CA2491208A1 - Model-based control systems and methods for gas turbine engines - Google Patents
Model-based control systems and methods for gas turbine engines Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2491208A1 CA2491208A1 CA002491208A CA2491208A CA2491208A1 CA 2491208 A1 CA2491208 A1 CA 2491208A1 CA 002491208 A CA002491208 A CA 002491208A CA 2491208 A CA2491208 A CA 2491208A CA 2491208 A1 CA2491208 A1 CA 2491208A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- engine
- model
- parameters
- state
- control
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B13/00—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion
- G05B13/02—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric
- G05B13/04—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric involving the use of models or simulators
- G05B13/048—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric involving the use of models or simulators using a predictor
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B13/00—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion
- G05B13/02—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric
- G05B13/04—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric involving the use of models or simulators
- G05B13/042—Adaptive control systems, i.e. systems automatically adjusting themselves to have a performance which is optimum according to some preassigned criterion electric involving the use of models or simulators in which a parameter or coefficient is automatically adjusted to optimise the performance
Abstract
A method and system of controlling a gas turbine engine (110) is disclosed.
The engine (110) has sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The method includes receiving data from the sensors of the engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters, estimating a state of the engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from the sensors and a predictive model (130) of the engine, generating commands for the actuators based on the state using an optimization algorithm (150);
and transmitting the commands to the engine (110). The system includes a state estimator (120) adapted to estimate a state of the engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from the sensors of the engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters. The estimator (120) includes a model (130) of the engine (110). The system also includes a control module (140) adapted to generate commands for the actuators based on the state. The control module (140) includes an optimization algorithm (150) for determining the commands.
The engine (110) has sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The method includes receiving data from the sensors of the engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters, estimating a state of the engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from the sensors and a predictive model (130) of the engine, generating commands for the actuators based on the state using an optimization algorithm (150);
and transmitting the commands to the engine (110). The system includes a state estimator (120) adapted to estimate a state of the engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from the sensors of the engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters. The estimator (120) includes a model (130) of the engine (110). The system also includes a control module (140) adapted to generate commands for the actuators based on the state. The control module (140) includes an optimization algorithm (150) for determining the commands.
Description
MODEL-BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS AND METHODS
FOR GAS TURBINE ENGINES
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to systems and methods for controlling a gas turbine engine. More specifically, the present invention relates to adaptive model-based control systems and methods that maximize capability after deterioration, fault, failure or damage to one or more engine components or systems so that engine performance and/or operability can be optimized.
Mechanical and electrical parts and/or systems can deteriorate, fail or be damaged.
Any component in a gas turbine system, including engine components, sensors, actuators, or any of the engine subsystems, is susceptible to degradation, failure or damage that causes the engine to move away from nominal conditions. The effect that these upsets have on the gas turbine performance ranges from no effect (e.g., possibly due to a single failed sensor in a mufti-sensor system) to a total loss of engine power or thrust control (e.g., for a failed actuator or damaged engine component).
Control systems of gas turbine engines may be provided to detect such effects or the cause of such effects and attempt to compensate.
Currently, gas turbine systems rely on sensor-based control systems, in which operating goals and limits are specified and controlled in terms of available sensed parameters. Online engine health management is typically limited to sensor failure detection (e.g., range and rate checks), actuator position feedback errors, and some selected system anomaly checks, such as stall detection, rotor overspeed, and other such indications of loss of power or thrust control. When an engine component or system fails or deteriorates, control of the component/system is handled on an individual basis (i.e., each component/system is controlled by its own control regulator or heuristic open-loop logic).
It is believed that presently no adequate adaptive model-based control systems and methods are available.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
One embodiment of the invention relates to a method of controlling a gas turbine engine. The engine has sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The method includes receiving data from the sensors of the engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters, estimating a state of the engine by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from the sensors and a predictive model of the engine, generating commands for the actuators based on the state using an optimization algorithm, and transmitting the commands to the engine.
Another embodiment of the invention relates to a system for controlling a gas turbine engine, the engine having sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The system includes a state estimator adapted to estimate a state of the engine by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from the sensors of the engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters. The estimator includes a model of the engine. The system also includes a control module adapted to generate commands for the actuators based on the state. The control module includes an optimization algorithm for determining the commands.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 is a schematic diagram showing the layout of an engine that may be controlled by a system or method according to an embodiment of the invention;
Figure 2 is a diagram illustrating the concept of receding horizon control implemented in an embodiment of the present invention; and Figure 3 is a schematic illustration of a control arrangement according to an embodiment of the present invention.
FOR GAS TURBINE ENGINES
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to systems and methods for controlling a gas turbine engine. More specifically, the present invention relates to adaptive model-based control systems and methods that maximize capability after deterioration, fault, failure or damage to one or more engine components or systems so that engine performance and/or operability can be optimized.
Mechanical and electrical parts and/or systems can deteriorate, fail or be damaged.
Any component in a gas turbine system, including engine components, sensors, actuators, or any of the engine subsystems, is susceptible to degradation, failure or damage that causes the engine to move away from nominal conditions. The effect that these upsets have on the gas turbine performance ranges from no effect (e.g., possibly due to a single failed sensor in a mufti-sensor system) to a total loss of engine power or thrust control (e.g., for a failed actuator or damaged engine component).
Control systems of gas turbine engines may be provided to detect such effects or the cause of such effects and attempt to compensate.
Currently, gas turbine systems rely on sensor-based control systems, in which operating goals and limits are specified and controlled in terms of available sensed parameters. Online engine health management is typically limited to sensor failure detection (e.g., range and rate checks), actuator position feedback errors, and some selected system anomaly checks, such as stall detection, rotor overspeed, and other such indications of loss of power or thrust control. When an engine component or system fails or deteriorates, control of the component/system is handled on an individual basis (i.e., each component/system is controlled by its own control regulator or heuristic open-loop logic).
It is believed that presently no adequate adaptive model-based control systems and methods are available.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
One embodiment of the invention relates to a method of controlling a gas turbine engine. The engine has sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The method includes receiving data from the sensors of the engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters, estimating a state of the engine by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from the sensors and a predictive model of the engine, generating commands for the actuators based on the state using an optimization algorithm, and transmitting the commands to the engine.
Another embodiment of the invention relates to a system for controlling a gas turbine engine, the engine having sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands. The system includes a state estimator adapted to estimate a state of the engine by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from the sensors of the engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters. The estimator includes a model of the engine. The system also includes a control module adapted to generate commands for the actuators based on the state. The control module includes an optimization algorithm for determining the commands.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 is a schematic diagram showing the layout of an engine that may be controlled by a system or method according to an embodiment of the invention;
Figure 2 is a diagram illustrating the concept of receding horizon control implemented in an embodiment of the present invention; and Figure 3 is a schematic illustration of a control arrangement according to an embodiment of the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Embodiments of the present invention provide control systems and methods wherein the models, optimizations, objective functions, constraints and/or parameters in the control system modify, update and/or reconfigure themselves whenever any engine component or system moves away from nominal so that as much performance and/or operability as possible can be regained. Further, systems and methods according to embodiments of the present invention provide that the control system updates itself in real-time. The systems and methods may be automated using a computer.
Embodiments of the present invention may take information about detected deterioration, faults, failures and damage and incorporate such information into the proper models, optimizations, obj ective functions, constraints and/or parameters in the control system to allow the control system to take optimized action given the current engine condition. Such systems and methods may allow any level of deterioration, faults, failures or damage to be accommodated, and not just deterioration, faults, failures or damage that have a priori solutions already programmed into the system.
Furthermore, embodiments of the present invention may be capable of being used to control gas turbines, such as the gas turbines in an aircraft engine, power plant, marine propulsion, or industrial application.
Figure 1 illustrates a schematic of a layout of an engine 10 as well as the station designations, sensors, and actuators for the engine 10. The engine 10 is an aerodynamically coupled, dual rotor machine wherein a low-pressure rotor system (fan and low-pressure turbine) is mechanically independent of a high-pressure (core engine) system. Air entering the inlet is compressed by the fan and then split into two concentric streams. One of these streams then enters the high-pressure compressor and proceeds through the main engine combustor, high-pressure turbine, and low-pressure turbine. The other stream is directed through an annular duct and then recombined with the core flow, downstream of the low-pressure turbine, by means of a convoluted chute device. The combined streams then enter the augmenter to a convergent-divergent, variable area exhaust nozzle where the flow is pressurized, expanded and accelerated rearward into the atmosphere, thereby generating thrust.
Embodiments of the present invention provide control systems and methods wherein the models, optimizations, objective functions, constraints and/or parameters in the control system modify, update and/or reconfigure themselves whenever any engine component or system moves away from nominal so that as much performance and/or operability as possible can be regained. Further, systems and methods according to embodiments of the present invention provide that the control system updates itself in real-time. The systems and methods may be automated using a computer.
Embodiments of the present invention may take information about detected deterioration, faults, failures and damage and incorporate such information into the proper models, optimizations, obj ective functions, constraints and/or parameters in the control system to allow the control system to take optimized action given the current engine condition. Such systems and methods may allow any level of deterioration, faults, failures or damage to be accommodated, and not just deterioration, faults, failures or damage that have a priori solutions already programmed into the system.
Furthermore, embodiments of the present invention may be capable of being used to control gas turbines, such as the gas turbines in an aircraft engine, power plant, marine propulsion, or industrial application.
Figure 1 illustrates a schematic of a layout of an engine 10 as well as the station designations, sensors, and actuators for the engine 10. The engine 10 is an aerodynamically coupled, dual rotor machine wherein a low-pressure rotor system (fan and low-pressure turbine) is mechanically independent of a high-pressure (core engine) system. Air entering the inlet is compressed by the fan and then split into two concentric streams. One of these streams then enters the high-pressure compressor and proceeds through the main engine combustor, high-pressure turbine, and low-pressure turbine. The other stream is directed through an annular duct and then recombined with the core flow, downstream of the low-pressure turbine, by means of a convoluted chute device. The combined streams then enter the augmenter to a convergent-divergent, variable area exhaust nozzle where the flow is pressurized, expanded and accelerated rearward into the atmosphere, thereby generating thrust.
The various actuators of the engine 10 are controlled through actuation inputs from a controller, such as the model predictive controller described below with reference to Figure 3. The various sensors provide measured or sensed values of parameters for monitoring and use by one or more systems. For example, the sensed and measured values may be used to estimate values of unsensed and unmeasured parameters using a state estimator, as described below with reference to Figure 3.
It will be understood by those skilled in the art that the disclosed embodiments may be applicable to a variety of systems and are not limited to engines similar to that illustrated in Figure 1.
During normal operation, such engines can experience large variations in operating parameters, such as ambient temperature, pressure, Mach number and power output level. For each of these variations, the change in engine dynamics includes a significant nonlinear component. A control system and method for such an engine must adapt to such non-linear changes.
Control systems adapted to provide control of such engines have been described in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/306,433, GE Dkt. No. 124447, entitled "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MODEL PREDICTIVE CONTROL OF
AIRCRAFT GAS TURBINE ENGINES," filed November 27, 2002, and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/293,078, GE Dkt. No. 126067, entitled "ADAPTIVE
MODEL-BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING
A GAS TURBINE," filed November 13, 2002, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
A nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) algorithm can explicitly handle relevant aircraft engine control issues in a single formulation. NMPC is a nonlinear, mufti-input, mufti-output algorithm capable of handling both input and output constraints. Embodiments of the present invention use a dynamic model of the system to determine the response of the engine to control inputs over a future time horizon. The control actions are determined by a constrained online optimization of these future responses, as described in detail below with reference to Figure 3.
It will be understood by those skilled in the art that the disclosed embodiments may be applicable to a variety of systems and are not limited to engines similar to that illustrated in Figure 1.
During normal operation, such engines can experience large variations in operating parameters, such as ambient temperature, pressure, Mach number and power output level. For each of these variations, the change in engine dynamics includes a significant nonlinear component. A control system and method for such an engine must adapt to such non-linear changes.
Control systems adapted to provide control of such engines have been described in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/306,433, GE Dkt. No. 124447, entitled "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MODEL PREDICTIVE CONTROL OF
AIRCRAFT GAS TURBINE ENGINES," filed November 27, 2002, and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/293,078, GE Dkt. No. 126067, entitled "ADAPTIVE
MODEL-BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING
A GAS TURBINE," filed November 13, 2002, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
A nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) algorithm can explicitly handle relevant aircraft engine control issues in a single formulation. NMPC is a nonlinear, mufti-input, mufti-output algorithm capable of handling both input and output constraints. Embodiments of the present invention use a dynamic model of the system to determine the response of the engine to control inputs over a future time horizon. The control actions are determined by a constrained online optimization of these future responses, as described in detail below with reference to Figure 3.
The concept of receding horizon control 20 is illustrated in Figure 2. At time k 21, the input variables 22 (u(k), u(k+1), ..., u(k+p-1)) are selected to optimize a performance criterion over the prediction horizon 23 (p). Of the computed optimal control moves, only the values for the first sample (u(k)), are actually implemented. Before the next time interval 24, 24' and calculation of another p input value (i.e., at u(k+1), u(k+2), .. , u(k+p)), the initial state is re-estimated from output measurements. This causes the seemingly open-loop strategy to actually implement a closed-loop control.
For further details, reference may be made to J.M. Maciejowski, Predictive Control with Constraints, Prentice-Hall London, 2002.
Figure 3 illustrates a control arrangement implementing NMPC according to an embodiment of the invention. The control system 100 is adapted to monitor and control the physical engine plant 110 to provide substantially optimal performance under nominal, off nominal and failure conditions, for example. "Optimal performance" may refer to different qualities under different conditions. For example, under normal flight, optimal performance may refer to maximizing fuel efficiency, while under a failure condition, optimal performance may refer to maximizing operability of the engine through maximum thrust.
The plant 110 includes sensors which sense or measure values Y of certain parameters. These parameters may include, for example, fan speed, pressures and pressure ratios, and temperatures. The plant also includes a plurality of actuators which are controlled by command inputs U. The plant may be similar to the engine illustrated in Figure 1, for example.
The values Y of the sensed or measured parameters are provided to a state estimator 120. The use of NMPC requires that values of all states must be available.
This is required since NMPC is a full state feedback controller. Availability of sensed or measured data is generally limited due to lack of sensors. To accommodate the requirements of the NMPC, embodiments of the present invention implement an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) for estimating values of unmeasured or unsensed parameters. The EKF is described below in greater detail.
The state estimator 120 includes a model 130 of the plant 110. The model 130 is used by the state estimator 120 to generate state parameters which include estimates of unmeasured and unsensed parameters. In a particular embodiment, the model 130 is a simplified real-time model (SRTM), described in further detail below. The SRTM
is a non-linear model that can be linearized for use by the state estimator to determine Kalman gain values.
The state parameters from the state estimator 120 are transmitted to a model-based predictive control module 140. The control module 140 uses the state parameters to perform an optimization to determine commands for the actuators of the plant 110. In this regard, the control module 140 includes an optimizer 150 and a model 160.
The model 160 may be identical to the model 130 in the state estimator 120. In a particular embodiment, both models 130, 160 are the SRTM. Using the SRTM, rather than a detailed, physics-based model allows the optimization to converge rapidly. In a particular embodiment, the optimizer 150 includes a quadratic programming algorithm to optimize an objective function under given constraints. The optimizer determines the optimum values of control variables (i.e., actuator commands), and allows constraints to be specified relating to certain engine parameters, such as maximum temperatures, altitude and Mach number, while maximizing or minimizing an objective function, such as fuel efficiency or thrust. It is noted that, in an embodiment of the invention, constraints and objective function may include any of the state parameters, whether sensed, measured, unsensed or unmeasured. An exemplary formulation for the optimizer is described below.
MODEL
Physics-based, component-level models (CLM) have been employed for various applications, including certain control systems. A CLM is generally a complicated, iterative model. Such a model may require extensive processing when used in an optimizer, for example, thereby delaying convergence of the optimization. In this regard, a non-linear, analytic and non-iterating model may be implemented.
This model is referred to herein as a simple real-time model (SRTM). In a particular embodiment, this model is used in both the state estimator 120 and the control module 140.
An exemplary SRTM for implementation of embodiments of the present invention has inputs including the 1) fuel flow demand, 2) exhaust nozzle area demand, 3) altitude, 4) Mach, and 5) delta from ambient temperature. The first two inputs correspond to actuator commands U from the control module 140, while the remaining three correspond to measured or sensed outputs Y from the plant 110.
It is noted that these inputs are only exemplary and that other combinations of inputs are contemplated within the scope of the invention.
The outputs of the SRTM include estimates for certain unmeasured and unsensed parameters. These output parameters may include core speed, fan speed, fan inlet pressure, fan exit pressure, compressor inlet pressure, compressor discharge static pressure, compressor discharge total pressure, fan airflow, compressor airflow, fan inlet temperature, compressor inlet temperature, high pressure turbine exit temperature, fan stall margin, core stall margin, and thrust.
An embodiment of the SRTM model depends on tables of steady state data to define the steady state relationships between states and inputs and on transient gains to represent the transient relationships. The model may be established in the following manner.
First, the dynamics of the inertias are modeled. The two main states of the model represent the fan and core spool inertias. The first input modeled is the corrected fuel flow input (wfr). Then the model is changed to account for exit area demand as an additional input. The steady state curves may then be generated. With the primary states and inputs established, other outputs and other inputs are added to the model.
With the model structure created and all of the steady state relationships defined, the transient 'k' parameters may then be determined through system identification techniques.
The embodiment of the SRTM considers the low-pressure and high-pressure spool speeds as two of the energy storage components, or the states of the model.
These speeds can change state if an unbalanced torque is applied. Simply put, the speed increments of the engine are the integral of the surplus torques. This is stated mathematically as:
_d r,~ _ 1 ' (Eq. 1 ) dt I~Q'' c=~
where ~~ is the spool angular acceleration, J is the number of unbalanced torques, I
is the spool inertia, and Qt is the i'h torque. The origin of the torques is based on the concept that if the value of an input or other state is different than what the local state is expecting at steady state, then it will apply an unbalanced torque to the local state.
Using this information and Eq. 1, this idea is expressed for LP spool speed (pcn2) , and the HP spool speed (pcn25) as:
pcn2 = k2 * (pcn25 - gpcn25) + kwfn2 * (wf - gwfn2) , (Eq. 2) pcn2 S = k25 * (pcn2 - gpcn2) + kwfn25 * (wf - gwfn25) , (Eq. 3) where pcn2 and pcn25 are the angular acceleration of the low-pressure and high-pressure spools, respectively, the g parameters are based on steady state relationships, and the k parameters are derived from transient data. Working through Eq. 2, each of the terms is described as follows:
k2 represents the aerodynamic influence of the HP spool on the LP spool acceleration, ~ gpcn25 is the steady state value of pcn25 based on pcn2, kwfn2 is the influence of a change in wf on the LP spool acceleration, gwfn2 is the steady state value of wf based on the value of pcn2.
~ Similarly for Eq. 3, k25 represents the aerodynamic influence of the LP spool on the HP spool acceleration, gpcn2 is the steady state value of pcn2 based on pcn25, kwfn25 is the influence of a change in wf on the HP spool acceleration, gwfn25 is the steady state value of wf based on the value of pcn25.
The two control outputs from the control module are fuel flow demand and exhaust nozzle area demand. The engine model inputs are fuel flow and exit area.
Between the commands from the control and the physical inputs to the engine are the inner-loop control algorithm and the actuators. The models of the inner loop controls and actuator dynamics for both the fuel metering valve and exhaust nozzle are created.
As noted above, in a particular embodiment, the SRTM is used as a predictive model in both the state estimator and the control module. The state estimator of one embodiment is an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) that uses the SRTM in its nonlinear form (described above) for the time update calculation. A linearized version of the SRTM is used by the EKF for the Kalman gain calculation. Similarly, the control module of one embodiment, using a quadratic programming algorithm, depends on a linear SRTM model to define the relationships between future control actions and future engine responses.
A linearized version of the SRTM is obtained as follows. The SRTM can be described in general as a nonlinear ordinary differential equation (ODE):
x, = .f (xr ~ uJ ) ~ (Eq~ 4) with the states x' and the inputs u'. Taylor's theorem is used to linearize the solution about the current (x' , u' ) value. Introducing the deviation variables (x' , u' ) , x' = x' + z', u' = u' + u' (Eq. 5) yields the following standard Taylor's expansion for the ODE in Eq. 4:
x' x' + x' - f (x' , u' ) + ~ ~ _ _ x' + ~ ~ _ a ' . (Eq 6) x,u x,u This ODE describes how the solution x' evolves with control u' in comparison with the nominal solution x' from control u' . The linearized system is then represented by:
x' = fr ~ x' + a'~ ~ a + f (x' , u' ) - x. (Eq. 7) ax x,u au x, In the above ODE, x = 0 , since x' is a constant denoting the current value of the states.
Moreover, for linearization about steady-state equilibrium solutions, f (x, a ) = 0, and thus, there is no additive term f (x' , u' ) . However, when linearizing about an arbitrary current point (x, , u' ) , this additive term is a non-zero term that is constant over the timeframe of evolution of the linearized system.
In addition to the ODE system in Eq. 4 that describes the dynamics of the system, we also linearize the output relations for both the measured outputs z' and the controlled outputs y' z' = hm (x' ~ u' ) (Eq. 8) Y' = he (x' ~ u' ) using a similar Taylor's series expansion about the current values:
_ ah r7h Zt = Zt - Zt = m .xt + m Ztt x,u ~ x,u .(Eq. 9) _ c~h . ah Yr = Yr - Yr ' ~ xr '~ c ur C~.aC X,u C~LI _x,u Using the above, the identity y = h(zr , ut ) , and the following substitutions:
Ac ~~xu~ B~ ~ au~Xu ' ' , (Eq. 10) C _ _ah~. D - ah~
C~x x,u (~ s,u the linear model is derived:
xr - Acxr +B~ut +.~
(Eq. 11 ) Yr = ~t + Dut .
Finally, when the control solution ut+z is determined it should be interpreted as additive to the constant current input, so that ur+T = ut + ut+r .
It is important to note the f term in Eq. 11. This term represents the free response of the plant.
Thus, the embodiment of the SRTM provides simplified model that provides accurate and rapid convergence of the optimization. The model can be linearized for certain purposes.
The linear model in Eq. 11 is discretized in time using the sample time TS to obtain the linear discrete-time model:
z~+, = Axr + Bur + F
_ , (Eq. 12) Yr = ~r + Dur where A = I + A~TS, B = B~TS, F = f(zr,ur)TS . (Eq. 13) EXTENDED KALMAN FILTER
The state estimator implemented in a particular embodiment is an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF). The EKF is a nonlinear state estimator, which is based on a dynamical system model. While the model underpinning the EKF is nonlinear, the recursion is based on a linear gain computed from the parameters of the linearized SRTM
model.
Thus the design concepts inherit much from the realm of Kalman Filtering.
The EKF need not provide the truly optimal state estimate to the controller in order to operate adequately well. It is usually a suboptimal nonlinear filter in any case.
However, its role in providing the state estimates to the NMPC for correct initialization is a key feature of the control module.
For the EKF analysis, the SRTM is described by:
xt ~ f (x" ur ) + wr (Eq. 14) Yxor = h(xxor ~ uxer ) + vkor where the measurement y arrives at every 0t seconds and the white noise variables w and v represent the process and measurement noises, respectively. This is a continuous-time dynamical system with discrete-time (sampled) measurements.
The EKF equations can be written in predictor-corrector form. For the state estimation case, the predictor or time-update equations using Euler integration to move from continuous to discrete time are:
xk+~ = xk + ~t f (xk , uk ) (Eq. 15) 'fk+i = Ak I'k Ak + W
where xk+, is a priori to the measurement step state estimate, Pk+, is the a priori estimate error covariance, W is the discrete-time process noise covariance (after scaling by t1t), and Ak is the discrete-time transition of the linearized system, or:
Ak = I + A~TS (Eq. 16) The linear discrete time measurement matrix C is defined as:
ah ~k = ax ( ~k+> > Pk ~ uk ) . (Eq. 17) Next the Kalman filter gain is computed using:
K = Pk+a'k ~ (R + Ck Pk+1 Ck ~ ) ~ (Eq. 18) The corrector or measurement update equations are:
xk+1 ' xk+1 + K(yk h(xk+1 ~ Pk'uk ~ (Eq. 19) I'k+~ = I'k+~ ~ K(R + Ckpk+1 Ck' ) K
OPTIMIZER FORMULATION
Embodiments of the control module include an optimizer adapted to maximize or minimize an objective function while satisfying a given set of constraints. In one embodiment, the optimizer uses a quadratic programming algorithm. As described above, the control module uses a dynamic model of the plant to perform simulations over a specific horizon, the model being the SRTM in one embodiment.
In an exemplary embodiment, the control module is designed to control the fan speed PCN2R, and the pressure ratio DPP (y,r=PCN2R, yZt=DPP) using the combustor fuel flow, fmvdmd, and the afterburner, a8xdmi as the manipulated inputs (u,t fmvdmd, ul~
= a8xdmi), subject to magnitude and slew rate constraints imposed by the hardware limits on the actuators for the two manipulated inputs. In addition to these constraints, the optimization in the control module will also be performed subject to other operational/safety constraints like stall margin, combustor blowout, maximum T4B, minimum and maximum PS3, maximum N25.
A quadratic programming (QP) algorithm with the linearized dynamic model is used along with a quadratic objective function and linear constraints. The QP
problem is convex and can be solved readily with available QP software. Moreover, since the linearization is performed repeatedly at each time sample about the corresponding operating point, it accounts for the nonlinearities encountered during dynamic transients over the flight envelope. To implement the control module using the QP
formulation, the nonlinear SRTM is linearized about the current state estimate zt obtained by the EKF and the current inputs ut_, , and then discretized in time using the sample time TS, to obtain the linear discrete-time model.
The main control objective is to track changes in the references for the two controlled outputs. The optimization objective function is postulated as a standard quadratic function to be minimized over a future prediction horizon nh, using the piecewise constant inputs over a future control horizon nc. More specifically, the objective function to be minimized is:
1 nn nc T T
JLQ = 2 ~t~Yt+iQdyr+t '~' ~,~~t+t-iROur+.-t r=~
> >
QZOYt+i > > RZ~ut 1 _ _ _ = 2 DYr t Q 2 . . . ~.Yt+nh ~ 2 ~ : + Du; R Z . . . ~u i n~-~ R 2 1 2 ~.yt+nh R 2 ~ul+nc-1 (Eq. 20) where Dyr+; = Y,,t+; - Yt+; denotes the error between the output reference and the predicted output at a future sample t+i, Dut+; = u,+; - u,+,-, = Dut+, = ur+t -ur+t-~
denotes the change in the manipulated inputs at sample t+a relative to the value of the inputs at the previous sample, and Q and R are symmetric positive definite weighting matrices. The weighting matrices Q and R and the prediction and control horizons nh, nc, respectively are tuned for optimal performance and stability. The objective function is to be minimized as a function of the future control action values ut+;_, , i =1,..., ne assuming that ut+;_, = ur+nc-~ , i = nc + 1,..., nh .
The objective function is calculated over the future prediction horizon nh using a linear discrete time model.
The predicted values of the outputs yr+; in terms of deviations from the current measured value y'r are given by the following relation:
Yr+~ xt+i ye = , = Ce : , where Ce = (Inh ~ C) .yt+nh xt+nh B 0 "~ 0 ur z F_ rt A _ AB B . . ur+, A F
t+nh xr + . - . 0 A ' ~ nh Ar+n>,-~ B . . . AB B a ~ A'-' F E9. 21 r+nh t=~
ur = Ce Aext + ABe * I nc ur+~ + AF
a 0 nh-nc+1 x nc-1 1 nh-nc+t x 1 ' a t+nc = C~xt + CzUe -~ C3 = CZUe + C3 Note that by its definition, z, = 0 , which is utilized in the above relation to obtain the predicted outputs Ye over the prediction horizon nh, as a linear function of the future control action Ue over the control horizon nc. Moreover, the changes in the control inputs Our+; = ut+; - ut+,-, are denoted by the following compact relation:
Dut 1 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ut Dut+, -1 1 0 0 ut+, = rUe (Eq. 22) 0 . . 0 Dut+nc ~ 0 - 1 1 ut+nc Using the above relations, the predicted value of the objective function to be minimized over the prediction horizon is given by the compact relation:
'JGQ = (.Yre - Ye )T (~nh ~ ~)(~re - Ye ) + Ue r~ (I nc ~ R)1 Ue _ (Y.e ~ ~2Ue -C3)T Qe(Y.e -CZUe -C3)+Ue rT RerUe (Eq. 23) = Ho + Ue H, Ue + H2 Ue The above quadratic objective function is to be minimized with respect to the future control moves Ue, subject to all input and output constraints. In particular, the input constraints consist of the min/max magnitude and rate of change constraints:
umin ~ ut-~ + l4r+i ~ umax (Eq. 24) ~umin ~ ut+i ut+i-1 ~ Qurnax In addition to the above input constraints, which are typically hard constraints, there may be other state/output operational/safety constraints (e.g., minimum stall margin, maximum core speed, combustor blowout). In one formulation of the NMPC, a logic to generate the output reference trajectory and update the constraints for changes in the control actions (fuel flow and A8) is used to enforce these operational/safety constraints. However, it is possible to enforce these operational/safety constraints directly using a linear model for the prediction of the relevant state/output variables over the prediction horizon. For instance, in order to enforce the maximum limit on the core speed, which is a measured variable and the 2°d state in the SRTM, the constraint can be accounted for using the linear discrete-time model:
x2,t+. ~ xZt~x -xz.t -'x2max (Eq. 25) Note that, unlike the input constraints, these state/output constraints rely on the model predictions and thus are subject to plant-model mismatch over the prediction horizon.
Thus, to avoid potential infeasibility, these constraints are typically included as a soft constraint. Thus, the overall QP problem to be solved at each time sample for the NMPC is given below:
min J LQ = Ue H, Ue + HZ Ue + W~3 Ue,,li subject to the constraints Uem~n ~ Ue ~ Ue~X (Eq. 26) ~Uemia ~ rUe <_ DUe YeSm;n W3 <_ L,tle + LZ < Yesmax + ~3 ,Q>_0 Imthe above QP formulation, the constant term Ho in the quadratic objective function is ignored, Eli denotes the violation in the soft, output/state constraints, W
is the penalty on the sob constraints, Yesm", and Yes", are the minimum and maximum limits on these output/state constraints in terms of deviations from the current values and L,Ue + L~ denotes the predicted values of these output/state constraints over the prediction horizon using the linear discrete time model.
The solution of the QP problem in Eq. 26 yields the optimal control trajectory Ue over the control horizon nc. The optimal values for the first sample, i.e. u,, yields the absolute value of the control action, u~ = u,_, + u~ . This optimal control input is implemented and the QP problem is updated and solved at the next sample along with the EKF.
The quadratic-programming based optimizer and control module rely on the predictions of the engine variables over the future prediction horizon. In the presence of a plant-model mismatch, the model predictions used in the control module can be incorrect and can lead to controller performance degradation or even instability. In embodiments of the present invention, the plant-model mismatch is addressed by including a corrective term on the model used for the prediction. In particular, at each time sample t, the term K~y, - h(xl+,, pr, u, )), in the EKF (Eq. 19) provides the mismatch between the current output measurements yr and the model predictions for these outputs yr =h(zr+,, pr,ur) with the current state estimates zt. The current value of this feedback correction term can be used as a constant correction term in the linearized discrete-time model. More specifically, this constant term can be included in the constant vector F to obtain the corrected linear model that can be used for prediction:
zr+, = Axr + Bur + (F + L(zr - it )) .(Eq. 27) yr = ~r The above correction term that accounts for the mismatch between the measured and predicted outputs, along with the fact that the quadratic objective function formulation in terms of deviations in the control actions effectively amounts to an integral action with respect to the error between the output reference and the predicted outputs, allows an offset-less control even in the presence of plant-model mismatch.
In another formulation of the QP problem, an infinite prediction horizon may be implemented. In this regard, the control objective function is extended to an infinite prediction horizon, resulting in positive impacts on stability and robustness.
The penalty for using the infinite prediction horizon is an increase in the computational cost to achieve a solution. To counter this penalty, a compact and efficient calculation of the infinite horizon term has been developed.
The standard quadratic objective function of Eq. 20 involves a quadratic cost on the tracking error Ayr+; over a prediction horizon n,, and a quadratic cost on the control action ur+;_, over a control horizon n~ ( n~ « nh ), where it is assumed that the control action is constant after the control horizon, i.e, u,+"~-, = ur+n~ = ur+~~+, _ ~ . A larger control horizon enables improved control performance, however the optimization problem and hence the computational burden grows with the control horizon, thereby limiting the control horizon due to real-time implementation issues. On the other hand, a larger prediction horizon enables improved stability and robustness, hence the prediction horizon is typically chosen to be significantly larger than the control horizon.
In the case of a large prediction horizon nh , the objective function in Eq.
20 involves nh an expensive calculation of the tracking error terms ( ~ ~y; iQOyr+; ) beyond the i=nc+1 control horizon n~ . This increases the computational burden and limits the choice of the prediction horizon nh due to real-time implementation issues. The use of infinite prediction horizon improves the stability and performance of the controller without adding undue computational burden. A significantly more efficient alternative is proposed to evaluating the quadratic cost due to the tracking error over an "infinite"
prediction horizon with minimal computational overhead.
In particular, consider the quadratic objective function over an infinite prediction horizon:
1 m i=nc T ,~ T
Joo = ~ ~, ~3'r+iQ~Yr+i '+' ~ ~'ut+i-l~~ut+i=l i=
nc i=nc - 1 ~~yt+iQwl+i +~~u~ i-1R021r+i=1 + 1 ~~.yt iQ~.yt+i (Eq. 2s) 2 i=1 i=1 2 i=nc+1 - Jnc + Jnc,ao Note that due to the assumption of constant control action beyond the control horizon (e.g., ur+nc-, = ur+nc = ur+n~+, _ ~ ~. ), the quadratic cost of the control action based on Onr+nc+;-, is zero and omitted from the objective function. The objective function is factored into two terms, where the first term is the standard objective function J, corresponding to a prediction horizon nh same as the control horizon nc. It is given as a quadratic function of the control action U = [ur ~ ~ ~ ur+n~-, ]T
Jn~ = 2 UT Hnw + f T ~ (Eq. 29) The second term J"~,~ = 1 ~ ~y~ ;Q>'yt+; is the remaining quadratic cost on the 2 ;=n~+~
tracking error beyond the control horizon, and needs to be computed as a function of the control action in a compact and efficient manner. We will henceforth focus on calculating this tracking error term over the infinite horizon. In fact, we will calculate a slightly modified term:
1 ~atOvt+;QOYt+a~ (Eq.30) 2 i=nc+~
with an exponentially decaying weighting factor a; given by an~+, =1, a;+, = aa; (a < 1) . The use of such an exponentially decaying weighting factor is motivated by several factors: (i) Due to modeling errors, model predictions over future get less accurate with increasing horizon, hence the decaying weighting factor reduces the weights on tracking error with increasing samples in future and gives more weight to tracking error in the immediate future. (ii) In some cases, one or more limiting constraints become active and inhibit an offset-less tracking, i.e. the tracking error term Dyt+; does not decay to zero over the infinite horizon. In such a case, the exponentially decaying weighting factor a; (with a < 1) ) is necessary to ensure that the sum of tracking error terms over an infinite horizon is still bounded and can be minimized.
The tracking error terms ~yt+i in Eq. 20 correspond to the outputs of the system:
xt+i+~ = Axt+. + But+n~-~ + F (Eq. 31 ) _ ~ + Du .yt+i t+J t+nc-1 ' starting from the initial state xt+n~ and constant inputs ut+n~-, . It is assumed that the above dynamic system is stable (i.e., all eigen values ofA are within the unit circle, else the states and hence the outputs would go unbounded over the infinite prediction horizon). For such a stable system, the final steady state corresponding to the constant input u,+n~-, is given by:
zs = Azs + Bu,+n~-, + F (Eq. 32) YS = ~s + Du,_n~-1 or, xs = (I - A) ' [But+n~-, + F] , (Eq. 33) yS = [C(1- A)~~' B + D]ut+n~-, + C(I - A)-' F = K"u,+nc-1 + KF
Defining the deviation variables xt+i = xr+; - xs, and yt+i = Yt+i -YS ~ the system dynamics are given by the simplified set of equations:
xt+i+~ = Axt+i (Eq. 34) Yt+i = cwt+i Thus, the infinite horizon tracking error term is given by:
1 °°
r ~n~~ - 2 ~ai dYt+i ~Yf+i i--ncr~
_ _ ~ai V'r,!+i KF Kuut+no-i ~t+i )T ~r,t+i KF Kuut+nc-1 ~t+i ) 2 i==nc+1 ~ai ~r,t+i KF)T ~r,t+i KF)+ 1 ~r+n~lKu ~~ut+nc-1 ~ai + ~(G'.O.SZt~ )T
~T~~a0.5~t+i ) 2 i:=nc+i 2 i=nc+1 i=nct 1. 'G~-ll ~yr,t+i -KF )T ~~ut+n~1 ~ai ~ai ~r,t+i KF Kuut+nrl )T ~~t+i i=nc+1 i=nc+1 (Eq. 35) Note that in the above equation, the first term is a constant, which is independent of the control action and can be omitted from the optimization objective.
Moreover, the term ( yr.,+; - KF - K" u,+n~-, ) denotes the steady state error between the output references and the controlled outputs, which will be assumed to be zero. Also, the summation term ~ (a,.°~S.zt+; )T CT QC(a °~S x~+; ) is evaluated in a compact closed-form t=n~+~
as = at+n~+, xt+nc+1 Qxt+nc+I ~ where Q is a symmetric positive definite matrix that is the solution of the Lyapunov equation:
Q - ATao.sQao.sA = CTQC . (Eq. 36) Finally, xt+n~+, = xr+n~+, - xs =- xr+~~+, - (I - A)-' (Buy+"~-, + F) , where the state x~+n~ = G~+n~U + V~+n~ is a function of the control inputs U and the free response corresponding to F. Thus, xr+n~+~ = Ax~+n~ '~ F = AGt+nrU + A T!+n~ + F = Gr+n~+~U + V~+rt~+~ (Eq. 37) and x~+n~+~ = f G~+n~+~ - LO . . . p (I - A)-' B] }U + f V~+n~+~ - (1- A)-' F} =
G~+n~+~ U + Vt+n~+~
(Eq. 38) Substituting these relations in Eq. 29, the following compact relation is obtained for the infinite horizon tracking error term:
~n~~ = 2u nrl~.~+nc-1 ~ca +2~cHy+ncHU+~+neH~~~+nc+lU+~+nefl~-~~ a~r,t+nc-KF)T
~~+no-1 _ ~UTI~,~~,U+ f G~U
(Eq. 39) which is another quadratic expression in the control action U similar to the objective function On~ over the control horizon in Eq. 29. Thus, evaluating the matrices:
0 ~~~ 0 _ HnGoo -~cfl~+nefl~+nc+1 ~~1_a ~ f Sao =~nc+1~~+ne'1 - 0 Cahc*1 ~T~v _ ~-u 1 a '- r't+nc KF
(Eq. 40) the infinite horizon tracking error term in Eq. 39 can be obtained in a compact and efficient manner. Finally, note that an~+, =1 and the forgetting factor a < 1 can be tuned to shorten or lengthen the extent of the infinite horizon tracking error that contributes to the overall objective function and the rate of decay of their relative weighting. A larger value of a will lengthen the effective terms in the infinite horizon thereby increasing the stability characteristics. However, in the presence of modeling errors, the undue weight on distant future tracking errors will degrade the transient performance. A judicious tuning of the factor a will enable increased stability as well as improved performance.
The present application is related to U.S. Patent Application Serial No.
10/306,433, GE Dkt. No. 124447, entitled "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MODEL
PREDICTIVE CONTROL OF AIRCRAFT GAS TURBINE ENGINES," filed November 27, 2002, and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/293,078, GE Dkt.
No.
126067, entitled "ADAPTIVE MODEL-BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS AND
METHODS FOR CONTROLLING A GAS TURBINE," filed November 13, 2002, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Exemplary embodiments of control systems and methods are described above in detail. The systems are not limited to the specific embodiments described herein, but rather, components of each system may be utilized independently and separately from other components described herein. Each system component can also be used in combination with other system components.
While the invention has been described in terms of various specific embodiments, those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention can be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of the claims.
For further details, reference may be made to J.M. Maciejowski, Predictive Control with Constraints, Prentice-Hall London, 2002.
Figure 3 illustrates a control arrangement implementing NMPC according to an embodiment of the invention. The control system 100 is adapted to monitor and control the physical engine plant 110 to provide substantially optimal performance under nominal, off nominal and failure conditions, for example. "Optimal performance" may refer to different qualities under different conditions. For example, under normal flight, optimal performance may refer to maximizing fuel efficiency, while under a failure condition, optimal performance may refer to maximizing operability of the engine through maximum thrust.
The plant 110 includes sensors which sense or measure values Y of certain parameters. These parameters may include, for example, fan speed, pressures and pressure ratios, and temperatures. The plant also includes a plurality of actuators which are controlled by command inputs U. The plant may be similar to the engine illustrated in Figure 1, for example.
The values Y of the sensed or measured parameters are provided to a state estimator 120. The use of NMPC requires that values of all states must be available.
This is required since NMPC is a full state feedback controller. Availability of sensed or measured data is generally limited due to lack of sensors. To accommodate the requirements of the NMPC, embodiments of the present invention implement an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) for estimating values of unmeasured or unsensed parameters. The EKF is described below in greater detail.
The state estimator 120 includes a model 130 of the plant 110. The model 130 is used by the state estimator 120 to generate state parameters which include estimates of unmeasured and unsensed parameters. In a particular embodiment, the model 130 is a simplified real-time model (SRTM), described in further detail below. The SRTM
is a non-linear model that can be linearized for use by the state estimator to determine Kalman gain values.
The state parameters from the state estimator 120 are transmitted to a model-based predictive control module 140. The control module 140 uses the state parameters to perform an optimization to determine commands for the actuators of the plant 110. In this regard, the control module 140 includes an optimizer 150 and a model 160.
The model 160 may be identical to the model 130 in the state estimator 120. In a particular embodiment, both models 130, 160 are the SRTM. Using the SRTM, rather than a detailed, physics-based model allows the optimization to converge rapidly. In a particular embodiment, the optimizer 150 includes a quadratic programming algorithm to optimize an objective function under given constraints. The optimizer determines the optimum values of control variables (i.e., actuator commands), and allows constraints to be specified relating to certain engine parameters, such as maximum temperatures, altitude and Mach number, while maximizing or minimizing an objective function, such as fuel efficiency or thrust. It is noted that, in an embodiment of the invention, constraints and objective function may include any of the state parameters, whether sensed, measured, unsensed or unmeasured. An exemplary formulation for the optimizer is described below.
MODEL
Physics-based, component-level models (CLM) have been employed for various applications, including certain control systems. A CLM is generally a complicated, iterative model. Such a model may require extensive processing when used in an optimizer, for example, thereby delaying convergence of the optimization. In this regard, a non-linear, analytic and non-iterating model may be implemented.
This model is referred to herein as a simple real-time model (SRTM). In a particular embodiment, this model is used in both the state estimator 120 and the control module 140.
An exemplary SRTM for implementation of embodiments of the present invention has inputs including the 1) fuel flow demand, 2) exhaust nozzle area demand, 3) altitude, 4) Mach, and 5) delta from ambient temperature. The first two inputs correspond to actuator commands U from the control module 140, while the remaining three correspond to measured or sensed outputs Y from the plant 110.
It is noted that these inputs are only exemplary and that other combinations of inputs are contemplated within the scope of the invention.
The outputs of the SRTM include estimates for certain unmeasured and unsensed parameters. These output parameters may include core speed, fan speed, fan inlet pressure, fan exit pressure, compressor inlet pressure, compressor discharge static pressure, compressor discharge total pressure, fan airflow, compressor airflow, fan inlet temperature, compressor inlet temperature, high pressure turbine exit temperature, fan stall margin, core stall margin, and thrust.
An embodiment of the SRTM model depends on tables of steady state data to define the steady state relationships between states and inputs and on transient gains to represent the transient relationships. The model may be established in the following manner.
First, the dynamics of the inertias are modeled. The two main states of the model represent the fan and core spool inertias. The first input modeled is the corrected fuel flow input (wfr). Then the model is changed to account for exit area demand as an additional input. The steady state curves may then be generated. With the primary states and inputs established, other outputs and other inputs are added to the model.
With the model structure created and all of the steady state relationships defined, the transient 'k' parameters may then be determined through system identification techniques.
The embodiment of the SRTM considers the low-pressure and high-pressure spool speeds as two of the energy storage components, or the states of the model.
These speeds can change state if an unbalanced torque is applied. Simply put, the speed increments of the engine are the integral of the surplus torques. This is stated mathematically as:
_d r,~ _ 1 ' (Eq. 1 ) dt I~Q'' c=~
where ~~ is the spool angular acceleration, J is the number of unbalanced torques, I
is the spool inertia, and Qt is the i'h torque. The origin of the torques is based on the concept that if the value of an input or other state is different than what the local state is expecting at steady state, then it will apply an unbalanced torque to the local state.
Using this information and Eq. 1, this idea is expressed for LP spool speed (pcn2) , and the HP spool speed (pcn25) as:
pcn2 = k2 * (pcn25 - gpcn25) + kwfn2 * (wf - gwfn2) , (Eq. 2) pcn2 S = k25 * (pcn2 - gpcn2) + kwfn25 * (wf - gwfn25) , (Eq. 3) where pcn2 and pcn25 are the angular acceleration of the low-pressure and high-pressure spools, respectively, the g parameters are based on steady state relationships, and the k parameters are derived from transient data. Working through Eq. 2, each of the terms is described as follows:
k2 represents the aerodynamic influence of the HP spool on the LP spool acceleration, ~ gpcn25 is the steady state value of pcn25 based on pcn2, kwfn2 is the influence of a change in wf on the LP spool acceleration, gwfn2 is the steady state value of wf based on the value of pcn2.
~ Similarly for Eq. 3, k25 represents the aerodynamic influence of the LP spool on the HP spool acceleration, gpcn2 is the steady state value of pcn2 based on pcn25, kwfn25 is the influence of a change in wf on the HP spool acceleration, gwfn25 is the steady state value of wf based on the value of pcn25.
The two control outputs from the control module are fuel flow demand and exhaust nozzle area demand. The engine model inputs are fuel flow and exit area.
Between the commands from the control and the physical inputs to the engine are the inner-loop control algorithm and the actuators. The models of the inner loop controls and actuator dynamics for both the fuel metering valve and exhaust nozzle are created.
As noted above, in a particular embodiment, the SRTM is used as a predictive model in both the state estimator and the control module. The state estimator of one embodiment is an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) that uses the SRTM in its nonlinear form (described above) for the time update calculation. A linearized version of the SRTM is used by the EKF for the Kalman gain calculation. Similarly, the control module of one embodiment, using a quadratic programming algorithm, depends on a linear SRTM model to define the relationships between future control actions and future engine responses.
A linearized version of the SRTM is obtained as follows. The SRTM can be described in general as a nonlinear ordinary differential equation (ODE):
x, = .f (xr ~ uJ ) ~ (Eq~ 4) with the states x' and the inputs u'. Taylor's theorem is used to linearize the solution about the current (x' , u' ) value. Introducing the deviation variables (x' , u' ) , x' = x' + z', u' = u' + u' (Eq. 5) yields the following standard Taylor's expansion for the ODE in Eq. 4:
x' x' + x' - f (x' , u' ) + ~ ~ _ _ x' + ~ ~ _ a ' . (Eq 6) x,u x,u This ODE describes how the solution x' evolves with control u' in comparison with the nominal solution x' from control u' . The linearized system is then represented by:
x' = fr ~ x' + a'~ ~ a + f (x' , u' ) - x. (Eq. 7) ax x,u au x, In the above ODE, x = 0 , since x' is a constant denoting the current value of the states.
Moreover, for linearization about steady-state equilibrium solutions, f (x, a ) = 0, and thus, there is no additive term f (x' , u' ) . However, when linearizing about an arbitrary current point (x, , u' ) , this additive term is a non-zero term that is constant over the timeframe of evolution of the linearized system.
In addition to the ODE system in Eq. 4 that describes the dynamics of the system, we also linearize the output relations for both the measured outputs z' and the controlled outputs y' z' = hm (x' ~ u' ) (Eq. 8) Y' = he (x' ~ u' ) using a similar Taylor's series expansion about the current values:
_ ah r7h Zt = Zt - Zt = m .xt + m Ztt x,u ~ x,u .(Eq. 9) _ c~h . ah Yr = Yr - Yr ' ~ xr '~ c ur C~.aC X,u C~LI _x,u Using the above, the identity y = h(zr , ut ) , and the following substitutions:
Ac ~~xu~ B~ ~ au~Xu ' ' , (Eq. 10) C _ _ah~. D - ah~
C~x x,u (~ s,u the linear model is derived:
xr - Acxr +B~ut +.~
(Eq. 11 ) Yr = ~t + Dut .
Finally, when the control solution ut+z is determined it should be interpreted as additive to the constant current input, so that ur+T = ut + ut+r .
It is important to note the f term in Eq. 11. This term represents the free response of the plant.
Thus, the embodiment of the SRTM provides simplified model that provides accurate and rapid convergence of the optimization. The model can be linearized for certain purposes.
The linear model in Eq. 11 is discretized in time using the sample time TS to obtain the linear discrete-time model:
z~+, = Axr + Bur + F
_ , (Eq. 12) Yr = ~r + Dur where A = I + A~TS, B = B~TS, F = f(zr,ur)TS . (Eq. 13) EXTENDED KALMAN FILTER
The state estimator implemented in a particular embodiment is an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF). The EKF is a nonlinear state estimator, which is based on a dynamical system model. While the model underpinning the EKF is nonlinear, the recursion is based on a linear gain computed from the parameters of the linearized SRTM
model.
Thus the design concepts inherit much from the realm of Kalman Filtering.
The EKF need not provide the truly optimal state estimate to the controller in order to operate adequately well. It is usually a suboptimal nonlinear filter in any case.
However, its role in providing the state estimates to the NMPC for correct initialization is a key feature of the control module.
For the EKF analysis, the SRTM is described by:
xt ~ f (x" ur ) + wr (Eq. 14) Yxor = h(xxor ~ uxer ) + vkor where the measurement y arrives at every 0t seconds and the white noise variables w and v represent the process and measurement noises, respectively. This is a continuous-time dynamical system with discrete-time (sampled) measurements.
The EKF equations can be written in predictor-corrector form. For the state estimation case, the predictor or time-update equations using Euler integration to move from continuous to discrete time are:
xk+~ = xk + ~t f (xk , uk ) (Eq. 15) 'fk+i = Ak I'k Ak + W
where xk+, is a priori to the measurement step state estimate, Pk+, is the a priori estimate error covariance, W is the discrete-time process noise covariance (after scaling by t1t), and Ak is the discrete-time transition of the linearized system, or:
Ak = I + A~TS (Eq. 16) The linear discrete time measurement matrix C is defined as:
ah ~k = ax ( ~k+> > Pk ~ uk ) . (Eq. 17) Next the Kalman filter gain is computed using:
K = Pk+a'k ~ (R + Ck Pk+1 Ck ~ ) ~ (Eq. 18) The corrector or measurement update equations are:
xk+1 ' xk+1 + K(yk h(xk+1 ~ Pk'uk ~ (Eq. 19) I'k+~ = I'k+~ ~ K(R + Ckpk+1 Ck' ) K
OPTIMIZER FORMULATION
Embodiments of the control module include an optimizer adapted to maximize or minimize an objective function while satisfying a given set of constraints. In one embodiment, the optimizer uses a quadratic programming algorithm. As described above, the control module uses a dynamic model of the plant to perform simulations over a specific horizon, the model being the SRTM in one embodiment.
In an exemplary embodiment, the control module is designed to control the fan speed PCN2R, and the pressure ratio DPP (y,r=PCN2R, yZt=DPP) using the combustor fuel flow, fmvdmd, and the afterburner, a8xdmi as the manipulated inputs (u,t fmvdmd, ul~
= a8xdmi), subject to magnitude and slew rate constraints imposed by the hardware limits on the actuators for the two manipulated inputs. In addition to these constraints, the optimization in the control module will also be performed subject to other operational/safety constraints like stall margin, combustor blowout, maximum T4B, minimum and maximum PS3, maximum N25.
A quadratic programming (QP) algorithm with the linearized dynamic model is used along with a quadratic objective function and linear constraints. The QP
problem is convex and can be solved readily with available QP software. Moreover, since the linearization is performed repeatedly at each time sample about the corresponding operating point, it accounts for the nonlinearities encountered during dynamic transients over the flight envelope. To implement the control module using the QP
formulation, the nonlinear SRTM is linearized about the current state estimate zt obtained by the EKF and the current inputs ut_, , and then discretized in time using the sample time TS, to obtain the linear discrete-time model.
The main control objective is to track changes in the references for the two controlled outputs. The optimization objective function is postulated as a standard quadratic function to be minimized over a future prediction horizon nh, using the piecewise constant inputs over a future control horizon nc. More specifically, the objective function to be minimized is:
1 nn nc T T
JLQ = 2 ~t~Yt+iQdyr+t '~' ~,~~t+t-iROur+.-t r=~
> >
QZOYt+i > > RZ~ut 1 _ _ _ = 2 DYr t Q 2 . . . ~.Yt+nh ~ 2 ~ : + Du; R Z . . . ~u i n~-~ R 2 1 2 ~.yt+nh R 2 ~ul+nc-1 (Eq. 20) where Dyr+; = Y,,t+; - Yt+; denotes the error between the output reference and the predicted output at a future sample t+i, Dut+; = u,+; - u,+,-, = Dut+, = ur+t -ur+t-~
denotes the change in the manipulated inputs at sample t+a relative to the value of the inputs at the previous sample, and Q and R are symmetric positive definite weighting matrices. The weighting matrices Q and R and the prediction and control horizons nh, nc, respectively are tuned for optimal performance and stability. The objective function is to be minimized as a function of the future control action values ut+;_, , i =1,..., ne assuming that ut+;_, = ur+nc-~ , i = nc + 1,..., nh .
The objective function is calculated over the future prediction horizon nh using a linear discrete time model.
The predicted values of the outputs yr+; in terms of deviations from the current measured value y'r are given by the following relation:
Yr+~ xt+i ye = , = Ce : , where Ce = (Inh ~ C) .yt+nh xt+nh B 0 "~ 0 ur z F_ rt A _ AB B . . ur+, A F
t+nh xr + . - . 0 A ' ~ nh Ar+n>,-~ B . . . AB B a ~ A'-' F E9. 21 r+nh t=~
ur = Ce Aext + ABe * I nc ur+~ + AF
a 0 nh-nc+1 x nc-1 1 nh-nc+t x 1 ' a t+nc = C~xt + CzUe -~ C3 = CZUe + C3 Note that by its definition, z, = 0 , which is utilized in the above relation to obtain the predicted outputs Ye over the prediction horizon nh, as a linear function of the future control action Ue over the control horizon nc. Moreover, the changes in the control inputs Our+; = ut+; - ut+,-, are denoted by the following compact relation:
Dut 1 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ut Dut+, -1 1 0 0 ut+, = rUe (Eq. 22) 0 . . 0 Dut+nc ~ 0 - 1 1 ut+nc Using the above relations, the predicted value of the objective function to be minimized over the prediction horizon is given by the compact relation:
'JGQ = (.Yre - Ye )T (~nh ~ ~)(~re - Ye ) + Ue r~ (I nc ~ R)1 Ue _ (Y.e ~ ~2Ue -C3)T Qe(Y.e -CZUe -C3)+Ue rT RerUe (Eq. 23) = Ho + Ue H, Ue + H2 Ue The above quadratic objective function is to be minimized with respect to the future control moves Ue, subject to all input and output constraints. In particular, the input constraints consist of the min/max magnitude and rate of change constraints:
umin ~ ut-~ + l4r+i ~ umax (Eq. 24) ~umin ~ ut+i ut+i-1 ~ Qurnax In addition to the above input constraints, which are typically hard constraints, there may be other state/output operational/safety constraints (e.g., minimum stall margin, maximum core speed, combustor blowout). In one formulation of the NMPC, a logic to generate the output reference trajectory and update the constraints for changes in the control actions (fuel flow and A8) is used to enforce these operational/safety constraints. However, it is possible to enforce these operational/safety constraints directly using a linear model for the prediction of the relevant state/output variables over the prediction horizon. For instance, in order to enforce the maximum limit on the core speed, which is a measured variable and the 2°d state in the SRTM, the constraint can be accounted for using the linear discrete-time model:
x2,t+. ~ xZt~x -xz.t -'x2max (Eq. 25) Note that, unlike the input constraints, these state/output constraints rely on the model predictions and thus are subject to plant-model mismatch over the prediction horizon.
Thus, to avoid potential infeasibility, these constraints are typically included as a soft constraint. Thus, the overall QP problem to be solved at each time sample for the NMPC is given below:
min J LQ = Ue H, Ue + HZ Ue + W~3 Ue,,li subject to the constraints Uem~n ~ Ue ~ Ue~X (Eq. 26) ~Uemia ~ rUe <_ DUe YeSm;n W3 <_ L,tle + LZ < Yesmax + ~3 ,Q>_0 Imthe above QP formulation, the constant term Ho in the quadratic objective function is ignored, Eli denotes the violation in the soft, output/state constraints, W
is the penalty on the sob constraints, Yesm", and Yes", are the minimum and maximum limits on these output/state constraints in terms of deviations from the current values and L,Ue + L~ denotes the predicted values of these output/state constraints over the prediction horizon using the linear discrete time model.
The solution of the QP problem in Eq. 26 yields the optimal control trajectory Ue over the control horizon nc. The optimal values for the first sample, i.e. u,, yields the absolute value of the control action, u~ = u,_, + u~ . This optimal control input is implemented and the QP problem is updated and solved at the next sample along with the EKF.
The quadratic-programming based optimizer and control module rely on the predictions of the engine variables over the future prediction horizon. In the presence of a plant-model mismatch, the model predictions used in the control module can be incorrect and can lead to controller performance degradation or even instability. In embodiments of the present invention, the plant-model mismatch is addressed by including a corrective term on the model used for the prediction. In particular, at each time sample t, the term K~y, - h(xl+,, pr, u, )), in the EKF (Eq. 19) provides the mismatch between the current output measurements yr and the model predictions for these outputs yr =h(zr+,, pr,ur) with the current state estimates zt. The current value of this feedback correction term can be used as a constant correction term in the linearized discrete-time model. More specifically, this constant term can be included in the constant vector F to obtain the corrected linear model that can be used for prediction:
zr+, = Axr + Bur + (F + L(zr - it )) .(Eq. 27) yr = ~r The above correction term that accounts for the mismatch between the measured and predicted outputs, along with the fact that the quadratic objective function formulation in terms of deviations in the control actions effectively amounts to an integral action with respect to the error between the output reference and the predicted outputs, allows an offset-less control even in the presence of plant-model mismatch.
In another formulation of the QP problem, an infinite prediction horizon may be implemented. In this regard, the control objective function is extended to an infinite prediction horizon, resulting in positive impacts on stability and robustness.
The penalty for using the infinite prediction horizon is an increase in the computational cost to achieve a solution. To counter this penalty, a compact and efficient calculation of the infinite horizon term has been developed.
The standard quadratic objective function of Eq. 20 involves a quadratic cost on the tracking error Ayr+; over a prediction horizon n,, and a quadratic cost on the control action ur+;_, over a control horizon n~ ( n~ « nh ), where it is assumed that the control action is constant after the control horizon, i.e, u,+"~-, = ur+n~ = ur+~~+, _ ~ . A larger control horizon enables improved control performance, however the optimization problem and hence the computational burden grows with the control horizon, thereby limiting the control horizon due to real-time implementation issues. On the other hand, a larger prediction horizon enables improved stability and robustness, hence the prediction horizon is typically chosen to be significantly larger than the control horizon.
In the case of a large prediction horizon nh , the objective function in Eq.
20 involves nh an expensive calculation of the tracking error terms ( ~ ~y; iQOyr+; ) beyond the i=nc+1 control horizon n~ . This increases the computational burden and limits the choice of the prediction horizon nh due to real-time implementation issues. The use of infinite prediction horizon improves the stability and performance of the controller without adding undue computational burden. A significantly more efficient alternative is proposed to evaluating the quadratic cost due to the tracking error over an "infinite"
prediction horizon with minimal computational overhead.
In particular, consider the quadratic objective function over an infinite prediction horizon:
1 m i=nc T ,~ T
Joo = ~ ~, ~3'r+iQ~Yr+i '+' ~ ~'ut+i-l~~ut+i=l i=
nc i=nc - 1 ~~yt+iQwl+i +~~u~ i-1R021r+i=1 + 1 ~~.yt iQ~.yt+i (Eq. 2s) 2 i=1 i=1 2 i=nc+1 - Jnc + Jnc,ao Note that due to the assumption of constant control action beyond the control horizon (e.g., ur+nc-, = ur+nc = ur+n~+, _ ~ ~. ), the quadratic cost of the control action based on Onr+nc+;-, is zero and omitted from the objective function. The objective function is factored into two terms, where the first term is the standard objective function J, corresponding to a prediction horizon nh same as the control horizon nc. It is given as a quadratic function of the control action U = [ur ~ ~ ~ ur+n~-, ]T
Jn~ = 2 UT Hnw + f T ~ (Eq. 29) The second term J"~,~ = 1 ~ ~y~ ;Q>'yt+; is the remaining quadratic cost on the 2 ;=n~+~
tracking error beyond the control horizon, and needs to be computed as a function of the control action in a compact and efficient manner. We will henceforth focus on calculating this tracking error term over the infinite horizon. In fact, we will calculate a slightly modified term:
1 ~atOvt+;QOYt+a~ (Eq.30) 2 i=nc+~
with an exponentially decaying weighting factor a; given by an~+, =1, a;+, = aa; (a < 1) . The use of such an exponentially decaying weighting factor is motivated by several factors: (i) Due to modeling errors, model predictions over future get less accurate with increasing horizon, hence the decaying weighting factor reduces the weights on tracking error with increasing samples in future and gives more weight to tracking error in the immediate future. (ii) In some cases, one or more limiting constraints become active and inhibit an offset-less tracking, i.e. the tracking error term Dyt+; does not decay to zero over the infinite horizon. In such a case, the exponentially decaying weighting factor a; (with a < 1) ) is necessary to ensure that the sum of tracking error terms over an infinite horizon is still bounded and can be minimized.
The tracking error terms ~yt+i in Eq. 20 correspond to the outputs of the system:
xt+i+~ = Axt+. + But+n~-~ + F (Eq. 31 ) _ ~ + Du .yt+i t+J t+nc-1 ' starting from the initial state xt+n~ and constant inputs ut+n~-, . It is assumed that the above dynamic system is stable (i.e., all eigen values ofA are within the unit circle, else the states and hence the outputs would go unbounded over the infinite prediction horizon). For such a stable system, the final steady state corresponding to the constant input u,+n~-, is given by:
zs = Azs + Bu,+n~-, + F (Eq. 32) YS = ~s + Du,_n~-1 or, xs = (I - A) ' [But+n~-, + F] , (Eq. 33) yS = [C(1- A)~~' B + D]ut+n~-, + C(I - A)-' F = K"u,+nc-1 + KF
Defining the deviation variables xt+i = xr+; - xs, and yt+i = Yt+i -YS ~ the system dynamics are given by the simplified set of equations:
xt+i+~ = Axt+i (Eq. 34) Yt+i = cwt+i Thus, the infinite horizon tracking error term is given by:
1 °°
r ~n~~ - 2 ~ai dYt+i ~Yf+i i--ncr~
_ _ ~ai V'r,!+i KF Kuut+no-i ~t+i )T ~r,t+i KF Kuut+nc-1 ~t+i ) 2 i==nc+1 ~ai ~r,t+i KF)T ~r,t+i KF)+ 1 ~r+n~lKu ~~ut+nc-1 ~ai + ~(G'.O.SZt~ )T
~T~~a0.5~t+i ) 2 i:=nc+i 2 i=nc+1 i=nct 1. 'G~-ll ~yr,t+i -KF )T ~~ut+n~1 ~ai ~ai ~r,t+i KF Kuut+nrl )T ~~t+i i=nc+1 i=nc+1 (Eq. 35) Note that in the above equation, the first term is a constant, which is independent of the control action and can be omitted from the optimization objective.
Moreover, the term ( yr.,+; - KF - K" u,+n~-, ) denotes the steady state error between the output references and the controlled outputs, which will be assumed to be zero. Also, the summation term ~ (a,.°~S.zt+; )T CT QC(a °~S x~+; ) is evaluated in a compact closed-form t=n~+~
as = at+n~+, xt+nc+1 Qxt+nc+I ~ where Q is a symmetric positive definite matrix that is the solution of the Lyapunov equation:
Q - ATao.sQao.sA = CTQC . (Eq. 36) Finally, xt+n~+, = xr+n~+, - xs =- xr+~~+, - (I - A)-' (Buy+"~-, + F) , where the state x~+n~ = G~+n~U + V~+n~ is a function of the control inputs U and the free response corresponding to F. Thus, xr+n~+~ = Ax~+n~ '~ F = AGt+nrU + A T!+n~ + F = Gr+n~+~U + V~+rt~+~ (Eq. 37) and x~+n~+~ = f G~+n~+~ - LO . . . p (I - A)-' B] }U + f V~+n~+~ - (1- A)-' F} =
G~+n~+~ U + Vt+n~+~
(Eq. 38) Substituting these relations in Eq. 29, the following compact relation is obtained for the infinite horizon tracking error term:
~n~~ = 2u nrl~.~+nc-1 ~ca +2~cHy+ncHU+~+neH~~~+nc+lU+~+nefl~-~~ a~r,t+nc-KF)T
~~+no-1 _ ~UTI~,~~,U+ f G~U
(Eq. 39) which is another quadratic expression in the control action U similar to the objective function On~ over the control horizon in Eq. 29. Thus, evaluating the matrices:
0 ~~~ 0 _ HnGoo -~cfl~+nefl~+nc+1 ~~1_a ~ f Sao =~nc+1~~+ne'1 - 0 Cahc*1 ~T~v _ ~-u 1 a '- r't+nc KF
(Eq. 40) the infinite horizon tracking error term in Eq. 39 can be obtained in a compact and efficient manner. Finally, note that an~+, =1 and the forgetting factor a < 1 can be tuned to shorten or lengthen the extent of the infinite horizon tracking error that contributes to the overall objective function and the rate of decay of their relative weighting. A larger value of a will lengthen the effective terms in the infinite horizon thereby increasing the stability characteristics. However, in the presence of modeling errors, the undue weight on distant future tracking errors will degrade the transient performance. A judicious tuning of the factor a will enable increased stability as well as improved performance.
The present application is related to U.S. Patent Application Serial No.
10/306,433, GE Dkt. No. 124447, entitled "METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR MODEL
PREDICTIVE CONTROL OF AIRCRAFT GAS TURBINE ENGINES," filed November 27, 2002, and U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 10/293,078, GE Dkt.
No.
126067, entitled "ADAPTIVE MODEL-BASED CONTROL SYSTEMS AND
METHODS FOR CONTROLLING A GAS TURBINE," filed November 13, 2002, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Exemplary embodiments of control systems and methods are described above in detail. The systems are not limited to the specific embodiments described herein, but rather, components of each system may be utilized independently and separately from other components described herein. Each system component can also be used in combination with other system components.
While the invention has been described in terms of various specific embodiments, those skilled in the art will recognize that the invention can be practiced with modification within the spirit and scope of the claims.
Claims (10)
1. A method of controlling a gas turbine engine (110), said engine (110) having sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands, comprising:
receiving data from said sensors of said engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters;
estimating a state of said engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from said sensors and a predictive model (130) of said engine (110); and generating commands for said actuators based on said state using an optimization algorithm (150); and transmitting said commands to said engine (110).
receiving data from said sensors of said engine for one or more measured or sensed parameters;
estimating a state of said engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using the data from said sensors and a predictive model (130) of said engine (110); and generating commands for said actuators based on said state using an optimization algorithm (150); and transmitting said commands to said engine (110).
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said step of estimating uses an Extended Kalman Filter (120).
3. The method of claim 2, wherein said Extended Kalman Filter (120) is adapted to correct a mismatch between said model (130) and said engine (110).
4. The method of claim 1, wherein said optimization algorithm (150) is a quadratic programming algorithm adapted to optimize an objective function under a set of constraints, said objective function being based on at least one of said unmeasured or unsensed parameters.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein optimization algorithm (150) uses an infinite control horizon to optimize said objective function, said infinite control horizon being implemented by approximating an infinite horizon tracking error.
6. A system for controlling a gas turbine engine (110), said engine (110) having sensors to detect one or more parameters and actuators adapted to respond to commands, comprising:
a state estimator (120) adapted to estimate a state of said engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from said sensors of said engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters, said estimator (120) including a model (130) of said engine (110); and a control module (140) adapted to generate commands for said actuators based on said state, said control module (140) including an optimization algorithm (150) for determining said commands.
a state estimator (120) adapted to estimate a state of said engine (110) by estimating one or more unmeasured or unsensed parameters using data from said sensors of said engine (110) for one or more measured or sensed parameters, said estimator (120) including a model (130) of said engine (110); and a control module (140) adapted to generate commands for said actuators based on said state, said control module (140) including an optimization algorithm (150) for determining said commands.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein said state estimator (120) uses an Extended Kalman Filter.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein said Extended Kalman Filter is adapted to correct a mismatch between said model (130) and said engine (110).
9. The system of claim 6, wherein said optimization algorithm (150) is a quadratic programming algorithm adapted to optimize an objective function under a set of constraints, said objective function being based on at least one of said unmeasured or unsensed parameters.
10. The system of claim 9, wherein optimization algorithm (150) uses an infinite control horizon to optimize said objective function, said infinite control horizon being implemented by approximating an infinite horizon tracking error.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/791,597 US20050193739A1 (en) | 2004-03-02 | 2004-03-02 | Model-based control systems and methods for gas turbine engines |
US10/791,597 | 2004-03-02 |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
CA2491208A1 true CA2491208A1 (en) | 2005-09-02 |
Family
ID=34750591
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
CA002491208A Abandoned CA2491208A1 (en) | 2004-03-02 | 2004-12-23 | Model-based control systems and methods for gas turbine engines |
Country Status (4)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US20050193739A1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1571509A1 (en) |
JP (1) | JP2005248946A (en) |
CA (1) | CA2491208A1 (en) |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
CN111456856A (en) * | 2020-04-04 | 2020-07-28 | 西北工业大学 | Robust controller for reducing conservative maximum thrust state of aero-engine |
Families Citing this family (117)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20040236673A1 (en) * | 2000-10-17 | 2004-11-25 | Eder Jeff Scott | Collaborative risk transfer system |
US20080027769A1 (en) | 2002-09-09 | 2008-01-31 | Jeff Scott Eder | Knowledge based performance management system |
US20080256069A1 (en) * | 2002-09-09 | 2008-10-16 | Jeffrey Scott Eder | Complete Context(tm) Query System |
US20110040631A1 (en) * | 2005-07-09 | 2011-02-17 | Jeffrey Scott Eder | Personalized commerce system |
US20090043637A1 (en) * | 2004-06-01 | 2009-02-12 | Eder Jeffrey Scott | Extended value and risk management system |
US7890310B2 (en) * | 2004-11-17 | 2011-02-15 | The Mathworks, Inc. | Method for analysis of control systems |
US8713025B2 (en) | 2005-03-31 | 2014-04-29 | Square Halt Solutions, Limited Liability Company | Complete context search system |
US20060282177A1 (en) * | 2005-06-10 | 2006-12-14 | United Technologies Corporation | System and method of applying interior point method for online model predictive control of gas turbine engines |
US7389773B2 (en) | 2005-08-18 | 2008-06-24 | Honeywell International Inc. | Emissions sensors for fuel control in engines |
US7742904B2 (en) * | 2005-09-27 | 2010-06-22 | General Electric Company | Method and system for gas turbine engine simulation using adaptive Kalman filter |
US7877154B2 (en) * | 2005-09-30 | 2011-01-25 | Fisher-Rosemount Systems, Inc. | Method and system for controlling a batch process |
US7603222B2 (en) * | 2005-11-18 | 2009-10-13 | General Electric Company | Sensor diagnostics using embedded model quality parameters |
US7363094B2 (en) * | 2006-01-09 | 2008-04-22 | General Electric Company | Multivariable controller design method for multiple input/outputs systems with multiple input/output constraints |
JP2007240464A (en) * | 2006-03-10 | 2007-09-20 | Toshiba Corp | Core monitor unit of boiling water reactor |
US8498915B2 (en) | 2006-04-02 | 2013-07-30 | Asset Reliance, Inc. | Data processing framework for financial services |
US7689296B2 (en) * | 2006-04-28 | 2010-03-30 | Honeywell Asca Inc. | Apparatus and method for controlling a paper machine or other machine using measurement predictions based on asynchronous sensor information |
US7421354B2 (en) * | 2006-10-13 | 2008-09-02 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for reducing an effect of a disturbance |
US7826909B2 (en) * | 2006-12-11 | 2010-11-02 | Fakhruddin T Attarwala | Dynamic model predictive control |
US7853392B2 (en) * | 2007-01-26 | 2010-12-14 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for initializing dynamic model states using a Kalman filter |
US7904282B2 (en) * | 2007-03-22 | 2011-03-08 | General Electric Company | Method and system for fault accommodation of machines |
US7908072B2 (en) * | 2007-06-26 | 2011-03-15 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for using a combustion dynamics tuning algorithm with a multi-can combustor |
US7620461B2 (en) * | 2007-06-26 | 2009-11-17 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for using a combustion dynamics tuning algorithm with a multi-can combustor |
GB0712980D0 (en) * | 2007-07-04 | 2007-08-15 | Rolls Royce Plc | Engine performance model |
JP5046104B2 (en) * | 2007-09-11 | 2012-10-10 | 独立行政法人 宇宙航空研究開発機構 | Gas turbine engine performance estimation method and system |
US7822512B2 (en) * | 2008-01-08 | 2010-10-26 | General Electric Company | Methods and systems for providing real-time comparison with an alternate control strategy for a turbine |
DE102008005712A1 (en) * | 2008-01-21 | 2009-07-23 | Volkswagen Ag | Method and arrangement for controlling motors and a corresponding computer program and a corresponding computer-readable storage medium |
US8332057B2 (en) * | 2008-03-20 | 2012-12-11 | University Of New Brunswick | Method of multi-dimensional nonlinear control |
US8060290B2 (en) | 2008-07-17 | 2011-11-15 | Honeywell International Inc. | Configurable automotive controller |
US8478473B2 (en) * | 2008-07-28 | 2013-07-02 | General Electric Company | Method and systems for controlling gas turbine engine temperature |
US7861578B2 (en) * | 2008-07-29 | 2011-01-04 | General Electric Company | Methods and systems for estimating operating parameters of an engine |
US8090456B2 (en) * | 2008-11-03 | 2012-01-03 | United Technologies Corporation | System and method for design and control of engineering systems utilizing component-level dynamic mathematical model |
US8131384B2 (en) * | 2008-11-03 | 2012-03-06 | United Technologies Corporation | Design and control of engineering systems utilizing component-level dynamic mathematical model with multiple-input multiple-output estimator |
FR2939928B1 (en) * | 2008-12-15 | 2012-08-03 | Snecma | STANDARDIZATION OF DATA USED FOR MONITORING AN AIRCRAFT ENGINE |
US8315741B2 (en) * | 2009-09-02 | 2012-11-20 | United Technologies Corporation | High fidelity integrated heat transfer and clearance in component-level dynamic turbine system control |
US8668434B2 (en) * | 2009-09-02 | 2014-03-11 | United Technologies Corporation | Robust flow parameter model for component-level dynamic turbine system control |
US8620461B2 (en) | 2009-09-24 | 2013-12-31 | Honeywell International, Inc. | Method and system for updating tuning parameters of a controller |
US8473079B2 (en) * | 2009-11-25 | 2013-06-25 | Honeywell International Inc. | Fast algorithm for model predictive control |
US8504175B2 (en) * | 2010-06-02 | 2013-08-06 | Honeywell International Inc. | Using model predictive control to optimize variable trajectories and system control |
US8554343B2 (en) | 2010-12-08 | 2013-10-08 | Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc. | Method for solving control problems |
JP5834759B2 (en) * | 2011-02-28 | 2015-12-24 | 富士通株式会社 | Matrix generation program, method and apparatus, and plant control program, method and apparatus |
US8417361B2 (en) | 2011-03-22 | 2013-04-09 | General Electric Company | Model predictive control system and method for integrated gasification combined cycle power generation |
US8538561B2 (en) | 2011-03-22 | 2013-09-17 | General Electric Company | Method and system to estimate variables in an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant |
US8899488B2 (en) | 2011-05-31 | 2014-12-02 | United Technologies Corporation | RFID tag system |
ES2395659B1 (en) * | 2011-06-30 | 2013-05-23 | Universidad Nacional De Educación A Distancia | METHOD AND GUIDANCE SYSTEM BY DERIVATIVE CONTROL. |
US20130024179A1 (en) * | 2011-07-22 | 2013-01-24 | General Electric Company | Model-based approach for personalized equipment degradation forecasting |
FR2978858B1 (en) * | 2011-08-01 | 2013-08-30 | Airbus Operations Sas | METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING FLIGHT PARAMETERS OF AN AIRCRAFT |
US9677493B2 (en) | 2011-09-19 | 2017-06-13 | Honeywell Spol, S.R.O. | Coordinated engine and emissions control system |
US20130111905A1 (en) | 2011-11-04 | 2013-05-09 | Honeywell Spol. S.R.O. | Integrated optimization and control of an engine and aftertreatment system |
US9650934B2 (en) | 2011-11-04 | 2017-05-16 | Honeywell spol.s.r.o. | Engine and aftertreatment optimization system |
US9002615B2 (en) * | 2012-01-18 | 2015-04-07 | General Electric Company | Methods and systems for managing power of an engine |
US8903753B2 (en) | 2012-02-06 | 2014-12-02 | General Electric Company | Steam turbine performance testing |
WO2013123385A1 (en) * | 2012-02-15 | 2013-08-22 | Rolls-Royce Corporation | Gas turbine engine performance seeking control |
US8849542B2 (en) | 2012-06-29 | 2014-09-30 | United Technologies Corporation | Real time linearization of a component-level gas turbine engine model for model-based control |
US9534547B2 (en) | 2012-09-13 | 2017-01-03 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Airflow control systems and methods |
US8720258B2 (en) | 2012-09-28 | 2014-05-13 | United Technologies Corporation | Model based engine inlet condition estimation |
US9540944B2 (en) | 2012-09-28 | 2017-01-10 | United Technologies Corporation | Real time model based compressor control |
US9429085B2 (en) | 2013-04-23 | 2016-08-30 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Airflow control systems and methods using model predictive control |
US9765703B2 (en) | 2013-04-23 | 2017-09-19 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Airflow control systems and methods using model predictive control |
US9388758B2 (en) * | 2014-03-26 | 2016-07-12 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Model predictive control systems and methods for future torque changes |
US9347381B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2016-05-24 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Model predictive control systems and methods for internal combustion engines |
US9399959B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2016-07-26 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | System and method for adjusting a torque capacity of an engine using model predictive control |
US9587573B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2017-03-07 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Catalyst light off transitions in a gasoline engine using model predictive control |
US9528453B2 (en) | 2014-11-07 | 2016-12-27 | GM Global Technologies Operations LLC | Throttle control systems and methods based on pressure ratio |
US9605615B2 (en) | 2015-02-12 | 2017-03-28 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Model Predictive control systems and methods for increasing computational efficiency |
US9732688B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2017-08-15 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | System and method for increasing the temperature of a catalyst when an engine is started using model predictive control |
US9714616B2 (en) * | 2014-03-26 | 2017-07-25 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Non-model predictive control to model predictive control transitions |
US9435274B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2016-09-06 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | System and method for managing the period of a control loop for controlling an engine using model predictive control |
US9599049B2 (en) | 2014-06-19 | 2017-03-21 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Engine speed control systems and methods |
US9541019B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2017-01-10 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Estimation systems and methods with model predictive control |
US9863345B2 (en) | 2012-11-27 | 2018-01-09 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | System and method for adjusting weighting values assigned to errors in target actuator values of an engine when controlling the engine using model predictive control |
US9784198B2 (en) | 2015-02-12 | 2017-10-10 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Model predictive control systems and methods for increasing computational efficiency |
US9797318B2 (en) | 2013-08-02 | 2017-10-24 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Calibration systems and methods for model predictive controllers |
US9920697B2 (en) | 2014-03-26 | 2018-03-20 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | Engine control systems and methods for future torque request increases |
US10190503B2 (en) * | 2013-03-15 | 2019-01-29 | United Technologies Corporation | Compact aero-thermo model based tip clearance management |
EP2971699B8 (en) * | 2013-03-15 | 2020-01-15 | Rolls-Royce Corporation | Lifing and performance optimization limit management for turbine engine |
US9494086B2 (en) * | 2014-02-28 | 2016-11-15 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for improved combined cycle control |
US20150276548A1 (en) * | 2014-04-01 | 2015-10-01 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Condition monitoring and analytics for machines |
JP6260437B2 (en) * | 2014-04-28 | 2018-01-17 | 株式会社Ihi | Dynamic system estimation apparatus and method |
US9441547B2 (en) | 2014-06-02 | 2016-09-13 | United Technologies Corporation | Model-based optimal control for stall margin limit protection in an aircraft engine |
US9606773B2 (en) | 2014-06-10 | 2017-03-28 | Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc. | Simulation-guided incremental stability analysis |
US10386796B2 (en) * | 2014-12-11 | 2019-08-20 | University Of New Brunswick | Model predictive controller and method with correction parameter to compensate for time lag |
CN104573195B (en) * | 2014-12-18 | 2018-03-02 | 东风康明斯发动机有限公司 | A kind of electric-control diesel engine single-point operation optimization method |
US10903778B2 (en) * | 2014-12-18 | 2021-01-26 | Eaton Intelligent Power Limited | Apparatus and methods for monitoring subsea electrical systems using adaptive models |
EP3051367B1 (en) | 2015-01-28 | 2020-11-25 | Honeywell spol s.r.o. | An approach and system for handling constraints for measured disturbances with uncertain preview |
EP3056706A1 (en) | 2015-02-16 | 2016-08-17 | Honeywell International Inc. | An approach for aftertreatment system modeling and model identification |
DE102015203210A1 (en) | 2015-02-23 | 2016-08-25 | Volkswagen Ag | Method for regulating a controlled system, device for generating controller parameters and control device |
EP3091212A1 (en) | 2015-05-06 | 2016-11-09 | Honeywell International Inc. | An identification approach for internal combustion engine mean value models |
EP3734375B1 (en) | 2015-07-31 | 2023-04-05 | Garrett Transportation I Inc. | Quadratic program solver for mpc using variable ordering |
US10272779B2 (en) | 2015-08-05 | 2019-04-30 | Garrett Transportation I Inc. | System and approach for dynamic vehicle speed optimization |
US10067033B2 (en) | 2015-10-26 | 2018-09-04 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for in-cylinder pressure estimation using pressure wave modeling |
US9587552B1 (en) | 2015-10-26 | 2017-03-07 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for detecting anomalies at in-cylinder pressure sensors |
US10415492B2 (en) | 2016-01-29 | 2019-09-17 | Garrett Transportation I Inc. | Engine system with inferential sensor |
WO2017142530A1 (en) * | 2016-02-17 | 2017-08-24 | Entit Software Llc | Environment simulations |
US10036338B2 (en) | 2016-04-26 | 2018-07-31 | Honeywell International Inc. | Condition-based powertrain control system |
US10124750B2 (en) | 2016-04-26 | 2018-11-13 | Honeywell International Inc. | Vehicle security module system |
US9938908B2 (en) | 2016-06-14 | 2018-04-10 | GM Global Technology Operations LLC | System and method for predicting a pedal position based on driver behavior and controlling one or more engine actuators based on the predicted pedal position |
US10444714B2 (en) * | 2016-06-21 | 2019-10-15 | General Electric Company | Machine monitoring device |
JP2020003831A (en) * | 2016-09-26 | 2020-01-09 | 株式会社Ihi | Performance estimation device and performance estimation method |
US10309330B2 (en) | 2016-10-27 | 2019-06-04 | Rolls-Royce Corporation | Model reference adaptive controller |
US10240544B2 (en) | 2016-10-27 | 2019-03-26 | Rolls-Royce Corporation | Adaptive controller using unmeasured operating parameter |
EP3548729B1 (en) | 2016-11-29 | 2023-02-22 | Garrett Transportation I Inc. | An inferential flow sensor |
US10227932B2 (en) | 2016-11-30 | 2019-03-12 | General Electric Company | Emissions modeling for gas turbine engines for selecting an actual fuel split |
US10337348B2 (en) * | 2017-03-27 | 2019-07-02 | General Electric Company | Systems and methods for controlling a power generation system |
US10423473B2 (en) * | 2017-04-18 | 2019-09-24 | United Technologies Corporation | Fault-accommodating, constrained model-based control using on-board methods for detection of and adaption to actuation subsystem faults |
WO2018229898A1 (en) | 2017-06-14 | 2018-12-20 | 三菱電機株式会社 | State estimation device |
US10344615B2 (en) * | 2017-06-22 | 2019-07-09 | General Electric Company | Method and system for schedule predictive lead compensation |
US11057213B2 (en) | 2017-10-13 | 2021-07-06 | Garrett Transportation I, Inc. | Authentication system for electronic control unit on a bus |
FR3077412B1 (en) * | 2018-02-01 | 2021-07-23 | Framatome Sa | PROCESS FOR REGULATING THE OPERATING PARAMETERS OF A NUCLEAR REACTOR AND CORRESPONDING NUCLEAR REACTOR |
GB201807771D0 (en) * | 2018-05-14 | 2018-06-27 | Rolls Royce Plc | Hybrid electric aircraft propulsion system |
US10961921B2 (en) | 2018-09-19 | 2021-03-30 | Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. | Model-based control system and method for a turboprop engine |
WO2020118512A1 (en) * | 2018-12-11 | 2020-06-18 | 大连理工大学 | Lft-based aeroengine sensor and actuator fault diagnosis method |
US11881713B1 (en) * | 2020-03-06 | 2024-01-23 | National Technology & Engineering Solutions Of Sandia, Llc | Digital twin advanced distribution management systems (ADMS) and methods |
JP7348126B2 (en) | 2020-03-30 | 2023-09-20 | 三菱重工業株式会社 | Control device, control input determination method, and control input determination program |
US11378032B1 (en) * | 2021-03-26 | 2022-07-05 | Caterpillar Inc. | Method and system for moving horizon estimation for machine control |
US11740598B2 (en) | 2021-04-30 | 2023-08-29 | Aspentech Corporation | Apparatus and methods to build a reliable deep learning controller by imposing model constraints |
CN114415506B (en) * | 2022-01-07 | 2023-08-04 | 大连理工大学 | Design method of dual-mode tracking prediction control system of aero-engine |
EP4223982A1 (en) * | 2022-02-03 | 2023-08-09 | Tata Consultancy Services Limited | Systems and methods for predicting and optimizing performance of gas turbines |
Family Cites Families (99)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US3898439A (en) * | 1970-10-20 | 1975-08-05 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | System for operating industrial gas turbine apparatus and gas turbine electric power plants preferably with a digital computer control system |
CA961920A (en) * | 1970-10-20 | 1975-01-28 | John F. Reuther | System and method for operating industrial gas turbine apparatus and gas turbine electric power plants preferably with a digital computer control system |
US3721120A (en) * | 1970-11-16 | 1973-03-20 | Howell Instruments | Engine performance indicator |
US4031407A (en) * | 1970-12-18 | 1977-06-21 | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | System and method employing a digital computer with improved programmed operation for automatically synchronizing a gas turbine or other electric power plant generator with a power system |
US3691759A (en) * | 1971-01-14 | 1972-09-19 | Curtiss Wright Corp | Automatic control system for a turbojet engine employed in a stationary environment |
US3738104A (en) * | 1971-07-16 | 1973-06-12 | Gen Electric | Gas turbine fuel flow metering control system |
JPS5938422B2 (en) * | 1971-10-15 | 1984-09-17 | ウエスチングハウス・エレクトリツク・コーポレーシヨン | gas turbine power plant |
GB1410526A (en) * | 1971-12-06 | 1975-10-15 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Industrial gas turbine power plant having capability for effectuating automatic fuel transfer under load employing a digital computer |
US3866108A (en) * | 1971-12-06 | 1975-02-11 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Control system and method for controlling dual fuel operation of industrial gas turbine power plants, preferably employing a digital computer |
US3924140A (en) * | 1972-03-14 | 1975-12-02 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | System for monitoring and controlling industrial gas turbine power plants including facility for dynamic calibration control instrumentation |
US3913314A (en) * | 1972-06-09 | 1975-10-21 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | System and method for operating a gas turbine electric power plant with bypass flow fueling operation to provide improved reliability and extended apparatus life |
US3911285A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1975-10-07 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus having a multiple backup control system |
US3892975A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1975-07-01 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus having improved monitoring and alarm elements |
US4208591A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1980-06-17 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including a turbine load control system |
US4019315A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1977-04-26 | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including a temperature reset starting control system and an ignition pressure control system |
US3924141A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1975-12-02 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including a two-shot shutdown system |
US3943373A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1976-03-09 | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including a speed/load hold and lock system |
US3943371A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1976-03-09 | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including automatic load pickup |
US4051669A (en) * | 1973-06-20 | 1977-10-04 | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus having a multiple backup control system |
US3844112A (en) * | 1973-06-27 | 1974-10-29 | Curtiss Wright Corp | Gas turbine start-up fuel control system |
US3851157A (en) * | 1973-07-09 | 1974-11-26 | United Aircraft Corp | Self-correcting feedback control system |
US4455614A (en) * | 1973-09-21 | 1984-06-19 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | Gas turbine and steam turbine combined cycle electric power generating plant having a coordinated and hybridized control system and an improved factory based method for making and testing combined cycle and other power plants and control systems therefor |
US3892978A (en) * | 1974-04-26 | 1975-07-01 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Apparatus and method for automatically guiding a driven generator into synchronization with a power system |
US4060980A (en) * | 1975-11-19 | 1977-12-06 | United Technologies Corporation | Stall detector for a gas turbine engine |
GB1581531A (en) * | 1976-09-09 | 1980-12-17 | Rolls Royce | Control of airflow in combustion chambers by variable rate diffuser |
US4314441A (en) * | 1977-07-22 | 1982-02-09 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including an ambient temperature responsive control system |
US4242592A (en) * | 1977-10-11 | 1980-12-30 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | Gas turbine power plant control apparatus including an ambient temperature responsive control system |
US4305129A (en) * | 1977-10-27 | 1981-12-08 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | System for providing load-frequency control through predictively and _dynamically dispatched gas turbine-generator units |
US4309871A (en) * | 1977-11-01 | 1982-01-12 | Borg-Warner Corporation | Control apparatus for controlling surge in air compressor-driven system |
US4275557A (en) * | 1978-01-25 | 1981-06-30 | General Electric Company | Method and apparatus for controlling thrust in a gas turbine engine |
US4259835A (en) * | 1978-02-06 | 1981-04-07 | Westinghouse Electric Corp. | System and method for monitoring industrial gas turbine operating parameters and for providing gas turbine power plant control system inputs representative thereof |
US4242042A (en) * | 1978-05-16 | 1980-12-30 | United Technologies Corporation | Temperature control of engine case for clearance control |
US4258545A (en) * | 1978-06-15 | 1981-03-31 | General Electric Company | Optimal control for a gas turbine engine |
US4215412A (en) * | 1978-07-13 | 1980-07-29 | The Boeing Company | Real time performance monitoring of gas turbine engines |
US4276744A (en) * | 1979-09-19 | 1981-07-07 | General Electric Company | Control system for gas turbine engine |
US4411595A (en) * | 1979-09-19 | 1983-10-25 | General Electric Company | Control system for gas turbine engine |
GB2088961B (en) * | 1980-11-26 | 1984-06-13 | Rolls Royce | Fuel control system for a gas turbine engine |
US4423594A (en) * | 1981-06-01 | 1984-01-03 | United Technologies Corporation | Adaptive self-correcting control system |
US4449358A (en) * | 1981-07-24 | 1984-05-22 | General Electric Company | Method and apparatus for promoting a surge condition in a gas turbine |
US4442668A (en) * | 1982-03-26 | 1984-04-17 | General Motors Corporation | Gas turbine engine fuel control system |
GB2125185B (en) * | 1982-07-27 | 1986-05-21 | Rolls Royce | Monitoring a control system for a gas turbine engine |
US4525998A (en) * | 1982-08-02 | 1985-07-02 | United Technologies Corporation | Clearance control for gas turbine engine |
US4578756A (en) * | 1982-12-28 | 1986-03-25 | United Technologies Corporation | Adaptive electrostatic engine diagnostics |
US4506504A (en) * | 1983-03-31 | 1985-03-26 | Dresser Industries, Inc | Electronic fuel control system for gas turbine |
US4648241A (en) * | 1983-11-03 | 1987-03-10 | United Technologies Corporation | Active clearance control |
US4651518A (en) * | 1984-12-18 | 1987-03-24 | United Technologies Corporation | Transient derivative scheduling control system |
US4655034A (en) * | 1984-12-20 | 1987-04-07 | United Technologies Corporation | Transient gas turbine engine bleed control |
US5082421A (en) * | 1986-04-28 | 1992-01-21 | Rolls-Royce Plc | Active control of unsteady motion phenomena in turbomachinery |
US4842477A (en) * | 1986-12-24 | 1989-06-27 | General Electric Company | Active clearance control |
US4809500A (en) * | 1987-02-03 | 1989-03-07 | United Technologies Corporation | Transient control system for gas turbine engine |
US4967550A (en) * | 1987-04-28 | 1990-11-06 | Rolls-Royce Plc | Active control of unsteady motion phenomena in turbomachinery |
GB8800904D0 (en) * | 1988-01-15 | 1988-02-17 | Rolls Royce Plc | Fuel control system |
US5099436A (en) * | 1988-11-03 | 1992-03-24 | Allied-Signal Inc. | Methods and apparatus for performing system fault diagnosis |
US5067099A (en) * | 1988-11-03 | 1991-11-19 | Allied-Signal Inc. | Methods and apparatus for monitoring system performance |
US5197280A (en) * | 1989-03-20 | 1993-03-30 | General Electric Company | Control system and method for controlling a gas turbine engine |
US5051918A (en) * | 1989-09-15 | 1991-09-24 | United Technologies Corporation | Gas turbine stall/surge identification and recovery |
US4999991A (en) * | 1989-10-12 | 1991-03-19 | United Technologies Corporation | Synthesized feedback for gas turbine clearance control |
US5285631A (en) * | 1990-02-05 | 1994-02-15 | General Electric Company | Low NOx emission in gas turbine system |
US5081830A (en) * | 1990-05-25 | 1992-01-21 | United Technologies Corporation | Method of restoring exhaust gas temperature margin in a gas turbine engine |
US5080496A (en) * | 1990-06-25 | 1992-01-14 | General Electric Company | Method and apparatus for compensated temperature prediction |
US6309379B1 (en) * | 1991-05-23 | 2001-10-30 | Lloyd K. Willard | Sheath for selective delivery of multiple intravascular devices and methods of use thereof |
JP3042066B2 (en) * | 1991-09-05 | 2000-05-15 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Plant control system |
JPH0579629A (en) * | 1991-09-19 | 1993-03-30 | Hitachi Ltd | Combustion device and operation thereof |
US5740033A (en) * | 1992-10-13 | 1998-04-14 | The Dow Chemical Company | Model predictive controller |
US5537813A (en) * | 1992-12-08 | 1996-07-23 | Carolina Power & Light Company | Gas turbine inlet air combined pressure boost and cooling method and apparatus |
GB2273316B (en) * | 1992-12-12 | 1996-02-28 | Rolls Royce Plc | Bleed valve control |
DE4315317A1 (en) * | 1993-05-07 | 1994-11-10 | Siemens Ag | Guide device for producers of electrical energy |
US5448881A (en) * | 1993-06-09 | 1995-09-12 | United Technologies Corporation | Gas turbine engine control based on inlet pressure distortion |
US5394689A (en) * | 1993-09-22 | 1995-03-07 | General Electric Company | Gas turbine engine control system having integral flight Mach number synthesis method |
US5447059A (en) * | 1993-12-27 | 1995-09-05 | Solar Turbines Incorporated | Apparatus and method for determining gas turbine engine life |
JP4416838B2 (en) * | 1994-05-10 | 2010-02-17 | シーメンス アクチエンゲゼルシヤフト | Operating system for technical equipment |
US5551227A (en) * | 1994-12-22 | 1996-09-03 | General Electric Company | System and method of detecting partial flame out in a gas turbine engine combustor |
US5718111A (en) * | 1995-08-04 | 1998-02-17 | Alliedsignal Inc. | Fuzzy start logic for jet engines |
JP2877098B2 (en) * | 1995-12-28 | 1999-03-31 | 株式会社日立製作所 | Gas turbines, combined cycle plants and compressors |
DE59706404D1 (en) * | 1996-11-08 | 2002-03-21 | Siemens Ag | TURBINE CONTROL DEVICE AND METHOD FOR REGULATING A LOAD CHANGING PROCESS OF A TURBINE |
US6208914B1 (en) * | 1996-11-21 | 2001-03-27 | Barron Associates, Inc. | System for improved receding-horizon adaptive and reconfigurable control |
JP2001507144A (en) * | 1996-11-27 | 2001-05-29 | サンドストランド・コーポレイション | How to protect components susceptible to fatigue failure |
GB2321720A (en) * | 1997-02-04 | 1998-08-05 | Secr Defence | Modelling a system with more parameters than sensors |
US6254750B1 (en) * | 1997-07-29 | 2001-07-03 | Ecm Engine Control And Monitoring | Exhaust emission sensors |
US6302682B1 (en) * | 1998-02-27 | 2001-10-16 | The Regents Of The University Of California | Laser controlled flame stabilization |
DE19808722C2 (en) * | 1998-03-02 | 2000-03-16 | Siemens Ag | Gas and steam turbine plant and method for operating such a plant |
US6282882B1 (en) * | 1998-12-11 | 2001-09-04 | Alliedsignal Inc. | Turbine engine control system providing electronic power turbine governor and temperature/torque limiting |
US6155038A (en) * | 1998-12-23 | 2000-12-05 | United Technologies Corporation | Method and apparatus for use in control and compensation of clearances in a gas turbine |
US6226974B1 (en) * | 1999-06-25 | 2001-05-08 | General Electric Co. | Method of operation of industrial gas turbine for optimal performance |
US6526358B1 (en) * | 1999-10-01 | 2003-02-25 | General Electric Company | Model-based detection of leaks and blockages in fluid handling systems |
US6393823B1 (en) * | 1999-11-05 | 2002-05-28 | General Electric Company | Methods for fuel nozzle staging for gas turbine engines |
US6321525B1 (en) * | 2000-02-03 | 2001-11-27 | Rolls-Royce Corporation | Overspeed detection techniques for gas turbine engine |
US6378287B2 (en) * | 2000-03-17 | 2002-04-30 | Kenneth F. Griffiths | Multi-stage turbomachine and design method |
JP2001282309A (en) * | 2000-03-29 | 2001-10-12 | Yokogawa Electric Corp | Screen display method and process controller using the method |
US20010032109A1 (en) * | 2000-04-13 | 2001-10-18 | Gonyea Richard Jeremiah | System and method for predicting a maintenance schedule and costs for performing future service events of a product |
WO2001079702A2 (en) * | 2000-04-17 | 2001-10-25 | Coltec Industries Inc | Fuel pump for gas turbines |
BR0112379A (en) * | 2000-06-30 | 2003-04-29 | Dow Chemical Co | Multivariate Matrix Process Control |
US6459963B1 (en) * | 2000-07-31 | 2002-10-01 | General Electric Company | Methods and apparatus for trimming engine control systems |
US6343251B1 (en) * | 2000-10-20 | 2002-01-29 | General Electric Company | Method and system for monitoring the operation of and predicting part life consumption for turbomachinery |
US6373422B1 (en) * | 2000-10-26 | 2002-04-16 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Method and apparatus employing decimation filter for down conversion in a receiver |
US6729139B2 (en) * | 2001-09-26 | 2004-05-04 | Goodrich Pump & Engine Control Systems, Inc. | Engine control system |
GB2388922B (en) * | 2002-01-31 | 2005-06-08 | Cambridge Consultants | Control system |
US6823675B2 (en) * | 2002-11-13 | 2004-11-30 | General Electric Company | Adaptive model-based control systems and methods for controlling a gas turbine |
US6823253B2 (en) * | 2002-11-27 | 2004-11-23 | General Electric Company | Methods and apparatus for model predictive control of aircraft gas turbine engines |
-
2004
- 2004-03-02 US US10/791,597 patent/US20050193739A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2004-12-22 EP EP04258055A patent/EP1571509A1/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2004-12-23 CA CA002491208A patent/CA2491208A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2004-12-28 JP JP2004380342A patent/JP2005248946A/en active Pending
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
CN111456856A (en) * | 2020-04-04 | 2020-07-28 | 西北工业大学 | Robust controller for reducing conservative maximum thrust state of aero-engine |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
JP2005248946A (en) | 2005-09-15 |
US20050193739A1 (en) | 2005-09-08 |
EP1571509A1 (en) | 2005-09-07 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
CA2491208A1 (en) | Model-based control systems and methods for gas turbine engines | |
US6823253B2 (en) | Methods and apparatus for model predictive control of aircraft gas turbine engines | |
EP1420153B1 (en) | Adaptive model-based control systems for controlling a gas turbine | |
JP5318662B2 (en) | Method and system for estimating operating parameters of an engine | |
EP3316051B1 (en) | Model reference adaptive controller | |
US20180119628A1 (en) | Adaptive controller | |
US20070055392A1 (en) | Method and system for model predictive control of a power plant | |
DeCastro | Rate-based model predictive control of turbofan engine clearance | |
EP1538319B1 (en) | Apparatus for model predictive control of aircraft gas turbine engines | |
Singh et al. | Dynamic modeling and robust nonlinear control of a laboratory gas turbine engine | |
Chen et al. | A novel direct performance adaptive control of aero-engine using subspace-based improved model predictive control | |
Kolmanovsky et al. | Robust control and limit protection in aircraft gas turbine engines | |
Wei et al. | Self-enhancing model-based control for active transient protection and thrust response improvement of gas turbine aero-engines | |
JP4555562B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for model predictive control of aircraft gas turbines | |
Ibrahem et al. | Nonlinear generalized predictive controller based on ensemble of NARX models for industrial gas turbine engine | |
Brunell et al. | Model adaptation and nonlinear model predictive control of an aircraft engine | |
Smith et al. | Optimizing aircraft performance with adaptive, integrated flight/propulsion control | |
Alaoui et al. | Gas turbine speed monitoring using a generalized predictive adaptive control algorithm | |
Sakthivel et al. | Disturbance rejection and robust tracking control design for turbofan systems | |
Sanusi et al. | Reinforcement learning for condition-based control of gas turbine engines | |
Turevskiy et al. | A model-based controller for commercial aero gas turbines | |
Litt et al. | Evaluation of an outer loop retrofit architecture for intelligent turbofan engine thrust control | |
Jia et al. | Multi-variable anti-disturbance controller with state-dependent switching law for adaptive cycle engine | |
Eslami et al. | A unified acceptance test framework for power plant gas turbine control systems | |
Zhou et al. | Controller design for acceleration and deceleration of a turbofan aircraft engine |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
EEER | Examination request | ||
FZDE | Discontinued |