International Journal of Control Science and Engineering
p-ISSN: 2168-4952 e-ISSN: 2168-4960
2020; 10(1): 1-10
doi:10.5923/j.control.20201001.01

Rashid M. Ansari1, Hasan Imran2, Ali S. Hunaidy3
1Engineering Specialist, Refining Development, Oil Upgrading R&D Division, Research & Development Center, Saudi Aramco
2Senior Scientist, Research & Development Center, Saudi Aramco
3Research Engineer, Research & Development Center, Saudi Aramco
Correspondence to: Rashid M. Ansari, Engineering Specialist, Refining Development, Oil Upgrading R&D Division, Research & Development Center, Saudi Aramco.
| Email: | ![]() |
Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Scientific & Academic Publishing.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This article presents the application of integrating real-time optimization with model-predictive control on a hydrocracking unit on a model case refinery in the Middle East. Real-time optimization (RTO) provides technological excellence that helps to maximize the contribution of the plant to the business profit, provides best-in-class performance, optimizing the plant operation, enhancing safety and reliability. The main objective of RTO implementation on refinery processes was to optimize the operation by applying online rigorous nonlinear closed-loop optimization technology. RTO contributed to optimize key process operating variables by shifting the unit margin toward the optimum, and operation was better placed to challenge targets and operating conditions, driving the plant toward a more profitable operating regime and bringing the higher benefits. The steady-state and kinetic models were developed and used by RTO to improve the yield of high value products by maximizing the economic objective function to enhance the yields of diesel and gasoline. Increasing the feed rate subject to unit constraints and catalyst run length was another objective of RTO implementation. In addition, potential RTO applications have been highlighted in this article for achieving CO2 emission reduction using two different approaches: improvement of energy efficiency and application of CO2 capture and conversion technologies. This application will integrate model predictive control (MPC) with RTO with an ultimate aim to maximize an economic objective function to reduce CO2 emission.
Keywords: Real-time optimization, Model-predictive control, Hydrocracker, Refinery processes, Inferential model, Economic objective function, CO2 emissions
Cite this paper: Rashid M. Ansari, Hasan Imran, Ali S. Hunaidy, Integration of Real-Time Optimization and Model-Predictive Control: Application to Refinery Processes, International Journal of Control Science and Engineering, Vol. 10 No. 1, 2020, pp. 1-10. doi: 10.5923/j.control.20201001.01.
![]() | Figure 1. Real-time optimization integrating with the system of automation |
Where,QE is the estimate of the process variableCi, j, k are trend coefficientsMi, j, k are measured or calculated process variablesXk are exponentiation coefficientsBias is a calibration constantThe different terms of the above equation represent a combination (linear with respect to the parameters) of process measurements such as pressure compensated temperature, feed flow, rundown rates, separation index terms (such as reflux, reboil or stripping steam ratios), and absolute pressure. For the flow data, the logarithmic value is often applied whereas for temperatures sometimes an exponential term is used for “contaminant” qualities such as ASTM color. In many applications the only measurements used are pressure corrected column tray or overhead temperatures.The inferential models are regularly updated based on laboratory measurements or online analyzer. Currently, the most common approach is to correct the calibration factor bias. The RQE provides a second updating mechanism based on the Kalman filter. It will correct all the coefficients and the bias term of the regression. This makes RQE an adaptive estimator. Figure 2 gives a simplified example of the systematic approach to construct the naphtha FBP inferential model with process variables such as pressure-compensated temperature, pressure of the column and reflux ratios. ![]() | Figure 2. System of inferential model and its development procedure |
|
|
|
![]() | Figure 3. Steps of online closed loop optimization |
Where X is the sample mean, while the variance of the difference between two successive points is expressed by:
These two variances give rise to the statistic R, which is eventually expressed as C, defined as:
There is an extra option, where the user may define a tuning parameter, TSM, which changes the definition of R in the following way:
Then, the signal is static if R is greater than a critical value Rc (or if C is lower than a critical value Cc).![]() | Figure 4. A block diagram representing the RTO and regulatory feedback system |
![]() | Figure 5. Inferential model for gasoline (HN 95% - hydrocracking) |
![]() | Figure 6. Maximization of gasoline production with RTO application |
![]() | Figure 7. Diesel (HDO 90%) specification control between the limits (350-352C) |