Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
www.elsevier.com/locate/jprocont
Abstract
The problem of controlling (possibly open-loop unstable) continuous free-radical solution polymer reactors with temperature, level
and ow measurements is addressed. The application of a nonlinear constructive control procedure, with emphasis on the attainment of
linearity, decentralization, robustness and model independency features, yields: (i) a measurement-driven control scheme with PI volume
and cascade temperature loops, a ratio-type feedforward free monomer controller, and a material balance molecular weight (MW) controller, and (ii) a closed-loop nonlocal stability criterion coupled with conventional-like tuning guidelines. The methodological developments connect the nonlinear geometric and constructive control design techniques with conventional-like schemes employed in industrial
polymer reactor control. The proposed approach is illustrated and tested with a representative example through simulations.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Nonlinear control; Constructive control; Polymer reactor control
1. Introduction
A wide variety of materials and products are manufactured in continuous free-radical polymer reactors. Due to
the strong exothermicity of the reaction and the presence
of the gel eect, which causes reaction autoacceleration
accompanied by viscosity increase and heat removal capability decrease, the reactor exhibits strongly nonlinear
behavior, with asymmetric input-output coupling, multiplicity of steady-states, and parametric sensitivity [1,2].
At the cost of less productivity, the reactors can be operated in open-loop stable regime by choosing the conversion
suciently low. In industrial practice, these reactors are
controlled with volume and cascade temperature linear PI
loops, and the monomer content and molecular weight
(MW) are regulated by adjusting the monomer and initiator and/or transfer agent dosages via supervisory or advisory control schemes. If the reactor is operated with or
close to gel eect, a free monomer controller driven by
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52 55 5804 4958; fax: +52 55 5804 4900.
E-mail address: jac@xanum.uam.mx (J. Alvarez).
0959-1524/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jprocont.2006.09.007
an on-line measurement must be used [3]. Thus, the objective of an advanced joint process-control design scheme is
to attain an operation with the best compromise between
safety, operability, productivity, and quality in the light
of investment and operation costs.
The polymer reactor control problem has been the subject of extensive theoretical, simulation and experimental
studies, the related state of the art can be seen elsewhere
[4], and here it suces to mention that: (i) only parts of
the multi-input multi-output (MIMO) control problem
have been addressed, (ii) a diversity of techniques has been
employed, including linear PI decoupling [2] and model
predictive (MPC) [5], as well as nonlinear geometric [3,6
9], MPC [10], and calorimetric [11,12] control techniques,
and (iii) the controllers have been implemented with
open-loop [7], extended Kalman lter (EKF) [10], and
Luenberger [8,9] nonlinear observers. Even though valuable insight and understanding have been gained, the
consideration of these highly nonlinear interactive and
model-dependent controllers raises serious complexity
and reliability concerns among industrial practitioners.
Recently, a combined PI-inventory approach was used to
draw a control scheme with linear components and reduced
464
v_ qm qs em =qm r q : fv ; zv y v v
1a
m_ r qm qm qm=v : fm ; zm m
1b
T_ Dr qm cm qs cs T T e U T T j =C : fT ;
zT y T T
r fr v; m; T ; I; s;
Q Dr
U fU v; m; T ; T j ; s;
yj T j
zi i
2ab
C fC v; m; s
2cd
p fp v; m; s
ri ET I : fri T ; I
2e
2f
r0 cd ET I it T ; m; s;
r : f0 v; m; T ; I; s
2g
y C y x;
z Czx
where
0
u q; qm ; qj ; wi ;
x v; m; T ; T j ; i; I; s; p ;
0
y y v ; y T ; y j ;
z zv ; zm ; zT ; zi
f fv ; fm ; fT ; fj ; fi ; fs ; fp ; d T e ; T je ; qs ;
u; pr 0; y C y x; z C zx
f x; d;
1e
pr is the vector of model parameters, denotes the steadystate nominal value of (), and x can be nonunique, either
stable or unstable. As it can be seen in (1), this system is
highly nonlinear and interactive. The denition of nonlocal
stability that underlies the present study is stated next.
Consider a nonlinear system with time-varying exogenous input de(t):
1f
e_ fe e; d e ;
1c
T_ j U T T j qj cj T j T je =C j fj ;
1g
1h
where the polymerization rate (r), initiation rate (ri), freeradical generation rate (r0) heat generation rate (Q), heat
transfer coecient (U), heat capacity (C), and polymer
mass (p), are set by the nonlinear functions
zc c p=vq s;
i_ r=pi it cd E=pI : fi ;
I_ ri wi qI=v : fi
s_ qs qs qs=v : fs
p_ r=pf2 r0 =r=ip 2r=r0 mw ig : fp
1d
e0 e0 ;
f e 0; 0 0
4a
4b
tP0
kd e tk sup jd e tj
t
where a (or c) bounds the transient (or asymptotic) response. The (necessary and sucient) Lyapunov characterization of the IS stability property is given by [19]
a1 jej 6 V e 6 a2 jej; V_ a3 jej a4 kd e k
4c
where V is a positive denite radially unbounded function
and ai is a K-class function.
Our problem consists in designing a feedback controller
that, driven by the measurements (y and d), regulates the
reactor operation about a (possibly open-loop unstable)
nominal steady state x. We are interested in: (i) solvability
conditions with physical meaning, (ii) closed-loop stable
functioning, (iii) a systematic construction-tuning procedure, and (iv) the attainment, as much as possible, of
linearity, decentralization, robustness and modeling independency features.
3. Solvability assessment
Assuming that the detailed reactor model (1), (2) and its
state (x) are known, in this section the related nonlinear
(feedforward) FF-(state-feedback) SF control problem is
addressed with geometric [14] and constructive methods
[18]. The purposes are the identication of the underlying
solvability conditions and of the behavior attainable with
robust FF-SF control.
3.1. Relative degrees (RD) and zero-dynamics (ZD)
Regarded individually, the coolant ow-temperature
inputoutput pair qj zT has relative degree (RD) equal
to 2, the associated controller (qj) requires the monomer
feed (qm) control time derivative, and consequently, the
4-input (u) 4-output (z) reactor system (1) does not have
RDs, meaning that the FF-SF problem cannot be solved
with static control [14]. From the application of the
dynamic extension procedure [14], the next proposition follows [the function f(x1, . . . , xn) is said to be xi-monotonic if
oxi f is of one sign]:
Proposition 1 (Proof in Appendix B). With the dynamic
extension (5a), the augmented reactor system (1, 5a) has
relative degree vector j (5b)
_ q_ m tq ; tqm
q;
5a
j jv ; jm ; jT ; ji 2; 2; 2; 2
5b
T je 6 T j
fT is T j -monotonic;
6ab
fi is I-monotonic: r
6cd
465
kor s; z; pr p
7a
2 mwi
7b
kor ro =po ;
T ; loI s; s
ro fr v; m;
s
po fp v; m;
o
qo 1 em ro =qm qs =1 m=p
T ;i; I; s 0 ) I loI s
f i v; m;
and loI s denotes the solution for I of the algebraic equation fi = 0.
Physically speaking, the ZD (7) represent the reactor
behavior [13] in perfect material balance control [21], with
the mass and the energy (u) delivered to the system exactly
balanced against the load demand z; d without gel eect,
or equivalently, without the sole potentially destabilizing
mechanism at play [3]. The ZD stability property is formally stated in the next proposition.
Proposition 2 (Proof in Appendix B). The ZD (7) are IS
stable, with respect to the exogenous input dz = (d,z,pr), if in
a compact set about the nominal operation:
skoq is s-monotonic; koq > 0;
kor > 0: r
8ac
dop ev ; em ; eT ; ei ; e0pr
ea a
a
466
T_ aT v; m; T ; T j ; sT j bT v; m; T ; T j ; r; s; qm ; T e ; qs 12a
T_ j aj T j ; T je qj bj v; m; T ; T j ; s
12b
a v; m; T ; i
10
11a
q_ m lgqm v; m; T ; T j ; i; I; s; q; qm ; T e ; qs ; q_ s
11b
wi lgwi v; m; T ; i; I; s; q; qm ; T e ; qs
11c
qj lgqj v; m; T ; T j ; i; I; s; q; qm ; T e ; T je ; qs ; T_ e ; q_ s
11d
i_ ai v; m; T ; sI bi v; m; T ; r; i; s
I_ ki v; T ; qI wi
12d
p_ kp v; m; T ; r; s; I; ip cp v; m; T ; r; i; I; s
12e
12c
where
aT U =C;
ki kq E;
aj cj T je T j =C j
ai cd E=p;
13ab
kq q=v
13ce
bT Dr qm cm qs cs T T e UT =C
bj U T T j =C j ;
bi kr i it
13f
13gh
kp kr 2 r0 =r=i
13i
cp kr 2r=r0 mw i;
kr r=p
13jk
p
v
e2v =2;
V o cvs e2s
V pT e2T e2j =2
ei I I
p
m
e2m =2;
14a
p
i
e2i
e2i =2
cvp e2p =2
14b
where T j (or I*) is the jacket temperature (or initiator content) virtual control (i.e., setpoint).
From the enforcement of the dissipation rates
V_ pv k v e2v ;
V_ pm k m e2m
V_ pT k T e2T k j e2j ;
15ab
V_ pi k i e2i k i e2i
15cd
16a
16cd
qj T_ j k j ej bj aT eT =aj
16e
T j
16f
wi I k i ei ki I ai ei ;
I bi k i ei =ai
bT k T eT =aT
or equivalently,
q lq v; m; T ; I; s; qs ;
qm lqm v; m; T ; I; s; qs
17ab
qj lqj v; m; T ; T j ; i; I; s; T e ; T je ; qs ; T_ e ; q_ s
17c
wi lwi v; T ; m; i; I; s; T e ; qs
17d
V_ p V_ pv V_ pm V_ pT V_ pi V_ o < 0
0
8jej P ap kdk; d d0 ; d_ 0 ; e0
d
pr
18
467
equipment characteristics and operating conditions provides a fundamental connection between reactor process
and control designs [12]. The a posteriori verication of
the control robustness property yielded a connection between passive and MPC polymer reactor control designs.
Finally, it must be pointed out that the IS stable reactor
dynamics (7), of the (exact model-based) nonlinear passive
controller (17) represents: (i) the behavior attainable with
any robust controller, and (ii) the recovery target for the
MD control design of the next section.
4. Measurement-driven control
up q; qm ; T j ; I ; us qj ; wi
Lp Lv Lm LT Li ;
Ls Lj Li
T_ aT T j bT ;
y v v;
yT T
20ab
T_ j aj qj bj ;
yj T j
m_ kq m qm qm r;
s_ kq s qs qs
bj ; bi
I_ ki I wi ;
20c
T_ j ; I_
20fg
i_ ai I bi kr i ci fi
p_ kp p cp fp ;
b_ v ; b_ T ; b_ j ; b_ j ; b_ i
20de
20h
0
20ij
where the function set {aT, aj, ai, bi, cp, ki, kq, kp} has been
dened in (13), and
^ a ;
^ =C
aT U
T
0
^ a
aj ^cj T je T j =C
j
j
0
b bv ; bT ; bi bv ; bT ; bj : b
bv qm qs em r=qm : bv r; qm ; qs ;
21a
21b
c i ai I kr i t
21cd
=CCT
r fC j bj CbT U
j cj qj T je T je T j T j
cm qm cs qs T e T g=D : br y; b; m; s; u; d
21e
468
bv q y_ v ;
22ab
V^ V^ v V^ m V^ T V^ t V^ o
22cd
V^ v ~b2v =2;
bT y_ T aT y j
bj y_ j aj qj ;
b :
bj ; bi
m_ qm=v qm qm r;
T_ j ; I_ : y
s_ qs=v qs qs
22ef
r br y; b; m; s; u; d
22g
I_ q=v Ey T I wi
i_ fi v; T ; r; m; s; I; i
22h
22i
p_ fp v; T ; r; m; s; I; i; p
22j
24a
~ 2 =2
V^ m m
24bc
24d
~2 =2
V^ o ~s2 p
24ef
25a
~ wm ~r
~ 2 m~
V^_ m kq m
25bc
_ ~
_~
_ ~
V^_ T xT ~b2T xj ~b2j xj ~b2
j bT bT bj bj bj bj
V^_ k ~i2 k ~I 2 x ~b2 ^i~i~k b_ ~b
25d
~s p
~~cp p
^~kp
~2 ~sw
V^_ o kq~s2 kp p
25f
wm qm qm ; ws qs qs ; b_ T T aT T_ j ;
_
b_ j T j b_ i I
b_ v v q;
25e
b_ j T j aj q_ j ;
v_ j x vj x2
j Tj ;
v_ i
x vi
x2
i I ;
23a
23b
23c
^
bj vj xj T j
^
b v x I
^ v ^r;
^_ qm qm qm=y
m
23d
23e
^s_ q^s=y v qs qs
23fg
~r br y r ; ^
^ ^s; u; d
b; m;
^I_ q=y v Ey T ^I wi ;
23h
^i_ fi y v ; y T ; ^r; m;
^ ^s; ^I; ^t
23ij
^_ fp y v ; y T ; ^r; m;
^ ^s; ^I;^i; p
^
p
where xv ; xT ; xj ; xj and xi are
setpoint value T j (or I*) acts
(23d) [or (23e)].
23k
adjustable gains, and the
as a measurement in
V T V pT V^ T
26ab
V i V pi V^ i
26cd
V m V pm V^ m ;
27a
27b
sv b_ v ev ~bv
xe bv ; bT ; bj ; bj ; bi ; m; s; I; i; p
dp p pc
d d0d ; d0pc 0 ; dd d d;
c
c
~xe ^xe xe ;
28a
28b
2
2
2
2
2
_
~
~
~
V_ T k T eT xT bT k j ej xj bj xj bj sT e; ~xe ; d; d
~
sT b_ T eT ~
bT b_ j ej ~
bj b_ ej b
28c
j
k m -m q=y v
29a
_
~ -m sm e; ~xe ; d; d
V_ m kq hem ; m;
29b
~ em ~
wm ~r
sm m
2
29c
30a
^
bi k i ^I I
_
V_ i kr hei ;~i; -i ki hei ; ~I; -i si e; ~xe ; d; d;
30b
30c
-i k i =kr ; -i k i =ki
si ki ei ^
ai ei ~I kr ei ^
ai ei ~i ei ~ii ~i~
kr
b_ i ei ~
bi ~i ei ~ci
Finally, solve Eqs. (27a), (28ab), (29a), and (30ab) for
the controls q; T j qj ; qm and I* wi, respectively, incorporate the estimator (23), and obtain the measurement-driven (MD) controller:
Volume controller
vv x v y v
q k v y v v
31a
v_ v xv vv xv xv y v q
Temperature controller
T ^
bT k T y T T =aT
31b
^
bj vj xj y j ;
k m -m q=y v ;
-m 2 - ; -
31d
^i_ fi y v ; y T ; ^r; m;
^ ^s; ^I;^i
^ ^s;^i k i ^i i=ai y v ; y T ; m;
^ ^s
I bi y v ; y T ; ^r; m;
^ ^s
k i -i kr y v ; ^r; m;
^b v x I ; v_ x v x2 I ; -i ; -i 2 - ; -
i
31e
Comparing with the detailed model-based nonlinear geometric (11) and passive (17) FF-SF control implementations with (say geometric [3,79]) nonlinear estimators,
the above MD controller is considerably less model-dependent. Specically: the volume controller (31a) is model
independent, the temperature controller (31b) needs two
static parameter approximations (aT and aj) (21), the
monomer controller needs calorimetric parameters (pc)
(i.e., densities and specic heats), and the MW controller
(31d) and polydispersity estimator (31e) need the initiation-transfer kinetics parameters. In addition, the propagation-termination kinetic (fr) and heat transfer (fU) models
are not needed. The MD control interaction, decentralization, and model dependency characteristics are presented in
Fig. 2.
In classical PI form, the volume controller (31a) is given
by
Z t
q jv ev s1
e
sds
; ev y v v
32
v
v
0
1
ja aa xa k a ;
1
sa x1
a k a ; a v;T ; j
^
bT vT xT y T ; v_ T xT vT xT xT y T aj y j
^ v x T ; v_ x v x2 T
b
j
j
j j
j j
j
j
^
^
q b k j y T bj aT y T =aj
j
31c
^s_ q^s=y v qs qs ;
^r br y; ^b; m;
^ ^s; u; d
^ v k m m
^ m=q
qm ^r qm=y
m
Monomer controller
^_ qm=y
^
qm q ^r;
m
469
v_ j xj vj xj xj y j aj qj
where (33b) is a primary-to-secondary feedforward lag element that performs the setpoint dierentiation.
Thus, from an industrial perspective: (i) the monomer
(31c) and MW (31d) SISO components are inventory
controllers driven by information generated in the temperature controller (31b), (ii) the monomer controller has a
470
ratio-type feedforward component ^r=qm that sets a feedow qm contribution, (iii) the MW controller has a cascade
structure, with a primary (or secondary) element that sets
the initiator setpoint (or initiator feedrate), including a
ratio-type correction by chemical reaction ^r=^
p, and (iv)
the functioning of the volume (31a), temperature (31b),
and monomer (31c) controllers is independent of the one
of the MW controller.
4.4. Closed-loop dynamics and tuning
Having as point of departure the LFs (14) of the passive
nonlinear controller, the open-loop estimator (24), and the
closed-loop component-wise design (26), the application of
Lyapunovs direct method within the IS stability framework yields the closed-loop robust stability criteria stated
in the next proposition.
Proposition 3 (Proof in Appendix B). Consider the polymer
reactor (1) with the MD controller (31). The closed-loop
reactor is IS-stable if: (i) the control gains of the unmeasured
outputs (m and I) are chosen as follows:
p
-m ; -i ; -i 2 - ; - - 3 2 2
34a
and (ii) the gains of the primary (kv, kT) and secondary (kj)
control and estimator xv ; xT ; xj ; xj ; xi components are
tuned so that the following dynamic separation conditions
are met:
k
p < k p < k p cp k j ;
kj < k
j cj x;
x < x
34bd
where k p mink v ; k T ;
c
)
is
an
isotonic
function
that
sets
an
upper
limit
k
j (or
p
471
-m -i -i 1:5
Table 1
Steady-states, nominal inputs, outputs and reactor states, and jacket parameter approximations
States and outputs
m (kg)
T (K)
Tj (K)
Mn (kg/kmol)
I (kg)
s (kg)
p
c
r
Steady-states
Stable (extinction)
Unstable
Stable (ignition)
1361.089
329.72
329.53
399149.03
1.685
501.283
1.9997
0.1072
0.08066
660.082
351.62
341.23
110384.75
1.3087
500.871
1.999
0.5672
0.4269
312.756
373.88
345.61
29395.15
0.3513
498.561
1.9966
0.7954
0.5997
Nominal inputs
i 0 = (30 L/min, 9.1 L/min, 7.34 L/min, 0.0078526 kg/min) 0 , d T e ; T je ; qs 0 =(315 K, 328 K, 2.54 L/min) 0
u qj ;
q;
qm ; w
Jacket parameters
aT = 4.71 102 min1, aj = 3.78 102 K/L
472
330
Tje
Te
T e 315 K 5 sin6:2832t=110
Tje
320
Te
310
330
320
310
0
1000
500
T je 328 K 2 sin6:2832t=110;
1500
t (min)
Reactor (T)
and jacket (Tj )
temperatures (K)
1.90
1.4
1.20
1.2
1.15
1.0
1.10
Mn
1.05
0.6
0.8
0.5
2.0
30
10
wi
20
10
qm
t (min)
1000
1500
2.00
680
660
640
620
600
1.25
1.95
1.90
1.4
1.20
1.2
1.15
1.0
1.10
1.05
Mn
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.4
2.1
2.0
1.9
40
15
qj
30
10
wi
20
10
qm
0
500
1000
1500
500
Tj
340
15
qj
1.9
40
Polydispersity,
(-)
0.4
2.1
Monomer
mass, m (kg)
1.95
Number-average
MW x 10-5,
M n (kg/kmol)
T
350
2.00
680
660
640
620
600
1.25
Conversion (c),
solid fraction ( ), (-)
Tj
340
Number-average
Conversion (c),
MW x 10-5,
solid fraction (), (-)
M n (kg/kmol)
T
350
-3
Polydispersity,
(-)
360
Volume x 10 , V (L)
Monomer
mass, m (kg)
Reactor (T)
and jacket (Tj )
temperatures (K)
360
t P 500 min
t (min)
Reactor (T)
and jacket (Tj)
temperatures (K)
1.95
1.15
1.2
1.0
1.10
0.6
0.5
0.8
Conversion (c),
solid fraction (), (-)
1.05
Mn
2.0
30
wi
20
10
10
5
500
1000
1500
t (min)
1.95
1.90
1.4
1.20
1.15
1.2
1.0
1.10
1.05
Mn
0.6
0.5
0.8
0.4
2.1
2.0
1.9
40
qj
30
15
wi
20
10
10
qm
0
500
1000
1500
qm
Initiator feedrate x 10 ,
wi (kg/min)
15
qj
Initiator feedrate x 10 ,
wi (kg/min)
1.9
40
Polydispersity,
(-)
0.4
2.1
2.00
680
660
640
620
600
1.25
1.20
Tj
340
-3
1.90
1.4
Monomer
mass, m (kg)
Number-average
MW x 10 -5,
M n (kg/kmol)
2.00
680
660
640
620
600
1.25
T
350
Volume x 10 , V (L)
Number-average
MW x 10 -5,
M n (kg/kmol)
Tj
340
Conversion (c),
solid fraction (), (-)
350
-3
Polydispersity,
(-)
360
Volume x 10 , V (L)
Monomer
mass, m (kg)
Reactor (T)
and jacket (Tj)
temperatures (K)
360
473
t (min)
474
features, and illustrated and made quantitative the assessment of the closed-loop IS stability property.
The proposed polymer reactor control design methodology suggests the pursuit of a general-purpose design framework that can fruitfully blend theoretical nonlinear and
applied chemical process control techniques.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support from
the Mexican National Council for Research and Technology (CONACyT Scholarship 118632) for P. Gonzalez.
Appendix A. Polymerization reactor model
A.1. Kinetics [13,20]
ri ET I : fri T ; I
r k p v;m; T ; I;sk0 v;m; T ; I;sm : fr v; m;T ;I; s
r0 cd fri T ; I it T ;m; sfr v;m; T ; I;s : f0 v; m;T ; I; s
cd 2f d =mwi
ET ead bd =T ; k po T eap bp =T ; k to T eat bt =T
k p v; m; T ;I; s k po T =1 k po T hp T Ef v;m; T ; sk0 v; m;T ; I; s
k0 v; m;T ; I; s k0 v;T ; I k2g v;m; T ; I;s1=2 kg v; m;T ; I; s
k0 v; T ;I 2f d fri T ; I=vmwi k to T
kg v; m;T ; I; s fd ht v;T ; IEf v; m;T ; sfri T ; I=vmwi
Ef v; m; T ;s e2:3m=vqm s=vqs =fAT BT m=vqm s=vqs g
hp T eahp bhp =T ; ht v; T ; I eaht bht I=vmwi d ht =T
AT aA bA 1 T =T g cA 1 T =T g 2 ;
BT aB bB 1 T =T g
it T ; m;s jm T s=mjs T ; jm T 1=mwm eam bm =T ;
js T 1=mws eas bs =T
lgq x; q; qm ; qs ; q_ s ; T e mm qm mv 1 em oxwi fr
# qm q_ s =qm m=v
lgqm x; q; qm ; qs ; q_ s ; T e fmm m=vvv
This system has relative degree j (5b) i the the maps / and
u of the coordinate change
v v; fv ; m; fm ; T ; fT ; i; fi 0 : /xa ; d;
oua / 0
B1a
0
0_
_
m oxa fv ; fm ; fT ; fi od fv ; fm ; fT ; fi d : uxa ; ua ; d; d
/ is xa -invertible
B1b
/ is ua -invertible
fv ; fm is q; qm -inv () 6a
fT is T j -inv () 6c; f i is I-inv () 6d
B2a
_ q_ m -inv () 6a
uv ; um 0 is q;
B2b
v_ 5 v6 ; v_ 6 m1
Proof of Proposition 2 (ZD stability). In nominal steadystate regime the ZD (7) become
2 mwi 2;
p
s
sro s=v w
B5ab
0
b es ; d
bos es ; dos
B6a
bop es ; dop
B6b
loq es ; dos q=v; q 1 em r=qm qs =1 m=p
o
r fr v; m; T ; lI s; s
^s ~
qs
lop es ; dop r=p; bos es ; dos es f
ws 1 loq es ; dos =
q q
~s ges
qs q
~
bop es ; dop ~cop p
kop ; dos d0z ; dqs ; dpr 0 ; dop d0z ; dpr 0 ; dz z z
dqs q
qs ; dpr pr pr
B7a
lop es ; dp ep
Compare these equations with the ones of the LNPA output error dynamics (10), obtain the controller (in v m attening coordinates)
c c
ma xc2
a ea fa xa fa ;
d wi qm ;qs ;T e :
p fp v; m; s
v_ 1 v2 ; v_ 2 m1 ;
v_ 7 v8 ; v_ 8 m2
475
a v; m; T ; i
B3
_ K p C z x z K d fv ; fm ; fT ; fi xa ; d
uxa ; ua ; d; d
) jep j 6
B7b
cop kdo k
c2
c2
c2
K p diagxc2
v ; xm ; xT ; xi
K d diagfcv xcv ; fcm xcm ; fcT xcT ; fci xci ;
_
V V p V^ ) V_ ae; ~xe ; d e; ~xe ; d; d
ae; ~xe ; d P 0; s0; 0; 0; 0 0
recall the ua-invertibility of u (B1b), and solve to last equation to obtain the dynamic nonlinear FF-SF controller (11)
with the following maps [mi is dened in (B3)]:
B8ab
476
_ u
_ si e; ~xe ; d; d
_
_ sT e; ~xe ; d; d
s sv e; ~xe ; d; d;
~~
ws ~cp ~
k
pep ~cp p p
kp ~
p
es ~s~
where {kq, kr, ki, kp} (13) is the dilution rate set, h is the
ellipsoidal function (29c), and the functions sv (27b), sT
(28c), and si (30c) have been already dened. Set the Eq.
(B9a), recall the closed-loop IS stability (18) with the passive controller (17), conclude the existence of a local
asymptotic gain c (B9b), draw the dissipation rate inequality (B9c):
_
ae; ~xe ; d se; ~x; d; d
) je0 ; ~x0 0 j ckd0 ; d_ 0 0 k
B9b
0
; ~x0e j
B9c
V_ 6 08je
P ckdtk
B9a
[10] R.K. Mutha, W.R. Cluett, A. Penlidis, On-line nonlinear modelbased estimation and control of a polymer reactor, AIChE J. 43 (11)
(1997) 3042.
[11] I. Saenz de Buruaga, P.D. Armitage, J.R. Leiza, J.M. Asua,
Nonlinear control for maximum production rate of latexes of welldened polymer composition, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 36 (1997)
4243.
[12] J. Alvarez, F. Zaldo, G. Oaxaca, Towards a joint process and control
design framework for batch processes: application to semibatch
polymer reactors, in: P. Seferlis, M.C. Georgiadis (Eds.), The
Integration of Process Design and Control, Elsevier, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, 2004, pp. 604634.
[13] P. Gonzalez, J. Alvarez, Combined proportional/integral-inventory
control of solution homopolymerization reactors, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 44 (2005) 7147.
[14] A. Isidori, Nonlinear Control Systems, third ed., Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1995.
[15] A. Isidori, Nonlinear Control Systems II, Springer-Verlag, London,
1999.
[16] R. Sepulchre, M. Jankovic, P. Kokotovic, Constructive Nonlinear
Control, Springer-Verlag, NY, 1997.
[17] R.A. Freeman, P.V. Kokotovic, Robust Nonlinear Control Design:
State-Space and Lyapunov Techniques, Birkhauser, Boston, 1996.
[18] M. Krstic, I. Kanellakopoulos, P. Kokotovic, Nonlinear and Adaptive Control Design, Wiley, New York, 1995.
[19] E.D. Sontag, The ISS philosophy as a unifying framework for
stability-like behavior, in: A. Isidori, F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue, W.
Respondek (Eds.), Nonlinear Control in the Year 2000, Lecture
Notes in Control and Information Sciences, vol. 2, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 2000, pp. 443468.
[20] W.Y. Chiu, G.M. Carratt, D.S. Soong, A computer model for the gel
eect in free-radical polymerization, Macromolecules 16 (3) (1983)
348.
[21] F.G. Shinskey, Process Control Systems, third ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1988.
[22] H.K. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems, third ed., Prentice-Hall, New Jersey,
2002.
[23] F. Allgower, A. Zheng (Eds.), Nonlinear Model Predictive Control,
Birkhauser, Germany, 2000.
[24] R.E. Kalman, When is a linear control system optimal? Trans. ASME
Ser. D: J. Basic Eng. 86 (1964) 1.
[25] P.J. Flory, Principles of Polymer Chemistry, Cornell University Press,
New York, 1953.
[26] J.A. Biesenberger, D.H. Sebastian, Principles of Polymerization
Engineering, Wiley, New York, 1983.
[27] J. Alvarez, Nonlinear state estimation with robust convergence, J.
Proc. Cont. 10 (2000) 59.
[28] T. Lopez, J. Alvarez, On the eect of the estimation structure in the
functioning of a nonlinear copolymer reactor estimator, J. Proc.
Cont. 14 (2004) 99.
[29] R. Hermann, A.J. Krener, Nonlinear controllability and observability, IEEE Trans. Auto. Control. AC-22 5 (1977) 728.
rez, J. Alvarez, A. Morales, An adaptive cascade
[30] J.J. Alvarez-Ram
control for a class of chemical reactors, Int. J. Adapt. Cont. Signal
Process. 16 (2002) 681.
[31] R.T. Stefani, C.J. Savant Jr., B. Shahian, G.H. Hostetter, Design of
Feedback Control Systems, third ed., Saunders College Publishing,
Florida, 1994.
[32] J. LaSalle, S. Lefschetz, Stability by Lyapunovs Direct Method,
Academic, New York, 1961.
[33] W.L. Luyben, Process Modeling, second ed.Simulation and Control
for Chemical Engineers, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1990.
[34] J.J. Dazzo, C.H. Houpis, Linear Control System Analysis and
Design, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1981.