Designing a multi-stage PD(1+PI) controller for DC–DC buck converter

Shayeghi, Hossein; Rahnama, Alireza; Takorabet, N.; Thounthong, Phatiphat; Bizon, Nicu

doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2022.10.448

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the frequent approaches is to alter the common controllers' configuration to enhance their performance in desired control purposes [7,20]. The cascade type of the PID controller is offered in the form of PD(1+PI) and has been employed for a different purpose, including the LFC of the μGs, and has consistently outperformed its classical predecessor [21,22]. For LFC in conventional power systems, the (1+PD)-PID cascaded controller is utilized.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

TFODn‐FOPI multi‐stage controller design to maintain an islanded microgrid load‐frequency balance considering responsive loads support

Shayeghi

Rahnama

Bizon

2023

IET Generation Trans & Dist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern electrical power system design will increase renewable energy sources (RES) dominance. Rotating masses, the main source of inertia in power systems, have been greatly decreased in renewable energy producing systems. Thus, load–frequency equilibrium is an important indicator of these systems' performance and safety. This work introduces a fractional‐order (FO) operator‐based cascade control structure for islanded microgrid (μG) load‐frequency control (LFC). The structure utilizes a tilt–FO derivative with filter (TFODn) in the first level to reduce noise. The second level implements the proportional integral (PI) controller's FO form (FOPI), making it a tilt–FO derivative with a filter cascaded to the FOPI controller (TOFDn‐FOPI). The optimal controller parameters for quick dynamic responses with low frequency fluctuation are determined using a unique cost function and prairie dog optimization (PDO) algorithm. The LFC control loops have frequency deviation‐based responsive loads (RL). Control signal delays, RES output changes, parameter uncertainties, and cyber vandalism are examined. Laboratory‐scale tests also assessed the controller's practicality. The proposed controller outperforms standard and FO type proportional integral derivative (PID) and PD‐PI controllers. The TFODn‐FOPI controller is suitable for complicated closed‐loop systems like islanded μGs due to its faster error clearing, reduced RL capacity, and superior time and frequency domain indicators.

show abstract