Load-frequency and voltage control for power quality enhancement in a SPV/Wind utility-tied system using GA & PSO optimization

Sachin Kumar , Akhil Gupta , Ranjit Kumar Bindal
{"title":"Load-frequency and voltage control for power quality enhancement in a SPV/Wind utility-tied system using GA & PSO optimization","authors":"Sachin Kumar ,&nbsp;Akhil Gupta ,&nbsp;Ranjit Kumar Bindal","doi":"10.1016/j.rico.2024.100442","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Load Frequency Control (LFC) and Voltage Control (VC) are critical aspects of hybrid generation systems. In this work, the performance comparison of three different control approaches for LFC and VC: Genetics Algorithm (GA)-tuned Proportional Integral Differentiator (PID), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)-PID, and a conventional PID controller is presented. Especially, the performance is assessed and analyzed for convergence speed and computational complexity for each approach. Mathematical framework for each approach is discussed, including the required equations for hybrid generation system. It is reported that the traditional PID controller exhibits fast convergence due to its direct adjustment of control parameters. Simulation results reveal that it requires manual tuning and has low computational complexity. In contrast, the GA-PID utilizes a GA optimization process which automatically tunes the PID gains. Although, it may require multiple generations to converge to the optimal solution, however, it offers better control performance. Moreso, it comes at the cost of higher computational complexity compared to the traditional PID controller. In contrast, the PSO-PID employs an algorithm for parameter optimization. It converges faster than the GA-PID but still requires more iterations than the traditional PID controller. Similar to the GA-PID, it has higher computational complexity due to fitness function evaluation and particle updates. The optimization results provide insights into the convergence speed and computational complexity trade-offs between the three control approaches. Practitioners in the field of hybrid energy systems can utilize the outcomes to make informed decisions based on their specific requirements and available computational resources.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34733,"journal":{"name":"Results in Control and Optimization","volume":"16 ","pages":"Article 100442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666720724000729/pdfft?md5=d7f5bde332790462d5a6b1cdb5aa8932&pid=1-s2.0-S2666720724000729-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Results in Control and Optimization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666720724000729","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Load Frequency Control (LFC) and Voltage Control (VC) are critical aspects of hybrid generation systems. In this work, the performance comparison of three different control approaches for LFC and VC: Genetics Algorithm (GA)-tuned Proportional Integral Differentiator (PID), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)-PID, and a conventional PID controller is presented. Especially, the performance is assessed and analyzed for convergence speed and computational complexity for each approach. Mathematical framework for each approach is discussed, including the required equations for hybrid generation system. It is reported that the traditional PID controller exhibits fast convergence due to its direct adjustment of control parameters. Simulation results reveal that it requires manual tuning and has low computational complexity. In contrast, the GA-PID utilizes a GA optimization process which automatically tunes the PID gains. Although, it may require multiple generations to converge to the optimal solution, however, it offers better control performance. Moreso, it comes at the cost of higher computational complexity compared to the traditional PID controller. In contrast, the PSO-PID employs an algorithm for parameter optimization. It converges faster than the GA-PID but still requires more iterations than the traditional PID controller. Similar to the GA-PID, it has higher computational complexity due to fitness function evaluation and particle updates. The optimization results provide insights into the convergence speed and computational complexity trade-offs between the three control approaches. Practitioners in the field of hybrid energy systems can utilize the outcomes to make informed decisions based on their specific requirements and available computational resources.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用 GA 和 PSO 优化实现负载-频率和电压控制,以提高太阳能光伏发电/风力发电公用事业并网系统的电能质量
负载频率控制(LFC)和电压控制(VC)是混合发电系统的关键环节。本研究比较了三种不同的 LFC 和 VC 控制方法的性能:遗传算法(GA)调整的比例积分微分器(PID)、粒子群优化(PSO)PID 和传统 PID 控制器。特别是对每种方法的收敛速度和计算复杂度进行了性能评估和分析。讨论了每种方法的数学框架,包括混合发电系统所需的方程。据报告,传统的 PID 控制器由于可直接调整控制参数,因此收敛速度快。仿真结果表明,它需要手动调整,计算复杂度较低。相比之下,GA-PID 利用 GA 优化过程自动调整 PID 增益。虽然它可能需要多代才能收敛到最优解,但却能提供更好的控制性能。然而,与传统的 PID 控制器相比,它的代价是更高的计算复杂度。相比之下,PSO-PID 采用的是参数优化算法。它的收敛速度比 GA-PID 快,但仍比传统 PID 控制器需要更多的迭代。与 GA-PID 类似,它的计算复杂度也较高,这是因为需要进行适配函数评估和粒子更新。优化结果让人们深入了解了三种控制方法在收敛速度和计算复杂度方面的权衡。混合能源系统领域的从业人员可以利用这些结果,根据自己的具体要求和可用的计算资源做出明智的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Results in Control and Optimization
Results in Control and Optimization Mathematics-Control and Optimization
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
91 days
期刊最新文献
A novel approach in controlling the spread of a rumor within a crowd A comparison study on optical character recognition models in mathematical equations and in any language Multiple sclerosis diagnosis with brain MRI retrieval: A deep learning approach Integral invariant manifold method applied to a mathematical model of osteosarcoma Evaluating consumers benefits in electronic-commerce using fuzzy TOPSIS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1