Randomized trial compares PID and MPC performances in urban water systems, suggesting MPC may reduce errors effectively.
Urban water SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) loops must track setpoints (SP) under actuator constraints while remaining robust to disturbances and model uncertainty. This study presents a reproducible benchmarking framework for fair comparison of constrained model predictive control (MPC) and conventional proportional-integral-derivative (PID) under identical sampled-data execution and saturation limits. The framework represents reduced-order SCADA-type single-loop regulation using a discrete-time single-input single-output (SISO) deviation model with a strict fairness protocol (T_s = 0.1 s, u ∈ [−1, 1], fixed tuning). Three scenarios are evaluated: nominal step tracking, constant input disturbance (d = −0.25), and plant model mismatch via increased damping. Performance is assessed using transient metrics, root mean square error (RMSE), integral absolute error (IAE), steady-state error, and saturation activity. Results show MPC achieves faster responses and lower error via brief saturation, while PID remains largely unsaturated but slower. Under disturbance, both exhibit steady-state offset; however, MPC reduces overall and final error, motivating offset-free MPC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parsapour et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: