International Journal of Aerospace Sciences
p-ISSN: 2169-8872 e-ISSN: 2169-8899
2013; 2(3): 138-147
doi:10.5923/j.aerospace.20130203.06
S. Jafari, M. Montazeri-Gh
Systems Simulation and Control Laboratory, School of Mechanical engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
Correspondence to: S. Jafari, Systems Simulation and Control Laboratory, School of Mechanical engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran.
| Email: | ![]()  | 
Copyright © 2012 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
This paper presents the application of invasive weed optimization (IWO) in Gas Turbine Engine (GTE) fuel controller design. For this purpose, the GTE controller gain tuning process is firstly formulated as an engineering optimization problem based on an industrial Min-Max fuel control strategy. This formulation is then carried out using the IWO method which is a newly developed search based stochastic optimization approach. The feasibility and efficiency of the proposed algorithm for optimization of GTE fuel controller are examined by comparison between IWO results, genetic algorithm (GA) results and the global optimal results obtained from dynamic programming (DP) method. In addition, simulation of the optimized controller confirms the effectiveness of the proposed approach and its ability to design an optimal fuel controller resulting in an improved GTE performance as well as protection against the physical limitations.
Keywords: Genetic Algorithm, Invasive Weed Optimization, Gas Turbine Engine-Fuel Controller, Gain Tuning, Dynamic Programming
Cite this paper: S. Jafari, M. Montazeri-Gh, Invasive Weed Optimization for Turbojet Engine Fuel Controller Gain Tuning, International Journal of Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 3, 2013, pp. 138-147. doi: 10.5923/j.aerospace.20130203.06.
) according to the engine operating condition. In this study, this part of the fuel flow is calculated by a scheduling controller as a function of the engine rotor speed. The steady state part of the controller satisfies the first engine control mode i.e. steady state control mode. In addition to the steady-state controller, a transient controller part is considered for the control of the engine transient performance as well as the engine limitations. Transient fuel flow is the variation of the fuel flow with respect to its steady-state value. As shown in Fig.1, the structure of the controller for calculation of the transient fuel flow consists of four control loops as follow:● Pilot lever angle (PLA) control loop; this control loop is responsible to provide the necessary transient fuel flow for satisfying the pilot demand (with gain 
). This control loop satisfies the second control mode i.e. transient control mode. The response time of the engine mainly depends on the 
 variation.![]()  | Figure 1. Schematic of a GTE and fuel controller | 
).● Maximum deceleration control loop; this control loop is designed to protect the engine against the flameout (with gain
).● Maximum acceleration control loop; this control loop takes care of the engine aerodynamic instability including surge or stall occurrence (with gain
). It should be noted that surge is a longitudinal flow oscillation over the length of the compressor and turbine and often is due to high rotor acceleration[13]. Thus, the control of rotor speed derivative (
control) provides surge control. In this study, the limiting bounds for the engine rotor acceleration and deceleration are found analytically and confirmed experimentally[14].  To satisfy all physical limitations, the turbine inlet temperature (TIT) should also be bounded. However, as the thermocouples usually need to shield and their responses are slow, the 
 ratio is widely used to control the combustion chamber output temperature as shown in Fig.1.Using this approach, Wf/P3 control provides good control of TIT and satisfies the combustion chamber overtemperature limitation.The Nmax control loop, acceleration and deceleration control loops and Wf/P3 saturation satisfy the third engine control mode i.e. physical limitation control mode.  Finally, in order to select the appropriate transient control loop at any time instance, a Min-Max logical algorithm is used as follow:![]()  | (1) | 
![]()  | (2) | 
 The PLA loop gain (
) is firstly initialized to achieve a preliminary response time. In order to improve the engine response time, 
 is then increased until the process begins to oscillate.In order to select the initial gain values for the four transient control loops, the tuning process is carried out as follows:
 In order to protect the engine against surge, 
 is changed until the maximum rotor speed derivative (
) is limited to an allowable value. In order to select the initial gain values for the four transient control loops, the tuning process is carried out as follows:
 
 is changed until the minimum rotor speed derivative (
) is limited to an allowable value. Consequently, the engine is protected against flameout.In order to select the initial gain values for the four transient control loops, the tuning process is carried out as follows:
 In order to keep the engine integrity, 
 is increased until the overspeed in every condition is vanished without overshoot. The initial values obtained by the above process for a case study in Seal Level Standard (SLS) condition is shown in Table.1.
  | 
![]()  | (3) | 
. The term 
 guarantees that the variation of cost function value remains between o-1 if 
. In the case that 
 there is no need to add 
 to the objective function. In this paper, the weight factors
, 
 are selected for the objective functions. It means that similar importance is considered for two objectives in the optimization process. In addition, 
 and 
 are the acceleration and deceleration times which the engine requires to follow the PLA command (settling times with 
 error). The Pi are penalty functions including over-speed, over-temperature and violation of 
 during simulation (these penalty functions protect the engine from overshoots in speed and temperature as well as surge and flameout). 
 are the penalty factors tuned in a trial and error manner to achieve the best results. Moreover, the design variables are the four transient control loop gains including 
, 
, 
 and 
as shown in Fig.1. Taking the nonlinear and switching nature of logical selection algorithm (1) into account, the IWO is proposed for Min-Max fuel controller gain tuning in this paper.
,
,
and 
). 2- Fitness evaluation: each individual of population is evaluated in this step using defined objective function. 3- Reproduction: In this step, each member of the colony of weeds is allowed to produce seeds depending on its own and the colony’s lowest and highest fitness. 4- Spatial dispersal: after reproduction, the generated seeds are randomly spread over the search space according to normal distribution with a mean of zero, but varying standard deviation (SD). The variation of the SD with generation is defined as follow[13]:![]()  | (4) | 
 is the maximum number of iterations and n is the nonlinear modulation index. The SD decreases from generation to generation. The decreasing rate depends on the value of the nonlinear modulation index which results in grouping fitter plants and eliminating the weaker plants[11]. Fig.2. b shows the variation of SD with generation for n=3.5- Competitive exclusion: After reaching the maximum number of plants, the competitor exclusion mechanism activates in order to eliminate the plants with poor fitness in the generation. This mechanism is formulated so that it gives a chance to plants with lower fitness to reproduce, and if their offspring has a good fitness in the colony, then, they will survive. 6- The above steps are repeated until the maximum number of iterations is reached[15].![]()  | Figure 2.a. IWO flowchart | 
![]()  | Figure 2.b. variation of SD with generation in spatial dispersal step (n=3) | 
![]()  | Figure 3. The IWO optimization process history | 
  | 
![]()  | Figure 4. Applied PLA for simulation | 
) are depicted in Fig.6. As shown in this figure, the optimized controller satisfies the engine overspeed limitation as well as the 
 bounds. In other words, the optimization method protects the engine against physical limitation resulting in safe operation of the engine as well as nearly global optimal performance of the engine in time response and fuel consumption.  Furthermore, Fig.6 shows that acceleration limiting loop at time t=7 sec is activated to protect the engine against surge. In other words, in IWO optimized controller, the PLA loop is firstly activated to achieve the best response time. The acceleration limiting loop is then activated at t=7sec when the 
 reaches to the maximum allowable value. The designed controller is optimized with a step input PLA. To show this fact that the optimized controller is improved for other inputs, the simulation is run for another PLA. For this purpose, a slope based variation of PLA is applied to the engine and controller simulation and the results are presented in Fig.7. As shown in this figure, the optimized controller tracks the input PLA in a reasonable response time without any steady state error.Finally, it is worthwhile to mention that the IWO implementation is easier as the number of parameters is less for IWO in comparison with relatively old well-established evolutionary population-based methods like GA. Although the IWO method is slower than the GA method, it has higher convergence rate than GA. Therefore, the IWO is proposed as an appropriate candidate for gain tuning of GTE Min-Max fuel controller which is a nonlinear switching control system.![]()  | Figure 5. Comparison of objective function terms in IWO and initial controller | 
![]()  | Figure 6. Physical limitation satisfaction using IWO | 
![]()  | Figure 7. Comparison of IWO optimized and initial controller for slope input PLA | 

| [1] | Kreiner. A, and Lietzau. K, “the use of onboard real-time models for jet engine control”, MTU Aero Engines, Germany. p. 27, (2002) | 
| [2] | Holland, J, “Adaptation in natural and artificial system”, ed. M.U.o.M.P. Ann Arbor, (1975). | 
| [3] | Shi. Y, Eberhart. R. C, “Empirical study of particle swarm optimization”, in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation., Washington, DC, pp. 1945–1950. July (1999). | 
| [4] | Dorigo. M, “Optimization, Learning and Natural Algorithms”, PhD thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Italie,. (1992). | 
| [5] | Zamani. M, Sadati. N, Karimi-Gh. M, “Design of an H∞ PID Controller Using Particle Swarm Optimization”. International Journal of Control, Automation, and Systems (2009). | 
| [6] | Yousefi. M.R., Emami. S. A., Eshtehardiha. S, and Bayati Poudeh. M, “Particle Swarm Optimization and Genetic Algorithm to Optimizing the Pole Placement Controller on Cuk Converter”, in 2nd IEEE International Conference on Power and Energy (PECon 08), Johor Baharu, Malaysia. December 1-3,(2008). | 
| [7] | Silva. V.V.R., Fleming. P.J., Sugimoto. J, and Yokoyama.R., “Multiobjective optimization using variable complexity modelling for control system design.” Applied Soft Computing, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 18 March (2007). | 
| [8] | Sidhartha Panda. N, Padhy. P, “Comparison of Particle Swarm Optimization and Genetic Algorithm for TCSC-based Controller Design.” International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering, (2007). | 
| [9] | Dambrosio. L, Sergio. M.M., Kamporeale. M, “performance of gas turbine power plants controlled by the multiagent scheme”. ASME, (2007). | 
| [10] | Lin, C.O.W., “Comparison between PSO and GA for Parameters Optimization of PID Controller”, in Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, Luoyang, China, June 25 - 28 (2006). | 
| [11] | Mehrabian, A.R. and Lucas. C, “A novel numerical optimization algorithm inspired from weed colonization”. Ecological Informatics, vol. 1, pp. 355–366. (2006). | 
| [12] | Mallahzadeh. A.R, Oraizi. H, and Davoodi-Rad. Z, “Application of invasive weed optimization technique for antenna configurations” Progress In Electromagnetics Research, (2008). | 
| [13] | Austin Spang. H, “Control of jet engines”. Control Engineering Practice, vol.7: p. 17. (1999) | 
| [14] | Montazeri-Gh. M, Safari. A, “Tuning of fuzzy fuel controller for aero-engine thrust regulation and safety considerations using genetic algorithm”, Aerospace Science and Technology, Published by Elsevier Masson SAS (2010) | 
| [15] | Sepehri Rad. H, and Lucos. C, “A Recommender System based on Invasive Weed Optimization Algorithm”, in 1-4244-1340-0/07-IEEE. (2007). | 
| [16] | Dasgupta, S., Papadimitriou, C.H, Vazirani, U.V.,“Algorithms”. McGraw-Hill, Higher Education, available online, (2007). | 
| [17] | Goldberg, D., “Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning”, ed. Addison-Wesley. (1989). | 
| [18] | Evans, C., “Testing and modeling aircraft gas turbines: an introduction and overview”, in UKACC International Conference on Cntrol. Conference Publication No. 455. (1998). | 
| [19] | M. Montazeri-Gh and S. Jafari,: Evolutionary Optimization for Gain Tuning of Jet Engine Min- Max Fuel Controller, JOURNAL OF PROPULSION AND POWER, Vol. 27, No. 5, September–October (2011) | 
| [20] | Kulikov, G.G. and Haydn Thompson. A, “Dynamic Modeling of Gas Turbines”. Industrial control center, Glasgow, scotland, U.K. (2003) |