Advertisement

Predictive Control of Constrained Hybrid Systems

  • Alberto Bemporad
  • Manfred Morari
Part of the Progress in Systems and Control Theory book series (PSCT, volume 26)

Abstract

This paper proposes a framework for modeling and controlling systems described by interdependent physical laws, logic rules, and operating constraints, denoted as Mixed Logical Dynamical (MLD) systems. These are described by linear dynamic equations subject to linear inequalities involving real and integer variables. MLD systems include linear hybrid systems, finite state machines, some classes of discrete event systems, constrained linear systems, and nonlinear systems which can be approximated by piecewise linear functions. A predictive control scheme is proposed which is able to stabilize MLD systems on desired reference trajectories while fulfilling operating constraints, and possibly take into account previous qualitative knowledge in the form of heuristic rules. Due to the presence of integer variables, the resulting on-line optimization procedures are solved through Mixed Integer Quadratic Programming (MIQP), for which efficient solvers have been recently developed. Some examples and a simulation case study on a complex gas supply system are reported.

Keywords

Optimal Control Problem Model Predictive Control Linear Inequality Finite State Machine Soft Constraint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    K. Akimoto, N. Sannomiya, Y. Nishikawa, and T. Tsuda. An optimal gas supply for a power plant using a mixed integer programming model. Automatica,27(3):513–518, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Bemporad, M. Morari. Control of systems integrating logic, dynamics, and constraints. IFA Tech. Rep. AUT98–04, submitted to Automatica, also appeared in Proc. 17th Benelux Meeting on Systems and Control, Mierlo, The Netherlands, March, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M.S. Branicky, V.S. Borkar, and S.K. Mitter. A unified framework for hybrid control: model and optimal control theory. IEEE Trans. Autom. Contr., 43(1):31–45, 1998.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    P.J. Campo and M. Morari. Model predictive optimal averaging level control. AIChE Journal, 35(4):579–591, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    T. M. Cavalier, P. M. Pardalos, and A. L. Soyster. Modeling and integer programming techniques applied to propositional calculus. Computers Opns Res., 17(6):561–570, 1990.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Y. Chikkula and J. H. Lee, Dynamically scheduled model predictive control of nonlinear processes using hinging-hyperplane models. Proc. AIChE Annual Meeting, 1995. Submitted AIChe Journal.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    R. Fletcher and S. Leyffer. A mixed integer quadratic programming package. Technical report, University of Dundee, Dept. of Mathematics, Scotland, U.K., 1994.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Fletcher and S. Leyffer. Numerical experience with lower bounds for miqp branch-and-bound. Technical report, University of Dundee, Dept. of Mathematics, Scotland, U.K., 1995. submitted to SIAM Journal on Optimization, http://www.mcs.dundee.ac.uk:8080/sleyffer/migp_art.ps.ZGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    C. A. Floudas. Nonlinear and Mixed-Integer Optimization. Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. P. Hayes. Introduction to Digital Logic Design. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    D. Christiansen (Editor in chief). Electronics Engineers’ Handbook, 4th edition. IEEE Press/ McGraw Hill, Inc., 1997.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S.S. Keerthi and E. Gilbert. Optimal infinite-horizon feedback laws for a general class of constrained discrete time systems: stability and moving-horizon approximations. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 2:265–293, 1988.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    R. Lazimy. Improved algorithm for mixed-integer quadratic programs and a computational study. Mathematical Programming, 32:100–113, 1985.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    J.H. Lee and B. Cooley. Recent advances in model predictive control. In Chemical Process Control - V, volume 93, no. 316, pages 201–216b. AIChe Symposium Series - American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1997.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. Leyffer. Deterministic methods for mixed integer nonlinear programming. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Dundee, Scotland, U.K., December 1993.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    J. Lygeros, D.N. Godbole, and S.S. Sastry. A design framework for hierarchical, hybrid control. Technical report, Intelligent Machines and Robotic Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, 1997. submitted to the IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., special issue on Hybrid Systems.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D.Q. Mayne. Nonlinear model predictive control: an assessment. In Chemical Process Control - V, volume 93, no. 316, pages 217–231. AIChe Symposium Series - American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    E. Mendelson. Introduction to mathematical logic.Van Nostrand, 1964.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    K. M. Passino, A. N. Michel, and P. J. Antsaklis. Lyapunov stability of a class of discrete event systems. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., 2(39):269–279, 1994.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    S.J. Qin and T.A. Badgewell. An overview of industrial model predictive control technology. In Chemical Process Control - V, volume 93, no. 316, pages 232–256. AIChe Symposium Series - American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    R. Raman and I. E. Grossmann. Relation between milp modeling and logical inference for chemical process synthesis. Computers Chem. Engng., 15(2):73–84, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    R. Raman and I. E. Grossmann. Integration of logic and heuristic knowledge in minlp optimization for process synthesis. Computers them. Engng., 16(3):155–171, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    R.L.Grossmann, A. Nerode, A.P.Ravn, and H. Rischel (Eds.). Hybrid Systems. Springer Verlag, New York, 1993. no. 736 in LCNS.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    V. A. Roschchin, O.V. Volkovich, and I.V. Sergienko. Models and methods of solution of quadratic integer programming problems. Cybernetics, 23:289–305, 1987.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    O. Slupphaug, J. Vada, and B. A. Foss. MPC in Systems with Continuous and Discrete Control Inputs. Proc. American Control Conf., Albuquerque, NM, USA, 1997.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    O. Slupphaug and B. A. Foss. Model Predictive Control for a class of Hybrid Systems. Proc. European Control Conf., Brussels, Belgium, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    M.L. Tyler and M. Morari. Propositional logic in control and monitoring problems. Technical Report AUT96–15, Institut für Automatik, ETH - Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, Switzerland, 1996.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    H.P. Williams. Logical problems and integer programming. Bulletin of the Institute of Mathematics and Its Applications, 13:18–20, 1977.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    H.P. Williams. Linear and integer programming applied to the propositional calculus. Int. J. Systems Research and Info. Science,2:81–100, 1987.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    H.P. Williams. Model Building in Mathematical Programming. John Wiley & Sons, Third Edition, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel AG 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto Bemporad
    • 1
  • Manfred Morari
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für AutomatikETH - Swiss Federal Institute of TechnologyZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations