Advanced Process Control (APC) and Multivariable Predictive Control (MVPC) are considered established technologies in the large scale processing and power industries with a plethora of published material, e.g. Qin S. Joe and Thomas A. Badgwell, “An Overview of Industrial Model Predictive Control,” AIChE Conference, 1996, J. A. Rossiter, “Model-Based Predictive Control: A Practical Approach,” 2003 and Eduardo F. Camacho and Carlos Bordons, “Model Predictive Control,” 2007.
Recently a lot of attention was paid to optimal operation of multi-unit plants, e.g. a white paper by Honeywell, “Optimization Solution White Paper: an Overview of Honeywell's Layered Optimization Solution”, 2009, and another white paper by ABB, “Lifecycle Optimization for Power Plants,” 2004, followed by ABB's news release in 2012 titled “Life cycle management and service”. Additionally, IBM has been promoting its Smarter Planet for energy and utilities, see, for example, white paper, “The State of Smarter Energy and Utilities,” 2010.
As equipment performance, production demands, and process and ambient conditions all fluctuating, determine the optimal operating mode across multi-unit plants are complicated. Control and data acquisition systems provide an extensive quantity of process data. However, the multidimensional analysis required to achieve optimal operation are often beyond human ability.
Some of the challenges addressed in these publications are the inefficiencies existing in current large scale processing and power generation providers and the need for holistic control, not just geared towards specific units, but for the entire plant operation or even a plant network, involving multi-unit designs, which ultimately provides optimal process operation.
Examples of multi-unit plants in large scale processing and power industries include:
The benefits of APC/MVPC (with basic foundations described well in U.S. Pat. No. 5,740,033 issued on April 1998 to Wassick et al. as well as U.S. Pat. No. 5,519,605 issued on May 1996 to Cawlfield) systems implementation into multi-unit plants include the following:
The large scale processing and power industries exhibit high demand for a decision support system that encompasses all of the above automation functions for plant networks, that is loaded with the state-of-the-art algorithms and models, and that is ultimately able to effectively communicate its performance and recommendations to decision makers throughout the organization. The current invention is the cost effective solution to this demand.
A system and method of Advanced Process Control for optimal operation of multi-unit plants in large scale processing and power generation industries is provided. The disclosed invention consists of continuous real time dynamic process simulation running in parallel to real process, automatic coefficient adjustment of dynamic and static process models, automatic construction of transfer functions, determination of globally optimal operating point specific to current conditions, provision of additional optimal operating scenarios through a variety of unit combinations, and calculation of operational forecasts in accordance with planned production.
All components of the invention, including forecasting, simulation, control, and optimization, rely heavily on process model accuracy. The disclosed process model is a set of differential and algebraic equations, which describes and solves representations of a large scale technological process. In other words, the process model is a combination of material and energy balances, which are statements on conservation of mass and energy, respectively. These models represent functional dependencies between highly interconnected (both linearly and nonlinearly) multiple inputs, multiple outputs and multiple losses and are used by the optimization applications for finding, recommending, and deploying improvements of the process.
The first major component of the disclosed invention is the Continuous Real Time Dynamic Process Simulation. Its objective is to create a virtual process that can be investigated or manipulated. The benefits of having such simulation are described well in U.S. Publication No. 2007/0168057 A1 published in July 2007 by Blevins et al. The uniqueness of the proposed invention lies in the method and apparatus for accomplishing this for large scale multi-unit systems. Process simulation occurs concurrently with process operation and reflects process dynamics. First, it is used to compare simulated and measured variables in order to determine model accuracy and adjust model's coefficients. Second, it is a cost effective method of determining transfer functions, discussed below, that avoids costly step testing. Because of high degree of accuracy of process models, the dynamic simulation accurately represents the process and can include all the major control loops; thus, it becomes possible to verify behavior of various events at initial system design and to analyze occurring transient processes.
The second major component of the disclosed invention is the Automatic Coefficient Adjustment across all static and dynamic process models. The need to adjust model coefficients exists whenever process changes occur, driven either by ambient event occurrences, equipment failure or changes in operational demand. This is well described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,826,521 issued in November 2004 to Hess et al. What makes this invention unique is that model coefficients are adjusted in online mode, depending on severity of process changes. Static models are described by algebraic equations, which are second, or fourth order polynomials acquired through ordinary least squares or partial least squares methods. Dynamic models are described by differential equations. The polynomial and dynamic models coefficients are adjusted automatically using particle filters, also known as Sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) methods, which are model estimation techniques based on simulation. The criteria for models coefficient adjustment is based on the comparison of the current measured process variables values with its simulated value.
The third major component of the disclosed invention is the Automatic Transfer Function Generation. A transfer function is a relationship between input and output signals within a system. The proposed optimization module empirically generates input/output transfer functions using data obtained from the simulated open-loop steps performed on the current model structure. For control purposes, transfer functions are described by first order plus time delay form, described in detail below. The proposed invention accommodates for various structural forms of transfer functions including parallel, in series, and combination input/output designs. In particular, transfer functions are automatically generated when system input is an ambient process disturbance.
The fourth major component of the disclosed invention is the Operating Mode Optimization. The optimization system uses automatically generated transfer functions to find the optimal mode based on the given optimization criteria. Standard optimization techniques, such as branch and bound, are used to find the global optimum. For differentiable process models, the partial derivatives are computed in domain and the objective function values are recorded. At the plant level, the optimization problem is solved either by unit shut down/start up or unit load sharing. The criteria for optimal load sharing is based on the comparison of the current objective function value with its value computed using the static model after the planned change in loads. Further reference to benefits of optimizing operational processes is well laid out in U.S. Publication No. 2009/0157590 A1 published in June 2009 by Mijares et al. What makes this invention unique is that the optimization system uses automatically generated transfer functions to find the optimal mode.
Finally, the fifth major component of the disclosed invention is Optimal Planning and Scheduling. This capability allows to solve major business problems including sequencing, scheduling of equipment operation, and load distribution over a planned period. The algorithm consists of two steps: finding optimal operating scenario (as a combination of unit start-ups/shut-downs, for example) based on predicted future conditions over an operator defined time horizon and creating an optimal forecast using time series and regression techniques for the same time frame. Ultimately, the best operating mode is suggested given current and future conditions, and is continuously updated based on process changes.
The invention's conceptual design is shown and described in
The overall system architecture is described in
Plant Optimization and Scheduling System 26 is installed on separate servers, which are also connected to the plant control network 25 in order to have full access to real time and historical operation data for all production units. Data needed for optimal operation of the Plant Optimization and Scheduling System 26 includes process data, plant-wide equipment conditions, critical operating parameters, and performance conditions. The system utilizes modeled information (described in detail below), real time and historical data to perform optimization and planning functions, and sends set point information to logic controllers. The Plant Optimization and Scheduling System 26 also provides presentation of plant-wide simulation, optimal scenarios, and optimal schedules on operator workstations 23.
Referring to
The MVPC algorithm then proceeds as follows. The Model Construction Module 38 receives real time values of Manipulated Variables (MV), Controlled Variables (CV) and Disturbance Variables (DV) 39 from the DCS 35. It uses predictive modeling and data mining techniques, such as ordinary least squares regression (OLS), partial least squares regression (PLS), decision trees (DT), and artificial neural networks (ANN) to simultaneously identify static and dynamic process characteristics. The resulting Process Model 310 is a collection of equations in steady-state working conditions that describe the interdependencies between units and process variables.
The static equations are given by standard multivariable formulas in the form
y=f(x1, . . . ,xn)
where y is the dependent variable and x1, . . . , xn is a set of independent variables influencing y. In case of OLS, f is usually a polynomial of degree two or four. In case of PLS, f is also characterized by a polynomial, however, x1, . . . , xm are now projections of original independent variables (aka factors), with m<n. PLS is often used when highly correlated independent variables are detected. In case of DT, the equation is replaced by “if-then” binning rules of all predictor variables that maximize the explained variability of the target. In case of ANN, the activation functions are characterized by
where b and w are the estimates/weights and j is the number of hidden units in the network. The dynamic model is a collection of differential equations that describe the process transitional state.
Additionally, the MVPC algorithm also has a built-in process shift detection algorithm (utilizing time series and six sigma techniques) that allows it to identify the severity of process changes so that models can be re-calibrated (i.e. the model coefficients adjusted) either in offline or online modes using real-time and historical data.
The resulting process model is then fed into the Optimization Module 311 and the Visualization Module 36 for monitoring purposes. The Optimization Module 311 also receives real time data from the DCS 35 along with the operator chosen Objective Function 33 and CV SP 34. Optimization Module 311 uses both steady-state and dynamic modeled information to predict how the process will respond to changes in each of the independent variables. Ultimately, the Optimization Module 311 provides two types of output: adjusted transfer functions 312 (described in detail below), which are generated through online simulation testing of the dynamic model and adjusted objective function 313, which is the operator provided objective function with optimized coefficients.
The next step of the algorithm loads the Optimization Module 311 output directly into MVPC 314. In addition, the MVPC 314 receives real time data from the DCS 35 as well as operator provided CV SP 34. MVPC 314 uses the steady optimal values of Manipulated Variables (MV) as targets and calculates future moves that will maintain the operation at specified targets. The MVPC 314 predicts future changes in controlled variables (CV) and determines past changes in MV and disturbance variables (DV). Then MVPC 314 calculates new changes in MV in order to ensure that targets for CV (CV SP) are reached and account for Operator chosen optimization criteria.
Specifically, the objective function that serves as input to the MVPC algorithm can be described by the following formula:
U(MV1, . . . ,MVn,DV1, . . . ,DVm)
The Input/Output transfer functions are described by
W(MV1, . . . ,MVn,DV1, . . . ,DVm)
Setting J to be the Time to Steady State, for each j=1, . . . , J transfer functions can be defined by
Wj(MV1, . . . ,MVn,DV1, . . . ,DVm)
Then the optimization problem can be stated as follows:
and
U(MV1, . . . ,MVn,DV1, . . . ,DVm)→min
Subject to constraints provided by the Operator 31, which are integrated into the objective function via multipliers. In case of differentiable objective functions (which is often the case with OLS output), the solution (set of optimal MVs) is found at the point where the partial derivatives of the objective function are zero. The algorithm continuously repeats to ensure accuracy of current process representation. Ultimately, the MVPC sends set points 315 to Distributed Control System process controllers 35.
As displayed in
Specifically, RTO simulates a DV and MV step change test such as DVs and MVs are changed separately to observe the CV response. As most processes tend to be nonlinear, several open-loop step change tests are performed for each variable to obtain the most accurate transfer function. For each individual transfer function, RTO identifies the Time to Steady State, Time Delay, Process Gain, and Time Constant (discussed in detail below). Once the Input/Output transfer function is known, it is possible to predict the system's reaction after any disturbance and at any given time. Also, it is possible to compute the MV value so that the integrated (over time) deviation of CVs from the set point would be minimal.
where kp is the process gain, tp is the process time constant, and u is process time delay. The Input/Output transfer function may assume a number of structural forms. First form is Parallel 42.
Second form is in series 43
CV2=W1W2MV1
For systems with more than one output, the Input/Output transfer function has the third combined form 44, where the outputs are related to the inputs as follows:
CV1=W11MV1+W22MV2
CV2=W12MV1+W21MV2
Processes are influenced by external disturbances, such as changes in ambient conditions, changes in the fuel quality, etc. To accommodate these effects, process disturbances are incorporated into the model with disturbance transfer functions of the fourth form 45:
CV1=Wd1DV1+W11MV1+W22MV2
CV2=Wd2DV2+W12MV1+W21MV2
Referring now to
The RTO algorithm proceeds similarly to the MVPC algorithm. The Model Construction Module 57 receives real time values of Manipulated Variables (MV), Controlled Variables (CV) and Disturbance Variables (DV) 58 from the DCS 56 and has the same modeling toolkit as the Model Construction Module in the MVPC algorithm.
Next, the Optimization Module 59 uses DCS supplied real time data 58 along with the operator chosen Objective and Constraint Functions 53, with coefficients provided by the Model Construction Module 57, and CV SP 54 to optimize the process. The RTO module uses a standard suite of optimization methods to globally optimize the objective function subject to the provided constraints. These methods include, but are not limited to, the following: integer programming, linear programming, mixed integer programming, mixed integer non-linear programming, quasi-Newton method, Nelder-Mead Simplex Method, and Lagrange multipliers (that transform the constrained optimization problem into an unconstrained problem).
Ultimately, RTO calculates the steady optimal values of manipulated variables (MV) and provides these values to the Operator 51 as Suggested Scenarios 510. These suggested Scenarios 510 may include a number of requests for unit shut-down/start-up as well as unit load sharing strategy. All available optimal scenarios (based on a range of expected future conditions) are relayed to the Operator 51 along with economic assessments that provide support for operating decisions.
Referring now to
During the second step, the Model Construction Module 67 receives real time values for all MVs, CVs and DVs 68 from the DCS 66 and builds models using the same modeling toolkit available in the MVPC and RTO modules.
For the third step, the Optimization Module 69 uses the operator chosen Objective and Constraint Functions 63 with coefficients 610 provided by the Model Construction Module 67 along with demand predicted by the Scheduling Module 611 to find optimal scenarios within an operator defined time period. As described above, for each defined time period, the RTO provides optimal MV values to the Operator as well as to the Scheduling Module 611 as a set of Suggested Scenarios 612, which include unit shut down and start-up requests as well as load sharing strategies.
During the fourth step, the Scheduling Module 611 employs genetic algorithms to find optimal solutions to efficient operating mode problems as well as forecast parameter search problems. The Scheduling Module 611 evaluates the fitness of each Suggested Scenario 612 according to following criteria:
This algorithm repeats and updates itself until incremental improvements are no longer financially viable. Finally, the Scheduling Module 611 provides the optimal schedule and forecast 613 to the Operator 61.
Referring now to
The smoothed measured process variables 76 are fed into the Data Justification Module 77. The module rejects data points (outliers) whenever they fall beyond a specified distance from expected model values or whenever user-defined criteria is exceeded. The output of the Data Justification Module 77 is the set of all accepted measured process variables values (MV) 78.
Process simulation occurs concurrently with the live process. Information about current operating mode 79 is fed into Online Simulation Module 710 which also receives Baseline Plant Model's 711 current coefficients 712. Of note, the Baseline Plant Model 711 coefficients 712 are created by the Configurator/Operator 713 supplied Manufacturer data 714. Online Simulation Module 710 provides simulated process variables (SV) 715 for every time scan corresponding to measured variable values 78.
The ultimate goal of the algorithm is to automatically adjust process model coefficients to reflect current operating mode and ensure model accuracy at any given time. The algorithm uses particle filtering methods that are based on dynamic state space models described by the following set of equations:
where f and g are estimated using polynomial regression, xt is a vector of state parameters at time t and yt are observed (measured) variables. Then xt is estimated using sequential importance sampling or sequential Monte Carlo sampling (from a simulated distribution), with general concepts of such simulation described well in A. Doucet et al, “Sequential Monte—Carlo Methods in Practice”, Springer—Verlag, 2000.
Referring back to
The coefficients of function are thus adjusted by the module 717 to reflect the most accurate relationship between the simulated variable values and the measured variable values. The adjusted coefficients 718 are provided to the Plant Model 719 and overall algorithm repeats whenever process changes occur.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4711753 | Miller et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4928484 | Peczkowski | May 1990 | A |
5024801 | Impink et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5075881 | Blomberg et al. | Dec 1991 | A |
5245528 | Saito et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5446648 | Abramovitch et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5519605 | Cawlfield | May 1996 | A |
5740033 | Wassick et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5933345 | Martin et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
6038540 | Krist et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6056781 | Wassick et al. | May 2000 | A |
6347254 | Lu | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6826521 | Hess et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6941177 | Jackson et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7096123 | McAdams et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7433743 | Pistikopoulos et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7949624 | Kelly et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8069101 | Von Groll et al. | Nov 2011 | B1 |
8195581 | Backstrom et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8494798 | Kettaneh et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
20020123864 | Eryurek et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20030046130 | Golightly et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030195665 | Cutler | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030220828 | Hwang et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040117042 | Jackson et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20050154477 | Martin et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20070050053 | Cutler | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070168057 | Blevins et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070299619 | Marik et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080082195 | Samardzija | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080109100 | Macharia et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090143871 | Gao et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090157590 | Mijares et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090198350 | Thiele | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090287320 | MacGregor et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100191361 | McCready et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Antoine, Marc et al., “Lifecycle Optimization for Power Plants”, ABB, 2004, pp. 1-15. |
ABB, “Life cycle management and service”, http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/4147d1a7902da406c125798700342fa4.aspx [relieved from the Internet on Jul. 10, 2012], 3 pages. |
Honeywell “Optimization solution White Paper: An Overview of Honeywell's Layered Optimization Solution”, 2009, pp. 1-16. |
IBM, “The State of Smarter Energy Utilities: Smarter Industries Symposium, Barcelona, Nov. 2010”, 7 pages. |
Qin, S. Joe et al., “An Overview of Industrial Model Predictive Control Technology”, AIChE Conference, 1996, pp. 1-31. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130317629 A1 | Nov 2013 | US |