Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.29, No.9, 1135-1143, 2012
Development of a novel self-validating soft sensor
A self-validating soft sensor is proposed that not only can perform self-diagnostics and self-reconstruction, but also generate a variety of output data types, including the prediction values, input sensors status of soft sensor and the uncertainty values which represent the credibility of soft sensor’s output. The input sensors are validated before performing a prediction by principal components analysis (PCA) model. These validated data are then employed for subsequent recursive partial least square (RPLS) prediction. Other than input sensor validation and modeling for prediction, a t-statistic confidence interval is created and the status of input sensors is offered. By using this self-validating soft sensor, we can determine the work condition of the soft sensor and take proper actions in real time. The usefulness of the proposed method is demonstrated through a case study of a wastewater treatment process.
[References]
  1. Facco P, Doplicher F, Bezzo F, Barolo M, J. Process Control, 19(3), 520, 2009
  2. Martens H, Hoy M, Westad F, Folkenberg D, Martens M, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems., 58, 151, 2001
  3. Aguado D, Montoya T, Borras L, Seco A, Ferrer J, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence., 21, 919, 2008
  4. Khayamian T, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems., 88, 35, 2007
  5. Fortuna L, Graziani S, Xibilia MG, Control Engineering Practice., 13, 499, 2004
  6. Alhoniemi E, Integrated Computer Aided Engineering., 6, 3, 1999
  7. Yan WW, Shao HH, Wang XF, Comput. Chem. Eng., 28(8), 1489, 2004
  8. Li WH, Yue HH, Valle-Cervantes S, Qin SJ, J. Process Control, 10(5), 471, 2000
  9. Pessel N, Balmat JF, Latont F, Bonnal J, 9th WSEAS International Conference on Automatic Control, Modeling and Simulation, Istanbul, Turkish, 2007
  10. Doan DX, Tien X, Lim KW, Jun L, The 30th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, Busan, South Korea, 2004
  11. Zhang F, Proceedings of the 2004 American Control Conference, Boston, U.S.A., 2004
  12. Martin G, Chem. Eng. Prog., 93(7), 66, 1997
  13. Qin SJ, Yue HY, Dunia R, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 36(5), 1675, 1997
  14. Yue HH, Qin SJ, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 40(20), 4403, 2001
  15. Ahmed F, Nazir S, Yeo YK, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 26(1), 14, 2009
  16. Ciba J, Dydo P, Tags KJ, Chemosphere., 76, 565, 2009
  17. Facco P, Doplicher F, Bezzo F, Barolo M, J. Process Control, 19(3), 520, 2009
  18. Mu SJ, Zeng YZ, Liu RL, Wu P, Su HY, Chu J, J. Process Control, 16(6), 557, 2006
  19. Jackson JE, Mudholkar G, Technometrics., 21, 341, 1979
  20. Qin SJ, Comput. Chem. Eng., 22(4-5), 503, 1998
  21. Dunia R, Qin SJ, Edgar TF, Mcavoy TJ, AIChE J., 42(10), 2797, 1996
  22. Kline S, McClintock F, Mech. Eng., 3, 8, 1853
  23. Management TQ, Committee SSP, British Standards Institution, London, 3, 1995
  24. Liu JL, Chen DS, Shen JF, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 49(22), 11530, 2010
  25. Blake CL, Merz CJ, UCI Repository of Machine Learning Databases, 1998
  26. Rallo R, Ferre-Gine J, Giralt F, Report, Spain, 1998