16th IFAC Symposium on Automation in Mining, Mineral

and Metal Processing

August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, California, USA

Automatic Control of Direct Reduction Iron Ore (DRI) Process

S. Guanin*, D. Pignattone**,
A. Martinis***

* Research & Development Department Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche S.p.A.,

Buttrio, 33043 UD, Italy (Tel:+39-0432-195-7246; e-mail: s.guanin@danieli.it).
**L2 Department Danieli Automation S.p.A., Buttrio, 33043 UD, Italy (e-mail:
d.pignattone@dca.it)
*** DE-CM Department Danieli & C. Officine Meccaniche S.p.A., Buttrio,
33043 UD, Italy (e-mail: a.martinis@danieli.it)

Abstract: An automatic control of a DRI plant has been performed in order to provide the best possible
working point, to obtain the target level 2 process set points (DRI metallization, carburation,
productivity) in function of Iron Ore and Reducing gas compositions. The target has been obtained by
means of a Process Reconstruction Model (PRM) that provides continuous static estimation of plant
measurements, efficiency analyses, virtual sensor and diagnostics. An Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) has
been used to provide continuous robust dynamic estimations of the output process measurements. Finally
the EKF feeds a Linear Quadratic Gaussian (LQG) regulator that performs, in real time, the calculation of
Optimal Controls (minimum energy, maximum gas quality level 1 set points), in function of level 2 sets.
The suite has been successfully applied to a DRI Energiron Plant.
Keywords: Process Reconstruction Model, Extended Kalman Filter, LQG, Real time, DRI Energiron
Plant, Automatic Process Control.

measurements collected in the level 2 by the PRM are used in

1. INTRODUCTION
The Level 2 Automatic Process Control is an advanced
technique, which includes various mathematical and
empirical functions, with the final target to stabilize and
optimize the overall process. The control is done pushing the
Plant as close as possible to the theoretical optimum
condition. The target is the minimization of variable standard
deviations in order to obtain the highest production quality
and yield. In the advanced control of an DRI plant a number
of “virtual variables” (e.g. short simulation processes) are
added to the traditional measurements, which are normally
managed via control loops in level 1, in order to perform
some local optimization functions. The suite has been
realized via a Process Reconstruction Model (PRM) that is a
grey box model which operates on line, in real time, as static
virtual sensor applied to the system where the system is the
complete set of process variables (Di Giorgio, 2011). An
Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) performs the minimum
variance estimation of a process variables subset (i.e. DRI
metallization, and carburation). A Linear Quadratic Gaussian
regulator (LQG) produces in real time the minimum energy
optimal level 1 process variable set points (i.e. reducing,
reformed, oxygen, natural gas flows (Nm3/h), reducing gas
temperature (°C), productivity (t/h)). This paper considers the
application of the whole level 2 structure described that is
one of the most important features that characterizes the
Energiron plant. The PRM collects and processes the
measurements transmitted from instrumentation on field to
the level 2 in order to monitorize the equipment efficiency,
the adopted operating conditions in the various sections of the
plant and the product quality as main final target. The
the EKF to correct the controlled variables estimation
produced by the physical model; in this model the reduction
process is described via a system of 7 differential equations,
based on the mass/energy balance of the gas and solid flows
inside the reducing reactor. The system is completed with 8
parametric equations used to define the kinetic working point
of the reactor. The estimation of the process production data
(DRI metallization, carburation and productivity) are used by
the LQG regulator that describes their evolution in function
of 7 main inlet variables. In this way, the outputs of the
regulator are 7 controlled variables set points to be
implemented directly in the level 1 control system (DCS).
2. THE PRM MODEL
The PRM mathematical model used for data analysis is a
grey box type; its structure is based on the concept of the
process static reproducer. Empirical equations based on
measurements and physical equations, are applied at the same
time to a defined data set, with the chosen degree of freedom
between variables, in order to obtain the desired analysis for
the observed section of the plant. Some sets of instru-
mentation signals coming from PLCs are processed via
physical equations to complete with non-measurable values
all the process data of system, to provide a full description of
its status. In addition, some redundancies have been applied
inside the model in order to have a double validation between
measurements and calculations: it means that reliability of
instrumentation and plant conditions/productivity can be
continuously monitored.

978-3-902823-42-7/2013 © IFAC 340 10.3182/20130825-4-US-2038.00012

IFAC MMM 2013
August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, USA

2.1 The PRM Virtual Sensor Iron Ore In Main Chemical Reactions
The software can envisage, through variation of degrees of Top
freedom on a selected and isolated system, the possible
presence of inconsistencies. For this reason, the first result of Pre Red - Fe 2 O3 H 2 l 2 FeO H 2O
® (1)
this kind of analysis is the detection of incorrect response Area ¯ Fe 2 O3 CO l 2 FeO CO 2

from instrumentation installed in the field. In that case the

incorrect measurement can be substituted, corrected or Red & - FeO H 2 l Fe H 2O
® (2)
completed with a virtual one. The figure 1 represents the AR Area ¯ FeO CO l Fe CO 2

reality of a Direct Reduction Plant: the measurements Cracking -CH 4 H 2 O l CO 3 H 2

transmitted from instrumentation on field are collected and ® (3)
Area ¯CO H 2 O l CO 2 H 2
processed in level 2 in order to keep monitored equipment 2CO l C CO 2 (4)
efficiency, operating conditions in the various sections of the CH 4 l C 2H 2 (5)
plant and product quality (productivity, carbon content,
metallization, DRI temperatures, etc.). (1) Pre Reduction (Pre-
Red)
(2) Reduction (Red)
Bottom (3) Auto Reforming (AR)
(4) Boudouard
DRI out
(5) Cracking
Fig. 2 Shaft reactor scheme and main chemical reactions
As shown in the figure, three main chemical areas
characterize the evolution of the process. From Top to
Fig. 1 Level 2 application: Schematic architecture of the Bottom of the shaft following the downstream of the pellets
PRM installed on level 2 at a DRI Energiron plant. inside the reactor, we can find the Pre Reduction Area (Pre
Red Area), where the reduction species change all the iron
Overall plant condition is continuously under control to
oxides in Wustite oxide (FeO). Then there is the Reduction
optimize the production and minimize the consumptions. In
and Auto Reforming Area (Red & AR Area) where the
fact several indexes (e.g. energy yield, equivalent
reduction to metallic Iron of the pellets is completed and
metallization, minimum carbon, etc.) have been set up in
where the reduction gas changes its species distribution, with
order to rationalize the plant performance and properly
a contribution of Auto Reforming Reactions (3) Boudouard
evaluate the process yield.
(4) and methane Cracking too (5). The thermodynamic
3. ENERGIRON PROCESS equilibrium is not reached. To evaluate the distance from the
equilibrium of each reaction it’s necessary to calculate the
3.1 The Shaft Reactor Chemical Process reaction kinetics for the whole reaction system. Finally the
iron pellets find the Cracking Area where the Cracking of
The iron ore reduction process takes place in a gas-solid methane (5) take place to enrich the pellets in carbon, the
reactor. The ore pellets are charged from the top of the most in the Fe3C form.
reactor and moves downstream to the bottom for the DRI
extraction. The reducing gas is a mixture of H2, CO, H2O, 3.2 The Shaft Physical Model
CO2, CH4 and moves upstream from the middle of the reactor
to the top. The chemical mechanism of the process consists in The mechanism described in the previous section is a
a continuous migration of atomic oxygen contained in the ore simplification of the real chemical mechanism of the process,
pellets (bond in form of iron oxides wustite FeO, hematite the scheme in figure 2 lets to the following simplified
Fe2O3) to the reducing gas. The gas species that take place in physical model:
the reduction reactions (1) and (2) are (Fig. 2): hydrogen H2,
- x qin qout
carbon monoxide CO, carbon dioxide CO2, water H2O. The °CH 2 V ˜ CinH 2 V
˜ CH2 Wgs 3 ˜ St 2 ˜ Cr PH 2 RH 2
atomic oxygen is captured by the reductive species (H2, CO) ° x
°C qin qout
˜ CinCH 4 ˜ CCH4 St Cr
to form oxidant species (H2O, CO2). The addition of methane ° CH 4 V V
° x
CH4 is done in order to enrich the reducing gas and to ° qin qout
®CCO
V
˜ CinCO
V
˜ CCO Wgs St 2 ˜ Bou PCO RCO (6)
carburize the product (when the injection is done in the shaft °
° x
qin qout
bottom). The relevant reactions are the Cracking of the °CCO2 V ˜ CinCO2 V
˜ CCO2 Wgs Bou PCO RCO
° x
methane (5) in equilibrium with the Boudouard reaction (4) °C qin
˜ CinH 2O
qout
˜ CH2O Wgs St PH 2 RH 2
¯° 2
H O
and the Methane Reforming (3) (Fig. 2). Reactions (3), (4) V V
and (5) bring the gas mix to a continuous changing
The dynamic system (6) calculates the volumetric
equilibrium during his track inside the reactor. The main
concentration trajectory of the chemical species that take part
reaction space distribution is shown in figure 2.
to the chemical reaction (1)..(5). In (6) the qin and qout
represent the gas volume flow inlet and outlet the reactor
[m3/s], Cj and Cinj are the chemical species concentrations

341
IFAC MMM 2013
August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, USA

[kmol/m3] outlet and inlet respectively, V the reactor volume temperatures of the gas, and finally by 8 parametric
[m3], Wgs represents the Water Gas Shift Reaction, St is the equations, referred to the kinetics Kj of the 8 reactions that
Steam Reforming reaction (Wgs and St are the AR reactions), take place in continuous process to follow the trajectory of
Cr represents the Cracking reaction, PH2 and PCO are the the reaction kinetic gains.
Pre Reduction reactions, RH2 and RCO represent the
Reduction Reactions and finally, Bou is the Boudouard 3.3 The EKF Estimator
reaction, all reaction in [kmol/m3s]. To complete the dynamic
system (6) we need now the calculation of the reaction The Kalman Filter theory brings to a solution of the optimal
chemical contributions, by means of the calculation of their state estimation problem, for a linear discrete time dynamic
kinetics: system described by the following equation:
Ei
§ · - x(k 1) f ( x(k ), u (k )) w(k )
R˜TR (Cc ) c ˜ (Cd ) d ® (10)
Rkin Ki ˜ e ˜ ¨¨ (Ca ) a ˜ (Cb ) b
Keqi TR
¸¸ (7) ¯ y (k ) h( x(k ), u (k )) v(k )
© ¹

In (7) the Keqi(TR) terms represent the equilibrium constants With f and h linear function of states and inlets; w, v additives
of the reactions calculated at the reaction temperature TR gaussian noise of states and measurements respectively with
[adim.] (for reactions with no mole production), Rkin are the known covariance matrix W = E(wwT) and V = E(vvT)
reaction contribution [kmol/m3s], Ei represent the Arrhenius respectively. For nonlinear systems a closed solution for the
coefficients of the reactions [kJ/kmol], (Ca)a are the chemical same problem doesn’t exists. In this case, a classical method
species concentration rising to the power of its mole to solve the problem is to linearize the system around the
contribution [kmol/m3]a, TR is the reaction temperature, or the actual estimation and to apply the Kalman Filter to the
temperature of both gas and solid flows at the Red & AR linearized system (Voros 2008).
Area [K], R is the gas Constant 8.314 [kJ/kmolK] and finally Let f and h be nonlinear function of the states, F(k), B(k) and
Ki are the Kinetic Constants to estimate [1/s]. The physical H(k) be the jacobian matrices of f and h, respectively,
model finally has been completed with the energy balance denoted by (Yang, 2011):
equations, taking in consideration the energy equilibrium at
the inlet (Red & AR Area) and outlet (Top) of the shaft for ª wf x ( k ), u ( k ) º ª wf x ( k ), u ( k ) º
F (k ) « » , B (k ) « » ,
¬ wx ( k ) ¼ ¬ wu ( k ) ¼
both gas and solid flows: xÖ ( k ), u ( k ) xÖ ( k ), u ( k )

(11)
x Qin QoutD ˜ A ˜ TR Tin ª wh x ( k ), u ( k ) º
TR ˜ Tin ˜ TR H (k ) « »
V V V ˜ U ˜ CP ¬ wx ( k ) ¼
( 'H Wgs ˜ Wgs 'H Cr ˜ Cr 'H St ˜ St 'H Bou ˜ Bou (8) xÖ ( k ),u ( k )

'H RH 2 ˜ RH 2 'H RCO ˜ RCO 'H PH 2 ˜ PH 2 'H PCO ˜ PCO ) /( U ˜ C P ) The solution is given by a recursive algorithm (table 1) that
x Qin Qout D ˜ A ˜ TTop Tox
can be easily described in the following steps:
TTop ˜ TR ˜ TTop
V V V ˜ U ˜ CP - Time update step that brings to the estimation of the
C pox ˜ qDRI DO ˜ Tox C pDRI ˜ q DRI ˜ TR
(9) current state and the state error covariance matrix P.
CP ˜V ˜ U CP ˜V ˜ U The evaluation is an ‘a priori’ estimation for the next
step.
In (8) the Tin term represents the gas temperature at the inlet
(Red & AR Area) [K], Qin and Qout are the gas mass flow - Measurement update step that brings to the feedback
inlet and outlet the reactor [kg/s], . is the heat transfer correction. The evaluation is an ‘a posteriori’
coefficient between gas and solid bed at inlet point [W/m2K], estimation for the current step.
A represents the equivalent area for the heat exchange [m2], ! The following scheme represents the previous algorithm:
is the gas inlet density [kg/m3], Cp represents the gas heat
capacity [kJ/kgK], û+i represent the heat of reactions Table 1. Predictor - Corrector
[kJ/kmol], In (9) the TTop is the gas temperature at the Top Time Update (step k) - Predictor
[K], Tox is the iron ore pellets temperature at inlet (Top) [K], Future - xÖ ( k 1) f ( xÖ (k ), u (k ))
Cpox and CpDRI represent the heat capacity of the solid bed at ® (12)
state ¯ yÖ (k ) h( xÖ (k ))
the inlet (for pellets the inlet is the Top zone) and at the Red
Future
& AR Area [kJ/kgK], qDRI is the solid flow [kg/s], DO P ( k 1) F ( k ) ˜ P ( k ) ˜ F ( k )T W (13)
covariance
represents the oxygen mass flow, passing from solid to
Measurement Update (step k+1) – Corrector
gaseous phase during the reduction process [kg/s].
Kalman K ( k ) P (k ) ˜ H (k )T ˜
The physical model of the shaft finally has been synthesized Filter Gain ( H (k ) ˜ P(k ) ˜ H (k )T V ) 1 (14)
using a system of 15 dynamic equations that represent the Innovation K (k ) ˜ ( y(k ) h( xÖ(k ))) (15)
complete evolution of the shaft state, considering both the estimation xÖ (k 1) f ( xÖ (k ), u (k ))
field measurements and the estimated reaction kinetics. The (16)
correction K (k ) ˜ ( y ( k ) h( xÖ (k )))
system is composed by 5 dynamic chemical equations that
covariance
describe the complete evolution trajectory of the 5 chemical P ( k ) ( I K ( k ) ˜ H ( k )T ) ˜ P ( k ) (17)
correction
gas species concentrations Cj, 2 dynamic energy equation
referred to the energy balance of the mass/gas system at the The next predicted state and state error covariance matrix at
shaft inlet/outlet that describe the tracking of the TR and TTop step k, xÖ(k+1) and P(k+1) respectively, are computed in the
first step and then in the measurement update at step k+1, the

342
IFAC MMM 2013
August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, USA

next estimated step xÖ(k+1), is obtained by means of the
corrective term called innovation, calculated by the Kalman
Filter Gain K(k).
3.4 EKF with Parametric Estimation
In this application we need to estimate not only the state
trajectory but also parameters represented by the reaction
kinetics. This kinetics must be represented as state variable
too (Voros 2008), with no dynamic (constant states). The
dynamic states represented by 5 chemical concentration
trajectory and by 2 temperature trajectory have been
augmented by 8 static parametric equations representing the
kinetics.
Kj 0 (18)
Introducing the parameters in the state equation (10):
- x( k 1) f ( x (k ), u (k ),T ( k )) w(k )
® (19)
¯ y (k ) h( x (k ), u ( k ),T (k )) v( k )
- A Reformer Unit that converts Steam and Natural gas into
Reducing (Bustle) gas, a gas mix rich in H2 and CO.
- A Dewatering Unit that removes H2O from the recirculating
process gas.
- A Compressor Unit that rises up the pressure of the
recirculating process gas.
- A CO2 Removing Plant Unit that removes the CO2 from the
recirculating process gas.
- A Heater Unit that rises the Process Gas temperature up to
the process request value before entering the Reactor Unit.
- A Flare Unit that bursts the bleed to maintain the pressure in
the circuit when regulations take place and to keep in control
the Inert gas specie concentration (Nitrogen N2) in the
process gas loop (minimum bleed required).

Brings to the final state that has been obtained in the

following form:
-ª x(k 1) º ª f ( x(k ), u (k ),T (k ))º ª w(k )º
°«
°¬T (k 1)»¼ «¬ T (k ) »
¼
« 0 »
¬ ¼
® (20)
° (a)
°¯ y (k ) >h( x(k ), u (k ),T (k )) 0@ v( k )

The final state dimension is 15 and the dimensions of the

matrices used applying the Extended Kalman Filter are:
F • R15 x15 ; B • R 15 x 7 ; H • R 7 x15 ; W • R15 x15 ; V • R 7 x 7 ; K • R15 x 7 ;
P • R15 x15

3.5 EKF with Augmented Measurement

The EKF estimation is not as consistent as the Kalman Filter

estimation for linear problems (Simon 2006). To check if the
solution is consistent the method of augmented measurement
has been applied on the boundary conditions of the process.
The boundary conditions are the mass/energy balance
equations of the system. If the EKF solution brings to a
deviation from 0 of the mass/energy balances, a corrective
measurement has been added to the state, as correction. The
gain has been calculated to maintain the deviation as low as
possible, to minimize the estimation error in any status of the
plant. Using the consistency criteria on balances, the final
result for estimation has the following form:
xÖ ( k 1) f ( xÖ ( k ), u ( k ), T ( k )) K ( k ) ˜ ( y ( k ) h ( xÖ ( k )))
With H • R11x15 the new jacobian measurement matrix
function of mass/energy balance deviation equations from
PRM.
4. CONTROL DESCRIPTION
4.1 Energiron Process and Inlets choice
The figure 3a reports a general plant configuration scheme of
a DRI Energiron plant. The main equipment of the plant
required to drive the process gas in the process loop are:
(b)
Fig. 3: (a) Plant configuration scheme: the defined control
inlets are signed with an increasing number inside a circle.
(b) Configuration of the discrete-time LQG scheme for the
DRI Plant.
The process needs many gas inlets to be managed. In figure
3a all the main gas inlets of the process are reported: the
Fuels for Reformer and Heater to control the heating system,
(21)
the Natural gas for Reformer, process and shaft to control gas
composition, process gas heating (with oxygen inlet too) and
carburation of DRI and finally Water for the production of
Steam in the Reformer. To manage the process it’s necessary
to control the flow, temperature and composition of the gas
entering the reactor. To do this it’s necessary to control the
flows reported with an increasing numeration from 1 to 7.
4.2 The LQG solution for the Energiron Process
The LQG control problem is to find the optimal control law
which minimizes the following cost function (Skogestad,
2001):

343
IFAC MMM 2013
August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, USA

f PRM user interface has 5 forms that represent in real time an

J ¦ >x
k 0
T
(k ) ˜ Q ˜ x (k ) u T (k ) ˜ R ˜ u (k ) @ (22) overview for the main plant equipment (Shaft, Cooler,
Reformer, Heater, CO2 plant). The operators have a powerful
The term Q is nonnegative definite state weighting matrix, R software instrument that let them easily manage the whole
a positive definite control weighting matrix. The optimal plant, taking in account both the quality of the product and
state-feedback law for zero reference sets is given by: the real time efficiencies of the equipment, with the
possibility to diagnose the instruments too. The EKF uses
u(k ) L ˜ x( k ) some of the PRM estimation as inlets and outlets of the shaft
(23)
L B ˜ T ˜ B Vp
T 1
˜ BT ˜ T ˜ F and builds up an optimal estimation of the process targets in
function of the process inlets. In figure 5 it’s represented an
The L • R 7 x15 matrix gain is the optimal gain calculated by on line comparison between the EKF response vs. the PRM
means of the T • R15 x15 matrix that is the unique symmetric estimation and the DRI metallization Laboratory
nonnegative definite solution for the following Discrete measurement [%]. The laboratory takes more or less 6 hours
Algebraic Riccati Equation (DARE): to realize a measurement of the DRI produced at the Red &
AR Area. The reason is that the DRI resident time in the
T F T ˜T ˜ F >
F T ˜ T ˜ F ˜ B T ˜ T ˜ B Vp @ 1
˜ BT ˜ T ˜ F W (24) reactor cone is more or less 3 hours (and vary in function of
the productivity) and takes about 2 hours to cool up to
The Vp • R 7 x 7 matrix is the optimal solution cost matrix. environment temperature. During this period, the information
Finally in the figure 3b, has been reported the automatic at disposal about DRI (both metallization and carburation)
control configuration, the N • R 7 x15 matrix has been used to fit coming from PRM and EKF. The frequency of the laboratory
the regulation for a non-zero reference set points. measurement is about 3 hours (circle in Fig. 5) that is the
DRI Sampling Bin frequency pick up. This means 2 or 3
5. APPLICATION RESULTS measurements to know what was going on at Red & AR
An Energiron plant has been controlled by a suite with three Area.
main components: a grey box model (section 2), an optimal
estimator (section 3) and a LQG regulator (section 4). The
control lets the optimal fitting of the product quality with the
minimum energy consumption.

Fig. 5 Comparison between PRM, EKF and laboratory

measurement for DRI metallization [%] on 1 week operation.
The figure 6 reports the EKF response for the kinetic gains. A
bounded parameter value performed by the EKF means that
the maximum likelihood estimation for parameters has been
correctly calculated during the observation period (1 month).

(a)

Fig. 4: The PRM data generation for both process variables

and process indicators to drive the plant
The PRM executes the first estimation with both physical and
statistical expressions from level 1 data; the figure 4
represents an example of the PRM user interface with (b)
estimations and virtual data production for the shaft unit. The Fig. 6 One month Constant Kinetics EKF evaluation: (a) Pre
Reduction (with H2, CO). (b) Reduction (with H2, CO).

344
IFAC MMM 2013
August 25-28, 2013. San Diego, USA
The dynamic system model aided by the PRM (for the
effective quantities of reactants and plants indicators) and the
EKF (with the estimation of kinetics and anti-windup for
state correction) lets to the determination of the whole shaft
state trajectory (Fig. 5, Fig. 7a). The formalization of the state
trajectory lets the application of the LQG controller. The
figure 7 shows the response in closed loop of the plant
applying the LQG controller to track a new plant working
point. The example reports a variation in the product quality
requests by the plant management: the request was the
augment of metallization +1[%] maintaining carburation and
productivity.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Fig. 7: (a) LQG result for a new working point with
augmented metallization (+1[%]) with same carburation and
productivity. New level 1 set points for Reducing (Bustle)
and Reformed gas (b), and for Natural gas (c). (d) Whole
plant Natural gas consumption response.
The LQG produced directly the new working point sets
(shaded lines on Fig 7b, 7c). The level 1 accepts the sets and
controls directly the process flows (continuous lines on Fig
7b, 7c). The result of the control action is reported in figure
7a with the new quality set reached (EKF continuous line) vs.
345
laboratory measurements (circles) before and after regulation
(regulation time: 2012, September 23, 1:00am). The regulator
let to the stability of the plant response reducing the mean
error of lab measurements and estimation from set required.
Finally in figure 7d is reported the energy consumption
comparison: Natural gas consumption (upper line) and the
whole specific energy consumption (lower line), before and
after the regulation. As we can expect from the theory, the
LQG regulates the process following both the management
requests (for the variation of metallization in this case) the
different response time of the equipment and the minimum
transformation cost (medium saving 0.1Gcal/t on 2.4Gcal/t
total consumption). The correct estimation of the shaft states
lets the control loop to act on the main gas flows, taking in
accounts the process time response.
6. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents the first automatic process controller
realized for a DRI Energiron plant, developed on level 2 by
means of a Grey Box model (PRM) an optimal state
estimator (EKF) and an optimal regulator (LQG). The
process control variables (level 1 set points) are automatic
calculated on line in function of the process target requests
(level 2 set points: DRI metallization, DRI carburation and
DRI productivity). The input/output plant values and the
mass/energy balances are calculated in real time by the PRM,
in function of accessible plant measurements. The EKF use
the physical shaft model and the PRM measurements, virtual
measurements and balances to generate an optimal estimation
of the shaft state. The LQG regulator performs the calculation
of the optimal level 1 set point input trajectories to manage
the plant from the current working point to a new one, to
realize the new process targets. The application of automatic
control on line lets to a mean energy saving of about 4% on
total consumption and a stabilization of the plant response
too. Stabilization brings also to an overall correct plant
managing with the reduction of trip events and unwanted
stops. Operators are supplied with a multi-purpose instrument
capable to manage in automatic the process for any kind of
quality charged, setting the optimal reducing gas composition
and temperature, pointing both the process target and the
minimum transformation cost.
7. REFERENCES
Skogestad, S., Postlethwhite, I. (2001), Multivariable
Feedback Control, John Wiley & Sons.
6LPRQ ' 2SWLPDO 6WDWH (VWLPDWLRQ .DOPDQ +’
and Nonlinear Approaches, John Wiley & Sons.
Yang, X., Marjanovic, O. (2011), LQG Control with EKF for
Power System with Unknown Time-Delays, Paper of the
18th IFAC World Congress, Milano.
Di Giorgio, F.M., Martinis, A., and others (2011), Driving
Process Optimization via the Energiron Advanced L2
Control, METEC InSteelCon 2011, Paper of 6th
European Coke Iron Making Congress, Dusseldorf.
Voros, J., Mikles, J., Cirka L. (2008), Parameter Estimation
of Nonlinear Systems, Acta Chimica Slovaca, Vol. 1, No.
1, 2008,309-320.