Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation: Simple Control Schemes With A Holistic Perspective

sustainability
Article
Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation: Simple
Control Schemes with a Holistic Perspective
S. Revollar 1, *,† , R. Vilanova 2,† , P. Vega 1,† , M. Francisco 1,† and M. Meneses 2,†
1 Informatics and Automatics Department, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain;
pvega@usal.es (P.V.); mfs@usal.es (M.F.)
2 Dept. Telecommunications and Systems Engineering, School of Engineering Universitat Autonoma
Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain; ramon.vilanova@uab.cat (R.V.); Montse.Meneses@uab.cat (M.M.)
* Correspondence: srevolla@usal.es or Ramon.Vilanova@uab.cat
† These authors contributed equally to this work.

Received: 18 December 2019; Accepted: 16 January 2020; Published: 21 January 2020
Abstract: In this paper, a control approach for improving the overall efficiency of a wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) is presented. It consists of a cascaded control system that uses a global
performance indicator as the controlled variable to drive the plant to operating conditions that
satisfies trade-offs involved in the WWTP operation, improving the global performance of the plant.
The selected global performance indicator is the N/E index that measures the ratio between the
amount of nitrogenated compounds eliminated (kgN) and the energy (kWh) required to achieve that
goal. This index links the variables of the activated sludge process with the energy consumed in the
whole plant, thus the control strategy takes actions based on plantwide considerations. An external
Proportional Integral (PI) controller changes the DO set point according to the N/E index and the
basic dissolved oxygen (DO) control scheme in the activated sludge process follows this reference
changes varying the aeration intensity. An outer loop with an event-based controller is used to
compute the index values when the DO concentration is driven to excessively low limits, preventing
long operation periods in this undesirable condition. Simple proportional integral controllers (PI) are
used to adapt the strategy to the automation systems available in WWTPs. The implementation in
the Benchmark Simulation Model 2 (BSM2) demonstrates the potential of the proposed approach.
The results show the possibilities of the N/E index to be used as an indicator of global performance
of WWTPs. It provides a link between water line objectives and energy consumption in the whole
plant that can be exploited to introduce plantwide considerations in alternative control strategies
formulated to drive the plant to operating conditions that optimize the overall process efficiency.
Keywords: wastewater treatment plants; environmental costs; PID control; plantwide control;
hierarchical control strategies
1. Introduction
Municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are public benefit processes focused on the
attainment of environmental objectives rather than economic benefits. Removing pollutants from
wastewater entails consumption of energy, use of chemicals, and treatment of sludge in excess, which
are operating expenses that cannot be compensated with economic profitable products. In addition,
the operation of a WWTP involves environmental impacts such as direct emissions of greenhouse
gases (GHG) from biological processes, indirect emissions of GHG from energy use (electricity and
heating), and sludge disposed to land and toxicity of chemicals [1,2]. Such environmental costs affect
process sustainability, which plays an important role in process management in the actual context.
Therefore, even the effectiveness of pollution removal is the main goal of WWTP operation, and the
Sustainability 2020, 12, 768; doi:10.3390/su12030768 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 768 2 of 28
appropriated management of resources and prevention of unnecessary emissions to air and soil must
be considered to ensure the economic feasibility and the sustainability of WWTP operation. It means
that operating conditions that satisfy the compromise between these conflicting objectives must be
selected from the overall assessment of plant performance that considers the interaction between the
different units and subsystems that comprise the plant (water line, sludge line, and gas line) [3–5].
A number of performance indicators have been defined to address the cost-effective operation
and sustainability of WWTPs [4,6–8]. The impact of greenhouse (GHG) emissions associated with
wastewater treatment has been introduced as an important factor in the evaluation of plant performance
in [3,9], and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been used to evaluate sustainable operation of WWTPs
in [1,2,10] and integrated water systems in [8,11], providing a wider perspective for the evaluation of
economic performance and sustainability in the operation of these processes. The available quantitative
indicators of performance provide an instrument to carry out a comprehensive analysis of the impact
of operating conditions on the efficiency of the plant. The analysis allows for measuring cause–effect
relationships between different operating variables and identifying specific situations that need
improvement. The information provided by different performance indicators and efficiency indices
that measure and link different aspects of the operation make it possible to take process control
decisions that produce an integral improvement of performance [4,8].
Different control strategies to improve the operation of WWTPs have been proposed in a significant
number of works ([12–18], but the evaluation of performance and the optimization objectives, in the
case of optimizing control strategies ([15–18]), concerns the quality of the effluent and economic aspects.
Since pollution removal takes place in the activated sludge process (ASP) in the water line, the control
strategies are applied to regulate dissolved oxygen (DO) in the aerobic zone or ammonium concentration
in the effluent through manipulation of aeration intensity, and nitrates concentration in the anoxic zone.
Few works are found in the literature ([5,19]) dealing with the implementation of control strategies
to improve the overall performance of WWTPs introducing plantwide considerations. Moreover, few
works [1,2] evaluate the effect of the control system performance considering its impact on the whole
plant behavior in terms of economic and environmental costs. In this work, a control approach is
proposed that uses a measure of global efficiency of the plant as the controlled variable with the aim
of introducing some sense of optimization in the control actions addressing effluent quality goals and
energy consumption in the whole plant. However, the consideration of efficiency as a controlled variable
also affects operation costs and emissions of CO2 associated with energy use and biological processes.
Most of the works addressing the advanced control and optimization of WWTPs have employed
recognized simulation platforms as Benchmark Simulation Model 1 (BSM1), Benchmark Simulation
Model 2 (BSM2) and their modifications to test their strategies. The BSM2 [20] represents the water
line and the sludge line of a typical municipal WWTP. It integrates the Benchmark Simulation Model 1
(BSM1) that represents the activated sludge process [21]. The BSM2 [20] is selected as the simulation
platform for the evaluation of the proposed control strategy.
Optimization methods and advanced control strategies are barely used in real practice; such
complex strategies are not attractive in an industry with economic limitations. Real WWTPs are
run adopting reasonable compromise solutions between operation objectives based on operators
expertise. The analysis of performance concentrates on energy consumption that is the most important
factor affecting operation and environmental costs [8,22,23], and it is involved in the majority of
the control actions. The regulation of the ASP variables is performed using the available control
strategies: open-loop and simple ON–OFF and PI (Proportional Integral) feedback and feed-forward
loops [20,21,24,25]. Some applications of advanced control strategies in real plants [26–29] and the
development of decision support systems for WWTPs that uses online sensors and information from
accessible data-bases to compute performance indicators associated with energy consumption [22,30]
demonstrate that technical limitations to the implementation of control systems to improve the
operation of WWTPs are being sorted out.
A typical municipal WWTP where activated sludge process (ASP) performs removal of
nitrogenated compounds and organic matter is considered in this work; therefore, the efficiency
index selected as a controlled variable is the ratio between the quantity of nitrogenated compounds
eliminated in the activated sludge process (kgN) and the energy (kWh) required by the whole plant
to eliminate that amount of nitrogenated compounds which is demoted N/E index ([31,32]). Thus,
the index connects ASP process performance with energy consumption in the whole plant giving a
holistic perspective to the control strategy. The manipulated variable to regulate the N/E index is
the set-point for the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration in the aerobic zone of the ASP. An upper
level PI controller provides the DO set-points that produce the desired efficiency to the lower level
DO control loop. The integration of existing DO control system and the use of simple PI controllers
increases the possibilities of implementing the proposed approach in real WWTPs using the available
online sensors, laboratory measurements, and automation systems.
One of the key points of the proposed control approach (N/E control strategy) is the
implementation of an event-based control algorithm to avoid DO inadmissible values in the aerobic and
N/E unreachable set-points. Due to the variable characteristics of the influent load and temperature,
the biological capacity for nitrogen removal can be limited in some situations. In order to attain
efficiency requirements given by N/E set-point when nitrogen removal capacity is limited, the use of
energy is reduced leading DO set-point to their minimum values. The manipulated variable can be
forced outside the recommended limits for a prolonged period producing deterioration of performance
and unsafe conditions for a biological system. Then, an event-based control algorithm that adapts an
N/E index set-point to reachable values when inadmissible DO values are detected is integrated into
the control scheme.
The use of an integral performance indicator as a controlled variable is a contribution of this
work that introduces a holistic perspective to control strategy, and the attainment of a desired of
process efficiency has a positive impact of effluent quality, energy management, and emissions of
CO2 . A comprehensive analysis of performance is carried out to compare existing PI based control
strategies applied to WWTP and the proposed N/E control strategy. The evaluation of performance is
carried out considering average values of performance indicators on an annual basis and dynamic
evolution of selected indices along the operation period (one year). The selected indicators measure the
characteristics affected by the evaluated control strategies treatment effectiveness, energy consumption,
and CO2 emissions.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The WWTP system and the control schemes are
described in Section 2, and global performance indicators are presented in Section 3. The evaluation
of the existing WWTP control strategies is presented in Section 4. The proposed control strategy is
described in Section 5. Section 6 is devoted to the comparison of the best existing WWTP control
strategy and the best N/E control design, closing with some conclusions to the article.
2. Description of Process and Control Strategies

The Benchmark Simulation Model 2 (BSM2) is a standard simulation platform that represents the
water line and the sludge line of a municipal WWTP that uses activated sludge process to perform
biological nitrogen removal [33,34]. The BSM2 plant layout (Figure 1) includes, in the water line,
a primary clarifier and the activated sludge process (ASP) for biological treatment. The sludge line
comprises a thickener for the sludge in the excess from activated sludge process, an anaerobic digester
to stabilize a mixture of the thickened sludge and sludge from primary clarifier and a dewatering
unit. The liquids collected in the thickening and dewatering steps are stored and recycled ahead of
the primary settler. The ASP is represented by a modification of the benchmark simulation model 1
(BSM1) ([21]) that consists of five biological reactors connected in series with internal nitrogen recycle
flow (Q a ), sludge recycle flow (Qr ), and purge flow (Qw ). The BSM2 is designed for an influent flow of
20,648.36 m3 /d and a biodegradable chemical oxygen demand (COD) in the influent of 592.53 mg/L.
The total volume of the bioreactor system is 12,000 m3 , 1500 m3 for each anoxic tank and 3000 m3 each
aerobic tank.
Qin Qbypass
Qpo Qe
Primary Secondary
Activated sludge
clariﬁer clariﬁer
reactors
Qa
Qr
Qw
Thickener
Anaerobic
digester
Storage
tank Dewatering
Sludge
Removal
Figure 1. BSM2 plant with notation used for flow rates.
The biological processes occurring in the activated sludge process reactors are described using 13
state variables and eight biological processes [21,35] by Activated Sludge Model 1 (ASM1), the clarifier
is described using Tackacs model [36], and Anaerobic Digestion Model 1 (ADM1) is used for anaerobic
digestion process [37].
The performance of biological treatments carried out in WWTPs is strongly affected by the
frequent and large disturbances in the influent flow and load. Then, the BSM2 model includes a
characteristic influent profile that describes daily flow rate dynamics (low rate at night, high rate
during day time), weekend effects, holiday and seasonal effects and incorporates household and
industrial pollutants. The average flow rate is 20,668 m3 /d, the maximum peak reaches 85,841 m3 /d,
and the minimum is 5146 m3 /d. This is considered in the BSM2 influent profile that contains an average
concentration of 52.2 g/m3 of total nitrogen and 592.2 g/m3 of COD (chemical oxygen demand). Sinus
functions are used to describe daily and seasonal temperature variation, then a warm and a cold season
are distinguished. The average temperature is 15 ◦ C, the highest values is 20 ◦ C, and the lowest is
10 ◦ C. A detailed description of dynamic influent profile generation can be found in [38]. The influent
data describe an operation period of a year in a plant located in the Northern hemisphere starting July
1st. Data provided by simulation protocol describe 609 operation days with a sampling time of 15 min,
but evaluation is performed using data from day 245 to day 609. Annual profiles of the characteristic
influent variables, influent flow (Qi n), total nitrogen concentration (Ntot ), COD concentration, and
temperature (T) considering weekly average values are presented in (Figure 2).
The effluent quality is usually described in terms of Ntot , ammonium S NH , CODt , S NH , TSS, and
BOD5 concentrations. In the BSM2 model, these metrics are estimated considering the variables of
the ASM1 model. The effluent quality requirements in BSM2 model are Ntot < 18 gN/m3 , CODt <
100 gCOD/m3 , S NH < 4 gN/m3 , TSS < 30 gSS/m3 , BOD5 < 10 gBOD/m3 . Biological elimination of
nitrogenated compounds and organic matter to reach those effluent quality levels takes place in ASP.
In the nitrification process, nitrogenated compounds (mostly ammonium NH4 ) are oxidized to nitrates
as part of aerobic growth of autotrophic bacteria that depends on the availability of free dissolved
oxygen in the system (DO). Nitrifiers growth follows Monod kinetics; it is minimal at DO levels below
0.5 g/m3 , then increases with DO concentration until maximum growth rate is reached approximately
at DO levels of 2 g/m3 [24,39]. Oxygen demand depends on the load of wastewater to be treated, but
nitrification is affected also by temperature and solids retention time (SRT). Nitrates (S NO ) produced
in the aerobic zone are transported to anoxic zone by internal recirculation (Q a ) where denitrification
process takes place by means of heterotroph microorganisms growth. Oxygen is taken from nitrates
that are reduced to nitrogen gas (N2 ) using organic matter as substrate.
Figure 2. Weekly average values of characteristic influent variables in the operating horizon (one year):
flow (Qin ), total nitrogen concentration (Ntot ), COD concentration and temperature (T).
2.1. Description of Operation and Control Strategies

The control actions in the WWTP are focused on the regulation of activated sludge process
variables but interactions between different units of water and sludge line, and impact of influent
disturbances must be considered to attain the optimal operating conditions from a global viewpoint.
The control handles available in the ASP process are: the airflow rate, the internal recirculation (Q a ),
the sludge recirculation (Qr ), the sludge purge flow (Qw ), and external carbon dosage (Qcarb ) as
manipulated variables. All of these control handles are represented in the BSM2 model, but the oxygen
transfer coefficient (KLa) is used instead of airflow rate. The oxygen transfer coefficient (KLa) measures
oxygen transfer efficiency in terms of air flow-rate, the dynamics of the air bubbles formation, and
diffusion phenomena.
In practice, the most commonly used control structures using the mentioned control handles are:
• Dissolved oxygen control in the aerobic basin (DO control). The set-point for DO is given by the
operator with values between 1.5–2 g/m3 , maximum growth rate is achieved at DO concentration
of 2 g/m3 , and non-desirable reactions promoted by filamentous microorganisms can occur at
the DO concentration below 1.5 g/m3 . In practice, a cascade scheme is implemented, the inner
loop controls the airflow rate manipulating a valve position, and the external loop controls DO
concentration manipulating the airflow rate. The time constant of the loop is about 30 min [24].
• Ammonium-based supervisory control. This control scheme is applied to reduce aeration costs
or to reduce peaks of ammonium concentration in the effluent ([13]. An upper loop is added
to the DO control scheme to compute DO set-points as a function of the measured ammonium
concentration in the effluent (S NH )). The S NH set-point is selected between 1 g/m3 –4 g/m3 .
• Nitrates control in the anoxic zone. Q a is used as manipulated variable for the closed loop
regulation of S NO , BSM1 platform ([21]) uses a set-point of 1 g/m3 . When external carbon source
is required, carbon dosage (Qcarb ) is used to regulate nitrates concentration S NO . In practice, open
loop control of nitrates is performed keeping the appropriated values of Q a and Qcarb .
• Open loop control of both recycle flows. The sludge age is regulated with purge flow (Qw ),
since growth rate decreases with temperature Qw is reduced in winter to increase the sludge age.
The external recirculation (Qr ) is used to regulate the Food to Microorganism Ratio (F:M); it is
usual to maintain a Qr equal to influent flowrate.
One of two, DO control or ammonium control, can be implemented combined with the other
control strategies. Feed-forward control can be used also to reduce the effect of disturbances. The
commented control strategies have been applied on the BSM2 platform ([1,2,5,19]). Figure 3 presents
the block diagrams of these typical close loop strategies and their implementation in the BSM2 plant.
The default operation strategy proposed in BSM2 plant includes:
• Feedback DO control in the aerobic zone manipulating directly the oxygen transfer coefficient
KLa (the aeration equipment is not modeled in the simulator).
• Carbon dosage to improve nitrification: Qcarb = 2 m3 added to the first reactor in the anoxic zone
(An external source with a concentration of 40,000 g/m3 is used).
• Fixed values of internal and external recycle flowrate: Qr = 20, 648 m3 /d and Q a = 61, 944 m3 /d,
computed to maintain the appropriated nitrates concentration levels in the anoxic zone and fed to
the microorganism (F:M) ratio respectively.
• Sludge age regulation manipulating the purge flow: Qw = 450 m3 /d in the warm season and
Qw = 300 m3 /d in the cold season.
DO control scheme (DO Default), in default BSM2 operation strategy, consists of a PI loop
that regulates the DO concentration in the fourth aeration tank to a constant set-point of 2 g/m3
manipulating the oxygen transfer coefficient (KLa) of the three aerated reactors. KLa4 , for the 4th
reactor is the controller output while KLa3 and KLa5 are calculated using a gain of 1 and 0.5 for the 3rd
and 5th reactors, respectively.
In this work, the existing control strategies considered to evaluate their impact on overall plant
performance in comparison with the proposed control strategy based on the control of the N/E
index are:
• DO + NO control that combines the default DO control scheme and PI control of nitrates
concentration in the anoxic zone (S NO2 ) manipulating the internal recycle flow Q a .
• Ammonium based supervisory control (Cascade) that controls the ammonium concentration in
the 5th reactor (S NH5 ) using an external PI loop that computes the DO set-point for the internal
loop given by the DO default scheme. Two different set-points are considered for the cascade
scheme, SPNH = 1 g/m3 for strict ammonium regulation (Cascade SPNH = 1), and SPNH = 4 g/m3
for relaxed ammonium regulation (Cascade SPNH = 4).
In both cases, strategies for carbon dosage, external recycle, and sludge age regulation are
maintained as in default strategy. The internal recycle Q a is kept constant with cascade control as in
DO default control. The tuning parameters for the PI controllers can be found in [20] for DO controller,
in [21] for nitrates controller and in [19] for the ammonium controller.
The control schemes implemented in the ASP of BSM2 plant are described in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Activated sludge process control schemes: DO control, cascade control, DO+NO control.
Different colors are used to identify the control loops in blocks and process layout
2.2. Evaluation Criteria in BSM2

The BSM2 provides a performance assessment framework divided into two levels. The first level
serves as a proof that the proposed control strategy has been applied properly using standard metrics
of control performance [20]. The second level measures the effect of the control strategy on plant
performance accounting for the percentage of time that the effluent limits are not met, the quality of
the effluent using the Effluent Quality Index (EQI), and the operation costs using the Overall Cost
Index (OCI).
The typical indicators of effluent quality total suspended solids (TSS), biological oxygen demand
(BOD5 ), chemical oxygen demand (COD), Kjeldahl nitrogen (S NKj ), and total nitrogen concentration
(Ntot ) are computed in BSM2 using the AM1 model variables obtained from simulations: soluble
inert organic matter (S I ), readily biodegradable substrate (SS ), particulate inert organic matter (X I ),
slowly biodegradable substrate (XS ), active heterotrophic biomass (XB,H ), active autotrophic biomass
(XB,A ), particulate products arising from biomass decay (XP ), nitrate, nitrite nitrogen (S NO ), NH4 +,
and NH3 Nitrogen (Ammonium) (S NH ), soluble biodegradable organic nitrogen (S ND ), particulate
biodegradable organic nitrogen (X ND ). Subscript e is used to denote effluent:
Total suspended solids (TSS):
gCOD
TSSe ( ) = 0.75 · ( XS,e + X I,e + XB,H,e + XB,A,e + XP,e ), (1)
m3
Biological oxygen demand (BOD5 ):
gBOD
BOD5,e ( ) == 0.25 · (SS,e + XS,e + (1 − f P ) · ( XB,H,e + XB,A,e )), (2)
m3
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
gCOD
CODe ( ) == (SS,e + XS,e + X I,e + XB,H,e + XB,A,e + XP,e , (3)
m3
Kjeldahl nitrogen is the sum of ammonium and organic nitrogen in the effluent:
gN
S NKj,e ( ) == S NH,e + S ND,e + X ND,e + i XB · ( XB,H,e + XB,A,e ) + i XP · ( XP,e + X I,e ), (4)
m3
Ntot is calculated as the sum of S NO and Kjeldahl nitrogen:
gN
Ntot,e ( ) == S NKj,e + S NO,e . (5)
m3
The quality of the effluent and the influent are measured using EQI and IQI indices, respectively,
that quantifies the amount of pollutants in the water and wastewater averaged over a 364-day
observation period and are calculated weighting the different compounds of the effluent load.
EQI defined to evaluate the quality of the effluent is:
t=609days
kg 1
Z
EQI ( ) == ( BTSS · TSSe (t) + BCOD · CODe (t)
d 1000 · T (6)
t=245days
+ BNKj,e · S NKj,e (t) + BNO · S NO,e (t) + BBOD5 · BOD5,i (t) · Qe (t) · dt.
IQI is defined to evaluate the quality of the influent. Subscript i is used for influent:
t=609days
kg 1
Z
IQI ( ) = ( BTSS · TSSi (t) + BCOD · CODi (t)
d 1000 · T (7)
t=245days
+ BNKj · S NKj,i (t) + BNO · S NO,i (t) + BBOD5 · BOD5,i (t) · Qin (t) · dt,
where Bi are weighting factors BTSS = 2, BCOD = 1, BNKj = 30, BNO = 10, BBOD5 = 2, and T is the
total time in days.
The BSM2 platform measures the energy consumption using: Aeration energy (AE) that quantifies
the amount of energy used for aeration in the ASP as a function of KLa, pumping energy (PE), which
is the amount the energy used for pumping in the whole plant (is the summation of pumping energy
of each unit), the mixing energy (ME) consumed in the whole plant, and the heating energy (HE) that
is the energy required to maintain a temperature of 35 ◦ C in the anaerobic digester. These indices are
described in [20].
Since anaerobic digester is self-sustainable, the net heating energy is computed assuming that
1 kg of methane (CH4 ) produces 7 kWh of heat [20].
HEnet is the net heating energy:
HEnet (kWh) = max (0, HE − 7 · METprod ), (8)
where METprod is the methane production in the anaerobic digester (kg CH4 /d).
The Overall Cost Index (OCI) is defined to evaluate the operation costs:
EUR
OCI ( ) = AE + PE + 3 · SP + 3 · EC + ME − 6 · METprod + HEnet , (9)
d
where SP is the sludge production to be disposed, EC is the consumption of external carbon source,
and ME is the mixing energy.
BSM2 protocol performs an analysis of violations of desired limits of Ntot and ammonium (S NH ),
CODt , BOD5 and suspended solids (SS) in the effluent in terms of percent of the operation period,
frequency (occur), and days equivalent (days).
In the next section, the N/E index and other indicators of process performance are presented to
be used for the evaluation of the overall performance of the plant under different control strategies.
3. Assessment of Global WWTP Performance

Methods and key performance indicators are available to address WWTP operation of WWTPs
from a global perspective [1,6–8,10,23]. In [6], more than 80 performance indicators are presented
as part of a performance assessment system for a cost-effective and sustainable management of
wastewater services. In [23], an interesting review of performance assessment methods for monitoring
and diagnosis of WWTP energy consumption is presented. In [7], some indicators to measure the
efficiency of nitrogen removal and the carbon footprint of the removal process are described. On the
other hand, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) has been used to perform a comprehensive analysis of
the environmental impact of WWTPs [1,2,10,11] considering different environmental indicators and
functional units. An extension of the analysis to the integrated water system is presented in [8].
In practice and in the majority of the works, the main objectives of the analysis of performance are
the energy efficiency and the minimization of emissions to water, air, and soil, although factors as
maintenance, services, and personnel costs should be included [8].
Some of those available indicators are selected here for supervising and rating the effect of control
actions on global efficiency of the plant. Energy consumption is the most important factor affecting
operation and environmental costs, and pollution removal is the main objective of plant operation
and the major contribution to energy use, then a sensible approach to address energy efficiency is the
use of metrics that associate energy consumption and pollution removal [23]. When the objective of
performance assessment is energy management, the ratio between energy consumption and pollution
removal is considered [23] in this work; it is preferred to express the inverse relationship. Lower values
index implies excessive requirement of energy and/or poor pollution elimination; on the contrary,
the index increases when energy requirements are reduced and/or a large amount of nitrogenated
compounds have been eliminated.
Specifically, an index that describes dynamically the efficiency of the nitrogen removal is selected
to be used as an integral performance index; the N/E index describes the ratio between nitrogen
removal (kgN) and energy required (kWh) to remove that amount of nitrogen providing a link between
pollution elimination and energy consumption in the whole plant. Furthermore, the N/E index
connects the water line with sludge line because the energy required in all the units (aeration energy,
heating energy for digestion and pumping and mixing energy) is accounted for.
In this work, the dynamic N/E index is used for evaluation and for control purposes. As an N/E
index is defined as an integral measure of performance, since nitrogen removal efficiency in terms
of energy use has an impact on several aspects of WWTP operation such as operation costs, GHG
emissions, organic matter removal, and frequency and amount of violations of desired effluent limits.
Thus, the regulation of the N/E index to appropriate values in a close loop control scheme should
improve the overall performance of the plant. Using such control approach, the DO set-point which
is a critical variable of the activated sludge process is manipulated to produce operating conditions
that improves pollution removal, reduce consumption of aeration energy and consequently decrease
indirect GHG emissions on the basis of a controlled variable that provides information about the
energy requirements of the whole plant to perform such actions.
The N/E index which is computed dynamically at each sampling time. It is described in terms of
the BSM2 plant variables and performance indicators described in Section 2.2:
N kgN IQN − EQN

( )= . (10)
E kWh AE + PE + ME + HE
Modifications of IQI and EQI are used in this work to quantify nitrogen removal in ASP. IQN
and EQN are the influent and effluent quality indices in terms of nitrogenated compounds:
t=609days
kg 1
Z
EQN ( ) = ( BNKj · S NKj,e (t) + BNO · S NO,e (t)) · Qe (t) · dt, (11)
d 1000 · T
t=245days
t=609days
kg 1
Z
IQN ( ) = ( BNKj · S NKj,i (t) + BNO · S NO,i (t)) · Qin (t) · dt, (12)
d 1000 · T
t=245days
where Bi are weighting factors reported for EQI (6) and T is the total time.
In order to complement the information provided by N/E index evolution, other efficiency
indicators are considered to measure the effect of control actions on dynamic performance. Such
indicators are the ratio between the amount of COD removed in ASP and the energy required (kWh) to
remove that quantity of organic matter (R-COD/E), the treatment efficiency in terms of influent flow
(D-TE), and the ratio between available COD and nitrogen in a given reactor i or stream (COD/Ni ).
The COD removal efficiency is computed as:
R − COD kgCOD CODi − CODe

( )= , (13)
E kWh AE + PE + ME + HE
where CODi is given by Equation (3).

The treatment efficiency with respect to influent flow is:
kg IQI − EQI kg
D − TE( )= , (14)
m3 Qin m3
where IQI and EQI are given by Equations (6) and (7).
The COD/Ni ratio is computed as the ratio between COD given by Equation (3) and total nitrogen
given by Equation (5) in reactor i or in wastage flow (i = w).
The annual average values of selected performance indicators are computed to carry out a
comprehensive evaluation of plant performance under different control strategies. The indicators are
chosen to measure the quality of the effluent, the efficiency of the treatment, the environmental costs
of the treatment, and the economic aspects that have to be taken into account simultaneously to take
decisions about the impact of control strategies from a multicriteria analysis. The selected indicators
are described below:
Treatment efficiency is the ratio between the pollution removed in the activated sludge process
and the pollution load in the influent. The treatment efficiency (TE):
IQI − EQI
TE = . (15)
IQI
Carbon dioxide emissions associated with biological processes: It is a measure of the ratio between
the CO2 emissions produced in ASP and anaerobic digestion (AD) and the kg of pollution eliminated
in ASP. In ASP, the growth of heterotrophs and decay of bacteria produces CO2 , but the growth of
autotrophs consumes CO2 , the emissions are estimated using the reactions presented in [40] for the
ASM1 model; CO2 generated by anaerobic digestion (CO2AD ) is computed by BSM2 platform:
kg CO2 CO2ASP + CO2AD

CO2P ( )= = . (16)
kg Pollutionremoved IQI − EQI
Energy consumption: Two indicators are considered: the total energy consumed per m3 of treated
wastewater and the net energy consumed per m3 of treated wastewater considering that biogas is used
to supply heat to digester. The total energy consumption:
kWh E AE + PE + ME + HE
TEQ( )= = . (17)
m3 Qin Qin
The net energy consumption:
kWh E(kWh) AE + PE + ME + HEnet − 0.5 · (7 · METprod − HE)

NEQ( )= = . (18)
m3 Q i n ( m3 ) Qi n
External energy for aeration: Given that biogas is used to heat the digester, but excess biogas can
be available for aeration assuming that 1 kg of CH4 produces 3.5 kWh of electricity:
kWh
External AE( ) = AE − 0.5 · (7 · METprod − HE). (19)
d
Finally, the electricity consumption is used also as a performance indicator:
kWh
Electricity( ) = AE + PE + ME. (20)
d
Radar plots are used to show the simultaneous impact of each control strategy on different
performance indicators. The indicators are expressed to increase their values when the desired
characteristic is worsened. The diagrams present the ratio between values of the indices for each
strategy and the worst value obtained for the group of strategies that are being evaluated, therefore
the maximum value of the indices in the plot is 1. The area of the polygons formed in the plots is
used to compare the effect on global performance of the control strategies. Indicators used in radar
plots decrease their value when they are improved, then strategies that improve simultaneously more
indicators will produce smaller polygons.
In summary, the annual based indicators considered for the evaluation of overall performance
using radar plots areas are:
• Inverse TE (Equation (15)), EQI (Equation (6)), and violations of effluent quality limits to measure
ASP treatment effectiveness.
• Electricity (Equation (20)) and pumping energy (PE) in the whole plant, aeration energy (AE), and
external AE in ASP and HE in the digester to measure energy consumption; and TEQ and NEQ to
compare net energy and required energy with respect to volume of treated water in a year.
• CO2 (Equation (16)) emissions relative to Nitrogen elimination as environmental impact metric.
• Overall cost index (OCI) to evaluate operation costs (Equation (9)).
An evaluation performance of existing PI based control strategies typically implemented in WWTPs
is carried out using these sets of dynamic and annual-averaged performance indicators. The minimization
of the area of the radar plots is used to deal with the multiple objectives involved in WWTP operation.
This information has been used for the design of the proposed control approach based on the regulation
of the N/E index. The best existing control strategy is compared with N/E index control approach
performing a multicriteria analysis to evaluate its effect on the global WWTP efficiency.
4. Evaluation of Existing PI-Based Control Strategies

A comprehensive evaluation of performance of the WWTP under the PI (Proportional Integral)
based control strategies typically implemented in a WWTP is carried out. The influence of control
actions of control schemes, namely DO control (DO Default), DO control and nitrates control (DO + NO
control), and supervisory ammonium based control (Cascade) on dynamic performance is addressed
to detect critical situations that affect pollution removal efficiency and the COD/N ratio. Furthermore,
the annual average performance indicators are computed and the multicriteria analysis carried out
using the information provided by radar plots of performance indicators and the measurement of the
area of the polygons corresponding to each strategy allow for determining the control strategy that
produce the best performance from a global viewpoint.
Regarding dynamic behavior analysis, the observation of evolution of N/E and COD/E index
along the operation period in Figure 4 and influent variations in Figure 2 make evident the influence
of temperature and the effect of variations on load on removal efficiency of the plant. In the
periods of lower temperature between weeks 20 and 35, the efficiency indices reach their minimum
values. Microorganism growth rate is diminished due to temperature effect, then nitrification and
denitrification processes that govern nitrogen and organic matter removal are slower while heating
energy requirements of anaerobic digester increases. On the other hand, the oxygen consumption
depends on the load of wastewater to be treated that varies over the day, then variations of the influent
load due to frequent changes on Qin , Ntot and COD concentration produce continuous variations
on N/E and R-COD/E indices. However, it can be observed that temperature effect dominates the
efficiency of the process. The evolution of the profiles of the N/E and R-COD/E index along the
year is similar because organic matter is consumed as substrate by heterotrophic biomass as part of
denitrification process.
Figure 4. Weekly profiles of of N/E index (kgN/kWh) and R-COD/E (kgCOD/kWh) index for the
existing control strategies.
Regarding the effect of control strategies, the objective of the implementation of ammonium based
supervisory control scheme (Cascade) in real practice [27] is to reduce the use of energy for aeration,
which is achieved varying DO set-point. Such reduction on aeration energy reflects as larger values
of N/E and COD/E indices in the full operation period as observed in Figure 4, which means major
efficiency. The evolution of D-TE, which is treatment efficiency with respect to influent flow, and
COD/N ratio in the 2nd reactor is shown in Figure 5. In this case study, it is observed that sensitivity of
D-TE index to control actions is significantly lower than N/E and COD/E indices, a minimal effect of
control actions on pollution removal with respect to influent flow rate is appreciated, and temperature
effect is unnoticed. The dynamic profile for COD/N ratio in the second reactor shows an effect of
temperature, with lower values between weeks 20 and 35, and an effect of load variations. Larger values
of COD/N ratio are attained with cascade schemes in the full operation period, which implies lower
requirements of external carbon, so carbon dosage could be reduced when using such control strategies.
As a conclusion of the analysis of the dynamic performance, it is observed that cascade schemes
improve pollution removal efficiency with respect to energy use and increases COD/N ratio in the
anoxic reactor. Both characteristics represent potential improvements on energy efficiency of WWTPs
and environmental impact. Reducing energy consumption implies lower indirect GHG emissions due
to energy use, and higher COD/N ratios in the anoxic zone implies a reduction on carbon dosage that
is a chemical additive. Moreover, both factors, energy consumption and external carbon source, affect
operation costs. Temperature is important for the energetic efficiency of the operation; the indices that
quantify energy effects on pollution removal are worsened in the periods of lower temperature, due to
kinetic limitations on growth rate and the increased demand of energy from digester. It is important
to indicate that the characteristic of cascade schemes that produce those benefits is the continuous
variation of DO set-point, to levels below the 2 g/m3 imposed by DO default and DO+NO control
strategies, which results in significant aeration energy savings. Such characteristic is exploited in the
formulation of the control strategy proposed in this work. It is important to analyze the effect on DO
dynamics of the control movements of cascade strategies, to provide insight of the effect of control
actions on the nitrogen removal process that affects energetic efficiency.
Figure 6 shows DO set-points given by the different control strategies, and DO concentration in
the 4th reactor of aerobic zone in representatives summer and winter weeks of the year. DO set-point
of DO default and DO+NO control strategies is fixed on 2 g/m3 and DO concentration follows the
reference very closely. On the other hand, the DO set-point with cascade schemes is continuously
driven to the minimum values of the admissible range in the warmer week and effluent quality goals
are attained. It could suggest that maintaining a fixed set-point of 2 g/m3 in the periods of higher
temperature represents unnecessary consumption of energy for aeration. Nevertheless, maintaining
DO concentration at their lowest levels as observed between days 272 and 275 in Figure 6 could
produce performance deterioration and undesirable reactions [24]. In the winter week, a DO set-point
with a cascade scheme exhibits continuous variations between its minimum and maximum admissible
values, since lower temperatures make treatment more exigent. In this situation, the cascade scheme
computes DO set-points over 2 g/m3 , which is also unnecessary, since the effect of DO levels above
2 g/m3 on nitrogen removal is minimal [13].
Figure 5. Weekly profiles of lIQI-EQI/Qin (kg/m3 ) index and COD/N ratio (gCOD/gN) in the 2nd
reactor for the existing control strategies.
Figure 6. N/E index profile in the warmest and coldest periods.

The analysis of performance using averaged values for the full operation period (one year) is
carried out; the performance indicators computed for each strategy are reported in Table 1.
Table 1. Performance indicators for the existing control strategies.
Performance Indicator DO Default DO+NO Cascade Cascade

Control SPN H = 1 SPN H = 4
IQI/(IQI-EQI) 1.081 1.093 1.077 1.078
EQI (kg/d) 5578 6343 5374 5426
CO2P (kg CO2 /kg) 0.050 0.052 0.048 0.048
OCI (EUR/d) 9447 9451 9023 8837
Electricity (kWh/d) 5436 5436 5016 4834
AE (kWh/d) 4223 4432 3803 3620
PE (kWh/d) 445.45 236.2 445.45 445.45
HE (kWh/d) 4225 4225 4225 4225
TEQ (kWh/m3 ) 0.467 0.467 0.447 0.438
NEQ (kWh/m3 ) 0.181 0.181 0.161 0.152
External AE (kWh/d) 2537 2746 2116 1933
Ntot violations (%) 1.18 46.1 0.5 0.39
Ntot violations (occur) 33 350 12 10
Ntot violations (days) 4.3 168 2 1.4
S NH violations (%) 0.4 0.3 3.4 7.9
S NH violations (occur) 11 7 116 207
S NH violations (days) 1.5 1.1 12.5 28.7
COD violations (%) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
SS violations (%) 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
Radar Area 1.692 2.030 1.428 1.456
Note: IQI: Influent Quality Index, EQI: Effluent Quality Index, OCI: Overall Cost Idex, AE: Aeration Energy,
PE: Pumping Energy, HE: Heating Energy, TEQ: Total Energy Consumption NEQ: Net Energy Consumption,
Ntot: Total Nitrogen concentration, SNH: Ammonium concentration, COD: Chemical Oxygen Demand, SS:
Suspended Solids.
From an overview of performance indicators presented in Table 1, it is corroborated that cascade

strategies improve energy efficiency of the WWTP. All the indicators associated with energy use, except
pumping energy (PE) and heating energy (HE), are decreased with respect to DO default and DO+NO
control strategies; as a consequence, operation costs, measured by OCI, are also reduced. The minimum
PE value corresponds to DO+NO control strategy that reduces internal recycle flow to meet the desired
nitrates’ reference. The control actions of existing ASP control schemes do not affect HE, which is the
same in all cases; it is known that heating requirements of the digester are associated with temperature
gradient. Even a slight difference is appreciated, CO2 emissions are also reduced by cascade strategies.
Regarding effluent quality goals, EQI is improved by cascade schemes, Ntot violations are reduced in
comparison with DO and DO+NO control, but ammonium violations are significantly increased in
frequency and magnitude as ammonium set-point is relaxed; consequently, lower DO levels in aerobic
reactors are admitted. Another difference observed when comparing cascade strategies with different
set-points is that relaxed option SPNH = 4 improves energy indicators and OCI, but slightly increases
EQI and frequency.
Radar plot that represents simultaneously the set of performance indicators of the existing control
strategies is presented in Figure 7. The area of the polygon corresponding to each control strategy is
reported in Table 1. The larger area corresponds to DO+NO strategy and the lower area corresponds
to cascade strategy with SPNH = 1; this means that it is the control strategy that reduces in a larger
amount, a larger number of performance indicators. Then, according to the proposed assessment
method, cascade strategy with SPNH = 1 (Cascade SPNH = 1) produce the major improvement of
performance from a holistic perspective.
Figure 7. Radar plot of performance indicators for the existing control strategies.
It is observed that varying DO set-point to attain the desired values of ammonium concentration
(S NH ) produces an improvement of global performance. The information about DO dynamics given
by Figure 8 is useful for the design of the proposed N/E control approach.
Figure 8. DO set-point and DO concentration (g/m3 ) in the 4th reactor in representative weeks of the
warmest and coldest periods.
5. N/E Index Control Approach

The proposed process control approach uses the N/E index described in Section 3 as the controlled
variable in a cascaded PI based strategy that uses the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration in the
aerobic zone of the ASP as the manipulated variable. As in the cascade control scheme for regulation
of ammonium concentration, an external PI controller provides the DO set-point to the internal DO
control loop, but, in this case, the DO set-points are computed considering a measure of the expected
efficiency of the plant. Thus, the DO set-point implemented in aerobic reactors lead the plant to
operating conditions that improve the ratio between ASP nitrogen removal efficacy and the energy
required by the whole plant, which provides a holistic perspective as well as optimizing characteristics
to control strategy.
A variable N/E set-point is considered to account for the effect of load and temperature variations.
In order to introduce a sense of optimization to control actions, a range of variation of N/E set-point that
improves the N/E efficiency observed with the typical strategies is applied to WWTPs. An event-based
control algorithm determines N/E set-point movements, and the algorithm is formulated to avoid
DO inadmissible values in the aerobic zone and unreachable N/E set-points. The block diagram
representing the proposed strategy and the control scheme in the plant is presented in Figure 9. The
external PI controller tuning is performed using the Internal Model Control (IMC) approach of [41].
A detailed description of controller tuning is presented in Appendix A.
The purpose of this work is to concentrate on the analysis of the effects of the N/E index using
DO concentration as the only manipulated variable. The external carbon source control is one of
the more effective ways of guaranteeing the availability of a carbon source, therefore ensuring the
heterotrophic denitrification, but it is not considered in the proposed strategy. Then, external carbon
dosage is maintained as in BSM2 strategy, and a constant Qcarb is added to the first anoxic reactor.
Figure 9. Block diagram representing the proposed N/E control strategy.
In order to determine the appropriated algorithm to vary N/E set-point, the relation between
N/E requirements and DO dynamics is evaluated considering fixed N/E set-points. When DO control,
DO+NO control, and ammonium based cascade control strategies are applied, the N/E index ranges
between 2.5 and 4.2 kgN/kWh for weekly average values (Figure 4) and the variation observed in
representative summer and winter weeks (Figure 10) ranges between 9 kgN/KWh and 1 kgN/kWh,
but peaks and valleys of N/E index values occur in a short time horizon, and the proposed strategy
contemplates a larger time horizon. Therefore, the range of variation of N/E set-point is selected
considering the weekly variations of N/E index. The maximum value observed in the weekly profile
is 4.2 kgN/kWh, so N/E index set-point should be higher to improve efficiency; the possibility of
increasing the maximum N/E value up to 4.5 kgN/kWh or to 5 kgN/kWh is considered.
Figure 10. N/E index profile in the warmest and coldest periods.
The first step to design the event-based controller is to analyze the impact on manipulated variable
of N/E index tracking considering constant set-points. Then, the behavior of DO set-points computed
by external PI controller when implementing the proposed N/E control strategy for constant N/E
set-points of 4.2 kgN/kWh, 4.5 kgN/kWh and to 5 kgN/kWh is observed. The range of admissible
values for DO set-point in BSM2 platform is 0.5 to 4 g/m3 .
Figure 11 shows control movements under N/E control in representative winter and summer
weeks. The first observation is that the trend of DO set-point movements to track the constant N/E
reference in the warmer and colder season is opposite to that observed with the cascade scheme
(Figure 8). DO set-points with frequent variations between 3.5 g/m3 and 0.5 g/m3 are computed
in summer weeks with N/E control, while DO set-points with a cascade scheme in the same week
tend to the minimum admissible values. The cascade scheme produces lower DO set-points because
ammonium reference can be easily attained with lower DO requirements at higher temperatures.
In the case of N/E control, the possibility of improving nitrogen removal at higher temperature is
exploited increasing or decreasing aeration (i.e., DO set-points) when it affects positively N/E index.
It is noticed that the peaks of set-point movements decrease as N/E reference increases. On the
other hand, DO set-points tend to the minimum admissible values with N/E control in winter week,
while cascade control varies DO set-points between 3.5 g/m3 and 0.5 g/m3 . At low temperatures,
nitrogen removal capacity of microorganisms (nitrifiers) is significantly reduced, then N/E efficiency
decreases and the imposed N/E set-point can be unreachable. The control system tries to achieve the
desired reference, leading DO set-point to the minimum levels (Figure 11) to reduce aeration energy
consumption. In these conditions, the control actions that force the N/E index to higher values produce
performance deterioration instead of improving plant efficiency. Therefore, the event-based controller
introduced in the proposed N/E control approach is based on the observation of DO dynamics, to
detect those situations where the manipulated variable is forced outside the recommended limits for a
prolonged period of time and adapt gradually N/E index set-point to reachable values.
Figure 11. DO set-point movements in the 4th aerobic reactor when N/E index control strategy is
applied considering constant N/E set-points.
5.1. Event-Based Controller Algorithm

The rationale of the event-based controller is based on the following operating rule: it should
reduce the N/E index set-point when DO levels reach the minimum allowed values and the desired
reference can not be attained, but the set-point should be increased when DO levels are high enough to
request more N/E efficiency. Performing these actions in a continuous way produces an N/E index
set-point trajectory associated with DO dynamics.
The DO levels are monitored at a given sampling time (τs ); then, when minimum DO levels are
detected, the N/E index set-point is reduced by a certain amount (∆) to adapt the N/E efficiency
requirements to real possibilities of the process. Once higher DO levels are detected, the N/E index
set-point is increased to improve N/E efficiency.
The parameters considered in the proposed event-based strategy are:
• τs : Sampling time at which the event-based detector will operate.

• DOlow : Lower value for the DO that should be avoided.
• ∆: Increments on the N/E set-point that should be performed at each event.
• N/E Max , N/E Min : Maximum and minimum values for the N/E index.
The logic of the event-based reference update is as follows:

Inputs: DO, N/E index set-point (N/ESP ), if ( DO ≤ DOlow )
N/ESP =min(N/E Min , N/ESP -∆),
else
N/ESP =min(N/E Max , N/ESP +∆).
end
This procedure is executed every τs , and the N/E reference will therefore remain constant during
the τs time interval. An example of the actions of the event-based algorithm on dynamic response is
presented in (Figure 12), where it is possible to observe how an N/E index set-point is decreased in a
magnitude given by ∆ each time period given by τs while DO levels reach the minimum value; if DO
increases, then N/E index is increased in ∆each τs until minimum DO levels are detected again.
Figure 12. Actions of the event-based algorithm to change the index set-point.
The DO set-point can vary between 0.5 and 4 g/m3 , then DOlow = 0.5 g/m3 is a fixed value,
but the rest of the parameters can be modified by designer: N/E Max , N/E Min , τs and ∆. In the next
section, event-based strategy with different tuning parameters is evaluated. The idea is to select the
combination of parameters of event-based controllers that produce the major improvement in global
performance when implementing the N/E control approach and comparing that design with the best
existing strategy, which is the ammonium-based control with SPNH = 1 (Cascade SPNH = 1).
Tuning of Event-Based N/E Controller Parameters

It has been observed in Figure 11 that a constant N/E set-point of 5 kgN/kWh leads DO set-point
to the minimum value along the whole week; then, it is assumed that higher N/E set-points are
not recommended. The maximum N/E index observed in the evaluation of existing strategies is
4.2 kgN/kWh and the idea of the proposed control approach is to improve that value. Therefore,
N/E Max values of the event-based controller to be evaluated are: 4.2 kgN/kWh, 4.5 kgN/kWh, and
5 kgN/kWh while N/Emin is fixed on 2 kgN/kW to provide a back-off with respect to the minimum
observed for existing control strategies.
The following procedure has been completed to find the best event-based controller parameters:
For each N/E Max value, different sampling times τs are tested: 15 min, 30 min, 60 min, and 120 min.
For N/E Max 4.2 kgN/kW and 5 kgN/kW, and the best sampling time, different values of ∆ are
considered: 0.25, 0.5, and 0.75 kgN/kWh.
In order to illustrate how N/E set-point trajectory and DO set-point vary with sampling time τs
and ∆ parameters of the event-based controller, details of the set-point movements with different τs
and ∆ for N/E Max = 5 kgN/kW and N/E Min = 2 kgN/kW are presented in Figure 13. In the figure, it
is possible to observe that τs affects the sensitivity and frequency of N/E set-point movements. The
smaller τs , which is 15 min, produces more trajectories between N/E Max and N/E Min since increasing
the frequency of DO monitoring makes it possible to detect more situations where DO levels reach
the minimum that can be unnoticed with larger sampling times. As a consequence, DO set-point
movements with smaller N/E Max are more frequent and smaller in magnitude. Regarding the effect
of ∆, in Figure 13, it can be observed that larger ∆ produce abrupt variations of N/E index set-point
while variations are gradual with smaller ∆; then, larger ∆ produce more trajectories between N/E Max
and N/E Min that are reflected as more frequent and smaller variations in DO set-point.
Figure 13. Effect of τs and ∆ on N/E index set-point and DO set-points.
The effect of N/E control approach with each set of tuning parameters on overall efficiency is
evaluated using the radar plots of performance indicators to find the best combination of parameters.
The radar plots for each combination of parameters have been obtained, and the area of the polygons
formed by each one is computed. The areas of the plots obtained for fixed ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh and
different τs are reported in Table 2. It is observed that the lowest area corresponds to sampling time of
30 min in all cases, which is the approximate time constant of the DO control loop.
The areas of the polygons obtained in the radar plots for different values of ∆ with N/E Max =
4.2 kgN/kWh, N/E Max = 5 kgN/kWh, and τs = 30 min are presented in Table 3. The lowest area is
obtained for ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh in both cases.
Finally, the areas of the polygons obtained in the radar plots for different values of N/E Max with
the best ∆ and τs : ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh and τs = 30 min are presented in Table 4. The lowest area is
obtained for N/E Max = 5 kgN/kWh.
Finally, Figure 14 shows the dynamics of the proposed N/E control approach in a representative
week with the best parameters of the event-based controller: N/E Max = 5 kgN/kWh, τs = 30 min
and ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh. It is observed that N/E index dynamic response follows the N/E set-point
trajectory given by an event based controller adjusting DO set-point. DO set-point is adjusted by KLa
movements computed by an internal DO controller.
Table 2. Radar area of N/E control strategy with different N/E Max and sampling time τs and
∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh.
Strategy Radar Area m2

N/E SP: 2–4.2 (15 min) 2.183
N/E SP: 2–4.2 (30 min) 1.232
N/E SP: 2–4.2 (60 min) 2.356
N/E SP: 2–4.2 (120 min) 2.308
N/E SP: 2–4.5 (15 min) 2.237
N/E SP: 2–4.5 (30 min) 1.164
N/E SP: 2–4.5 (60 min) 2.202
N/E SP: 2–4.5 (120 min) 2.320
N/E SP: 2–5 (15 min) 2.576
N/E SP: 2–5 (30 min) 1.391
N/E SP: 2–5 (60 min) 2.256
N/E SP: 2–5 (120 min) 2.368
Table 3. Radar area of N/E control strategy with different N/E Max and ∆.

N/E SP: 2–4.2 (0.25) 2.275
N/E SP: 2–4.2 (0.50) 1.500
N/E SP: 2–4.2 (0.75) 2.202
N/E SP: 2–5 (0.25) 2.321
N/E SP: 2–5 (0.50) 1.201
N/E SP: 2–5 (0.75) 2.536
Table 4. Radar area of N/E control strategy with different N/E Max , τs = 30 min and ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh.

N/E SP: 2–4.2 2.317
N/E SP: 2–4.5 1.039
N/E SP: 2–5 0.791
Figure 14. Dynamics of the proposed N/E control approach, N/E tracking, and DO control variables
in a representative summer week.
6. Effect on Process Behavior and Global Performance: N/E Control Strategy vs.
Existing Strategies
In Section 4, it was demonstrated that the typical control strategy that produces the major
improvement of overall performance is the ammonium-based control with SPNH = 1 (Cascade
SPNH = 1). In this section, Cascade SPNH = 1 strategy is compared with the proposed N/E
control approach using the best set of tuning parameters: N/E Max = 5 kgN/kWh, τs = 30 min,
∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh in terms of the dynamic behavior of efficiency indicators and key operation
variables and global performance improvement achieved in the whole operation period.
The evolution of N/E and R-COD/E in the evaluation period is presented in Figure 15. Similar
patterns of the indicators are produced by both strategies, but, in most of the operating period (weeks
10 to 48), the N/E control strategy produces similar or higher values of the N/E index than cascade
control. N/E efficiency increases with cascade control in the first 10 weeks corresponding to higher
temperatures when cascade scheme tends to lead DO set-point to the lower bound, but, the rest of the
time, the N/E control strategy produces equal or better N/E values, especially in the colder period
(weeks 20 to 35), when cascade strategy tries to compensate for temperature effect increasing DO
set-point and N/E control reduces DO set-point to increase N/E efficiency. Similar observations are
made respect to R-COD/E profile, with the particularity that a major improvement of the index is
observed in the colder period with N/E control strategy.
Figure 15. Weekly profiles of of N/E index (kgN/kWh) and R-COD/E (kgCOD/kWh) index for
Cascade SPNH = 1 and N/E control approach.
The evolution of D-TE and COD/N ratio in the 2nd reactor is shown in Figure 16. As in the case
of existing control strategies, a minimal effect of control strategies on D-TE profile (pollution removal
with respect to influent flow rate) is observed, and the evolution of COD/N ratio in the second reactor
shows that slightly larger values are obtained with N/E control strategy in most of the operation
period, especially in the colder weeks (Week 20–35) that indicate that availability of organic matter to
be used as substrate is improved in some degree.
Annual average values of performance indicators are computed for both control strategies and
presented in Table 5. The effect of executing control actions based on the regulation of an efficiency
index that accounts for energy requirement of the full plant is notorious, and all performance indicators
associated with energy use are improved with N/E control strategy except pumping energy (PE) and
heating energy (HE) that are not affected by control actions. It was a positive effect of cascade control
scheme that has been leveraged with the regulation of the efficiency index. The operation costs (OCI)
are reduced due to energy savings and the amount of CO2 emissions is similar with both strategies.
Regarding effluent quality requirements, EQI is worsened with N/E control as well as S NH violations,
but Ntot violations are reduced in frequency and magnitude. This trend is observed in a radar plot
shown in Figure 17. The global effect of control strategies on performance is quantified with an
area of the polygon formed in radar plot (Table 5), that is reduced approximately 10% with N/E
control strategy.
Finally, a comparison of dynamic performance based on the observation of effluent quality
indicators as EQI and total nitrogen concentration in the effluent (Ntot ) is made between DO default,
Cascade SPNH = 1, and N/E control. Those dynamic profiles are presented in Figure 18, to show that
an N/E control strategy produces lower values of Ntot than the other strategies in the whole operation
period. Ntot is directly involved in the N/E index used as a control variable. On the other hand, EQI
that measures other impacts on effluent quality is slightly improved by N/E control in the warmer
weeks of the operation period but is worsened in the colder weeks.
Figure 16. Weekly profiles of IQI-EQI/Qin (kg/m3 ) index and COD/N ratio (gCOD/gN) in the 2nd
reactor for Cascade SPNH = 1 and N/E control approach.
Table 5. Comparison of performance indicators for Cascade SPNH = 1 and N/E control strategy.
Performance Indicator Cascade N/E Control

SPN H = 1
IQI/(IQI-EQI) 1.077 1.079
EQI (kg/d) 5374 5494
CO2P (kg CO2 /kg) 0.048 0.047
OCI (EUR/d) 9023 8760
Electricity (kWh/d) 5016 4757
AE (kWh/d) 3803 3544
PE (kWh/d) 445.45 445.45
HE (kWh/d) 4225 4225
TEQ (kWh/m3 ) 0.447 0.435
NEQ (kWh/m3 ) 0.161 0.149
External AE (kWh/d) 2116 1857
Ntot violations (%) 0.5 0.21
Ntot violations (occur) 12 9
Ntot violations (days) 2 0.71
S NH violations (%) 3.4 11.9
S NH violations (occur) 116 143
S NH violations (days) 12.5 43.2
COD violations (%) 0.06 0.06
SS violations (%) 0.34 0.34
Radar Area 2.601 2.347
Figure 17. Radar plot of performance indicators for the comparison between Cascade SPNH = 1 and
N/E control strategy.
Figure 18. Evolution of the EQI index and Ntot /Qin in the whole operation period—weekly average values.
The use of the simple PI controllers makes feasible the full-scale implementation of the proposed
N/E control strategy. It is possible to compute the N/E index using online measures from available
sensors to estimate nitrogen removal term, and energy term can be computed from power data from
pumps, blowers, and heating equipment. The rest of the variables involved in the proposed control
scheme have been implemented in previous works [27,28] using available DO sensors, ammonium
sensors, and nitrate sensors.
7. Conclusions
In this paper, the N/E index, defined as the ratio between the amount of nitrogenated compounds
eliminated (kgN) and the energy (kWh) required by the whole plant to eliminate that amount of
nitrogen (N/E index), is used as a global indicator of plant performance. The evaluation of existing
control strategies (DO control, cascade control of effluent ammonium concentration, and combined
nitrates and DO control) in the BSM2 model showed that cascade control (SPNH = 1 g/m3 ) produces
the best performance from a global viewpoint, exhibiting the lower values of most of the performance
indicators associated with energy use, CO2 emissions, effluent quality, and effluent violations. In the
implementation of control approach based on the control of N/E index, the event-based control
algorithm is used to produce a variable N/E set-point that detects when inadmissible values of DO
concentration (0.5 g/m3 ) are reached. PI controllers prove themselves to be effective to introduce some
sense of optimization in the control approach producing the control actions that lead the N/E index to
the desired values with a simple control law. From the evaluation of different tuning parameters for
the event-based N/E control approach, the best parameters were determined: N/E Max = 5 kgN/kWh,
N/E Min = 2 kgN/kWh, τs = 30 min, ∆ = 0.5 kgN/kWh. The N/E index control approach using
the best tuning parameters reduced the area of the polygonal figure of radar plot by 9% when
comparing with the best existing strategy (cascade control SPNH = 1 g/m3 ) that is associated with
the simultaneous improvement of more performance indicators. These results show the possibilities
of the N/E index to be used as an indicator of global performance of WWTPs. It provides a link
between water line objectives and energy consumption in the whole plant that can be exploited to
introduce plantwide considerations in alternative control strategies formulated to drive the plant to
operating conditions that optimize the overall process efficiency. The combination with other efficiency
indicators is considered for future work.
The use of the simple PI controllers makes feasible the full-scale implementation of the proposed
N/E control strategy. It is possible to compute the N/E index using online measures from available
sensors to estimate nitrogen removal term, and energy term can be computed from power data from
pumps, blowers, and heating equipment [22]. The rest of variables involved in the proposed control
scheme have been implemented in previous works [27,28] using available DO sensors, ammonium
sensors, and nitrate sensors.
Author Contributions: S.R., R.V. and P.V. conceived and designed the general approach; S.R performed the
simulations; M.F. and M.M. contributed to the simulation interpretations; writing-review and editing, S.R., R.V.
and P.V.; supervision, R.V.; S.R. wrote the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This work has received funds from the Ministerio de y Competitividad (MINECO) projects DPI2015-
67341-C2-1-R, DPI2016-77271-R, and also with FEDER funding. APC have been covered from such projects.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank the support of the Spanish Government through the Ministerio de
Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) projects DPI2015-67341-C2-1-R, DPI2016-77271-R, and also with FEDER
funding. The authors would also like to thank the WWTP of Salamanca (Aqualia) for allowing our research group
to visit, and sharing the plant, in addition to the IWA Task Group from the Department of Industrial Electrical
Engineering and Automation (IEA), Lund University, Sweden (Ulf Jeppsson, Christian Rosen) for the BSM1 models.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Appendix A
Appendix A.1. N/E Index Controller Tuning

An appropriated controller tuning is important also for control system performance. The internal
PI controller that manipulates KLa of the aerobic reactors to regulate DO in the 4th reactor uses the
default tuning parameters of BSM2 platform [20]. Therefore, it can be considered as an already existing
controller. For the tuning of the external PI that manipulates DO set-point to regulate N/E index, the
identification of the model of the system is necessary. This controller is tuned on the basis of a first
order filter with unitary gain and time constant of 0.1 that represent physical delay of the process.
To obtain the model, step changes are applied to the DO set-point considering constant influent flow
and influent concentrations corresponding to BSM2 steady state operation. The N/E index response
(Figure A1) is obtained and approximated with a first order model:
N/E K 0.25
= = . (A1)
DO τ·s+1 0.2 · s + 1
On the basis of this first order model, an Internal Model Control (IMC) approach is followed
to design the PI controller. PI = K p + K p /Ti s [41]. The resulting PI controller parameters obey the
following expressions that relate PI parameters with first order model:
Ti = τ, (A2)
τ
Kp = . (A3)
λ·K
A tuning value of λ = 0.8 has been taken.
Figure A1. N/E index response to step changes in DO concentration.
References
1. Meneses, M.; Concepcion, H.; Vrecko, D.; Vilanova, R. Life Cycle Assessment as an environmental evaluation
tool for control strategies in wastewater treatment plants. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 653–661. [CrossRef]
2. Meneses, M.; Concepcion, H.; Vilanova, R. Joint Environmental and Economical Analysis of Wastewater
Treatment Plants Control Strategies: A Benchmark Scenario Analysis. Sustainability 2016, 8, 360. [CrossRef]
3. Flores-Alsina, X.; Arnell, M.; Amerlinck, Y.; Corominas, L.; Gernaey, K.V.; Guo, L.; Lindblom, E.; Nopens, I.;
Porro, J.; Shaw, A.; et al. Balancing effluent quality, economic cost and greenhouse gas emissions during
the evaluation of (plant-wide) control/operational strategies in WWTPs. Sci. Total Environ. 2014, 466–467,
616–624. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Gordon, G.T.; McCann, B.P. Basis for the development of sustainable optimisation indicators for activated
sludge wastewater treatment plants in the Republic of Ireland. WAter Sci. Technol. 2014, 71, 131–138.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Barbu, M.; Santin, I.; Vilanova, R. Applying Control Actions for Water Line and Sludge Line To Increase
Wastewater Treatment Plant Performance. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018, 57, 5630–5638. [CrossRef]
6. Quadros, S.; Joao Rosa, M.; Alegre, H.; Silva, C. A performance indicators system for urban wastewater
treatment plants. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 62, 2398–2407. [CrossRef]
7. Mauricio-Iglesias, M.; Garrido, J.M.; Lema, J.M. Operation of an innovative WWTP with environmental
objectives. A model-based analysis. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016, 49, 539–543. [CrossRef]
8. Puleo, V.; Notaro, V.; Freni, G.; La Loggia, G. Multicriteria performance analysis of an integrated urban
wastewater system for energy management. J. Hydroinformatics 2017, 19, 865–878. [CrossRef]
9. Flores-Alsina, X.; Corominas, L.; Snip, L.; Vanrolleghem, P.A. Including greenhouse gas emissions during
benchmarking of wastewater treatment plant control strategies. Water Res. 2011, 45, 4700–4710. [CrossRef]
10. Rodriguez-Garcia, G.; Molinos-Senante, M.; Hospido, A.; Hernández-Sancho, F.; Moreira, M.; Feijoo, G.
Environmental and economic profile of six typologies of wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2011,
45, 5997–6010. [CrossRef]
11. Lemos, D.; Dias, A.C.; Gabarrell, X.; Arroja, L. Environmental assessment of an urban water system.
J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 54, 157–165. [CrossRef]
12. Stare, A.; Vrečko, D.; Hvala, N.; Strmčnik, S. Comparison of control strategies for nitrogen removal in an
activated sludge process in terms of operating costs: A simulation study. Water Res. 2007, 41, 2004–2014.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Rieger, L.; Jones, R.M.; Dold, P.; Bott, C. Ammonia-based feedforward and feedback aeration control in
activated sludge processes. Water Environ. Res. 2014, 86, 63–73. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Santin, I.; Pedret, C.; Vilanova, R. Fuzzy Control and Model Predictive Control Configurations for Effluent
Violations Removal in Wastewater Treatment Plants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 2763–2775. [CrossRef]
15. Machado, V.C.; Gabriel, D.; Lafuente, J.; Baeza, J.A. Cost and effluent quality controllers design based on the
relative gain array for a nutrient removal WWTP. Water Res. 2009, 43, 5129–5141. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Vega, P.; Revollar, S.; Francisco, M.; MartÃn, J. Integration of set point optimization techniques into nonlinear
MPC for improving the operation of WWTPs. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2014, 68, 78–95. [CrossRef]
17. Santin, I.; Pedret, C.; Vilanova, R. Applying variable dissolved oxygen set point in a two level hierarchical
control structure to a wastewater treatment process. J. Process. Control. 2015, 28, 40–55. [CrossRef]
18. Revollar, S.; Vega, P.; Vilanova, R.; Francisco, M. Optimal Control of Wastewater Treatment Plants Using
Economic-Oriented Model Predictive Dynamic Strategies. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 813. [CrossRef]
19. Barbu, M.; Vilanova, R.; Meneses, M.; Santin, I. On the evaluation of the global impact of control strategies
applied to wastewater treatment plants. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 396–405. [CrossRef]
20. Alex, J.; Benedetti, L.; Copp, J.; Gernaey, J.; Jeppsson, U.; Nopens, I.; Pons, M.; Rosen, C.; Steyer, J.;
Vanrolleghem, P. Benchmark Simulation Model no. 2 (BSM2). In Technical Report 3, IWA Taskgroup on
Benchmarking of Control Strategies for WWTPs; International Water Association: London, UK, 2018.
21. Alex, J.; Benedetti, L.; Copp, J.; Gernaey, J.; Jeppsson, U.; Nopens, I.; Pons, M.; Rieger, L.; Rosen, C.;
Steyer, J.; et al. Benchmark Simulation Model no. 1 (BSM1). In Technical Report 1, IWA Taskgroup on
Benchmarking of Control Strategies for WWTPs; Dpt. of Industrial Electrical Engineering and Automation,
Lund University: Lund, Sweden, 2008.
22. Torregrossa, D.; Schutz, G.; Cornelissen, A.; Hernández-Sancho, F.; Hansen, J. Energy saving in WWTP:
Daily benchmarking under uncertainty and data availability limitations. Environ. Res. 2016, 148, 330–337.
[CrossRef]
23. Longo, S.; d’Antoni, B.M.; Bongards, M.; Chaparro, A.; Cronrath, A.; Fatone, F.; Lema, J.M.; Mauricio-Iglesias, M.;
Soares, A.; Hospido, A. Monitoring and diagnosis of energy consumption in wastewater treatment plants. A
state of the art and proposals for improvement. Appl. Energy 2016, 179, 1251–1268. [CrossRef]
24. Amand, L.; Olsson, G.; Carlsson, B. Aeration control-a review. Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 67, 2374–2398.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Olsson, G. ICA and me a subjective review. Water Res. 2012, 46, 1585–1624. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. O’Brien, M.; Mack, J.; Lennox, B.; Lovett, D.; Wall, A. Model predictive control of an activated sludge process:
A case study. Control. Eng. Pract. 2011, 19, 54–61. [CrossRef]
27. Leiv Rieger, Imre Takács, H.S. Improving Nutrient Removal While Reducing Carbon Footprint at Three
Swiss WWTPs Thanks to Advanced Control. Water Environ. Res. 2012, 84, 170–188. [CrossRef]
28. Mulas, M.; Tronci, S.; Corona, F.; Haimi, H.; Lindell, P.; Heinonen, M.; Vahala, R.; Baratti, R. An application of
predictive control to the Viikinmäki wastewater treatment plant. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2013, 46, 18–23. [CrossRef]
29. Drewnowski, J. Advanced Supervisory Control System Implemented at Full-Scale WWTP—A Case Study of
Optimization and Energy Balance Improvement. Water 2019, 11, 1218. [CrossRef]
30. Torregrossa, D.; Castellet-Viciano, L.; Hernández-Sancho, F. A data analysis approach to evaluate the impact
of the capacity utilization on the energy consumption of wastewater treatment plants. Sustain. Cities Soc.
2019, 45, 307–313. [CrossRef]
31. Revollar, S.; Vilanova, R.; Francisco, M.; Vega, P. PI Dissolved Oxygen control in wastewater treatment plants
for plantwide nitrogen removal efficiency. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 450–455. [CrossRef]
32. Revollar, S.; Vega, P.; Francisco, M.; Vilanova, R. A hierachical Plant wide operation in wastewater treatment
plants: Overall efficiency index control and event-based reference management. In Proceedings of the
2018 22nd International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing (ICSTCC), Sinaia, Romania,
10–12 October 2018; pp. 201–206.
33. Jeppsson, U.; Pons, M.N.; Nopens, I.; Alex, J.; Copp, J.; Gernaey, K.; Rosen, C.; Steyer, J.P.; Vanrolleghem, P.
Benchmark Simulation Model No 2: General protocol and exploratory case studies. Water Sci. Technol. 2007,
56, 67–78. [CrossRef]
34. Nopens, I.; Benedetti, L.; Jeppsson, U.; Pons, M.N.; Alex, J.; Copp, J.B.; Gernaey, K.V.; Rosen, C.; Steyer, J.P.;
Vanrolleghem, P.A. Benchmark Simulation Model No 2: Finalisation of plant layout and default control
strategy. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 62, 1967–1974. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Henze, M.; Grady, C.; Gujer, W.; Marais, G.; Matsuo, T. Activated Sludge Model 1. In IAWQ Scientific and
Technical Report 1; IAWQ: London, UK, 1987.
36. Takács, I.; Patry, G.; Nolasco, D. A dynamic model of the clarification-thickening process. Water Res. 1991,
25, 1263–1271. [CrossRef]
37. Batstone, D.; Keller, J.; Angelidaki, R.; Kalyuzhnyi, S.; Pavlostathis, S.; Rozzi, A.; Sanders, W.; Siegrist, H.;
Vavilin, V. Anaerobic Digestion Model No.1, STR No.13; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2002.
38. Gernaey, K.V.; Flores-Alsina, X.; Rosen, C.; Benedetti, L.; Jeppsson, U. Dynamic Influent Pollutant Disturbance
Scenario Generation Using a Phenomenological Modelling Approach. Environ. Model. Softw. 2011, 26, 1255–1267.
[CrossRef]
39. Makinia, J. Mathematical Model and Computer Simulation of Activated Sludge Systems; IWA Publishing: London,
UK, 2010.
40. Takacs, I.; Vanrolleghem, P. Elemental Balances in Activated Sludge Modelling; IWA Publishing: London,
UK, 2006.
41. Rivera, D.E.; Morari, M.; Skogestad, S. Internal model control: PID controller design. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process
Des. Dev. 1986, 25, 252–265. [CrossRef]
c 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation: Simple Control Schemes With A Holistic Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation: Simple Control Schemes With A Holistic Perspective

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation: Simple Control Schemes With A Holistic Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 768; doi:10.3390/su12030768 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

2. Description of Process and Control Strategies

Figure 1. BSM2 plant with notation used for flow rates.

2.1. Description of Operation and Control Strategies

2.2. Evaluation Criteria in BSM2

Ntot is calculated as the sum of S NO and Kjeldahl nitrogen:

HEnet (kWh) = max (0, HE − 7 · METprod ), (8)

3. Assessment of Global WWTP Performance

N kgN IQN − EQN

R − COD kgCOD CODi − CODe

where CODi is given by Equation (3).

kg CO2 CO2ASP + CO2AD

The net energy consumption:

kWh E(kWh) AE + PE + ME + HEnet − 0.5 · (7 · METprod − HE)

4. Evaluation of Existing PI-Based Control Strategies

Figure 6. N/E index profile in the warmest and coldest periods.

Table 1. Performance indicators for the existing control strategies.

Performance Indicator DO Default DO+NO Cascade Cascade

From an overview of performance indicators presented in Table 1, it is corroborated that cascade

5. N/E Index Control Approach

Figure 9. Block diagram representing the proposed N/E control strategy.

5.1. Event-Based Controller Algorithm

• τs : Sampling time at which the event-based detector will operate.

The logic of the event-based reference update is as follows:

Tuning of Event-Based N/E Controller Parameters

Figure 13. Effect of τs and ∆ on N/E index set-point and DO set-points.

Strategy Radar Area m2

Strategy Radar Area m2

Strategy Radar Area m2

Performance Indicator Cascade N/E Control

Appendix A.1. N/E Index Controller Tuning

Figure A1. N/E index response to step changes in DO concentration.

You might also like