A New Fault Tolerant Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller Incorporating An UKF-Based Centralized Measurement Fusion Scheme
A New Fault Tolerant Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller Incorporating An UKF-Based Centralized Measurement Fusion Scheme
A New Fault Tolerant Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller Incorporating An UKF-Based Centralized Measurement Fusion Scheme
Archive of SID
Research Note
ABSTRACT: A new Fault Tolerant Controller (FTC) has been presented in this research by
integrating a Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) mechanism in a nonlinear model predictive
controller framework. The proposed FDD utilizes a Multi-Sensor Data Fusion (MSDF)
methodology to enhance its reliability and estimation accuracy. An augmented state-vector model
is developed to incorporate the occurred sensor faults and then a UKF algorithm is utilized
to estimate the augmented state vector including system states along with the fault terms using
a centralized measurement fusion scheme. The designed FDD architecture is then merged with
a conventional NMPC to form a Fault-Tolerant Control System (FTCS). A series of sensor fault
senarios is conducted on a Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor (CSTR) to comparatively illustrate
the superiority of the proposed FTCS in eliminating the miserable impacts of the induced sensor faults
against a conventional NMPC.
KEY WORDS: Fault Tolerant Control System (FTCS), Nonlinear Model Predictive Controller (NMPC),
Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD), Unscented Kalman Filter (UKF), Multi Sensor Data
Fusion (MSDF).
INTRODUCTION
The ever-increasing complexity of modern chemical
plants and the tightly environmental regulations are pushing
the process industries to optimize their production
systems against any process abnormally. Any malfunction
in these plants will cause great economic losses or may
even result into safety dangers [1]. The preventive action
should be done by the control mechanism, creating a Fault
Tolerant Control (FTC) system. If the designed mechanism
operates correctly, the system function is satisfied even
after occurrence of a fault, possibly after a short time
period of performance degradation.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
+ E-mail: salahshoor@put.ac.ir
1021-9986/11/4/107
6/$/2.60
107
www.SID.ir
Archive of SID
x k = Ax k 1 + Bu k 1 + w k 1
x k = f (x k 1 , u k , v k ) + w k 1
(3)
z k = h(x k , k) + v k
(4)
(z k2 )T ]T
(5)
Denoting:
H (xk , k ) =
Vk =
( h1 ( x k , k ) ) ( h 2 ( x k , k ))
( v1k ) ( v2k )
T T
T T
and
Zk = H(x k , k) + Vk
(6)
(1)
Rk =
z k = Hx k + v k
(2)
R1k
R 2k
(7)
108
www.SID.ir
Archive of SID
b k i = bk 1i + N k bi
i = 1,
, nb
(8)
Nkbi
x*k = [bTk
(9)
(10)
where
F(x*k 1 , u k , v k ) = [bTk 1
w *k 1 = [N bki
f (x k 1 , u k , vk )]
w k 1 ]T
(11)
(12)
(13)
NMPC Approach
Since most of the chemical processes are highly nonlinear,
nonlinear extensions to MPC (NMPC) must be applied in
order to provide satisfactory control results. To alleviate
the derivation of control law, the following objective function,
formulated in vector notation, can be considered for
computing the desired control moves [10]:
N
J(k) =
p = N1
(15)
N u 1
|| u(k + p | k) ||2
(14)
p=0
(16)
109
www.SID.ir
Archive of SID
Ca
0.05
0.06
Bas in Ca sensor
Bas in V sensor
6.5
5.5
10
Discrete time
0.04
0.02
0
0
10
Discrete time
Fig. 2: Estimating the introduced calibration biases via the CMF-based FDI mechanism.
110
www.SID.ir
Archive of SID
C NMPC
FT NMPC
Tank level
48
46
44
42
40
0
Set point
0.25
Output concentration
50
0.2
0.15
0.1
0
10
Discrete time
10
Discrete time
Estimated bias
Aging bias
0.06
0.04
Bias in CA sensor
Bias in V sensor
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
0
0.02
0
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
0
10
10
Discrete time
Discrete time
Fig. 4: Estimating the introduced aging biases via the CMF-based FDD mechanism.
FT NMPC
52
Set point
0.25
Output concentration
Tank level
51
C NMPC
50
49
48
47
46
0
10
Discrete time
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0
10
Discrete time
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, a new fault tolerant NMPC has been
presented which incorporates a FDD mechanism. The
proposed mechanism utilizes a MSDF architecture which
fuses the sensor measurements in augmented state vectors
111
www.SID.ir
Archive of SID
REFERENCES
[1] Visscher, R., Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster.
http://www.chernobul.co.ul/hoef.html ,(1990).
[2] Maciejowski J. M., Modeling and Predictive Control:
Enabling Technologies for Reconfiguration, Annual
Reviews in Control, 23, p. 13 (1999).
[3] Pranatyasto T.N., Qin S.J., Sensor Validation and
Process Fault Diagnosis for FCC Units under MPC
Feedback, Control Engineering Practice, 9, p. 877
(2001).
[4] Prakash J., Patwardhan S.C., Narasimhan S.A.,
Integrating Model Based Fault Diagnosis with
Model Predictive Control, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 44,
p. 4344 (2005).
[5] Venkatasubramanian V., Rengaswamy R., Yin K.,
Kavuri S.N., A Review of Process Fault Detection
and Diagnosis Part I: Quantitative Model-Based
Methods, Computers and Chemical Engineering, 27,
p. 293 (2003).
[6] Julier S.J., Uhlmann J.K., Durrant-Whyte H., A New
Approach for Filtering Non-Linear Systems, in
"Proceedings of the American Control Conference",
p. 1628 (1995).
[7] Julier S.J., Uhlmann J.K., A New Extension of the
Kalman Filter to Non-linear Systems, in "Proc. Of
AeroSense: The 11th Int. Symp. A.D.S.S.C", (1997).
[8] Grewal M., Andrews A.P., Kalman Filtering, Theory
and Practice Using Matlab, Third Edition, John
Wiley & Sons, (2008).
[9] Harris C., Bailey A., Dodd T., Multisensor Data
Fusion in Defense and Aerospace, Journal of Royal
Aerospace Society, 162, p. 229 (1998).
[10] Srensen H., Nrgaard M., Ravn O., Oulsen N.K.,
Implementation of Neural Network Based Non-Linear
Predictive Control, Neurocomputing, 28, p. 37 (1999).
[11] Dennis J.E, Schnabel R.B., Numerical Methods for
Unconstrained
Optimization
and
Nonlinear
Equations, Prentice-Hall, (1997).
112
www.SID.ir