Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

Paper:

Optimal Fuzzy Self-Tuning of PI Controller Using GA

Optimal Fuzzy Self-Tuning of PI Controller Using Genetic Algorithm for Induction Motor Speed Control

Ismail K. Bouserhane , Abdeldjebar Hazzab , Abdelkrim Boucheta ,

Benyounes

Mazari , and Rahli Mostefa

University Center of Bechar, B.P 417 Bechar 08000, Algeria Laboratoire de D´eveloppement et des Entraˆınements Electriques LDEE, University of Sciences and Technology of Oran, B.P 1523 El-M’naouer (31000), Oran, Algeria E-mail: bou isma@yahoo.fr

[Received June 10, 2007; accepted August 29, 2007]

We present induction motor speed control using opti- mal PI controller fuzzy gain scheduling. To improve PI controller performance, we designed fuzzy PI con- troller gain tuning for indirect-field oriented IM speed control using fuzzy rules on-line to adapt PI controller parameters based on error and its first time derivative. To overcome the major disadvantage of fuzzy logic control, i.e., the lack of design technique, we propose optimization of fuzzy logic tuning parameters using a genetic algorithm. Optimally designed fuzzy logic provides suitable PI controller gain to achieve the de- sired speed while varying load torque and parameters. Simulation demonstrated the performance of the pro- posed optimal fuzzy-logic tuning PI controller, and nu- merical validation results of our proposal showed per- formance comparable to a fuzzy controller having pa- rameters chosen by a human operator.

Keywords: vector control, fuzzy logic, genetic algo- rithm, fuzzy-genetic systems, PI controller tuning

1. Introduction

Important progress in power electronics and micro- computing has enabled considerable advances in the con- trol of AC equipment and real-time implantation appli- cations. AC motors, especially induction motors (IM), enjoy inherent advantages, such as simplicity, reliability, low cost, and almost maintenance-free electrical drives [1, 2], although their control remains challenging in high- performance dynamic industrial applications because sig- nificant nonlinearity and many parameters, mainly rotor resistance, vary with operating conditions. For long years, direct current (DC) equipment constituted the primary electromechanical source for variable speed applications because of ease of control, where torque and flux are nat- urally decoupled and can be controlled independently by torque and flux producing current [1–3]. Field-oriented control is widely used in industry for high performance IM drives and provides the same per-

Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.2 No.2, 2008

formance as separately excited DC equipment [1, 2, 4]. Knowledge of synchronous angular velocity is often nec- essary in phase transformation to achieve favorable de- coupling control between motor torque and rotor flux, the same as for separately excited DC equipment. This is done by one of two types of vector control, direct or in- direct. Both have been implemented in industrial drives demonstrating performances suitable for a wide range of technological applications, but IM control performance is still influenced by uncertainty such as mechanical param- eter variation, external disturbance, and unstructured un- certainty due to non ideal field orientation in a transient state. To deal with such uncertainty, much research has been applied to lessen effects. PID controllers are most widely used in industrial applications due to their simple struc- ture, easy design, and effectiveness in a variety of oper- ating conditions, but conventional PI and PID controllers, and their various versions are not robust enough to pro- vide high performance if the controlled plant is highly nonlinear [5, 6]. To overcome this problem, the fuzzy- logic controller (FLC) is used for motor control. The mathematical FLC tool is fuzzy set theory, intro- duced by Zadeh [4, 7, 8], which adjusts control parame- ters using fuzzy rules, i.e., a logical model of human be- havior, for process control. The main advantages of FLCs over conventional controllers are there are usefulness in controller design when the plant model is unknown or difficult to develop. It does not require an exact pro- cess model and is robust against disturbance, large uncer- tainty, and variations in process behavior [8, 9]. Efforts have been made to use fuzzy control to control electrical drives [9–12]. Uddin et al. [9] proposed induction mo- tor speed control based on indirect vector control using fuzzy logic. Liaw and Lin proposed a model following fuzzy adaptation to reduce the effects of parameter varia- tion, but fuzzy rules must be constructed beforehand us- ing time-consuming trial-and-error tuning [10]. Tzou and Lin proposed fuzzy tuning current-vector control, but it’s the stability can not be guaranteed [11]. Mohamed and Hew [12] proposed applying practical fuzzy logic con- trol (FLC) applied to a two-phase (d-q) current induc-

85

Bousserhane, I. K. et al.

tion motor. The combination of conventional and intel- ligent fuzzy control for electrical motor control has also grown rapidly [6, 13–15]. Radaideh and Hayajneh [13] derived fuzzy gain scheduling for the PID controller, in which fuzzy rules are used online to adjust controller pa- rameters based on error and its derivative. Fuzzy logic- based self-tuning PI control proposed by Abdul-Mannan et al. [6] for IM drive speed control with IFO used well- designed fuzzy logic providing suitable PI controller gain. Wai et al. [14] proposed adaptive fuzzy sliding-mode con- trol with an integral-operation switching surface to con- trol electrical servo drive positioning. Visioli [15] pro- posed a different way based on fuzzy logic for tuning PID controllers, in which a fuzzy mechanism is used to im- prove performance by Ziegler-Nichols parameters. The major drawback of fuzzy control is the lack of de- sign techniques [16, 17]. Most fuzzy rules are based on human knowledge and differ among persons despite the same system performance. The selection of suitable fuzzy rules, membership functions, and their definitions in the universe of discourse invariable involves painstaking trial- and-error [17]. We address using genetic algorithms to overcome these drawbacks to make design tasks easier. Our goal was to find an optimal rule-base and membership functions of fuzzy logic. Such an optimal FLC could pro- vide ideal control performance and achieve desired speed. Genetic algorithms (GAs) are general-purpose opti- mization techniques that use the direct analogy of natu- ral evolution involving survival of the fittest [18]. GAs, developed by Holland in 1962, use multiple concurrent search points called chromosomes, that process three ge- netic operations – reproduction, crossover, and mutation – to generate new search points called offspring for sub- sequent iterations. Some or all members of the current solution set are replaced with newly created members to improve solution set quality with increasing numbers of iterations. Since GAs simultaneously evaluate many points in pa- rameter space, they are likely to converge toward a global solution [18, 19]. GAs have been implemented in con- trol for improving overall system performance [20–24]. In most controller design, parameters must be optimized to give better overall control performance [16, 19]. Sun- dareswaran and Vasu [20] proposed designing an optimal PI controller for separately excited DC motor drive speed control. Elsewhere [21], GAs are proposed for online auto tuning PID controller parameters in which GAs are used to search for optimal PID parameters that minimize in- tegral absolute error (IAE). Rahman [22] proposed lab- oratory testing GAs based on a self-tuned PI controller. We used GAs to obtain optimized PI constants for inte- rior permanent synchronous motor (IPMSM) speed con- trol. Lin and Chou [23] developed an adaptive sliding mode controller based on real-coded GAs for the online tuning of adaptive algorithm adaptation gain in sliding mode controllers to enhance IM servo drive control. In [24], online tuning of control gain in multi segment slid- ing mode control MSSMCs was proposed to reduce chat- ter in torque commands while retaining favorable control

86

performance. This underlying GA-based global optimiza- tion was applied to several FLC applications [25]. In [25], fuzzy controller parameters, including normalization fac- tors, and membership functions are translated into binary bit strings and processed using GAs to be optimized for the object function used. Kuo and Li [26] used GAs to produce rule tables for fuzzy PI and PD controllers. Xia et al. [27] proposed auto-tuning of fuzzy controller based on GAs for brushless DC motor speed control. Uddin et al. [28] used GAs to design speed control based on FLCs for an interior permanent synchronous motor. With this design, the controller has less computational burden, mak- ing it suitable for real-time use. We propose designing optimal PI controller fuzzy gain tuning based on GAs to enhance IM drive control perfor- mance. We studied fuzzy gain tuning of conventional PI controllers in which fuzzy logic is used online to generate PI controller parameters. This paper is organized as fol- lows: Section 2 reviews the indirect field-oriented control (FOC) principle of induction motors. Section 3 discusses the development of online PI controller tuning using FLC based on error and its first time derivative. Section 4 de- velops optimization to optimize FLCs and optimal fuzzy gain tuning of PI controllers. Section 5 presents simula- tion results and Section 6 presents conclusions.

2. Indirect

Field-Oriented

Induction

Motor

Control

A dynamic three-phase, Y-connected induction motor model is expressed in a d-q synchronously rotating frame as follows [1–3]:

di

ds

dt

1

σL s V ds R s L

L

2

m

2

r

R r i ds L m R r

L

2

r

φ

dr

L m

L

r

φ qr ω r

ω e i qs

.

.

.

di

qs

σL s V qs R s L

L

1

m

2

r

R r i qs

L

m

.

L

r

.

2

 

dt

dφ dr

L m R r

dt

L

r

dφ qr

L m R r

dt

L

r

dω r

dt

3 P 2 L m 2 L r J

L m R r

L

2

r

R r

L r

φ qr ω e i ds .

i ds

φ dr ω e ω r φ qr .

R r

L r

φ qr

.

J ω r

i qs ω e ω r φ dr

i qs φ dr i ds φ qr f c

.

.

. (1)

φ dr ω r

.

.

.

.

.

.

P

J

. (2)

. (3)

. (4)

T l (5)

Where R s is the stator resistance per phase, R r rotor re- sistance per phase referencing the stator, L m magnetizing inductance per phase, L s stator inductance per phase, L r rotor inductance per phase referencing the stator, ω e syn- chronous frequency, ω r rotor frequency, P the number of pole pairs, J inertia moment, τ r L r R r the rotor time- constant, σ 1 L m L s L r the leakage coefficient, i ds and i qs d-axis and q-axis stator current, φ dr and φ qr d-axis and q-axis rotor flux, and V ds and V qs d-axis and q-axis

2

Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.2 No.2, 2008