PID and GPC control in a fluidized bed gasifier

model

Alegría Castellanos, Pedro Jesús Vásquez Díaz, Edilberto Horacio

Facultad de ingeniería – Departamento de ingeniería Facultad de ingeniería – Departamento de ingeniería
mecánico - eléctrica mecánico - eléctrica
Universidad de Piura Universidad de Piura
Piura, Perú Piura, Perú
pedrojesus.alcast@gmail.com edilberto.vasquez@udep.pe

Abstract— Gasifiers has been a topic to consider in the explained. Due to requirements of power the reactor
production of fuels and energy without negative effects in the dimensions are the shown in Fig. 1 [1].
environment. Utilization of biomass in gasifiers involves avoid the
incineration of agriculture wastes, which leads to optimize
resources. Of course, every system needs to be controlled in order
to obtain the best possible profit of it. PID and GPC controllers
are well known for industries at the moment, that’s why is
interesting the implementation of each method to compare which
one makes the system to behave properly. The present article
core is the fluidized bed gasifier model control in a specific point
of work. This model was obtained with data identification of gas
temperature in the exit of a fluidized bed gasifier installed inside
“Universidad de Piura” campus.

Keywords—gasifier; PID; GPC; model

I. INTRODUCTION
Since the second half of the last century, industrial
intensive development –which matrix is based in fossil fuels
(oil and their derivatives) – comes producing serious alterations
to earth ecosystems; impacting directly in every of its habitants
life quality.
Peru’s Energy and Mines Ministry, in 2014 energy balance,
defines biomass as non-fossil organic mass with biological
origin which can be used to produce heat and electricity.
Bagasse, dung, yareta and agriculture wastes are considered
under this concept.
Usually, biomass contains low sulfur levels, in comparison
with coal. This property favors its use as an energy source
because greenhouse gases emissions are reduced, also its low
cost contributes to local people economy.
A gasifier is a thermochemical reactor where, in its inside,
occurs processes which transforms biomass, as a fuel, in Fig. 1. Reactor body dimensions
energy or products which could replace fossil fuels. Is because To obtain the fluidized state with a 15 cm bauxite bed, inert
of this that a deep analysis in the topic of control methods in material needed to self-maintaining the process, is necessary a
gasifiers is important. high pressure and appropriate mass flow of air. For this a fan
with a 3 HP motor was installed to the reactor. The fan capacity
II. GASIFIER ELEMENTS DESIGN AND BEHAVIOUR to rise inert material in the inside of the gasifier is shown in
Fig. 2.
In J. Estremadoyro investigation [1] there are equations to
obtain the measures of a fluidized bed gasifier, these are
 Fig. 5. Burner test registered temperatures
Fig. 2. Inert material elevation over the bed inside the
gasifier With all main gasifier elements defined, the system total
process temperature data, with specific working conditions, is
The fuel for this gasifier is sugar cane leaf, this must be shown in Fig. 6. Acquisition sampling period is 2 seconds.
crushed to obtain better results in the process. A 1.6 kw motor
coupled to an endless screw feeds the gasifier with biomass.
The behaviour of this subsystem is shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Biomass feeder system behaviour

A burner is also coupled to the reactor in order to heat inert
material inside the gasifier. Along reactors body are
temperature sensors which capture data. Sensors position are
shown in Fig. 4 and burner test results in Fig. 5.

Fig. 6. Gasifier system test data

Sensor 9 data, for this work, is going to be used for
analysis. The reason of this is because is the final product
temperature. In [2] there is more information of this gasifier
elements.

III. IDENTIFICATION METHOD TO OBTAIN GASIFIER MODEL

For this work a linear behavior parametric model is
calculated using MATLAB identification toolbox [3]. In (1) is
Fig. 4. Temperature position (in mm) along reactors body determined parametric general structure.
 B(q1 ) C(q1 )
A(q1 ). y(k )  1
.u(k )  .e(k ) (1)
F (q ) D(q1 )
Where
B(q1 )  b1.qnk  b2.qnk 1  ....  bnb .qnk nb1
F (q 1 )  1  f1.q 1  ....  f nf .q  nf

C(q1)  1 c1.q1  ....  cnc .qnc

Fig. 7. Time lapse data for identification
D(q1)  1 d1.q1  ....  dnd .qnd
As is known, a linear system is expressed as is shown in
(2). A(z) 10.6186z1 0.006382z2 0.1064z3 0.2745z4 (5)

ye  (t, )  T (t)  (2) B(z)  0.5761z1 0.5605z2 0.0184z3 0.005974z4 (6)

Where In [5] there is more information about the entire

identification steps which leads to the model previously
ye Estimated output exposed.

 T (t )  Vector column of past inputs and outputs IV. PID CONTROL

Because the model is one which was identified with
  Model parameters vector information in a specific working point, the simulation must
In order to calculate model parameters, using least square consider manual – automatic transition once the model reach
estimation method (LSE), this equation is shown in (3), to settlement state. In MATLAB Simulink is built the necessary
reduce error, the model parameters vector is obtained with system for simulation, Fig. 8. In 2000 seconds of operation
equation (4). time the switch changes from manual, saturation value, to
automatic, PID value. The reference is 320 ºC.
N
1 1
VN ( ) 
N
 2  [ ]
t 1
2 (3)

1 N T 
LSE  sol    (t )   y(t )   T (t )    0 (4)
 N t 1 
Table I presents determined models which are simplified
models of (1) [4]. Fig. 8. Simulink system with manual – automatic transition
TABLE I. SPECIFIC MODEL STRUCTURES BASED ON THE
GENERAL FORM PID parameters are calculated counting that, for the
moment, this installation, the gasifier, only needs to maintain
reference value even with disturbances. Considering this
conditions integer parameter must dominate controller values,
in (7) PID parameters are shown.

P0
I  0.0155516704136252 (7)
D0

For the present work the specific model to use is ARX.
Using Sensor 9 data between 4470 and 4659 seconds of
working time as the output and 700 rpm as the input, graphic
shown in Fig. 7, MATLAB identification toolbox calculates
ARX model parameters (5) and (6) which presents the best fit.
Before start simulation, PID block contains the method
“bumpless transfer” which consists in a control signal
supervisor while PID block doesn’t work, before manual –
automatic change. This helps to maintain proper control signal
values. With this considerations, model output signal is shown
in Fig. 9 and control signal in Fig. 10.
 Ek  z 1   ek ,0  ek ,1 z 1 
 k 1
 ek ,k 1 z

T
Fk  z 1   f k ,0  f k ,1 z 1   f k ,na z  na
e

C  z 1   1
m
p
e
r
Considering and multiplying (8) by

1  z  E  z  z
a
t 1 1 k
u
r k
, then the equation obtained is (11).
a
(ºC)

y  t  k   Fk  z 1   y t   Ek  z 1   B  z 1   u t  k  d 1  Ek  z 1   e t  k  (11)

Tiempo (s)
Working the prediction model:
nb
Fig. 9. Controlled model output signal using PID yˆ  k  d 1 k   Fd 1  z1  y  k   g1,0 u  k   g1,i u k  i 
i 1
nb 1
yˆ  k  d  2 k   Fd 2  z 1
 y k   g
2,0 u  k 1  g2,1 u  k    g2,i u k  i 
i 2

V
e
l
o
c
h1 nb h1
yˆ  k  d  h k   Fd h  z1  y  k    gh,i u  k  i   g u  k  i 
i
d
a h,i
d i 0 i h
(rpm)

Then prediction model can be expressed as (12)

yˆ  Gu  F  y  G'u (12)
Tiempo (s)

For last, using cost function (13), the GPC control law
Fig. 10. Controlled model control signal using PID equation (14) is calculated.
As can be seen, using a PID controller with the conditions (13)
   
h hu
J  h1 , h, hu      yˆ  t  k t   w  t  k t      u  t  k  1 t 
2 2
before mentioned makes the system to behave properly, control
k  h1 k 1
signal works between proper values with soft characteristics.
1
u  t   CTw  Sy  t  (14)
R
V. GPC CONTROL Where
Generalized predictive control is widely used in the
R  1    i G '  z 1   z 1
h

industry. This minimizes trajectory tracking error and control

i 1
cost.

S    i F  z 1 
h
Considering one operation point a general linearization
form is able to obtain for every system, this equation is (8) [6]. i 1

e t 
A z 1   y(t )  B  z 1   z d u t 1  C  z 1  
(8) h
1 z 1 T  i
i 1
Where
In order to obtain the previously mentioned system desired
A  z 1   1  a1 z 1  a2 z 2   ana z  na behavior, maintain reference value, the controller parameters
calculated and used are:
B  z 1   b0  b1z 1  b2 z 2   bnb z na
R  1 0.018117 0.00050126 0.00019057
C  z 1   1  c1 z 1  c2 z 2   cnc z  na S  0.043159 0.017587 0.0048137 0.00142488 0.008756

The objective is to work with the model until obtain an T  0.023054

expression like (9). The Simulink scheme for simulation is shown in Fig. 11.
yˆ  Gu  f (9)
Using a mathematical trick, performing the Diophantine
equation (10):
C  z 1   Ek  z 1 1  z 1  A  z 1   z  k Fk  z 1  (10)

Where
 V
e
l
o
c
i
d
a
d
(rpm)

Tiempo (s)

Fig. 11. Simulink scheme to simulate GPC control with

manual – automatic transition
Output signal after using GPC controller on the model are
shown in Fig. 12, and the control signal in Fig. 13.
T
Fig. 13. Controlled model control signal using GPC
As can be seen, the behavior of both, output signal and
control signal are suitable, but not the best. In this case when
manual – automatic transition occurs there is a variation which
can be expressed as non – desirable characteristic. Despite this,
the implemented control works how was expected.

m
e
In [5] there is more information about both control
p
e
r
methods for this gasifier system.
a
t
u
r
a VI. CONCLUSIONS
(ºC)

Both control methods makes the model behaves as is

needed, but PID control with “bumpless transfer” obtain
Tiempo (s)
profitable results in comparison with GPC as the first doesn’t
have problems at the manual – automatic transition event.
Because the model is one which represents the gasifier at
one working point it doesn’t represents the entire output signal
T
specter of the system. Gasifiers are known for their non – linear
m
e
behavior, for this a non – linear identification method would be
the best choice, but this isn’t necessary because the working
p
e
r
a
t condition data, so the ARX model at the moment is more than
u
r
a
acceptable.
(ºC)

REFERENCES

Tiempo (s)
[1] Estremadoyro, J. (2015). Análisis de factibilidad para producción de
energía utilizando un gasificador de hojas de caña de azúcar.
Fig. 12. Controlled model output signal using GPC
[2] Alegría, P. (2017). Instalación y puesta en marcha de un gasificador de
lecho fluidizado.
[3] Ljung, L. (2014). System identification toolbox: User’s Guide.
[4] López, E. Identificación de sistemas. Aplicación al modelado de un
motor de continua.
[5] Alegría, P. (2017). Identificación y control de un gasificador de lecho
fluidizado.
[6] Zubizarreta, A. (2011). Control Predictivo.