WEEK 6 MODULE 6 - Part 2 NN Models of Three Tank System1

CHE 509: Process Dynamics
MODULE 6:
Empirical Modeling and Control of Amira Three Tank
System Using Artificial Neural Networks (ANN)
Ayorinde Bamimore, Ph.D.

Department of Chemical Engineering
Obafemi Awolowo University
Module Objectives
▪ To be able to model Amira three-tank
system using ANN models,
▪ To be able to control the Amira three-tank
system using ANN-based control
techniques,
Obafemi Awolowo University 2

Chemical Engineering
Amira Three-Tank System
q1 q2
Tank 3
Tank 2
H1
q13 q32
Pump
Pump
H3 𝑺𝒑 , 𝝁 𝟐
H2
1
2
𝑺𝒑 , 𝝁 𝟏 𝑺𝒑 , 𝝁𝟑
d1 d3 d2 q20
Figure 6.30: A schematic of the three tank system with labels

Amira Three-Tank System
Figure 6.31: Photograph of the three-tank system

Dynamic Model of the Three-Tank System
The change in the levels of water inside tanks 1, 2 and 3 are modeled by ODE:
𝒅𝒉𝟏 (6.50)
𝑨 = 𝝁𝟏 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟏 − 𝒉𝟑 ). √|𝒉𝟏 − 𝒉𝟑 | + 𝒒𝟏 − 𝒅𝟏
𝒅𝒕
𝒅𝒉𝟐 (6.51)
𝑨 = 𝝁𝟑 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 ). √|𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 |
𝒅𝒕
− 𝝁𝟐 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟐 ). √|𝒉𝟐 | + 𝒒𝟐 − 𝒅𝟐
𝒅𝒉𝟑 (6.52)
𝑨 = 𝝁𝟏 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟏 − 𝒉𝟑 ). √|𝒉𝟏 − 𝒉𝟑 |
𝒅𝒕
− 𝝁𝟑 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 ). √|𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 |−𝒅𝟑

Dynamic Model of the Three-Tank System
𝐴 =Cross-sectional area of the tank=149cm2

𝑆𝑝 =Cross-sectional area of the connecting pipes=0.5 cm2
The flow coefficients are given as
𝝁𝟏𝟎 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟒, 𝝁𝟐𝟎 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟕, 𝝁𝟑𝟎 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟐
𝑔 =acceleration due to gravity=981cm2/s
Nominal operating point:
𝒄𝒎𝟑 𝒄𝒎𝟑
𝒒𝟏𝟎 = 𝟑𝟐 , 𝒒𝟐𝟎 = 𝟒𝟑
𝒔𝒆𝒄 𝒔𝒆𝒄
𝒉𝟏𝟎 = 𝟑𝟕. 𝟖 𝒄𝒎, 𝒉𝟐𝟎 = 𝟏𝟓. 𝟐 𝒄𝒎, 𝒉𝟑𝟎 = 𝟐𝟔. 𝟗𝟕 𝒄𝒎

Linearized Model of the Three-Tank System
Linearizing Equations (6.50-6.52), and taking the leaks 𝑑𝑖 = 0 yields the following
linear state space model:

𝒅𝒉𝟏
𝒅𝒕 𝒉𝟏
𝒅𝒉𝟐 𝒒𝟏
𝒅𝒕
= 𝑨 [𝒉𝟐 ] + 𝑩 [𝒒 ] (6.53)
𝟐
𝒅𝒉𝟑 𝒉𝟑
[ 𝒅𝒕 ]
𝒉𝟏
𝒉 𝟏 𝟎 𝟎 𝒉
[ 𝟏] =[ ] [ 𝟐]
𝒉𝟐 𝟎 𝟏 𝟎
𝒉𝟑 (6.54)

Linearized Model of the Three-Tank System
Where:
−𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟓 𝟎 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟓

𝑨=[ 𝟎 −𝟎. 𝟎𝟐𝟓𝟕 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟎𝟗],
𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟓 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟎𝟗 −𝟎. 𝟎𝟏𝟗
𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟔𝟕𝟏 𝟎
𝑩=[ 𝟎 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟔𝟕𝟏]
𝟎 𝟎

Data collection for Identification, Validation and Testing
For the purpose of deriving control models, the SIMULINK model of the
experimental tank system was excited by simultaneous random inputs 𝑞1 and 𝑞2 .
The input signal 𝑞1 was designed to have a mean value of 28 cm3/sec and a
variance of 200 while 𝑞2 was designed with a mean value of 43 cm3/sec and a
variance of 1000. The switching time for both inputs was chosen as 200 seconds.
By sampling the process at every 1 second, 20000 data were collected and
plotted in Figure . Of the 20000 data collected, the first 14000 were used for
identification, the next 3000 for validation while the last 3000 were used for
testing.

Figure 6.32a: Simulink model of the three-tank system

70 40
60
30
50
Height 1[cm]
Height 2[cm]
40
20
30
20
10
10
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
4 4
x 10 x 10
70
80
60
Pump 1 flow [cm3/s]
Pump 2 flow [cm3/s]

50 60
40
40
30
20
20
10 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
T ime[Samples] 4 T ime[Samples] 4
x 10 x 10
Figure 6.32b: Input-output data collected

Linear Model Validation
Figure 6.33:Validation results: Linear model prediction vs. process

output for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

Linear Model Validation
Figure 6.34: parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

FFNN model identification and Control of the three-tank-system
Due to the inability of the linear model to represent the process, a FFNN
model was therefore considered for the process. A feedforward multi-layer
perceptron (MLP) neural network model with the following topology is hereby
chosen with 8 inputs, 7 hidden layers and 2 output layer, as shown in Figure .
A nonlinear autoregressive exogenous (NARX) model of the following form is
chosen for the process:
ℎ (𝑘 − 1), ℎ2 (𝑘 − 1), 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 1), 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 1),

[ℎ̂1 (𝑘) ℎ̂2 (𝑘)] = 𝑓𝐹𝐹𝑁𝑁 ( 1 ) (6.53)
ℎ1 (𝑘 − 2), ℎ2 (𝑘 − 2), 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 2), 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 2),

Using the data set collected in Figure , a MLP ANN model was trained for the
process using the MATLAB ANN toolbox. The training algorithm chosen is
Levenberg-Marquardt. A comparison of the process output with the FFNN output
as shown in together with the computed MSE=0.0083 showed that the FFNN
gives a good representation of the process.
The final ANN model obtained after training is:
𝑦(𝑘) = 𝑊𝑜𝑢 [𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝑖𝑛 𝜓(𝑘 − 1) + 𝑏𝑖𝑛 )] + 𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 (6.54)

where
𝑦(𝑘) = [ℎ1 (𝑘) ℎ2 (𝑘)]
𝜓(𝑘 − 1) =
[ℎ1 (𝑘 − 1) ℎ2 (𝑘 − 1) ℎ1 (𝑘 − 2) ℎ2 (𝑘 − 2) 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 1) 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 1) 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 2) 𝑞2 (𝑘 −
The activation function is chosen as:
2
𝑓ℎ (𝑥 ) = ( −1
1+𝑒 −2𝑥 )
The model parameters can be requested for.
The i-step prediction model used for NMPC design is then
𝑦(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) = 𝑊𝑜𝑢𝑡 [𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝑖𝑛 𝜓(𝑘 + 𝑖 − 1) + 𝑏𝑖𝑛 )] + 𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡

FFNN Architecture Selected for the three-tank-system
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌)
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
𝒒𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌)
𝒒𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒒𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
𝒒𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
Figure 6.35: FFNN topology selected for the three-tank system

FFNN Model Validation
Figure 6.36:Validation results FFNN model prediction vs. process

output for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

FFNN Model Validation
Figure 6.37:Parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

RNN model identification and Control of the three-tank-system
RNN was equally considered for the control of the tank process, with its topology
selected as 2 inputs, 8 hidden layers and 2 output layer.
Using the data set collected in Figure , a RNN model was trained for the process
using the MATLAB ANN toolbox. The training algorithm chosen is Levenberg-
Marquardt. A comparison of the process output with the RNN output as shown in
together with the computed MSE=0.1493 showed that the RNN gives a good
representation of the process.

The final RNN model obtained after training is:
𝑦(𝑘 + 1 + 𝑖 ) = 𝑊𝑜 𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝐼 𝑢(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) + 𝑊𝐿 𝐻(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) + 𝑏𝐼 ) + 𝑏𝑜
where
𝑦(𝑘) = [ℎ1 (𝑘) ℎ2 (𝑘)]
𝑢(𝑘) = [𝑞1 (𝑘) 𝑞2 (𝑘)]
2
𝑓ℎ (𝑥 ) = ( −1
1+𝑒 −2𝑥 )
A comparison is made among the three model types considered for the control of
the three-tank process.

FFNN gives the best accuracy with the lowest MSE of 0.0083, followed by RNN
with MSE of 0.1493, the linearized model gives the least accuracy with a MSE of
1.85.

RNN Model Validation
Figure 6.38:Validation results: RNN model prediction vs. process output

for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

RNN Model Validation
Figure 6.39: Parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

FFNN-based Nonlinear Model
Figure 6.40a: Block diagram for implementing ANN model based NMPC

NMPC control of the three-tank-system using FFNN and RNN
With both the identified FFNN and RNN models as the prediction models; and
the tuning parameters selected as in LMPC, a nonlinear predictive controller was
designed and implemented on the Simulink model of the tank system, with 𝑢(𝑘),
∆𝑢(𝑘) and Laguerre filter parameters as decision variables in the optimization
algorithms. The simulation results of implementing these control algorithms as
plotted in Figures 6.40(b) and 6.41 show an excellent setpoint tracking with no
overshoot and undershoot. The results are better than that of LMPC.

Simulation Results
Figure 6.40b: Process inputs and outputs using FFNN-NMPC

Simulation Results
Figure 6.41: Process inputs and outputs using RNN-NMPC

Inverse-FFNN model Identification and Control of the Three-Tank-System
To design an inverse-FFNN model to be used as controller for the tank
system, a NARXN model was chosen to represent the inverse-FFNN model:
ℎ1 (𝑘 + 1) ℎ2 (𝑘 + 1)
ℎ1 (𝑘) ℎ2 (𝑘)
ℎ1 (𝑘 − 1) ℎ2 (𝑘 − 1)
[𝑞̂1 (𝑘) 𝑞̂2 (𝑘)] = 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑣−𝑓𝑓𝑛𝑛 (6.56)
ℎ1 (𝑘 − 2) ℎ2 (𝑘 − 2)
𝑞1 (𝑘 − 1) 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 1)
(𝑞1 (𝑘 − 2) 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 2))

The input layers were selected as 12, the hidden layers 6 and the output layers 2
with its topology in Figure 6.42a. The final FFNN model obtained after training is:
𝑦(𝑘) = 𝑊𝑜𝑢𝑡 [𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝑖𝑛 𝜓(𝑘 − 1) + 𝑏𝑖𝑛 )] + 𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 (6.57)
where
𝑦(𝑘) = [𝑞̂1 (𝑘) 𝑞̂2 (𝑘)]T

𝜓(𝑘 − 1) = [ℎ1 (𝑘 + 1), ℎ1 (𝑘), ℎ1 (𝑘 − 1), ℎ1 (𝑘 − 2), 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 1), 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 2), 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 2),
𝑞2 (𝑘 − 1), ℎ2 (𝑘 − 2), ℎ2 (𝑘 − 1), ℎ2 (𝑘), ℎ2 (𝑘 + 1)] (6.58)
2
𝑓ℎ (𝑥 ) = ( −1 (6.59)
1+𝑒 −2𝑥 )
Simulink block diagram (Fig. 6.42b) was used for the implementation of this
control scheme while Figure 6.43 gives the simulation results which are quite
satisfactory.

FFNN nonlinear IMC control of the three-tank-system
It is implemented here a nonlinear IMC strategy which uses FFNN model for
prediction and Inverse FFNN model as the controller (Figure 6.44a). The
simulation results obtained are shown in Figure 6.44b. The results are quite
satisfactory except for the spikes observed in the control signals.

Inverse-FFNN Model Architecture
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌 + 𝟏)
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌)
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒉𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
𝒒𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒒𝟏 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
̂𝟏 (𝒌)
𝒒
𝒒𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
𝒒𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟏) ̂𝟐 (𝒌)
𝒒
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟐)
Figure 6.42a: The topology of the

𝒉𝟐 (𝒌 − 𝟏)
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌)
inverse-FFNN model
𝒉𝟐 (𝒌 + 𝟏)

NN-Inverse Model Controller Design
Figure 6.42b: Block diagram for implementing inverse-FFNN Controller

Simulation Results
Figure 6.43: Process inputs and outputs using Inv-ANN as controller

ANN model based Nonlinear Internal Model Control
M=ANN model
C=ANN-Inverse Model
P=Plant
F=Filter
Figure 6.44a: Block diagram for implementing ANN model based

nonlinear IMC

Simulation Results
Figure 6.44b: Process inputs and outputs using FFNN nonlinear IMC
Experimental Results
To verify the applicability of the proposed NMPC design procedures, the
designed controllers were implemented on the laboratory scale three tank
system. The experimental results obtained were plotted as Figures 6.45 – 6.49.

It is noteworthy that the experimental results were very similar to the simulation
results except for the Inverse-ANN controller and ANN-NIMC whose control
signals were changing very rapidily. This is because discrete time inverse-model
based controllers are always very sensitive to process noise and sampling time.
These results also confirm the practical implementability of the developed model-
based control algorithms in this work.

Figure 6.45: Experimental results of implementing First-Principle(FP)
model based - NMPC

Figure 6.46: Experimental results of implementing FFNN-NMPC

Figure 6.47: Experimental results of implementing RNN-NMPC

Figure 6.48: Experimental results of implementing Inverse-FFNN

control

Figure 6.49: Experimental results of implementing FFNN-based

Nonlinear IMC


WEEK 6 MODULE 6 - Part 2 NN Models of Three Tank System1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

WEEK 6 MODULE 6 - Part 2 NN Models of Three Tank System1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHE 509: Process Dynamics

Ayorinde Bamimore, Ph.D.

Obafemi Awolowo University 2

Figure 6.30: A schematic of the three tank system with labels

Obafemi Awolowo University 3

Figure 6.31: Photograph of the three-tank system

Obafemi Awolowo University 4

− 𝝁𝟐 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟐 ). √|𝒉𝟐 | + 𝒒𝟐 − 𝒅𝟐

− 𝝁𝟑 . 𝑺𝒑 . √𝟐𝒈. 𝒔𝒈𝒏(𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 ). √|𝒉𝟑 − 𝒉𝟐 |−𝒅𝟑

Obafemi Awolowo University 5

𝐴 =Cross-sectional area of the tank=149cm2

Obafemi Awolowo University 6

linear state space model:

Obafemi Awolowo University 7

−𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟓 𝟎 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗𝟗𝟓

Obafemi Awolowo University 8

experimental tank system was excited by simultaneous random inputs 𝑞1 and 𝑞2 .

Obafemi Awolowo University 9

Figure 6.32a: Simulink model of the three-tank system

Obafemi Awolowo University 10

Pump 2 flow [cm3/s]

Figure 6.32b: Input-output data collected

Obafemi Awolowo University 11

Figure 6.33:Validation results: Linear model prediction vs. process

Obafemi Awolowo University 12

Figure 6.34: parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

Obafemi Awolowo University 13

model was therefore considered for the process. A feedforward multi-layer

A nonlinear autoregressive exogenous (NARX) model of the following form is

chosen for the process:

ℎ (𝑘 − 1), ℎ2 (𝑘 − 1), 𝑞1 (𝑘 − 1), 𝑞2 (𝑘 − 1),

Obafemi Awolowo University 14

Levenberg-Marquardt. A comparison of the process output with the FFNN output

gives a good representation of the process.

The final ANN model obtained after training is:

𝑦(𝑘) = 𝑊𝑜𝑢 [𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝑖𝑛 𝜓(𝑘 − 1) + 𝑏𝑖𝑛 )] + 𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡 (6.54)

Obafemi Awolowo University 15

𝑦(𝑘) = [ℎ1 (𝑘) ℎ2 (𝑘)]

The activation function is chosen as:

The model parameters can be requested for.

The i-step prediction model used for NMPC design is then

𝑦(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) = 𝑊𝑜𝑢𝑡 [𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝑖𝑛 𝜓(𝑘 + 𝑖 − 1) + 𝑏𝑖𝑛 )] + 𝑏𝑜𝑢𝑡

Figure 6.35: FFNN topology selected for the three-tank system

Obafemi Awolowo University 17

Figure 6.36:Validation results FFNN model prediction vs. process

Obafemi Awolowo University 18

Figure 6.37:Parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

Obafemi Awolowo University 19

selected as 2 inputs, 8 hidden layers and 2 output layer.

representation of the process.

Obafemi Awolowo University 20

The final RNN model obtained after training is:

𝑦(𝑘 + 1 + 𝑖 ) = 𝑊𝑜 𝑓ℎ (𝑊𝐼 𝑢(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) + 𝑊𝐿 𝐻(𝑘 + 𝑖 ) + 𝑏𝐼 ) + 𝑏𝑜

𝑦(𝑘) = [ℎ1 (𝑘) ℎ2 (𝑘)]

𝑢(𝑘) = [𝑞1 (𝑘) 𝑞2 (𝑘)]

The activation function is chosen as:

the three-tank process.

Obafemi Awolowo University 22

Figure 6.38:Validation results: RNN model prediction vs. process output

Obafemi Awolowo University 23

Figure 6.39: Parity plots for 𝒉𝟏 and 𝒉𝟐

Obafemi Awolowo University 24