Apparatuses and methods for actualizing future process outputs using artificial intelligence
US-2024369979-A1 · Nov 7, 2024 · US
US9904257B2 · US · B2
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Publication number | US-9904257-B2 |
| Application number | US-201213465764-A |
| Country | US |
| Kind code | B2 |
| Filing date | May 7, 2012 |
| Priority date | Jan 31, 2008 |
| Publication date | Feb 27, 2018 |
| Grant date | Feb 27, 2018 |
A practical reading order for non-experts. Skip the full description unless you need deep technical detail.
What the patent document calls the invention.
A short plain-language summary of the technical disclosure.
Who owns or filed the patent and who is credited as inventor.
Filing, priority, publication, and grant dates set the timeline.
The legal scope of protection — read this for what is actually claimed.
Technology tags used to group this patent with similar filings.
Prior art links and similar publications in this corpus.
Official abstract text for this publication.
A process controller adaptation and tuning technique uses a closed loop adaptation cycle that performs an autocorrelation analysis on the prediction error or the control error of a process control system to determine if significant process model mismatch exists or to determine an increase or a decrease in process model mismatch over time. The adaptation and tuning technique may perform a controller tuning cycle when the determined model mismatch raises above a predetermined level.
Opening claim text (preview).
The invention claimed is: 1. A method of detecting process model mismatch between a controller model used by a predictive process controller and a process plant, the method comprising: determining, via a computing device, an error signal associated with the control of the process plant; performing, via a computing device, an autocorrelation analysis on the error signal to obtain an autocorrelation output value; analyzing, via a computing device, the autocorrelation output value to detect process model mismatch between the controller model and the process plant, the analyzing including comparing the autocorrelation output value to a predetermined threshold; and triggering a retuning of the predictive process controller, without regenerating the controller model, during on-line controller operation when the comparison indicates that the autocorrelation output value exceeds the predetermined threshold. 2. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the error signal associated with the control of the process plant includes determining a control error signal associated with the predictive process controller as a difference between a measured value of a process variable and a set point for the process variable. 3. The method of claim 2 , wherein performing the autocorrelation analysis on the error signal includes performing the autocorrelation analysis on control error data collected during a time period when the process variable is in a steady state condition. 4. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the error signal associated with the control of the process plant includes determining a prediction error signal associated with the predictive process controller as a difference between a predicted value of a process variable and a measured value of the process variable. 5. The method of claim 4 , wherein performing the autocorrelation analysis on the error signal includes performing the autocorrelation analysis on prediction error data collected during a time period when the process variable is being controlled in response to a disturbance or upset. 6. The method of claim 5 , wherein determining the error signal associated with the control of the process plant includes obtaining a first control error signal for a first time period as a difference between a measured value of a process variable and a set point for the process variable during the first time period and obtaining a second control error signal for a second time period later than the first time period as a difference between a measured value of the process variable and a set point for the process variable during the second time period, and wherein performing an autocorrelation analysis on the error signal includes performing an autocorrelation analysis on the first control error signal and performing an autocorrelation analysis on the second control error signal, and wherein analyzing the autocorrelation analysis to detect process model mismatch includes comparing the results of the autocorrelation analyses on the first and second control error signals to determine a change in process model mismatch between the first and second time periods. 7. The method of claim 6 , wherein obtaining the first control error signal and obtaining the second control error signal includes obtaining the first and second control error signals during first and second time periods in which the process variable is in a steady state condition. 8. A method of detecting process model mismatch for predictive process controllers, the method comprising: determining, via a computing device, an error signal associated with a controller model used by a predictive process controller in a process plant; performing, via a computing device, an autocorrelation analysis on the error signal to obtain an autocorrelation output having a value indicative of a degree of process model mismatch between the controller model and the process plant; and retuning the predictive process controller, without regenerating the controller model, during on-line controller operation by generating one or more tuning parameter values based on the value of the autocorrelation output.
using a predictor · CPC title
in which a parameter or coefficient is automatically adjusted to optimise the performance · CPC title
electric · CPC title
characterised by modeling, simulation of the manufacturing system · CPC title
involving the use of models or simulators · CPC title
Related publications grouped by family.
Answers are generated from the same data shown on this page.