Gain-analytical equations generalized for FOPID controllers — An application with DC–DC power converters

Gain-analytical equations generalized for FOPID controllers — An application with DC–DC power converters

This study presents algebraic formulations for determining the gains of a fractional-order PID (FOPID) regulator, with attention to gain crossover frequency, phase margin, and robustness against gain variations (iso-damping). The differential evolution (DE) algorithm is employed for optimal tuning o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Luís Felipe da S.C. Pereira, Anderson S. Volpato, Edson Antonio Batista, Moacyr A.G. de Brito, Ruben B. Godoy, João O.P. Pinto, Leon M. Tolbert
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2025-06-01
Series:e-Prime: Advances in Electrical Engineering, Electronics and Energy
Subjects:
Buck converter
DC–DC boost converter
Differential evolution
Fractional-order PID
FPGA-in-the-loop
Oustaloup filter
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772671125000749
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study presents algebraic formulations for determining the gains of a fractional-order PID (FOPID) regulator, with attention to gain crossover frequency, phase margin, and robustness against gain variations (iso-damping). The differential evolution (DE) algorithm is employed for optimal tuning of fractional-order values, aligned with FOPID gain parameters. FPGA-in-the-loop simulations for Buck and DC–DC Boost converters are conducted to validate the DE-tuned FOPID controllers, optimized using the L2 norm and compared to MATLAB-Simulink simulations. The approach introduces a key innovation: disaggregating the FOPID equation for memory efficiency. Simulations and experiments demonstrate the controller’s precision in setpoint tracking and resilience to load and input voltage variations in Buck and DC–DC Boost converters, with effective damping of load disturbances. A test bench validated the proposed method, which was also compared to conventional PID, Type 3, and PIDD2-IMC controllers. While the proposed FOPID controller performed better in the presented results, a conclusive comparison could not be drawn due to unequal tuning efforts. Future work will focus on a more thorough comparison of controllers.
ISSN:2772-6711

Similar Items