SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2

Performance Comparison of Pitch Control Using Different Controllers Optimized by CEAPSO in Wind Turbine Systems

Rüzgar Türbin Sistemlerinde CEAPSO ile Farklı Kontrolör Yapılarının Pitch Kontrol Performanslarının Karşılaştırılması

Soner Çelikdemir(BITLIS EREN UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-1419-3398
Pages
386–394
Publication Date
2025-12-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results demonstrate that optimization‑based parameter tuning provides meaningful technical and economic benefits, making the study a valuable reference for developing control strategies and improving energy efficiency in renewable energy systems.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the parameters of commonly used Proportional–Integral (PI) and Proportional–Integral–Derivative (PID) controllers were optimized using the Chaos‑Embedded Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization (CEAPSO) algorithm.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The controllers’ performances were compared under variable and uncertain wind conditions; the PID controller was found to achieve approximately 77% lower control error and 52.9% faster system stabilization than the PI controller.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results demonstrate that optimization‑based parameter tuning provides meaningful technical and economic benefits, making the study a valuable reference for developing control strategies and improving energy efficiency in renewable energy systems.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Rüzgar Turbini · Pitch kontrol · PI kontrolör

Abstract

In this study, the parameters of commonly used Proportional–Integral (PI) and Proportional–Integral–Derivative (PID) controllers were optimized using the Chaos‑Embedded Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization (CEAPSO) algorithm. The controllers’ performances were compared under variable and uncertain wind conditions; the PID controller was found to achieve approximately 77% lower control error and 52.9% faster system stabilization than the PI controller. Furthermore, the PID‑based controller more effectively reduced power output fluctuations, achieved faster transient stabilization, and minimized dynamic loads, thereby significantly lowering maintenance costs and the risk of mechanical wear. The high tuning accuracy of CEAPSO not only improved control performance but also substantially enhanced turbine power quality and operational reliability. These results demonstrate that optimization‑based parameter tuning provides meaningful technical and economic benefits, making the study a valuable reference for developing control strategies and improving energy efficiency in renewable energy systems.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, yaygın kullanılan Proportional-Integral (PI) ve Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) kontrolörlerin parametreleri, gelişmiş bir optimizasyon yöntemi olan Kaos Gömülü Adaptif Parçacık Sürü Optimizasyonu (CEAPSO) algoritması ile optimize edilmiştir. Değişken ve belirsiz rüzgar koşullarında kontrolörlerin performansları karşılaştırılmış ve PID kontrolörün, PI’ye kıyasla yaklaşık %77 daha düşük kontrol hatası ve %52,9 daha hızlı sistem stabilizasyonu sağladığı tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, PID tabanlı kontrolör güç çıkışındaki dalgalanmaları daha etkin azaltmış, transient tepkilerde daha hızlı kararlılık sağlamış ve dinamik yükleri minimize ederek bakım maliyetleri ile mekanik aşınma riskini önemli ölçüde düşürmüştür. CEAPSO’nun yüksek parametre ayar doğruluğu, kontrol performansını artırmakla kalmayıp, türbinlerin enerji üretim kalitesi ve operasyonel güvenilirliğini de önemli ölçüde iyileştirmiştir. Sonuçlar, optimizasyon tabanlı parametre ayarlarının teknik ve ekonomik açıdan anlamlı kazanımlar sağladığını göstermektedir. Bu çalışma, yenilenebilir enerji sistemlerinde kontrol stratejilerinin geliştirilmesi ve enerji verimliliğinin artırılması için önemli bir referans niteliğindedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çelikdemir, S. (2025). Performance Comparison of Pitch Control Using Different Controllers Optimized by CEAPSO in Wind Turbine Systems. Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2, 386–394. https://doi.org/10.18586/msufbd.1788608

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (32)

  1. M. LÜY and N. A. METİN, “PID Control Medium Size Wind Turbine Control with Integrated Blade Pitch Angle,” Int. Sci. Vocat. Stud. J., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 22–31, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.47897/bilmes.1091968.
  2. A. Hassan, G. Ahmad, M. Shafiullah, A. Islam, and M. Shafiul Alam, “Review of the Intelligent Frameworks for Pitch Angle Control in Wind Turbines,” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 29864–29885, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3540367.
  3. I. M. SOUGUEH and G. GÖREL, “Pitch Angle Control of Wind Turbine with PI, PID and GA-PID controller,” Uluslararası Muhendis. Arastirma ve Gelistirme Derg., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 502–513, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.29137/umagd.1036461.
  4. A. Wan et al., “Robust loop shaping design pitch control of wind turbine for maximal power output and reduced loading,” Energy, vol. 319, p. 135136, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2025.135136.
  5. Q. Hawari, T. Kim, C. Ward, and J. Fleming, “A robust gain scheduling method for a PI collective pitch controller of multi-MW onshore wind turbines,” Renew. Energy, vol. 192, pp. 443–455, Jun. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2022.04.117.
  6. L. Alhrshy, A. Lippke, and C. Jauch, “Variable Blade Inertia in State-of-the-Art Wind Turbine Structural-Dynamics Models,” Energies, vol. 16, no. 16, p. 6061, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.3390/en16166061.
  7. T. Ullah, K. Sobczak, G. Liśkiewicz, and A. Khan, “Two-Dimensional URANS Numerical Investigation of Critical Parameters on a Pitch Oscillating VAWT Airfoil under Dynamic Stall,” Energies, vol. 15, no. 15, p. 5625, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15155625.
  8. J. Lin, Y. Wang, G. Zhang, Y. Liu, and J. Zhang, “Novel tuned mass dampers installed inside tower of spar offshore floating wind turbines,” Ocean Eng., vol. 301, p. 117412, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2024.117412.
  9. J. Lin, H. Duan, B. Xu, Y. Wang, and J. Zhang, “Equivalent Aerodynamic Design of Blade for Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Model,” J. Mar. Sci. Eng., vol. 10, no. 2, p. 132, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.3390/jmse10020132.
  10. Z. Zhou, S. Wang, J. Jiang, H. Li, J. Zhao, and D. Yu, “Optimizing wind turbine blade pitch control via input output differential model free adaptive control,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 6325, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88711-z.
  11. Z. Civelek, M. Lüy, E. Çam, and H. Mamur, “A new fuzzy logic proportional controller approach applied to individual pitch angle for wind turbine load mitigation,” Renew. Energy, vol. 111, pp. 708–717, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2017.04.064.
  12. J. López-Queija, E. Robles, J. Jugo, and S. Alonso-Quesada, “Review of control technologies for floating offshore wind turbines,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 167, p. 112787, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.112787.
  13. R. Nash, R. Nouri, and A. Vasel-Be-Hagh, “Wind turbine wake control strategies: A review and concept proposal,” Energy Convers. Manag., vol. 245, p. 114581, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114581.
  14. L. Colombo, M. L. Corradini, G. Ippoliti, and G. Orlando, “Pitch angle control of a wind turbine operating above the rated wind speed: A sliding mode control approach,” ISA Trans., vol. 96, pp. 95–102, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.isatra.2019.07.002.
  15. A. Lasheen, M. Elnaggar, and H. Yassin, “Adaptive control design and implementation for collective pitch in wind energy conversion systems,” ISA Trans., vol. 102, pp. 251–263, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.isatra.2019.11.019.
  16. E. C. Navarrete, M. Trejo Perea, J. C. Jauregui Correa, R. V. Carrillo Serrano, and G. J. R. Moreno, “Expert Control Systems Implemented in a Pitch Control of Wind Turbine: A Review,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 13241–13259, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2892728.
  17. L. Li et al., “Research on Nonlinear Pitch Control Strategy for Large Wind Turbine Units Based on Effective Wind Speed Estimation,” Electronics, vol. 14, no. 12, p. 2460, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.3390/electronics14122460.
  18. N. Labed, I. Attoui, S. Makhloufi, A. Bouraiou, and M. S. Bouakkaz, “PSO Based Fractional Order PI Controller and ANFIS Algorithm for Wind Turbine System Control and Diagnosis,” J. Electr. Eng. Technol., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 2457–2468, May 2023, doi: 10.1007/s42835-022-01330-w.
  19. K. Palanimuthu and Y. H. Joo, “Reliability improvement of the large-scale wind turbines with actuator faults using a robust fault-tolerant synergetic pitch control,” Renew. Energy, vol. 217, p. 119164, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.119164.
  20. S. Tang, D. Tian, X. Wu, M. Huang, and Y. Deng, “Wind turbine load reduction based on 2DoF robust individual pitch control,” Renew. Energy, vol. 183, pp. 28–40, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.10.086.
  21. T. Li, J. Yang, and A. Ioannou, “Data-driven control of wind turbine under online power strategy via deep learning and reinforcement learning,” Renew. Energy, vol. 234, p. 121265, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2024.121265.
  22. V. Lakshmi Narayanan, D. Kumar Dhaked, and R. Sitharthan, “Improved machine learning-based pitch controller for rated power generation in large-scale wind turbine,” Renew. Energy Focus, vol. 50, p. 100603, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ref.2024.100603.
  23. K. Ma, J. Wang, and K. Lin, “A novel variable pitch control strategy to improve the aerodynamics of vertical axis wind turbine,” Phys. Fluids, vol. 37, no. 3, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1063/5.0254998.
  24. I. M. Youssouf and T. Etem, “Statistical and Machine Learning Approaches for Energy Consumption Forecasting Using Time Series Analysis,” Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Fen Bilim. Derg., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 95–103, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.18586/msufbd.1674717.
  25. L. Weidong, “Comparative Review of Pitch Control Strategies for Wind Turbine,” Int. Core J. Eng., vol. 11, no. 7, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.6919/ICJE.202507_11(7).0024.
  26. R. Eberhart and J. Kennedy, “New optimizer using particle swarm theory,” in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, 1995. doi: 10.1109/mhs.1995.494215.
  27. J. Yang, F. Lin, D. K. Saini, Y. Zhu, Y. Li, and Z. Guo, “Energy‐efficient computation offloading and resource allocation in delay‐constrained vehicular edge network,” Int. J. Commun. Syst., vol. 38, no. 1, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1002/dac.5335.
  28. S. Çelikdemir and M. T. Özdemir, “Development of Small Hydroelectric Power Plant Maintenance Costs using Chaos Embedded Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization,” J. Adv. Res. Nat. Appl. Sci., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 788–803, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.28979/jarnas.1197546.
  29. B. Alatas, E. Akin, and A. B. Ozer, “Chaos embedded particle swarm optimization algorithms,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 1715–1734, May 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2007.09.063.
  30. M. T. Özdemir, “Optimal parameter estimation of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells model with chaos embedded particle swarm optimization,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 46, no. 30, pp. 16465–16480, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.203.
  31. C. Haydaroğlu, “Chaos-based optimization for load frequency control in Islanded airport microgrids with hydrogen energy and electric aircraft,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 143, pp. 1198–1214, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2025.01.174.
  32. S. Doğan, C. Haydaroğlu, B. Gümüş, and A. Mohammadzadeh, “Innovative fuzzy logic type 3 controller for transient and maximum power point tracking in hydrogen fuel cells,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, vol. 143, pp. 833–845, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.10.382.