Diagnosis and Fault-Tolerant Control

Blanke, Mogens; Kinnaert, Michel; Lunze, Jan; Staroswiecki, Μ.

doi:10.1007/978-3-662-05344-7

Cited by 1,778 publications

(1,555 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,515

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…, where x (i) ∈ R represents the state of Σ (i) that is the zone air temperature, and u ≜ [u (1) ,...,u (N) ], where u (i) ∈ R is the input vector of Σ (i) that corresponds to the controlled mass flow rate of water flowing into each fan-coil (see Fig. 1 …”

Section: Problem Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assignment of the values to the elements F s qk is realized such that the sensitivity of every ARRs to local and propagated sensor faults is distinguished [12]. For example, f (1) is involved in E (1) since it is a fault that may affect the local sensor S (1) , while it is also involved in E s , since it may propagated through the exchange of information between the agent M (i) and M s . Hence, the assignment F s 22 = 1 implies that f (1) necessarily discloses its occurrence by provoking the violation of E (1) , while F s 12 = * implies that f (1) may justify the violation of E s , but E s may be satisfied in spite of its occurrence.…”

Section: B Distributed Sensor Fault Isolation Decision Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, f (1) is involved in E (1) since it is a fault that may affect the local sensor S (1) , while it is also involved in E s , since it may propagated through the exchange of information between the agent M (i) and M s . Hence, the assignment F s 22 = 1 implies that f (1) necessarily discloses its occurrence by provoking the violation of E (1) , while F s 12 = * implies that f (1) may justify the violation of E s , but E s may be satisfied in spite of its occurrence. On the other hand, F s 52 = 0, since f (1) is not involved in E (5) .…”

Section: B Distributed Sensor Fault Isolation Decision Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To tackle this problem, the implementation of a fault tolerant control (FTC) scheme [1] vasiliki.reppa@centralesupelec.fr [3] and FTC [4], [5] techniques for HVAC systems following centralized approaches. However, in many practical applications involving large-scale buildings distributed FTC schemes are more effective since by handling the occurrence of faults locally and exchanging information between neighboring subsystems and local control agents, the delay in fault diagnosis and estimation can be reduced, facilitating the early compensation of faults effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Papadopoulos

Reppa

Polycarpou

et al. 2015

2015 54th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-This paper presents a model-based distributed fault-tolerant control (FTC) scheme with emphasis on compensating the effects of sensor faults in multi-zone heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems. A bank of local adaptive FTC agents are designed to accommodate possible sensor faults in HVAC systems, modeled as a set of interconnected, nonlinear subsystems. In order to compensate the fault effects that may propagate in the neighboring subsystems, each local FTC utilizes the information generated by a local monitoring agent that diagnoses the sensor faults and performs an adaptive estimation of the isolated sensor faults. The local monitoring and control agents are allowed to exchange information with neighboring agents. Simulation results are used to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology applied to a sevenzone HVAC system.

show abstract

Section: Problem Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Distributed Sensor Fault Isolation Decision Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Distributed Sensor Fault Isolation Decision Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Papadopoulos

Reppa

Polycarpou

et al. 2015

2015 54th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Control system design for safety-critical systems [9,10] is vital for the integrity of such systems when sub-systems faults occur. Therefore the scientific community developed an area where the faults can be accommodated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimised sensor selection for control and fault tolerance of electromagnetic suspension systems: A robust loop shaping approach

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a systematic design framework for selecting the sensors in an optimised manner, simultaneously satisfying a set of given complex system control requirements, i.e. optimum and robust performance as well as fault tolerant control for high integrity systems. It is worth noting that optimum sensor selection in control system design is often a non-trivial task. Among all candidate sensor sets, the algorithm explores and separately optimises system performance with all the feasible sensor sets in order to identify fallback options under single or multiple sensor faults. The proposed approach combines modern robust control design, fault tolerant control, multiobjective optimisation and Monte Carlo techniques. Without loss of generality, it's efficacy is tested on an electromagnetic suspension system via appropriate realistic simulations.Keywords: Optimised sensor selection, Robust control, Fault tolerant control, Magnetic levitation, Multi-objective optimisation, Electromagnetic Suspension IntroductionOptimum sensor selection in practical control system design can be complex process especially if the selection is done with respect to a number of properties in order to achieve robust optimum performance and reliability properties.A typical closed-loop control system is shown in Fig. 1. Typically, a system to be controlled has a number of candidate control inputs (actuators) and outputs (sensors) that could be used to control it by proper controller design using one of the existing modern control methods. Moreover the system suffers from input disturbances and uncertainties or model inaccuracies. Additionally, faults highly The problem of sensor/actuator selection has been addressed before in the literature [5] but none of the methods consider simultaneous satisfaction of the aforementioned properties except in [6] where the authors have consider both optimum performance and sensor fault tolerance using Linear Quadratic Gaussian (LQG) control. Therefore the problem is to find the 'best' set of sensors, Y o , subject to the aforementioned control properties i.e. optimum performance, robustness, fault tolerance and minimum number of sensors.The novelty in this paper relies in the fact that optimum robust performance with sensor fault tolerance is achieved by combining robust control methods, Fault Tolerant Control (FTC), MultiObjective OPtimisation (MOOP) and Monte Carlo (MC) method as illustrated in Fig. 2.Robust control design in a practical control system has a vital role because real systems have

show abstract

Indirect vector controlled of an induction motor using H ^∞ current controller for IGBT open circuit fault compensation

Chérif

Djerioui

Zeghlache

et al. 2020

Int Trans Electr Energ Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to design the robust fault-tolerant control FTC open-circuit fault IGBT's, first of all. The modeling and control of the induction motor in the healthy inverter and in the faulty inverter (open-circuit fault at the IGBT switch) are proposed. Furthermore, the technique for detection and location the open-circuit fault an IGBT based on the Park vector combined with the polar coordinate. In order to ensure the service continuity of the system, two methods of tolerance are developed: the first method, the indirect vector control with H ∞ controller of the induction motor fed by a three-phase inverter based on the fault compensation. The second method, the indirect vector control of the induction motor fed by a three-phase inverter with the redundant leg. Finally, comparative study between the two techniques of tolerance is carried out. The performance of each technique is confirmed by experimental results.

show abstract

Diagnosis and Fault-Tolerant Control

Cited by 1,778 publications

References 0 publications

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Optimised sensor selection for control and fault tolerance of electromagnetic suspension systems: A robust loop shaping approach

Indirect vector controlled of an induction motor using H ^∞ current controller for IGBT open circuit fault compensation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Diagnosis and Fault-Tolerant Control

Cited by 1,778 publications

References 0 publications

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Distributed adaptive sensor fault tolerant control for smart buildings

Optimised sensor selection for control and fault tolerance of electromagnetic suspension systems: A robust loop shaping approach

Indirect vector controlled of an induction motor using H ∞ current controller for IGBT open circuit fault compensation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Indirect vector controlled of an induction motor using H ^∞ current controller for IGBT open circuit fault compensation