Economic optimization using model predictive control with a terminal cost

In the standard model predictive control implementation, first a steady-state optimization yields the equilibrium point with minimal economic cost. Then, the deviation from the computed best steady state is chosen as the stage cost for the dynamic regulation problem. The computed best equilibrium point may not be the global minimum of the economic cost, and hence, choosing the economic cost as the stage cost for the dynamic regulation problem, rather than the deviation from the best steady state, offers potential for improving the economic performance of the system. It has been previously shown that the existing framework for MPC stability analysis, which addresses to the standard class of problems with a regulation objective, does not extend to economic MPC. Previous work on economic MPC developed new tools for stability analysis and identified sufficient conditions for asymptotic stability. These tools were developed for the terminal constraint MPC formulation, in which the system is stabilized by forcing the state to the best equilibrium point at the end of the horizon. In this work, we relax this constraint by imposing a region constraint on the terminal state instead of a point constraint, and adding a penalty on the terminal state to the regulator cost. We extend the stability analysis tools, developed for terminal constraint economic MPC, to the proposed formulation and establish that strict dissipativity is sufficient for guaranteeing asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system. We also show that the average closed-loop performance outperforms the best steady-state performance. For implementing the proposed formulation, a rigorous analysis for computing the appropriate terminal penalty and the terminal region is presented. A further extension, in which the terminal constraint is completely removed by modifying the regulator cost function, is also presented along with its stability analysis. Finally, an illustrative example is presented to demonstrate the differences between the terminal constraint and the proposed terminal penalty formulation. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.