4.6 Article

Multiblock dynamic enhanced canonical correlation analysis for industrial MSW combustion state monitoring

期刊

CONTROL ENGINEERING PRACTICE
卷 138, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2023.105612

关键词

Fault detection; Municipal solid waste incineration; Combustion monitoring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Combustion state monitoring in industrial MSWI power generation process is challenging due to the time lag between the combustion chamber and steam generation stage, as well as the continuous addition of raw waste. To overcome these difficulties, a MBDCCA method is proposed, which extends CCA and incorporates dynamic enhancement. An online monitoring approach based on MBDCCA algorithm is designed and applied in an industrial MSWI plant to demonstrate its effectiveness.
Combustion state monitoring in industrial municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI) power generation process is very difficult. There are two main reasons for this dilemma: (1) there is a large time lag between the combustion chamber and the steam generation stage; (2) reactions continue to occur and raw waste is fed into the incinerator continuously, so there are strong correlations and remarkable dynamic characteristics among process variables. The complex correlations in time and in space cause difficulties in combustion state monitoring for incinerators. Those correlations are common in industrial processes because the large scale equipment is usually needed and a whole process is realized by equipment in sequence. To overcome those difficulties, a multi-block dynamic enhanced canonical correlation analysis (MBDCCA) method is proposed to help monitor the MSWI process. Firstly, canonical correlation analysis (CCA) is extended to MBDCCA to model the MSWI process. Secondly, a combustion state online monitoring approach is designed based on the proposed MBDCCA algorithm. Finally, the proposed method is applied in an industrial MSWI plant to demonstrate the effectiveness.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据