IRJET- Optimum Design of PSO based Tuning using PID Controller for an Automatic Voltage Regulator System

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 12 | Dec 2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 748
Optimum Design of PSO based tuning using PID controller for an
Automatic Voltage Regulator system
Prashant Singh Chauhan1, Prof. Ashish Patra2
1M.E. (MAC), IV Semester, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, M.I.T.S, Gwalior, M.P.
2Associate Professor, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, M.I.T.S, Gwalior, M.P.
------------------------------------------------------------------------***-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - In this paper, an endeavour is made to apply
the Optimization procedure to tune the parameters of a
PID controller for a viable Automatic Voltage Regulator
(AVR). Existing metaheuristic tuning strategies have been
turned out to be very fruitful yet there were detectable
territories that require upgrades particularly as far as
the framework's gain overshoot and steady state
mistakes. Utilizing the improved algorithm where every
area in the crowd is a hopeful answer for the
Proportional-Integral-Derivative parameters was
extremely useful. The empowering results acquired from
the reproduction of the PID Controller parameters-tuning
utilizing the PSO when contrasted and the execution of
formal PID, and (Enhanced Particle-Swarm Optimization
PID (PSO-PID), and creates enhanced-PID a good
addition to solving PID Controller tuning problems using
metaheuristics. This optimization done with the help
MATLAB 2018a.
Keywords- AVR system, optimal control, particle
swarm optimization, PID controller.
1. INTRODUCTION
The main function of AVR loop is to control the generator
terminal voltage. This implies keeping regulated voltage
inside endorsed restrains as conceivable as could be
Increasing or diminishing terminal voltage is performed
by relative process for excitation voltage/current. This
directly increases or reduces the reactive power output
of the generator. This procedure is confined by two
cutoff points; AVR loop impediments and generator
capacity.
Electricity must be expended at a similar moment it is
created. Therefore, the total generation must meet the
total load requirement of both active and reactive power.
The heap dynamic interest is voltage and recurrence
freque [1]. It is for the most part increments as voltage
or frequency dependent (inside the safe operational
breaking points). The electrical burdens are not steady
always but rather lamentably, a large portion of the
heaps fluctuate frequently or arbitrarily everywhere
throughout the time In request to enhance the execution
of the AVR frameworks, the PID controller is ordinarily
utilized since it has basic structure. Likewise, it is strong
to varieties of the framework parameters. The reason of
this acceptability is for its simple structure which can be
easily understood and implemented [5]. Easy
implementation of hardware and software has helped to
gain its popularity. A few methodologies have been
reported in literary works for deciding the PID controller
parameters. Most well known techniques are Ziegler
Nichols tuning, as given in Ziegler JG, and Nichols NB
(1942), neural system, as given in Q.H. Wu, B.W. Hogg,
and G.W. Irwin, (1992), fluffy based methodology as
given in A. Visioli (2001), and Genetic Algorithm as given
in R.A. Krohling, and J.P. Rey (2001). Particle swarm
optimization (PSO) method is utilized in tuning the
parameters of the proposed (PID) controller of a
synchronous generator.
This PSO system is exceptionally effective in taking care
of persistent non-linear optimization issues [11]. The
performance index used for tuning the controller
considers both the set point and disturbance responses.
Next to the strong dependability of the closed loop
framework is ensured by determining limited bound on
the greatest affectability work. The results of the
simulation show that when the PSO method is used the
performance of the tuned PID controller is significantly
more efficient and the response is better in quality.
In general, the responsive power deviations influence
the terminal voltage of the framework and the job of AVR
is to hold the voltage extent of synchronous generator at
a predetermined dimension and furthermore to improve
the framework steadiness [17]. The essential methods
for generator responsive power control in AVR circle is
finished with the excitation control and the valuable
control activity is furnished with customary controllers
like Proportional (P), Integral (I), Proportional Integral
(PI) and PID controller or with an intelligent controllers.
The fundamental choice criteria of these controllers are
assessed by its legitimate control exhibitions, quick
reaction and its robustness towards the non linearity,
time fluctuating elements, unsettling influences and
different variables. The PID controller has been
prescribed as a presumed controller in this
understanding and can be utilized as an advantageous
controller for AVR framework. Normally, the gain
parameters PID controllers are computed through trial
and error or conventional Ziegler–Nichols methods
(Katsuhiko Ogata, 2008).
There is so many optimization techniques are developed
now a days for optimal tuning of these gain parameters

(Indranil Pan and Saptarshi Das, 2013; Seyed Abbas
Taher, 2014). Among them the Swarm Intelligent (SI)
techniques are very popular only because of, providing
good quality of solutions within a short duration of time
for mixed integer nonlinear optimization problems (Anil
Kumar and Rajeev Gupta, 2013). Although, these
techniques have been used in almost all fields of
engineering (Noureddine Bouarroudj et al., 2015), the
effectiveness is dreadfully confirmed in control and
stability domain. The SI methods for the most part
comprise of a populace of regular or counterfeit swarms,
communicating locally with each other and furthermore
with their condition. This phenomenon aids to find an
optimal solution in any field of optimization problems.
The earlier research work proves that both the transient
performances and the stability of an AVR system can be
improved with PID controller compared to Particle
Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm (Haluk and Cengiz,
2011). For the same system configurations.
Focusing only two of the transient measuring
parameters called maximum peak and settling time.
However, the rise time of the system, which is one of the
main transient measures to be considered for analyzing
the transient performances. When, the system is having
high rise time characteristics, the settling time of the
system also increased drastically in most of the cases.
This can be clearly demonstrated when the system is
subjected to any kind of uncertainties/ disturbances.
Correspondingly, in enhanced PSO based tuning the
system exhibits rapid variations in settling time and
peak time during the robustness performance analysis
with parameter variations. Proved its effectiveness over
ultimate algorithms like previous PSO Algorithm and
enhanced PSO. The objective function plays a major role
in optimization problems. Normally, minimization of
integrated absolute error (IAE), or integrated time
absolute error (ITAE), or the integral of squared-error
(ISE), or the integrated of time weighted-squared-error
(ITSE) are used as an objective function for optimal
tuning of PID controller. In contrast to others a new
objective function with fundamental time domain
specifications such as maximum peak, rise time, settling
time, and steady-state error is used in this paper to
enhance the transient performances of the AVR system.
The results of the proposed approach are analyzed in
three different ways such as transient analysis, stability
analysis and robustness analysis to prove its superiority
over other algorithms. At first, the output response of the
system with proposed approach is analyzed with the
essential transient measuring parameters like Maximum
Peak, Settling time, Rise Time and Peak Time. Further,
the stability of the system is demonstrated with
necessary stability margins such as peak gain, phase
margin, gain margin and delay margin. At the point when
a designer plans a control framework, the structure is
normally founded on some mathematical model for the
framework to be controlled. However, the system model
is only an approximation. In reality the system may
behave differently than the model indicates, or the
system parameters may vary with time. So as to acquire
palatable control design, it is required that the control
framework performs well, on the embraced ostensible
model, as well as on the genuine physical process. This
leads directly to that agreeable execution is
accomplished for the unverifiable model and the class of
possible perturbations. In this way this manuscript did
the various types of robustness analysis to ensure the
proper design of the controller.
Fig.1. Block Diagram of AVR system
2. PID CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR AVR SYSTEM
It is a critical issue for the stable electrical power service
to build up the AVR of the synchronous generator with a
high productivity and a quick reaction. As of not long
ago, the similarity PID controller is commonly utilized
for the AVR as a result of its effortlessness and ease.
However, these parameters of PID controller are not
easy to tune Gaining [17] proposed a method to search
these parameters by using a particle swarm optimization
(PSO) algorithm. The AVR system model controlled by
the PID controller can be expressed by Figure 1. Where is
the output voltage of sensor model, e is the error voltage
between the s and reference input voltage ref (S), R is an
amplify voltage by amplifier model, F is a output voltage
by exciter model, and t is a output voltage by generator.
There are 5 models: (a) PID Controller Model, (b)
Amplifier Model, (c) Exciter Model, (d) Generator Model,
and (e) Sensor Model. Their exchange capacities are
described as pursues:
(a) PID Controller Model The transfer function of PID
controller is
...........(1)
Where kp, kd, and ki are

the proportion coefficient, differential coefficient, and
integral coefficient, respectively.
(b)Amplifier Model The transfer function of amplifier
model is
...........(2)
Where KA is a gain and A is a time constant.
(c) Exciter Model The transfer function (TF) of exciter
model is
................(3)
Where KE is a gain and E is a time constant.
(d) Generator Model the TF of generator model is
..................(4)
Where KG is a gain and G is a time constant.
(e) Sensor Model the TF of sensor model is
....................(5)
Where KR is a gain and R is a time constant. In this paper,
the PSO algorithm is applied to search best PID
parameters so that the controlled system has a good
control performance. In [17], a perform
Fig.2.A practical high-order AVR system controlled by
a PID controller.
Table 1. Parameter limits in AVR system
Model Name Parameter
limits
Used Parameter
values
PID
controller
0.2 ≤ Kp ≤ 2
0.2 ≤ Ki ≤ 2
0.2 ≤ Kd ≤ 2
Optimum values
Amplifier 10 ≤ Ka ≤ 40
0.02 ≤ Ta ≤ 0.1
Ka = 10 Ta = 0.1
Exciter 1 ≤ Ke ≤ 10
0.4 ≤ Te ≤ 1
Ke = 1 Te = 0.4
Generator Kg depends on
load (0.7-1) 1 ≤
Tg ≤ 2
Kg = 1 Tg = 1
Sensor 0.001 ≤ Ts ≤
0.06
Ks = 1 Kg = 0.01
Table 2. Effect of PID controller on time domain
specifications
Contr
oller
Rise-time Overshoot Settling
time
Steady
state error
K p Decreases Increases Small
Change
Decreases
Ki Decreases Increases Increases Eliminates
Kd Small
Change
Decreases Decreases Small
Change
3. PROBLEM FORMULATION
In huge interconnected frameworks soundness issues
like low recurrence motions are normal. Electro-
mechanical oscillations must be damped out as fast as
would be prudent. To do so, a simple way is to play with
the performance indices of the system such as maximum
peak overshoot ( Mp ), settling time (ts ), rise time (tr
).Therefore in order to improve the damping
performance of power systems we go for coordinated
tuning of PID parameters for an AVR system with PSS.
Choosing good control parameters K p, Ki and Kd gives
rise to good step response and better stability
performance to a system. The simultaneous tuning of
over three control parameters is defined as an
improvement issue.
F (K)=αM p + β(tr + ts )
Where α and β are the weights the above objective
function is known as weighted objective function. We try
to control the values of Mp, tr and ts by associating each
with proper weights. The allocation of weights varies
with different problem descriptions. In this paper, the
main aim is to increase the damping performance of a
AVR-PSS system. Therefore, more weight age is allocated
to settling time and rise time i.e. > . But this does not
mean that maximum peak overshoot has no effect on the
damping performance, it does have a significant and

considerable effect but in this paper, we have worked
based on the following case. The above optimization
problem is subjected to following inequality constraints.
Kp min < Kp < Kp max,
Ki min < Ki < Kimax and
Kd min < Kd< Kd max
Where Kp min, Ki min and Kd min are the minimum limits
of proportional, integral and derivative gains
individually and Kp max, Ki max and Kd max are the base
furthest reaches of corresponding, essential and
subordinate gains separately.
Figure-3: Flowchart of parameter optimizing procedure
using PSO
4. SIMULATION RESULTS
To verify the efficiency of the proposed fitness function
in the PSO algorithm, a practical high order AVR system
[19] as shown in Figure 2 is tested.
The AVR system has the following parameters.
Fig.4. Effects without PID Controller
Fig.5. Iteration behaviour of the System
Fig.6. Normal PSO-1 Effect with AVR System
Fig.7. Enhanced PID Effect for AVR System

Fig.8. Comparative Results AVR System
5. CONCLUSION
The amenity of using PSO-PID to enhance the control and
stability of AVR system is discussed in this paper. In AVR,
the steady and quick reaction of the controller is hard to
accomplish because of the high inductance of the
generator field windings and load variety. Henceforth,
different control structures have been proposed for the
AVR framework, be that as it may, among these
controllers the relative in plus integral plus derivative
(PID) is recommended as the most ideal controller in this
paper. The gain parameters of PID controller in AVR
system are, effectively tuned with applied optimization
approach and the improvement in closed loop
performances are clearly established in point in this
paper. Minimization of voltage deviations in output
response is considered as a main objective of AVR and a
new fitness function with all the essential time domain
specifications is introduced in this paper to satisfy this
objective. The potency of the proposed algorithm is
confirmed by comparing the output responses, stability
and robustness of the system with the recently reported
modern heuristic algorithms such as PSO and improved
PSO. The transient response analysis assures that, the
maximum peak, settling time, rise time and peak time of
the system is considerably reduced with the applied
approach. All these analysis certainly assures that
effective tuning of controllers, better control
performances, enhancement in system stability and
robustness can be obtained through the applied
optimization for tune PID controller.
REFERENCES
1) Chent, S., Istepaniant, R. H., Whidbornet, J. F. And
Wu, J., “Adaptive Simulated Annealing for
Designing Finite-Precision PID Controller
Structures,” IEE Colloquium on Optimisation in
Control: Methods and Applications, pp. 13
(1998).
2) Kwok, D. P. and Sheng, F., “Genetic Algorithm
and Simulated Annealing for Optimal Robot Arm
PID Control,” IEEE Conference on Evolutionary
Computation, pp. 707712 (1994).
3) Mitsukura, Y., Yamamoto, T. and Kaneda, M., “A
Genetic Tuning Algorithm of PID Parameters,”
Inference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol.
1, pp. 923 928. (1997).
4) Krohling, R. A., Jaschek, H. and Rey, J. P.,
“Designing PI/PID Controller for a Motion
Control System Based on Genetic Algorithm,”
12th IEEE International Symposium on
Intelligent Control, July, pp. 125130 (1997).
5) Davis, L., Handbook of Genetic Algorithms, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1991).
6) Goldberg, D. E., Genetic Algorithms in Search,
Optimization, and Machine Learning, Addison-
Wesley, Reading, Mass (1989).
7) Wong, C. C. and Chen, C. C., “A GA-Based Method
for Constructing Fuzzy Systems Directly from
Numerical Data,” IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 30, pp. 904911
(2000).
8) Wong, C.,C., Lin, B. C. and Chen, C. C., “Fuzzy
System Design by a GA-Based Method for Data
Classification,” Cybernetics and Systems: An
International Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 253270
(2002).
9) Wong, C. C., Lin, B. C., Lee, S. A. and Tsai, C. H.,
“GA-Based Fuzzy System Design in FPGA for an
Omni-Directional Mobile Robot,” Journal of
Intelligent & Robotic Systems, Vol. 44, pp.
327347 (2005).
10) Kennedy, J. and Eberhart, R., “Particle Swarm
Optimization,” IEEE International Conference on
Neural Networks, pp. 19421948 (1995).
11) Shi, Y. and Eberhart, R., “A Modified Particle
Swarm Optimizer,” IEEE Congress on
Evolutionary Computation, May, pp. 6973
(1998).
12) Angeline, P. J., “Using Selection to Improve
Particle Swarm Optimization,” IEEE Congress on
Evolutionary Computation, May, pp. 8489
(1998).
13) Shi, Y. and Eberhart, R. C., “Empirical Study of
Particle Swarm Optimization,” IEEE Congress on
Evolutionary Computation, July, pp. 19451950
(1999).

14) Clerc, M. and Kennedy, J., “The Particle Swarm
Multidimensional Complex Space,” IEEE
Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol.
6, pp. 5873 (2002).
15) Parsopoulous, K. E. and Vrahatis, M. N., ”On the
Computation of All Global Minimizers through
Particle Swarm Optimization,” IEEE
Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol.
8, pp. 211224 (2004).
16) Yoshida, H., Kawata, K., Fukuyama, Y. And
Nakanishi, Y., “A Particle Swarm Optimization
for Reactive Power and Voltage Control
Considering Voltage Security Assessment,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 15, pp.
12321239 (2000).
17) Gaing, Z. L., “A Particle Swarm Optimization
Approach for Optimum Design of PID Controller
in AVR System,” IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, Vol. 19, pp. 384394 (2004).
18) Liu, Y., Zhang, J. and Wang, S., “Optimization
Design Based on PSO Algorithm for PID
Controller,” 5th World Congress on Intelligent
Control and Automation, Vol. 3, pp. 24192422
(2004).
19) Eberhart, R. C. and Shi, Y., “Comparison between
Genetic algorithms and Particle Swarm
Optimization,” IEEE Congress on Evolutionary
Computation, May, Optimal PID Controller
Design for AVR System 269 pp. 611616 (1998).

IRJET- Optimum Design of PSO based Tuning using PID Controller for an Automatic Voltage Regulator System

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to IRJET- Optimum Design of PSO based Tuning using PID Controller for an Automatic Voltage Regulator System (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Optimum Design of PSO based Tuning using PID Controller for an Automatic Voltage Regulator System