1. 2 Training Center, Razi Petrochemical Company, Bandar Imam,Iran,161
2. 3 UM Power Energy Dedicated Advanced Centre (UMPEDAC), University of Malaya,Kuala Lumpur,Malaysia,50603
3. 4 Petroleum and Chemical Engineering Department, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat,Oman,123
4. 5 Process Design and Simulation Research Center, School of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran 11155/,Iran,4563
Ahmad Shamiri, Mohamed azlan Hussain, Farouq sabri Mjalli, 等. Dynamics and Predictive Control of Gas Phase Propylene Polymerization in Fluidized Bed Reactors[J]. 中国化学工程学报(英文版), 2013,21(9):1015-10291004-954160565-0.
Ahmad Shamiri, Mohamed azlan Hussain, Farouq sabri Mjalli, Navid Mostoufi, Seyedahmad Hajimolana. Dynamics and Predictive Control of Gas Phase Propylene Polymerization in Fluidized Bed Reactors[J]. Chin.J.Chem.Eng., 2013, 21(9): 1015-1029.
Ahmad Shamiri, Mohamed azlan Hussain, Farouq sabri Mjalli, 等. Dynamics and Predictive Control of Gas Phase Propylene Polymerization in Fluidized Bed Reactors[J]. 中国化学工程学报(英文版), 2013,21(9):1015-10291004-954160565-0.DOI: 10.1016/S1004-9541(13)60565-0.
Ahmad Shamiri, Mohamed azlan Hussain, Farouq sabri Mjalli, Navid Mostoufi, Seyedahmad Hajimolana. Dynamics and Predictive Control of Gas Phase Propylene Polymerization in Fluidized Bed Reactors[J]. Chin.J.Chem.Eng., 2013, 21(9): 1015-1029.DOI: 10.1016/S1004-9541(13)60565-0.
Dynamics and Predictive Control of Gas Phase Propylene Polymerization in Fluidized Bed Reactors
describing gas phase propylene polymerization in a fluidized bed reactor
was used to explore the dynamic behavior and process control of the polypropylene production rate and reactor temperature. The open loop analysis revealed the nonlinear behavior of the polypropylene fluidized bed reactor
justifying the use of an advanced control algorithm for efficient control of the process variables. In this case
a centralized model predictive control (MPC) technique was implemented to control the polypropylene production rate and reactor temperature by manipulating the catalyst feed rate and cooling water flow rate respectively. The corresponding MPC controller was able to track changes in the setpoint smoothly for the reactor temperature and production rate while the setpoint tracking of the conventional proportional-integral (PI) controller was oscillatory with overshoots and obvious interaction between the reactor temperature and production rate loops. The MPC was able to produce controller moves which not only were well within the specified input constraints for both control variables
but also non-aggressive and sufficiently smooth for practical implementations. Furthermore
the closed loop dynamic simulations indicated that the speed of rejecting the process disturbances for the MPC controller were also acceptable for both controlled variables.
关键词
Keywords
references
The trial reading is over, you can activate your VIP account to continue reading.