Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

DOI 10.1007/s11012-015-0259-0

Multivariable optimal control of an industrial nonlinear

boilerturbine unit
Hamed Moradi . Gholamreza Vossoughi

Received: 1 April 2015 / Accepted: 7 August 2015 / Published online: 18 August 2015
Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Abstract Performance control of a boilerturbine tracking of farther operating points (generally). Also,
unit is of great importance due to demands for the it is investigated that the designed optimal controller
economical operations of power plants and environ- guarantees the robust performance of the system in the
mental awareness. In this paper, an optimal control presence of model parametric uncertainties.
strategy is designed to achieve the desired perfor-
mance of a boilerturbine unit. A multivariable Keywords Boilerturbine unit  Nonlinear model 
nonlinear model of a utility boilerturbine unit is Multivariable optimal control  Tracking  Parametric
considered. By manipulation of valves position for the uncertainty
fuel, steam and feed-water flows; output variables
including the drum pressure, electric output and fluid
List of symbols
density (and consequently drum water level) are
a Nonlinear function in state space
controlled. Performance measure of the problem is
acs Steam quality
defined such that the control efforts are minimized
H1 H-infinity robust technique
while the tracking objectives are obtained. In devel-
H Hamiltonian function
opment of the optimal control strategy, the variation
I Identity matrix
of extremal approach is used as an effective tool to
J Performance measure (objective function)
handle the nonlinear uncertain problems. Tracking
pi i-th Component of P (i = 1, 2, 3)
performance of the system is investigated and com-
P Co-state vector
pared for three cases; tracking from a specific oper-
ating point to another near, far and farther P~x State influence matrix
operating point (depending on the distance between P~p Co-state influence matrix
the operating points, the qualitative phrases near, qe Evaporation rate (kg/s)
far and farther are used). According to the results qi i-th Component of Q (i = 1, 2, 3)
obtained, more control efforts are required for the Q A real symmetric positive semi-definite matrix
ri i-th Component of R (i = 1, 2, 3)
R A real symmetric positive definite matrix
H. Moradi (&)  G. Vossoughi t Time (s)
Centre of Excellence in Design, Robotics and t0 Initial time
Automation, School of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif tf Final time
University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
u1 Valve position of fuel flow
e-mail: hamedmoradi@sharif.edu;
hamedmoradi@asme.org u2 Valve position of steam control

123
860
u3 Valve position of feed-water flow
ui Optimal control signals in terms of state and co-
state variables (i = 1, 2, 3)
U Control input vector
xi i-th State variable
X State vector
Xd Desired state vector
y1 Drum pressure (kg f/cm2) (y1 = x1)
y2 Electric output (MW) (y2 = x2)
y3 Fluid density (kg/m3) (y3 = x3)
y4 Drum water level (m)
j Output yi at the operating point # j
yi
d Parameter taking a small value
wi A nonlinear function (i = 1, 2)
1 Introduction
Industrial boilerturbine units are extensively used for
the steam generation as a source of power or for
achieving heating capabilities in thermal plants. These
units are complex nonlinear systems due to dynamic
interaction between their various components such as
furnace, evaporator, super-heaters, economizer,
attemperator and drum. Two configurations can be
realized for the electricity generation [1]. In the first
one, as called the boilerturbine unit, the steam is
produced by a single boiler and is fed to a single
turbine as shown in Fig. 1 [2]. In the second one,
several boilers generate the total steam conducted to a
Fig. 1 Schematic of the
boilerturbine unit [2]
123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
collector and then distributed to the several turbines.
Since the boilerturbine units show quick responses
for electricity demand from a power network, they are
preferred to collector type systems [1].
Several dynamic models of the boiler system have
been developed. In the early works, dynamic mod-
elling of a boilerturbine unit based on data logs,
parameter estimation [3, 4], system identification [5],
and simplification of the nonlinear models [6] have
been done. Also, several simulation packages such as
the SYNSIM for steam plants [7], and simulation of
large boilers with natural recirculation [8] have been
carried out. Using the basic conservation rules, a
model for water level dynamics in natural circulation
of drum-type boilers has been developed [9].
Using physical principles and neural networks,
dynamic nonlinear modelling of power plant has been
investigated [10, 11]. Also, various nonlinear models
have been presented based on the data logs and
parameter estimation [1214] and identification of the
boilerturbine system based on a new fuzzy method
[15]. Recently, using fuzzy-neural network methods,
modelling of a 1000 MW power plant including ultra
super-critical boiler system [16] and numerical sim-
ulations of a small-scale biomass boiler unit [17] has
been performed.
Recently, stability analysis for the simple dynamic
modelling of a steam boiler drum [18]; development of
various simulation packages for steam plants with
natural and controlled recirculation (e.g., [19]) and
using a computational model for minimizing the fuel
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
and environmental costs of a 310 MW fuel oil fired
boiler have been investigated [20].
To have an appropriate performance of the boiler
turbine unit for large changes in the operating
conditions, effective control systems must be devel-
oped. Various control methods have been used for the
boiler or boilerturbine controller design. In the early
works, linear optimal regulators [21] and decoupling
controller [22] for performance control of the boiler
turbine units have been designed. Also, multivariable
long-range predictive control based on local model
networks [23], fuzzy based control systems for the
thermal power plants [24, 25] and neuro-fuzzy
network modelling and PI control of a steam-boiler
system [26] have been presented. A loop-by-loop
approach for the water circulation control during the
start-up process of a once-through boiler [27] and life
extending control of the boilerturbine units by model
predictive methods [28] have been investigated.
In some other works, a linear controller is designed
for the nonlinear model of the boilerturbine units. For
this purpose, nonlinearity is avoided by selecting the
appropriate operating zones such that the linear
controller can perform effectively [1, 2]. In other
works, by constituting a linear parameter varying
model of the nonlinear boilerturbine unit, gain-
scheduled optimal control [29] and approximate
dynamic feedback linearization [30] have been
applied. For the robust performance of boilerturbine
units, locally robust intelligent supervisory system
[31], a controller based on adaptive Grey predictor
algorithm [32], backstepping-based nonlinear adap-
tive control [33], sliding mode and H? robust
controllers have been designed [3437]. Also, the
optimum robust minimum-order observer has been
designed for the robust state estimation of the process
and improving its performance [38].
For a wide range of operating conditions, conven-
tional proportionalintegralderivative (PID)/propor-
tionalintegral (PI) type controllers and linear
multivariable controllers based on linear quadratic
Gaussian (LQG)/linear quadratic regulator (LQR)
theory cannot result in a satisfactory performance.
On the other hand, in the nonlinear models of the
boilerturbine unit, the estimation and rejection of the
disturbance is a great challenge. In spite of the public
concern regarding the high energy consumption,
limited number of works has been devoted to reduce
861
the energy consumption in steam power plants [21,
29].
In this paper, an optimal control strategy is applied
to obtain the appropriate performance of a boiler
turbine unit. A multivariable nonlinear model of the
unit is considered. Drum pressure, electric output and
fluid density (and consequently drum water level) are
controlled in their desired values by manipulation of
the valve positions for the fuel, steam and feed-water
mass rates. The related performance measure for the
tracking objectives with minimum required control
efforts (and consequently less energy consumption) is
defined.
An algorithm based on variation of extremals is
developed in MATLAB to solve the two-point
boundary-value problem. Tracking performance of
the system is investigated for three cases; from a
specific operating point to another near, far and
farther operating points (depending on the distance
between the operating points, the qualitative phrases
near, far and farther are used). Control efforts and
performance measure are compared for these cases. In
addition, it is investigated that in the presence of
model parametric uncertainties, designed optimal
controller guarantees the robust performance of the
system.
In this paper, the optimal control strategy is used to
keep the control efforts (fuel, steam and feed-water
mass flow rates) as small as possible while the tracking
objectives are also guaranteed. This method and
implementation of the variation of extremal
approach as an effective tool to handle the nonlinear
uncertain problems has not been addressed in the
previous works of this area.
2 Process description and nonlinear dynamic
model of the system
As shown in Fig. 1 [2], a water-tube boiler is
considered in which the preheated water is fed into
the steam drum and flows through the down-comers
into the mud drum. Passing through the risers, water is
heated and changed to the saturation condition. This
saturated mixer of steam and water enters the steam
drum. There, the steam is separated from the water and
flows into the primary and secondary super-heaters.
Then, the steam is heated more and is fed into the
123
862
header. There is a spray attemperator between the two
super-heaters that regulates the steam temperature by
mixing the low temperature water with the steam from
the primary super-heater.
In this paper, the nonlinear dynamic model of a
boilerturbine unit presented by Bell and Astrom is
used [13]. Parameters of this model were estimated by
data measurement from the Synvendska Kraft AB
Plant in Malmo, Sweden. The original dynamic model
of this plant has been widely used since 1987 for
various research purposes. This plant is still in use
without any change for the current researches of
20132015.
As shown in Fig. 2 [29], output variables are
denoted by y1 for the drum pressure (kg f/
cm2 = 98.06806 kPa), y2 for the electric output
(MW) and y4 for the drum water level (m); while the
fluid density (kg/m3) as y3 is not shown. Input
variables are denoted by u1, u2 and u3 for the valves
position of fuel flow, steam control, and feed-water
flow, respectively. Dynamics of this 160 MW oil-fired
unit is given in state space representation as [13]:
9=8
x_1 0:0018 u2 x1 0:9 u1  0:15 u3
9=8
x_2 0:073 u2  0:016 x1  0:1 x2
1
x_3 141 u3  1:1 u2  0:19 x1 =85
y1 x1 ; y2 x2 ; y3 x3
The details of mathematical background of the applied
thermodynamics laws, related formulation simplifica-
tion and discussions have been presented in [13]. The
output vector is defined as y x1 x2 x3 y4 T , as given
by Eq. (1), while the drum water level (y4) is given in
terms of the steam quality acs and evaporation rate qe
(kg/s) as:
Fig. 2 Multi-input multi-output (MIMO) model of the boilerturbine unit [29]
123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
 qe 
y4 0:05 0:13073x3 100acs  67:975
9
2
where
1  0:001538x3 0:8x1  25:6
acs
x3 1:0394  0:00123404 x1
qe 0:854u2  0:147x1 45:59u1  2:514u3  2:096
and due to actuator limitations, control inputs and their
rates are limited to the following constraint:
0  ui  1
0:007  u_ 1  0:007
3
2  u_ 2  0:02
0:05  u_ 3  0:05 i 1; 2; 3
Table 1 gives some typical operating points of the Bell
and Astrom model where the midpoint operating
condition coincides with the operating point # 4 [13].
3 Optimal control design based on variation
of extremals
For proper performance of the boilerturbine unit,
control system must satisfy some requirements
according to the varying operating conditions and
load demands. Electricity output must be followed by
the variation in demands from a power network.
Although the amount of steam demanded by the users
is varied, the steam pressure of the collector must be
maintained constant. Also, to prevent overheating of
the drum components or flooding of the steam lines,
the amount of water in the steam drum must be kept
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875 863

Table 1 Typical operating #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7

points of the Bell and
Astrom model [13]; in x1 75.6 86.4 97.2 108 118.8 129.6 140.4
which the drum pressure
x2 25.27 36.65 50.52 66.65 85.06 105.8 128.9
(x1) unit is kg f/cm2, while
1 kg f/cm2 x3 299.6 342.4 385.2 428 470.8 513.6 556.4
= 98.06806 kPa y4 -0.97 -0.65 -0.32 0 0.32 0.64 0.98
u1 0.156 0.209 0.271 0.34 0.418 0.505 0.6
u2 0.483 0.552 0.621 0.69 0.759 0.828 0.897
u3 0.183 0.256 0.34 0.433 0.543 0.663 0.793

constant. On the other hand, the steam temperature nonlinear coupled dynamics (Eq. 1), the effect of all
must be maintained at the desired level to prevent state variables must be included in the objective
overheating of the super-heaters and to prevent the wet function.
steam entering turbines [29]. In addition, the physical Weighting factors Q and R are real symmetric
constraints exerted on the actuators must be satisfied positive semi-definite and positive definite matrices,
by the control signals. These constraints are the respectively. Consider these weight factors as:
magnitude and saturation rate for the control valves of 2 3 2 3
q1 0 0 r1 0 0
the fuel, steam and feed-water flows [as given by
Q 4 0 q2 0 5; R 4 0 r2 0 5 5
Eq. (3)].
0 0 q3 0 0 r3
In this section, variational techniques are used to
derive the necessary conditions for optimal control. and state equations of the system given by Eq. (1) in
In general, the variational approaches lead to a the form of X_ aX; U. Therefore, Hamiltonian of
nonlinear two-point boundary-value problem that the system is constituted as (for more details see [39]):
cannot be solved analytically to obtain the optimal
control law or even an optimal open-loop control HXt;Pt;Ut X T QX U T RU PT a
3 h
X i
[39].
qi xi t2 ri ui t2
It is assumed that the final time tf is fixed (chosen as i1
arbitrary practical values in simulations) and the state n o
p1 t 0:0018u2 tx1 t9=8 0:9u1 t  0:15u3 t
variables are not constrained by any boundaries while n o
the control efforts must satisfy 0  ui  1i 1; 2; 3 p2 t 0:073u2 t  0:016x1 t9=8  0:1x2 t
[as given by Eq. (3)]. To maintain the drum pressure,
p3 t f141u3 t  1:1u2 t  0:19x1 tg=85
electric output and fluid density close to their desired
steady-state values without expending the large 6
amount of control efforts, performance measure to where P = [p1 p2 p3]T is the co-state vector which is
be minimized is defined as: found from the co-state equations as:
Z n
tf   oH 1=8
J X T QX U T RU dt 4 p_ 1 
ox1
 2 q1 x1  0:002025 p1 u2 x1
0 
9 1=8 p3
where X = [x1 x2 x3]T and U = [u1 u2 u3]T are the p2 0:073 u2  0:016 x1  1:1 u2  0:19
8 85
state and control vectors, respectively. According to oH
Eq. (1), the output variables are defined as y1 for the p_ 2  f2 q2 x2  0:1 p2 g
ox2
drum pressure, y2 for the electric output and y3 for the oH
fluid density. On the other hand, with definition of p_ 3  2 q3 x3
ox3
X = [x1 x2 x3]T in optimization process, the drum 7
pressure, the electric power and the fluid density are
desired to be tracked in the commanded set paths Using the variational approach, another necessary
while the control efforts U = [u1 u2 u3]T are mini- condition that must be satisfied for the unbounded
mized. Since dynamics of the boilerturbine unit is a control effort is:

123
864 Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

o H Xt; Pt; Ut 3.1 Variation of extremals algorithm

0 8
oUt
Each trajectory generated by the variation of extremals
which leads to the following expressions for the algorithm is extremal because the algorithm satisfies
optimal control signals in terms of the state and co- Eqs. (1), (7) and (8). In addition to the reduced state/
state variables: co-state equations mentioned above, there are two set
0:9 of differential equations to find the influence function
u1 t  p1 t matrices (which are used in evaluation of the guessed
2 r1
1 initial co-state vector of the algorithm). State and co-
u2 t w t state influence matrices (P~x and P~p ) are defined as
2 r2 1
  [39]:
1 141
u3 t 0:15p1 t  p3 t
2 r3 84 oXt
P~x Pi t0 ; t
where oPt0
11
w1 t 0:0018 p1 t x1 t9=8  0:073 p2 t x1 t9=8 oPt
P~p Pi t0 ; t
1:1 oPt0
x1 t p3 t
85 Differentiating from Eq. (10) with respect to P(t0) and
9 using the chain rule and remembering the necessary
Although the condition qH/qU = 0 [given by conditions X_ oH=oP and P_ oH=oX; yields the
Eq. (8)] is not valid to use for the bounded control set of differential equations for the state/co-state
signals [given by Eq. (3)], it is shown in the results that influence matrices as:
this assumption is correct for this problem since the  2   2 
~_ i o H ~ oH
control signals themselves are found positive values in Px P t0 ; t t Px t P~p
oPoX i oP2 i
the developed algorithm. For the values [1 (ui [ 1),  2   2 
o H ~x  o H t P~p
the value of ui 1 are used. Substituting ui t; i P~_ p Pi t0 ; t  t P
1; 2; 3 from Eq. (9) into Eqs. (1) and (7) results in oX 2 i oXoP i
reduced state and co-state equations as: 12

8
> 0:0009 9=8 0:405 0:075
>
> x_1  w2 x1  p1  0:15 p1  1:659 p3 
>
> r2 r1 r3
>
>  
< 0:0365 9=8
x_2 w2  0:016 x1  0:1 x2
>
> r 2
>
>  
>
> 0:8294 0:00647
>
: x_3 0:15 p1  1:659 p3   w2  0:00223 x1
r3 r2
8
> 0:5 1=8 10
>
< p_ 1 2 q1 x1 r w1 w2 0:018 p2 x1  0:00223 p3
2
>
> p_ 2 q2 x2 0:1 p2
: 2
p_ 3 2 q3 x3
where
1:1
w2 t 0:0020 p1 t x1 t1=8  0:082 p2 t x1 t1=8 p3 t
85

123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
where for the simplicity, P~x Pi t0 ; t and
P~p Pi t0 ; t are denoted by P~x and P~p , respectively.
Influence function matrices can be obtained by
integrating Eq. (12) and reduced state/co-state differ-
ential equations (Eq. 10) simultaneously. The appro-
priate initial conditions for the influence function
equations are:
oXt0
P~x Pi t0 ; t0 0 n  n zero matrix
oPt0 Pi t0
oPt0
P~p Pi t0 ; t0 I n  n identity matrix
oPt i
0 P t0
The procedure used in the variation of extremals
algorithm is explained as [39]:
1. By solving the condition o H=oU 0 for U(t) in
terms of X(t) and P(t) (Eq. 9), and substituting the
result in the state and co-state equations (Eqs. 1
and 7); reduced differential equations of the
system are governed (Eq. 10).
2. Initial value of the co-state vector P(0)(t0) is
guessed; in which the iteration index is set to zero
(i.e., P(i=0)(t0) is guessed).
3. Using initial conditions as P(t0) = P(i)(t0) and
X(t0) = X0, and integrating the reduced state/co-
state equations and the influence function equa-
tions (Eq. 12) with initial conditions given by
Eq. (13) from t0 to tf; yields the final values of
P(i)(tf), X(i)(tf) and the n 9 n matrices
P~x Pi t0 ; tf and P~p Pi t0 ; tf .
4. It must be checked to see if the termination
criterion jjXtf  Xd jj\d is satisfied; where Xd is
the desirable state vector that must be tracked in
tracking problem and Xd = 0 for the regulation
problem. If this condition is not satisfied, initial
value of the co-state vector for the next stage
Fig. 3 Closed-loop control system of the boilerturbine unit
865
(P(i?1)(t0)) is determined from the following
iterative equation:
1
pi1 t0 pi t0  P~x pi t0 ; tf : 
xi tf  0
14
Using Eq. (6), coefficients of the state and co-state
influence matrices (P~x and P~p ) in Eq. (12) are evalu-
ated, as given in Appendix (o2 H oPoX, o2 H oP2
and o2 H oX 2 ).
4 Simulation of the control design, results
13 and discussion
The schematic of the closed-loop control system of the
boilerturbine unit is shown in Fig. 3. It is assumed
that all state variables are measured by related sensors
or are estimated by using an observer (the observer can
be designed with a straightforward procedure as
discussed in a previous work [38]; not explained in
this paper). In this section, to improve the boiler
turbine unit performance, regulation and tracking
problems are investigated. For tracking problem, three
cases from a nominal operating point to near, far
and farther operating points are considered. In all
next simulation results, the drum pressure (x1) unit is
kg f/cm2, while 1 kg f/cm2 = 98.06806 kPa.
4.1 Regulator design
The operating point # 4 is considered as the median
nominal operating point (in which the water level of
drum is set to zero). In this paper, y(j)
i represents the
output yi at the operating point #j. For the regulation
problem, states and control weighting factors in the
performance measure are selected as Q I33 and
R 50  I33 . Initial value of the co-state vector is
123
866 Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

Fig. 4 Variation of the

performance measure (J) for
the regulation problem around
the operating point # 4,
x4 108; 66:65 ; 428

Fig. 5 Variation of the

optimal state variables
around the operating point #
4, x4 108; 66:65 ; 428
(given in Table 1), for the
disturbance of D x4 0
10:8; 6:665; 42:8 (10 % of
x4 )

123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
Fig. 6 Variation of the
valves position for fuel flow
(Du1 ), steam flow (Du2 ) and
feed-water flow (Du3 ) for
disturbance rejection
(Dx4 0) around the
operating point # 4, x4
108; 66:65 ; 428 (given in
Table 1)
considered as P(0)(0) = [1 1 1]T. The variation of
extremals algorithm developed in MATLAB is used to
minimize the performance measure given by Eq. (4)
with the procedure as discussed in previous section. As
shown in Fig. 4, after five iterations, performance
measure is minimized with the optimum value of

Jregulation 5:07  103 (D x4 0 0:1 x4 0). in Table 1. So the output variables must be changed
Figure 5 shows the variation of optimal trajectories
(Dxi ; i 1; 2; 3) with the 10 % disturbance around the
operating point # 4; x4 108; 66:65 ; 428 (as given
in Table 1). Figure 6 shows the required optimal
variation of the valves position for the fuel, steam and
feed-water flows (Dui ; i 1; 2; 3) for disturbance
rejection around the operating point # 4.
The final non-zero steady values for Dui must be
exerted to keep the states of the system at the operating
point # 4 after the states regulation (the steady values
of Du1 0:34; Du2 0:69; Du3 0:433 are in agree-
ment with those given in Table 1 for the operating
point # 4).
4.2 Tracking controller design
Depending on the amount of electricity needed by the
network or power grids, power plant must be able to
867
switch between the several operating points. In this
section, optimal controller is designed for three cases
of tracking from operating point # 4 to # 5 (near), # 4
to # 7 (far) and # 1 to # 7 (farther). For instance,
dynamic system is expected to move from the
operating point # 4 to the operating point # 5, as given
as:
4 5
y1 108 ! y1 118:8
4 5
y2 66:65 ! y2 85:06 15
4 5
y3 428 ! y3 470:8
In all results of this section, drum pressure
(y1 = x1), electric output (y2 = x2) and fluid density
(y3 = x3) are considered as the output variables. The
value of drum water level can be evaluated by Eq. (2)
(to prevent elaboration, this variable is not shown in
results of simulation; while the perfect control is
achieved for that).
An algorithm based on variation of extremals is
developed in MATLAB for tracking optimal controller
design. For this purpose, states and control weighting
factors are selected as Q I33 and R 50  I33
and initial value of the co-state vector is considered as
P(0)(t0 = 0) = [1 1 1]T. Similar to the regulator case
123
868 Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

Fig. 7 Optimal trajectory

for the drum pressure x1
(kg f/cm2) from operating
point # 4 to # 5 (near), # 4 to
# 7 (far) and # 1 to # 7
(farther)

Fig. 8 Optimal trajectory

for the electric output x2
(MW) from operating point
# 4 to # 5 (near), # 4 to # 7
(far) and # 1 to # 7 (farther)

123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875 869

Fig. 9 Optimal trajectory

for the fluid density x3 (kg/
m3) from operating point # 4
to # 5 (near), # 4 to # 7 (far)
and # 1 to # 7 (farther)

Fig. 10 Fuel flow optimal

control (u1 ) from operating
point # 4 to # 5 (near), # 4 to
# 7 (far) and # 1 to # 7
(farther)

123
870 Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

Fig. 11 Steam flow optimal

control (u2 ) from operating
point # 4 to # 5 (near), # 4 to
# 7 (far) and # 1 to # 7
(farther)

Fig. 12 Feed-water flow

optimal control (u3 ) from
operating point # 4 to # 5
(near), # 4 to # 7 (far) and # 1
to # 7 (farther)

123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875 871

Fig. 13 Optimal trajectories of drum pressure (x1 ), electric (with an arbitrary 20 % uncertainty in all parameters of the
output (x2 ) and fluid density (x3 ) from operating point # 4 to # 7 model). (Color figure online)
(far) for nominal (black dots) and uncertain plant (blue circles)

(Fig. 4), optimum values of the performance measure

for near, far and farther cases are found as Jnear
3  
6:1  10 , Jfar 1:15  10 and Jfarther 4:23  104 ,
4 feed-water flow (u3 ) for mentioned tracking objectives
respectively (not shown). As expected physically, for
farther tracking objectives, optimum values of the
performance measure are greater.
Figures 7, 8 and 9 show the optimal trajectory for
the drum pressure x1 (kg f/cm2), electric output x2
(MW) and fluid density x3 (kg/m3); respectively from
the operating point # 4 to # 5 (near), # 4 to # 7 (far) and
# 1 to # 7 (farther). The required variation of valve
positions for the fuel flow (u1 ), steam flow (u2 ) and
are shown in Figs. 10, 11 and 12, respectively.
According to Figs. 10 and 11, more fuel flow and
steam flow are required for the farther tracking
objectives. However, according to Fig. 12, the
required feed-water flows for the near and far
tracking objectives are approximately equal (while as
expected, it is greater for the farther case).

123
872
Fig. 14 Fuel flow (u1 ),
steam flow (u2 ) and feed-
water flow (u3 ) optimal
controls from operating
point # 4 to # 7 (far) for
nominal (black) and
uncertain plants (blue) (with
an arbitrary 20 %
uncertainty in all parameters
of the model). (Color figure
online)
Similar to the regulator case, the final non-zero
steady values for ui (after 400 s) must be exerted to
keep the states of the system at the desired final
operating points; after accomplishment of the tracking
command.
As a practical remark, in general, the heat and mass
transfer is a time consuming process in thermal
systems and the boiler unit of power plant is not an
exception (e.g., perfect tracking is obtained in 400 s in
Fig. 12). Achievement of a faster response associates
with the larger magnitudes of control inputs that may
not be practical. Moreover, it is well-known in control
theory that as the settling time of response is decreased
(tf), more oscillatory behaviour is expected. In this
paper, and as discussed on Eq. (4), the objective
Rt
function J is defined such that J 0f X T QX same model. In other words, when the proposed
U T RU dt is minimized for a given practical value
of tf. Therefore, the problem is not solved for making
the tf shorter. Under such condition and for a given
value of tf, while it is desired to minimize the control
efforts, a monotonic response for the state variables
can be expected (as it is observed in the previous
related figures).
123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
To investigate the controller robustness, an arbi-
trary 20 % random uncertainty in all parameters of
the model is considered [coefficients of Eqs. (10)].
Figures 13 and 14 show the optimal trajectories and
required control efforts for tracking from e.g., the
operating point # 4 to # 7 (far) for nominal and
uncertain plants. As it is shown, generally with
exerting more control efforts, optimal controller
guarantees the robust performance of the system
against possible parametric uncertainties (in compar-
ison with the nominal model).
In addition, less control efforts are observed in this
research, in comparison with the previous work [40]
where the nonlinear controller based on feedback
linearization and gain-scheduling was designed for the
optimal control strategy is applied, the valve positions
for the fuel flow (u1 ), steam flow (u2 ) and feed-water
flow (u3 ) are changed in a such way that less amount of
the fuel flow, steam flow and feed-water flow are
required to guarantee the desired control tracking
objectives (in comparison with the feedback lineariza-
tion and gain scheduling approaches used in [40]).
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
For example, comparing the results of control
signals (u1, u2, u3) for the tracking objective from
operating point # 4 to # 7 (as shown in Figs. 10, 11, 12)
with the same results of [40], reveals that the fuel flow
(u1), steam flow (u2) and feed-water flow (u3) are
saved about 8, 7 and 11 %, respectively. These indices
have been determined by the calculation of
R
jui tj dt; i 1; 2; 3 and their comparison, over measure is defined. To solve the two-point boundary-
the interval time of simulations, i.e., 480 s.
Finally, regarding the comparison of linear and
nonlinear models, for the considered tracking objectives
(e.g., tracking from the operating point # 4 to # 7),
reliable results for the linear model are not obtained
because the model is linearized around the e.g., operat-
ing point # 4. Then, the control strategy is designed for
this specific dynamics and used over the path of tracking
from # 4 to # 7. This is not a robust optimal design for the
mentioned linearization. One approach is to linearize the
model dynamics around its instantaneous state variables
X = [x1 x2 x3]T. This approach is called gain-schedul-
ing. This method was already applied on Bell-Astrom
model and its results were compared with the feedback
linearization approach [40].
According to the results obtained in [40], using
feedback linearization approach led to the more quick
time responses with a bit more overshoots (in compar-
ison with the gain-scheduling method). In addition, in
feedback linearization strategy, input control signals
(valves position) actuated in less time with less oscil-
lations. It is observed that in the presence of an arbitrary
random uncertainty in model parameters, the controller
designed based on feedback linearization is more robust.
As a final practical remark, the behaviour of boiler
turbine unit is described through the first-order
nonlinear differential equations in which the state
variables (x1, x2, x3) are coupled dynamically [given
by Eq. (1)]. Time constants can be calculated in single
inputsingle output (SISO) systems easily. For this
nonlinear multivariable coupled dynamics, definition
of time constants is not possible. One approach is to
linearize and transfer the equations given by Eq. (1)
into a new decoupled space. Then, three time constants
for three decoupled SISO systems can be found.
5 Conclusions
In this paper, an optimal control strategy is designed to
improve the performance of a multivariable nonlinear
873
model of the boilerturbine unit. Drum pressure,
electric output and fluid density (and consequently
water level of drum) are controlled in the desired set-
points by manipulating of the valve positions for the
fuel, steam and feed-water flow rates. To obtain the
desired tracking objectives with the minimum
required control efforts, an appropriate performance
value problem, an algorithm based on the variation of
extremals is developed in MATLAB environment.
Depending on the amount of electricity needed by the
network or power grids, the power-plant must be able to
switch between the several operating points. By apply-
ing the optimal controller, system moves from one
operating point to another one (near, far and farther
operating point) with an appropriate time response of
output variables. Finally, it is assumed that the dynamic
model of boilerturbine system is associated with model
parametric uncertainties. Results show that in the
presence of model uncertainties, designed optimal
controller guarantees the robust performance of the
system. Due to robustness with low energy consump-
tion, application of the proposed control strategy is
economical in the real world.
Finally, it should be mentioned that the designed
optimal robust control can be applied on any other
industrial boilerturbine unit. In fact, all the design
steps for the proposed control strategy can be followed
in a similar procedure, provided that the dynamic model
of the boilerturbine unit has been already extracted
(e.g., from the empirical methods based on data logs of
inputoutput variables). Moreover, in this research, the
optimal robust control of the nonlinear system dynam-
ics is presented. As a future research, some other
important aspects of the boiler control such as the boiler
life and environmental emissions can be investigated.
Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge the National
Elite Foundation of Iran for supporting this research.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest There is no conflict of interest.
Appendix
Using Eq. (6), coefficients of state and co-state
influence matrices (P~x and P~p ) in Eq. (12) are
evaluated as:
123
874 Meccanica (2016) 51:859875

2 1=8 9=8 3
 2  0:0020 x1 w1 0:0018 x1 w2 0 0  T
oH 6 7 o2 H
4 0:0821 x1=8 w1  0:073 x9=8 w2  0:018 x1=8 0:1 0 5
oPoX 1 1 1 oXoP
0:01294 w1 x1 w2 0:00223 0 0
2 6 5
3
0:405 1:62  10 9=4 0:01125 6:57  10 9=4 1:16  105 17=8 0:1244
6 r1 r2
x1
r3

r2
x1
r2
x1 
r3 7
 2  6 7
oH 6 4 7
6 0:00266 9=4 4:72  10 17=8 7
6 sym: x1  x1 7
oP 2 6 r2 r2 7
6 7
4 8:372  10 5
1:376 5
2
sym: sym: x1
r2 r3 symmetric
2 7=8
3
 2  2 q1  r2 w22 w1 w3  0:00225 p2 x1 0 0
oH 6 7
40 2 q2 0 5
oX 2
0 0 2 q3
16

where,
  7=78:8
w3 2:531  104 p1  0:01026p2 x1 17
and w1, w2 are given by Eqs. (9) and (10).
References
1. Tan W, Marquez HJ, Chen T, Liu J (2005) Analysis and
control of a nonlinear boilerturbine unit. J Process Control
15:883891
2. Tan W, Fang F, Tian L, Fu C, Liu J (2008) Linear control of
a boilerturbine unit: analysis and design. ISA Trans
47:189197
3. Donate PD, Moiola JL (1994) Model of a once-through
boiler for dynamic studies. Latin Am Appl Res 24:159166
4. Lo KL, Zeng PL, Marchand E, Pinkerton A (1990) Mod-
elling and state estimation of power plant steam turbines.
IEEE Proc Part C 137(2):8094
5. Murty VV, Sreedhar R, Fernandez B, Masada GY, Hill AS
(1993) Boiler system identification using sparse neural
networks. In: Proceedings of ASME Winter Meeting, New
Orleans, pp 103111
6. Astrom KJ, Eklund K (1972) A simplified nonlinear model
of a drum boiler turbine unit. Int J Control 16(1):145169
7. Rink R, White D, Chiu A, Leung R (1996) SYNSIM: A
computer simulation model for the Mildred Lake
steam/electrical system of Syncrude Canada Ltd. University
of Alberta, Edmonton
8. Adam EJ, Marchetti JL (1999) Dynamic simulation of large
boilers with natural recirculation. J Comput Chem Eng
23:10311040
9. Kim H, Choi S (2005) A model on water level dynamics in
natural circulation drum-type boilers. Int Commun Heat
Mass Transf 32:786796
10. Kouadri A, Namoun A, Zelmat M (2013) Modelling the
nonlinear dynamic behaviour of a boilerturbine system
using a radial basis function neural network. Int J Robust
Nonlinear Control 24:18731886
11. Rusinowski H, Stanek W (2007) Neural modelling of steam
boilers. J Energy Convers Manag 48:28022809
12. Moon UC, Lee KY (2011) An adaptive dynamic matrix
control with fuzzy-interpolated step-response model for a
drum-type boilerturbine system. IEEE Trans Energy
Convers 26(2):393401
13. Bell RD, Astrom KJ (1987) Dynamic models for boiler
turbine-alternator units: data logs and parameter estimation
for a 160 MW unit. In: Technical Report LUTFD2/(TFRT-
3192)/1-137; Department of Automatic Control, Lund
Institute of Technology, Lund, Sweden
14. Astrom KJ, Bell RD (2000) Drum-boiler dynamics. J Autom
36:363378
15. Li C, Zhou J, Li Q, An X, Xiang X (2010) A new TS fuzzy-
modeling approach to identify a boilerturbine system.
Expert Syst Appl 37(3):22142221
16. Liu XJ, Kong XB, Hou GL, Wang JH (2013) Modeling of a
1000 MW power plant ultra super-critical boiler system
using fuzzy-neural network methods. Energy Convers
Manag 65:518527
17. Collazo J, Porteiro J, Mguez JL, Granada E, Gomez MA
(2012) Numerical simulation of a small-scale biomass
boiler. Energy Convers Manag 64:8796

123
Meccanica (2016) 51:859875
18. Bracco S, Troilo M, Trucco A (2009) A simple dynamic
model and stability analysis of a steam boiler drum. Proc
Inst Mech Eng Part A: J Power Energy 223(7):809820
19. Aranda E, Frye M, Chunjiang Q (2008) Model develop-
ment, state estimation, and controller design of a nonlinear
utility boiler system. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Interna-
tional Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT08),
Sichuan University, Chengdu, China, Article # 4608412,
pp 16
20. Kouprianov VI, Kaewboonsong W (2004) Modeling the
effects of operating conditions on fuel and environmental
costs for a 310 MW boiler firing fuel oil. Energy Convers
Manag 45(1):114
21. Yang S, Qian C (2009) Real-time optimal control of a
boilerturbine system using pseudospectral methods. In:
19th Annual Joint ISA POWID/EPRI Controls and Instru-
mentation Conference and 52nd ISA POWID Symposium,
Rosemont, Illinois, USA, Article # 477, pp 166177
22. Liu H, Li S, Chai T (2003) Intelligent decoupling control of
power plant main steam pressure and power output. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 25(10):809819
23. Liu X, Kong X (2013) Nonlinear fuzzy model predictive
iterative learning control for drum-type boilerturbine sys-
tem. J Process Control 23(8):10231040
24. Prokhorenkov AM, Sovlukov AS (2002) Fuzzy models in
control systems of boiler aggregate technological processes.
J Comput Stand Interfaces 24:151159
25. Kocaarslan I, Ertugrul C, Tiryaki H (2006) A fuzzy logic
controller application for thermal power plants. J Energy
Convers Manag 47:442458
26. Thangavelusamy D, Ponnusamy I (2013) Elimination of
chattering using fuzzy sliding mode controller for drum
boiler turbine system. Control Eng Appl Inform 15(2):7885
27. Eitelberg E, Boje E (2004) Water circulation control during
once-through boiler start-up. J Control Eng Pract 12:
677685
28. Li D, Chen T, Marquez HJ, Gooden RK (2006) Life
extending control of boilerturbine systems via model
predictive methods. J Control Eng Pract 14:319326
29. Chen PC, Shamma JS (2004) Gain-scheduled l1-optimal
control for boilerturbine dynamics with actuator satura-
tion. J Process Control 14:263277
875
30. Yu T, Chan KW, Tong JP, Zhou B, Li DH (2010) Coordi-
nated robust nonlinear boilerturbine-generator control
systems via approximate dynamic feedback linearization.
J Process Control 20:365374
31. Abdennour A (2000) An intelligent supervisory system for
drum type boilers during severe disturbances. J Electr Power
Energy Syst 22:381387
32. Nanhua Y, Wentong M, Ming S (2006) Application of
adaptive Gray predictor based algorithm to boiler drum
level control. J Energy Convers Manag 47:29993007
33. Fang F, Wei L (2011) Backstepping-based nonlinear
adaptive control for coal-fired utility boilerturbine units.
J Appl Energy 88:814824
34. Moradi H, Bakhtiari-Nejad F, Saffar-Avval M (2009)
Robust control of an industrial boiler system; a comparison
between two approaches: sliding mode control & H?
technique. J Energy Convers Manag 50:14011410
35. Moradi H, Alasty A, Bakhtiari-Nejad F (2007) Control of a
nonlinear boilerturbine unit using two methods: gain
scheduling and feedback linearization. In: 2007 ASME
international mechanical engineering congress and exposi-
tion, IMECE2007-42945, November 1115, Seattle,
Washington, USA
36. Tan W, Marquez HJ, Chen T (2002) Multivariable robust
controller design for a boiler system. IEEE Trans Control
Syst Technol 10(5):735742
37. Moradi H, Saffar-Avval M, Bakhtiari-Nejad F (2012) Slid-
ing mode control of drum water level in an industrial boiler
unit with time varying parameters: a comparison with H?
robust control approach. J Process Control 22(10):1844
1855
38. Moradi H, Bakhtiari-Nejad F (2011) Improving boiler unit
performance using an optimum robust minimum-order
observer. J Energy Convers Manag 52(3):17281740
39. Kirk DE (1998) Optimal control theory. Dover Publications
Inc., Mineola
40. Moradi H, Alasty A, Saffar-Avval M, Bakhtiari-Nejad F
(2013) Multivariable control of an industrial boilerturbine
unit with nonlinear model: a comparison between gain
scheduling and feedback linearization approaches. Trans B:
Mech Eng J Sci Iran 20(5):14851498
123