Generalized minimum variance with pole assignment controller modified for practical applications

Abstract

Among self-toning eontrollcrs, the explicit typt is the most commonly osed in industrial applications due to its simple strnctore; on the other hand the implicit shllctores are less attractive because of their largest shpchlr~l complexity. This paper presents a modification to the generalized minimum variance with pole assignment controller. The modiPr*tion pretends to simplify the origi0.1 algorithm and to make easier its implementation io practical projects, conserving most o f the original attributes. PRINCIPAL SYMBOLS A . MPolynomials of order n,, mb and n, corresponding to, respectively, system output, control input, and disturbance input; e+=co=l.

Current Control of Switched Reluctance Motor Based on Generalized Minimum Variance Controller

“…(15), which are directly used as the controller parameters of Eq.(15). Equation (16) forms the basis of recursive least squares parameters estimator with data vector:…”

“…In recent years, the interest on GMVC-type controllers have reappeared mainly by exploiting its characteristics to interact with other control structures [12], extension to multivariable systems [13], its ability to deal with time variant systems [14], and the improvement in robustness [15]. Nowadays, an adequate specification of cost polynomials for GMVC is a major task and it may become critical if an autonomous initialization is required [16].…”

Generalized Minimum Variance Controller with Dynamic Pole Assignment to Improve Performance in Industrial Applications

“…Even when the GMVCPA preserve the ability to minimize the output variance, the performance could be affected due to changes in the denominator of (7). The Generalized Minimum Variance Controller with Dynamic Pole Assignment (GMVCDPA) was proposed in [3], and allows a better control when parameter perturbations are present. While in the GMVCPA the cost functions are proposed off line, in the GMVCDPA the cost polynomials are calculated and updated on line.…”

“…If we wanted to achieve a dynamic pole assignment in the traditional GMVCPA, we would need two parametric estimations: process estimation and control estimation. In [3] the control estimation is avoided and substituted by a control calculation using only process estimation. Figure 2 illustrates the structure of the GMVCDPA.…”