Model-based automatic tuning of a filtration control system for submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactors (AnMBR)

This paper describes a model-based method to optimise filtration in submerged AnMBRs. The method is applied to an advanced knowledge-based control system and considers three statistical methods: (1) sensitivity analysis (Morris screening method) to identify an input subset for the advanced controlle...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Authors: Robles Martínez, Ángel, Ruano García, María Victoria, Ribes Bertomeu, Jose, Seco Torrecillas, Aurora, FERRER, J.
Format: article
Publication Date:2014
Country:España
Institution:Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV)
Repository:RiuNet. Repositorio Institucional de la Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia
Language:English
OAI Identifier:oai:riunet.upv.es:10251/52668
Online Access:https://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/52668
Access Level:Open access
Keyword:Model filtration
Model-based automatic tuning
Control system
Submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactors
INGENIERIA HIDRAULICA
TECNOLOGIA DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE
Description
Summary:This paper describes a model-based method to optimise filtration in submerged AnMBRs. The method is applied to an advanced knowledge-based control system and considers three statistical methods: (1) sensitivity analysis (Morris screening method) to identify an input subset for the advanced controller; (2) Monte Carlo method (trajectory-based random sampling) to find suitable initial values for the control inputs; and (3) optimisation algorithm (performing as a supervisory controller) to re-calibrate these control inputs in order to minimise plant operating costs. The model-based supervisory controller proposed allowed filtration to be optimised with low computational demands (about 5min). Energy savings of up to 25% were achieved when using gas sparging to scour membranes. Downtime for physical cleaning was about 2.4% of operating time. The operating cost of the AnMBR system after implementing the proposed supervisory controller was about 0.045/m3, 53.3% of which were energy costs.