03RMPCO

Honeywell Forge APC-4516
Process Controller Implementation

Process Controller Introduction
Honeywell Confidential
Copyright © 2012 Honeywell International Inc.
Honeywell Restricted
1 September 26, 2022
Profit Controller Honeywell
• Incorporates RMPCT
– Robust
– Multivariable
– Predictive
– Control
– Technology
• Controller designed to consider robustness issues
– not a retro-fitted feature
Honeywell Restricted 2 September 26, 2022
Contents Honeywell
• Robustness Issues
– Condition Number
• Off-line scaling
• On-line treatment for ill-conditioned problems
– Covered in the Advanced Profit Controller course
• Range Control Algorithm
– Application
– Solution
– Other features
• Feedforward
• Transformations
• Optimization
What is Robustness ? Honeywell
• Ability to handle model mismatch
– Between embedded process model and actual process behavior.
• Model mismatch typically due to:
– Non-linear process
• Operating in a different region from where models were derived
– Errors in determination of process model
• Statistically determined
• Model mismatch impacts ability to achieve stable control and good
control performance
Robustness Summary Honeywell
• RMPCT considers problem conditioning
– Off-line by scaling (primarily for engineering units)
– On-line using URV thresholding
• Preventing controller exploiting weak response modes
• RMPCT includes other on-line robustness features (within Range
Control Algorithm)
– Funnels
– Minimum move solution
Benefits of Robustness Honeywell
• Robust control technology is an enabling tool that:
– Allows a RMPCT controller to be tuned for high performance
• Reject disturbances
• Pushing to optimum in a timely manner
– Provides mechanism to avoid controller instability when control problem is
sensitive to error
Range Control Algorithm (RCA)
Range Control Algorithm Honeywell
1.Predicted CV, ŷ , can be represented as

ŷ = A u = A (uFuture + uPast)
where A is the process model, u is a set of MV moves.
2.Range Control Formulation:
minu ,y || W(Au - y) ||2
F
subject to:
ROCl ≤ ∆uF ≤ ROCh (∆MVs within ROC limits)
MV ≤ uF ≤MV (MVs must lie within high and low bounds)
CV ≤ y ≤ CV (CVs must lie within high and low bounds)
3. The solution uF is the control moves, and the
solution y is the optimal CV response trajectory.
Application of RCA1 Honeywell
This slide illustrates the funnel in conceptual Funnel opens up to provide CV some time to
terms. The actual shape of the funnel depends get to the new SP target. RMPCT tries to keep
on many things. Advanced options allows the control within the high and low bounds of the
user to change the shape of the funnel, by funnel
selecting funnel type 0, 1 or 2. Funnel type 1
and 2 are advanced options. allows some overshoot setpoint
Known Values
CV
Predicted
Unforced
worst performance limit Response
MV (I.e. if MVs are assumed

to be constant in the future
Assumed Values and no moves are made)
Past T=0 Future
We can change the length of the funnel for more or

The open loop settling time is less aggressive control action. Each CV has 2 parts
calculated as a gain weighted to the funnel made up of allowance for DT and/or
average settling time. inverse response
Σgi x ssι/Σgi allows some overshoot setpoint
Known Values
CV
Predicted
worst performance limit Unforced
MV
P.R. × (Open Loop Settling Time − DT )
Assumed Values
Allowance for average dead time / inverse response
T=0 (otherwise known as non-minimum phase behaviour)
Effect of unmeasured disturbance Predicted

Unforced
Response
CV
* e0 setpoint
MV
Assumed Values
Past T=0 Future
If you open up the bounds of the CV The funnel opening becomes

and change it from a setpoint to a smaller as the range widens
range then you open up the funnel
range
Known Values
CV
If we are lucky and the
CV is within its
Predicted bounds, we may not
Unforced actually need to move
the MVs at all (move
Response minimisation)
MV
Assumed Values
Past T=0 Future
When going from a setpoint to a

range, there is no reason to change
MVs at all since the CV is within its
allowed range
range
CV_Hi
Known Values
CV Predicted
Unforced
Response
CV_Lo
MV
Assumed Values
Past T=0 Future
One Dimension of RCA Honeywell
Shows penalty function. No penalty at all if CV value

is within range. However as CV value moves outside
the range, the penalty increases with the square of the
Penalty Function (QP) distance from the bound
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
CVi CVi
Comparison to Least Squares1 Honeywell
Any value offset from reference (trajectory) incurs a

penalty.
Penalty Function
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
PVi Ref PVi
Solution of RCA with Funnel Honeywell
Funnel_Hi: allows some overshoot

setpoint
Known Values Optimal Response
PV Predicted
Unforced
* e0 Response
Funnel_Lo: allows inverse
response
MV
Assumed Values
Past T=0 Future Minimum Effort Move
RCA Impact Honeywell
• Minimizing energy input to process
– minimizes CV response error (model error)
– minimizes scope for controller instability
– Optimal response because of minimum MV movement
• RCA funnel improves noise rejection
– Higher frequency components of CV trajectory ignored (tunable with PR and
funnel type)
– Funnel acts like a filter
Advantages of RCA with Funnel Honeywell
• CV response trajectory is optimally solved
– obtain minimum-effort solution
– gain control robustness
• Funnel end determines the control speed
– independent speed tuning for each CV
• I.e. emphasis of tuning is on CVs and not MVs
– default speed = open-loop speed
• Stable CVs
– tuning is based on the ratio to the open-loop speed
Advantages of RCA with Funnel Honeywell
• RCA avoids inverting the right-half-plane zeros (inverse response)
– control performance is enhanced because this part of the loop can be
ignored
– tuning becomes much easier
• RCA utilizes the slackness in CV high/low range
– enhance control performance
– simplify the control tuning
– handle parallel CVs better
RCA Solution1 Honeywell
1.Predicted CV can be represented as

ŷ = A u
where A is the process model, u is the MV move vector.
2.Range Control Formulation:
min || W(Au - y) ||2 (1)
u,y
subject to ROCl ≤ ∆u ≤ ROCh
MV ≤ u ≤ MV
CV ≤ y ≤ CV
where W is a weighting matrix
= Identity matrix when sufficient degrees of freedom
= User specified when insufficient degrees of freedom
Assuming the weighting W = I (Identity Matrix)
Generalized RCA formulation:

2
min Au − y
u, y
Simplifies to:
2
min Ab u − y b
u
Where yb is a sub-set (active set) of the ‘optimal’ CV

trajectory constrained by the funnel.
• RCA solution algorithm

– Identifies active set of constraints
– Formulates a minimum move control solution
• Using direction protection (URV thresholding)
– Are all CV blocks within funnels
• Yes => Terminate
• No => Add additional CV blocks to active set
• Custom QP used to solve control problem
– Solution solved using URV factorization
– Back-substitution to solve for minimum move solution
• Ref. Golub & Van Loan
Independent Feedforward Control
Example of Traditional or “Classical” Advanced Control
Process Coil Control with Feedback and Feedforward Honeywell
FC TI
SP
TC
We can make the feedforward
more aggressive than the feedback Q/F +
SP
FC QC RC S
Gain, DT, LL (m3/h) +
Dyn
Gain, DT, LL (oC)
Dyn
Independent Feedforward Control Honeywell
Feedback Control Funnel
CV Performance Ratio = 0.8
This slide explains in conceptual terms

how the independent feedforward
Feedforward Control Funnel tuning works. Internally the funnel
shape is adjusted when the FF-to_FB is
adjusted and the feedback response is
adjusted using a filter.
FF-to-FB Performance Ratio = 0.5

(meaning that the FF disturbances are
rejected
within 40% of the open-loop response time)
FF Example1 Honeywell
Controlled Variables
0.4
0.3
with the default
0.2 feedforward
0.1 control tuning we see
0
the deviation in CVs
0 10 20 30 40 50
Manipulated Variables Time [Min]
0
-0.2 1
-0.4
2
-0.6
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [Min]
Controlled Variables
0.2
with a sped-up
0.1 feedforward
control we now see
0 faster CV action and
less CV deviation
-0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50
Manipulated Variables Time [Min]
0
-0.2
Therefore we now have
1
2 performance ratio tuning
-0.4 handles. One for CV control
-0.6 2 and one for rejecting known
-0.8
disturbances
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time [Min]
Dynamic Unit Optimization
Dynamic Unit Optimization1 Honeywell
Calculate a set of MV steady state targets such that our objective

function is:
J= ∑ i
a × MVi
SS
+ ∑i
c 2
× MVi (
SS
− MVi
T
) 2
+ ∑ j
b × CV SS
j + ∑ i
d 2
× CV j(
SS
− CV T
j ) 2
i =1, # MVs i =1, # MVs j =1, #CVs j =1, #CVs
Typically for Product Value Optimization:

J = ∑ i
a × MV
i =1, # MVs
i
SS
+ ∑ j
b × CV
j =1, #CVs
j
SS
Pushing the process to a defined ‘ideal operating point’

J = ∑ ci2 × (MVi SS − MVi T ) + ∑ d i2 × (CV jSS − CV jT )
2 2
i =1, # MVs j =1, #CVs
Dynamic Unit Optimization2 Honeywell
Augment RCA with the solution uss

min
 W [W
 ] [
×(A Ad ] × u − [ yy]) 
min u, y
 
× d
 × u −   
u, y W S u 
 o    ss  
Objective is to push the steady state MV values closer to an optimum as
defined by uss.
Ad specifies the process dynamics
S is a summation matrix
Wo is the tuning weight to adjust the optimization speed and determines
how dominant the controller and optimization parts of the controller are.
Solve the control and optimization problem together using the

QP (URV factorization) => minimum move solution
Tuning for Optimization1 Honeywell
• Speed Factor determines how the optimizer speed is balanced relative
to the average speed of the process
– Tuning is relative to the average overall response time (OART)
• Controller Detail Page in Profit Viewer
– Default value is 0.0
– Speed factor can be set between 0 and 50
• Speed factor = 0 – Economic Optimization suspended
• Speed factor = 1 – MV optimization moves are 1/6 as fast as OART
• Speed factor = 6 – MV optimization moves are as fast as OART
• Soft Limits
Control limit
Soft high limit
Can apply to CVs or MVs
Optimizer limit
Soft low limit
• Error tolerance for each CV
– Optimization yields to control when a CV has a sustained error (steady state)
> tolerance.
• When CV is outside the limit RMPCT stops optimizing
– Optimization resumes when all CVs come within the CV tolerance of their
(soft) limits.
• A large value lets RMPCT continue to optimize the unit even when a CV
becomes uncontrollable.
• Can set these very large so RMPCT always optimize
• A small value protects a CV from being pushed outside its limit due to
model/process mismatch.
Summary Honeywell
• Profit Controller
– Unifies the unit dynamic control and optimization
– Solves for the optimal CV response trajectory consistent with minimum MV
moves
– Manages ill-condition problems for the user
• Off-line
• On-line
– Enhances control performance and robustness
– Simplifies control tuning
– Current version runs on Latest windows platforms
Honeywell

03RMPCO

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

03RMPCO

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

03RMPCO

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Honeywell Forge APC-4516

Process Controller Implementation

1.Predicted CV, ŷ , can be represented as

MV (I.e. if MVs are assumed

Past T=0 Future

We can change the length of the funnel for more or

Effect of unmeasured disturbance Predicted

Past T=0 Future

If you open up the bounds of the CV The funnel opening becomes

Past T=0 Future

When going from a setpoint to a

Past T=0 Future

Shows penalty function. No penalty at all if CV value

Any value offset from reference (trajectory) incurs a

PVi Ref PVi

Funnel_Hi: allows some overshoot

Known Values Optimal Response

Past T=0 Future Minimum Effort Move

1.Predicted CV can be represented as

Assuming the weighting W = I (Identity Matrix)

Generalized RCA formulation:

Where yb is a sub-set (active set) of the ‘optimal’ CV

• RCA solution algorithm

Feedback Control Funnel

CV Performance Ratio = 0.8

This slide explains in conceptual terms

FF-to-FB Performance Ratio = 0.5

Calculate a set of MV steady state targets such that our objective

i =1, # MVs i =1, # MVs j =1, #CVs j =1, #CVs

Typically for Product Value Optimization:

Pushing the process to a defined ‘ideal operating point’

i =1, # MVs j =1, #CVs

Augment RCA with the solution uss

Solve the control and optimization problem together using the

Can apply to CVs or MVs

You might also like