Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
CHAPTER 4
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Small Size
Low friction
High speed
No gear backlash
dif
Vf if R f Lf (4.1)
dt
di f
= Rate of change of field current with respect to time
dt
Vf
if (4.2)
Rf
di a
Va ia R a La Eb (4.3)
dt
di a
= Rate of change of armature current with respect time
dt
Va=iaRa+Eb (4.4)
Eb=K r (4.5)
39
K= Back emf constant and its value depends on the armature winding.
= Flux in webers
Te K vi a (4.6)
Kv=Torque constant
d r
Te J B r TL (4.7)
dt
Pa=EbIa (4.8)
Pa K i
r a (4.9)
If is constant,
Pa K r ia (4.10)
40
PSO/ PSODE
Hysteresis
r Fuzzy /Fuzzy Current Chopper Drive DC Motor
PI Controller Controller
Ia
Figure 4.1 Block Diagram for Speed Control of Separately Excited DC Motor
The inputs to the FLC are speed error and change in speed. Speed
error is defined as the difference between the actual speed and reference speed
of the motor. Seven membership functions are created for each input and
output. The FLC has been built with two inputs and one output. The
membership functions are Negative Small, Negative Medium, Negative Big,
Zero, Positive Small, Positive Medium, and Positive Big. Based on the values
of error and change in error of speed, the output of the FLC is in terms of
current. This is the reference value for the current controller. The difference
between the reference current from the fuzzy controller and actual armature
current is given as an input to the current controller. Based on the current
limit, the current controller generates the gate current to the chopper drive.
The armature voltage of the separately excited DC motor is varied when
variation occurs in the gate pulse of the chopper. Thus, the speed of the motor
is controlled.
In fuzzy PI controller, the gain value is added with speed error and
change in speed error. Gain value is used as P and I value of PI controller.
Speed (rads/sec)
Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.2 Change in Speed under No-Load Condition for Fuzzy and
Fuzzy PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)
PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.3 Change in Speed under No-Load Condition for PSO Fuzzy
PI and PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
44
Speed (rads/sec)
Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.4 Change in Speed with Constant Load for Fuzzy and Fuzzy
PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)
PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.5 Change in Speed with Constant Load for PSO Fuzzy PI and
PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
46
Speed (rads/sec)
Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.6 Change in Load with Constant Speed for Fuzzy and Fuzzy PI
Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)
PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.7 Change in Load with Constant Speed for PSO Fuzzy PI and
PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
48
Speed (rads/sec)
Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.8 Change in Speed and Load for Fuzzy and Fuzzy PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)
PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI
Time (sec)
Figure 4.9 Change in Speed and Load for PSO Fuzzy PI and PSODE
Fuzzy PI Controllers
50
S – Simulation H – Hardware
PSO PSO DE
PI Fuzzy Fuzzy PI
Conditions Fuzzy PI Fuzzy PI
S H S H S H S H S H
500 Rpm to
Change in 2.0 2.2 0.92 1.28 0.61 1.2 0.52 1.15 0.48 0.84
1000 Rpm
Speed under No
Load 1000Rpm to
1.5 2.4 1.01 1.28 0.6 1.2 0.52 1.15 0.58 0.84
2000 Rpm
Sudden
Change in both 2.6 3 0.9 1.48 0.62 1.32 0.52 1.28 0.5 0.9
Change 1
Speed and Load
Simultaneously
Sudden
1.5 3 1.45 1.48 1.1 1.32 0.8 1.28 0.7 1
Change 2
51
52
All the work mentioned in the section 4.5 is carried out in both
simulation and experimental setup for the system with new parameters, given
below:
controllers under the four conditions. From the settling time and the peak
time, the damping ratio and natural frequency of the system are calculated.
From the values of damping ratio and natural frequency, the transfer function
and the poles of the response are derived. With the help of the location poles,
the stability of the system is obtained by using the root locus method. From
the observations and calculations, the system is stable for all the conditions
mentioned in this chapter for all the controllers. These observations are
verified by taking the criteria of varying speed with constant load as example
for stability analysis. The settling time and peak time of the response of all the
controllers are tabulated in Table 4.6. With help of this, the values of natural
frequency and damping ratio are derived. By using the second order standard
formulae, the transfer function of the system is derived the stability of the
system is analyzed by root locus method.
13.8
1 Fuzzy 2 1 3.72 0.53 Stable
s2 34 s 13.8
15.77
2 Fuzzy PI 1.28 1.28 4 0.5 Stable
s2 4 s 15.77
PSO 26.5
3 1.2 0.8 5.14 0.64 Stable
Fuzzy PI s2 6.67 s 26.5
PSODE 28.05
4 0.78 0.9 5.2 0.85 Stable
Fuzzy PI s2 8.9 s 28.05
54
Ts 0.9 sec s
Tp 0.78 sec
4 4 (4.13)
n 4.44
Ts 0.9
2
n 1 4.02 (4.14)
Tp 0.78
2
poles j 1 (4.15)
n n
28.05
Transfer function of the system at this instant is
s2 8.89 s 28.05
From the above calculation, the two poles of the system are derived
from the settling time and peak time. It is observed that the system is stable at
this instant because two poles of the system are located in left half of the S
Plane. The graphs obtained for the transfer functions to analyze the stability
are displayed in Figures A 1.21 to A 1.24 of Appendix 1.
present value. After the peak, the current is settled with increased value than
the previous value up to further changes in the load. When load is released,
the current of the motor is decreased from its present value.
All the controllers performed smoothly for all the ranges of speed
within the rated speed. For all the ranges of load, the speed of the motor can
be controlled effectively without overshoot, by all the controllers. The range
of settling time is differed based on the algorithms. The settling times of the
controllers are already compared and the values are illustrated in the Table
4.5.
If the gain value in the transfer function is equal to one, the system
is stable. While increasing the gain value from 1 to 15, the system is stable
with small oscillatory response. While increasing the gain value from 15 to
25, the system becomes oscillatory, but finally settles down. Thus the stability
of the system is decreased. While further increasing the gain value above 25,
the system’s state becomes unstable from stable.
All the four controllers developed and reported in this thesis have
good adaptability and strong robustness than the conventional PI controller.
56
4.9 CONCLUSION