To facilitate the solution of the optimization problem, we eliminate three of the four unknown variables (Ap, v, and/) from the objective function using the three equality constraints, leaving D as the single independent variable. Direct substitution yields the cost equation... 

The uniformity inequality constraints [Equations (/)-(/)] were again included in the problem. Additionally, the bounds on the variables were... 

Inventory relaxation cases are determined for all inventory boundary constraints using a logical constraint equation. 

When the system is nonestimable, the estimated value of x (x) is not a unique solution to the least squares problem. In this case a solution is only possible if additional information is incorporated. This must be introduced via the process model equations (constraint equations). They occur in practice when some or all of the system variables must conform to some relationships arising from the physical constraints of the process. 

An elegant classification strategy using projection matrices was proposed by Crowe et al. (1983) for linear systems and extended later (Crowe, 1986, 1989) to bilinear ones. Crowe suggested a useful method for decoupling the measured variables from the constraint equations, using a projection matrix to eliminate the unmeasured process variables. 

An equivalent decomposition can be performed using the Q-R orthogonal transformation (Sanchez and Romagnoli, 1996). Orthogonal factorizations were first used by Swartz (1989), in the context of successive linearization techniques, to eliminate the unmeasured variables from the constraint equations. 

Step 3. We process the final constraint equation. In this case... 

Furthermore, the balance (constraint) equations for the linear or linearized case are... 

If combinations of leaks and measurement biases are considered, both the measurement model and the process constraints equations need to be modified. The formulation for the least squares problem is now... 

This procedure (based on sample variance and covariance) is referred to as the direct method of estimation of the covariance matrix of the measurement errors. As it stands, it makes no use of the inherent information content of the constraint equations, which has proved to be very useful in process data reconciliation. One shortcoming of this approach is that these r samples should be under steady-state operation, in order to meet the independent sampling condition otherwise, the direct method could give incorrect estimates. 

In general case this equation hasn t a simple analytical solution, but permits with the use of (23) and (46) easy to obtain the constraint equation between G,. By acting analogously to the developed algorithm [1], we will obtain... 

From this follows, that for the calculation of 7, and respectively G, the constraint equation (46) between l// is insufficiently additional information about the character of deformation... 

For the ellipsoid of rotation the general constraint equations (23) and (46) take on the particular form... 

---