Comparative analysis of Cuk converter with proportional integral controller & proportional resonant controller

Author(s):  
Tejal Dinesh Patil ◽  
D. S. More
2022 ◽  
pp. 38-82
Author(s):  
Bhavya Dharmesh Pandya ◽  
Siddharth Joshi

The small-scale wind energy generation system is one of the solutions to empower the isolated loads and provides a promising solution to decrease the greenhouse effect. This chapter describes the simulation analysis for wind energy conversion system incorporated with maximum power point tracking feature. The MPPT algorithms like variable current perturb and observe algorithm and variable step perturb and observe algorithm are incorporated with WECS. The comparative analysis is done in the closed-loop model in continuous time-varying wind speed. The closed-loop simulation is performed using a conventional fixed gain controller. To address the limitations of the fixed gain controller, the analysis is done using the gain scheduling proportional integral controller and the good gain method to tune the proportional integral controller. The comparative analysis between the fixed gain controller, the gain scheduling proportional integral controller, and the good gain method to tune proportional integral controller for above-stated MPPT methods is shown.


Author(s):  
Viyils Sangregorio-Soto ◽  
Claudia L. Garzon-Castro ◽  
Gianfranco Mazzanti ◽  
Manuel Figueredo ◽  
John A. Cortes-Romero

Author(s):  
Mikuláš Huba ◽  
Igor Bélai

This article presents design and evaluation of filtered proportional–integral controllers and filtered Smith predictor–inspired constrained dead time compensators. Both are based on the integral plus dead time and on the first-order time delayed plant models. They are compared as for tuning simplicity, robustness and noise attenuation. Such a comparison, which presents a robustness test regarding the importance of the internal plant feedback approximation, may be carried out by performance measures built on deviations of the input and output transient responses from their ideal shapes. When combined with integral of absolute error measures of both solution types with the disturbance responses set as nearly equivalent, we can see that the filtered Smith predictor setpoint responses may be significantly faster than the filtered proportional–integral controller responses, more robust and, using higher-order filters, also sufficiently smooth. Furthermore, tuning of the possibly higher-order filters for filtered Smith predictor is simpler. Its overall design is more transparent and straightforward with respect to the control constraints, where the filtered Smith predictor requires some additional anti-windup measures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document