Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 42

49

CHAPTER 4

SINGLE LOOP PID, CASCADED PID AND ADAPTIVE


FUEL SETPOINT BASED CASCADED PID CONTROLLERS
FOR COMBUSTION PROCESS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

Combustion control in utility boiler is one of the most important


control loops in a power plant. The control of air and fuel to the furnace is an
important aspect in the combustion process. Control objective is to maintain
constant pressure at the inlet of the turbine irrespective of change in load. This
is achieved only by regulating the fuel and air flow to the combustion chamber
in the boiler. For every load there is a unique set point for fuel and air. Once
the set point is reached, it is concluded that the desired turbine inlet pressure has
reached.

Thus, in the present work, the manipulated variables are air and fuel
flow to the boiler with respect to the set value. In the following sections, the
design and closed loop simulation with conventional PID, cascaded PID and
adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID schemes are presented.

4.2 BOILER COMBUSTION CONTROL STRATEGIES

Steam pressure to the turbine inlet is the key variable that indicates the
state of balance between steam supply and demand. If supply exceeds demand,
then the pressure rises. Conversely, when demand exceeds the supply pressure
will drop.
50

The boiler master modulates the Firing Rate Demand (FRD) in order to
maintain a constant steam pressure. The air-fuel control modulates the air and
fuel supply in order to meet the firing rate demand.

In a multiple boiler application, all the boilers are connected to a main


steam header. The Plant Master Controller (PMC) controls the steam header
pressure. The plant master maintains a constant steam header pressure by
sending a master FRD signal to all the boilers, with each boiler having a
separate combustion controller known as the Boiler Master (BM). The boiler
master receives the plant master FRD signal and biases this signal in accordance
with its load-sharing requirement for controlling the air and fuel. It is important
to maintain the air slightly greater than the stoichiometric (chemical equivalent)
amount required for complete combustion. Minimum air is typically 15% excess
air or 2% excess oxygen.

There are many conventional control strategies for controlling the air
and fuel namely, single point positioning control, parallel positioning control,
ratio control and full-metered cross-limited control.

With single-point positioning control, the air damper and fuel control
valve are connected to a common master actuator through a jackshaft or
mechanical linkage. The combustion controller modulates the master fuel
actuator, with the jackshaft connections maintaining a minimum air to fuel ratio.
Single point positioning control is used where neither air nor fuel flow
measurements are available.

The ratio of air flow to fuel flow is not constant as a percentage of


damper and valve opening, due to non-linearity of these devices. Parallel
positioning control compensates for the non-linear characteristics by
independently controlling the air damper and fuel actuator. The fuel actuator
and air damper are modulated based on the firing rate demand (FRD). Parallel
positioning control is not used in applications where neither air nor fuel flow
measurements are available.
51

In ratio control, the air /fuel ratio is maintained with respect to FRD.
The ratio can be adjusted and provides a more constant air/fuel ratio across the
span of the boiler-firing-rate capacity.

In full-metered control (Sam G.Dukelow 1991), both the airflow rate


and the fuel flow rate are measured in addition to having independent air damper
and the fuel actuator control. Air flow and fuel flow are not linear with damper
percentage or valve opening. For a given change in valve opening, the change
in air or fuel flow rate is not constant. To compensate for this non-linearity,
metered control regulates the FRD based on fuel flow, rather than by valve
opening. Airflow demand is also controlled based on mass flow rate rather than
damper opening. This approach gives the best air/fuel ratio control.

With cross-limited metered control, safety overrides are incorporated.


Since the air and fuel flow rates are measured, it is possible to maintain the
airflow rate above the minimum required for a given fuel flow rate. This adds a
significant level of safety to the boiler operation.

With full-metered cross-limited control, excess oxygen trim can be


used. In excess oxygen trim control, the forced draft air damper is modulated to
maintain a specific level of excess oxygen in the flue gas. The set point of the
oxygen trim loop is usually a function of boiler load (steam flow). With this
method, the amount of combustion air required is minimized. The amount of fuel
required to heat the air is also reduced. Excess oxygen trim represents huge
savings in fuel cost.

The forced draft fan supplies combustion air and it is important


because it ensures adequate air-fuel mixing and keeps the flame away from the
nozzle. The furnace operates under pressure and flue gases are exhausted by
forced draft convection. The airflow rate is typically controlled with air
dampers. Some applications use fan speed control.
52

The unit operation modes of thermal power plant are namely, turbine­
following mode (TFM), boiler following mode (BFM), unit coordinated mode
(UCM) and frequency compensation mode (FCM).

In turbine-following mode, the component load command adjusts the


fuel supply to the boiler and the turbine admission valves control the boiler
pressure.

In boiler following mode, the component load command adjusts the


turbine admission valves by means of the speed or power controller and the
steam pressure is controlled by the fuel supply to the boiler.

In unit-coordinated mode, the component load command is applied


simultaneously to both the turbine admission valves and the fuel supply system.
The steam pressure is trimmed by the turbine admission valves and/or by the
fuel supply to the boiler.

Frequency compensation mode requires the provision of a system


frequency compensation device to modify the power demand signal by a bias
proportional to frequency deviation from a target value set by the system
operator.

In this thesis, boiler follow mode and full-metered cross-limited scheme


with excess oxygen trim is considered to control fuel and air flow for the
combustion process. Instead of FRD, the computer simulated combustion system
will produce set values to the fuel, air and oxygen controllers.

4.3 PID CONTROLLER SCHEME FOR COMBUSTION PROCESS


4.3.1 Design of PID Controller Scheme

The load controller generates the demand to the steam throttle valve
from the unit load demand and the measured generated power. The throttle
53

pressure controller generates heat rate to the combustion controller from the
measured throttle pressure and the turbine inlet pressure set point. Finally
combustion controller activates the fuel valve and air dampers. Oxygen trimming
fine-tunes the air-fuel ratio. Block diagram for combustion control of boiler is
shown in Figure 4.1.

The function generator on the air flow measurement scales the air flow
signal relative to the fuel flow signal to provide optimum air /fuel ratio. The
function generator values are determined by adjusting the fuel flow relative to
air flow at each test load. This allows air and fuel flow set points to be driven
by the same firing rate demand signal. If an increase in the firing rate is needed
due to increase in steam demand, the airflow leads the fuel. As the load curtails,
the fuel decreases first, followed by a decrease in combustion airflow. This
assures an air rich mixture always. A lower limiter is used in the air controller
to prevent the airflow set point reduction less than 25%of full span.

The arrangements for conventional PID controller scheme for air and
fuel control is shown in Figure 4.2.

An ideal equation for the PID controller output is given by

U(s) = Kp 1 -|-------- + Tds E(s)


Tis
(4.1)

To improve the performance of the derivative mode , the algorithm is

modified to

TgS
U (s) = Kp 1 + - - +
T,s aTDs +1 (4.2)
54

Figure 4.1 Block diagram for combustion control of boiler


55

From Master Pressure Air Flow


Fuel Flow Controller

f(x)

Legends
f(x)=function generator.
FT=flow transmitter.
T=transfer switch
A=auto switch

Fuel Air \
Valve Damper'

Figure 4.2 Arrangements for conventional PID controller scheme for air
and fuel control

The equation (4.2) shows that the derivative portion is multiplied by


1
the term a7o5 + 1 which is recognized (Carlos smith, 1997 and Pradeep B

Deshpande, 1981) as the transfer function of a first-order system with unity gain

and a time constant equal to ‘TD’ is referred as a filter which will not affect the

performance of the controller because the typical values of ‘a’ range between

0.01 and 0.1.


56

T„s +1
Controller Output = KP 1 + E(s) (4.3)
T,s Ti>cis +1

where

E(s) is the error given by


Error = SP - PV (reverse mode)
Error = PV - SP (direct mode)
SP=Set point for fuel flow and air flow
PV=Actual value of fuel flow and air flow

After suitable modification, the equation (4.3) can be rewritten as

KdS +1
PID controller output = KKp 1-* E(s) (4.4)
s Kd
5+1
Ka

Where

K = Gain multiplier

Kp = Proportional gain

K, = Integral gain

Kd — Derivative gain

Ka = Derivative lag constant

The overall optimum PID controller parameters for air and fuel flow
controllers for combustion process are obtained from the behavior modeling
approach as discussed in chapter 2. The controller parameters for fuel are as
follows: Gain multiplier K=2, Proportional gain KPF= 1.75, Integral gain
Kif =1.0, Derivative gain KDF=0.2, and Derivative lag constant KAF=10. The
controller parameters for air are as follows: Gain multiplier K=2, Proportional
57

gain Kpa =1.5, Integral gain KIA =0.8, Derivative gain KDA=0.2, and Derivative
lag constant KAA=10. These values are considered as optimum because of
satisfactory agreement with the real time behavior responses obtained from
210 MW thermal power plant.

4.3.2 Simulation studies with PID scheme

After designing PID controller for air and fuel, several experiments
were conducted on the experimental set-up and the performances for both
positive and negative changes in the set point as well as in the load perturbation
are studied. The responses obtained are presented in Figures 4.3(a) - 4.3 (1).

PID Fuel
Load 21MW-42MW
F 30
u
e
1 20
f
I 10
o
w
0
t/hr

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3(a) PID fuel flow response for 21 to 42 MW change in load


58

A
500
r
400
f
1 300
0
w 200

t/hr 100

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3(b) PID air flow response for 21 to 42 MW change in load

PID Fuel
Load 21MW-63MW
KP=1.75, K^l, Kd= 0.2
F
u 30
e
ii
20
f
1i
0 10
w
t/hr 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3(c) PID fuel flow response for 21 to 63 MW change in load


59

PID Air

600
A 500
r 400
f 300
1
o 200
w
100
t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (d) PID air flow response for 21 to 63 MW change in load

F
u
e
1
f
1
o
w
t/hr

Figure 4.3(e) PID fuel flow response for 21 to 84 MW change in load


60

PID Air
Load 21MW-84MW
600 KP=1.5, K]=0.8, Kd= 0.2

A 500

r 400
f 300
1
o 200
w
100
t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (f) PID air flow response for 21 to 84 MW change in load

PID Fuel
Load 110MW-42MW
F 30
u
e
1
20
f
1
o 10
w
t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3(g) PID fuel flow response for 110 to 42 MW change in load
61

PID Air
600

A 500
i
400
r
300
f
1 200
0
w 100
t/hr 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (h) PID air flow response for 110 to 42 MW change in load

30
F
u
e
1 20
f

o 10
w
t/hr
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Time in seconds

Figure 4.3(i) PID fuel flow response for 110 to 63 MW change in load
62

PID air
600

A 500
i
400
r
300
f
1 200
o
w 100

t/hr 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180


Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (j) PID air flow response for 110 to 63 MW change in load

40

F
u 30
e
ii
20
f
1i
0 10
w
t/hr 0

0 30 60 90 120 150 180


Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (k) PID fuel flow response for 110 to 84 MW change in load
63

PID Air
600
500
A
i 400
r
300
f
1 200
o
w 100
t/hr 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.3 (1) PID air flow response for 110 to 84 MW change in load

During steady state and dynamic conditions, for complete combustion


of fuel, there need to be a slight excess of air (over and above the theoretically
required quantity) will have to be supplied to the boiler. When excess air is
low, losses due to incombustibles are high. When excess air increases, a loss
due to dry gas increases in linear proportion.

It is difficult to achieve perfect air-fuel ratio by conventional PID


controllers, particularly during dynamic conditions. In order to alleviate this
drawback, a new approach using cascaded PID scheme for fuel and air control is
designed for combustion of utility boiler.

4.4 CASCADED PID SCHEME FOR COMBUSTION PROCESS

Boiler efficiency depends mainly on the optimum excess air supplied to


the boiler, over and above the theoretical air required for combustion. In the
conventional PID controllers the set point for fuel and air is derived from master
pressure controller. Master pressure controller has a PID control loop, which
64

uses steam pressure as controlled process variable and allocates set point for fuel
and air flow. Perfect stoichiometric air-fuel ratio cannot be achieved by the set
point for airflow, derived from master controller. The quantity of air required
depends on the quantity of fuel actually supplied. In order to make an
improvement to the existing system, a new methodology has been proposed and
designed using cascaded PID scheme for fuel and air control for combustion of
utility boiler. In this new approach, fuel controller will get the set point with
respect to the load and the air controller will get the set point as a function of
the fuel flow. Thus required air-fuel ratio will be maintained. Further, oxygen
controller carries out fine-tuning for air-fuel ratio, which is not included in the
cascaded loop.

4.4.1 Design of cascaded PID controller scheme

Cascade control is used to enable a process having multiple lags to be


controlled with the fastest possible response to process disturbances, including
set point changes. Cascade control is a multi-loop that is widely used to improve
controllability of a process.

In general, in the cascade controllers, the dynamics of the secondary


controller are much faster than those of primary loop. However, in the present
work, for the combustion process, both the loops are considered as primary
loops. If an increase in the firing rate is needed due to increase in steam
demand, the airflow leads the fuel. As the load curtails, first the fuel decrease,
followed by a decrease in combustion airflow. This is achieved through a
software based lead/lag program. Block diagram of the proposed cascaded
combustion control scheme is shown in Figure 4.4. The schematic of the
proposed conventional cascaded PID scheme for fuel and air control is shown in
the Figure 4.5. A response graph between loads vs. fuel flow is plotted with the
data collected from thermal power plant and stored as the database. From the
graph (incorporated in Figure 4.5), the fuel set point corresponding to the desired
load is derived.
65

Figure 4.4 Block diagram of cascaded control scheme

The difference between the set point and the actual fuel flow is
computed as the error signal. The control signal from the fuel controller is
applied to the fuel control valve. Same signal is applied to a function generator,
which develops a set point for the airflow loop with respect to the fuel flow.

The actual value of oxygen is measured from the flue gas analyzer for
the oxygen contents of the flue gas at the economizer outlet of the boiler. Since
real time combustor is not available, the set point for the oxygen controller is
derived as a function of steam flow through combustion simulator. The actual
value with respect to air/fuel ratio is collected from power plant and stored in
the computer database. The computer simulated error signal is given as input to
the oxygen controller. The output signal from the oxygen controller is added
with the airflow controller output, which trims the airflow to optimize the
combustion process.

The overall optimum cascaded PID controller parameters for air and
fuel flow controllers for combustion process is obtained from the behavior
modeling approach as per the procedure discussed in chapter 2. The controller
66

parameters for fuel are as follows: Gain multiplier K=2, Proportional gain
KPF=2.75, Integral gain K1F =1.5, Derivative gain KDF=0.4, and Derivative lag
constant KAF=10. The controller parameters for air are as follows: Gain
multiplier K=2, Proportional gain KPA =2.0, Integral gain KIA =1.0, Derivative
gain Kda=0.4, and Derivative lag constant KAA=10. These values are considered
as optimum because of satisfactory agreement with the real time behavior
response obtained from thermal power plant.

Figure 4.5 Arrangement for the proposed cascaded PID controller


scheme
67

The optimum PID controller parameters for the oxygen controller is


obtained by trial and error method from the computer simulation test conducted
for various load conditions based on the real time response obtained from 210
MW thermal power plant. The real time response for Steam flow vs. oxygen is
shown in Figure 4.6. The controller parameters for oxygen are as follows: Gain
multiplier K=l, Proportional gain KPO=2, Integral gain KI0 =1.5, Derivative gain
Kdo=0.5 and Derivative lag constant KAO=5.

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105%

Steam flow ----------------------------

Figure 4.6 Steam flow Ys Oxygen response (design)

4.4.2 Simulation studies with cascaded PID Scheme

After designing the cascaded PID controllers for air and fuel, several
simulations were conducted on the lab scale experimental set-up and the
performance for both positive and negative changes in the set point as well as in
the load perturbation were studied. The responses obtained are presented in
Figures 4.7 (a) - 4.7 (f).
68

Cascaded PID
LOAD 21MW-42MW
F 500
u
e A 30 400
1

300
f 20
1 200
o
w 10 100
t/hr 0
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7(a) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 21 to 42 MW change


in load

Cascaded PID
Load 21MW-63MW
KP=2.75, K,= 1.5, KD= 0.4
40
F 500
A
u
A 30 400 I
e
300
f 20 F
1 200 L
o O
w 10 100 w
t/hr 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7 (b) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 21 to 63 MW change in
load
69

Cascaded PID
Load 21MW-84MW 700
KP=2.75, K,= 1.5, Kd= 0.4
600
F
500 A
u 30
e 4 400
20 300 f
1
200 o
o 10
w w
100
t/hr 0 t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7(e) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 21 to 84 MW change


in load

700
Cascaded PID
Load 110MW-42MW 600
F 500 A
u
e 4 30 i
400
1 r
300 f
f 20
1
200
o o
w 10 100 w

t/hr t/hr
0
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7(d) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 110 to 42 MW


change in load
70

Cascaded PID
Load 110MW-63MW 700
KP=2.75, K,= 1.5, Kd= 0.4
40 600
F
500 A
u
30 i
e 400
1 r

f 20 300 f
1 1
200 o
o
w 10 w
100
t/hr t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7(e) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 110 to 63 MW


change in load

Cascaded PID
Load 110MW-84MW 700
KP=2.75, K,= 1.5, KD= 0.4
600
F A
500
u 30 i
e r
400

20 300 f
f 1
1
200 o
o 10 w
w
100
t/hr
t/hr 0 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.7(f) Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response for 110 to 84 MW


change in load
71

In the cascaded PID scheme, the required air-fuel ratio will be


maintained. Also, satisfactory performance is achieved when compared with
conventional PID controller. A drop in throttle pressure due to increase in steam
flow, activates the combustion control to increase the firing rate of the boiler
and bring the steam pressure back to its set point. In the real time, effect of
increased firing rate starts 45 to 60 seconds after the demand signal. During this
period, the stability with pressure set point and MW generation at the desired
level is not achieved, until several minutes have passed. In order to have quick
control action and to improve the performance, a new approach using adaptive
fuel set point based cascaded PID scheme for fuel control is designed for
combustion of utility boiler. In order to develop adaptive fuel set point, the
control system measures the effective governor valve position by computing the
ratio of turbine first state pressure to throttle pressure (P/Pt) of the steam
turbine.

4.5 ADAPTIVE FUEL SET POINT BASED CASCADED PID


SCHEME FOR COMBUSTION PROCESS

Adaptive control schemes (Karl J. Astrom 1995) automatically adjust


their control characteristics under various operating conditions to maintain
effective control of a process. The drop in drum pressure and the change in
steam flow requirement will activate the combustion control system to increase
the firing rate of the boiler through air and fuel regulation and bring the steam
pressure back to its set point. The effect of increased firing rate starts to be
effective about 25 to 40 seconds after the load change. During this period the
required energy comes from the storage in the drum (Sam G.Dukelow 1991). In
order to improve the stability and performance, a new approach has been
developed to give the variable set point to the cascaded PID controller for fuel
flow. An adaptive fuel set point calculation is proposed by considering turbine
first stage pressure change, which is the first and immediate response, due to
load disturbance. This method will improve the stability of the system during
dynamic conditions without time delay.
72

4.5.1 Design of adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID scheme

Turbine is a combination of impulse and reaction stages, designed for


high operating efficiencies and maximum reliability. Whenever there is a change
in load, turbine first stage pressure will change immediately. The first stage
pressure (Pj) is directly proportional to the energy supplied to the turbine.
Turbine valve opens (Sam G. Dukelow 1991) and admits steam to produce
required generation. Due to this action there will be a change in turbine inlet
pressure, which is also called throttle pressure (PT). In order to maintain the
turbine inlet pressure to the desired set point (Ps), combustion control will
activate the fuel control valve to change the firing rate. Airflow also altered
with respect to fuel flow to maintain air-to-fuel ratio for complete combustion.
In the proposed design, the balance between energy supplied and energy demand
is achieved by altering the fuel flow by way of giving adaptive set point to the
cascaded fuel flow controller.

Adaptive fuel set point (EF(Ada)) = (energy demand) - (energy supply)

In order to develop the energy demand, the control system measures


the effective governor valve position by computing the ratio of turbine first stage
pressure to throttle pressure (P/Pt) at a particular value of throttle pressure.

p
Energy demand (for any value of throttle pressure) =-^-xJ°s (4.5)
PT
O

Energy supplied = Rate of change of drum pressure (Pd)+ First stage


pressure (P1}

Adaptive Fuel Set Point (EF(Ada)) -PxPs (Pd + Pt) (4.6)


73

where

EF(Ada) is the required adaptive fuel, Pi is the turbine first stage pressure
PT is the turbine throttle pressure, Ps is the throttle pressure set point
O

pd is the drum pressure differential

The measuring circuit for calculating the adaptive set point is shown in
Figure 4.8. The response for load vs. steam flow, load vs. first stage pressure
and steam flow vs. oxygen were obtained from 210 MW thermal power plant
during real time operation and stored in the computer for simulation are shown
in Figures (4.9-4.11).

Figure 4.8 Measuring system for adaptive fuel set value calculation
74

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%
Load in MW

Figure 4.9 Response for load Vs steam flow


CTQ
03

Figure 4.10 Response for load Vs first stage pressure


75

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105%

Steam flow --------------------------------►

Figure 4.11 Response for steam flow Vs oxygen

The proposed conventional adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID
scheme for fuel and air control is shown in the Figure 4.12.

As discussed, adaptive fuel set value corresponding to the desired load


is derived and applied to the cascaded PID controller for fuel flow. The
difference between the adaptive fuel set point and the actual fuel flow is
computed as the error signal. The control signal from the fuel controller is
applied to the fuel control valve. Same signal is applied to a function generator,
which develops a set point for the airflow loop with respect to the fuel flow.

Since real time combustor is not available, the set point for the oxygen
controller is derived as a function of steam flow through combustion simulator.
The actual value with respect to air/fuel ratio is collected from power plant and
stored in the computer database. The computer simulated error signal is given as
input to the oxygen controller. The output signal from the oxygen controller is
added with the airflow controller output, which trims the airflow to optimize the
combustion process.
76

Figure 4.12 Arrangement for the adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID
controller scheme
77

The overall optimum cascaded PID controller parameters for air and
fuel flow controllers for combustion process is obtained from the behavior
modeling approach as discussed in chapter 2.

The controller parameters for fuel are as follows: Gain multiplier K=2,
Proportional gain KPF = 1.5, Integral gain KIF =2.0, Derivative gain KDF=0.5, and
Derivative lag constant KAF=10. The controller parameters for air are as follows:
Gain multiplier K=2, Proportional gain KPA =1.5, Integral gain KJA =1.2,
Derivative gain KDA=0.5 and Derivative lag constant KAA=10. The controller
parameters for oxygen are as follows: Gain multiplier K=l, Proportional gain
KP0 =4, Integral gain KI0 =2.0, Derivative gain KDO=1.0, and Derivative lag
constant KA0=5.

These values are considered as optimum because of satisfactory


agreement with the real time behavior response obtained from thermal power
plant.

4.5.2 Simulation studies with adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID
scheme

After designing the adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID
controllers for fuel, several simulations were conducted on the lab scale
experimental setup and the performance for both positive and negative changes
in the set point as well as in the load perturbation are studied. The responses
obtained are presented in Figures 4.13 (a)-4.13 (f).
78

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


Load 21MW-42MW 600
30 Kp=1.50, K,=2, Kd= 0.5
Fuel flow set point 5-12 t/hr __ 500
F KP=1.5, K,= 1.2, Kd= 0.5
u ▲ A
Air flow set point 150-200 t / hr 400
e 20
1 300 F A

f
1 10 200 {
o
w
----------------------------------------------------------------- 0
t/hr 0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(a) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 21 to 42 MW change in load

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


Load 21MW-63MW
KP=1.50, K,=2, Kd= 0.5
Fuel flow set point 5-18 t/hr
600
F
500 A
u
e 4 30 i
400 r

f 20 300 f
1 1
o 200 o
w 10 w
100
t/hr t/hr
0 0

0 30 60 90 120 1 50 180
Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(b) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 21 to 63 MW change in load
79

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


Load 21MW-84MW
KP=1.50, Kr=2, Kd= 0.5 — 700
Fuel flow set point 5-24 t/hr
Kp=1.5, KfI.2, Kd= 0.5 600
F 30 A
500 i
u
e ^ r
1 400
20 f A
f 300 1
1 o |
o 200 w
w 10
100 t/hr
t/hr
n
0
Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(c) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 21 to 84 MW change in load

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


Load 110MW-42MW
Kp=1.50, Kf2, Kd= 0.5
Fuel flow set point 29-12 t/hr ----- 700
Kp=1.5, K,= 1.2, Kd= 0.5
600
30
F 500
A ▲
u
400
e i 20
1 r
300
f f
1 200 1
10
o o
100 w
w
t/hr 0 t/hr
0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(d) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 110 to 42 MW change in load
80

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


LOAD 110MW-63MW 700
KP=1.50, K]=2, Kd= 0.5
600
F
500 A
u 30
e *
i
1 400 r
20 f
f 300
1 1
0 200 o
10
w w
100
t/hr t/hr
0 0

Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(e) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 110 to 63 MW change in load

Adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID


Load 110MW-84MW
Kp=1.50, K,=2, Kd= 0.5
Fuel flow set point 29-24 t/hr 700
KP=1.5, K^l.2, Kd= 0.5
600
F 30
500 A
u
e A i
1 400 r
20
f 300 f
1 1
o 200 o
w 10 w
100
t/hr t/hr
0
0
Time in seconds

Figure 4.13(f) Adaptive fuel SP based Cascaded PID air/fuel flow response
for 110 to 84 MW change in load
81

Table 4.1 presents the comparison of time domain specifications for


various conventional control schemes for Positive step change in load and
Table 4.2 for negative step change in load. Table 4.3 present the comparison of
performance indices for various conventional control schemes.

Table 4.1 Comparison of time domain specifications for various


conventional control schemes for Positive step change in load

Positive step change

21-42MW 21-63MW 21-84MW


Control Control
scheme loop
Rise Peek Settling Rise Peek Settling Rise Peek Setting
time time time time time time time time time

PID Air
19 22 73 21 26 83 29 34 90
flow
Fuel
28 36 69 32 39 74 36 42 84
flow
Cascaded Air
16 20 50 23 27 45 26 30 72
PID flow
Fuel
18 31 42 26 36 48 32 37 66
flow
Adaptive Air
14 18 41 20 25 41 18 24 39
fuel SP flow
based
cascaded Fuel
14 28 34 22 23 41 26 31 52
flow
PID

Table 4.2 Comparison of time domain specifications for various


conventional control schemes for negative step change in load

Negative step change

Control Control 110-42MW 110-63MW 110-84MW


scheme loop
Under Settling Under Settling Under Settling
shoot time shoot time shoot time

Air flow 31 84 39 96 48 101


PID
Fuel flow 28 81 21 86 39 94
Air flow 18 68 21 65 31 76
Cascaded PID
Fuel flow 16 60 19 62 24 71
Adaptive fuel Air flow 18 55 21 59 24 66
SP based
cascaded PID Fuel flow 16 52 20 55 21 61
Table 4.3 Comparison of performance indices for various conventional control schemes

Positive step change Negative step change


Control Control
21-42MW 21-63 MW 21-84 MW 105-84 MW 105-63 MW 105-42 MW
scheme loop av i av i avi
ISE ISE ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE
Air flow 9749 9964 8634 9972 8723 9873 8423 9165 7699 9976 9945 9823
PID
Fuel flow 9867 9406 8943 9012 8422 9345 8322 8873 7902 9045 9093 9075

O
O
OO
Cascaded PID Air flow 8792 9667 8076 9025 8129 8445 8654 7288 9596 9076 9544

00
r-
r-
Fuel flow 9043 8971 8669 8277 8071 8112 8437 7723 8821 8659 8452

00
o
o
05
Adaptive fuel Air flow 8072 8975 7221 8493 7659 6989 i 8759 8856
7387 7541 8997
i

1
SP based ----------
Fuel flow 8817 8637 8432 7665 7165 7062 7667 7503 7045 8640 8329 8199
cascaded PID i

1
82
83

Figures 4.14(a) - 4.14(1) show the bar charts for time domain and
performance criteria to various positive & negative step changes in loads and for
several set point variations.
Settling tim e in seco n d s

□ PID

■ CASCADED PID

ilADAPTIVE CASCADED
PID

Figure 4.14(a) Comparison of air flow settling time for positive step change
in loads with conventional schemes
Settling time in seconds

□ PID
■ CASCADED PID
S3 ADAPTIVE CASCADED PID

21-84 MW

Figure 4.14(b) Comparison of fuel flow settling time for positive step
change in loads with conventional schemes
84

□ PID

■ CASCADED PID

a ADAPTIVE CASCADED
PID

Figure 4.14(c) Comparison of air flow settling time for negative step change
in loads with conventional schemes
o o- * Mo Uo J oi 0 1o C oD oN lo0 0 o( f loO
Settling time in seconds

□ PID

■ CASCADED PID

B ADAPTIVE CASCADED
PID
ON
C k)

oO
N)

s3

Figure 4.14(d) Comparison of fuel flow settling time for negative step
change in loads with conventional schemes
85

10000
9000 -
8000 - —
7000 -
6000 - □ PID
LU
C/3 5000 - ■ CASCADED PID
4000 - 0 ADAPTIVE CASCADED PID
3000 —
2000 -
1000 —
0 -

21-42 MW 21-63 MW 21-84 MW

Figure 4.14(e) Comparison of ISE (air) for positive step change in loads
with conventional schemes

Figure 4.14(f) Comparison of ISE (fuel) for positive step change in loads
with conventional schemes
86

10000
9000
8000
7000
6000 □ P!D
in
< 5000 ■ CASCADED RD
4000 0 ADAPTIVE CASCADED PID
3000
2000
1000
0

21-42 MW 21-63 MW 21-84 MW

Figure 4.14(g) Comparison of IAE (air) for positive step change in loads
with conventional schemes

Figure 4.14(h) Comparison of IAE (fuel) for positive step change in loads
with conventional schemes
87

10000
9000 -
8000 -
7000
6000 - □ PID
M 5000 - ■ CASCADED PID
4000 B ADAPTIVE CASCADED PID
3000 -
2000 -

1000 -

0 -

110-84 MW 110-63 MW 110-42 MW

Figure 4.14(i) Comparison of ISE (air) for negative step change in loads
with conventional schemes

10000

110-84 MW 110-63 MW 110-42 MW

Figure 4.14(j)Comparison of ISE (fuel) for negative step change in loads


with conventional schemes
88

Figure 4.14(k) Comparison of IAE (air) for negative step change in loads
with conventional schemes

10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
< 5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
110-84 MW 110-63 MW 110-42 MW

Figure 4.14(1) Comparison of IAE (fuel) for negative step change in loads
with conventional schemes
89

Table 4.4 presents the percentage improvement in settling time and


Table 4.5 presents percentage improvement in ISE and IAE for conventional
control schemes.

Table 4.4 Percentage Improvement in settling time for conventional control


schemes

Positive step change Negative step change


Control Control
21-2 21-63 21-84 105-84 105-63 105-42
scheme loop
MW MW MW MW MW MW

PID to Air flow


31 46 20 19 32 25
Cascaded
PID Fuel flow
39 35 21 26 28 25

Air flow
PID to 44 51 54 35 39 36
AFSCPED
Fuel flow
50 45 39 36 37 35

Table 4.5 Percentage Improvement in ISE and IAE for conventional


control schemes

Positive step change Negative step change

Control Control 105-84 105-63 105-42


21-42MW 21-63 MW 21-84 MW
scheme loop MW MW MW

ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE IAE ISE IAE

PID to Air flow 9.8 3 6 9.4 6.8 15 5 6 5.3 3.8 8.7 2.8
Cascaded
PID Fuel
8.4 4.6 3.1 8.1 4.2 9.2 2.5 5 9.8 2.4 4.7 6.8
flow

Air flow 17 10 16 15 13 19 12 18 9.2 9.8 9.5 9.9


PID to
AFSCPID Fuel
18 8.1 5.7 21 15 18 7.9 16 11 4.5 8.4 11
flow
90

4.6 CONCLUSION

The conventional control schemes namely PID, cascaded PID and


adaptive fuel set point based cascaded PID controllers are designed and
implemented on the lap scale experimental set-up. Closed loop studies for all
the above schemes are carried out. Table 4.1 and 4.2 summarize the time
domain specifications for positive and negative step change in loads and show
the improvement of AFSCPID when compared to all other schemes with respect
to rise time, over shoot, under shoot and settling time.

Table 4.3 summarizes the performance indices for various conventional


control schemes with respect to positive & negative step change in loads and for
several set point variations. It shows that the AFSCPID scheme results in least
ISE and IAE values for both positive & negative step change in loads.

Also in all cases air flow follows the fuel flow to match the required
air/fuel ratio for complete combustion. It has been observed from the responses,
that in the entire negative step changes in the boiler demand the fuel decreases
first and then air decreases and for all the positive step changes in boiler
demand, the air increases first and then the fuel increases to maintain optimal
air/fuel at all loads.

Cascaded controllers result in overall 25% improvement in settling time


over conventional PID controllers. AFSCPID controllers result in overall 40%
improvement in settling time over conventional PID controllers and 22%
improvement in settling time over cascaded PID controllers. AFSCPID
controllers results in overall 20% improvement ISE and IAE over conventional
PID controllers.