&VSPQFBO
$POUSPM
$POGFSFODF

&$$



"VHVTU
o

4FQUFNCFS


,BSMTSVIF

(FSNBOZ

DIRECTSUPERVISORYADAPTIVEFUZZYCONTROLLER
APPLIEDTOpHCONTROL
YulY.Nazaruddin,P.Astrid,Y.Samyudia
Department of Engineering Physics, Institut Teknologi Bandung
Jl. Ganesha no. 10, Bandung 40132, INDONESIA
Phone/fax. : +(62) (22) 2504424 ; e-mail : yul@tf.itb.ac.id
Keywords : Fuzzy logic controller, nonlinear control,
supervisory control, pH control, neutralization process
Abstract
A design approach of a direct supervisory adaptive fuzzy
controller applied to pH control of a neutralization process
is presented in this paper. Structure and designs of the
controller using this approach will be briefly discussed,
which includes fuzzy controller comprising a number of fuzzy
systems constructed from the control knowledge as well as a
supervisory scheme which will monitor the systems
performance during the operation. To improve the
performance, two level quantization mechanism and an
indication function were added in the controller design.
Results of simulation studies show how the designed
supervisory adaptive fuzzy controller achieved the desired
performance. Observations were also made by comparing
the solution with nonsupervisory scheme and non-adaptive
fuzzy controller which uses pre-defined linguistic rules.
1Introduction
Due to its severe nonlinear characteristics, the control of
a neutralization process is among the most difficult ones
[shin1],[klat2]. The use linear controller is effective only
within a certain linear operating range. Unfortunately, the
precense of disturbance and time-variant properties of the
chemical component have made this chemical processes very
unlikely to be linear ones. To accomodate the time-variant
characteristics, the use of adaptive controller which has the
ability to adjust its parameters during operation, seems to be
a solution. Extensive efforts have been made, in the past few
years, to apply adaptive approaches in the field of chemical
processes (see. e.g. [step3]).
The neutralization process which was subject of this
investigation belongs to the waste water process in the industry.
The primary concerns of controlling the process, which can be
considered as highly nonlinear [klat2], is to keep the pH value
within the desired specified range which can be considered
as neutral and which is very difficult to control due to the
disturbances, especially using linear control. The increasing
*4#/


popularity of fuzzy controller to handle difficult processes having
nonlinear characteristics and its ability to acommodate the
human knowledge into control rules [jang4],[jams5], has been
thought as an alternative to control this kind of process. The
fuzzy controller is also equipped with a supervisory scheme
[wang6] to stabilize the system within a bounded region.
Further, on applying this control strategy for the
neutralization pocess, the fluctuating control signal should be
taken into consideration since the capability of the peristaltic
pump used is limited. To improve the performance of the
design, two level quantization mechanism and an indication
function were added in the controller design. Simulation
studies have been conducted to observe how the designed
supervisory adaptive fuzzy controller achieved the desired
performance. Observations were also made by comparing the
solution with the nonsupervisory scheme and non-adaptive
fuzzy controller which uses pre-defined linguistic rules.
2NeutralizationProcessDynamics
Many chemical processes can be used to treat waste water.
For waste having an unappropriate pH, neutralization process is
required prior to subsequent treatment. Neutralization process of
acetic acid using sodium hydroxide taking place in a CSTR
(Continuous Stirred Tank Reactor) was considered, with the
following defined parameters :
Volume (VR) : 5.51 litre
Base concentration (cBo) : 0.01 M
Acetic acid concentration (cAo) : 0.007 M
Process flow : 20 litre/hour
The process dynamics model derived in [klat2] will be
applied, which is given in the following form
( 1 + I T ( x1 )( u − I T ( x1 )F ) 1
x&1 = ; x&2 = ( x1 − x2 )
VR ( ∂I T ( x1 ) / ∂x1 ) τ (1)
y = x2 = pH
in which IT(pH) is the inverse function of the standard titration
curve defined as
IT ( pH) = −
[ (
10− pH − 10pH Kw − c Ao / 1 + 10( pKs− pH ) )] (2)
cBo + 10− pH − 10pH Kw

which shows a highly nonlinear function. At room temperatur
(25°C), pKs = 4.75 and Kw = 10-14 mol2/L2.
The control action is given by the base flow, u, and titrant
flow is limited in the range 0 ≤ u ≤ 45 litre/h. The time constant ym
τ caused by the measuring apparatus dynamics and non-ideal y +
mixing characteristics is 10 s. PLANT
x( n ) = f ( x ) + bu , y = x -
3FormulationofDirectAdaptiveFuzzy FUZZYCONTROLLER e
Controller T
uD = θ ξ ( x )
Adaptive fuzzy controller, as differ from the conventional
θ
adaptive controller, has the ability to construct the control action
based on human knowledge (formulated as fuzzy rules) and has ADAPTATIONLAW
a special nonlinear structure which is universal for different
θ& = −γ eT pn ξ ( x )
plants. Non-adaptive fuzzy controller has fixed fuzzy control
rules (static fuzzy knowledge base) whereas the adaptive one has
θ( 0 ) from control
the learning capability through the modification of its knowledge
knowledge
base. In general, the non-adaptive fuzzy controller is simple, but
it needs a good knowledge about the controlled process. On the
Fig.1.Basic configuration of direct adaptive fuzzy controller
other hand, the adaptive fuzzy controller has the ability to
continously adapt itself without sufficient information of the
The design steps for direct adaptive fuzzy controller are as
controlled process. Adaptive fuzzy controllers are divided into
follows :
two types :
1. Construct the fuzzy rules based on the control knowledge that
1. Indirect : the fuzzy controller comprises a number of fuzzy
describes human control actions. The fuzzy rules obtained are
system constructed from the plant knowledge
in the form
2. Direct : the fuzzy controller is a single fuzzy system
constructed from the control knowledge, i.e. the knowledge IF x1 is P1r and . . . and xn is Pnr , THEN u is Qr (4)
gained after observing the result of implementing specified where P1r r
and Q are fuzzy sets in R with r = 1,2,..., Lu.
control actions on the systems.
2.For variables xi (i =1,2,...,n) define mi fuzzy sets
l
In this investigation, the second type of adaptive fuzzy Ai i ( li = 1,2 ,...,mi ) which includes Pir ( r = 1,2 ,..., Lu ) in
controller, as derived in [wang6], will be taken into (4) as special cases.
consideration. Consider a single-input-single-output nth-order 3.Design fuzzy systems uD ( x θ ) from the rules ∏in=1 mi .
nonlinear system represented in the form
Using product inference engine, singleton fuzzifier and
( )
x( n ) = f x , x&,.........., x ( n −1 ) + bu ; y=x (3) center average defuzzifier, the following fuzzy system is
obtained
where f is unknown continuous nonlinear functions, b is a
positive unknown constant functions, y is the output of the uD ( x θ ) =
∑ml =1L∑ml =1 yul ......l ∏in=1 μ A ( xi )
1
1

n
n 1 n
( li
i
) (5)
(
system, x = x , x& ,.........., x( n −1 ) )
T
= ( x1 , x2 ,.........., xn )
T
are ∑ml1 =1 1L∑mln n=1 ( l
∏in=1 μ Ai i ( xi )
)
l ......ln
the states of the system that are available for measurement,  If yu1 are free parameters collected in
and u is the control function. Given bounded reference signal n
θ ∈ R ∏i =1 mi , the fuzzy controller becomes
y m which is continuous and differentiable, the objective of
control is to design a feedback controller u = u( x θ ) based uD ( x θ ) = θ T ξ ( x ) . As the adaptation parameters θ

on fuzzy system and an adaptive control law which adjusts
the parameter θ , to force the output to track the reference
signal with constraint that all signals involved must be
bounded. The block diagram of this type of controller can be
seen in Fig. 1, where ym is the desired output of the plant. The
plant itself has a nonlinear structure with respect to the state and
the control function is constructed directly using the fuzzy
system ξ( x ) . To have plant output follow the desired ym
changes during operation, it is necessary to give the initial
values. These values may be chosen based on the
observation or randomly.
4.Define k = [ kn kn −1 L k2 k1 ] T ∈ R n as an appropriately
chosen coefficient vector to obtain stable closed-loop error
equation e( n ) + k1e( n −1 ) +K+ k n e = 0 so that the roots of
the polynomial equation sn + k1sn −1 +K+ kn −1s + k n is

adjustment mechanism is needed for θ so the designed fuzzy Hurwitz, and e = [ e e& L e( n − 2 ) e( n −1 ) ] T is an error
systems may approximate the desired functions. vector


5.Define γ and the matrix P as positive definite matrix For the non-adaptive fuzzy controller, where the control
which satifies the Lyapunov equation ΛT P + PΛ = −Q action is constructed based in the pre-defined linguistic rules,
1
where the reference potential is defined as V = x T Px , with P is
2
⎡ 0 1 0 L 0 ⎤
⎢ 0 a symmetric positive definite matrix satisfying the Lyapunov
⎢ 0 1 L 0 ⎥⎥ equation as in the case of direct adaptive fuzzy controller. In
Λ=⎢ M M M M M ⎥ non-adaptive case, reference potential is state-based, not
⎢ ⎥ error-based. To have the derivative of reference potential
⎢ 0 0 0 L 1 ⎥
⎢⎣ − k n − k n −1 − k n − 2 L − k1 ⎥⎦ smaller than zero, supervisory control action usis defined as
⎡ 1 ⎤

and Q is a positive semi - definite matrix.
us ( x ) = − sgn( x T Pb )⎢
g
⎣ L
(
f U + k T e + u fuzz ⎥
⎦
)
(8)

Refer to Fig. 1, θ& = −γ eT pn ξ ( x ) is the adaptation law where gL is the lower estimate constant of g(x) which is
greater than zero, fU is the upper estimate constant of f(x)
with pn is the last column of matrix P. and bfuzz is the control action resulting from fuzzy inference
rules.
SupervisoryControl From the formulation of supervisory control action for both
adaptive and non-adaptive type, it can be seen that this
Many controllers are failed to maintain the plant output additional control signal is meant to be large as the estimate
within the desired range due to their limited operating range constants are within loose bounds. This is dedicated to
and characteristics. Supervisory control is a scheme added to immediate response, so if the system tends to get away from
the main controller which acts as a supervisor monitoring its its desired states, it may get back at once to the desired
performance during operation. As the control system tends to states.
get away from the desired output range, the supervisory
scheme will correct the given output signal, either by
addition or substraction. As soon as the system returns to its
desired range, the scheme becomes idle. The control signal u
4SimulationResults
with its supervisory control scheme can be written as
To demonstrate the performance of the indirect adaptive
u = umain controller + usupervisory control fuzzy controller using supervisory scheme applied to the
(6) neutralization process model (1), simulation studies were
conducted. Using the Gaussian type membership function,
The supervisory control works based on the system the following five membership functions were used for the
1 controller :
potential Ve which can be formulated as Ve = e T Pe , with P 2 2
2 ⎛ x − 6⎞ ⎛ x − 6.5⎞
is the solution of the Lyapunov equation and μ 1( x ) = exp⎜ ⎟ ; μ 2 ( x ) = exp⎜ ⎟ ; μ3( x ) =
⎝ 0.75 ⎠ ⎝ 0.75 ⎠
( n −1 )
e = ( ym − x1 , y&m − x2 , L, ym − xn )T . If this potential 2 2
⎛ x − 7⎞ ⎛ x − 7.5⎞
exceeds the reference or barrier potential V , the supervisory exp⎜ ⎟ ; μ 4 ( x ) = exp⎜ ⎟ ; and μ 5 ( x ) =
⎝ 0.75 ⎠ ⎝ 0.75 ⎠
control will in operation. Define the reference potential V 2
λP sup
2 ⎛ x − 8⎞
[wang6] as V = min ⎜⎛⎝ M x − t ≥ 0 ym ⎟⎞⎠ , where λ Pmin is the = exp⎜ ⎟ . In this case, the resulting fuzzy systems
2 ⎝ 0.75 ⎠
minimum eigenvalue of the matrix P and Mx is the desired 2 li
∏i =1 μ A ( xi )
lower or upper bound of tolerance which must not be were given as ξ( x ) = 25
i
. Initial adaptation
exceeded. For direct adaptive fuzzy controller, the
supervisory control, us, can be formulated as follows :
∑
1
( l
∏i2=1 μ Ai i ( x1 ) )
parameters θ( 0 ) were equals to zero. k was chosen to be
⎡ 1 U ⎤
us ( x ) = I * sgn( e T Pb )⎢ uD +
⎣ b L
( (n)
f + ym + kT e ⎥
⎦
) (7)
[1 2]T ,
⎡37.5 12.5⎤
P = 10−7 ⎢ ⎥ , γ was chosen to be 8000. For
⎣12.5 12.5⎦
where the indicator function I* = 1 if Ve ≥ V and the supervisory controller, bL(x) was set to 1,
I* = 0 if Ve < V ; sgn(y) = 1 if y > 0 and sgn(y) = -1 if y < f U = 16 and b = 4000 . The estimated constants were
0. The constant bL must lie within the range 0<bL<b and determined from the steady state value, that was by equating the
dynamics equation of the process to zero. The control objective is
f (x) ≤ f U(x).
to have the pH output value at 7, the neutral value. Regardless of
any condition that might occur, the control system was expected
to maintain the pH value within the range of 6<pH<8.



For the non-adaptive fuzzy controller, control action is fired
from the defined linguistic rules as follows
1. IF pH_value small THEN base_flow big
2. IF pH_value medium THEN base_flow medium
3. IF pH_value operation THEN base_flow operation
4. IF pH_value big THEN base_flow small
The membership function for each type of fuzzy variables
pH_value (representing x2) and base_flow (representing u) are
shown in Fig. 2. Universe of discourse for operation value was
chosen based on the steady-state value of base_flow if x equals 7
and the others were chosen by trial and error procedure.
The insignificance of system response if the supervisory
scheme was applied did not occur in the non-adaptive case. As
the non-adaptive controller has already set up defined control
action for certain range of pH, there will be no any adjustment
needed and the maximum value of base flow will never be
reached unless pH value goes beyond the limit (see Fig. 4).
Without the supervisory controller, the response can not be kept
within the desired range 6<pH<8. The pH value decreased only
to about 6.3. However, as adding the supervisory control means
adding the base flow if there is untolerable acid amount in the
substance and this results in higher overshoot of the response.

(a)

(a)

(b)
(b) Fig.3. Response due to disturbance (a) open loop case, (b)
Fig.2. Membership function for (a) pH_value (b) base_flow using direct adaptive fuzzy controller

In the first simulation, the process was subjected to a

disturbance in the form of an increase of acid concentration as
high as 200% and the acid flow as much as 50%. The duration
of disturbance was 5 s. Fig. 3.a shows the open loop response of
the system where the base flow was kept on the steady state value
13.92 litre/hour. It can be seen that the system can not keep its
operation within the desired range 6<pH<8. Due to the
disturbance, pH decreases to less than 5.4. Using the designed
direct adaptive fuzzy controller with and without supervisory
scheme, the system response is shown in Fig. 3.b. Due to the
disturbance, the pH value was decreased to almost 6.3. It can Fig.4. Response using non-adaptive fuzzy controller
also be seen that no significant improvement is achieved by
using the supervisory control. It was observed that in the present
of disturbance, the main controller itself produced a control
signal which was more than the maximum value. Therefore any
additional control signal given by the supervisory control did not
bring any significant effects to the control system.


 signal from the fuzzy system, I ( e( t ) = 1 if e(t) > φ and
I ( e( t ) = β / φ if e(t) < φ .

The responses of the system using indicator function are

shown in Fig. 6. As φ is made larger, the steady state error is
getting larger. As observed from the resulting control signals, it
indicated the importance of selecting the value of φ since larger φ
may cause the control system not function optimally (φ = 1
results in maximum control signal less then 25 l/h) and small φ
causes high frequency oscillation signal.
Fig.5. Response using two level of quantization

The control signal from the non-adaptive case itself, as 5Conclusions

differs from the adaptive fuzzy controller, will never exceed the
pre-defined control action. Therefore, the use of supervisory An alternative strategy for pH control of a neutralization
controller will significantly affect the system response. process using direct adaptive fuzzy controller with a supervisory
scheme has been presented. The simulation results show that by
To use the supervisory scheme in the adaptive scheme more restricting the control signal and by using one level of
properly, two level of quantization was proposed. This means, quantization, no significant improvement was obtained using the
that the control signal for the main controller and the supervisory supervisory scheme, because the main controller itself has
control was separated. First, the base flow from the main produced the maximum control signal. On the other hand,
controller was restricted to 20 l/h. Then, the base flow from the significant improvement was shown if two level of quantization
supervisory controller was also restricted to 5 l/h. By doing so, in was applied. It was also shown that the chattering problem could
the presence of disturbance, the main controller would obtain be overcome by introducing an indicator function which will
maximum additional 5 l/h from the supervisory scheme. Fig. 5 smooth out the control signal but cause steady state error.
shows the result of the second simulation where the base
concentration was increased to 250% so the new restriction of
maximum base flow of 25 l/h might be appropriate. The result
shows also that using peristaltic pump with the capacity of 25 l/h
was already adequate for the process. As can be seen from the
figure, the use of supervisory controller brings significant
improvement to the response. Using supervisory control, the pH
value was decreased to only 6.8 as compared to 6.35 without
supervisory control.

Unfortunately, it was observed that the control signal

obtained fluctuated heavily and made it difficult to be realized.
(a)
This problem is known as chattering and caused by the operation
of the controller. To have the system returns to its desired
operating condition, the controller produces the maximum
control signal and then suddenly gives no signal at all. This may
cause high frequency oscillation because of the drastic change of
the control signal. To overcome the problem, an indicator
function which has been succesfully applied in the case of non-
adaptive controller [wang6], was used for this investigation. As
the system has already been in the error-tolerance range, the
control signal given was gradually decreased. The steps in
implementing the indicator function are as follows :
1. determine the absolute error φ which can be tolerated (b)
2. if the system has already reached φ , the control signal will be
gradually decreased based on the ratio of β/φ , where β is the
error of the system.
The given control signal can thus be formulated as
u = I ( e( t )u fuzz , where e(t) is error at t, ufuzz is the control


 (c)
Fig.6. Response of the neutralization process using indicator
function (a) φ = 0.005, (b) φ = 0.3, (c) φ = 1

6Acknowledgement

The first author would like to thank the Hitachi Scholarship

Foundation, Japan, for the financial support given for this
research study.

7Reference

[shin1] Shinskey, F.G., “Process Control System”, McGraw-

Hill Book Co., (1988)
[klat2] Klatt, K.U., Engell, S., “Nonlinear Control of
Neutralization Process by Gain-Scheduling
Trajectory Control”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 35,
no. 10, pp. 3511-3518, (1996)
[step3] Stephanopoulos, G., “Chemical Process Control”,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., (1984)
[jang4] Jang, J.S.R., Sun, C.T., Mizutani, E., “Neuro-Fuzzy
and Soft Computing”, Prentice Hall, N.J., (1997)
[jams5] Jamshidi, M., Nader, V., Timothy, R., “Fuzzy Logic
and Control, Software and Hardware Application”.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., (1993)
[wang6] Wang, L.X., “A Course in Fuzzy Systems and
Control”, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,
(1997)