Abstract

This paper is concerned with computationally efficient nonlinear model predictive control (MPC) of dynamic systems described by cascade Wiener–Hammerstein models. The Wiener–Hammerstein structure consists of a nonlinear steady-state block sandwiched by two linear dynamic ones. Two nonlinear MPC algorithms are discussed in details. In the first case the model is successively linearised on-line for the current operating conditions, whereas in the second case the predicted output trajectory of the system is linearised along the trajectory of the future control scenario. Linearisation makes it possible to obtain quadratic optimisation MPC problems. In order to illustrate efficiency of the discussed nonlinear MPC algorithms, a heat exchanger represented by the Wiener–Hammerstein model is considered in simulations. The process is nonlinear, and a classical MPC strategy with linear process description does not lead to good control result. The discussed MPC algorithms with on-line linearisation are compared in terms of control quality and computational efficiency with the fully fledged nonlinear MPC approach with on-line nonlinear optimisation.

Highlights

  • The dynamic model of the controlled process is used only during development of the classical controllers, e.g. linear quadratic regulator (LQR)

  • In order to illustrate efficiency of the discussed nonlinear model predictive control (MPC) algorithms, a heat exchanger represented by the Wiener–Hammerstein model is considered in simulations

  • The simplest approach to nonlinear MPC of dynamic systems represented by the Wiener–Hammerstein model is to use for prediction a linear time-varying model obtained by linearisation of the nonlinear steady-state part of the model

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The dynamic model of the controlled process is used only during development of the classical controllers, e.g. linear quadratic regulator (LQR). MPC algorithms for the Hammerstein structure (a nonlinear steady-state block followed by a linear dynamic one) discussed in [15,16,17] use an inverse of the steady-state part of the model to compensate for process nonlinearity. In the first case the model is successively linearised on-line for the current operating conditions, whereas in the second case the predicted output trajectory of the system is linearised along the trajectory of the future control scenario In both MPC approaches on-line linearisation makes it possible to obtain quadratic optimisation problems, which may be efficiently solved using the available solvers [35].

Model predictive control problem formulation
Hammerstein–Wiener model of the process
Nonlinear MPC algorithms of Hammerstein–Wiener systems
Nonlinear MPC algorithm with on-line simplified model linearisation
Nonlinear MPC algorithm with on-line predicted trajectory linearisation
Simulation results
Conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.