DocumentCode
2537091
Title
Active set vs. interior point strategies for model predictive control
Author
Bartlett, R.A. ; Wächter, A. ; Biegler, L.T.
Author_Institution
Dept. of Chem. Eng., Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Volume
6
fYear
2000
fDate
2000
Firstpage
4229
Abstract
We consider a comparison of active set vs. interior point strategies for the solution of receding time horizon problems in nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC). For this study we consider a control algorithm where we form quadratic programs (QPs) in each time horizon by linearizing the model. We also ignore second order information on the model and constraints. This approach can be viewed as a direct nonlinear extension of MPC with linear models and is easily tailored to include stabilizing constraints. Using this framework we consider the application of three active set strategies as well as interior point methods applied to both the NMPC and the QP subproblem. The first two active set methods (QPOPT and and QKWIK) are general purpose solvers that have been incorporated into SQP algorithms previously, while the third is a Schur complement approach that can easily exploit the sparse structure of the KKT matrix in MPC
Keywords
approximation theory; linearisation techniques; matrix algebra; nonlinear control systems; predictive control; quadratic programming; active set method; interior point method; linearization; model predictive control; nonlinear control systems; quadratic programming; receding time horizon; Chemical engineering; Constraint optimization; Ear; Gaussian processes; Large-scale systems; Predictive control; Predictive models; Process control; Quadratic programming; Sparse matrices;
fLanguage
English
Publisher
ieee
Conference_Titel
American Control Conference, 2000. Proceedings of the 2000
Conference_Location
Chicago, IL
ISSN
0743-1619
Print_ISBN
0-7803-5519-9
Type
conf
DOI
10.1109/ACC.2000.877018
Filename
877018
Link To Document