Figure 20. Simulation results for the case where MV_1 is removed (Left: all CV at Prio 1, Right: CV Prio 1,2,3).
圖20：MV_1移除時(shí)的仿真結(jié)果（左側(cè)：所有的CV優(yōu)先級(jí)等于1滥朱，右側(cè)：CV優(yōu)先級(jí)為1,2,3）毅戈。
如下所示到腥，接下來(lái)我們探索當(dāng)MV_2處于“Local”時(shí)的仿真結(jié)果钞脂。此圖有三個(gè)重要的地方需要指出：
- 注意時(shí)間戳中當(dāng)控制器切換到控制模式（第5步）至當(dāng)干擾信號(hào)第一次從原點(diǎn)移除（第20步）。這里我們注意到在圖的左側(cè)SMOCPro不能控制CV_1和CV_2至其設(shè)定值播演。這種情況下偶翅，所有的CVs都具有相同的優(yōu)先級(jí)讶坯，鑒于SMOCPro只能通過(guò)MV_1控制2個(gè)CVs至設(shè)定值宣鄙，它不能同時(shí)滿足所有的控制目標(biāo)袍镀，因此基于CV權(quán)重其放棄了所有的CVs，這與該仿真是相同的冻晤。這導(dǎo)致CV_1和CV_2偏離設(shè)定點(diǎn)的差值相同∥郏現(xiàn)在將你的注意力轉(zhuǎn)移到圖右側(cè)的相同時(shí)間戳處。這里我們已經(jīng)分別指定CV優(yōu)先級(jí)為1,2,3鼻弧。 SMOCPro使用此信息來(lái)計(jì)算MV_1的動(dòng)作計(jì)劃以控制更高優(yōu)先級(jí)的CV设江，在本例中是CV_1,并且放棄CV_2。第3個(gè)CV是由MV_3控制的温数，绣硝，因此在這里不受影響蜻势。
2.接下來(lái)我們來(lái)關(guān)注從干擾進(jìn)入系統(tǒng)時(shí)（第20步）到MV_2重新置回控制問(wèn)題時(shí)（第400步）的時(shí)間戳撑刺。在此期間我們可以看到圖左側(cè)都有類似的缺陷，因?yàn)樗械腃Vs都具有相同的優(yōu)先級(jí)握玛， SMOCpro不知道區(qū)分CV的優(yōu)先順序够傍，因此只能以同時(shí)放棄CV_1和CV_2并將CV_3保持在設(shè)定點(diǎn)而結(jié)束甫菠。圖的右側(cè)顯示了當(dāng)斜坡CV優(yōu)先級(jí)已經(jīng)錯(cuò)開(kāi)時(shí)的控制器行為。注意SMOCPro如何控制CV_1和CV_3到設(shè)定點(diǎn)冕屯，并且放棄CV_2寂诱。
3.最后，在400步后SMOCPro能夠重新操作MV_2安聘，因此使用所有這3個(gè)手段把所有CV帶回設(shè)定值痰洒，而不用顧忌CV優(yōu)先級(jí)。
Figure 21. Simulation results for the case where MV_2 is removed (Left: all CVs Prio 1, Right: CV Prio 1,2,3).
圖21：MV_2被移走時(shí)的仿真結(jié)果（左：所有CV的優(yōu)先級(jí)都為1浴韭，右：CV優(yōu)先級(jí)分別為1,2,3）
如下所示丘喻，接下來(lái)我們觀察最后一種情況的仿真結(jié)果。該方案研究當(dāng)MV_3處于“Local”狀態(tài)時(shí)的控制行為念颈。然后如前面的情況一樣泉粉，讓我們來(lái)分析相同的三個(gè)時(shí)間戳：
原文：
Next we explore the simulation results for the case when MV_2 is on “Local,” shown below. There are three important items to point out in this figure:
- Focus on the timeframe from when the controller is switched to control (step 5) to when the disturbance signal first moves away from its origin (step 20). Here we notice that on the figure on the left SMOCPro has not been able to control CV_1 and CV_2 to their setpoints. In this case all CVs are at the same priority and since SMOCPro only has MV_1 available to control 2 CVs to setpoint it cannot meet both control objectives and gives up on both CVs based on the CV weights, which for this simulation are the same. This results in the deviation from setpoint being equal for both CV_1 and CV_2. Now shift your attention to the same timeframe on the right side of the figure. Here we have specified the CV priorities to be 1,2,3 respectively. SMOCPro uses this information to plan moves for MV_1 to control the higher priority CV, in this case CV_1 and give up on CV_2. The third CV is controlled with MV_3 and as such is not affected here.
- Next, focus on the timeframe from when the disturbance enters the system (step 20) to when MV_2 is brought back into the control problem (step 400). In this period on the left side we see a similar deficiency in that because all the CVs are at the same priority SMOCPro does not know which CV to prioritize and ends up giving up on both CV_1 and CV_2 while maintaining CV_3 at setpoint. The right side of the figure shows the controller behavior when the ramp CV priorities have been staggered. Notice how SMOCPro controls CV_1 and CV_3 to setpoint and only gives up on CV_2.
- Lastly, after step 400 SMOCPro is able to manipulate MV_2 again and uses all three handles to bring all CVs to their setpoints, regardless of the choice of CV priorities.
Next we look at the simulation results for the last case which are shown below. This scenario considers the control behavior for the case when MV_3 is on “Local.” Again, let us analyze the same three timeframes as in the previous case:
2016.5.28
