Fast synchronization of distributed generators with power grid under transient conditions using hybrid optimization algorithm

Abstract

The integration of nonrenewable and renewable energy resources is growing rapidly due to energy demand and smart grid technologies. In power grids, the performance of synchronization is reduced by some issues such as frequency instability, voltage distortion, and voltage unbalance. This work presents the fast synchronization of the PV grid‐connected system utilized the hybrid optimized proportional resonant (PR) controller under transient condition. The proposed system is designed and controlled by the optimized PR controller strategy on stationary reference frame control. The AC voltage is switched into the AC grid voltage, and error can occur in the difference between the phase reference and measured value. So the current controller of the PR controller is considering the effects of harmonics. The controller is properly tuned by the hybrid algorithm of killer whale optimization (KWO) and the grasshopper optimization algorithm to reduce the harmonics. The synchronization reduces the phase angle, voltage, and frequency between the generator outcomes. The performance of a PV based optimized PR controller controlled the voltage source inverter to achieve the optimal signal of fast synchronization. The effect of total harmonic distortion transient response is improved by the well‐designed PR control parameters based LC filter. The proposed system is implemented in MATLAB/Simulink platform. The robustness of the system is compared with traditional controllers of the proportional integral derivative and proportional–integral controller.

A state‐of‐the‐art comprehensive review of modern control techniques for grid‐connected wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays distributed generation systems

“…Additionally, the GSC CB of PV arrays DGSs using PI control [99], adaptive PI control [100] and LBAC [103] offers lower settling times, that is, 0.09, 0.074 and 0.02 s, respectively (Figure 14a) than those achieved with the PI [68], dual dq theory [69], SOS‐PI [72] and GWO‐PI [72] control techniques for the WTs DGSs, that is, 0.2, 0.9, 1.51 and 1.21 s, respectively (Figure 11c). Similarly, the GSC CB of PV arrays systems implemented using FLC [104] and PR control [110] respectively presents much lower THDs of 0.26% and 0.23% (Figure 14c) unlike various advanced GSC CBs of WTs DGSs, for example, APRG [73], FIR [74], MPC [79] etc. as shown in Figure 11a.…”

“…The GSC CB using optimized PR control‐based CC in [110] offers a THD of 0.23%, which is lower than that obtained with the PI control (24.42%) [106]. To reduce harmonics, the proposed PR control [110] is optimally tuned using the grasshopper optimization and killer whale optimization‐based hybrid algorithm. However, under critical transient‐states, the appropriate dynamic response in terms of a reduced settling time and overshoot is not validated based on experimental investigations.…”

“…Additionally, the proposed DOB successfully estimates both the fixed offsets and disturbances with sinusoidal nature happening under voltage unbalance because of parameters uncertainties. The GSC CB using optimized PR control‐based CC in [110] offers a THD of 0.23%, which is lower than that obtained with the PI control (24.42%) [106]. To reduce harmonics, the proposed PR control [110] is optimally tuned using the grasshopper optimization and killer whale optimization‐based hybrid algorithm.…”

“…Also, the QC of the GSC CB is mostly realized using PI control [98,105]. Likewise, the dq-axis CC of the GSC CB comprises PI control [106], reduced-order generalized integrator using a complex coefficient (CC-ROGI) control [107], ISMC [108], MPC [109], feedback linearization (FL) control [7], PR control [110] and H ∞ control [111]. Finally, the commonly employed grid sync.…”