2020
DOI: 10.1007/s13369-020-04761-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Novel Hybrid Fuzzy PD-TID Controller for Load Frequency Control of a Standalone Microgrid

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A modified moth swarm algorithm (mMSA) with a hybrid fuzzy PD-PI controller to achieve the frequency stability of a distributed HGS is described in [7]. In addition, a feedforward fractional-order PID strategy based on a harmony search algorithm is applied in [8] to regulate system frequency considering the integral of time multiplied squared error (ITSE), while the chaotic crow search algorithm is used to optimize the hybrid fuzzy proportional derivative-tilt integral derivative controller parameters to control the frequency of a standalone microgrid [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A modified moth swarm algorithm (mMSA) with a hybrid fuzzy PD-PI controller to achieve the frequency stability of a distributed HGS is described in [7]. In addition, a feedforward fractional-order PID strategy based on a harmony search algorithm is applied in [8] to regulate system frequency considering the integral of time multiplied squared error (ITSE), while the chaotic crow search algorithm is used to optimize the hybrid fuzzy proportional derivative-tilt integral derivative controller parameters to control the frequency of a standalone microgrid [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the performance efficacy of classical controllers is more likely to be dependent upon the optimization algorithms that have been deployed to optimize the controller gains. Several population-and stochastic-based searching algorithms reported in domain of LFC in optimizing classical controllers are chaotic atom search optimization (CASO) (Irudayaraj et al, 2022), many-objective optimization approach (MOOA) (Hajiakbari Fini et al, 2016), chaotic crow search (CCS) algorithm (Khokhar et al, 2021), gray wolf optimizer (GWO) (Sharma and Saikia, 2015), quadratic approach with pole compensator (QAWPC) (Hanwate and Hote, 2018), marine predator algorithm (MPA) (Yakout et al, 2021), Hooke-Jeeve's optimizer (HJO) (Chatterjee, 2010), quasioppositional harmony search algorithm (QOHSA) (Shankar and Mukherjee, 2016), chemical reaction optimizer (CRO) (Mohanty and Hota, 2018), hybrid artificial electric field algorithm (HAEFA) (Sai Kalyan et al, 2020), bacteria foraging optimization (BFOA) (Ali and Elazim, 2015), mine blast optimizer (MBO) (Alattar et al, 2019), particle swarm optimizer (PSO) (Magid and Abido, 2003), differential evolution (DE) (Kalyan and Suresh, 2021), combination of DE with pattern search (Sahu et al, 2015a) and AEFA (DE-AEFA) (Kalyan and Rao, 2021a), grasshopper optimizer (GHO), and cuckoo search approach (CSA) (Latif et al, 2018). Moreover, the conventional controllers exhibit efficacy in linearized models and could not maintain the stability of nonlinear interconnected power systems (IPS).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A nonlinear load frequency controller is developed in [8], also with sliding mode controller in [24], [25], however, they have more mathematical intricacies. More new optimization methods are implemented for this problem in [20][23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%