Optimal control closed loop problem

The PI controller, even when optimally tuned, is also unable to prevent surge. Furthermore, it is unable to stop surge once it occurs. In the above situation, the operator would correctly identify the problem as instability of the closed-loop PI controller. The only viable action would be to open the closed control loop by placing the controller in manual, thereby freezing the valve open. In this scenario, open-loop control will stop surge. 

This paper presents a general mathematical programming formulation the can be used to obtain customized tuning for PID controllers. A reformulation of the initial NLP problem is presented that transforms the nonlinear formulation to a linear one. In the cases where the objective function is convex then the resulting formulation can be solved easily to global optimality. The usefulness of the proposed formulation is demonstrated in five case studies where some of the most commonly used models in the process industry are employed. It was shown that the proposed methodology offers closed loop performance that is comparable to the one... 

The primary interest in the pole placement literature recently has been in finding an analytical solution for the feedback matrix so that the closed loop system has a set of prescribed eigenvalues. In this context pole placement is often regarded as a simpler alternative than optimal control or frequency response methods. For a single control (r=l), the pole placement problem yields an analytical solution for full state feedback (e.g., (38), (39)). The more difficult case of output feedback pole placement for MIMO systems has not yet been fully solved(40). 

The LQP is the only general optimal control problem for which there exists an analytical representation for the optimal control in closed-loop or feedback form. For the LQP, the optimal controller gain matrix K becomes a constant matrix for tf>°°. K is independent of the initial conditions, so it can be used for any initial condition displacement, except those which, due to model nonlinearities, invalidate the computed state matrices. 

The situation is quite different when inequality constraints are included in the MPC on-line optimization problem. In the sequel, we will refer to inequality constrained MPC simply as constrained MPC. For constrained MPC, no closed-form (explicit) solution can be written. Because different inequahty constraints may be active at each time, a constrained MPC controller is not linear, making the entire closed loop nonlinear. To analyze and design constrained MPC systems requires an approach that is not based on linear control theory. We will present the basic ideas in Section III. We will then present some examples that show the interesting behavior that MPC may demonstrate, and we will subsequently explain how MPC theory can conceptually simplify and practically improve MPC. 

This paper presents the application of a model based predictive control strategy for the primary stage of the freeze drying process, which has not been tackled until now. A model predictive control framework is provided to minimize the sublimation time. The problem is directly addressed for the non linear distributed parameters system that describes the dynamic of the process. The mathematical model takes in account the main phenomena, including the heat and mass transfer in both the dried and frozen layers, and the moving sublimation front. The obtained results show the efficiency of the control software developed (MPC CB) under Matlab. The MPC( CB based on a modified levenberg-marquardt algorithm allows to control a continuous process in the open or closed loop and to find the optimal constrained control. 

Centric loads are thus the requirement to be fulfilled for good and accurate parts, which need to be optimized in the planning of the forming steps, when multiple forming steps are included within one tool on one slide. The problem to be solved is that the force-time functions for each forming step are different and at best at all times within the stroke, the force center should be aligned with the center of the slide. Hydraulic presses sometimes have closed-loop controls for keeping the slide despite excentric loads parallel. 

After solving the optimization problem, the user obtains the optimum operation policy (u°P ) and the optimum reference values for state variables (x°p ) and end-use properties (yopt). These values can be used for implementation of open-loop operation of the polymerization reactors and for closed-loop control purposes, as discussed in the following section. 

One final point about closed-loop process control. Economic considerations dictate that to derive optimum benefits, processes must invariably be operated in the vicinity of constraints. A good control system must drive the process toward these constraints without actually violating them. In a polymerization reactor, the initiator feed rate may be manipulated to control monomer conversion or MW however, at times when the heat of polymerization exceeds the heat transfer capacity of the kettle, the initiator feed rate must be constrained in the interest of thermal stability. In some instances, there may be constraints on the controlled variables as well. Identification of constraints for optimized operation is an important consideration in control systems design. Operation in the vicinity of constraints poses problems because the process behavior in this region becomes increasingly nonlinear. 

The most important and challenging problems in active and passive stmctural control systems are the formulation and solution of optimal control and nonlinear constrained optimization needed to develop appropriate closed loop feedback control algorithms and the optimal placement, which is the central focus of this book. State-of-the-art techniques for optimal design of passive and active control systems are described in detail in various chapters written by researchers aroimd the world. I welcome this new book for offering a very good overview of the current developments in the field. 

Important advantages of the presented approach are, firstly, that exact solutions for the optimal control problem are considered. Secondly, the optimal static state feedback control law is compared to linear static state feedback, respecting the nature of the optimal control law. By this means, an evaluation of the nonlinearity of the optimal control law in closed-loop operation is possible without the necessity to compute the feedback law. A big advantage of the presented approach is that the OCL nonlinearity can be computed for stable as well as for unstable systems, due to the fact that the optimal control law is a static relation in any case. 

While the main thrust of these analyses are to provide a plant that exhibits satisfactory closed-loop performance, the assumptions regarding the control system vary considerably across the various methods proposed. The open-loop indicators are largely based on factors that limit achievable closed-loop performance independent of controller type, whereas most of the optimization based integrated design formulations assume a specific controller type such as multiloop PI, LQG and so forth. While this is not considered to be a problem per se, it is important that the implications of these assumptions are clear so that appropriate deductions may be drawn. This chapter attempts to at least in part address this issue. 

Known approaches to this problem either use indieators of I/O-controllability (e.g. [22, 25]) or include the controller in the overall optimization. This has been done either by parameterizing fixed controller structures (e.g.[2]) or by optimizing over the inputs [32], The assumption of a specific control structure has two disadvantages firstly it restricts the control performance and secondly, it renders the optimization problem to be non-convex and thus a lot more difficult. The optimization of the inputs in an open-loop fashion on the other hand does not reflect the issues of closed-loop stability and of robustness correctly. 

Summarizing, the proposed approach suggests the combination of the constructive and optimization methods to develop a tractable approach to tackle the complex process and control design problem. The construetive part provides the building of the controller, the means to assess the corresponding closed-loop dynamics, fundamental connections between process and control design, and a procedure to simplify the search of the optimal solution for the process and control design problem. 

Oiur objective is to find the PID controller parameters such that the actual closed-loop frequency response is in some sense close to the desired closed-loop fi quency response Gr- y jw). However, the direct approach to this problem leads to a nonlinear optimization problem. Instead, we choose to work with the equivalent open-loop transfer function because, in this case, the problem becomes linear in the controller parameters, enabling us to consider a linear least squares approach to solving this problem. 

---