IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 35, NO.
3, AUGUST 1988
State Estimation of Output-Decoupled Complex
Systems With Application to Fluid Pipeline
L. W. T A 0 AND
A bstract-Most industrial processes are complex systems characterized
by nonlinearity, high order, and even implicit dynamics. The design of a
Luenherger-type observer or an extended Kalman filter for state estima-
tion of such systems presents, in general, considerable difficulties. In this
paper, i t is shown that a state estimator can be designed and implemented
very easily if the system is output-decoupled, as is often the case in
process monitoring and control applications. Simulation study and
experiments on an experimental water pipeline show that the proposed
estimator works very well. Its estimation accuracy is nearly the same as
(hat of an extended Kalman filter, while its computational expenditure is
almost as small as the real-time system model.
I. INTRODUCTION
S TATE ESTIMATION theory for linear dynamic systems
has been fully developed over the past 20 years. However,
most industrial systems, such as hydraulic, chemical, and
thermal systems are nonlinear. They may also be characterized
by high order or distributed parameter. Moreover, dynamics
of some systems are expressed in implicit form, which often
requires an iterative solution technique. State estimation of
these complex systems still remains a challenge to control
engineers.
The Kalman filter is a powerful means for state estimation
[6], ["I, [ l l ] . It may give an optimal estimation of system
state in an ideal environment. However, there are a few facts
one has to bear in mind:
1) The optimal filter is optimal only for linear systems with
linear measurement and also when knowledge of system
dynamics and noise statistics is accurate enough;
2) The Kalman filter is more suitable for simple systems
than for complex ones with respect to the computational
burden of both computer and designer. For the computer, on-
line calculation of filter gain matrix often requires a heavy
computational expenditure. For the designer, it is always
difficult to determine a precise statistical model of the system
uncertainty and measurement noise [9];
3) For nonlinear systems, although an extended Kalman
filter may be used, it does not necessarily work well. Problems
such as divergency and poor estimation accuracy may be
encountered in some applications;
4) Since implementation of a Kalman filter is done almost
always with certain approximations, the optimal filter is
probably never optimal in the real world.
Manuscript received July 27, 1987; revised March 1, 1988. This work was
supported by the Science Fund of the Chinese Academy of Science.
The authors are with the Department of Automation, Tsinghua University,
Beijing, China.
IEEE Log Number 8822 151.
0278-0046/88/0800-0469$01.OO
469
C. Z . FANG
The Luenberger-type observer is another widely used means
for system state estimation. In comparison with the Kalman
filter, it provides more design freedom to include some
properties such as robustness to system parameter variation.
Generally speaking, computational expenditure of an observer
is much less than that of a Kalman filter. However, the main
drawback of the Luenberger-type observer is that it gives
essentially no consideration to measurement noise. Besides,
for nonlinear systems, observer design still remains a very
difficult task [ 11, [ 131.
Owing to the reasons mentioned above, applications of
optimal filter and Luenberger observer to most industrial
processes are not so widespread and successful as might be
expected from their theoretical development. State variables of
many industrial processes are still estimated by real-time
process models [4], [SI.
In this paper, we attempt to tackle the state estimation
problem for a class of complex systems, namely, systems that
are output decoupled. This is different from discussions about
the reduced-order observer o r the reduced-order Kalman filter
such as in [3]. A state estimator of simple structure is proposed
whose computational expenditure is only about the same as a
real-time process model. A simulation study on a fluid
pipeline, which is a nonlinear high-order system, shows that
estimation accuracy of this estimator is almost as good as that
of an extended Kalman filter.
11. O N STATE ESTIMATION
OF OUTPUT-DECOUPLED COMPLEX
SYSTEMS
We consider here a class of complex systems that often
emerges in process monitoring and control. Some charactcris-
tics of these systems are:
1) The system is stable by itself or under control;
2 ) The state of the system may be observed by a real-time
system model; however, some kind of filter or observer is
required to improve estimation accuracy and to reduce its
sensitivity to uncertainties;
3) The system is output decoupled, which means there exists
one-to-one correspondence between the individual system
state and system output variable. This is often the case in
applications to pipeline networks, river systems. and some
other industrial processes;
4) System input and output are measured by industrial
instrumznts with known precision.
To describe such a system in general, we may use the
following implicit discrete-time state-space model:
F(Xk+l,xk, Uk+I+tk+I)=O (1)
O 1988 IEEE
470 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 35, NO. 3, AUGUST 1988

where xk+ I , xk E R" are system state vectors at time k + 1
and k , respectively, U E R Qis a system input vector, and 4 E
R Q is zero-mean Gaussian input measurement noise. It is
assumed that state xk+ I is uniquely determinable from (1) if
x k , Uk + and l k + are known. Generally speaking, a solution
of & + I can be determined by an iterative optimization
technique [ 101 such as in the case of the river routine problem
[41.
The measurement model of output-decoupled systems is
given by
Yk= cxk + q k
or
rate design procedure, possible divergency, and/or poor
estimation accuracy.
Considering the difficulties associated with the design of the
general form observer or filter ( 5 ) , we examine here a special
form of observer that results in a very simple design
procedure. To begin with, we assume that the dimension of
output in ( 2 )is m = 1. Any measurable state may serve as the
system output, but here we choose to specify cI = 1 so that (2)
simplifies to
Yk=xlf)+q7/,. (6)
(2)
Then, the estimator ( 5 ) becomes

where x; = [ x f ) ,x f ) , . . , x p ) ] E R", is a state vector, y ; The validity of this assumption will be discussed later. In this
= [Jy,
Yj?', . . . ,yi")] E R", m 5 n , is an output vector, c, case, we need only to design g l . Rewrite (7) as
is the instrument coefficient of an i* output variable, q t ) ,
zero-mean Gaussian noise, is a measurement error of i"
output, and C is a measurement matrix defined by (2)and (3).
A state estimator may be an open-loop or a close-loop system.
As an open-loop state estimator, the real-time system model and remember that i?fi is an estimate of x t i I by the real-
time model (4) and Y k + I is the noise contaminated x f i I . In this
manner, the design of an observer gain turns out to be a
problem of how to obtain an optimal estimation of x t i I from
may suffer from slow convergency speed of initial estimation both of its observations 2 ! t I l kand y k + l with different
error and high sensitivity to modelling uncertainty and precision. Assume that i ! -
I;
,k X ( x f i I , ul), while yk+ -
measurement noise. For this reason, the Luenberger-type x(xjfiI , U*). Since observations of Yk+ I and 2:; I ! k(the latter
observer or the Kalman filter are often used, which have is obtained from input measurement U + [ and system model
feedback from the difference between measured and estimated (4)) are generally independent of each other, then from the
states maximum likelihood principle, an optimal estimation of xi1;I
i k + l = g k + l ! k + G(yk+l-cik+l;k) ( 5 ) may be determined by maximizing the joint probability density
where i k + Ilk is the system state at instant k +
1 estimated by
real-time model (4) based on the estimated state at instant k ,
and G is the estimation error weighting matrix (or estimator
gain matrix). In the case of the extended Kalman filter, G is
calculated on-line whilst a constant G is often used in a
Luenberger observer. In both cases, the design and computing
of G may cause a number of theoretical and practical
problems. The first problem to be considered in designing G is
to make the feedback system (5) stable. The second is to obtain
an optimal estimator in the sense of least square error or
maximum likelihood. Then there may be problems of robust-
ness, etc. Thus, it can be appreciated that for a complex
system with nonlinearity, high order, and even implicit
dynamics, the design of Luenberger observer weighting
matrix G with good properties is in general very difficult,
while the computation of an optimal filter gain G is very time-
and storage-consuming . Besides, since an extended Kalman
filter is based on linearization, it may suffer from overelabo-
T A 0 AND FANG. ESTIMATION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS
u p s t r e a m end
Fig. 1.
It is obvious that
O s g l I1, or O s 1 -gl s 1.
When g l = 0, the state estimator reduces to the real-time
model (4) and when g, = 1, yk+I is taken as the true value of
.If; I and is irrespective of 2;;
A problem left to be solved is how to determine u1and a2.u2
can be determined simply by the precision of the transducer of
y. In stationary operating conditions, uI reflects the combined
effect of modelling error, input measurement noise, and
process noise. Its determination should be based on the
knowledge of input transducer precision and system uncer-
tainty. In the initial stage of state estimation, owing to lack of
knowledge of the initial system state, it is reasonable to assume
uI to be much larger than u2. This results in g l = 1.
Experience shows that by assigning gl = 1, both stability and
initial convergency speed will be satisfactory.
In its normal tracking stage, direct determination of uI may
present some difficulty, so that it becomes inconvenient to use
(13). However, in this case, g l can be determined directly,
e.g., from real-time data of iyi I and yk+ by minimization
K2
Min (yk+l-X~~l~k)2-
'I K=KI
This optimization problem may be solved by a nongradient
method such as that described by Eykhoff [2].In this way,
determination of uI and u2 is not needed.
Recall the assumption made in (9) that every g, equals zero
except g l . Thus, a question naturally arises about how much
this feedback from only one output to one system state can
contribute to the entire state estimation xk = [ x y ) ,x f ) ,
x f ) I T . This problem is important also because it strongly
relates with the problem of optimal location design of process
transducer.
In fact, in the system (4), (7)-(9), feedback from a scalar
output y k + l to one system state x y i , at time k 1 means a +
feedback from yk+ I to all states xt\,, i = 1, 2, . . . , n at time
k + 2. However, this feedback from yk+ to xk+2 is carried
out by the system itself, which can be seen by considering a
linear system
System: Xk+ I =AXk + BUk+ 1, yk = CXn
State estimator: & I =A i k + Buk+I , + GC(xk+I -2k+ ~ ; k )
where all the elements of matrix GC are zero except the
element locating at the first row and first column. Then, it is
47 1
downstream end
Discrete state representation of pipeline.
(14)
which means feedback from one state estimation error G ( y k
- C&;k-I ) contributes to entire state estimation xk I through
weighting matrix A G . However, A G is partially designed by
the system itself.
It should also be noted that in order to make feedback from a
single output y to a single state x(I) effective on the entire
system state estimation, both observability with respect to y
and controllability with respect to x(I) are required. This
requirement on controllability is obvious by noting that the
system (7)-(9) is a control system with control variable yk I
- $1)
k+l:k'
So far, we have assumed that the dimension of output in ( 2 )
is m = 1. It is obvious that the use of still more output
variables (m > 1) will bring no difficulty to the design of G
since its element g, can be treated independently.
111. APPLICATION ESTIMATION
TO STATE OF FLUID
PIPELINE
Pipelines are widely used in hydroelectrical installations,
(1 5 ) nuclear and thermal power stations, and fuel supply systems as
well as in gas, oil, water, and slurry transportation. For the
purpose of monitoring, control and economic operation, real
time estimation of the dynamic distribution of pressure and
flow along a pipeline is highly desirable.
From the basic nonlinear partial differential equations of
pipeline dynamics [ 141, a nonlinear discrete-space discrete-
time state space model of pipeline can be obtained [13].
Consider a fluid pipeline shown in Fig. 1 with total length L,
e ,
and assume that there are no power sources or branch nodes
within it. By discretizing L, into N equal-length sections and
defining the state vector of the pipeline as
Xk =
x(2), . . . x(N- I ) , X(N), . . . , X ( 2 N ) ]7-
=[HI,f f z , . * * , "-1, Qo, QI, ' ' ' 9 QNI;
where * denotes the transpose of [ .]; Hiand Q,, i = 0 , 1,
[ e ]
2, . . . , N are piezometric head and flowrate respectively at
discrete points throughout the pipeline, and k denotes the kth
(16) sampling moment (discrete time coordinate). For simplicity,
the pipeline inner diameter and friction factor are assumed to
be uniform over the whole length of pipeline. Then the state
space representation of the pipeline can be obtained as
(17)
x k +I = A X / + + U + S k + I , Q,2 0
, MxL.852 (19)
where Q; 2 0 means fluid always flows downstream and
472 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL 35. NO 3, AUGUST 1988

xi 852 .” [Hf852 HI 852 . . ., H f i 8 5 2 ,

’ 2 ’
QA 852, . . ., Qk852 J [ here b = a/gF, r = fLP/2gDFN,D is the inner diameter, f is
U I [0.5H,,k, 0 , . . * , 0 , O . ~ H N H
, ~o, , ~1 /+b , the friction factor, F is the cross-sectional area, “a” is wave
speed, and g is gravity acceleration. Temperature distribution
0.5Ho,k/b? 09 * * * 7 0, -o.5HN,k/b, -“,k+ along the pipeline can also be included in the state x if

0 1/2 0 . a . 0 i b/2 0 -b/2 0 . * . . . 0

I
. II

1/2 0 1/2 * * 0 b/2 0 - b/2 .

I
. . ( * .
I

0 0 : *

. . I
I . . .
II

* 1/2 0 1/2 ; * 0
I
I .

0 . . . 0 1/2 0
I
I O . . . . . 0 b/2 0 - b/2
A=
-1/b 0 . . . . . 0
I

; 0 1 0 . . . . . . . 0
I
* II

0 - 1/2 b . * j 1/2 0 1/2 *

I
* II

1/2 b 0 . 0
. .
I
I
I
. .
0 0 ; *
. . 1
I . . .
I

* - 1/2b 1 0
1
I .
I

. 1/2b 0 j * 1/2 0 1/2

II .
I

o . . . . a 0 l / b j
I
0 . . e . . . . 0 1 0

I
o...0 ; -r/2 0 r/2 0 . 0 corresponding energy equation and fluid state equations are
I
I considered.
I
I

. I 0 -r/2 0 r/2 - System output is defined as the flowrate at upstream end

I
; . . . . Y , = cxk + ~k =xlfl’ + ~ k (= Q o ) ~+ ~ k . (20)
. I . 0
I
I This pipeline model has been proved quite satisfactory by
I I .
experiments on a model water pipeline [12], [13].
It should be pointed out that this mathematical model of
fluid pipeline is not unique. For gas pipelines, a direct
. II
difference scheme is often used that results in an implicit high-
M= order nonlinear expression [8]. If the friction factor of the
pipeline is not small, a second-order approximation technique
should be considered [15] that will result in a more compli-
cated model than that given below. However, without loss of
generality we use the simple model for a clear presentation of
this paper.
In order to illustrate the properties of the proposed state
estimator, we also give the following extended Kalman filter
[7] for comparison:
.
I
I
I
. 0
I
=k==r?k;k-I+Gk(yk-C=k~k-~) (21)
I .
I

. I . . -r/2 b 0 - r/2b

I
I
I
I .
I

o...o; 0 . . . . 0 -r/b 0
I
T A 0 A N D F A N G . ESTIMATION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS 473

[ A + M diag { 1 .852(.?p)0.'52}] T+ s k - 1 (24)

where s k is the covariance matrix of system noise [ k , R k is the

variance of q k , Gk is the filter gain matrix at moment k , I is the
identity matrix. The symmetrical property of the estimation 0 120m
error covariance matrices pk, P k l k - I was utilized in imple-
Fig. 2. Schematic layout of the simulated pipeline system
menting this algorithm on computer in order to reduce the
computation burden.
A horizontal water pipeline with inner diameter of 10 mm
and length of 120 m is simulated (Fig. 2). The piezometric
head of the water tank at the upstream end is about 55 m and
upon it is superposed a pseudo-random binary fluctuation
whose maximum deviation is about 5 m. Regulating valves are ----- e x t e n d e d K a l m a n filter

mounted at upstream and downstream ends in order to get a -p r o p o s e d estimator

proper operating state. The real-time model of the pipeline is
discretized into 12 equal-length sections, i.e., N = 12 so that
the order of model (19) is 24. Four pressure transducers are
located at 0, 20, 100, I20 m, respectively to give two
boundary measurements Ho and H 1 2and two inner observa-
tions H2 and H l o .Two flowmeters, Qo and Q 1 2 are , mounted
at the upstream and downstream ends. Among them, Ho and
H I 2are used as system input and Qois used as system output y ,
while H2, Hlo, and Q12are used to check the performance of
the state estimators. The sampling period of measurement is
chosen to be the travel time of pressure wave across one
pipeline section. All measurements are corrupted by additive
zero-mean Gaussian white noise whose standard deviations are
about 0.34 percent of the average value of the corresponding Fig. 3 . Estimation errors of piezometric head at 2 111. - HL).
(14.
pressure or flowrate. This is approximately the case when
transducers with 1 -percent precision are used.
When an extended Kalman filter is used, R k is assumed to
be equal to the variance of measurement noise of Qo, 0.9 x
while the covariance matrix of system noise Sk cannot
be determined so straightforwardly. Many trials have been
made to obtain a most suitable value distribution of Sk E
R24x24,so that the difference between the measured and
estimated states is minimal. The optimal Sk thus found is in the
form of 1, Osk<50
I g,, k I50.
l l a 2 a2 . . . a2 l a b - . . . ab
The effect of g,, 0 5 g, 5 1 , on the performance of the
estimator can be judged by the average squared estimation
a2 . . . a2 11a2i ab * . ab error

For each value of g,, J ( . ) is computed for the output Qo as well

as for certain measured states H 2 , H l o ,and Q12.The results
are given in Fig. 4 together with those of the Extended Kalman
Filter (EKF) (21)-(25). Since it is a simulation study,
where b2 = 5. x l o - ' ' , a* = 1 . x lo-'. The initial value of covariance u t of the estimation error 2r:)l,h- xil:)l and
PA is assumed as Po = diag {200., . * . , 200., 2. x IO-', covariance CT,' of the measurement error y k +I - xil:)lcan be
2. x l o - ' } .
e . . , calculated. Their values are
The convergency
- property
. . . of the extended Kalman filter is
shown in Fig. 3 together with that of the proposed state a ~ = 4 . 4 ~ 1 0 - a' ~f = 9 . 0 ~
4 74 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS. VOL. 35. NO. 3, AUGUST 1 9 8 8

.3?
Extended
.-_.. Kalman F i l t e r l E K F l
~ proposed estimator .3?

solenoid -L_l j
valve
Fig. 5 . Schematic layout of the experimental pipeline system

E
c
YO1 1 -m e a s u r e d
..... e s t i m a t e d
H j

orooosed estimator
H3 b y t h e

. . .
0. .I .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .B .? 1. Igs)
U 1 7
Fig. 4. Relationship between average estimation errors and g,

6 20
Thus, according to (13), g, should be
: I
N

g,= o : / ( o : + o : ) = 4.4/(4.4 + 9.0) = 0.328. 10

TIME I S e c o n d I

This approximately meets the experimental result given in Fig. 0. 0.5 1.0

4 where J(Qo), J(Qt2),J(H2), and J(H,,) reach their Fig. 6. Estimation and measured piezomctric head at 20 in. (H,).
respective minimal values when g, are 0.35, 0.39, 0.4, and
0.47. It is interesting to give it a physical interpretation. This
pipeline system has three measurements Qo, Ho, and H l z ,but TABLE I
COMPARISON OF ESTIMATION ACCURACY
theoretically only two boundary conditions, one at the up-
stream end and another at the downstream end, are sufficient. J(H3) JIROI J 1818)

At the upstream end, Qo or Ho may be used as system input. Proposed e s t i s a t o r l g s = . 7 ) .356 . 4 5 1 ~-

1G-~ .397x10Vb
,364 .434~10-~ .388~10-~
They have the same effect on the entire system behavior. On Extended Kalaan f i l t e r

the downstream end, since friction of the pipeline is small, real-time model lg,=OI 1 .510 [ .5hlxIG~b I .517~10-~

input H I *has almost the same effect on upstream pressure and

flow as Ho and Qohave. Thus, Qo, Ho, H 1 2contribute nearly
the same amount to pipeline dynamic behavior, especially
when they have the same measurement noise. So, if Ho, H12
are used as system input, a 113 contribution should come from
measurement of Qo, i.e., g, = 1/3 = 0.33.
From the above simulation results, it is interesting to note
that the extended Kalman filter has almost the same estimation
error as our proposed estimator when g, = 0.4 (Fig. 4).
However, it is much cheaper to use the proposed state
estimator when computational expenditure is considered.
Computation of this estimator is nearly the same as the system
model and a structure-based technique can be used to simplify
its computation. The executing time of the estimator on a
microcomputer (CPU: Intel-8086) is about 0.2 s per step,
which is only about 1/40 of that of the extended Kalman filter.
No matrix needs to be stored in the proposed estimator, while
at least three 24 x 24 matrices should be stored when the
extended Kalman filter is used.
IV. EXPERIMENTAL
RESULTS
An experimental pipeline system has been installed in our
laboratory, the schematic layout of which is shown in Fig. 5 .
At the upstream end of the pipeline are two series-connected
pumps, a bypass pipe with a gatevalve A and a solenoid valve
B driven by an electrical m-sequence in order to stimulate
pipeline transients. The maximum pressure fluctuation at the
upstream end is less than 6 percent of its mean value. The
shortest and longest impulse widths of the m-sequence are 50
and 350 ms, respectively. A micro-computer (CPU: Intel-
8086) with a 12-bit A/D converter is used. The total length of
the copper pipe is 150 m, but only 120 m was used in this
experiment. Pipe diameter is 10.0 mm uniformly. Four quick-
response pressure transducers are mounted at 0, 20, 100, and
120 m, respectively. The piezometric head at the upstream end
is about 55 m and the velocity of flow is about 1.1 m/s. The
pipeline is discretized into 18 sections and sampling period is
about 5 ms. The proposed state estimator (27)-(30) and the
Extended Kalman Filter (21)-(25) are applied to this pipeline.
Fig. 6 shows the measured piezometric head at 20 m from
upstream end (H3) and its estimation by our proposed
estimator (gsoptimal = 0.7). At the instant t = 0.6 s, the second
pump is switched into operation to bring about a violent
pressure fluctuation. It can be noted that the estimator tracks
the pressure change very well. Table I lists the resulting
.I(x(')). Convergency properties of estimation errors of the
proposed estimator and the real-time model (i.e., g, = 0) are
compared in Fig. 7. It can be seen that the accuracy of our
proposed estimator is quite satisfactory. The execution time of
the proposed estimator is 0.3 s per step on the same
microcomputer as used in the simulation study. It is only 1/100
of the execution time of the extended Kalman filter.
V. CONCLUSIONS
To estimate the state of output-decoupled complex dynamic
systems, a state estimator is proposed in this paper that is very
TA0 AND FANG ESTIMATION OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS 475

REFERENCES
[I] D. Bestle and M. Zeitz, “Canonical form observer design for non-
linear time-variable systems,” In[. J. Control, vol. 38, pp. 419-431,
-H J - H ~ o f t h e proposed ehtimdtor 1983.
-..__
HI-H; of t h e r e a l - t i m e model 121 P. Eykhoff, System Identification, Parameter and State Estima-
tion. New York: Wiley, 1974, p. 361.
[3] F. W . Fairman and L. Luk, “On reducing the order of Kalman filter
for discrete-time stochastic systems having singular measurement
noise,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., vol. AC-30, pp, 1150-1 152,
1985.
a D. L. Fread, “Channel routing,” in HydrologicalForecasting, M. G .
[4]
v
0
Anderson and T. P. Burt, Eds. New York: Wiley, 1985, ch. 14.
E
0 [SI R . A. Furness, “Modern pipeline monitoring techniques,” Pipes and
(L
Y
P- Pipelines International, vol. 30, no. 3. pp. 7-10, 1985.
161 A. Gelb, “Dual contributions of optimal estimation theory in aerospace
TIME
applications,” IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 3-
13, 1986.
(71 A. H. Jazwinski, Stochasfic Processes and Filtering Theory. New
York: Academic, 1970.
[8] G. Lappus and G. Schmidt, “Supervision and control of gas transporta-
tion and distribution systems,” in Proc. IFAC/IFIP 6th Int. Conf.
Digital Computer Applications to Process Control, p. 251, 1980.
[9] P. S . Maybeck, Stochastic Models, Estimation and Control, vol.
2. New York: Academic, 1982.
[IO] J . M. Ortega and W. C . Rheinboldt, Iterative Solution of Non-Linear
Fig. 7. Estimation errors of the estimator and real-time model. Equations in Several Variables. New York: Academic. 1970.
[ I 11 KT C. Shet and B. V. Rao, “An overview of the Kalman algorithm.”
Int. J. Electron., vol. 59, pp. 657-665, 1985.
simple in concept and easy to design. Simulation study and test 1121 L. W. Tao and C . Z. Fang, “Diagnosis of a class of faults in distributed
results on an experimental water pipeline show that this parameter systems,’’ Preprints of IFAC loth World Congress
(Munich), vol. 3 , pp. 80-85. 1987.
estimator works very well. Its estimation accuracy is nearly 1131 ~, “Robust observer design for fluid pipeline.” Int. J. Control,
the same as an extended Kalman filter, while its computation vol. 47, no. 2 , pp. 601-603, 1988.
expenditure is only about the same as the system real-time [I4] E. B. Wylie and V . L. Streeter, Fluid Transients. Ann Arbor: FEB
Press, 1983.
model. Both the controllability and observability of the system 1151 E. B. Wylie, “The microcomputer and pipeline transients,” J .
are required. Hydraulic Engineering, vol. 109, pp. 1723-1739, 1983.