Update Content - 2021-08-24
This commit is contained in:
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Tags
|
||||
: [Multivariable Control](multivariable_control.md)
|
||||
|
||||
Reference
|
||||
: ([Albertos and Antonio 2004](#org22a156f))
|
||||
: ([Albertos and Antonio 2004](#orga6ef935))
|
||||
|
||||
Author(s)
|
||||
: Albertos, P., & Antonio, S.
|
||||
@@ -19,6 +19,9 @@ Year
|
||||
|
||||
## [Decentralized Control](decentralized_control.md) and Decoupled Control {#decentralized-control--decentralized-control-dot-md--and-decoupled-control}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Introduction {#introduction}
|
||||
|
||||
Decentralized control is decomposed into two steps:
|
||||
|
||||
1. decoupled the plant into several subsystems
|
||||
@@ -26,6 +29,42 @@ Decentralized control is decomposed into two steps:
|
||||
|
||||
The initial effort of decoupling the system results in subsequent easier design, implementation and tuning.
|
||||
|
||||
Decentralized control tries to control multivariable plants by a suitable decomposition into SISO control loops.
|
||||
If the process has strong coupling or conditioning problems, centralized control may be required.
|
||||
It however requires the availability of a precise model.
|
||||
|
||||
Two approaches can be used to control a coupled system with SISO techniques:
|
||||
|
||||
- **decentralized control** tries to divide the plant and design _independent_ controllers for each subsystems.
|
||||
Two alternative arise:
|
||||
- neglect the coupling
|
||||
- carry out a _decoupling_ operation by "canceling" coupling by transforming the system into a diagonal or triangular structure bia a transformation matrix
|
||||
- **cascade control**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Mutli-Loop Control, Pairing Selection {#mutli-loop-control-pairing-selection}
|
||||
|
||||
The strategy called _multi-loop control_ consists of first proper input/output pairing, and then design of several SISO controllers.
|
||||
In this way, a complex control problem is divided into several simpler ones.
|
||||
|
||||
The multi-loop control may not work in strongly coupled systems.
|
||||
Therefore, a methodology the access the degree of interaction between the loops is needed.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#### [Relative Gain Array](relative_gain_array.md) {#relative-gain-array--relative-gain-array-dot-md}
|
||||
|
||||
The Relative Gain Array (RGA) \\(\Lambda(s)\\) is defined as:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\Lambda(s) = G(s) \times (G(s)^T)^{-1}
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
|
||||
The RGA is scaling-independent and controller-independent.
|
||||
These coefficients can be interpreted as the ratio between the open-loop SISO static gain and the gain with "perfect" control on the rest of the loops.
|
||||
|
||||
For demanding control specifications, the values of \\(\Lambda\\) car be drawn as a function of frequency.
|
||||
In this case, at frequencies important for control stability robustness (around the peak of the sensitivity transfer function), if \\(\Lambda(j\omega)\\) approaches the identity matrix, stability problems are avoided in multi-loop control.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Decoupling {#decoupling}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -40,16 +79,17 @@ This strategy is called **decoupling**.
|
||||
|
||||
#### Feedforward Decoupling {#feedforward-decoupling}
|
||||
|
||||
A pre-compensator can be added to transform the open-loop characteristics into a new one as chosen by the designer.
|
||||
A pre-compensator (Figure [1](#org7023330)) can be added to transform the open-loop characteristics into a new one as chosen by the designer.
|
||||
This decoupler can be taken as the inverse of the plant provided it does not include RHP-zeros.
|
||||
|
||||
<a id="org7023330"></a>
|
||||
|
||||
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/albertos04_pre_compensator_decoupling.png" caption="Figure 1: Decoupler pre-compensator" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
**Approximate decoupling**:
|
||||
To design low-bandwidth loops, insertion of the inverse DC-gain before the loop ensures decoupling at least at steady-state.
|
||||
If further bandwidth extension is desired, an approximation of \\(G^{-1}\\) valid in low frequencies can be used.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#### Feedback Decoupling {#feedback-decoupling}
|
||||
|
||||
Although at first glance, decoupling seems an appealing idea, there are some drawbacks:
|
||||
|
||||
- as decoupling is achieved via the coordination of sensors and actuators to achieve an "apparent" diagonal behavior, the failure of one the actuators may heavily affects all loops.
|
||||
@@ -72,12 +112,12 @@ where \\(U\\) and \\(V\\) are orthogonal matrices and \\(\Sigma\\) is diagonal.
|
||||
The SVD can be used to obtain decoupled equations between linear combinations of sensors and linear combinations of actuators.
|
||||
In this way, although losing part of its intuitive sense, a decoupled design can be carried out even for non-square plants.
|
||||
|
||||
If sensors are multiplied by \\(U^T\\) and control actions multiplied by \\(V\\), as in Figure [1](#orgbba6502), then the loop, in the transformed variables, is decoupled, so a diagonal controller \\(K\_D\\) can be used.
|
||||
If sensors are multiplied by \\(U^T\\) and control actions multiplied by \\(V\\), as in Figure [2](#org2de6de7), then the loop, in the transformed variables, is decoupled, so a diagonal controller \\(K\_D\\) can be used.
|
||||
Usually, the sensor and actuator transformations are obtained using the DC gain, or a real approximation of \\(G(j\omega)\\), where \\(\omega\\) is around the desired closed-loop bandwidth.
|
||||
|
||||
<a id="orgbba6502"></a>
|
||||
<a id="org2de6de7"></a>
|
||||
|
||||
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/albertos04_svd_decoupling.png" caption="Figure 1: SVD decoupling: \\(K\_D\\) is a diagonal controller designed for \\(\Sigma\\)" >}}
|
||||
{{< figure src="/ox-hugo/albertos04_svd_decoupling.png" caption="Figure 2: SVD decoupling: \\(K\_D\\) is a diagonal controller designed for \\(\Sigma\\)" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
The transformed sensor-actuator pair corresponding to the maximum singular value is the direction with biggest "gain" on the plant, that is, the combination of variables being "easiest to control".
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -88,13 +128,22 @@ SVD decoupling produces the most suitable combinations for independent "multi-lo
|
||||
If some of the vectors in \\(V\\) (input directions) have a significant component on a particular input, and the corresponding output direction is also significantly pointing to a particular output, that combination is a good candidate for an independent multi-loop control.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Fundamentals of Centralised Closed-loop Control {#fundamentals-of-centralised-closed-loop-control}
|
||||
### Conclusions {#conclusions}
|
||||
|
||||
In this chapter, the control of systems with multiple inputs and outputs is discussed using SISO-based tools, either directly or after some multivariable decoupling transformations.
|
||||
|
||||
## Optimisation-based Control {#optimisation-based-control}
|
||||
Multi-loop strategies, if suitable, may present th advantages of fault tolerance, as well as simplicity.
|
||||
However, in some cases, tuning may be difficult and coupling may severely limit their performance.
|
||||
|
||||
Decoupling is based on mathematical transformations of the system models into diagonal form.
|
||||
Feedforward decoupling can be used in many cases.
|
||||
Feedback decoupling achieves its objective if state is measurable and system is minimum-phase.
|
||||
However, decoupling may be very sensitive to modelling errors and it is not the optimal strategy for disturbance rejection.
|
||||
|
||||
## Designing for Robustness {#designing-for-robustness}
|
||||
Cascade control is widely used in industry to improve the behaviour of basic SISO loops via the addition of extra sensors and actuators.
|
||||
However, ease of tuning requires that different time constants are involved in different subsystems.
|
||||
In general, addition of extra sensors and actuators in a SISO or MIMO loop, will improve achievable performance and/or tolerance to modelling errors.
|
||||
The level of improvement must be traded off against the cost of additional instrumentation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation and Other Issues {#implementation-and-other-issues}
|
||||
@@ -142,4 +191,4 @@ The solution is similar to that of the wind-up phenomenon: the regulator should
|
||||
|
||||
## Bibliography {#bibliography}
|
||||
|
||||
<a id="org22a156f"></a>Albertos, P., and S. Antonio. 2004. _Multivariable Control Systems: An Engineering Approach_. Advanced Textbooks in Control and Signal Processing. Springer-Verlag. <https://doi.org/10.1007/b97506>.
|
||||
<a id="orga6ef935"></a>Albertos, P., and S. Antonio. 2004. _Multivariable Control Systems: An Engineering Approach_. Advanced Textbooks in Control and Signal Processing. Springer-Verlag. <https://doi.org/10.1007/b97506>.
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user