An efficient model predictive controller with pole placement
Introduction
Model predictive control (MPC) is an effective control algorithm for handling constrained control problems encountered in the chemical process industries. At each sampling instant, with the current state of the plant as the initial condition, a control sequence is obtained by solving online a finite horizon optimal control problem and the first control in this sequence is applied to the plant. At the next sampling instant, when the new state is available, the same procedure is repeated over a shifted horizon [7]. In the past decades, most of the studies on MPC focused on the closed-loop stability [8], [11]. Ref. [13] summarized three key ingredients for establishing the closed-loop stability of an MPC system: terminal performance cost, terminal constraint set and local controller.
In the design of predictive controllers with guaranteed closed-loop stability, a terminal constraint set is usually imposed artificially on the online optimization problem. For a discrete-time linear system subject to input and state constraints, Ref. [10] presented a sufficient condition for the exponential stability of the constrained system based on a terminal ellipsoid constraint. For a class of nonlinear systems, Ref. [12] approximated the nonlinear behavior by combining a linear model with a linear time-varying model, and developed a scheduling quasi-min–max MPC algorithm.
For constrained systems, the terminal constraint set has influence not only on the closed-loop stability, but also on the initial feasible region and the dynamic performance. The usual way to enlarge the initial feasible region is to optimize the terminal weighting matrix. In terms of LMIs, Ref. [9] provided an approach to enlarging the initial feasible region by optimizing the terminal weighting matrix offline. However, the initial feasible region was enlarged at the cost of poor dynamic performance. To enlarge the initial feasible region without sacrificing local optimality of the controller, Ref. [1] introduced a new approach to designing MPC controllers by optimizing online the end-point state-weighting matrix. Although effective in most cases, this approach incurs heavy computational burden. For high-dimensional systems, it is difficult to complete the tremendous computation within one sampling period.
In addition, it is well known that the dynamic performance of a system depends on the locations of the closed-loop poles. Refs. [5], [6] indicated that placing all closed-loop poles within a specified disk could achieve the desired dynamic performance. In practical applications, we hope to place all closed-loop poles into a disk near the origin in order to obtain good dynamic performance. Doing so, however, will cause the feasible region to shrink. To solve this problem, this paper presents an approach to designing efficient model predictive controllers with pole placement. The key idea is as follows: Design offline a group of terminal weighting matrices by placing closed-loop poles into different circular regions within the unit circle, then combine them into a terminal constraint convex set. In the online optimization, coefficients of the terminal convex set can be adjusted flexibly according to the actual state so as to achieve a large feasible region as well as good dynamic performance.
Section snippets
Problem statement
Consider the following discrete-time linear system:where u(k) ∈ Rm is the control input, x(k) ∈ Rn is the state of the plant, A and B are matrices of appropriate dimensions.
The input constraints are given bywhere ∣·∣i denotes the absolute value of the ith element of a vector, and uimax represents the maximal value of the corresponding element.
For the above system, consider the following infinite horizon objective function:
MPC with pole placement
It is well known that the dynamic performance of a controlled system is to a large degree determined by the locations of its closed-loop poles. To obtain good dynamic performance, it is necessary to place all of the poles at certain prescribed locations. For linear systems without constraints, Refs. [5], [6] studied the pole placement problems within circular regions by using state feedback and output feedback, respectively. In the presence of constraints, however, placing the closed-loop poles
Feasibility and stability
For the feasibility and stability of the proposed algorithm with pole placement, we have the following conclusion. Theorem 2 Given linear system (1) with input constraint, if optimization problem (31) is initially feasible, the implementation of the first control in stabilizes system (1) asymptotically. Proof Suppose that optimization problem (31) has a feasible solution at sampling instant kThe corresponding state sequence is , and the terminal state
An example
Consider the following model for a single, nonisothermal continuous CSTR[16]:where x is a vector of the reactor concentration and temperature, and u is the coolant flow (which is constrained). The matrices A and Bdepend on operating conditions as follows:where F = 1 m3/min, V = 1 m3, k0 = 1010/min−1, −ΔHrxn = 1.3 × 108 cal/kmole, E/R = 8330.1K, ρ = 106g/m3, UA = 5.34 × 106 cal/K,Cp = 1 cal/(gK), And Ts and
Conclusions
This paper presents an efficient MPC algorithm with pole placement. By pre-specifying several different disk regions, a terminal convex set with free coefficients is designed. During the online optimization, the maximal domain of attraction can be achieved by adjusting free coefficients of the terminal convex set. As the state converges to the zero, the constraint on input is relaxed gradually, which makes it possible to select the controller with good dynamic performance. The LMI-based online
Acknowledgement
This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 60474002 and 60674041, and in part by the National High Tech. Project of China under Grant No.2006AA04Z173.
References (16)
- et al.
Optimizing the end-point state-weighting matrix in model-based predictive control
Automatica
(2002) - et al.
Uniting bounded control and MPC for stabilization of constrained linear systems
Automatica
(2004) Implementation of stabilizing receding horizon controls for time-varying systems
Automatica
(2002)- et al.
On stability of constrained receding horizon control with finite terminal weighting matrix
Automatica
(1998) - et al.
Multi-model predictive control based on the Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy models: a case study
Information Science
(2004) - et al.
Quasi-min–max MPC algorithms for LPV systems
Automatica
(2000) - et al.
Constrained model predictive control: stability and optimality
Automatica
(2000) - et al.
Robust hybrid predictive control of nonlinear systems
Automatica
(2005)
Cited by (7)
Robust pole assignment in a specified union region using harmony search algorithm
2015, NeurocomputingCitation Excerpt :It is known that when all state variables of a system are completely controllable and observable, the poles of the closed-loop system can be placed at any desired locations on the complex plane via proper state feedback law. Robust pole assignment by state feedback for linear time-invariant control system has been investigated by many researchers and various robustness measures and optimization approaches have been proposed, see e.g., [1–49]. Among these results, there are two approaches for studying robust pole assignment by state feedback for linear control systems.
Data-Driven Performance Monitoring for Model Predictive Control Using a mahalanobis distance based overall index
2019, Asian Journal of ControlOrthonormal basis functions applied to optimal control design with closed-loop pole location constraints
2014, International Journal of ControlOrthonormal basis functions applied to optimal control with pole location constraints
2013, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Decision and ControlExperimental application of predictive controllers
2012, Journal of Control Science and EngineeringResearch of quasi-equivalent aggregation strategy in model predictive control based on simulation
2009, Xitong Fangzhen Xuebao / Journal of System Simulation