This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

### Publishers

Scribd Selects Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Scribd Selects Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

P. 1

Landau RST|Views: 53|Likes: 1

Published by pbaculima

See more

See less

https://www.scribd.com/doc/57611398/Landau-RST

01/06/2013

text

original

fr

Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

The R-S-T digital controller design and applications

I.D. Landau*

Laboratoire d+Automatique de Grenoble (CNRS/INPG/UJF), ENSIEG — BP 46 — 38402 Saint-Martin d+He` res Cedex, France

Received September 1997; in revised form November 1997

Abstract

The two-degrees-of-freedom R-S-T digital controller is becoming a standard for computer control in industry. This paper presents

a methodology for the design of the R-S-T controller, which involves identiﬁcation of the plant model from data, combined with

a robust control design. The performance of the controller can be further enhanced by plant model identiﬁcation in a closed loop, and

re-tuning of the controller. For large parameter variations, adaptation has to be considered in order to maintain the performance.

Software packages are available for the design, implementation and commissioning of the R-S-T digital controllers. The methodology

is illustrated by its application to the control of deposited zinc in hot-dip galvanizing at SOLLAC(Florange, France). 1998 Elsevier

Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: System identiﬁcation; digital control; robust control; adaptation; software tools

1. Introduction

A ‘‘good’’ control system has in general an important

economic impact in industry. Fig. 1 illustrates the histo-

gram of a controlled variable for ‘‘poor’’ control and for

‘‘good’’ control, respectively.

If the variance of the controlled variable is high, a

signiﬁcant number of the measurements will lie far from

the desired value. In a large number of applications,

a minimal acceptable value is imposed (e.g., the humidity

of the paper, the depth of the coating, etc.) and poor

quality of the control will require the choice of a higher

value for the reference. As a consequence, more energy or

material will be needed, and the direct consequence is an

increase in production costs.

If one has a ‘‘good’’ controller, which signiﬁcantly

reduces the variance of the controlled variable around

the reference value, this will on the one hand improve the

quality and, on the other hand, will allow a reduction of

the reference value. This leads in general to energy and

material savings which correspond to a reduction in

production costs.

Therefore, the impact of ‘‘good’’ control is:

(1) Improvement in the quality of the products.

(2) Energy and material savings.

However, it is important that the investment return

gained by improvements in control can be clearly evalu-

ated, in order to justify the investment.

The question is: How does one improve the investment

return for high-performance control systems?

The answers to this question are:

(1) Reduction in the design cost.

(2) Reduction in the implementation cost (including

commissioning).

(3) Achievement of the desired performance.

Therefore, it is necessary to develop an eﬃcient design

and implementation methodology. This development has

to be considered in the context of computer control,

which is now widespread in industry. All the advantages

and features of using computers for control have to be

taken into account. Among these aspects, those of system

identiﬁcation and the introduction of a standard form for

a digital controller (the R-S-T controller) play a crucial

role.

Fig. 2 summarizes the basic principles of control

system design. In order to design and to tune a good

0967-0661/98/$19.00 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

PII S 0 9 6 7 - 0 6 6 1 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 1 6 - 1

Fig. 1. Histograms for good and poor control.

Fig. 2. Principle of controller design.

Fig. 3. Computer control system. D.A.C.: Digital-to-Analog Conver-

ter, Z.O.H.: Zero-Order Hold, A.D.C.: Analog-to-Digital Converter.

controller one needs:

(1) To specify the desired control-loop performances.

(2) To have a dynamic model of the plant to be con-

trolled (this can be obtained from real data by identi-

ﬁcation).

(3) To possess a suitable controller design methodology,

compatible with the desired performance and the

corresponding plant model.

(4) To have a procedure for controller validation and on-

site re-tuning.

(5) To have appropriate software packages with

real-time capabilities for data acquisition, system

identiﬁcation, control design and on-site commis-

sioning.

This paper will present such a methodology for the

design and application of R-S-T digital controllers. The

methodology will be illustrated by its application to the

control of the deposited zinc in hot-dip galvanizing at

SOLLAC (Florange, France).

2. Identiﬁcation of discrete-time models for

industrial processes

Fig. 3 illustrates an appropriate setting for a computer

control system. The set D.A.C.# plant # A.D.C. is

interpreted as a discretized system, whose control input is

the sequence ¦u(t)¦ generated by the computer, the out-

put being the sequence ¦y(t)¦ resulting from the A/D

conversion of the system output y(t). The discretized

plant is characterized by a discrete-time model, which

should be identiﬁed.

Note that the sampling frequency is selected in accord-

ance with the bandwidth of the continuous-time plant,

and more speciﬁcally in accordance with the desired

bandwidth of the closed loop. The basic rule is:

f

Q

"(6 to 25) f !J

where f

Q

is the sampling frequency and f !J

is the desired

bandwidth of the closed loop.

The discrete-time model of the plant to be controlled is

described in the time-domain by:

y(t)"!

L

G¯¹

a

G

y(t!i)#

L

G¯¹

b

G

u(t!d!i)

where d is the integer number of sampling periods con-

tained in the time-delay of the plant, t is the normalized

discrete time (0, 1, 2, 3,

2

) and corresponds to the

discrete time divided by the sampling periods ¹

Q

. The

discrete-time model of the plant to be controlled can

alternatively be represented by its pulse transfer operator

H(q¹):

y(t)"H(q¹) u(t).

H(q¹) is deﬁned by:

G(q¹)"

qB B(q¹)

A(q¹)

"

qB¹ B*(q¹)

A(q¹)

where q¹ is the backward shift operator (q¹ y(t)"

y(t!1)) and

A(q¹)"1#a

¹

q¹#

2

a

L

qL

B(q¹)"b

¹

q¹#

2

b

L

qL"q¹B*(q¹).

156 I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

Fig. 4. Parameter estimation of discrete-time models.

Fig. 5. The R-S-T canonical structure of a digital controller.

For models with constant parameters, replacing q by

z (the complex variable) in the expression of the pulse

transfer operator gives the pulse transfer function.

The principle of the identiﬁcation of discrete-time

models is illustrated in Fig. 4.

A discrete-time model with adjustable parameters is

implemented on the computer. The error between the

system output at instant t, y(t), and the output predicted

by the model, yL(t), (known as the prediction error) is used

by a parameter-adaptation algorithm which, at each

sampling instant, will modify the model parameters in

order to minimize this error. The input is in general

a very low-level pseudo-random binary sequence, gene-

rated by the computer (sequence of rectangular pulses

with randomly variable duration). Once the model has

been obtained, an objective validation can be made by

carrying out statistical tests on the prediction error c(t)

and the predicted output yL(t). The validation test enables

the best algorithm to be obtained for the estimation of

the parameters.

This approach provides much more accurate models

than the methods based on step response or frequency

response. In addition, it requires an input signal of much

lower magnitude than those used for step or frequency

response.

The identiﬁcation methodology includes four steps:

(1) Input-output data acquisition around an operating

point, using as input in general a centered pseudo-

random binary sequence (PRBS) of small magnitude,

(2) Estimation (choice) of the model complexity

(structure),

(3) Estimation of the model parameters,

(4) Validation of the identiﬁed model (structure and

values of the parameters).

One of the important facts to be emphasized is that the

plant measurements are generally noisy. Unfortunately,

no unique parameter-estimation method exists which

may be used successfully for all the types of disturbances,

such that the estimated parameters are always unbiased.

Therefore, a good identiﬁcation of a plant model gene-

rally requires the use of an interactive system featuring

various parameter-estimation methods and the corre-

sponding validation techniques.

For a more detailed discussion see (Landau, 1990;

Ljung, 1987).

3. The R-S-T digital controller

The canonical structure of the R-S-T digital controller

is represented in Fig. 5.

This structure has two degrees of freedom, i.e., the

digital ﬁlters R and S are designed in order to achieve the

desired regulation performance, and the digital ﬁlter ¹ is

designed afterwards in order to achieve the desired track-

ing performance. This structure allows achievement of

diﬀerent levels of performance in tracking and regulation.

The case of a controller operating on the regulation

error (which does not allow the independent speciﬁcation

of tracking and regulation performance) corresponds to

¹"R. Digital PID can also be represented in this form,

leading to particular choices of R, S and T.

The equation of the R-S-Tcanonical controller is given

by:

S(q¹) u(t)#R(q¹) y(t)"¹(q¹) y*(t#d#1)

where u(t) and y(t) are the input and output of the plant

and y*(t#d#1) is the desired tracking trajectory,

which is either generated by a tracking reference model

(Bm/Am) or stored in the computer memory.

The polynomials R(q¹), S(q¹), ¹(q¹) have the

form:

R(q¹)"r

"

#r

¹

q¹

2

#r

L0

qL0

S(q¹)"s

"

#s

¹

q¹

2

#s

L1

qL1 (often s

"

"1)

¹(q¹)"t

"

#t

¹

q¹

2

t

L2

qL2.

The corresponding time-domain expression of the con-

trol law is given by (s

"

"1):

u(t)"!

L1

G¯¹

s

G

u(t!i)!

L0

G¯"

r

G

y(t!i)

#

L2

G¯"

t

G

y*(t#d#1!i).

I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 157

The closed-loop control transfer operator (between r(t)

and y(t)) is given by:

H

''

(q¹)"

qB ¹(q¹) B(q¹)

A(q¹) S(q¹)#qB B(q¹) R(q¹)

"

qB ¹(q¹) B(q¹)

P(q¹)

,

and the behaviour with respect to an output disturbance

is given by the output sensivity function:

S

WN

(q¹)"

A(q¹) S(q¹)

A(q¹) S(q¹)#qB B(q¹) R(q¹)

"

A(q¹) S(q¹)

P(q¹)

where P(q¹) deﬁnes the desired closed-loop poles (regu-

lation behaviour).

The input sensitivity function which reﬂects the eﬀects

of an output disturbance upon the plant input is given by:

S

SN

(q¹)"!

A(q¹) R(q¹)

P(q¹)

.

In general, the desired closed-loop poles are speciﬁed

in the form:

P(q¹)"P

"

(q¹) P

$

(q¹)

where P

"

(q¹) speciﬁes the desired dominant poles of the

closed loop, and P

$

(q¹) speciﬁes the auxiliary poles of

the closed loop.

Once the closed-loop poles have been deﬁned, solving

the equation:

P(q¹)"A(q¹) S(q¹)#q° B(q¹) R(q¹)

allows the determination of S(q¹) and R(q¹), which

will ensure the desired closed-loop poles.

Let the degrees of polynomials A(q¹) and B(q¹) be

deﬁned by:

n

"deg A(q¹); n

"deg B(q¹).

Then the above equation has a unique solution (assum-

ing that A(q¹) and B(q¹) do not have common factors)

for:

n

.

"deg P(q¹))n

#n

#d!1

n

1

"deg S(q¹)"n

#d!1

n

0

"deg R(q¹)"n

!1

in which:

S(q¹)"1#s

¹

q¹#

2

s

L1

qL1"1#q¹ S*(q¹)

R(q¹)"r

"

#r

¹

q¹#

2

r

L0

qL0.

However, in general the polynomials R(q¹) and S(q¹)

of the controller may, for various reasons, contain some

prespeciﬁed ﬁxed parts. For this reason it is convenient

to factorize the polynomials R(q¹) and S(q¹) as

follows:

R(q¹)"H

0

(q¹) R' (q¹)

S(q¹)"H

1

(q¹) S' (q¹)

where H

0

(q¹) and H

1

(q¹) are prespeciﬁed polyno-

mials. These polynomials are deﬁned by the performance

speciﬁcations (e.g., the integrator in the controller) and

by considerations of robustness. For example, the intro-

duction of an integrator in the controller requires one to

take H

1

(q¹)"1!q¹.

Many control strategies can be applied to the design of

the R-S-T controller by an appropriate reformulation.

See for example (Landau, 1990; Astro¨ m and Wittenmark,

1990; Landau et al., 1997), as well as the special issue of

European Journal of Control Vol. 1, N°2, 1995, dedicated

to a robust control benchmark.

However, the pole placement can be considered as the

basic design technique, and most of the various designs

can be related to it.

3.1. Pole placement

This control strategy can be used for plant models of

any order, with or without time delay, and featuring

stable or unstable zeros. The only assumption is that the

polynomials A(q¹) and B(q¹) characterizing the plant

model do not have common factors.

The controller polynomials S(q¹)"H

1

(q¹) S' (q¹)

and R(q¹)"H

0

(q¹) R' (q¹) are obtained by solving

the equation:

P(q¹)"A(q¹) H

1

(q¹) S' (q¹)

#qB¹ B*(q¹) H

0

(q¹) R' (q¹)

where P(q¹) deﬁnes the desired closed-loop poles.

The ¹(q¹) polynomial is chosen as:

¹(q¹)"P(q¹) /B(1)

(B(1)"B(q¹) for q"1), and the tracking behaviour is

described by the equation:

y(t)"qB¹

B*(q¹)

B(1)

y*(t#d#1).

In other words one follows the desired trajectory, ﬁltered

through the plant zeros. For more details see (Landau,

1990, 1993).

Note that unstable discrete-time zeros occur when

a fractional delay larger than half of the sampling period

is present, or when a high sampling frequency is used for

158 I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

Fig. 6. Modulus, gain and phase margins.

continuous-time models having a diﬀerence of degree

between denominator and numerator greater than or

equal to 2 (Astro¨ m and Wittenmark, 1990; Landau,

1990). Both phenomena lead to the conclusion that

the sampling frequency has to be chosen as low as pos-

sible, but in accordance with the desired closed-loop

performance.

3.2. Relationship with other control strategies

For plant models with stable zeros, one can use the

strategy called ‘‘tracking and regulation with indepen-

dent objectives’’, which can be viewed as a particular case

of the pole-placement strategy, where the desired closed-

loop poles contains the zeros of the plant, i.e.,

P(q¹)"P

"

(q¹) ) B*(q¹) ) P

$

(q¹).

‘‘Internal model control’’ (Morari, 1989) corresponds to

a pole-placement strategy where the desired closed-loop

poles contain the poles of the plant model, i.e.,

P(q¹)"A(q¹) ) P

$

(q¹).

Digital PID can be designed using pole placement. In

this case, the orders of the plant model are limited to

n

)2, n

)2, d"0.

Predictive control strategies and an LQ control strat-

egy using an appropriate formulation of the criterion to

be minimized lead to an R-S-T controller, and can be

viewed as an approximation of the pole placement in the

sense of a certain quadratic criterion (Landau et al.,

1997).

4. Robustness

Four indicators are generally used to express the

robustness of a design in terms of the minimal distance

with respect to the critical point [!1, j0] in the Nyquist

plane. These indicators are the gain margin (G), the

phase margin (), the modulus margin (M) and the

delay margin (t). The modulus margin and the delay

margin are the most interesting in applications. Fig. 6

illustrates the modulus, gain and phase margins.

The modulus margin is the minimal distance between

the critical point [!1, j0] and the Nyquist plot of the

open-loop transfer function:

H

''

(z¹)"z° B(z¹) R(z¹)/A(z¹) S(z¹).

The modulus margin M is deﬁned as the radius of

a circle, centered on [!1, j0] and tangent to the Nyquist

plot of H

''

(eHU) (see Fig. 6).

The result is that:

M"¦1#H

''

(eHU) ¦

°'"

.

"¦S¹

WN

(eHU) ¦

°'"

.

"(¦S

WN

(eHU) ¦

°º`

)¹.

In other words, the modulus margin corresponds to the

inverse of the H

`

norm of the output sensitivity function.

Minimization of the H

`

norm of S

WN

(eHU) will maximize

the modulus margin.

To obtain the modulus margin, it is therefore suﬃcient

simply to plot the frequency characteristics of the modu-

lus (gain) of the output sensitivity function in dB. In this

case:

M dB"(¦S

WN

(eHU) ¦

°º`

)¹ dB

"!¦S

WN

(eHU) ¦

°º`

dB.

Note that a given value of the modulus margin will

guarantee certain phase and gain margins, while the

converse is not true (systems with good phase and gain

margins can pass very close to the critical point).

The delay margin is the maximal additional delay that

will be tolerated in the open-loop system without causing

an instability of the closed-loop system. If the Nyquist

plot of the open-loop system intersects the unit circle at

several cross-over frequencies cG

°'

, characterized by the

corresponding phase margins

G

, the delay margin of

the system is deﬁned as:

t"min

G

G

cG

°'

.

Typical values of these robustness indicators are:

— modulus margin: M*0.5 (!6 dB)

— delay margin: t*¹

1

(sampling period)

— gain margin: G*2 (6 dB)

— phase margin: 30°))60°.

Note that M*0.5 implies G*2 and '29° (the

converse is not necessarily true).

Sensitivity functions are related to the robust stability

of the closed loop with respect to plant model uncertain-

ties, see (Doyle et al., 1992). Bounds on the magnitude of

the frequency-dependent model uncertainties convert

to upper constraints upon the moduli of the various

I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 159

Fig. 7. Templates for the sensitivity functions: (a) output sensitivity

function; (b) input sensitivity function.

Fig. 8. Plant model identiﬁcation in closed-loop operation.

sensitivity functions. These constraints, as well as those

on the modulus margin and delay margin, can be trans-

lated into desired templates for the sensitivity functions.

Conversely, constraints imposed on the sensitivity func-

tions can be translated into tolerated model uncertainties.

Typical templates for S

WN

and S

SN

are shown in Fig. 7.

The upper and lower bounds on the output sensitivity

function S

WN

in the high-frequency region come from the

translation of the delay margin constraints in the fre-

quency domain (Landau, 1995).

The input sensitivity function reﬂects both tolerance

with respect to additive uncertainties, and the activity of

the input in the presence of disturbances (high values in

certain frequency regions indicate low model uncertainty

tolerance and important stress on the actuator).

A design methodology that combines pole placement

with the shaping of the sensitivity function has been

developed in order to ensure both performance and

robustness. See (Landau, 1993; Landau et al., 1996).

5. Identiﬁcation in a closed loop

In a number of practical situations, it may not be

possible to operate the plant in an open loop in order to

achieve system identiﬁcation. Such situations are en-

countered, for example, when the plant contains an inte-

grator, or when important drifts of the operating point

may occur during input/output data acquisition. In

a number of other situations, a controller already exists,

but for various reasons cannot be disconnected. There-

fore, techniques for plant identiﬁcation in closed-loop

operation should be used.

Signiﬁcant progress in this area has been made in the

last few years. Newalgorithms dedicated to identiﬁcation

in closed loops have been developed. For a detailed

presentation see (Van den Hof and Schrama, 1995;

Landau and Karimi, 1997; Landau et al., 1997).

A basic scheme for plant model identiﬁcation in a

closed loop is shown in Fig. 8 (Landau and Karimi,

1997). The upper part represents the true closed-loop

system, and the lower part corresponds to an adjustable

predictor for the closed loop, re-parameterized in terms

of a known ﬁxed controller and an adjustable plant

model. The error between the system output and the

closed-loop predictor output (called a closed-loop output

error) is used by a parameter-adaptation algorithm that

will drive the parameters of the estimated plant model in

order to minimize the error between the two closed-loop

systems. In other words, the model obtained in a closed

loop will allow for better prediction of the behaviour of

the closed-loop system.

6. Controller validation and on-line retuning

As indicated in Section 1, validation of the designed

controller is a key issue in assessing the eﬀective perfor-

mance of the closed-loop system. Identiﬁcation of the

closed loop will allow the performance achieved to be

compared with the designed performance by comparing

the achieved and the designed closed-loop poles. It will

also allow the robustness of the control schemes to be

assessed by comparing the designed and achieved sensi-

tivity functions in the frequency domain.

However, with the same data, acquired in a closed

loop, one can also identify a new plant model. The new

160 I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

Fig. 9. ‘‘Closed loop’’ adaptive control.

Fig. 10. ‘‘Open-loop’’ adaptation.

model, identiﬁed in the closed loop, is then used for

re-tuning of the controller.

This procedure is used for two purposes:

— improvement of a previous design

— controller maintenance.

Examples can be found in (Zhang et al., 1995; Langer and

Landau, 1996; Landau et al., 1997).

7. Adaptation

When ‘‘system identiﬁcation’’ plus ‘‘robust control

design’’ does not allow one to obtain a single linear

controller, giving acceptable performance for the whole

range of operating points because of the too-wide varia-

tions in the dynamic characteristics of the plant, one has

to consider the ‘‘adaptation’’ of the controller.

The term ‘‘adaptation’’ (adaptive control) refers to a set

of techniques for the automatic tuning of the controller in

real time, in order to maintain the desired performance

when the plant parameters vary.

One can distinguish between two basic adaptive con-

trol techniques:

(1) ‘‘closed-loop’’ adaptive control (Fig. 9)

(2) ‘‘open-loop’’ adaptive control (Fig. 10).

The ‘‘closed-loop’’ adaptive control system usually

combines a real-time identiﬁcation algorithm with the

computation of the controller in real time, based on

a current estimation of the plant model and the desired

performance.

However, in a number of applications, the characte-

ristics of the dynamic model of the plant depend upon

a set of measured variables, which deﬁne an operating

point. In this case, one can use an ‘‘open-loop’’ adaptive

control (Fig. 10). The range of operating points is divided

into a number of operating intervals. For each interval,

a relevant operating point is selected and a correspond-

ing controller is designed, based on an identiﬁed model.

This controller assures the desired performance for all the

operating points located in the interval. The correspond-

ing controllers are stored in a table. When the plant is

operating at a certain point, the corresponding values of

the controller parameters will be used, according to the

table.

8. Hot-dip galvanizing at SOLLAC (Florange)

The objective of the galvanizing line is to obtain

galvanized steel with formability, surface quality and

weldability equivalent to uncoated cold rolled steel. The

variety of products is very large in terms of deposited zinc

thickness and steel strip thickness. The deposited zinc

may vary between 50 to 350 g/m` (each side), and the

strip speed may vary from 30 to 180 m/mn.

The most important part of the process is the hot-dip

galvanizing. The principle of hot-dip galvanizing is illus-

trated in Fig. 11. Preheated steel strip is passed through

a bath of liquid zinc, and then rises vertically out of the

bath through the stripping ‘‘air knives’’, which remove

the excess zinc. The remaining zinc on the strip surface

solidiﬁes before it reaches the rollers, which guide the

ﬁnished product. The measurement of the deposited zinc

can be made only on the cooled, ﬁnished strip. The eﬀect

of the air knives depends on the air pressure, the distance

between the air knives and the strip, and the speed of the

strip. Nonlinear static models have been developed for

computing the appropriate pressure, distance and speed

for a given desired value of the deposited zinc.

The objective of the control is to assure good unifor-

mity of the deposited zinc, whilst guaranteeing a mini-

mum value of the deposited zinc per unit area. Tight

control (i.e., a small variance in the controlled variable)

will allow a more uniform coating and a reduction of the

average quantity of deposited zinc per unit area. As

a consequence, in addition to an improvement in quality,

tight control of the deposited zinc per unit area has an

important commercial impact since the average con-

sumption for a modern galvanizing line is of the order of

40 tons per day (price+1 500 USD/ton).

I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 161

Fig. 11. Process description.

9. Model of the process

For an analysis of the process, the model originally

proposed by Harvey and Carton (1974) and completed

by Jacobs (1991) can be used:

m"KD

»

P

#¨

K

where m is the deposited mass per unit area, K is a con-

stant of proportionality, D is the distance between the air

knives and the strip, P is the air pressure and » is the

strip speed. ¨

K

accounts for unpredictable eﬀects and/or

modelling errors. At SOLLAC Ste Agathe, the control

variable is the air pressure.

A linearized model around an operating point (P

"

, »

"

,

D

"

) can be obtained using a standard Taylor series ex-

pansion for variations of pressure (P), speed (») and

distance (D). It has the form:

m"KD

"

»

"

P

"

#: D#[ »!j P#.

K

;

:, [, j'0.

It can be seen that, by using the pressure as the control

variable, one can compensate for the disturbances

created by variations in distance and speed as well as by

the term .

K

.

The pressure in the air knives is regulated through

a pressure loop, which can be approximated by a ﬁrst-

order system. The delay of the process will depend

linearly on the speed. Therefore, a continous-time linear

dynamic model, relating variations in the pressure to

variations in the deposited mass, of the form:

H(s)"

GeQ

t

1#s¹

; t"

¸

»

can be considered, where ¸ is the distance between the air

knives and the transducers, and » is the strip speed.

When discretizing this model, the major diﬃculty comes

from the variable time-delay. In order to obtain a con-

troller with a ﬁxed number of parameters, the delay of the

discrete-time model should remain constant. Therefore,

the sampling period is tied to the strip speed using the

formula:

¹

Q

"

(¸/»)#o

d

; (d"integer)

where d is a small additional time-delay due to the

implementation, and d is the discrete-time delay (an

integer).

The corresponding linearized discrete-time model will

be of the form:

H(q¹)"

qB (b

¹

q¹)

1#a

¹

q¹

.

The fractional delay (which corresponds to the presence

of an additional term b

`

q`) is negligible because of the

way in which the sampling period ¹

Q

is selected; this was

conﬁrmed by the model identiﬁcation procedure. How-

ever, the parameters of the model, given above, will

depend on the distance D and on the speed ».

10. Identiﬁcation of the discrete-time plant model

The process comprises the air-pressure control loop

and the coating process. The control input to the process

is the reference of the air pressure control loop, and the

output of the process is the measured deposited mass per

unit area (see Fig. 12).

The PC used for data acquisition, identiﬁcation and

control is connected to the process through an industrial

network. The identiﬁcation has been done with the coat-

ing process operating in an open loop.

The sampling frequency has been chosen at each ope-

rating point, in order to have the discrete-time delay

d"7. The data acquisition is illustrated in Fig. 13. First,

an analog anti-aliasing ﬁlter is used, before a high-

frequency sampling is undertaken (a multiple of the

desired sampling frequency). A digital anti-aliasing ﬁlter

is inserted between the two samplers.

The input used was a P.R.B.S. (Pseudo Random

Linary Sequence) of a magnitude of $4% with respect

to the static pressure (P

"

). The P.R.B.S. was generated by

a shift register with N"5 cells and a clock frequency

equal to half of the sampling frequency (length of the

162 I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

Fig. 12. Process block diagram.

Fig. 13. Data acquisition.

sequence: 64). 100 to 160 (average: 128) measurements

have been used for the various identiﬁcations made in the

diﬀerent regions of operation. The choice made for the

P.R.B.S. allowed at least one full sequence to be sent for

each experiment, and yielded the largest pulse width

(10 ¹

'

) comparable with the rise time of the process. As

both sides of the steel strip have to be galvanised, and

because the positions and physical realisations of the two

actuators are not symmetrical, both ‘‘front’’ and ‘‘back’’

models have been identiﬁed.

As no unique identiﬁcation method gives unbiased

results for all types of disturbances, the following recur-

sive identiﬁcation methods have been used (Landau,

1990):

— Recursive least squares

— Extended least squares

— Recursive maximum likelihood

— Instrumental variable with auxiliary model

— Output error

— Generalized least squares

For validation of the identiﬁed models and compari-

son of the models obtained with the diﬀerent methods,

a cross-correlation between the predicted output (using

an output error predictor) and the output error has been

used (Landau, 1990). (For the ﬁrst four methods, the

whiteness test on the prediction error has also been used

for validation and comparison). ‘‘Output error’’ consis-

tently provided the best results for this application.

It was observed that a signiﬁcant variability in the

parameters occurs with a change of the operating points.

This necessitated splitting the operation of the plant into

several regions. However, a variability of the parameters

is observed, even within a region of operation at a con-

stant distance and with relatively small speed variations.

One of the causes is the imperfect measurement of the

strip/air-knives distance. This variability will require

a robust control design.

11. Controller design and adaptation

The ‘‘tracking and regulation with independent objec-

tives’’ (which in this case is equivalent to the poles place-

ment, since the model does not have ﬁnite zeros) has been

used.

Robust control design using an identiﬁed model

and based on shaping of the sensitivity function

allowed a modulus margin greater than !6 dB, to

be obtained with a delay margin greater than 2¹

Q

.

These robustness margins assure satisfactory perfor-

mance in a region of operation, despite the variability of

the model.

In order to ensure satisfactory performance for all

regions of operation, an ‘‘open-loop adaptation’’ tech-

nique has been considered. The open-loop adaptation is

made with respect to:

— steel strip speed,

— distance between the air knives and the steel strip.

The strip speed directly aﬀects the sampling period

according to the relationship:

¹

Q

"

¸#o

»

where o is the equivalent time-delay of the industrial

network and of the programmable controller used for

pressure regulation. The speed range and the distance

range have been split into 3 regions, giving a total of

9 operating regions. For each of these operating regions

an identiﬁcation has been performed, and controllers

based on the identiﬁed model have been computed and

stored in a table.

Anti-wind-up procedures have been used for the imple-

mentation of the controller, and a smooth transfer from

open-loop to closed-loop operation has also been

assured. For a detailed presentation of this application

see (Fenot et al., 1993).

12. Results

Fig. 14 shows typical results, obtained when one of the

sides is under digital regulation and the other side is

I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 163

Fig. 14. Typical performance of the digital regulation of the deposit zinc.

under computer-aided manual control (the operator has

on display a moving short-time history of the deposited

zinc and applied pressure).

A reduction in the dispersion of the coating is noticed

when closed-loop digital control is used. This provides

a better-quality ﬁnished product (extremely important in

the automotive industry, for example).

The average quantity of deposited zinc is reduced by

3% when closed-loop digital control is used, while still

guaranteeing the speciﬁcations for minimum zinc deposi-

tion. Taking into account the line production and the

price of the zinc, this corresponds to an annual saving

over 350 000 USD. The closed-loop operation also re-

duces the task of the operator, thereby creating better

working conditions.

13. Conclusions

A methodology for the design and tuning of R-S-T

digital controllers has been presented. These controllers

have already been used in a signiﬁcant number of indus-

trial applications (Rolland and Landau, 1991). The eco-

nomic impact of the improved performance has largely

justiﬁed their use. Software packages are available for the

design, implementation and commissioning of the R-S-T

digital controllers.

References

Astro¨ m, K.J., Wittenmark, B., 1990. Computer Controlled Systems—

Theory and Design. Prentice Hall, N.J. (2nd Edition).

Doyle, J.C., Francis, B.A., Tannenbaum, A.R., 1992. Feedback Control

Theory. MacMillan, New York.

Fenot, C., Rolland, F., Vigneron, G., Landau, I.D., 1993. Open loop

adaptive digital control in hot-dip galvanizing. Control Engineering

Practice 1(5), 779—790.

Harvey, C.F., Carlton, A.J., 1974. Mathematical Modelling of Air Jet

Coating Mass, J. Lysagh Ltd. Res. Tech. Rep. Australia.

Jacobs, O.L.R., Chen, D.S., 1991. Regulation of Deposited Zinc in hot-

dip Galvanizing. Proceedings of the ﬁrst European Control Confer-

ence, Grenoble, 1, 773—778.

Landau, I.D., 1990. System Identiﬁcation and Control Design. Prentice

Hall, Englewood Cliﬀs, N.J.

Landau, I.D., 1993. Identiﬁcation et Commande des Syste` mes (seconde

e´ dition), Herme` s, Paris.

Landau, I.D., Karimi, A., 1997. Recursive algorithms for identiﬁcation

in closed loop — A uniﬁed approach and evaluation. Automatica

33(8).

Landau, I.D., Langer, J., Rey, D., Barnier, J., 1996. Robust control of

a 360° ﬂexible arm using the combined pole/placement sensitivity

function shaping method. IEEE T-CST, 4(4), 369—383.

Landau, I.D., Lozano, R., M’Saad, M., 1997. Adaptive Control.

Springer Verlag, London.

Langer, J., Landau, I.D., 1996. Improvement of robust digital control

by identiﬁcation in closed loop, application to a 360° ﬂexible arm.

Control Engineering Practice 4(8), 1079—1088.

Ljung, L., 1987. System Identiﬁcation. Theory for the user. Prentice

Hall, Englewood Cliﬀs, N.J.

164 I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165

Morari, M., Zaﬁriou, 1989. Robust process control. Prentice Hall, N.J.

Rolland, F., Landau, I.D., 1991. Pour mieux re´ guler, le PC va

vous aider. Mesures, n°640, pp. 71—73, De´ c.

Van den Hof, P., Schrama, R., 1995. Identiﬁcation and control —

closed-loop issues. Automatica 31(12).

Zang, Z., Bitmead, R.R., Gevers, M., 1995. Iterative weighted least-

squares identiﬁcation and weighted lqg control design. Automatica,

31(11).

I.D. Landau/ Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 165

D. The set D. Histograms for good and poor control.H.C. 3. Computer control system.156 I. The Q discrete-time model of the plant to be controlled can alternatively be represented by its pulse transfer operator H(q\): Fig. Note that the sampling frequency is selected in accordance with the bandwidth of the continuous-time plant.: Analog-to-Digital Converter. which should be identiﬁed. 3 illustrates an appropriate setting for a computer control system. This paper will present such a methodology for the design and application of R-S-T digital controllers.: Digital-to-Analog Converter. (2) To have a dynamic model of the plant to be controlled (this can be obtained from real data by identiﬁcation).D. the output being the sequence +y(t). 3. Z. t is the normalized discrete time (0. is interpreted as a discretized system. L Fig.2) and corresponds to the discrete time divided by the sampling periods ¹ .O. q\B B(q\) q\B\ B*(q\) G(q\)" " A(q\) A(q\) where q\ is the backward shift operator (q\ y(t)" y(t!1)) and A(q\)"1#a q\#2a q\L L B(q\)"b q\#2b q\L "q\B*(q\). A.C. generated by the computer. . (4) To have a procedure for controller validation and onsite re-tuning.C.# plant # A. Identiﬁcation of discrete-time models for industrial processes Fig.C. The discretized plant is characterized by a discrete-time model. 1. 2. (3) To possess a suitable controller design methodology.D.: Zero-Order Hold. (5) To have appropriate software packages with real-time capabilities for data acquisition. 1. Fig. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 2. resulting from the A/D conversion of the system output y( ). whose control input is the sequence +u(t). H(q\) is deﬁned by: controller one needs: (1) To specify the desired control-loop performances. and more speciﬁcally in accordance with the desired bandwidth of the closed loop. 2. y(t)"H(q\) u(t). France).D.A. system identiﬁcation. compatible with the desired performance and the corresponding plant model. Principle of controller design. The basic rule is: f "(6 to 25) f !J Q where f is the sampling frequency and f !J is the desired Q bandwidth of the closed loop. control design and on-site commissioning. The methodology will be illustrated by its application to the control of the deposited zinc in hot-dip galvanizing at SOLLAC (Florange. The discrete-time model of the plant to be controlled is described in the time-domain by: L L y(t)"! a y(t!i)# b u(t!d!i) G G G G where d is the integer number of sampling periods contained in the time-delay of the plant.A.

at each sampling instant. The validation test enables L the best algorithm to be obtained for the estimation of the parameters. an objective validation can be made by carrying out statistical tests on the prediction error (t) and the predicted output y (t). which is either generated by a tracking reference model (Bm/Am) or stored in the computer memory. it requires an input signal of much lower magnitude than those used for step or frequency response. the digital ﬁlters R and S are designed in order to achieve the desired regulation performance. For a more detailed discussion see (Landau. i. generated by the computer (sequence of rectangular pulses with randomly variable duration). G G Fig. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 157 Therefore.. (known as the prediction error) is used L by a parameter-adaptation algorithm which. 3. (4) Validation of the identiﬁed model (structure and values of the parameters). A discrete-time model with adjustable parameters is implemented on the computer. In addition. y (t). ¹(q\) have the form: R(q\)"r #r q\2#r q\L0 L0 S(q\)"s #s q\2#s q\L1 (often s "1) L1 ¹(q\)"t #t q\2 t q\L2. Fig. The input is in general a very low-level pseudo-random binary sequence. Parameter estimation of discrete-time models. This approach provides much more accurate models than the methods based on step response or frequency response.D. L2 The corresponding time-domain expression of the control law is given by (s "1): L1 L0 u(t)"! s u(t!i)! r y(t!i) G G G G L2 # t y*(t#d#1!i). leading to particular choices of R. and the digital ﬁlter ¹ is designed afterwards in order to achieve the desired tracking performance. such that the estimated parameters are always unbiased. S(q\). 4. Digital PID can also be represented in this form. The error between the system output at instant t. The identiﬁcation methodology includes four steps: (1) Input-output data acquisition around an operating point. (2) Estimation (choice) of the model complexity (structure). The case of a controller operating on the regulation error (which does not allow the independent speciﬁcation of tracking and regulation performance) corresponds to ¹"R. will modify the model parameters in order to minimize this error. This structure has two degrees of freedom. The equation of the R-S-T canonical controller is given by: S(q\) u(t)#R(q\) y(t)"¹(q\) y*(t#d#1) where u(t) and y(t) are the input and output of the plant and y*(t#d#1) is the desired tracking trajectory.I. The polynomials R(q\). replacing q by z (the complex variable) in the expression of the pulse transfer operator gives the pulse transfer function. Once the model has been obtained. . For models with constant parameters. and the output predicted by the model. 5. (3) Estimation of the model parameters. The R-S-T digital controller The canonical structure of the R-S-T digital controller is represented in Fig. 1990. 1987). no unique parameter-estimation method exists which may be used successfully for all the types of disturbances. S and T. 4.e. y(t). 5. The R-S-T canonical structure of a digital controller. a good identiﬁcation of a plant model generally requires the use of an interactive system featuring various parameter-estimation methods and the corresponding validation techniques. Unfortunately. This structure allows achievement of diﬀerent levels of performance in tracking and regulation. Ljung. The principle of the identiﬁcation of discrete-time models is illustrated in Fig. using as input in general a centered pseudorandom binary sequence (PRBS) of small magnitude. One of the important facts to be emphasized is that the plant measurements are generally noisy.

1 Many control strategies can be applied to the design of the R-S-T controller by an appropriate reformulation. The only assumption is that the polynomials A(q\) and B(q\) characterizing the plant model do not have common factors. N°2. These polynomials are deﬁned by the performance speciﬁcations (e. the introduction of an integrator in the controller requires one to take H (q\)"1!q\. The ¹(q\) polynomial is chosen as: ¹(q\)"P(q\)/B(1) (B(1)"B(q\) for q"1). contain some prespeciﬁed ﬁxed parts. Once the closed-loop poles have been deﬁned. and most of the various designs can be related to it. Let the degrees of polynomials A(q\) and B(q\) be deﬁned by: n "deg A(q\). For this reason it is convenient to factorize the polynomials R(q\) and S(q\) as follows: R(q\)"H (q\) R(q\) 0 S(q\)"H (q\) S(q\) 1 where H (q\) and H (q\) are prespeciﬁed polyno0 1 mials.1. for various reasons. the pole placement can be considered as the basic design technique. the desired closed-loop poles are speciﬁed in the form: P(q\)"P (q\) P (q\) " $ where P (q\) speciﬁes the desired dominant poles of the " closed loop. and the tracking behaviour is described by the equation: y(t)"q\B\ B*(q\) y*(t#d#1). solving the equation: P(q\)"A(q\) S(q\)#q\ B(q\) R(q\) allows the determination of S(q\) and R(q\). However. as well as the special issue of European Journal of Control Vol.. with or without time delay. 1997). 1990. 1990. n "deg B(q\). B(1) In other words one follows the desired trajectory. See for example (Landau. P(q\) and the behaviour with respect to an output disturbance is given by the output sensivity function: A(q\) S(q\) S (q\)" WN A(q\) S(q\)#q\B B(q\) R(q\) A(q\) S(q\) " P(q\) where P(q\) deﬁnes the desired closed-loop poles (regulation behaviour). Astrom and Wittenmark. n "deg S(q\)"n #d!1 1 n "deg R(q\)"n !1 0 in which: S(q\)"1#s q\#2 s q\L1"1#q\ S*(q\) L1 R(q\)"r #r q\#2 r qL0. and featuring stable or unstable zeros.D. 1993).g. For example. L0 However. Landau et al. Then the above equation has a unique solution (assuming that A(q\) and B(q\) do not have common factors) for: n "deg P(q\))n #n #d!1 . ¨ 1990. 1995. Pole placement This control strategy can be used for plant models of any order. The controller polynomials S(q\)"H (q\) S(q\) 1 and R(q\)"H (q\) R(q\) are obtained by solving 0 the equation: P(q\)"A(q\) H (q\) S(q\) 1 #q\B\ B*(q\) H (q\) R(q\) 0 where P(q\) deﬁnes the desired closed-loop poles. and P (q\) speciﬁes the auxiliary poles of $ the closed loop. Note that unstable discrete-time zeros occur when a fractional delay larger than half of the sampling period is present. SN P(q\) In general. which will ensure the desired closed-loop poles. 1. The input sensitivity function which reﬂects the eﬀects of an output disturbance upon the plant input is given by: A(q\) R(q\) S (q\)"! . the integrator in the controller) and by considerations of robustness. For more details see (Landau.158 I. in general the polynomials R(q\) and S(q\) of the controller may. or when a high sampling frequency is used for . Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 The closed-loop control transfer operator (between r(t) and y(t)) is given by: q\B ¹(q\) B(q\) H (q\)" !* A(q\) S(q\)#q\B B(q\) R(q\) q\B ¹(q\) B(q\) " .. dedicated to a robust control benchmark. 3. ﬁltered through the plant zeros.

while the converse is not true (systems with good phase and gain margins can pass very close to the critical point). P(q\)"P (q\) ) B*(q\) ) P (q\).. -* ""S\(e\HU) " . the phase margin ( ). -* The modulus margin M is deﬁned as the radius of a circle. it is therefore suﬃcient simply to plot the frequency characteristics of the modulus (gain) of the output sensitivity function in dB.5 implies G*2 and '29° (the converse is not necessarily true). Note that M*0..e. the delay margin of G the system is deﬁned as: G. " $ ‘‘Internal model control’’ (Morari. "min G G Typical values of these robustness indicators are: — modulus margin: M*0.D. and can be viewed as an approximation of the pole placement in the sense of a certain quadratic criterion (Landau et al. d"0. Fig. These indicators are the gain margin ( G). ¨ 1990). 4. The modulus margin and the delay margin are the most interesting in applications. gain and phase margins. centered on [!1. j0] and the Nyquist plot of the open-loop transfer function: H (z\)"z\ B(z\) R(z\)/A(z\) S(z\).I.e. The delay margin is the maximal additional delay that will be tolerated in the open-loop system without causing an instability of the closed-loop system. P(q\)"A(q\) ) P (q\). 1989) corresponds to a pole-placement strategy where the desired closed-loop poles contain the poles of the plant model. i. which can be viewed as a particular case of the pole-placement strategy. In other words. j0] and tangent to the Nyquist plot of H (e\HU) (see Fig. n )2. gain and phase margins. In this case. characterized by the corresponding phase margins .5 (!6 dB) — delay margin: *¹ (sampling period) 1 — gain margin: G*2 (6 dB) — phase margin: 30°) )60°.2. one can use the strategy called ‘‘tracking and regulation with independent objectives’’. 6 illustrates the modulus. 1997). Landau. 6). Minimization of the H norm of S (e\HU) will maximize WN the modulus margin. If the Nyquist plot of the open-loop system intersects the unit circle at several cross-over frequencies G . Robustness Four indicators are generally used to express the robustness of a design in terms of the minimal distance with respect to the critical point [!1. 1992). "!"S (e\HU) " WN Note that a given value of the modulus margin will guarantee certain phase and gain margins. Bounds on the magnitude of the frequency-dependent model uncertainties convert to upper constraints upon the moduli of the various .. Predictive control strategies and an LQ control strategy using an appropriate formulation of the criterion to be minimized lead to an R-S-T controller.. The modulus margin is the minimal distance between the critical point [!1. j0] in the Nyquist plane. Relationship with other control strategies For plant models with stable zeros. Sensitivity functions are related to the robust stability of the closed loop with respect to plant model uncertainties. -* The result is that: M""1#H (e\HU) " . To obtain the modulus margin. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 159 continuous-time models having a diﬀerence of degree between denominator and numerator greater than or equal to 2 (Astrom and Wittenmark. where the desired closedloop poles contains the zeros of the plant. the orders of the plant model are limited to n )2. the modulus margin corresponds to the inverse of the H norm of the output sensitivity function. In this case: M dB"("S (e\HU) " )\ dB WN dB. 1990. WN Fig. the modulus margin ( M) and the delay margin ( ). WN "("S (e\HU) " )\. 3. Modulus. 6. i. but in accordance with the desired closed-loop performance. Both phenomena lead to the conclusion that the sampling frequency has to be chosen as low as possible. $ Digital PID can be designed using pole placement. see (Doyle et al.

when the plant contains an integrator. (b) input sensitivity function. Landau et al. 1997. it may not be possible to operate the plant in an open loop in order to achieve system identiﬁcation.160 I. The upper part represents the true closed-loop system.D. Such situations are encountered. one can also identify a new plant model. 1997). Templates for the sensitivity functions: (a) output sensitivity function. and the lower part corresponds to an adjustable predictor for the closed loop. with the same data.. Fig. 8 (Landau and Karimi. A basic scheme for plant model identiﬁcation in a closed loop is shown in Fig. for example. 1996). 8. Landau and Karimi. sensitivity functions. 1995). The new 5. . Signiﬁcant progress in this area has been made in the last few years. 1995. However. Typical templates for S and S are shown in Fig. 7. WN SN The upper and lower bounds on the output sensitivity function S in the high-frequency region come from the WN translation of the delay margin constraints in the frequency domain (Landau. a controller already exists. 6. techniques for plant identiﬁcation in closed-loop operation should be used. For a detailed presentation see (Van den Hof and Schrama. constraints imposed on the sensitivity functions can be translated into tolerated model uncertainties. Identiﬁcation of the closed loop will allow the performance achieved to be compared with the designed performance by comparing the achieved and the designed closed-loop poles. In other words. A design methodology that combines pole placement with the shaping of the sensitivity function has been developed in order to ensure both performance and robustness. It will also allow the robustness of the control schemes to be assessed by comparing the designed and achieved sensitivity functions in the frequency domain. Controller validation and on-line retuning As indicated in Section 1. 1997). Conversely. 1993. the model obtained in a closed loop will allow for better prediction of the behaviour of the closed-loop system. or when important drifts of the operating point may occur during input/output data acquisition. can be translated into desired templates for the sensitivity functions. These constraints. See (Landau. New algorithms dedicated to identiﬁcation in closed loops have been developed. Identiﬁcation in a closed loop In a number of practical situations. The error between the system output and the closed-loop predictor output (called a closed-loop output error) is used by a parameter-adaptation algorithm that will drive the parameters of the estimated plant model in order to minimize the error between the two closed-loop systems. but for various reasons cannot be disconnected. acquired in a closed loop. 7. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 Fig. validation of the designed controller is a key issue in assessing the eﬀective performance of the closed-loop system. Therefore. In a number of other situations. Landau et al. re-parameterized in terms of a known ﬁxed controller and an adjustable plant model. Plant model identiﬁcation in closed-loop operation. as well as those on the modulus margin and delay margin.. The input sensitivity function reﬂects both tolerance with respect to additive uncertainties. and the activity of the input in the presence of disturbances (high values in certain frequency regions indicate low model uncertainty tolerance and important stress on the actuator).

The principle of hot-dip galvanizing is illustrated in Fig.I. The measurement of the deposited zinc can be made only on the cooled. the corresponding values of the controller parameters will be used. Nonlinear static models have been developed for computing the appropriate pressure. In this case. which remove the excess zinc. Tight control (i. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 161 model. The most important part of the process is the hot-dip galvanizing. in a number of applications. 1995. Fig. a small variance in the controlled variable) will allow a more uniform coating and a reduction of the average quantity of deposited zinc per unit area. ‘‘Open-loop’’ adaptation. . ﬁnished strip. and then rises vertically out of the bath through the stripping ‘‘air knives’’. 10). the distance between the air knives and the strip. The objective of the control is to assure good uniformity of the deposited zinc. one can use an ‘‘open-loop’’ adaptive control (Fig. tight control of the deposited zinc per unit area has an important commercial impact since the average consumption for a modern galvanizing line is of the order of 40 tons per day (price+1 500 USD/ton).. The corresponding controllers are stored in a table. 1997). based on an identiﬁed model. 10). in addition to an improvement in quality. is then used for re-tuning of the controller. For each interval. one has to consider the ‘‘adaptation’’ of the controller. The eﬀect of the air knives depends on the air pressure. The term ‘‘adaptation’’ (adaptive control) refers to a set of techniques for the automatic tuning of the controller in real time.. ‘‘Closed loop’’ adaptive control. the characteristics of the dynamic model of the plant depend upon a set of measured variables. 7. and the strip speed may vary from 30 to 180 m/mn. This controller assures the desired performance for all the Fig. 1996.D. operating points located in the interval. 11. which deﬁne an operating point.e. Preheated steel strip is passed through a bath of liquid zinc. However. The remaining zinc on the strip surface solidiﬁes before it reaches the rollers. identiﬁed in the closed loop. Langer and Landau. a relevant operating point is selected and a corresponding controller is designed. Hot-dip galvanizing at SOLLAC (Florange) The objective of the galvanizing line is to obtain galvanized steel with formability. according to the table. One can distinguish between two basic adaptive control techniques: (1) ‘‘closed-loop’’ adaptive control (Fig. based on a current estimation of the plant model and the desired performance. Examples can be found in (Zhang et al. 8. 9) (2) ‘‘open-loop’’ adaptive control (Fig. Landau et al. As a consequence. Adaptation When ‘‘system identiﬁcation’’ plus ‘‘robust control design’’ does not allow one to obtain a single linear controller. distance and speed for a given desired value of the deposited zinc. and the speed of the strip. This procedure is used for two purposes: — improvement of a previous design — controller maintenance. The variety of products is very large in terms of deposited zinc thickness and steel strip thickness. whilst guaranteeing a minimum value of the deposited zinc per unit area.. 10. 9. which guide the ﬁnished product. When the plant is operating at a certain point. giving acceptable performance for the whole range of operating points because of the too-wide variations in the dynamic characteristics of the plant. The ‘‘closed-loop’’ adaptive control system usually combines a real-time identiﬁcation algorithm with the computation of the controller in real time. The range of operating points is divided into a number of operating intervals. in order to maintain the desired performance when the plant parameters vary. surface quality and weldability equivalent to uncoated cold rolled steel. The deposited zinc may vary between 50 to 350 g/m (each side).

When discretizing this model. '0. by using the pressure as the control variable. The identiﬁcation has been done with the coating process operating in an open loop. 1#a q\ The fractional delay (which corresponds to the presence of an additional term b q\) is negligible because of the way in which the sampling period ¹ is selected. relating variations in the pressure to variations in the deposited mass. one can compensate for the disturbances created by variations in distance and speed as well as by the term . The delay of the process will depend linearly on the speed. Identiﬁcation of the discrete-time plant model The process comprises the air-pressure control loop and the coating process. The sampling frequency has been chosen at each operating point.R. The corresponding linearized discrete-time model will be of the form: q\B (b q\) H(q\)" . Therefore. the major diﬃculty comes from the variable time-delay.B.R. However. 10. the model originally proposed by Harvey and Carton (1974) and completed by Jacobs (1991) can be used: m"KD » # K P where m is the deposited mass per unit area. Therefore. and d is the discrete-time delay (an integer). identiﬁcation and control is connected to the process through an industrial network. The control input to the process is the reference of the air pressure control loop. before a highfrequency sampling is undertaken (a multiple of the desired sampling frequency). the sampling period is tied to the strip speed using the formula: (¸/»)# ¹" . and the output of the process is the measured deposited mass per unit area (see Fig. » . In order to obtain a controller with a ﬁxed number of parameters. in order to have the discrete-time delay d"7. which can be approximated by a ﬁrstorder system. First. speed ( ») and distance ( D). of the form: G e\Q H(s)" . D is the distance between the air knives and the strip. was generated by a shift register with N"5 cells and a clock frequency equal to half of the sampling frequency (length of the D# »! P# K . The data acquisition is illustrated in Fig. 11. A linearized model around an operating point (P . 12). D ) can be obtained using a standard Taylor series ex pansion for variations of pressure ( P). K The pressure in the air knives is regulated through a pressure loop.D. Process description. the parameters of the model.B. accounts for unpredictable eﬀects and/or K modelling errors. P is the air pressure and » is the strip speed. (Pseudo Random Linary Sequence) of a magnitude of $4% with respect to the static pressure (P ). an analog anti-aliasing ﬁlter is used. (d"integer) Q d where d is a small additional time-delay due to the implementation. given above. 1#s¹ ¸ " » can be considered. Model of the process For an analysis of the process. The PC used for data acquisition. A digital anti-aliasing ﬁlter is inserted between the two samplers. K is a constant of proportionality. the delay of the discrete-time model should remain constant. It can be seen that. the control variable is the air pressure. 9. Fig. and » is the strip speed. It has the form: m"KD » # P . Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 dynamic model. this was Q conﬁrmed by the model identiﬁcation procedure. will depend on the distance D and on the speed ». 13. .S. The input used was a P. a continous-time linear .S.162 I. The P. At SOLLAC Ste Agathe. where ¸ is the distance between the air knives and the transducers.

12. One of the causes is the imperfect measurement of the strip/air-knives distance. 1993). 14 shows typical results. This variability will require a robust control design. The speed range and the distance range have been split into 3 regions.D. As both sides of the steel strip have to be galvanised. ‘‘Output error’’ consistently provided the best results for this application. 100 to 160 (average: 128) measurements have been used for the various identiﬁcations made in the diﬀerent regions of operation. a variability of the parameters is observed. The strip speed directly aﬀects the sampling period according to the relationship: ¸# ¹" Q » where is the equivalent time-delay of the industrial network and of the programmable controller used for pressure regulation. despite the variability of the model. For a detailed presentation of this application see (Fenot et al. both ‘‘front’’ and ‘‘back’’ models have been identiﬁed. and yielded the largest pulse width (10 ¹ ) comparable with the rise time of the process. an ‘‘open-loop adaptation’’ technique has been considered.I. However. a cross-correlation between the predicted output (using an output error predictor) and the output error has been used (Landau. Anti-wind-up procedures have been used for the implementation of the controller. Q These robustness margins assure satisfactory performance in a region of operation. Data acquisition.B. For each of these operating regions an identiﬁcation has been performed. even within a region of operation at a constant distance and with relatively small speed variations.R. This necessitated splitting the operation of the plant into several regions. 12. 1990). the following recursive identiﬁcation methods have been used (Landau. since the model does not have ﬁnite zeros) has been used. Controller design and adaptation The ‘‘tracking and regulation with independent objectives’’ (which in this case is equivalent to the poles placement. and because the positions and physical realisations of the two actuators are not symmetrical. giving a total of 9 operating regions. (For the ﬁrst four methods.S. It was observed that a signiﬁcant variability in the parameters occurs with a change of the operating points. Process block diagram. the whiteness test on the prediction error has also been used for validation and comparison). Results Fig. Fig. The choice made for the P. — distance between the air knives and the steel strip. 11. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 163 Fig. 13. 1990): — Recursive least squares — Extended least squares — Recursive maximum likelihood — Instrumental variable with auxiliary model — Output error — Generalized least squares For validation of the identiﬁed models and comparison of the models obtained with the diﬀerent methods. The open-loop adaptation is made with respect to: — steel strip speed. As no unique identiﬁcation method gives unbiased results for all types of disturbances. to be obtained with a delay margin greater than 2¹ . In order to ensure satisfactory performance for all regions of operation.. and controllers based on the identiﬁed model have been computed and stored in a table. obtained when one of the sides is under digital regulation and the other side is . Robust control design using an identiﬁed model and based on shaping of the sensitivity function allowed a modulus margin greater than !6 dB. allowed at least one full sequence to be sent for each experiment. sequence: 64). and a smooth transfer from open-loop to closed-loop operation has also been assured.

I.A. Res. Wittenmark. . application to a 360° ﬂexible arm. Identiﬁcation et Commande des Systemes (seconde ` edition). 369—383. 1996. Robust control of a 360° ﬂexible arm using the combined pole/placement sensitivity function shaping method. 14.. I. A.D. Rolland. MacMillan. Langer. Doyle. B. The economic impact of the improved performance has largely justiﬁed their use. Computer Controlled Systems — ¨ Theory and Design.. Hermes. Feedback Control Theory. Mathematical Modelling of Air Jet Coating Mass. A... J. Proceedings of the ﬁrst European Control Conference.J. G. Open loop adaptive digital control in hot-dip galvanizing. Regulation of Deposited Zinc in hotdip Galvanizing. I. London. 1997. System Identiﬁcation and Control Design..D.. This provides a better-quality ﬁnished product (extremely important in the automotive industry. Springer Verlag. 4(4)... Australia. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliﬀs.. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 Fig. B. J. Rep. Fenot. 1991). L.R.F. 1974. M. A. Prentice Hall. Jacobs. Typical performance of the digital regulation of the deposit zinc. C.. Landau. this corresponds to an annual saving over 350 000 USD.. These controllers have already been used in a signiﬁcant number of industrial applications (Rolland and Landau.D.. J. Barnier. 1993. for example). Francis.D. K. Tannenbaum. New York. Landau. Vigneron. 1997. Landau. I.J. Karimi. O. Control Engineering Practice 4(8).D.J.. 1992.. Adaptive Control.D.J. N.C. 1.. 1990. F. Prentice Hall.. ´ ` Landau. Control Engineering Practice 1(5). 1993. 13. Lozano. 1079—1088. 1990. Automatica 33(8).. under computer-aided manual control (the operator has on display a moving short-time history of the deposited zinc and applied pressure).. Software packages are available for the design. while still guaranteeing the speciﬁcations for minimum zinc deposition. Carlton.. IEEE T-CST. The closed-loop operation also reduces the task of the operator.D. Improvement of robust digital control by identiﬁcation in closed loop.L. C.D. J. Chen. Recursive algorithms for identiﬁcation in closed loop — A uniﬁed approach and evaluation. Grenoble. D. M’Saad. I. thereby creating better working conditions. References Astrom. I. Landau.. J. 1996. Englewood Cliﬀs. N.. System Identiﬁcation. Landau. implementation and commissioning of the R-S-T digital controllers. The average quantity of deposited zinc is reduced by 3% when closed-loop digital control is used. 1991.164 I.J... Theory for the user. (2nd Edition). Lysagh Ltd. Tech. 1987. D.R. Rey. 773—778. I.. Ljung.. A reduction in the dispersion of the coating is noticed when closed-loop digital control is used. Conclusions A methodology for the design and tuning of R-S-T digital controllers has been presented. N. Landau. Langer..S. Paris. 779—790.. Harvey. R. Taking into account the line production and the price of the zinc.

le PC va ´ vous aider.. 1995. Automatica 31(12). M. 1989. Prentice Hall. Iterative weighted leastsquares identiﬁcation and weighted lqg control design. Landau. F.I. R. Robust process control. 1991..R. Bitmead. Zaﬁriou. n°640. Landau / Control Engineering Practice 6 (1998) 155—165 Morari. Rolland. Dec.. Schrama. N. Pour mieux reguler. R.J. Identiﬁcation and control — closed-loop issues.. 31(11)..D. pp. 165 Zang.D.. M. Automatica. 71—73. ´ Van den Hof. Z. 1995. P. Gevers. .. Mesures.. I.

Tutorial de App Inventor

Aplicaciones móviles con App Inventor

Forever Love

MPC

Normativa Sobre Vibraciones

Predictive Control in Olive Oil Production

Torque Control

Closed Loop ID

Tutorial de Instalación de OpenCV

La BIBLIA de Nuestro Pueblo

La Biblia Version Jerusalem 1976

normalizacion

Good Tuning - A Pocket Guide

Control Systems

CIN_ROB

IEC_60617_SIMBOLOS

Doc6 a+B Colores+Radios

Info

SID Practica7 WinCC Iniciacion

Aria de Bach

Tarea05TCD

PID_Analogico

Aprenda matlab 7.0 como si estuviera en primero

- Read and print without ads
- Download to keep your version
- Edit, email or read offline

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CANCEL

OK

You've been reading!

NO, THANKS

OK

scribd

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->