International Journal of Systems Science

ISSN: 0020-7721 (Print) 1464-5319 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsys20

Guaranteed cost nonlinear tracking control of a

boiler-turbine unit: an LMI approach

Jie Wu , Sing Kiong Nguang , Jiong Shen , Guangyu Justin Liu & Yi Guo Li

To cite this article: Jie Wu , Sing Kiong Nguang , Jiong Shen , Guangyu Justin Liu & Yi Guo
Li (2010) Guaranteed cost nonlinear tracking control of a boiler-turbine unit: an LMI approach,
International Journal of Systems Science, 41:7, 889-895, DOI: 10.1080/00207720903480683

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207720903480683

Published online: 08 Jun 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 103

View related articles

Citing articles: 10 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsys20
International Journal of Systems Science
Vol. 41, No. 7, July 2010, 889–895

Guaranteed cost nonlinear tracking control of a boiler-turbine unit: an LMI approach

Jie Wua, Sing Kiong Nguangb, Jiong Shena*, Guangyu Justin Liuc and Yi Guo Lia
a
School of Energy and Environment, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China;
b
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand;
c
The Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
(Received 22 February 2009; final version received 3 November 2009)

This article addresses the problem of designing a guaranteed cost nonlinear state feedback tracking control for
a boiler-turbine unit. First, the nonlinear boiler-turbine is re-expressed as a linear system with norm bounded
uncertainties via a nonlinear transformation function. Then, based on this linear model a sufficient condition for
the existence of a guaranteed cost nonlinear state feedback tracking control is derived in terms of linear matrix
inequalities. The advantage of the proposed tracking control design is that only a simple nonlinear controller is
constructed and it does not involve feedback linearisation technique and complicated adaptive or fuzzy schemes.
An industrial boiler-turbine system is used to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed design as compared with
a linearised approach.
Keywords: optimal control; energy and power systems

1. Introduction (MIMO) nonlinear system (Tan, Marquez, Chen, and

A boiler-turbine system is an energy conversion device
which comprises of steam boiler and turbine. The aim
of a steam boiler is to transfer the input chemical
energy of fuel into the thermal energy that is directly
fed to a turbine. Nowadays, boiler-turbine systems are
the preferred electricity generation system, because of
their ability to meet electric demands much faster than
header systems. The following are the typical require-
ments of a boiler-turbine system control problem:
(1) Electric power output must meet the load
demand.
(2) The drum pressure must be kept within some
tolerances despite the load’s variations.
(3) The water level in the steam drum of the boiler
must be regulated at a desired level to prevent
overheating or flooding.
(4) The steam temperature must be maintained at
a desired level to prevent overheating or leaking
wet steam to turbines.
(5) The system’s constraints are imposed by
physical limits such as control valves’ con-
straints must be taken into considerations.
Typically, the steam temperature and the drum
water level are regulated tightly around a desired level
over the full operating range. Therefore, the above
requirements 3 and 4 can be treated as one. The boiler-
turbine control system is a multi-input multi-output
Liu 2005) and its state variables are strongly coupled.
The boiler-turbine unit has been widely studied in the
literature using various control techniques. In Kwon,
Kim, and Park (1989); Tan, Niu, and Liu (1999), an
H1 controller design is conducted for a linearised
boiler-turbine system. However, this design shows a
good system response as long as the change in
operating points is sufficiently small. In Dimeo and
Lee (1995), a genetic algorithm is used to find the ‘best’
proportional-integral gains and state feedback gains on
a linearised boiler-turbine system. The resulting con-
troller performs well over a well-defined range, but
cannot guarantee the robust performance over a wide
operating range. In Moon and Lee (2003), an online
self-organising fuzzy logic controller to a boiler-turbine
system of fossil power plant has been proposed. Fuzzy
rules are generated using the history of input–output
data and updated online by a self-organising proce-
dure. One of the drawbacks of this fuzzy approach is
that it requires a complicated online learning techni-
que. In Chen and Shamma (2004), a gain scheduling
control has been proposed for the nonlinear boiler-
turbine dynamics which is represented as a linear
parameter varying (LPV) form.
Although the aforementioned approaches provide a
design methodology to construct controllers for boiler-
turbine systems which guarantee closed-loop stability,
in practice, it is desirable to have a controller which
guarantees a certain level of performance as well.

*Corresponding author. Email: shenj@seu.edu.cn

ISSN 0020–7721 print/ISSN 1464–5319 online

ß 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/00207720903480683
http://www.informaworld.com
890 J. Wu et al.

One approach to handle such a problem is the so-called is an unknown matrix which is bounded with Lebesgue
guaranteed cost approach, and the approach has the measurable elements and satisfies
advantage of providing an upper bound on a given FT ðtÞFðtÞ  I, ð2:3Þ
performance index. In the past decade, for the
advantages of linear matrix inequalities (LMI) and where I denotes the identity matrix. The uncertainties
breakthrough of its solving approach, it has been are said to be admissible if they satisfy (2.2) and (2.3).
broadly used in the analysis and design of control Associating with the system (2.1), the quadratic
systems such as continuous-time uncertain system, performance cost is defined as follows:
Z1
discrete-time uncertain system and system with uncer-
tain time-delay. This article is mainly devoted to a J¼ ðxT ðtÞQxðtÞ þ uT ðtÞRuðtÞÞdt, ð2:4Þ
0
guaranteed cost nonlinear tracking state-feedback
where Q and R are given symmetric positive-definite
control for the boiler-turbine unit subject to input
weighting matrices.
constraints using an LMI approach. The main
contribution of this article is the nonlinear boiler- Definition 1: For the uncertain system (2.1) and the
turbine model re-expressed as a TS fuzzy system via a performance cost (2.4), if there exist a control law u(t)
nonlinear transformation function. This approach has and a positive scalar J such that for all admissible
never been done in the literature. The advantage of the uncertainties, the closed-loop system is asymptotically
proposed tracking control design is that only a simple stable with the performance cost satisfying J  J. Then
nonlinear controller is constructed and it does not J is called a guaranteed cost, and u(t) is called a
involve feedback linearisation technique and compli- guaranteed cost control law for the uncertain
cated adaptive or fuzzy schemes. system (2.1).
The rest of this article is organised as follows.
The design of such control law u(t) guarantees
Section 2 gives preliminaries of a guaranteed cost state
feedback control. Section 3 focuses on the model of the not only the asymptotical stability of the closed-loop
boiler-turbine unit. The design of a guaranteed cost system, but also an adequate level of performance in
nonlinear tracking control for the constrained boiler- terms of a certain upper bound of the guaranteed
turbine unit is given in Section 4. Simulation studies performance cost J.
are given in Section 5. Finally, conclusions are given in Lemma 1 [Petersen and McFarlane 1994, Yu, Xu, and
Section 6. Han 2004]: For the uncertain system (2.1) and the
performance cost (2.4), if there exist positive scalars "1
and "2, a matrix Y and a symmetric positive definite
2. Guaranteed cost state feedback control matrix X such that the following LMI holds for all
Consider a norm bounded continuous-time linear admissible uncertainties:
system which can be described by the following 28 9 3
T T
<XA þ AX þ BY >
> =
model with parameter uncertainties (Petersen 1987, 6 7
6 þYT BT þ "1 H1 HT1 YT ET2 XET1 Y X 7
Xu, Wang, and Wu 2006): 6> > 7
6 : þ"2 H2 HT ; 7
6 2 7
_ ¼ ðA þ 4AÞxðtÞ þ ðB þ 4BÞuðtÞ,
xðtÞ 6 7
6  "2 0 0 0 7
yðtÞ ¼ CxðtÞ, ð2:1Þ 6 7
6   "1 0 0 7
6 7
xðt0 Þ ¼ x0 , 6 7
4    R1 0 5
where x 2 Rn is the state vector, x0 is the initial state     Q1
vector, u 2 Rm is the control input vector, y 2 Rq is the  0: ð2:5Þ
controlled output vector. A, B and C are known real
constant matrices that describe the nominal system. Then
iA and iB are matrix-valued functions representing
u ðtÞ ¼ YX1 xðtÞ ð2:6Þ
time-variant parameter uncertainties in the system
model, and are assumed to be of the following is a guaranteed cost controller for the uncertain
structure: system (2.1) and the performance cost of the closed-
4A ¼ H1 FðtÞE1 , loop system satisfies
ð2:2Þ
4B ¼ H2 FðtÞE2 , J  traceðX1 Þ ¼ J , ð2:7Þ

where Hi and Ei (i ¼ 1, 2) are known real constant where trace is the sum of diagonal elements.
matrices with appropriate dimensions and F(t) 2 R The asterisk () in (2.5) stands for the corresponding
 International Journal of Systems Science 891

elements below the main diagonal of a symmetric Table 1. Typical operating points of boiler-turbine.
block matrix.
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7

2.1. Guaranteed cost tracking control x01 75.60 86.40 97.20 108.00 118.80 129.60 135.00
x02 15.27 36.65 50.52 66.65 85.06 105.80 127.00
Consider the uncertain system (2.1) and assume that y(t)
is the controlled output signal, the desired tracked x03 492.20 469.30 450.90 427.90 398.40 355.40 289.10
signal is yref, then the error can be presented by u01 0.1191 0.2091 0.2705 0.3402 0.4182 0.5046 0.5878
(Czarkowski and Kazimierczuk 1994, Reza u02 0.3803 0.5519 0.6209 0.6900 0.7589 0.8279 0.9171
Moheimani and Petersen 1998, and Zhang and u03 0.1224 0.2556 0.3399 0.4358 0.5433 0.6625 0.7840
Hu 2008):
eðtÞ ¼ yðtÞ  yref ðtÞ ¼ CxðtÞ  yref ðtÞ: ð2:8Þ drum pressure (kg cm2), electric output (MW) and
The augmented system is given as follows: fluid density (kg cm3), respectively. The output y3 is
         the drum water level deviation (m). acs and qe are steam
_
xðtÞ A 0 xðtÞ B 0
¼ Rt þ uðtÞ þ yref ðtÞ quantity and evaporation rate (kg/s), respectively and
eðtÞ C 0 0 eðtÞdt 0 I are given as follows:
ð2:9Þ
ð1  0:001538x3 Þð0:8x1  25:6Þ
or in a compact form acs ¼ ,
x3 ð1:0394  0:0012304x1 Þ
x_ ðtÞ ¼ Ae
e exðtÞ þ BuðtÞ
e e
þ dðtÞ, ð2:10Þ qe ¼ ð0:854u2  0:147Þx1 þ 45:59u1  2:514u3  2:096:
where ð3:2Þ
   
xðtÞ e ¼ 0 The control inputs are subject to
xðtÞ ¼ R t
e ,
dðtÞ ,
eðtÞdt y ðtÞ
 0   ref 0  u1 , u2 , u3  1,
e¼ A 0 e¼ B :
A and B 0:007  u_ 1  0:007,
C 0 0 ð3:3Þ
Thus, the guaranteed cost control via an integral 2  u_ 2  0:02,
control can be formulated as a design of a guaranteed 0:05  u_ 3  0:05:
cost state feedback control law u ðtÞ ¼ Ke
xðtÞ.
Some typical operating points of the boiler-turbine
model (3.1) while the drum water level deviation (y3)
3. The boiler-turbine model is kept at 0 are tabulated in Table 1.
A 160 MW oil-fired electrical power plant model is
used in this article constituted with a drum-type boiler
and a turbine. The model is based on the P16/G16 at 4. Design of guaranteed cost nonlinear
the Sydvenska Kraft AB plant in Malmö, Sweden. The tracking control
boiler dynamic model is provided by both physical and This section focuses on the design of a guaranteed
empirical methods based on the data acquired from a cost nonlinear tracking control for the boiler-turbine
series of experiments and identification which captures system. In order to apply the method outlined in
all the relevant characteristics of the process. The Section 2, the nonlinear boiler-turbine is first trans-
boiler-turbine dynamic nonlinear model is given in the formed into a linear system with norm bounded
following equations (Chen and Shamma 2004 and Tan uncertainties by defining
et al. 2005):
u2 ¼ u2 x1 , ð4:1Þ
x_1 ¼ 0:0018u2 x9=8
1 þ 0:9u1  0:15u3 ,
Applying (4.1), the boiler-turbine system (3.1) can be
x_2 ¼ ð0:073u2  0:016Þx9=8
1  0:1x2 , rewritten as
x_3 ¼ ½141u3  ð1:1u2  0:19Þx1 =85,
ð3:1Þ x_1 ¼ 0:0018u2 x1=8
1 þ 0:9u1  0:15u3
y1 ¼ x 1 ,
y2 ¼ x 2 , x_2 ¼ 0:073u2 x1=8 1=8
1  0:016x1 x1  0:1x2

y3 ¼ 0:05ð0:1307x3 þ 100acs þ qe =9  67:975Þ, x_3 ¼ ð141u3  1:1u2 þ 0:19x1 Þ=85

ð4:2Þ
y1 ¼ x1
where the inputs u1, u2 and u3 are the valve positions
y2 ¼ x2
for fuel flow, steam control and feedwater flow,
respectively. The state variables x1, x2 and x3 are the y3 ¼ 0:05ð0:1307x3 þ 100acs þ qe =9  67:975Þ
892 J. Wu et al.

or in a more compact form as with

2 3
1 0 0
_ ¼ ðA þ 4AÞxðtÞ þ ðB þ 4BÞuðtÞ,
xðtÞ ~ ð4:3Þ
 T C ¼ 40 1 0 5:
where x(t) ¼ [x1(t) x2(t) x3(t)]T, uðtÞ
~ ¼ u1 ðtÞ u2 ðtÞ u3 ðtÞ , 0 0 1
2 3 2 3 Remark 4.1: The main contribution of this article
0 0 0 0 0 0 is the proposal of a nonlinear transformation (4.1) that
6 7 6 1=8 7
A¼6
4 0 0:1 0 7 6
5, 4A ¼ 4 0:016x1 0 0 5
7 transforms the nonlinear boiler-turbine system into
a linear system with norm bounded uncertainties. In
0:0022 0 0 0 0 0 Chen and Shamma (2004), the nonlinear boiler-turbine
¼ H1 FðtÞE1 , system is approximated by an LPV model and the
2 3 design is based on the assumption that the scheduling
0:9 0 0:15 variable, i.e. drum pressure, is a slow varying quantity.
6 7
B¼6 4 0 0 0 7 5,
In this article, the nonlinear boiler-turbine system is
exactly represented by a linear system with norm
0 0:0129 1:655 bounded uncertainties and no assumption has been
2 3 imposed on the drum pressure.
0 0:0018x1=8 1 0
6 7 The cost index (2.4) consists of weighting matrices Q
4B ¼ 6
4 0 0:073x1
1=8
075 ¼ H2 FðtÞE2 , and R. It is not a trivial problem to find the optimal
0 0 0 control since the tracking performance depends on
the choice of the weighting matrices Q and R. This
with problem becomes more difficult when the control
2 3 inputs are subject to constraints. In this article, the
0 choice of the weighting matrices is performed by a trial
6 7  
H1 ¼ 4 0:016 5, E1 ¼ 1501=8 0 0 , and error procedure so as to achieve a satisfactory
0 control performance. In the trial and error procedure,
2 3 we start with some plausible values for the weighting
0:0018 matrices Q and R and then look at the control
6 7  
H2 ¼ 4 0:073 5, E2 ¼ 0 1501=8 0 performance results obtained by the simulation. If
0 these results are not satisfactory, or input variables
violate constraints too often, the corresponding
and FðtÞ ¼ ðx150
1 ðtÞ 1=8
Þ . From Table 1, x1(t) varies from matrices Q and R are changed accordingly, and
75.6 to 135.0, hence kFT(t)F(t)k  1. simulation is repeated. Through the trial and error
Note that by measuring y1(t), y2(t), y3(t), u1(t), u2(t) method, the following weighting matrices are obtained:
2 3 2 3
and u3(t), the state variable x3(t) can be indirectly 0:1 0 0 1 0 0
reconstructed by the last equation of (4.2). Hence, 6 7 6 7
Q ¼ 34 0 1 0 5, R ¼ 106 4 0 1 0 5
the output equation of the boiler-turbine system is
0 0 1 0 0 1
given as follows:
and the corresponding matrices X and Y are
~ ¼ ½x1 ðtÞ x2 ðtÞ x3 ðtÞT ¼ CxðtÞ,
yðtÞ ð4:4Þ found to be
2 3
0:0001 0:0001 0:0001 0:0028 0:0002 0:0014
6 0:0001 0:0138 0:0001 0:0069 0:1354 0:0011 7
6 7
6 7
6 0:0001 0:0001 0:0013 0:0014 0:0001 0:0190 7
X¼6
6 0:0028
7,
6 0:0069 0:0014 0:1697 0:0228 0:0228 77
6 7
4 0:0002 0:1354 0:0001 0:0228 1:3463 0:0045 5
ð4:5Þ
0:0014 0:0011 0:0190 0:0228 0:0045 0:4696

2 3
0:2551 0:0001 0:0000 0:0003 0:0007 0:0002
6 7
Y ¼ 4 0:0088 0:3415 0:0373 0:0017 0:3910 0:0058 5
0:4475 0:0000 4:9490 0:0002 0:0003 0:0001
 International Journal of Systems Science 893

and "1 ¼ 3 and "2 ¼ 4. Therefore, the integral action The cost function with weighting matrices Q and R
matrix KI and the state feedback control matrix K are are selected to be the same as in the above nonlinear
2 3 approach. The rest of the control strategy design
0:011 0:0003 0:0001
6 7 is identical. By solving the LMI (2.5), the following
KI ¼ 4 0:0019 0:0072 0 5 and
controller’s gain matrices are obtained:
0:0003 0:0002 0:0034
2 3 2 3
0:0731 0:0028 0:0063 0:011 0:0002 0
6 7 6 7
K ¼ 4 0:007 0:0721 0:0012 5: KI ¼ 64 0:0008 0:0028 0:0010 5 and
7
0:0069 0:0015 0:0851 0:0004 0:0007
0:0034
The guaranteed cost nonlinear tracking control law 2 3
0:0623 0:0018 0:0048
for the boiler-turbine unit is 6 7
Zt K¼6 7
4 0:0352 0:0163 0:0155 5:
~ ¼ KxðtÞ þ KI
uðtÞ eðtÞdt:
0 0:0205 0:0063 0:0837
Using (4.1), we have
In order to prevent the windup caused by the
u ðtÞ saturations of the actuators, the same tracking anti-
u2 ðtÞ ¼ 2 ,
x1 ðtÞ windup strategy has been used.
where e(t) ¼ x(t)  xref(t) and the corresponding upper
bound of performance cost is
J  J ¼ traceðX1 Þ ¼ 0:4974: 5. Simulation results
The control systems for the boiler-turbine model are
In order to prevent the windup caused by the developed in MATLAB. Simulations presented here
saturations of the actuators, the tracking anti-windup are to illustrate the performances of the designed
strategy (Tharayil and Alleyne 2002) is applied here nonlinear control for various kinds of electric load and
(Figure 1). drum pressure demands. In this section, the following
For comparisons, a linearised model at #4 opera- two cases will be considered.
tion point is obtained as follows:
(1) Case 1:
_ ¼ AxðtÞ þ BuðtÞ,
xðtÞ ð4:6Þ 8 ref
>
> y ¼ 75:60, yref ref
2 ¼ 15:27, y3 ¼ 0, 0  t  500
where x ¼ x  x0, u ¼ u  u0, x0 and u0 are the < 1
corresponding steady-state values at #4 operating yref ref ref
1 ¼ 108:00, y2 ¼ 66:65, y3 ¼ 0, 500  t  1500
>
>
point, and the matrices A and B are : ref
y1 ¼ 75:60, yref ref
2 ¼ 15:27, y3 ¼ 0, 1500  t  2500
2 3
0:00251 0 0
6 7 (2) Case 2:
A ¼ 4 0:06941 0:1 0 5 and 8 ref
0:00669 0 0 >
> y ¼ 75:60, yref ref
2 ¼ 15:27, y3 ¼ 0, 0  t  500
2 3 < 1
0:9 0:349 0:15 yref ref ref
1 ¼ 135:00, y2 ¼ 127:00, y3 ¼ 0, 500  t  1500
6 7 >
>
B¼4 0 14:155 0 5: : ref
y1 ¼ 75:60, yref ref
2 ¼ 15:27, y3 ¼ 0, 1500  t  2500:
0 1:3976 1:6588
Remark 5.1: Case 1 simulates a change in the
reference signal from the operating point 1–4 and
Case 2 analyses how efficient the presented control
approach can be used to transfer the system to an
operating point that can be considered far away.
Simulation results for Cases 1 and 2 are shown in
Figures 2–5, respectively. Figure 2 shows the outputs
for Case 1. The figure shows that outputs of the linear
control design follow the reference signal faster than
the nonlinear control design, but with overshoots and
large control inputs. Also, the variations in the drum
Figure 1. Integral state-feedback control system with anti- water level are larger than in the nonlinear control
windup for boiler-turbine unit. design. Figure 4 shows the outputs for Case 2.
894 J. Wu et al.

(a) (a)
120 140
Drum pressure

Drum pressure
Nonlinear LMI Nonlinear LMI
120
(kg cm–2)

(kg cm–2)
Linear control Linear control
100
100
80 80
60 60
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
(b) Time (s) Time (s)
(b)
80 150
Electric output

Electric output
60
(MW)

100

(MW)
40
20 50
0 0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Time (s) Time (s)
(c) (c)
0.4 0.5

deviation (m)
deviation (m)

Water level
Water level

0.2
0 0
–0.2
–0.4 –0.5
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 2. Boiler-turbine unit outputs for Case 1. Figure 4. Boiler-turbine unit outputs for Case 2.

(a) (a)
1 Nonlinear LMI 1 Nonlinear LMI
Fuel flow
valve (%)

valve (%)

Linear control Linear control

Fuel flow

0.5 0.5

0 0

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Time (s) Time (s)
(b)
(b)
Steam control

1
Steam control

1
valve (%)
valve (%)

0.5
0.5

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Time (s)
(c) Time (s) (c)
Feedwater flow

1
Feedwater flow

1
valve (%)
valve (%)

0.5
0.5
0
0
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Time (s)
Time (s)
Figure 5. Boiler-turbine unit inputs for Case 2.
Figure 3. Boiler-turbine unit inputs for Case 1.

From the figure, one can conclude that, although the Conversely, the nonlinear designed system presents a
linear approach shows faster response in the drum good quality control in this case. It has been analysed
pressure tracking, it fails to track changes in electric in Tan et al. (2005) that linear control designs are not
output and the drum water level deviation. able to track large changes as given in Case 2.
 International Journal of Systems Science
6. Conclusions
Based on an LMI approach, a guaranteed cost
nonlinear tracking state feedback control for a boiler-
turbine plant unit is presented. In order to prevent the
windup caused by the saturations of the actuators, an
anti-windup is also implemented. The advantage of the
proposed control design is that only a simple nonlinear
controller is constructed and it does not involve any
feedback linearisation technique and complicated
adaptive or fuzzy schemes. Numerical simulation
results show that the proposed nonlinear control
system is able to cope with a large change in the
reference signal whereas a linear control design fails
to achieve.
References
Chen, P.C., and Shamma, J.S. (2004), ‘Gain-Scheduled
‘1-Optimal Control for Boiler-Turbine Dynamics with
Actuator Saturation’, Journal of Process Control, 14,
263–277.
Czarkowski, D., and Kazimierczuk, M.K. (1994),
‘Application of State Feedback with Integral Control
to Pulse-Width Modulated Push-Pull DC-DC Convertor’,
IEE Proceedings of Control Theory Applications, 141,
99–103.
Dimeo, R., and Lee, K.Y. (1995), ‘Boiler-Turbine Control
System Design using a Genetic Algorithm’, IEEE transac-
tions on energy conversion, 10, 752–759.
Kwon, W.H., Kim, S.W., and Park, P.G. (1989), ‘On the
Multivariable Robust Control of a Boiler-Turbine System’,
IfAC symposium on power systems and power plant control,
Seoul, Korea, pp. 219–223.
Moon, U.C., and Lee, K.Y. (2003), ‘A Boiler-turbine System
Control using a Fuzzy Auto-regressive Moving Average
895
(FARMA) Model’, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, 18, 142–148.
Petersen, I.R. (1987), ‘A Stabilization Algorithm for a
Class of Uncertain Linear Systems’, System & Control
Letters, 8, 351–357.
Petersen, I.R., and McFarlane, D.C. (1994), ‘Optimal
Guaranteed Cost Control and Filtering for Uncertain
Linear Systems’, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,
39, 1971–1977.
Reza Moheimani, S.O., and Petersen, I.R. (1998),
‘Guaranteed Cost Control of Uncertain Systems with a
Time-Multiplied Quadratic Cost Function: an Approach
Based on Linear Matrix Inequalities’, Automatica, 34,
651–654.
Tan, W., Niu, Y.G., and Liu, J. (1999), ‘H1 Control for
a Boiler-Turbine Unit’, in Proceedings of IEEE conference
on control applications, Hawaii, USA, pp. 807–810.
M. Tharayil, A. Alleyne. (2002), ‘A Generalized PID Error
Governing Scheme for SMART/SBLI Control’,
Proceedings of the American Control Conference,
Anchorage, AK, pp. 346–351.
Tan, W., Marquez, H.J., Chen, T., and Liu, J. (2005),
‘Analysis and Control of a Nonlinear Boiler-Turbine Unit’,
Journal of Process Control, 15, 883–891.
Xu, J., Wang, Y., and Wu, H. (2006), ‘LMI Based Tracking
Guaranteed Cost Control’, in Proceedings of the 2006
IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and
Automation, Luoyang, China, pp. 1037–1042.
Yu, L., Xu, J., and Han, Q. (2004), ‘Optimal Guaranteed
Cost Control of Linear Uncertain Systems with Input
Constraints’, Proceedings of the 5th World Congress on
Intelligent Control and Automation, Hangzhou, China,
pp. 553–557.
Zhang, S.J., and Hu, S.S. (2008), ‘Output Feedback Tracking
Control for a Class of MIMO Nonlinear Minimumn Phase
Systems Based on RBF Neural Networks’, International
Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control,
4, 802–812.