Active Disturbance Rejection Control of LCL-Filtered Grid ...
Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control
-
Upload
mary-battle -
Category
Documents
-
view
24 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control
![Page 1: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control
Vinay Kariwala* and Sigurd Skogestad
Department of Chemical Engineering
NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
* From Jan. 2006: Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore
![Page 2: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Outline
• Motivation
• Objectives
• Interpolation constraints
• Performance limits
• Comparison with direct control
• Feedback + Feedforward control
![Page 3: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
General control problem
y
d
![Page 4: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
“Direct” Controld
K G
Gd
zu- y = z
Unstable (RHP) zeros αi in G limit disturbance rejection:interpolation constraint
![Page 5: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Problem
In many practical problems, – Primary controlled variable z not available
L
V
xD
B
F
zF
D
xB
LC
LR
Compositions cannot be measuredor are available infrequently
Need to consider “Indirect control”
![Page 6: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Indirect Control
K Gy
Gd
d
z
u-
G
Gdy
y
Primary objective paper: Derive limits on disturbance rejection for indirect control
Indirect control: Control y to achieve good performance for z
![Page 7: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Related work
• Bounds on various closed loop functions available– S, T – Chen (2000), etc.
– KSGd – Kariwala et al. (2005), etc.
• Special cases of indirect control
Secondary objective:Unify treatment of different closed loop functions
![Page 8: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Main Assumptions (mostly technical)
• Unstable poles of G and Gdy – also appear in Gy
• All signals scalar
• Unstable poles and zeros are non-repeated
• G and Gdy - no common unstable poles and zeros
![Page 9: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Nevanlinna-Pick Interpolation TheoryParameterizes all rational functions with
Useful for characterizing achievable performance
• Derivative constraints
• a
• Interpolation constraints
![Page 10: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Indirect control: Interpolation ConstraintsNeed to avoid unstable (RHP) pole-zero cancellations
If are unstable zeros of G
If are unstable zeros of Gdy
same as for direct control
![Page 11: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
More new interpolation Constraints
If are unstable poles of Gy that are shared with Gdy
If are unstable poles of Gy not shared with G and Gdy
If are unstable poles of Gy that are shared with G
- stable version (poles mirrored in LHP)
![Page 12: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Derivative Interpolation Constraint
Very conservative: Should be:
Special case: Control effort required for stabilization
Reason: Derivative is also fixed
Bound due to interpolation constraint
![Page 13: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Main results: Limit of Performance, indirect control
Derivative constraint neglected, Exact bound in paper
optimal achievable performance
optimal achievable performance
Let v include all unstable poles and zeros:
![Page 14: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
“Perfect” Indirect Control possible when:
• G and Gdy have no unstable zeros – or Gd evaluated at these points is zero and
• G and Gdy have no unstable poles
– or has transmission zeros at these points and
• Gy has no extra unstable poles
![Page 15: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Direct Control vs Indirect Control
• Zeros of G
• Poles of G
+ (Possible) derivative constraint
Practical consequence: To avoid large Tzd, y and z need to be “closely correlated” if the plant is unstable
![Page 16: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Indirect control
The required change in u for stabilization may make z sensitive to disturbances
Exception: Tzd(gammak) close to 0 because y and z are “closely correlated”
Example case with no problem : “cascade control”In this case: z = G2 y, so a and y are closely correlated.
Get Gd = G2 Gdy and G = G2 Gy, and we find that the above bound is zero
![Page 17: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Simple Example
Case Direct Indirect
Stable system 0.5 0.5
Unstable system 1.5 15.35
Extra unstable pole of Gy - 51.95
![Page 18: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Feedback + Feedforward Control
K1 Gy
Gd
d
z
u-
G
Gdy
y
K2
M
Disturbance measured (M)
![Page 19: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Feedback + Feedforward Control
• Limitation due to– Unstable zeros of G
– Extra unstable poles of Gy, but no derivative constraint
• No limitation due to– Unstable zeros of Gdy unless M has zeros at same points
– Unstable poles of G and Gdy
• + Possible limitation due to uncertainty
![Page 20: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Simple Example (continued)
Case DirectFB
Stable system 0.5 0.5
Unstable system 1.5 15.35
Extra unstable pole of Gy - 51.95
Indirect
FB FB+FF0.5
FB+FF0.5
0.5 0.5
- 0.68
![Page 21: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Conclusions
• Performance limitations– Interpolation constraint, derivative constraint
– and optimal achievable performance
• Indirect control vs. direct control– No additional fundamental limitation for stable plants
– Unstable plants may impose disturbance sensitivity
• Feedforward controller can overcome limitations– but will add sensitivity to uncertainty
![Page 22: Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062408/56813298550346895d992e8e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Limits of Disturbance Rejection using Indirect Control
Vinay Kariwala* and Sigurd Skogestad
Department of Chemical Engineering
NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
* From Jan. 2006: Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore