Problems with Algebraic Equation Models

Algebraic Stress Models (ASM) Accounts for anisotropy Combines generality of approach with the economy of the k-s model Good performance for isothermal and buoyant thin shear layers Restricted to flows where convection and diffusion terms are negligible Performs as poorly as k-e in some flows due to problems with s equation Not widely validated... 

Dynamic simulations are also possible, and these require solving differential equations, sometimes with algebraic constraints. If some parts of the process change extremely quickly when there is a disturbance, that part of the process may be modeled in the steady state for the disturbance at any instant. Such situations are called stiff, and the methods for them are discussed in Numerical Solution of Ordinary Differential Equations as Initial-Value Problems. It must be realized, though, that a dynamic calculation can also be time-consuming and sometimes the allowable units are lumped-parameter models that are simplifications of the equations used for the steady-state analysis. Thus, as always, the assumptions need to be examined critically before accepting the computer results. 

The application of simultaneous optimization to reactor-based flowsheets leads us to consider the more general problem of differentiable/algebraic optimization problems. Again, the optimization problem needs to be reconsidered and reformulated to allow the application of efficient nonlinear programming algorithms. As with flowsheet optimization, older conventional approaches require the repeated execution of the differential/algebraic equation (DAE) model. Instead, we briefly describe these conventional methods and then consider the application and advantages of a simultaneous approach. Here, similar benefits are realized with these problems as with flowsheet optimization. 

However, all of these studies determine only approximate or parameterized optimal control profiles. Also, they do not consider the effect of approximation error in discretizing the ODEs to algebraic equations. In this section we therefore explore the potential of simultaneous methods for larger and more complex process optimization problems with ODE models. Given the characteristics of the simultaneous approach, it becomes important to consider the following topics ... 

In order to illustrate this approach, we next consider the optimization of an ammonia synthesis reactor. Formulation of the reactor optimization problem includes the discretized modeling equations for a packed bed reactor, along with the set of knot placement constraints. The following case study illustrates how a differential-algebraic problem can be optimized efficiently using (27). In addition, suitable accuracy of the ODE model can be obtained at the optimum by directly enforcing error restrictions and adaptively adding elements. Finally, bounds on the continuous state profiles can be enforced directly in the optimization problem. 

Remark 1 If no approximation is introduced in the PFR model, then the mathematical model will consist of both algebraic and differential equations with their related boundary conditions (Horn and Tsai, 1967 Jackson, 1968). If in addition local mixing effects are considered, then binary variables need to be introduced (Ravimohan, 1971), and as a result the mathematical model will be a mixed-integer optimization problem with both algebraic and differential equations. Note, however, that there do not exist at present algorithmic procedures for solving this class of problems. 

I will return to this diagram near the end of the chapter, particularly to amplify the meaning of error removal, which is indicated by dashed horizontal lines in Fig. 7.1. For now, I will illustrate the bootstrapping technique for improving phases, map, and model with an analogy the method of successive approximations for solving a complicated algebraic equation. Most mathematics education emphasizes equations that can be solved analytically for specific variables. Many realistic problems defy such analytic solutions but are amenable to numerical methods. The method of successive approximations has much in common with the iterative process that extracts a protein model from diffraction data. 

In this approach, the ODE or DAE process models are discretised into a set of algebraic equations (AEs) using collocation or other suitable methods and are solved simultaneously with the optimisation problem. Application of the collocation techniques to ODEs or DAEs results in a large system of algebraic equations which appear as constraints in the optimisation problem. This approach results in a large sparse optimisation problem. 

Tran and Mujtaba (1997), Mujtaba et al. (1997) and Mujtaba (1999) have used an extension of the Type IV- CMH model described in Chapter 4 and in Mujtaba and Macchietto (1998) in which few extra equations related to the solvent feed plate are added. The model accounts for detailed mass and energy balances with rigorous thermophysical properties calculations and results to a system of Differential and Algebraic Equations (DAEs). For the solution of the optimisation problem the method outlined in Chapter 5 is used which uses CVP techniques. Mujtaba (1999) used both reflux ratio and solvent feed rate (in semi-continuous feeding mode) as the optimisation variables. Piecewise constant values of these variables over the time intervals concerned are assumed. Both the values of these variables and the interval switching times (including the final time) are optimised in all the SDO problems mentioned in the previous section. 

---