MBPC Gentle Approach

EPSAC MBPC
A ‘Gent’le Approach to MBPC

Model Based
PREDICTIVE CONTROL
Robin DE KEYSER
Ghent University / BELGIUM
Email: rdk@autoctrl.UGent.be
Robin De KEYSER, Ghent University / Belgium, EeSA Department of Electrical energy, Systems & Automation 1
MBPC Strategy
MBPC Principles
2 KEY principles:
• explicit on-line use of a process model
(forecasting)
• optimal control action based on cost-function minimization
(constraints)
MBPC = family of methods; family-members differ by:

• type of cost function, constraints, optimizer
• type of model for process and disturbances
MBPC History
• pioneering work 2 decennia ago
- Industrial:
- EU: MAC (Adersa, Richalet, 78)
- USA: DMC (Shell Oil, Cutler, 80)
- Academic: adaptive prediction & control (all in Europe)
- EPSAC (Gent, De Keyser, 80)
- EHAC (London, Ydstie, 84)
- GPC (Oxford, Clarke, 85)
- MUSMAR (Firenze, Mosca, 85)
• 1990’s: boom all over the world : - industrial applications
- academic research
Application Area
• PID (95 %):
- lower level
- regulatory, stabilizing, DDC
• MBPC (5 %):
- optimizing level
- economically important loops (money-making loops)
• Process industry (refinery, petrochemical, chemical,

steel, pharmaceutical, food, …)
• Production lines (discrete parts manufacturing)
• Products (sophisticated mechatronic devices)
Benefits & Requirements
BENEFITS:
• easy concepts, intuitive
• nonlinear, interactive MV
• constrained control
• dead-time and feedforward compensation
• unusual dynamic behavior (NMP, unstable)
• open methodology
ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES:
• modeling and identification
• digital computers
MBPC Methodology
• prediction by means of a Reference
Trajectory
Past Inputs
process model And Outputs
Predicted
Outputs
+
• specification of a reference Model
-
trajectory
Future
• structuring of the future Inputs
(postulated) control law
• definition of a cost function Optimizer
Future Errors
(and constraints)
• calculation of the Cost Constraints
Function
optimizing control scenario
Objective
Find the control vector
Nu =4
u u(t+k/t) {u(t+k / t}, k=0…N2-1}
which minimizes the cost
y(t+k/t) function
N2
∑[r(t +k /t)− y(t +k /t)]

r=w 2
y
time
N1=2 N2=8
k=N1
PAST current time t FUTURE
EPSAC: Process Model
y(t ) = x(t ) + n(t ) e(t ): white noise (uncorrelated

 noise with zero mean value)

n C(q −1 ) = 1 + c q −1 +...+ c q −nc
u x + y  1 nc
MODEL D(q −1 ) = 1 + d q −1 +...+ d q −nd

+
 1 nd
C(q−1 ) (1 + cq−1 )
C ( q −1 ) −1 =
n(t ) = e(t ) D(q ) (1 + dq−1 )(1 − q−1 )
−1
D (q )
x(t ) = f [ x(t − 1), x(t − 2), , u(t − 1), u(t − 2), ]

CARIMA Model
−1
−1 −1 C(q )
A(q ) y(t ) = B(q )u(t ) + −1 e(t )
1− q
 B( q −1 )
with: x (t ) = −1 u ( t ), a linear PTF
 A( q )
( Pulse Transfer Function )
 B( q −1 ) = b1q −1 +…+bnb q − nb  −1
 n ( t ) = C ( q )
−1 −1 − na −1 e ( t )
 A( q ) = 1 + a1q +…+a na q  −1
A( q )(1 − q )
NN Model
1 1
wi1 w11 w1
x(t-1) 12
z1 S
x(t-2) 2
.. w1 1
x(t-3) zi x(t)
u(t-1) .. z 2
n wn
u(t-2) 0
u(t-3) 1 -3 -2 -1 1 2 3 X
wn6
-1
INPUT HIDDEN OUTPUT

layer layer layer
EPSAC : Multistep Predictor
The prediction of the process output
{y(t+k / t), k=1…N2 }is based on:
• measurements available at time t:
{y( t ), y( t-1 ), … , u( t-1 ), u( t-2 ), …}
• future (postulated) values of the input:
{u( t / t ), u( t+1 / t ), …}
GPC: Diophantine equations EPSAC: Filtering techniques
y(t+k / t) = x(t+k / t) + n(t+k / t)

Prediction x(t+k/t)
x(t+k-1/t) y(t+k-1/t)
x(t+k-2/t) y(t+k-2/t)
x(t+k-3/t) y(t+k-3/t)
x(t+k/t) x(t+k/t)
u(t+k-1/t) u(t+k-1/t)
u(t+k-2/t) u(t+k-2/t)
u(t+k-3/t) u(t+k-3/t)
PARALLEL SERIES-PARALLEL
P rocess P rocess
u y u y
+ +
x P -M od el y S /P -M o d el
x - n x - n
u u
Prediction n(t+k/t)
D ( q −1 ) C ( q −1 )
n f (t ) = −1 n(t ) n(t) = −1 e(t )
C (q ) D (q )
C(q −1 )
nf (t) = − c1nf (t −1) − c2nf (t − 2) −... n(t + k / t ) = −1 n f ( t + k / t )
D(q )
...+ n(t ) + d1n(t −1) + d2n(t − 2)+...
n f (t + k / t ) ≡ 0, k = 1… N 2 n(t +k / t) =−dn
1 (t +k −1/ t) −d2n(t +k −2/ t)−…
…+nf (t +k / t)+cn1 f (t +k −1/ t) +…
Base/ Optimizing response
y(t + k / t) = ybase(t + k / t) + yoptimize(t + k / t)
• ybase(t+k/t)
-Effect of past control {u(t-1), u(t-2), ... }
-Effect of a basic future control scenario Nu =4
-Effect of future disturbances n(t+k / t) u(t+k/t)
u
• yoptimize(t+k/t)
-Effect of the
optimizing δu(t+k/t)
future control actions ubase(t+k/t)
{δu( t / t ), δu( t + 1 / t ), … δu( t + N u − 1 / t )}
time
y(t+k/t)=ybase(t+k/t)+yoptimize(t+k/t)
Nu =4
u u(t+k/t)
δu(t+k/t)
ubase(t+k/t)
time
Optimizing response
impulse input impulse input
δ u(t/t) δu(t+1/t)
h δ u(t+1/t)
impulse response k-1 impulse response
h δ u(t/t)
k
k samples time (k-1) samples time
t t+k t t+k
yoptimize (t + k / t ) = hk δu (t / t ) + hk −1δu ( t + 1 / t ) +...

...+ gk − N u+1 δu (t + N u − 1 / t )
Basic EPSAC equation
Y = Y + G. U
 hN1 hN1 −1 hN1 −2 ... g N1 − N u +1 
Y=[ y(t +N1 /t) y(t +N2 /t)]T h hN1 hN1 −1 ... ... 
  N1 +1 

 [ base ] G =  ... ... 
T
Y= y (t + N1 / t) ybase (t + N2 / t) ... ... ...
  
U=[δ u(t /t) δ u(t +Nu −1/t)]  ... ... ... ... ... 
T
 hN hN 2 −1 hN 2 −2 ... g N 2 − N u +1 
 2
Objective
Find the control vector
Nu =4
u u(t+k/t) {u(t+k / t}, k=0…N2-1}
which minimizes the cost
y(t+k/t) function
N2
∑[r(t +k /t)− y(t +k /t)]

r=w 2
y
time
N1=2 N2=8
k=N1
PAST current time t FUTURE
EPSAC solution
N2
∑[ r(t + k / t ) − y(t + k / t )] = [R − Y − GU] [R − Y − GU]

2 T
k =N1
U = [G G ] [G T (R − Y )]
∗ T −1
The actual control action applied to the process is

∗
u(t ) = ubase (t / t ) + δu(t / t ) = ubase (t / t ) + U (1)
MIMO MBPC - The method
Generic process model (2 inputs and 2 outputs) :
y1(t) = x1(t) + n1(t)
y2 (t) = x2 (t) + n2t)
x1(t ) = f1[ x1(t −1), x1(t − 2),...

Parallel model structure: ..., u1(t −1), u1(t − 2),..., u2 (t −1), u2 (t − 2),...]
x2 (t ) = f2[ x2 (t −1), x2 (t − 2),...
..., u1(t −1), u1(t − 2),..., u2 (t −1), u2 (t − 2),...]
x1 ( t ) = f1[ y1 ( t − 1), y1 ( t − 2),...

Series-parallel model ..., u1 ( t − 1), u1 ( t − 2),..., u2 ( t − 1), u2 ( t − 2),...]
structure: x2 ( t ) = f2 [ y2 ( t − 1), y2 ( t − 2),...
..., u1 ( t − 1), u1 ( t − 2),..., u2 ( t − 1), u2 ( t − 2),...]
The disturbances are modeled as  y1 forced ( t + 1 / t ) 
 y 
colored noise processes:  1 forced ( t + 2 / t ) 
 ...... =
 
......
C ( q −1 ) C ( q −1 )  
n1 ( t ) = −1 1
e ( t ) and n 2 ( t ) = −1
e2 ( t )  y1
 forced
( t + N 2 / t )

D(q ) D(q )
 g111 0 0 ... 0 
 11  ∆u1( t / t ) 
 g2 g111 0 ... 0   ∆u ( t + 1 / t ) 
The concepts of base and optimizing  ... ... ... ... ...  
1 +
  ... 
 ... ... ... ... ...   
response lead to the following:  g11 g11 11   ∆ u1 ( t + N u − 1 / t ) 
 N 2 N 2 −1 g N 2 − 2 ... g11
N 2 − N u +1 
 y1(t + k / t) = y1base (t + k / t) + y1optim (t + k / t)  g112

 12
0 0 ... 0 
 ∆u2 ( t / t ) 
  g2 g112 0 ... 0   ∆u ( t + 1 / t ) 
 y2 (t + k / t) = y2base (t + k / t) + y2optim (t + k / t)  ...

... ... ... ...  

2
...


 ... ... ... ... ...   
 g12 g12 12 12  ∆u2 ( t + N u − 1 / t )
 N 2 N 2 −1 g N 2 − 2 ... g N 2 − N u +1 
1. N2 could be chosen differently for the 2 outputs
2. Nu could be chosen differently for the 2 outputs
3. y1 forced ( t + k / t ) denotes the forced part in the predicted process output
y1 ( t + k / t ) ,being the effects of both future control actions
∆u1 ( t + k / t ) and ∆u2 ( t + k / t )
4. The coefficients of the step response of input j to the output i are denoted by :
{g ij
1 }
g2ij g3ij ... KEY MBPC EQUATION - MIMO CASE
Y1 = Y1 + G 11 . U 1 + G 12 . U 2

Y2 = Y2 + G 21 . U 1 + G 22 . U 2
MIMO MBPC - Solidary Control
Makes sense even in the case of the number nu of

control variables being unequal to the number ny of (R 1 − Y1 ) T (R 1 − Y1 ) + (R 2 − Y2 ) T (R 2 − Y2 ) +
controlled process outputs. The objective is to find the λ . ( U 1T U 1 + U 2 T U 2 )
control vectors U1 and U2 that minimize the cost
function:
N2
∑1
[ ] Compound matrices:
2
r ( t + k / t ) − y1 ( t + k / t ) +
k = N1 G 1 = [G 11 G 12 ] and G 2 = [G 21 G 22 ]
N2
∑2
[ ]2
r ( t + k / t ) − y 2 ( t + k / t ) +
k = N1 U1 
N u −1
Compound vector: U= 
∑{ 1
[ ] [ ] } U 2 
2 2
λ ∆ u ( t + k / t ) + ∆ u2 ( t + k / t )
k =0
subject to:
∆u1 ( t + k / t ) ≡ 0 and ∆u2 ( t + k / t ) ≡ 0 for k ≥ N u
MIMO MBPC - Solidary Control
Predicted errors : (R 1 − Y1 ) = (R 1 − Y1 ) − G 1 . U The minimization of the scalar

(R 2 − Y2 ) = (R 2 − Y2 ) − G 2 .U expression V(U) w.r.t to the vector U
Cost function: leads to the optimal (unconstrained)
[(R1 − Y1 ) − G1 .U] [(R 1 − Y1 ) − G1 .U] +
T
solution:
[(R 2 − Y2 ) − G 2 .U] [(R 2 − Y 2 ) − G 2 . U] + λ U T U
T
Standard quadratic cost index: U ∗ = − H −1 f
V ( U ) = U T HU + 2 f T U + c
[
H = G 1T G 1 + G 2T G 2 + λ I ]
H = G1TG1 + G2TG2 + λ I

 f [
=− G T
1 (R1 − Y1 ) + GT
2 (R2 − Y2 ) ] [
f = − G 1T (R 1 − Y1 ) + G T2 (R 2 − Y2 ) ]

c = (R1 − Y1 )T(R1 − Y1 ) + (R2 − Y2 )T(R2 − Y2 )
MIMO MBPC - Selfish Control
This approach is valid if the number of control variables (manipulated process inputs)
is equal to the number of controlled variables (controlled process outputs). The
objective is to:
• Find the control vector U2 • and the control vector U1
which minimizes the cost which minimizes the cost
function: function:
N2 N2
∑ [ r ( t + k / t ) − y ( t + k / t )] ∑ [r (t + k / t ) − y (t + k / t )]
2 2
1 1 + 2 2 +
k = N1 k = N1
N u −1 N u −1
∑ [ ∆u1( t + k / t )] ∑ [∆u2 ( t + k / t )]
2 2
λ λ
k =0 k =0
subject to: ∆ u1 ( t + k / t ) ≡ 0 for k ≥ N u subject to: ∆u2 ( t + k / t ) ≡ 0 for k ≥ N u
Using the matrix notations the The minimization of V1(U1) w.r.t U1 leads to the
optimal (unconstrained) solution:
first cost function can be written:
(R1 − Y1 )T (R1 − Y1 ) + λ .U 1T U 1 = U 1∗ = − H1−1f1 =
[ ] [ ]
(R 1 − Y1 − G 11 .U 1 − G 12 .U 2 )T * T −1 T
G11G11 +λ I . G 11 (R 1 − Y1 − G 12 U 2 )
(R 1 − Y1 − G 11 .U 1 − G 12 .U 2 ) + λ .U 1T U 1
Quadratic form in U1:

The minimization of V2(U2) w.r.t U2 leads to the
V1 ( U 1 ) = U 1T H 1 U 1 + 2 f 1T U 1 + c1 optimal (unconstrained) solution:
H1 = G11 T
G11 + λ I U ∗2 = − H 2−1f 2 =

[ ] .[G ]
−1
T
f1 = −G11 (R 1 − Y1 − G12 U 2 ) G T22G 22 +λ I T
22 (R 2 − Y2 − G 21U 1 )
 T
c1 = (R 1 − Y1 − G 12 U 2 ) (R 1 − Y1 − G 12 U 2 )
Combining the 2 expressions
The optimal (unconstrained)
for the optimal solution:
solution is given by:
(G 11
T
G 11 + λ I)U 1 + G 11T T
G 12 U 2 = G 11 (R 1 − Y1 )
 T
G 22G 21 U 1 + (G T22G 22 + λ I)U 2 = G T22 (R 2 − Y2 )
U ∗ = − H −1 f
gives (with the definitions of the  G T G  

H =   T11 1  + λ I
compound matrices and vector):  G 22 G 2  
 G T G    G 11 (R 1 − Y1 )   G 11 (R 1 − Y1 ) 
T T
  11 1  + λ I . U =  T 
 GT G
  22 2    G 22 (R 2 − Y2 ) f = − T 
 G 22 (R 2 − Y2 )
Constraints
• actuators, valves: limited rate of action, maximum slew

rate
• constructive and safety reasons: bounds in process
variables
• economic targets: operating points are close to limits
• example: input constraints
- clipping
- constrained control
Constrained Control
Clipping:
Constrained optimization problem
uj < uj (t) < uj (QP: quadratic programming)
u
w + u u 60
-
PID u
u
50
y
u*2 M
40
Constrained Control: 30
• minimize 20
u2 C O
V(U) = UTHU + 2fTU + c 10
• subject to AU < b 10 20
u*1 30 40 50 60
Interactive MIMO process (1)
Side
R C F
Center
Wafer
S
Side
Rear Center Front
Semiconductor Reactor Wafer and lamp-bank configuration

(3=wafer) (top view of reactor chamber)
Clipping (solidary EPSAC): Constrained Control (solidary EPSAC):
Constrained Control (solidary EPSAC): Constrained Control (selfish EPSAC):
Advanced control
C on ve n tion a l m an ua l con trol
C on tr ol P ID con trol
ra tio con trol
ca sca d e con trol
fe ed forw a rd con trol
A d va n c e d g a in sch ed ulin g
C on tr ol: tim e-d ela y c om p en sa tion
c la ssic a l d ec ou p lin g
A d va n c e d p red ictive con trol (M B P C )
C on tr ol: sta tistical qu ality con trol (S Q C )
wid e ly u se d in tern al m od el con trol (IM C )
a d a ptive con trol
A d va n c e d n on lin ear con trol
C on tr ol: op tim al con trol (L Q G )
fe w a p p lic a tio n s ex p ert system s
n eural/fu zz y c on trol
robu st con trol
Why advanced control ?
Requirements:
• flexibility in production
• improved quality control
• environmental restrictions
• energy/raw material saving
• maximize product yield
• avoid process shutdown
An Optimizing Control system should drive the process tight

against the operating constraints ===> The control system has
to understand the dynamics of the process.
WHY Advanced Control?
MOISTURE CONTROL IN PAPER MAKING
• improved moisture control will allow moisture setpoint to be increased (without incurring
a higher risk of excess moisture) THE BEST PRODUCT IS MADE
• this will save energy (steam) BY THE WORST PRODUCER
• it will also enable the paper maker to sell the customer more water (which is cheaper
than selling him fiber)

MBPC Gentle Approach

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MBPC Gentle Approach

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EPSAC MBPC

A ‘Gent’le Approach to MBPC

MBPC = family of methods; family-members differ by:

• Process industry (refinery, petrochemical, chemical,

∑[r(t +k /t)− y(t +k /t)]

PAST current time t FUTURE

y(t ) = x(t ) + n(t ) e(t ): white noise (uncorrelated

MODEL D(q −1 ) = 1 + d q −1 +...+ d q −nd

x(t ) = f [ x(t − 1), x(t − 2), , u(t − 1), u(t − 2), ]

INPUT HIDDEN OUTPUT

GPC: Diophantine equations EPSAC: Filtering techniques

y(t+k / t) = x(t+k / t) + n(t+k / t)

…+nf (t +k / t)+cn1 f (t +k −1/ t) +…

k samples time (k-1) samples time

yoptimize (t + k / t ) = hk δu (t / t ) + hk −1δu ( t + 1 / t ) +...

∑[r(t +k /t)− y(t +k /t)]

PAST current time t FUTURE

∑[ r(t + k / t ) − y(t + k / t )] = [R − Y − GU] [R − Y − GU]

The actual control action applied to the process is

x1(t ) = f1[ x1(t −1), x1(t − 2),...

x1 ( t ) = f1[ y1 ( t − 1), y1 ( t − 2),...

 y1(t + k / t) = y1base (t + k / t) + y1optim (t + k / t)  g112

Makes sense even in the case of the number nu of

Predicted errors : (R 1 − Y1 ) = (R 1 − Y1 ) − G 1 . U The minimization of the scalar

Standard quadratic cost index: U ∗ = − H −1 f

Quadratic form in U1:

gives (with the definitions of the  G T G  

• actuators, valves: limited rate of action, maximum slew

V(U) = UTHU + 2fTU + c 10

Rear Center Front

Semiconductor Reactor Wafer and lamp-bank configuration

An Optimizing Control system should drive the process tight

You might also like