This paper compares and demonstrates the efficacy of implementing two practical single input single output multiloop control schemes on the dynamic performance of selected signals of a solid oxide fuel cell gas turbine (SOFC-GT) hybrid simulation facility. The hybrid plant located at the U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, WV is capable of simulating the interaction between a 350 kW solid oxide fuel cell and a 120 kW gas turbine using a hardware in the loop configuration. Previous studies have shown that the thermal management of coal based SOFC-GT hybrid systems is accomplished by the careful control of the cathode air stream within the fuel cell (FC). Decoupled centralized and dynamic decentralized control schemes are tested for one critical airflow bypass loop to regulate cathode FC airflow and modulation of turbine electric load to maintain synchronous turbine speed during system transients. Improvements to the studied multivariate architectures include: feed-forward control for disturbance rejection, antiwindup compensation for actuator saturation, gain scheduling for adaptive operation, bumpless transfer for manual to auto switching, and adequate filter design for the inclusion of derivative action. Controller gain tuning is accomplished by Skogestad’s internal model control tuning rules derived from empirical first order plus delay time transfer function models of the hybrid facility. Avoidance of strong input-output coupling interactions is achieved via relative gain array, Niederlinski index, and decomposed relative interaction analysis, following recent methodologies in proportional integral derivative control theory for multivariable processes.

1.
Tucker
,
D.
,
Gemmen
,
R.
, and
Lawson
,
L.
, 2005, “
Characterization of Air Flow Management and Control in a Fuel Cell Turbine Hybrid Power System Using Hardware Simulation
,” ASME Paper No. PWR2005-50127.
2.
Hughes
,
D.
,
Tucker
,
D.
,
Tsai
,
A.
,
Haynes
,
C.
, and
Rivera
,
Y.
, 2010, “
Transient Behavior of a Fuel Cell/Gas Turbine Hybrid Using Hardware-Based Simulation With a 1-D Distributed Fuel Cell Model
,”
Proceedings of ICEPAG2010
, Costa Mesa, CA, Feb. 9–11, Paper No. ICEPAG2010-3408.
3.
Liese
,
E.
,
Smith
,
T.
,
Haynes
,
C.
, and
Gemmen
,
R.
, 2006, “
A Dynamic Bulk SOFC Model Used in a Hybrid Turbine Controls Test Facility
,” ASME Paper No. GT2006-90383.
4.
Tsai
,
A.
,
Banta
,
L.
,
Tucker
,
D.
, and
Gemmen
,
R.
, 2008, “
Multivariable Robust Control of a Simulated Hybrid SOFC-GT Plant
,”
Proceedings of FuelCell2008
, Denver, CO, Jun. 16–18, Paper No. FuelCell2008-65071.
5.
Wang
,
Q.
,
Ye
,
Z.
,
Cai
,
W.
, and
Hang
,
C.
, 2008,
PID Control for Multivariable Processes
,
Springer
,
New York
.
6.
Tucker
,
D.
,
Liese
,
E.
, and
Gemmen
,
R.
, 2009, “
Determination of the Operating Envelope for a Direct Fired Fuel Cell Turbine Hybrid Using Hardware Based Simulation
,”
Proceedings of ICEPAG2009
, Newport Beach, CA, Feb. 10–12, Paper No. ICEPAG2009-1021.
7.
Tucker
,
D.
,
Smith
,
T. P.
,
Lawson
,
L. O.
, and
Haynes
,
C.
, 2006, “
Evaluation of Cathodic Air Flow Transients in a Hybrid System Using Hardware Simulation
,”
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology
, Paper No. FUELCELL2006-97107.
8.
Smith
,
T. P.
,
Tucker
,
D.
,
Haynes
,
C. L.
,
Liese
,
E. A.
, and
Wepfer
,
W. J.
, 2006, “
Hardware-Based Simulation of a Fuel Cell Turbine Hybrid Response to Imposed Fuel Cell Load Transients
,” ASME Paper No. IMECE2006-13978.
9.
Tsai
,
A.
,
Banta
,
L.
,
Tucker
,
D.
, and
Gemmen
,
R.
, 2007, “
Determination of an Empirical Transfer Function of a SOFC-GT Hybrid System via Frequency Response Analysis
,”
Proceedings of ASME Fuel Cell Engineering and Technology
, New York, Jun. 18–20.
10.
Tsai
,
A.
,
Banta
,
L.
,
Tucker
,
D.
, and
Gemmen
,
R.
, 2008, “
RGA Analysis of a SOFC-GT Hybrid Plant
,”
Proceedings of FuelCell2008
, Denver, CO, Jun. 16–18, Paper No. FuelCell2008-65070.
11.
Bristol
,
E. H.
, 1966, “
On a New Measure of Interaction for Multivariable Process Control
,”
IEEE Trans. Autom. Control
0018-9286,
11
, pp.
133
134
.
12.
Brogan
,
W. L.
, 1991,
Modern Control Theory
, 3rd ed.,
Prentice-Hall
,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ
.
13.
Tham
,
M. T.
, 1999, “
Multivariable Control: An Introduction to Decoupling Control
,” Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Newcastle Tyne.
14.
Umez-Eronini
,
E.
, 1999,
System Dynamics and Control
,
PWS Publishing
,
Pacific Grove, CA
.
15.
Skogestad
,
S.
, and
Postlethwaite
,
I.
, 2005,
Multivariable Feedback Control, Analysis and Design
, 2nd ed.,
Wiley
,
New York
.
16.
Xue
,
D.
,
Chen
,
Y.
, and
Atherton
,
D.
, 2007, “
Linear Feedback Control, Analysis and Design With MATLAB
,” Advances in Design and Control SIAM.
17.
Astrom
,
K.
, and
Hagglund
,
T.
, 2006, “
Advanced PID Control
,” Department of Automatic Control, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society ISA.
18.
Cooper
,
D.
, 2009, “
Practical Process Control
,” Electronic Textbook http://www.controlguru.comhttp://www.controlguru.com, accessed on Apr. 20.
19.
Tucker
,
D.
,
Liese
,
E.
,
Smith
,
T.
, and
Haynes
,
C.
, 2006, “
Evaluation of Cathodic Airflow Transients in a Hybrid System Using Hardware Simulation
,”
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology
, Irvine, CA, Jun. 19–21, Paper No. FuelCell2006-97107.
You do not currently have access to this content.