Distributed Model Predictive Control Made Easy pp 437-450 | Cite as

# Decompositions of Augmented Lagrange Formulations for Serial and Parallel Distributed MPC

## Abstract

In this chapter we described two distributed MPC schemes for control of interconnected time-invariant discrete-time linear systems: a scheme with serial iterations, and a scheme with parallel iterations. Under the given assumptions, the schemes converge to a solution that a centralized controller would obtain. The schemes have originally been derived from an overall augmented Lagrange formulation in combination with either a block coordinate descent or the auxiliary problem principle. The chapter describes the characteristics of the type of system and control architecture for which the distributed MPC schemes can be used, as well as the actual steps of the schemes, availability of more theoretically oriented extensions, application oriented results, and emerging potential new applications.

## Keywords

Control Problem Container Terminal Prediction Horizon High Voltage Direct Current Serial Implementation## Notes

### Acknowledgments

This research is supported by the VENI project “Intelligent multi-agent control for flexible coordination of transport hubs” (project 11210) of the Dutch Technology Foundation STW, a subdivision of The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

## References

- 1.I. Alvarado, D. Limon, D. Munoz de la Pena, J.M. Maestre, H. Scheu, M.A. Ridao, W. Marquardt, R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, F. Valenciaand, J. Espinosa, A comparative analysis of distributed MPC techniques applied to the HD-MPC four-tank benchmark. J. Process Control
**21**(5), 800–815 (2011)Google Scholar - 2.J. Batut, A. Renaud, Daily generation scheduling optimization with transmission constraints: a new class of algorithms. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
**7**(3), 982–989 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 3.D.P. Bertsekas, J.N. Tsitsiklis,
*Parallel and Distributed Computation: Numerical Methods*(Athena Scientific, New Hampshire, 1997)Google Scholar - 4.B.H. Kim, R. Baldick, Coarse-grained distributed optimal power flow. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
**12**(2), 932–939 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 5.S. Leirens, C. Zamora, R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, Coordination in urban water supply networks using distributed model predictive control, in
*Proceedings of the American Control Conference 2010*, Baltimore, Maryland, June 2010, pp. 3957–3962Google Scholar - 6.J. Lemos Nabais, R.R. Negenborn, M. Ayala Botto, A novel predictive control based framework for optimizing intermodal container terminal operations, in
*Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Logistics*, Shanghai, China, September 2012, pp. 53–71Google Scholar - 7.J. Lemos Nabais, R.R. Negenborn, M. Ayala Botto, Model predictive control for a sustainable transport modal split at intermodal container hubs. in
*Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Networking Sensing and Control*, Paris, France, April 2013Google Scholar - 8.L. Li, R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, A general framework for modeling intermodal transport networks. in
*Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Networking Sensing and Control*, Paris, France, April 2013Google Scholar - 9.P. Mc Namara, R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, G. Lightbody, Weight optimisation for iterative distributed model predictive control applied to power networks. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell.
**26**(1), 532–543 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 10.P. Mc Namara, R. R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, G. Lightbody, Optimal coordination of a multiple HVDC link system using centralised and distributed control. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. (2013)Google Scholar
- 11.R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, H. Hellendoorn, Multi-agent model predictive control for transportation networks with continuous and discrete elements, in
*Proceedings of the 11th IFAC Symposium on Control in Transportation Systems*, Delft, The Netherlands, August 2006, pp. 609–614Google Scholar - 12.R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, J. Hellendoorn, Multi-agent model predictive control for transportation networks: serial versus parallel schemes, in
*Proceedings of the 12th IFAC Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing*, Saint-Etienne, France, May 2006, pp. 339–344Google Scholar - 13.R. R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, J. Hellendoorn, Efficient implementation of serial multi-agent model predictive control by parallelization, in
*Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing, and Control*, London, UK, July 2007, pp. 175–180Google Scholar - 14.R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, J. Hellendoorn, Multi-agent model predictive control for transportation networks: serial versus parallel schemes. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell.
**21**(3), 353–366 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 15.R.R. Negenborn, P.J. van Overloop, T. Keviczky, B. De Schutter, Distributed model predictive control for irrigation canals. Netw. Hetrog. Media.
**4**(2), 359–380 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 16.C. B. Royo, Generalized unit commitment by the radar multiplier method, PhD thesis, Technical University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain, May 2001Google Scholar
- 17.J. Xin, R.R. Negenborn, G. Lodewijks, Hybrid model predictive control for equipment in an automated container terminal, in
*Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Networking Sensing and Control*, Paris, France, April 2013Google Scholar