A pragmatic approach towards assessment of control loop performance

International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing

Volumn 17, Issue 7-9, 2003, Pages 589-608

  Huang, B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

LQG; Performance assessment; Performance monitoring; Process identification; Tradeoff curve

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; CLOSED LOOP CONTROL SYSTEMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; PERFORMANCE;

CONTROL LOOPS;

CONTROL EQUIPMENT;

EID: 0141861075     PISSN: 08906327     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/acs.767     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Harris T. Assessment of closed loop performance. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 1989; 67:856-861.
2. Desborough L, Harris T. Performance assessment measure for univariate feedback control. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 1992; 70:1186-1197.
3. Stanfelj N, Marlin TE, MacGregor JF. Monitoring and diagnosing process control performance: the single-loop case. Industrial Engineering and Chemical Research 1993; 32:301-314.
4. Thornhill NF, Oettinger M., Fedenczuk P. Refinery-wide control loop performance assessment. Journal of Process Control 1999; 9(2):109-124.
5. Lynch CB, Dumont GA. Control loop performance monitoring. IEEE Transactions on Control System 1996; 4(2): 185-192.
6. Huang B, Shah SL. Control Loop Performance Assessment: Theory and Applications. Springer, London, 1999.
7. Kammer LC, Bitmead RR, Bartlett PL. Signal-based testing of lq-optimality of controllers. In Proceedings of 1996 IFAC World Congress, June-July 1996.
8. Horch A, Isaksson AJ. A modified index for control performance assessment. Journal of Process Control 1999; 9(6):475-483.
9. Grimble MJ. Controller performance benchmarking and tuning using generalized minimum variance control. Automatica 2002; 38:2111-2119.
10. Grimble MJ. Restricted structure controller tuning and performance assessment. IEEE Proceedings - Control Theory and Applications 2002; 149:8-16.
11. Isaksson A. Pid controller performance assessment. In Control Systems '96, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1996; pp. 163-169.
12. Ko BS, Edgar TF. Assessment of achievable pi control performance for linear processes with deadtime. In Proceedings of Americal Control Conference, Philadelphia, USA, 1998; pp. 1548-1552.
13. Kwakernaak H, Sivan R. Linear Optimal Control System. Wiley: New York, 1972.
14. Boyd SP, Barratt CH. Linear Control Design. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersy, 1991.
15. Wang YG, Shao HH. Optimal tuning for pi controller. Automatica 2000; 36(1):147-152.
16. Ljung L. System Identification (2nd edn). Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1998.
17. Wang QG, Zhang Y. Robust identification of continuous systems with dead-time from step responses. Automatica 2001; 37:377-390.
18. Huang B, Thornhill N. Shah SL, Shook D. Path analysis for process troubleshooting. In Proceedings of ADCHINP, Kumarmuto, Japan, June 2002.
19. Soderstrom T, Stoica P. System Identification. Prentice Hall International: UK, 1989.
20. Bialkowski WL. Dreams versus reality: a view from both sides of the gap. Pulp and Paper Canada 1993; 94(11):19-27.
21. Gevers M. Towards a joint design of identification and control. In 2nd European Control Conference, Holland, June 1993.
22. Van den Hof PMJ, Schrama RJP. Identification and control - closed-loop issues. Automatica 1995; 31(12):1751-1770.
23. MacGregor JF. Optimal discrete stochastic control theory for process applications. Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 1973; 51:468-473.
24. Bergh LG, MacGregor JF. Constrained minimum variance controllers - internal model structure and robustness properties. Industrial Engineering of Chemical Research 1987; 26:1558-1564.
25. Astrom KJ, Wittenmark B. Computer-Controlled Systems, Theory and Design (2nd edn). Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, 1990.