Application of An Optimal Fractional Order Controller-HRES

fractal and fractional
Article
Application of an Optimal Fractional-Order Controller for a
Standalone (Wind/Photovoltaic) Microgrid Utilizing Hybrid
Storage (Battery/Ultracapacitor) System
Hani Albalawi 1,2 , Sherif A. Zaid 1, * , Aadel M. Alatwi 1,3 and Mohamed Ahmed Moustafa 4
1 Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 47913, Saudi Arabia;
[email protected] (H.A.); [email protected] (A.M.A.)
2 Renewable Energy and Environmental Technology Centre, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 47913, Saudi Arabia
3 Industrial Innovation and Robotic Center (IIRC), University of Tabuk, Tabuk 47731, Saudi Arabia
4 Department of Electrical Power, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza 82524, Egypt;
[email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]
Abstract: Nowadays, standalone microgrids that make use of renewable energy sources have gained
great interest. They provide a viable solution for rural electrification and decrease the burden on the
utility grid. However, because standalone microgrids are nonlinear and time-varying, controlling and
managing their energy can be difficult. A fractional-order proportional integral (FOPI) controller was
proposed in this study to enhance a standalone microgrid’s energy management and performance.
An ultra-capacitor (UC) and a battery, called a hybrid energy storage scheme, were employed as
the microgrid’s energy storage system. The microgrid was primarily powered by solar and wind
power. To achieve optimal performance, the FOPI’s parameters were ideally generated using the
gorilla troop optimization (GTO) technique. The FOPI controller’s performance was contrasted with a
conventional PI controller in terms of variations in load power, wind speed, and solar insolation. The
microgrid was modeled and simulated using MATLAB/Simulink software R2023a 23.1. The results
Citation: Albalawi, H.; Zaid, S.A.; indicate that, in comparison to the traditional PI controller, the proposed FOPI controller significantly
Alatwi, A.M.; Moustafa, M.A. improved the microgrid’s transient performance. The load voltage and frequency were maintained
Application of an Optimal constant against the least amount of disturbance despite variations in wind speed, photovoltaic
Fractional-Order Controller for a intensity, and load power. In contrast, the storage battery precisely stores and releases energy to
Standalone (Wind/Photovoltaic) counteract variations in wind and photovoltaic power. The outcomes validate that in the presence of
Microgrid Utilizing Hybrid Storage the UC, the microgrid performance is improved. However, the improvement is very close to that
(Battery/Ultracapacitor) System.
gained when using the proposed controller without UC. Hence, the proposed controller can reduce
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629. https://
the cost, weight, and space of the system. Moreover, a Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) emulator was
doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8110629
implemented using a C2000™ microcontroller LaunchPad™ TMS320F28379D kit (Texas Instruments,
Academic Editors: Arman Oshnoei Dallas, TX, USA) to evaluate the proposed system and validate the simulation results.
and Mahdieh S. Sadabadi
Received: 15 September 2024

Keywords: wind energy; photovoltaic (PV); ultra-capacitor (UC); fractional-order proportional
Revised: 22 October 2024 integral (FOPI); gorilla troop optimization (GTO)
Accepted: 22 October 2024
Published: 25 October 2024
1. Introduction
An increasing population and global industrial development coincided with the
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
start of this century. This led to a rise in global electricity demand. But conventional
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
electricity sources have numerous environmental issues and are insufficient [1–4]. As a
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
result, attention has been drawn to renewable electricity sources (wind, solar, tidal, etc.).
conditions of the Creative Commons
The environmental benefits of renewable electricity resources are numerous. However,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// a common drawback of them is their sporadic nature [5]. When a system is linked to a
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ major utility grid, an intermittent energy supply might not be a significant issue. Small
4.0/). microgrids and isolated systems will be particularly affected by this issue, though. Hybrid
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8110629 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fractalfract

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 2 of 24
energy systems, which integrate two or more renewable resources, are one approach to
address the intermittency issue [6]. A wind/PV hybrid is a typical example of this kind of
microgrid [7].
Even though solar and wind energy sources fluctuate, they could work together to
help mitigate the issue of intermittency. In the day, solar energy is available. There is no
set time of day when wind energy is most accessible. On the other hand, there are some
situations where nighttime wind energy exceeds daytime wind energy. As a result, the two
energy resources are integrated in some way. As a result, hybrid PV/wind systems are
regarded as dependable and practical substitutes for battery-based wind and solar diesel
systems in standalone applications [8].
For hybrid wind/photovoltaic systems, several research publications have been se-
lected [5,6,9–15]. Reference [9] suggests that the boost converter in a traditional wind/
photovoltaic power system be swapped out for a PWM rectifier. For rural electrification
applications, a composite sliding mode controller for load inverters was also implemented.
According to reference [10], a PID technique can be employed by a dual input buck-boost
converter to control the bus voltage that charges the battery from the solar module and
wind turbine generator. The propulsion system of a ship model has been powered by
batteries. According to this study, a PID control system may produce effective performance
from wind and solar turbine generators. Reference [11] has proposed the use of an en-
hanced decomposition multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for the scaling of hybrid
PV/battery/wind/diesel microgrids. The analysis has taken into account several factors
such as parameter uncertainty, battery deterioration, viability of energy infrastructure,
internal rate of return, payback time evaluation, and total expenses. There has been a study
conducted on a wind farm, photovoltaic plant, concentrated solar power plant, electric
heater, inverter, and battery model [12]. A wind/photovoltaic microgrid with a distributed
DC bus has been proposed in Ref. [13]. The PV array’s and the wind turbine’s MPPT
have been put into practice by the control system. The response of the power system was
tested by applying step changes in the nonlinear load. A wind/photovoltaic microgrid
that functioned in both AC and DC modes was presented by [14]. The control scheme
was adjusted to the AC/DC microgrid power exchange. The microgrid powered both
household and dynamic loads. The ideal system architecture and design considerations
were determined using a variety of levelized cost of energy methodologies.
Consumption of solar and wind power is increasing as a result of our growing desire
to lessen our environmental impact. In order to mitigate an unpredictable power supply,
Reference [15] proposes a hybrid system that combines wind and solar generators. PV
arrays, wind turbines, batteries, a standby diesel generator, converters, and other equipment
are all parts of PV, battery, wind, and diesel hybrid systems. These parts produce, store,
and control electricity. The primary source of the world’s environmental degradation is
conventional fossil fuel-based electricity generation, and this situation is only going to get
worse soon.
Proportion integral derivative (PID) controllers have historically been used to operate
freestanding microgrids. PID controllers are renowned for their simplicity and depend-
ability, but they can also have drawbacks when dealing with complicated and uncertain
systems, such as overshoot [16]. A recent development in control techniques, fractional-
order control (FOC) is a step up from conventional integer-order control techniques and
is employed in a variety of renewable energy systems. The key advantages of FOPI con-
trollers over PI controllers are their greater flexibility due to non-integer orders; their
enhanced robustness in uncertain or time-varying systems; their better frequency-domain
performance, especially in low-frequency dynamics; and their improved performance in
complex, non-linear, or multi-variable systems. Despite these advantages, the use of FOPI
controllers may be limited by their increased computational demands and complexity of
design, making them more suitable for advanced or high-performance control systems [17].
Nonlinear systems are difficult to control due to varying behavior under different
conditions, making it challenging for traditional controllers to maintain stability. Fractional-
order controllers (FOCs) address this by providing additional tuning parameters (fractional
orders), offering greater flexibility and improved robustness against nonlinearities like satu-
ration and friction. This smooth transition between linear and nonlinear systems enhances
performance in complex systems, such as power electronics [18]. Designing FOCs involves
mathematical modeling, optimization, and discretization for digital implementation. A
common approach is extending traditional PID controllers to fractional-order PID (FOPID)
controllers, where both integral and derivative terms are non-integer. Tuning methods
include frequency response, optimization-based techniques, and modified Ziegler–Nichols
rules. For digital control, fractional derivatives and integrals are approximated using
numerical methods like Grünwald–Letnikov and Oustaloup’s approximation to enable
real-time implementation [17].
FOC has been applied in a number of microgrids that are fed by renewable energy
sources [19–22]. In order to improve the efficiency of the electrical power system, a FOPID
controller based on the real-world application of automatic control techniques was used
in [19] to optimize the hydraulic turbines’ isochronous speed regulator. A fractional
order fuzzy-PID controller was employed in [20] to manage the frequency of a hybrid
system comprising a tidal and diesel power plant. The applicability of fractional order
intelligent control for distributed energy generation or hybrid power systems was examined
in [21]. Using various particle swarm optimization (PSO) variants, robust optimization
techniques were used to tune the FOC controller parameters, which were then compared
with the corresponding optimal solutions using simulation results. In [22], a new intelligent
FOC controller was proposed for frequency regulation of two area interconnected energy
systems. The research idea utilized the virtual inertia principle with the help of the proposed
intelligent FOC controller to regulate the system voltage and frequency.
To maintain the stability and dependability of the power system, wind power’s
intermittent nature requires the use of energy storage devices to offset variations in
wind/photovoltaic systems [23]. Additionally, these storage devices strengthen the sys-
tem’s ability to withstand abrupt changes in wind and load [24]. Batteries, flywheels,
superconducting magnetic energy storage, ultracapacitors, thermal, compressed air storage,
hydrogen, and other devices have all been used as energy storage systems. Nevertheless,
because of their low cost, broad temperature range, and high cell voltage, batteries are
frequently utilized in a variety of applications [25]. When compared to a single energy
storage technology, the implementation of hybrid energy storage system (HESS) minimizes
the initial cost because the secondary storage system just needs to meet the average power
demand because power and energy are decoupled. Additionally, it increases the plant
lifetime and storage capacity while improving the overall system efficiency (minimizes the
dynamic stress of the secondary storage system and optimizes the operation). A UC-battery
HESS was initially investigated in the literature as a potential replacement for conventional
battery systems in digital communication applications that experienced pulsed loads [26].
Due to the frequent motor starts and braking events of electric vehicles, this technology
is currently widely used in these vehicles. It is possible to decrease the size and extend
the battery life by including a supercapacitor [27]. Due to the superior dependability and
extended battery life that these battery–supercapacitor combinations produce, HESS is also
being investigated for stand-alone renewable energy applications [28].
This paper describes how to manage and operate an autonomous microgrid that is
powered by solar and wind energy using a FOPI controller. In addition, the microgrid
uses a semiactive UC-battery HESS for energy storage. Optimal fractional-order controllers
form the foundation of the proposed microgrid’s energy management and control system.
The primary goals of the system are to regulate the DC bus voltage, manage the energy
of the system, and operate the semiactive UC-battery HES. Using the GTO optimization
technique, the fractional-order controller’s gains were optimally selected. Additionally,
evaluations of the proposed FOPI controller’s performance in comparison to the con-
ventional PI controller were conducted. Additionally, a comparison was made between
the proposed microgrid’s performance with and without the UC, utilizing the optimized
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 25
optimization technique, the fractional-order controller’s gains were optimally selected.

Additionally, evaluations of the proposed FOPI controller’s performance in comparison
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 optimization
to the conventional technique, the fractional-order
PI controller were conducted. controller’s gains were
Additionally, optimallywas
a comparison selected.
made
4 of 24
Additionally,
between the proposed evaluations of the proposed
microgrid’s performance FOPI controller’s
with and without performancethe UC, in utilizing
comparison the
optimization
to the conventional
optimized FOPI technique,
controller. theThe
PI controller fractional-order
were conducted.
MATLAB/Simulink controller’s gainswas
Additionally,
platform were optimally
a comparison
utilized was
to modelselected.
made
and
FOPI controller.
Additionally,
between
simulate the proposed The MATLAB/Simulink
evaluations of the proposed
microgrid’s
wind/photovoltaic platform
performance microgrid. wasThe
FOPI controller’s
with utilized
and to
without
goals ofmodel
performancethestudy
this and
UC, simulate
in utilizing
comparison
were as fol- the
optimization
to proposed
the conventional
optimized
lows: FOPI technique,
wind/photovoltaic theThe
PI controller
controller. fractional-order
microgrid. The goals
were conducted.
MATLAB/Simulink controller’s this gains
ofplatform
Additionally,study was were optimally
as
a comparison
utilized follows: was
to modelselected.
made
and
Additionally,
between
simulate
▪ FOPIFOPI the evaluations
proposed
controllers
controllers were
were ofincorporated
microgrid’sthe proposed
wind/photovoltaic
incorporated performance
to FOPI
tomicrogrid.
improve
improve controller’s
with and
The
the
the performance
without
goals
recommended
recommended thestudy
of this UC, in utilizing
comparison
were as
microgrid’s
microgrid’s the
fol-
func-
func-
to the
optimized
lows:tionality. conventional
FOPI
tionality. PI
controller. controllerThe were conducted.
MATLAB/Simulink Additionally,
platform was a comparison
utilized to was
model made
and
optimization
between
simulate FOPIthe
The technique,
proposed
metaheuristic theincorporated
microgrid’sfractional-order
wind/photovoltaic
optimization performance
method controller’s
tomicrogrid.
known with and
The
as GTOgains
without
goals
was were
of the
this optimally
utilized UC,
study were selected.
utilizing
to ascertain
ascertain as the
fol-
the
▪ The controllers
metaheuristic wereoptimization method improve
known the
as recommended
GTO was utilized microgrid’s
to func-
the
Additionally,
optimized
lows:tionality. optimal FOPI evaluations
controller.
parameters ofofThetheproposed
the proposedFOPI
MATLAB/Simulink FOPIcontroller.
controller’s
platform performance
was utilized intocomparison
model and
optimal parameters of the proposed FOPI controller.
to
▪ theFOPI
simulate The conventional
The the proposed
effectiveness
controllers
metaheuristic PIwere controller
wind/photovoltaic
of the
optimization were
proposed
incorporated conducted.
tomicrogrid.
microgrid
method improve
known Additionally,
with The
the
as and goals
wasof
without
recommended
GTO autilized
comparison
this
thestudy
UC was
microgrid’s
to was was
were made
as
assessed
ascertain fol-
func-
the
effectiveness of the proposed microgrid with and without the UC assessed
between
lows:tionality. the
utilizing
optimal proposed
the FOPI microgrid’s
controller. performance with and without the UC, utilizing the
utilizingparameters
the FOPI controller. of the proposed FOPI controller.
optimized
▪ FOPI
The FOPI
A comparison
comparison
controllers
metaheuristic
effectivenesscontroller.
was were
of made The MATLAB/Simulink
between
theincorporated
optimization
proposed the
method performance
to performance
microgridimprove
known withplatform
the
as and of the
the was
recommended
GTO was
without utilized
proposed to
system
the microgrid’s
utilized UC to was model
with
ascertain and
the
func-
assessed the
A was made between the of proposed system with
simulate FOPI the proposed
controller and wind/photovoltaic
the microgrid. The goals of this study were as fol-
tionality.
optimal
utilizing
FOPI controller parameters
the FOPI and the traditional PI. The controller’s performance was assessed ina
of the
controller. traditional
proposed PI.
FOPIThe controller’s
controller. performance was assessed in
▪lows:The A range
a range of
comparison load
metaheuristic
effectiveness
of loadwas power,
power,ofmade
thesolar,
optimization and
proposedandwind
between
solar, theenergy
method
microgrid
wind known
performance
energy disturbances.
withas and
GTO was
without
of the
disturbances. utilized
proposed the UC to was
systemascertain
with the
assessed
▪▪ FOPIThe
optimal
utilizing
The proposedproposed
controllers
parameters
the FOPI
controller system
were
and
system of was
the
controller.
thewas modeled
incorporated
proposed
traditional
modeledPI. in
to
FOPI
in MATLAB.
improve
The the
controller.
MATLAB. The
controller’s system’s
recommended
performance
The system’s performance
microgrid’s
was assessed
performance was
was func-as-
in
as-
▪ A sessed
tionality.
The
asessed to
comparison
range find
effectiveness
tooffind out
was
loadoutpower,ofhow
made
how variations
thesolar,
proposed
between
and wind
variations in wind
microgrid
thewind
in and
performance
energy
and solar
with and energy
without
ofenergy
the
disturbances.
solar affected
proposed the UC
affected the
thewas
system microgrid’s
assessed
with the
microgrid’s
▪ Theresponse.
utilizing
FOPI
response.metaheuristic
the FOPI
controller
proposed and
system optimization
controller.
thewas traditional
modeled methodPI.
in The known
MATLAB. asThe
controller’sGTO was utilized
performance
system’s to ascertain
was
performance was the
assessed in
as-
▪ optimal
A This
aThis comparison
range
sessed parameters
manuscript
of load was is
power,
to find outishow
manuscript
of
organized
made the
solar,
organized
proposed
as
between
and
variations follows:
the
wind FOPI
as follows:
controller.
Section
performance
energy
in windSection 2 provides
of the
disturbances.
and solar a summary
proposed
energy affected
2 provides a summary
of
systemthe proposed
with
the microgrid’s
of the pro- the
▪microgrid; The
FOPI
response.effectiveness
Section 3system
controller
proposed and of the
describes was proposed
the hybrid
traditional
modeled microgrid
energy
PI.
in The
MATLAB. with The
storage and
controller’s without
configurations;
performance
system’s the UC
Section
was
performance was 4 assessed
presents
assessed
was as- in
posed microgrid; Section 3 describes the hybrid energy storage configurations; Section 4
the proposed
utilizing
asessed
range toof control
the FOPI
load
find power,
out structure;
controller.
how solar, Section
and
variations wind 5
inSection
windcovers
energy
and the simulation
disturbances.
solar energy results;
affected and Section
the microgrid’s 6
presents This manuscript
the proposed iscontrol
organized as follows:
structure; Section
5 covers 2 provides a summary
the simulation results; of and
the pro-
Sec-
▪posed
presents A the
comparisonconclusions.
was made between the performance of system’s
the proposed systemSectionwith
was the
tion 6The proposed
response.
microgrid;
presents system
theSection
conclusions. 3 was modeled
describes the in MATLAB.
hybrid energyThe storage performance
configurations; as-4
presents FOPI
sessed
This controller
to find
manuscript
the proposed outandishow the
organized
control traditional
variations as
structure; in PI.
wind
follows: The
Section controller’s
and
Section
5 solar
covers 2 performance
energy
provides
the affected
a
simulation summary was
the
results; assessed
microgrid’s
of the
and pro-
Sec-in
2. The Examined Microgrid’s Overview
posed
2. The
tion 6aresponse.
range
microgrid;
Examined
presents of the
load power,
Section
Microgrid’s
conclusions. solar,
3 describes andthe
Overview wind hybridenergy disturbances.
energy storage configurations; Section 4
▪presents Figure
The
This 1 shows
proposed
manuscript
the proposed
the
systemis planned
was
organized
control
autonomous
modeled
as
structure; in
follows:
Section
microgrid
MATLAB.
Section
5 covers The
2 powered
system’s
provides
the
by
aby
simulation
solar PVofand
performance
summary results; was
the
and
windas-
pro-
Sec-
energy Figure 1 shows
resources. In the day,
the planned solar autonomous
energy is microgrid
available, powered
however, it is not solar PV and
available at wind
night.
posed
2. The
tion
energy6sessed Examined
presents to find
microgrid; out how
Section
theMicrogrid’s
Inconclusions.
variations
3 describes
Overview thein hybrid
wind and solarstorage
energy energy affected the microgrid’s
however, itconfigurations; Section 4
isresources.
Thereresponse. no set time the
of dayday, when solar energy
wind is available,
energy is most accessible. is not
On theavailable
other hand, at night.
there
presents
There Figure
is notheset
1proposed
shows the
time ofwhere control
day planned
when structure;
autonomous
wind Section
energy 5 covers
ismicrogrid
most the simulation
powered
accessible. Onby the results;
solar
other PV andwind
and
hand, Sec-
there
are some This situations
manuscript is nighttime
organized as wind
follows: energy
Section exceeds
2 daytime
provides a wind
summary energy.
of the As
pro- a
2.
areThe
tion
energy6
some Examined
presents
resources.
situationsthe Microgrid’s
Inconclusions.
the
where day, Overview
solar
nighttime energy
wind is available,
energy however,
exceeds daytimeit is not
wind available
energy. at
As night.
a re-
result, the two energy resources are integrated in some way. Nevertheless, because of
posed
There
sult, microgrid;
Figure
is
the no
two 1 energy
set shows
timeSection
ofthe day
resources 3when
describes
planned arewind the
autonomous hybrid
energy
integrated is
in energy
microgrid
most
some storage
powered
accessible.
way. configurations;
Onby
Nevertheless,thesolar
other PVhand,
because Section
and wind
there
of the4
the fluctuations in the weather and solar radiation, they are unable to produce consistent
2.
areThe
presents
energy
some Examined
the
resources.proposed
in theIn
situations Microgrid’scontrol
the day,
where Overview
structure;
solar
nighttime energy
wind Section
isenergy 5
available,covers the
however,
exceeds simulation
it
toisproduce
nottheseresults;
available and
at Sec-
Asnight.
fluctuations
energy. The weather
intermittent natureand solar
of radiation,
solar and wind they are
energy isdaytime
unable
caused wind
by energy.
consistent
problems. a en-
re-
As 5 of 25
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW tion
There
sult,
ergy. 6Figurepresents
is
the
The no
two 1
set the conclusions.
shows
time
energy
intermittent the
of day planned
resources
nature when of are autonomous
wind
solar energy
integrated
and wind is
inmicrogrid
most
some
energy way.
is powered
accessible. On by
Nevertheless,
caused by thesolar
these other PV and
hand,
because
problems. wind
there
ofAs thea
a result, using both resources improves the microgrid’s sustainability and dependability.
energy
are some
fluctuations
result,
Additionally, resources.
situations
usinginboththe In
theenergythe
where
weather
resources day, and
storage solar
nighttime energy
solar
improves wind is
radiation,
system’s available,
energy
thedimensions they are
microgrid’s however,
exceeds daytime
unable it is not
wind
to produce
sustainability
will be lowered. available
energy. at
As night.
consistent en-
and dependability. a re-
2. The
There
sult, isExamined
the no
two setenergy
timeMicrogrid’s
ofresources
day when Overview
arewind energy
integrated is most
someaccessible.
inenergy way. On
by the other hand,of there
ergy. The
Additionally, intermittent
the energy nature
storage of solar and
system’s wind
dimensions will beNevertheless,
is caused lowered. these because
problems. As thea
are some
result, Figure
fluctuations
The using
wind1 shows
situations
inboth
the
system the
where
weather
resources planned
nighttime
consists and autonomous
a 3 wind
solar
improves
of radiation,
− the energy microgrid
exceeds
they
microgrid’s
φ permanent are powered
daytime
unable by
wind
to produce
sustainability
magnet synchronous solar
andenergy.PV and
consistent
dependability.
generator wind
As ame- re-
en-
energy
sult,
ergy.
chanically the
The
Additionally, resources.
two energy
intermittent
linked In athe
the energy
to day,
resources
nature
wind storage solar
ofare energy
solar
turbine. integrated
and
system’s
An is available,
wind inenergy
dimensions
uncontrolled however,
somerectifier
way.
is caused
will is itused
is not
beNevertheless,
by
lowered. to available
these because
problems.
rectify theatgener-
night.
ofAs thea
There
fluctuations
result, isusing
The
ator output, no set
wind in time
the
both
system
producing of day
weather
resources an when
consists and wind
solar
improves
of
unregulated −energy
a 3 radiation,
the
φ
DC isthey
mostAare
microgrid’s
permanent
voltage. accessible.
unable to
sustainability
magnet
boost On
synchronous
converter the
produceisother
and hand,
consistent bythere
dependability.
generator
powered en-
me-
this
are some
ergy.
chanically
voltage. TheThe
Additionally, situations
intermittent
linkedthe energy
wind where
toturbine
a windnature nighttime
storage
is of solar
turbine.
pushed wind
and
system’s
An
toward energy
wind
dimensions
uncontrolled exceeds
the energy
MPPT will
rectifierdaytime
is caused by
be lowered.
conditionsis used bywind
these energy.
problems.
to rectify
the boost the As a re-
As
gener-
converter. a
sult,
result,
ator the
output,
The microgrid’s two
using
The wind energy
both
system resources
resources
DC busconsists
producing an
is connected are
improves integrated
of a 3to
unregulated −φ the
DC in
permanent
voltage.
boost some
microgrid’s way.
Amagnet Nevertheless,
sustainability
synchronous
boost output.
converter’s converter and
Three because
dependability.
generator
is powered
parallel byof the
me-
this
strings
fluctuations
Additionally,
chanically
voltage.
make upThe the in
linked
wind
PV the
the weather
energy
toturbine
array isand
thatstorage
a wind pushed
powers solar
turbine. the radiation,
system’s
An
toward thethey
dimensions
uncontrolled
solar energy MPPT are unable
will
rectifier
system.conditionsis to
be lowered.
Modulesused produce
by consistent
to included
the
are rectify
boost the ingener-
converter.
everyen-
ergy.
ator
The The
The
output,
microgrid’s
string. This intermittent
wind PV system
producing
DC bus
output nature
consists
an
is of ofsolar
unregulated
is connected
fed into aan −and
3to φ
DC
the wind
permanent
additional energy
voltage.
boost boost is
Amagnet
boost
converter’s caused by
synchronous
converter
output.
converter. these
Three problems.
generator
is powered
Additionally,parallel theby As
me-
this
strings
PV’s a
result,
chanically
voltage.
make up
MPPT using
The
the
conditions both
linked
wind
PV toresources
a implemented
turbine
array
are wind
that powers improves
isturbine.
pushed theAn the
toward
viasolar
the microgrid’s
uncontrolled
the MPPT
energy
boost system. sustainability
rectifier
conditions
converter. is used
Modules byare and
to
the dependability.
rectify
boost
included the ingener-
converter.
every
Additionally,
ator
The output,
microgrid’s
string. AsThis PV
a result theoutput
ofenergy
producing
DC the isstorage
an
busgenerated
is unregulated
connected
fed into system’s DCdimensions
antoadditional
energy’sthe voltage.
boost A will
boost
converter’s
boost
intermittent beoutput.
lowered.
converter
converter.
nature, HESS isisused
Three powered
Additionally,parallel the
to offsetby this
strings
PV’s
the
voltage.
make
energyup
MPPT The wind
The
the PV
conditions wind
intermittencysystemturbine
array
are consists
isand
that powers
implemented
issue of
pushed a 3
the −
via
maintain φ
toward
solar permanent
the MPPT
energy
thesystem
boost magnet
system.
converter.
stability. synchronous
conditions
Modules
Besides by
a are
UC, generator
theincluded
boost converter. me-
in every
a series-parallel
chanically
The microgrid’s
string.
arrangementAsThis linked
PV
a result oftothe
DC
of output a wind
bus
lead–acid is fed
generated turbine.
is connected An
intoenergy’s
batteries an
makes uncontrolled
toadditional
the boost boost
intermittent
up HES. rectifier
theconverter’s isHESS
converter.
nature,
A used
output.
bidirectional to
Three rectify
Additionally,
is DC/DC
used tothe
parallel thegener-
strings
offset
converterPV’s
the
ator
make
MPPT
energyoutput,
connects up the producing
conditions PV
intermittency array toanthe
that
are implemented
batteries issue unregulated
powers
and
DCmaintainthe
bus.viaOn DC
solar
the voltage.
energy
boost
system
the other A boost
system.
converter.
stability.
hand, converter
Modules
Besides
the are
UC isadirectly
UC,isincluded
powered inby
a series-parallel
connected this
every to
voltage.
string.
arrangementAs The
This
a wind
PV
resultof of turbine
output
the
lead–acid is is
fed
generated pushed
into
batteries antoward
additional
energy’s
makes the MPPT
boost
intermittent
up the
the DC bus. Semi-active HESS is the name given to this topology of the HESS. Its job is to HES. conditions
converter.
nature,
A HESS
bidirectionalby the
is boost
Additionally,
used
DC/DC to converter.
the
offset
converterPV’s
the
The
MPPT microgrid’s
energy
connects
control conditions
intermittency
howthe the DCarebus
batteries
energy isthe
connected
implemented
issue
tostorage and
DCsystembus. toOn
via
maintain is boost
thedischarged
system
the otherconverter’s
converter.
stability.
hand, output.
Besides
the
and charged. Three
UC, aparallel
adirectly
UC isFurthermore, strings
series-parallel
connected
that con-to
make
arrangement
the DC
verter up the
Asserves
a result
bus. PV
of array
of
thethe
as lead–acid
Semi-active that
primary HESSpowers
generated
batteries
is the
actuator the solar
energy’s
makes
name energy
intermittent
up thetoHES.
given
for microgrid system.
this A Modules
nature, HESS
bidirectional
topology
energy balance are
of theand included
is DC/DC
used
DC to
HESS. in
offset every
converter
Its
bus job isthe
voltage to
string.
energy
connects
control
adjustments. This
howthePV
intermittency output
batteries
the energy isthe
issue fed
tostorage and
DC into an On
maintain
bus.
system additional
system
the other
is discharged boostandconverter.
stability.
hand, Besides
the
charged. Additionally,
adirectly the PV’s
UC, a series-parallel
UC isFurthermore, connected
that con-to
MPPT
arrangement
the DCserves
verter conditions of
bus. Semi-active areprimary
as lead–acid
the implemented
HESS is thevia
batteries
actuator makes
namethemicrogrid
for boost
up
given thetoconverter.
HES.
this A bidirectional
topology
energy balance of theandDC/DC
HESS.
DC bus converter
Its job is to
voltage
connects
control As how
adjustments. athe
result
the of the to
batteries
energy generated
the DCsystem
storage energy’s
bus. On intermittent
the other hand,
is discharged and nature,
the UC
charged. HESS is usedconnected
isFurthermore,
directly to offset
that con- the
to
energy
the DCserves
verter intermittency
bus. Semi-active
as the primary issue HESS and ismaintain
the name
actuator for system
given to
microgrid stability.
this Besides
topology
energy balance ofatheUC,HESS.
and a series-parallel
DC Its job
bus is to
voltage
arrangement
control
adjustments. how the of lead–acid
energy storage batteriessystem makes up the HES.
is discharged andAcharged.
bidirectional DC/DC converter
Furthermore, that con-
connects
verter serves the batteries
as the primary to the DC bus. On
actuator for the other hand,
microgrid energy thebalance
UC is directly
and DCconnectedbus voltage to
the DC bus. Semi-active HESS is the name given to this topology of the HESS. Its job is to
adjustments.
control
Figure 1.how The thepower energy
circuitstorage
topology system
of the is discharged
proposed and charged. Furthermore, that con-
microgrid.
Figure
verter serves 1. The poweras the circuit
primary topology
actuatoroffor themicrogrid
proposed energy microgrid. balance and DC bus voltage
adjustments.
3. Hybrid Energy Storage Configurations
Energy storage technologies can be classified as high power and high energy storage
systems (HPS and HES) [29]. Each energy storage technology has its own restrictions,
which limit the variety of applications that it may be used for. This is because the ideal
The wind system consists of a 3 − φ permanent magnet synchronous generator

mechanically linked to a wind turbine. An uncontrolled rectifier is used to rectify the
generator output, producing an unregulated DC voltage. A boost converter is powered
by this voltage. The wind turbine is pushed toward the MPPT conditions by the boost
converter. The microgrid’s DC bus is connected to the boost converter’s output. Three
parallel strings make up the PV array that powers the solar energy system. Modules
are included in every string. This PV output is fed into an additional boost converter.
Additionally, the PV’s MPPT conditions are implemented via the boost converter.
As a result of the generated energy’s intermittent nature, HESS is used to offset the
energy intermittency issue and maintain system stability. Besides a UC, a series-parallel
arrangement of lead–acid batteries makes up the HES. A bidirectional DC/DC converter
connects the batteries to the DC bus. On the other hand, the UC is directly connected to
the DC bus. Semi-active HESS is the name given to this topology of the HESS. Its job
is to control how the energy storage system is discharged and charged. Furthermore,
that converter serves as the primary actuator for microgrid energy balance and DC bus
voltage adjustments.
3. Hybrid Energy Storage Configurations

Energy storage technologies can be classified as high power and high energy storage
systems (HPS and HES) [29]. Each energy storage technology has its own restrictions,
which limit the variety of applications that it may be used for. This is because the ideal
operation requires the integration of high power and high energy storage elements. In
order to create a HESS, a system that mixes two or more energy storage equipment types
must be built [30]. Batteries, for instance, have low specific power, high specific energy, a
shorter life cycle, a lower self-discharge capacity, and a lower cost per watt-hour. However,
a UC has a higher self-discharge, a longer lifespan, faster charging, less specific energy,
and greater specific power [31]. Consequently, a battery–UC mixture can make use of
each other’s complementing characteristics. This combination’s symmetrical functioning
concept, wide availability, and inexpensive initial cost have made it popular.
Generally, the two-energy storage elements in a battery–UC HESS can be connected
to a common AC or DC bus [32]. A common DC bus is the recommended option for
freestanding microgrids for several reasons [33]. First off, DC voltage is used by most
energy storage system components and renewable energy sources. Consequently, keeping
a DC bus minimizes the requirement for a power converter [34]. Second, DC buses do not
need to be synchronized, which significantly lowers the system’s overall complexity [35].
Consequently, DC coupling is less expensive and more efficient than comparable AC bus
systems [36].
In forming a battery–UC circuit for DC bus systems, the battery and UC may be
connected by three common topologies, namely, passive, semi-active, and active. Figure 2
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW
illustrates the typical topologies for a battery–UC HESS. The subsequent subsections 6 of 25will
provide a description and an explanation of each topology.
(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure 2. The typical topologies for a battery–UC HESS. (a) Passive topology, (b) active topology,
Figure 2. The typical topologies for a battery–UC HESS. (a) Passive topology, (b) active topology,
(c) semi-active topology, and (d) alternative semi-active topology.
(c) semi-active topology, and (d) alternative semi-active topology.
3.1. Passive HESS Topology
The straightforward method of linking a HPS and HES to a system shown in Figure
2a is known as passive architecture. Without the need for power converters, the energy
storage systems are connected directly to one another [37]. The passive topology is like
synchronous generators that operate in parallel and share the load according to the im-
3.1. Passive HESS Topology

The straightforward method of linking a HPS and HES to a system shown in Figure 2a
is known as passive architecture. Without the need for power converters, the energy storage
systems are connected directly to one another [37]. The passive topology is like synchronous
generators that operate in parallel and share the load according to the impedance ratio.
In a similar vein, the ESS’s internal resistance and output parameters determine how the
load is divided. where the state of charge and the temperature have a major impact on the
resistance. For example, in a battery–UC hybrid, the low impedance of the UC absorbs the
high-power pulses. Hence, the UC acts as a low pass filter for power variations.
Equation (1) provides the system’s power balance, where Pg, Ps, and Pl stand for
power produced, power transferred by HESS, and power used by the load, in that order.
The total power supplied by HPS and HES, as indicated by the second portion of (1), is the
power exchanged by HESS.
Pg − Pl
Ps = (1)
PHPS + PHES
This architecture was first applied to battery–UC hybrid vehicles and pulse loads.
Later, it was utilized for power system applications [29,38]. In isolated microgrids, battery–
UC with passive connectivity has recently been employed to reduce the intermittency of
RES [26]. Nevertheless, the following drawbacks prevented this topology from receiving
much interest: lack of power control flexibility that is dependent on the internal resistance;
because energy storage systems are directly connected to the power system, they are
susceptible to progressive setback in dangers; and the DC link or load voltage and the
energy storage voltage must match precisely.
3.2. Active HESS Topology

To regulate HPS and HES, the active architecture uses a split bidirectional DC–DC
converter (see Figure 2b). With the two energy storage items being independently con-
trolled, this design provides the maximum level of controllability. It makes it easier to use
the complementing qualities of HPS and HES in the energy management plan. Moreover,
it facilitates the implementation of an extensive range of control methodologies. All of
these benefits, nevertheless, come at the price of higher power conversion losses and higher
converter costs.
Ps = µP HPS + αP HES (2)
Equation (2) gives the power transferred by HESS with this topology. The controllabil-
ity of HPS and HES are represented by the variables µ and α, respectively. These variables
are determined by the control techniques using a number of criteria, including SOC, power
variation frequency, and battery deterioration rate. This architecture has been applied
to HESS in power systems significantly more frequently than any other. There are two
categories for this: series active topology and parallel active topology. In order to interface
HPS and HES in parallel, the parallel topology uses two different sets of converters. In
contrast, the series topology decouples the HPS and HES from the DC bus by cascading
them with a power converter [39–41]. Because the power converter must be rated to the
HESS’s overall power rating, the series topology is frequently disregarded. Thus, power
system applications have made extensive use of parallel active topology. This architecture
has a number of benefits, including: more flexibility due to separate control of the HPS and
HES; numerous different control techniques are available for use; the system voltage has
no bearing on the voltage levels of the energy storage system; with converters that separate
the energy storage system from the system, it has built-in fault tolerance.
3.3. Semi-Active HESS Topology

Using a single power converter to operate HPS, this topology is an expansion of
the passive topology, where an appropriate control algorithm and a bidirectional DC–DC
converter are utilized to manage the power exchanged by HPS (refer to Figure 2c). Equation
(3) provides the power exchanged by HESS with this topology, where β indicates HPS
controllability and establishes the HPS power share. HPS meets the system’s peak power
requirements, while HES handles the remainder demand. Semi-active topologies with
controlled batteries and controlled UC have been examined in a study. The UC power
converter is too big to manage the output power of the pulse. On the other hand, the DC
link voltage varies in the topology with a regulated battery [42].
Ps = µP HPS + PHES (3)
Consequently, anytime a HES is interfaced with a converter, significantly large en-

ergy storage is required to maintain the DC bus voltage. Lately, a wind-supplied remote
microgrid has been supported by a hybrid battery–SMES system. Because the SMES can
absorb high frequency power changes, it has been utilized to increase battery longevity.
Likewise, the variations of small wind-supplied systems have been suppressed with the
use of a battery–UC hybrid. Another semiactive HESS design is depicted in Figure 2d,
where the battery is linked directly to the DC bus and only the UC is interfaced to the DC
bus via a bidirectional DC/DC converter [43]. The bidirectional DC/DC converter in this
design separates the battery terminal and DC bus from the supercapacitor. The volumetric
efficiency of the supercapacitor is much increased in this configuration since it may be
operated over a greater voltage range. A stable DC bus voltage is also guaranteed by the
battery’s direct connection [33]. Despite providing some flexibility, it has the following
drawback: when an HPS is interfaced directly with the system, the DC bus and voltage
fluctuates; the DC–DC converter must be built to withstand the significant power spikes.
Consequently, the battery’s longevity is negatively impacted by the battery’s inevitable ex-
posure to significant current fluctuations due to the passive connection [42]. Many control
techniques have been adapted for this topology. The control techniques can be classified as
classical and intelligent techniques. The classical techniques include filtration based, rule
based, dead beat, and droop controllers [29]. On the other hand, many intelligent control
techniques have been adapted for HESS such as: model predictive control; fuzzy logic
control; and robust control [29].
4. The Proposed Control Framework

The wind/PV MPPT controllers, the semiactive HESS controller, and the load inverter
controller are the proposed system controllers depicted in Figure 3. The MPPT controllers’
duties include obtaining the maximum power output from the PV array and wind turbine.
They produce the necessary duty cycle signal for the boost converter, which loads the PV
array and wind turbine under MPPT load circumstances. On the other hand, the HESS’s
charge/discharge process and the DC link voltage are regulated by the semiactive HESS
controller. The frequency and voltage of the load inverter are controlled by the third
controller. The descriptions of these controllers are as follows:
4.1. The Wind and PV’s MPPT Controllers

For optimal wind and photovoltaic energy consumption, these controllers are essential.
The popular and widely used MPPT technique known as perturb and observe has been
implemented here for both controllers, as Figure 3a indicates. It offers the advantages of
an easy algorithm and simple implementation. For this problem, two boost converters are
used: one for the PV panel and one for the wind. The duty cycle switch value of the boost
converter is the output of every MPPT controller. For both energy sources, the algorithm is
the same [44].
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 controller. The frequency and voltage of the load inverter are controlled
8 of by
24 the thir
troller. The descriptions of these controllers are as follows:
(a)
(b)
Semiactive Power Circuit
Semiactive HES Controller
UC
-re
FOPI ogic
Controller Hysteresis Circuit
Controller
b
TO
Algorithm 2 b
(c)
Figuremicrogrid’s
Figure 3. The proposed 3. The proposed microgrid’s
controllers: controllers:
(a) MPPT’s (a) MPPT’s
regulator, regulator,
(b) output DC/AC’s (b)controller,
output DC/AC’s c
ler, and (c) semiactive HESS’s controller.
and (c) semiactive HESS’s controller.
4.2. The Output 4.1.

DC/ACThe Controller
Wind and PV’s MPPT Controllers
For
This controller’s optimal
goal is to wind and
deliver photovoltaic
AC energy
power to the loadconsumption, these
at a controlled controllers are
frequency
and voltage. Intial. The3b,
Figure popular and widely
the control loop isused MPPT A
displayed. technique known
phase locked as perturb
loop and observ
is used to
measure and transmit the load 3 − φ voltages to the d-q frame. The reference values of
the transferred d-q voltages are compared with them. A basic PI controller is then fed
the resultant error. Thus, the Ziegler–Nichols method is used to adjust the gains of the PI
controller.
4.3. The Semiactive HESS Controller

This controller’s primary goal is to control the DC-link voltage, which can be done by
managing the semiactive HESS’s charging. It has two stacked loops, as Figure 3c illustrates.
With the aid of the optimized FOPI controller, the outer loop modifies the DC-link voltage.
On the other hand, an additional hysteresis controller assists the inner loop in managing
the semiactive HESS charging current. The inner loop’s reference charging current is the
outer loop’s output. The MPPT controllers cease and the controller finishes the charging
process when the battery is fully charged.
4.3.1. The FOPI Controller Principles

This regulator’s aim is to maintain the DC link voltage (Vdc ) constant at a prede-
termined value (Vdc-ref ). In order to do this, the controller modifies the battery energy
storage’s charging and discharging procedures. The outer loop of the proposed controller
is designed with the help of the FOPI, which preserves the voltage stability of the DC
link. Still, the inner loop controls the current drawn from the storage battery. For stability
reasons, it has to be made quicker than the outer loop [5].
Any real number can be presented using a complex and flexible integral or differential
notation thanks to the controller’s use of fractional operators [22]. For a given order q, the
following function represents the essential mathematical relationship between the fractional
order differential and integral operator:


 f (t) q=0
 q
q d
Da,b f (t) = dt q f (t) q>0 (4)

 b
 R −q
a f ( t ) dτ q<0
where (a, b) indicate the lower and upper limits; if the value of the order q is negative
(that is, q < 0), it is categorized as a first-order integral; on the other hand, once the value
of the order q is positive (that is, q > 0), it is categorized as a fractional order differential
transfer function.
Because it can be difficult to understand the physical consequences of fractional order,
scholars have developed several formulations to help make the concept more understand-
able. Our comprehension of the fundamental ideas of fractional order is aided by one such
formulation, the Riemann–Liouville technique, which provides a way to get the function’s
order derivative [45]:
k Z b
q 1 d f (τ )
Da,b f (t) = dτ (5)
Γ(k − q) dt a ( t − τ ) n − k +1
where k ∈ K, q − 1 < q < k, and the Gamma function Γ( x ) is defined as,

Z ∞
Γ( x ) = t x−1 e−t dt (6)
0
The solution to Equation (7) can be obtained by applying the Laplace transformation
to the fractional derivative of R-L in Equation (5) [22]. Equation (8) [46] represents the time
domain representation of the n order of the function f (t), and it is derived from Caputo’s
definition, which is a second definition associated with the idea of fractional order.
k −1
n o
q − z −1
L D0 f (t) = sq F (s) − ∑z=0 sz D0
q
f ( t ) | t =0 (7)
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 10 of 24

1
Rb f k (τ )
q

Γ(k−q) a (t−τ )1−k+q dτ k−1 < q < k
Da,b f (t) = (8)
k
( dtd ) f (t)

q=k
An initial condition is associated with the integral order of Equation (14) when the
Laplace transformation is performed on it. Equation (9), where s is the Laplace opera-
tor, provides an explanation of this beginning condition, which has important physical
implications.
k −1
n o
L D0 f (t) = sq F (s) − ∑z=0 sq−z−1 f (z) (0)
q
(9)
Completing intricate mathematical computations is required when using the FO oper-

ators in the time domain. We frequently employ the recursive approximation method to
implement FO operators [47]. An alternative mathematical formula, the Laplace transfor-
mation of the qth derivative, can be used to represent it in the following manner:
K s + ωy′
sq ≈ ωh ∏y=−K
q
(10)
s + ωy
where
y+K+(1−q)/2
2K +1
ωy′ = ωb ωh
ωb ,
y+K+(1+q)/2
ωh 2K +1
ωy = ωb ωb ,
[ωb , ωh ] is the working frequency band and (K) is the approximation order. These param-
eters have the values: ωb = −1000, ω h = 1000, and K = 5, in utilizing the Oustaloup
algorithm.
The FO proportional integral regulator, which has three tuning gains—proportional
gain (Ap ), integral gain (Ai ), and integral fractional order λ—is used in this investigation.
Compared to traditional PI regulators, controllers built with these specific characteristics
have been found to provide improved transient time, overall precision, and stability [45].
Additionally, this controller can successfully handle a variety of disturbances due to its
increased robustness and adaptability in the face of system interruptions. Additionally,
Equation (11) gives the general expression for the FOPI’s transfer function in Laplace form,
which is represented as H(s), where λ is often between 0 and 1.
Ai
H (s) = A p + (11)
sλ
A predetermined reference voltage is used to compare the voltage across the DC
link to be monitored. The desired battery current reference value is produced by the
FOPI controller, which is in charge of controlling the voltage differential. This reference
value aids in ensuring that the DC link voltage is properly managed and controlled. As
a result, the reference-determined required storage battery current is compared to the
actual battery current. This comparison is used by the FOPI controller to calculate and
adjust the bidirectional DC/DC converter’s duty cycle. Protection is provided by the dual
loop controller, which makes sure that the current withdrawn from the battery stays at an
acceptable level.
4.3.2. GTO Optimization of the FOPI Parameters

It might be difficult to determine the FOPI gains through trial and error, and it heavily
depends on the practitioner’s experience and expertise. The task of determining appropriate
values for the proposed FOPI parameters might be extremely difficult. It is crucial to
meticulously execute this procedure in order to improve the system’s functionality and
guarantee its stability, hence averting any disturbances. The best values for the FOPI
controller’s parameter values are found using the metaheuristic optimization technique
known as gorilla troop optimization (GTO) [48].
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 11 of 24
Nowadays, an optimization technique that finds inspiration in the actions of gorilla

troops has seen a recent spike in popularity. It is thought to be a brand-new meta-heuristic
optimization strategy [49]. The advantages of the GTO optimization over popular opti-
mization methods like PSO or the genetic algorithm (GA) are summarized at Table 1 [50].
Table 1. Summary of the advantages of the GTO optimization versus popular optimization methods.
Popular Optimization
Issue GTO Optimization Comments
Methods
Due to the
Premature Convergence Reduced Common problem exploration–exploitation
balance of the GTO.
Additional operators like
Handling Nonlinearities Better
mutation (in GA) are required
The dynamic encirclement
and competition strategies in
Escape from Local Optima Better Common problem
GTO help it to avoid being
trapped in local minima.
Due to its hierarchical
Handles high-dimensional behaviors enabling robust
Scalability Less effective
problems effectively performance with complex
problems.
Fewer parameters with less More parameters with high
Parameter Tuning
sensitivity to them sensitivity to them
Actually, the GTO algorithm’s primary source of inspiration is the innate social intelli-
gence of gorilla troops. The gorilla’s natural behavior can be summed up in five strategies.
The GTO optimizer uses three of them during the exploration stage. These include relocat-
ing to the other gorilla, migrating to locations that are known, and migrating to locations
that are unknown. The following formulae serve as mathematical models for each of these
tactics [51]:

 minb + (max b − minb ) × r1 r2 < p
GX (i + 1) = H × L + Xran (i )(r3 − C ) r2 ≥ 0.5 (12)
 2
X (i ) − L × ( X (i ) − GX (i )) + r4 × ( X (i ) − GX ran (i ))) rand < 0.5
C = (1 − i/imax ) × F (13)
F = 1 + cos(2r5 ) (14)
L = l×C (15)
H = Z × X (i ), Z = [−C, C ] (16)
where (minb , max b ) are the variable limits, (GX (i + 1), X (i )) are the position vectors of the
gorilla at two successive iterations, and (r6 , r5 , r4 , r3 , r2 , r1 ) are random positive numbers
between [0, 1] produced with a uniform distribution. The parameter (p), which falls within
the range [0, 1], specifies the probability of choosing the migration option. When the
exploration phase is over, the solution GX (i ) will take the place of X (i ), and if GX (i )’s
fitness function value is less than X (i ), it will emerge as the silverback. Conversely, the
exploitation phase of the GTO optimization process employs strategies like competing for
adult females and trailing the silverback. These strategies can be expressed mathematically
using Equation (17) through (20). The flow chart that shows the GTO optimization execution
steps is shown in Figure 4a.
GX (i + 1) = X (i ) − M × L × ( X (i ) − Xsb ) + r4 × ( X (i ) − GX ran (i )) (17)

execution steps is shown in Figure 4a.
𝐺𝑋(𝑖 + 1) = 𝑋(𝑖) − 𝑀 × 𝐿 × (𝑋(𝑖) − 𝑋𝑠𝑏 ) + 𝑟4 × (𝑋(𝑖) − 𝐺𝑋𝑟𝑎𝑛 (𝑖))) (17)
2−𝐿
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 𝐺𝑁 2𝐿
12 of 24
𝑀 = (|1⁄𝐺𝑁 ∑ 𝐺𝑋𝑘 (𝑖)| ) (18)
𝑘=1
 2− L
2L

GN
𝐺𝑋(𝑖)M= =
𝑋𝑠𝑏−1(𝑄 × 𝑋𝑠𝑏 GX
/GN ∑ − 𝑋(𝑖)
k (i )
× 𝑄)
 ×𝐴 (19)
(18)
k =1
𝑁 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 ≥ 0.5
𝐴 = 𝛽 × 𝐸, 𝑄 = 2𝑟6 − 1, 𝐸={ 1 (20)
GX (i ) = Xsb − ( Q × Xsb − X (i ) × Q𝑁)2 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑
A < 0.5 (19)
When the exploitation stage comes to its end, the
cost of GX(i) is compared to that of
N1 rand ≥ 0.5
its corresponding item, β × E,
A = X(i). If GX(i) 6 − 1,
Q =is2rless E = than
expensive (20)
X(i), then GX(i) takes its place
N2 rand < 0.5
and emerges as the optimum choice (silverback).
(a)
Simulation of the Proposed
Microgrid
FOPI Cost Function
Parameters Determination
Gorilla Troop
Optimization (GTO)
(b) (c)
Figure 4. (a) The GTO procedure flowchart; (b) the optimized FOPI parameters procedure for the
semiactive
Figure 4. (a)HESS; (c) theprocedure
The GTO convergence curve of(b)
flowchart; the GTO
the used to FOPI
optimized optimize the FOPIprocedure
parameters parameters.
for the
semiactive HESS; (c) the convergence curve of the GTO used to optimize the FOPI parameters.
4.3.3. Determination of the Objective Function

Figure 4b shows the optimized FOPI gain tuning procedure for the semiactive HESS
controller’s outer loop. The GTO procedure to determine the ideal parameters of the pro-
posed FOPI is summed up in the following points:
1. Establish the gorilla population, which is thought to be a potential answer for the
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 13 of 24
When the exploitation stage comes to its end, the cost of GX(i) is compared to that of
its corresponding item, X(i). If GX(i) is less expensive than X(i), then GX(i) takes its place
and emerges as the optimum choice (silverback).
4.3.3. Determination of the Objective Function

Figure 4b shows the optimized FOPI gain tuning procedure for the semiactive HESS
controller’s outer loop. The GTO procedure to determine the ideal parameters of the
proposed FOPI is summed up in the following points:
1. Establish the gorilla population, which is thought to be a potential answer for the
FOPI gains (i.e., three quantities).
2. Using the parameters produced by GTO, simulate the proposed microgrid.
3. To measure the effectiveness of the control system, compute the cost function using
the integral square error (ISE).
4. Combine the best answers from the previous phase to create new ones. Determine
whether the new solutions are fit.
5. Based on fitness, choose the population’s finest solutions.
6. Continue the procedure until the required end points are met.
The GTO’s associated parameters are β = 3, w = 0.8, and p = 0.03. Equation (21), where
TS is the simulation time, uses the ISE as the objective function for the GTO. Figure 4c
displays the convergence curve of the applied GTO, and the optimized FOPI parameters
are Kp = 20, Ki = 50, and λ = 0.05. The proposed GTO technique is able to achieve a very
low objective function estimate of approximately 0.012. Moreover, it is noteworthy that the
GTO procedure, taking into account the goal function (ϵ), can approach the optimal gains
in a rather short amount of time, usually within 85 iterations.
Z T 2
S
ϵ= Vdc − Vdc−re f dt (21)
0
5. Simulation Findings and Discussions

To verify the paper’s theory, the proposed wind/photovoltaic microgrid, shown in
Figure 1, is simulated on the MATLAB/Simulink platform. The general specifications of
the operating microgrid are displayed in Table 2.
Table 2. The proposed microgrid’s specifications.
System Element Variable Value

Wind speed 3.5–25 m/s
Wind Turbine
Power 10 KW
Ib , Vb 800 Ah, 300 V
HESS (Battery/UC)
UC 2F
AC Bus Voltage, frequency 220 V, 50 Hz
DC Bus Voltage 500 V
MPPT 5440 W
PV
Isc , Voc 22.8 A, 316.5 V
On testing the system performance during all states, the microgrid is subjected to
three types of disturbances. They are the wind speed variations, the variations in the solar
irradiation, and the load power changes as presented in Figure 5a, Figure 5b, and Figure 5c
respectively. In Figure 5a, the wind speed has speed step changes of 12 m/s, 6.5 m/s,
14 m/s, 0 m/s, and 8 m/s at the instants 0, 0.29 s, 0.62 s, 1 s, and 1.3 s, respectively. However,
in Figure 5b, the solar irradiation has step variations of 1 kW/m2 , 0, and 0.5 kW/m2 at the
instants 0, 1 s, and 1.5 s, respectively. On the other hand, the AC load varies in Figure 5c
with step changes between 100% full load and 50% full load at the instants 0, 0.42, 0.72 s,
On testing the system performance during all states, the microgrid is subjected to
three types of disturbances. They are the wind speed variations, the variations in the solar
irradiation, and the load power changes as presented in Figure 5a, Figure 5b, and Figure
5c respectively. In Figure 5a, the wind speed has speed step changes of 12 m/s, 6.5 m/s, 14
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 m/s, 0 m/s, and 8 m/s at the instants 0, 0.29 s, 0.62 s, 1 s, and 1.3 s, respectively. However, 14 of 24
in Figure 5b, the solar irradiation has step variations of 1 kW/m2, 0, and 0.5 kW/m2 at the
instants 0, 1 s, and 1.5 s, respectively. On the other hand, the AC load varies in Figure 5c
with1.38
step s,
changes
and 1.7 between
s. The 100%DCfull load
bus and 50%responses
voltage full load atfor
the the
instants 0, 0.42, 0.72 s, FOPI and PI
GTO-optimized
1.38 s, and 1.7 s. The DC bus voltage responses for the GTO-optimized FOPI and PI con-
controllers for the proposed microgrid are shown in Figure 5d. For both controllers, it
trollers for the proposed microgrid are shown in Figure 5d. For both controllers, it tracks
tracks well with the reference voltage of 500 V. Nevertheless, the GTO-optimized FOPI
well with the reference voltage of 500 V. Nevertheless, the GTO-optimized FOPI responds
veryresponds very well.
well. Its settling Its very
times are settling
shorttimes are low
and very verymaximum
short and very low
overshoot, maximum
0.2%, com- overshoot,
0.2%, compared to the PI controller. The PI controller has 3.6% maximum
pared to the PI controller. The PI controller has 3.6% maximum overshoot and 150 ms as overshoot and
150 ms as a
a peak settling time.peak settling time.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 5. The
Figure 5. simulation findingsfindings
The simulation of the proposed
of the microgrid.
proposed(a) Disturbance
microgrid. (a)inDisturbance
the wind speed,
in(b)
the wind speed,
disturbance in solar irradiation, (c) disturbance in the load power, and (d) assessment of the DC link
(b) disturbance in solar irradiation, (c) disturbance in the load power, and (d) assessment of the DC
voltage for both controllers without the UC.
link voltage for both controllers without the UC.
Two states are distinguished from the results. In the first state, the optimized FOPI
and traditional PI controllers are used to examine the performance of the proposed mi-
crogrid without the UC. On the other hand, the second state uses the optimized FOPI
controller to demonstrate how the proposed microgrid with a full HESS UC performs.
These states are explained in the following paragraphs.
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 15 of 24
Two states are distinguished from the results. In the first state, the optimized FOPI and
traditional PI controllers are used to examine the performance of the proposed microgrid
without the UC. On the other hand, the second state uses the optimized FOPI controller to
demonstrate how the proposed microgrid with a full HESS UC performs. These states are
explained in the following paragraphs.
5.1. Performance of the Proposed Microgrid Without UC Using Both Controllers

Figure 6 shows the response of the investigated microgrid, without UC, using the
proposed GOT optimized FOPI controller in contrast to the conventional PI controller.
Figure 6a,b present the 3 − φ load currents using both controllers and the currents are
balanced 3 − φ with stable frequency. The 3 − φ load voltages for each controller are
displayed in Figure 6c,d. Despite all of the disruptions, the voltage remains constant in
amplitude and maintains a sinusoidal pattern with a consistent frequency. Nevertheless,
some transients have occurred at the instants of load changes. The reason behind this effect
is the inverter’s filter characteristics.
The battery charging and discharging currents using the traditional PI controller are
displayed in Figure 6e. Since the PV generation is full and the wind generation is relatively
high, corresponding to a wind speed of 12 m/s, the charging current for the interval of
0 to 0.3 s is 17 A, that is, comparatively high. As the PV power reaches its peak and the
wind power decreases, the charging current for the duration 0.3 to 0.42 s is 5 A, which
is reasonable. At the instant 0.42 s, the load is increased to full load. Consequently, the
battery discharges to balance for the required demand. When both the PV power and
the wind power are fully utilized, at the period 0.62 s to 1 s, which corresponds to a
wind speed of 14 m/s, the charging current is 21 A. As the load increases, the charging
current decreases during all periods. Both wind and photovoltaic energy are suppressed
for 1 s–1.3 s. Because of this, the storage battery will make up for them throughout
this time, with a discharging current of 18 A. The same rules are applied during the
remaining time of operation. Additionally, Figure 6f shows the current response of the
battery for the proposed controller. It successfully tracks its reference for each controller.
The DC bus voltage controller generates the reference value for the battery’s current.
The charging and discharging operations account for radiation variations in addition to
tracking their references. Figure 6g,h display the battery’s SOC performance for both the
conventional PI controllers and the proposed FOPI controllers. The SOC’s response for
each of the two regulators is almost the same. The steps for charging and discharging
are presented, nevertheless. The load current spectrum analysis using the proposed FOPI
and PI controllers is displayed in Figure 6i,j. For the proposed FOPI controller, the load
current THD is 0.42%. But in the case of the PI controller, it is 0.72%. In all scenarios, the
load current THD is less than the requirements stated in standards [52]. As a result, the
proposed FOPI controller has a higher load current quality than the PI controller.
5.2. Performance of the Proposed Microgrid with UC Using the Optimized FOPI Controller
Figure 7 shows the response of the investigated microgrid (with UC) using the pro-
posed GOT optimized FOPI controller. Hence, the semiactive HESS acts effectively in this
case. The response of the DC-link voltage including the proposed regulator is presented
in Figure 7a. It seems ideal as there are no transients corresponding to all kinds of distur-
bances from the solar irradiation, wind speed, and load variations as provided by Figure 5.
Compared to the response without the UC, in Figure 5d, there are no transients at all with
the presence of a UC. However, it can be concluded that the proposed GOT optimized
FOPI controller can provide nearly the same performance as that with the UC. Hence, the
proposed controller can reduce the cost, weight, and space of the system. The UC current
waveform is present in Figure 7b. It has a high frequency pattern to compensate for the
transients in the DC-link voltage variations. Also, the current oscillates around zero to
indicate the stability of the DC-link voltage at steady state.
FractalFractal
Fract.Fract. 8, 629
2024,2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 16
25 of 24
Traditional PI Proposed Optimized FOPI

IL
(a) (b)
VL
(c) (d)
Ib
(e) (f)
Battery SOC%
(g) (h)
Spectrum of IL
(i) (j)
Figure 6. The response of the investigated microgrid (without UC) using the traditional PI controller
(a,c,e,g,i) in comparison to the proposed GOT optimized FOPI controller (b,d,f,h,j).
the presence of a UC. However, it can be concluded that the proposed GOT optimized
FOPI controller can provide nearly the same performance as that with the UC. Hence, the
proposed controller can reduce the cost, weight, and space of the system. The UC current
waveform is present in Figure 7b. It has a high frequency pattern to compensate for the
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 17 of 24
transients in the DC-link voltage variations. Also, the current oscillates around zero to
indicate the stability of the DC-link voltage at steady state.
Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
Figure
Figure 7. The
The response
responseofofthe
theinvestigated
investigated microgrid
microgrid (with
(with thethe
UC)UC) using
using the proposed
the proposed GOTGOT opti-
optimized
mized FOPI controller
FOPI controller (a–f). (a–f).
In Figure 7c,d,
7c,d,thetheload
loadvoltage
voltageand and current
current areare displayed.
displayed. Despite
Despite allthe
all of of disruptions,
the disrup-
the voltage
tions, remains
the voltage constant
remains in amplitude
constant in amplitude andand maintains
maintains a sinusoidal
a sinusoidal pattern
pattern with
witha
aconsistent
consistent frequency.
frequency. TheThebattery SOC
battery SOCresponse
response is presented
is presentedin Figure 7e. It7e.
in Figure seems to have
It seems to
the same
have character
the same as the as
character casethewithout the UC,the
case without displayed in Figure
UC, displayed in6h. Figure
Figure 6h.7fFigure
displays7f
the battery
displays thecurrent
batteryresponse with the proposed
current response GTO optimized
with the proposed FOPI controller.
GTO optimized Except for
FOPI controller.
the high-frequency
Except waves uploaded
for the high-frequency wavesonuploaded
the battery oncurrent, the response
the battery current, is resampling
the response to is
that without the UC.
resampling to that without the UC.
Figure 8 shows
shows the the power
power response
response of of the
the wind,
wind, PV,PV, battery,
battery, and UC for for the
the proposed
proposed
GTO optimized FOPI controller. Figure 8a displays the wind
GTO optimized FOPI controller. Figure 8a displays the wind turbine power during the turbine power during the
operating time.
operating time. ItIt is
is noted
noted that
that wind
wind power
power tracks
tracks itsits MPPT
MPPT conditions
conditions well.well. Also,
Also, the
the PV
PV
power response
power response follows
follows its its MPPT
MPPT conditions
conditions well,
well, asas displayed
displayed in in Figure
Figure 8b.
8b. Those
Those reflect
reflect
the perfect
the perfect operation
operation of ofthe
theMPPT
MPPTsubsystems
subsystemsfor forboth
boththe
thewind
wind andandPVPV supplies.
supplies. Figure
Figure8c
presents the battery power performance. When the battery power
8c presents the battery power performance. When the battery power is positive, it indi- is positive, it indicates
battery
cates charging.
battery On the
charging. Onother hand,hand,
the other whenwhenit is negative, the battery
it is negative, is discharging.
the battery is discharging.For
example, in the period 0.42 s to 0.72 s, the battery discharges due to the
For example, in the period 0.42 s to 0.72 s, the battery discharges due to the low generated low generated wind
energy
wind and high
energy anddemand
high demand full load.
full Also,
load. for thefor
Also, time
theafter
time1after
s, the1 battery discharges
s, the battery as the
discharges
as the generated wind and PV energies are low and the demand fluctuates between 50%
to 100% full load.
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 18 of 24

generated wind and PV energies are low and the demand fluctuates between 50%19
to of100%
25
full load.
Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e)
Figure 8.
Figure 8. The
The power
power performance
performance of of the
the investigated
investigatedmicrogrid
microgrid(with
(withthe
theUC)
UC)using
usingthe
theproposed
proposed
GOT optimized FOPI controller (a–e).
GOT optimized FOPI controller (a–e).
Figure
Figure 8d 8d indicates
indicates the UC power power response.
response.ItIthas hashigh
highfrequency
frequencytransients
transientsasasititisis
expected
expectedto tobebea asink
sinkforfor
voltage
voltage transients.
transients. TheTheload power
load poweris presented
is presentedin Figure 8e. There
in Figure 8e.
are some
There aretransient oscillations
some transient at the at
oscillations step
theinstants due todue
step instants thetoelectrical characteristics
the electrical of the
characteristics
output filter offilter
of the output the load
of theinverter. Also, Also,
load inverter. it must be noted
it must that the
be noted thatrated power
the rated of the
power ofPV
theis
5.44
PV isKW,
5.44which
KW, is ≈50%
which is of
≈50%the full
of theload.
fullHence, the PVthe
load. Hence, cannot supplysupply
PV cannot the fulltheload without
full load
any support
without any from
support thefrom
batterythe or the wind
battery or theenergy. Refer toRefer
wind energy. Figure 8 and track
to Figure 8 and the power
track the
for the for
power time range
the time 0.42
range s to
0.420.5s s,
to where the load
0.5 s, where the became
load became 10 KW. It is found
10 KW. thatthat
It is found the sum
the
of
sumtheofPVtheandPVtheandwind powerpower
the wind is lessisthan
lessthethan loadthedemand.
load demand.Therefore, the battery
Therefore, power
the battery
reverses its direction
power reverses to support
its direction the dropthe
to support in energy.
drop in By the same
energy. By the way, the power
same way, the balance
powerof
the system
balance can system
of the be checked,
can be and also theand
checked, energy
also management and controland
the energy management can control
be proven.
can
The assessment of the maximum overshoot for each period of the results utilizing
be proven.
the standard PI controller
The assessment of theand the proposed
maximum overshoot FOPI foriseach
presented
period in Table
of the 3. For
results a variety
utilizing theof
types of disturbances in the load
standard PI controller and the proposed FOPI power (P ), wind speed (ω
l is presented in Table S ), and solar insulation
3. For a variety of types (In ),
the peak overshoot
of disturbances of load
in the VDC power
using the(Pl),proposed
wind speed FOPI is and
(ωS), much smaller
solar than that
insulation using
(In), the peakthe
conventional
overshoot of PI VDCcontroller.
using the proposed FOPI is much smaller than that using the conven-
tional PI controller.
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 19 of 24
Table 3. Maximum DC link voltage overshoot using both the traditional PI controller and the
proposed optimized FOPI.
Table 3. Maximum DC link voltage overshoot using both the traditional PI controller and the pro-
posed optimized FOPI.
Peak Overshoot of VDC (%) Settling Time (s)
Time (s) Disturbance (%) GTO Optimized
Peak Overshoot of VDC (%) GTO Optimized
Settling TimeTraditional
(s)
Traditional PI PI
FOPI FOPI
Time (s) Disturbance (%) GTO Opti- GTO Optimized
∆ωS = 86%, Traditional PI Traditional PI
0 mized FOPI
0.2% 3.6% FOPI
0.04 0.2
0 ∆P l = ΔPl∆I
ΔωS = 86%,50%, n = 100%
= 50%, ΔIn = 100% 0.2% 3.6% 0.04 0.2
0.29 ∆ωS = −46% ~0.01 0.9% ~0.0 0.08
0.29 ΔωS = −46% ~0.01 0.9% ~0.0 0.08
0.42 ∆Pl = 50% ~0.01 0.6% ~0.0 0.06
0.42
0.62 ∆ωΔP l = 50%
S = 46% ~0.01~0.01 0.6%
0.6% ~0.0
~0.0 0.060.07
0.62
0.72 ∆Pl = −=50%
Δω S 46% ~0.01~0.01 0.6%
0.7% ~0.0
~0.0 0.070.16
0.72 ∆ωΔP = − 100%,
S l = −50% ~0.01 0.7% ~0.0 0.16
1 ~0.01 1% ~0.0 0.07
1 ΔωS =∆I−100%,
n = −100% ΔIn = −100% ~0.01 1% ~0.0 0.07
1.3
1.3 ∆ω S=
Δω 57%
S = 57%
~0.01~0.01 0.6%
0.6% ~0.0
~0.0 0.065
0.065
1.38 ∆Pl = 50% ~0.01 0.6% ~0.0 0.055
1.38
1.5
ΔPl = 50%
∆In = +50% ~0.01
~0.01 0.6%
0.4%
~0.0
~0.0
0.0550.06
1.5
1.7 ∆Pl =n =−+50%
ΔI 50% ~0.01~0.01 0.4%
0.8% ~0.0
~0.0 0.060.15
1.7 ΔPl = −50% ~0.01 0.8% ~0.0 0.15
5.3. HIL Validation Results

5.3. HI Validation Results
To
Toevaluate
evaluate the
the proposed systemand
proposed system andvalidate
validatethethe simulation
simulation results,
results, a Hardware-in-
a Hardware-in-
the-Loop (HIL) emulator was implemented using a C2000™ microcontroller
the-Loop (HIL) emulator was implemented using a C2000™ microcontroller LaunchPad™ LaunchPad™
TMS320F28379D kit, (Texas Instruments, Dallas, TX, USA) as presented
TMS320F28379D kit, (Texas Instruments, Dallas, TX, USA) as presented in Figure 9. In in Figure 9. this
In this
setup,
setup, the HIL emulator partitions the system, typically hosting the power components asas a
the HIL emulator partitions the system, typically hosting the power components
model
a model in MATLAB
in MATLAB on aonpersonal computer.
a personal computer.TheThe
power
powerunits of the
units of proposed
the proposedsystem, includ-
system,
ing the photovoltaic (PV) arrays, wind turbines, power converters, battery,
including the photovoltaic (PV) arrays, wind turbines, power converters, battery, super- supercapacitor,
and filters, are
capacitor, andsimulated
filters, arewithin MATLAB.
simulated Meanwhile,
within MATLAB.theMeanwhile,
control algorithms—specifically
the control algo-
the
rithms—specifically the FOPI—are executed on the microcontroller kit.between
FOPI—are executed on the microcontroller kit. Communication the PC and
Communication
the microcontroller
between the PC andisthe established via a virtual
microcontroller serial COM
is established via aport [53–55],
virtual serialallowing
COM port MATLAB
[53–
to55],
send measured
allowing MATLABpowertocircuit signals, such
send measured as the
power DC signals,
circuit bus voltage,
such asto the
the DC
microcontroller.
bus volt-
The
age,microcontroller then processes
to the microcontroller. the control
The microcontroller algorithms
then processesand generates
the control the switching
algorithms and
signals
generatesfor the switching
power converter. Data
signals for theexchange between Data
power converter. the PC and thebetween
exchange microcontroller
the PC is
synchronized at each sampling
and the microcontroller interval.at each sampling interval.
is synchronized
Figure9. 9. Schematic
Figure Schematic diagram
diagram ofofthe
theHIL
HILsimulation based
simulation on the
based DSP DSP
on the targettarget
Launch-
PadXLTMS320F28379D kit.
LaunchPadXLTMS320F28379D kit.
Figure 10 presents
Figure 10 presentsthe
the response
response of investigated
of the the investigated microgrid
microgrid (with
(with the the UC)
UC) using the us-
ing the GTO optimized FOPI controller utilizing the HIL with
GTO optimized FOPI controller utilizing the HIL with the DSP target the DSP target Launch-
PadXLTMS320F28379D kit (Texas Instruments, Dallas, TX, USA). The results are fairly close
to those shown in Figure 7.
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 20 of 24

LaunchPadXLTMS320F28379D kit (Texas Instruments, Dallas, TX, USA) . The results are
fairly close to those shown in Figure 7.
Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller (HIL Implementation)
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
Figure 10. The response of the investigated microgrid (with the UC) using the proposed FOPI con-
Figure 10. The response of the investigated microgrid (with the UC) using the proposed FOPI
troller utilizing the HIL with a DSP target LaunchPadXLTMS320F28379D kit (a–f).
controller utilizing the HIL with a DSP target LaunchPadXLTMS320F28379D kit (a–f).
6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions A hybrid wind/photovoltaic microgrid that operates in standalone mode and makes
use of hybrid storage (ultracapacitor/battery) is proposed. The latest fractional-order PI
A hybrid wind/photovoltaic microgrid
(FOPI) control approach that
serves as the operates
foundation inmicrogrid’s
for the standalone energymode and makes
management
use of hybrid storage
and (ultracapacitor/battery) is proposed.
control. A wind turbine, photovoltaic array, two stepThe latestconverters,
up DC/DC fractional-order
semiac- PI
tive HESS
(FOPI) control approach system,as
serves two-way DC/DC converter,
the foundation for and
theDC/AC load inverter
microgrid’s are all part
energy of the
management
microgrid. The P&O procedure was employed to obtain the MPPT conditions for the PV
and control. A windand
turbine,
the windphotovoltaic array,control
turbine. The proposed two step
schemeupforDC/DC converters,
the semiactive semiactive
HESS consists of
HESS system, two-way DC/DC converter, and DC/AC load inverter are all part
double loops: an inner loop that uses the hysteresis controller to regulate the battery cur-of the
rent and an outer loop that uses a FOPI controller to control the DC-link voltage. To attain
microgrid. The P&O procedure was employed to obtain the MPPT conditions for the PV
optimal performance, the gorilla troop optimization (GTO) approach was utilized to im-
and the wind turbine. The
prove the proposed
parameters of thecontrol
FOPI. scheme for the semiactive HESS consists
of double loops: an inner loop that uses the hysteresis controller to regulate the battery
current and an outer loop that uses a FOPI controller to control the DC-link voltage. To
attain optimal performance, the gorilla troop optimization (GTO) approach was utilized to
improve the parameters of the FOPI.
MATLAB was used to simulate the proposed microgrid with the optimized FOPI
controller. According to the simulation results, the classical PI controller’s system responses
are inferior to those of the GTO optimized FOPI controller. Different wind speeds, sun
insolation levels, and load powers were used to evaluate the system. The load voltage was
sinusoidal with perfect responsiveness, maintaining a constant frequency and amplitude
for all disturbances. For the proposed controller, the maximum overshoot can reach a
maximum value of 0.2%. In the case of the PI controller, it is 3.6%. It was also found
that in the presence of the UC, the microgrid performance was improved. However, the
improvement was very close to that gained when using the proposed controller without the
UC. Hence, the proposed controller can reduce the cost, weight, and space of the system.
This reduction has important ramifications for creating distributed energy systems that
are hybrids and will facilitate the global integration of renewable energy resources. Future
research might concentrate on improving the recently developed intelligent fractional
order controllers for the microgrid’s independent and grid-connected modes. Also, the
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 21 of 24
demand management via distributed control and human-in-the-loop optimization could

be applied to a wind/PV microgrid-connected system as in [56]. Finally, a HIL emulator
was implemented using a C2000™ microcontroller LaunchPad™ TMS320F28379D kit to
evaluate the proposed system and validate the simulation findings.
Author Contributions: S.A.Z. and H.A. handled the formal analysis and conceptualization; H.A.
assessed and re-reviewed the article; and A.M.A. and M.A.M. helped with funding acquisition. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Deputyship for Research and Innovation, Ministry of
Education, Saudi Arabia through the University of Tabuk, grant number S-1444-0070.
Data Availability Statement: Data is contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: The authors extend their appreciation to the Deputyship for Research and
Innovation, Ministry of Education, Saudi Arabia for funding this research work through the project
number S-1444-0070.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Nomenclature
PV photovoltaic
UC ultra-capacitor
PID proportional integral derivative
FOPI fractional-order proportional integral
FOC fractional-order control
FO fractional order
DC direct current
AC alternating current
PWM pulse width modulation
MPPT maximum power point tracking
HESS hybrid energy storage system
HES high energy storage
HPS high power storage
Pg , Ps , and Pl power produced, power transferred by HESS, and power used by the load
PHPS , PHES power supplied by the HPS and HES elements
µ and α controllability representing variables
SMES super conducting magnetic energy storage
Vdc-ref , Vdc DC link reference voltage and its actual value
(a, b) lower and upper limits
q order of differentiation
ωb , ωh working frequency band
K approximation order
(Ap , Ai ) proportional gain, integral gain
H(s) FOPI’s transfer function
(min b , max b ) variable limits
GX (i + 1), GX (i ) position vectors of the gorilla at two successive iterations
r6 , r5 , r4 , r 3 , r2 , r1 random positive numbers between [0, 1] produced with a uniform distribution
β, w, and p GTO’s weighting parameters
GTO gorilla troop optimization
ISE integral square error
ϵ cost function
ISC , VOC PV short circuit current, open circuit voltage
Vb , Ib battery voltage and current
ωS wind speed
In solar insulation
PSO particle swarm optimization
GA genetic algorithms
SOC state of charge
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 22 of 24
References
1. Bhimaraju, A.; Mahesh, A. Recent developments in PV/wind hybrid renewable energy systems: A review. Energy Syst. 2024, 15.
[CrossRef]
2. Kartal, M.T.; Pata, U.K.; Alola, A.A. Renewable electricity generation and carbon emissions in leading European countries:
Daily-based disaggregate evidence by nonlinear approaches. Energy Strat. Rev. 2024, 51, 101300. [CrossRef]
3. Meng, D.; Yang, S.; Yang, H.; De Jesus, A.M.; Correia, J.; Zhu, S.P. Intelligent-inspired framework for fatigue reliability evaluation
of offshore wind turbine support structures under hybrid uncertainty. Ocean Eng. 2024, 307, 118213. [CrossRef]
4. Peters, R.; Berlekamp, J.; Kabiri, C.; Kaplin, B.A.; Tockner, K.; Zarfl, C. Sustainable pathways towards universal renewable
electricity access in Africa. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2024, 5, 137–151. [CrossRef]
5. Albalawi, H.; El-Shimy, M.E.; AbdelMeguid, H.; Kassem, A.M.; Zaid, S.A. Analysis of a Hybrid Wind/Photovoltaic Energy
System Controlled by Brain Emotional Learning-Based Intelligent Controller. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4775. [CrossRef]
6. Albalawi, H.; Kassem, A.M.; Zaid, S.A.; Lakhouit, A.; Arshad, M.A. Energy management of an isolated wind/photovoltaic
microgrid using cuckoo search algorithm. Intell. Autom. Soft Comput. 2022, 34, 2051–2066. [CrossRef]
7. Hybrid Wind and Solar Electric Systems.(22C.E.). Available online: https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/hybrid-wind-and-
solar-electric-systems (accessed on 1 August 2024).
8. Angadi, S.; Yaragatti, U.R.; Suresh, Y.; Raju, A.B. Comprehensive review on solar, wind and hybrid wind-PV water pumping
systems-an electrical engineering perspective. CPSS Trans. Power Electron. Appl. 2021, 6, 1–19. [CrossRef]
9. Pradhan, S.; Singh, B.; Panigrahi, B.K.; Murshid, S. A composite sliding mode controller for wind power extraction in remotely
located solar PV–wind hybrid system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 5321–5331. [CrossRef]
10. Setiawan, B.; Putra, E.S.; Siradjuddin, I.; Junus, M. Optimisation solar and wind hybrid energy formod elcatamaran ship. IOP
Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 1073, 012044. [CrossRef]
11. Bouchekara, H.R.E.H.; Sha’aban, Y.A.; Shahriar, M.S.; Abdullah, S.M.; Ramli, M.A. Sizing of Hybrid PV/Battery/Wind/Diesel
Microgrid System Using an Improved Decomposition Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm Considering Uncertainties and
Battery Degradation. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11073. [CrossRef]
12. Liu, J.; Cao, S.; Chen, X.; Yang, H.; Peng, J. Energy planning of renewable applications in high-rise residential buildings integrating
battery and hydrogen vehicle storage. Appl. Energy 2021, 281, 116038. [CrossRef]
13. Rezkallah, M.; Hamadi, A.; Chandra, A.; Singh, B. Design and implementation of active power control with improved P&O
method for wind-PV-battery-based standalone generation system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 5590–5600.
14. Parida, A.; Chatterjee, D. Stand-alone AC-DC microgrid-based wind solar hybrid generation scheme with autonomous energy
exchange topologies suitable for remote rural area power supply. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2018, 28, 2520. [CrossRef]
15. Jamshidi, S.; Pourhossein, K.; Asadi, M. Size estimation of wind/solar hybrid renewable energy systems without detailed wind
and irradiation data: A feasibility study. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 234, 113905. [CrossRef]
16. Zaid, S.A.; Kassem, A.M.; Alatwi, A.M.; Albalawi, H.; AbdelMeguid, H.; Elemary, A. Optimal Control of an Autonomous
Microgrid Integrated with Super Magnetic Energy Storage Using an Artificial Bee Colony Algorithm. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8827.
[CrossRef]
17. Muresan, C.I.; Birs, I.; Ionescu, C.; Dulf, E.H.; De Keyser, R. A Review of Recent Developments in Autotuning Methods for
Fractional-Order Controllers. Fractal Fract. 2022, 6, 37. [CrossRef]
18. Monje, C.A.; Chen, Y.Q.; Vinagre, B.M.; Xue, D.; Feliu, V. Fractional-Order Systems and Controls: Fundamentals and Applications;
Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010.
19. Da Silva, C.S.M.; Da Silva, N.J.F.; Júnior, F.A.D.C.A.; De Medeiros, R.L.P.; E Silva, L.E.S.; De Lucena, V.F. Experimental Implemen-
tation of Hydraulic Turbine Dynamics and a Fractional Order Speed Governor Controller on a Small-Scale Power System. IEEE
Access 2024, 12, 40480–40495. [CrossRef]
20. Zaheeruddin; Singh, K. Load frequency regulation by de-loaded tidal turbine power plant units using fractional fuzzy based PID
droop controller. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020, 92, 106338. [CrossRef]
21. Pan, I.; Das, S. Fractional order AGC for distributed energy resources using robust optimization. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2016, 7,
2175–2186. [CrossRef]
22. Zaid, S.A.; Bakeer, A.; Magdy, G.; Albalawi, H.; Kassem, A.M.; El-Shimy, M.E.; AbdelMeguid, H.; Manqarah, B. A New Intelligent
Fractional-Order Load Frequency Control for Interconnected Modern Power Systems with Virtual Inertia Control. Fractal Fract.
2023, 7, 62. [CrossRef]
23. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis—Version 16. Available online: https://www.lazard.com/research-insights/2023
-levelized-cost-of-energyplus/ (accessed on 4 April 2023).
24. Soudagar, M.E.M.; Ramesh, S.; Khan, T.Y.; Almakayeel, N.; Ramesh, R.; Ghazali, N.N.N.; Cuce, E.; Shelare, S. An overview of the
existing and future state of the art advancement of hybrid energy systems based on PV-solar and wind. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol.
2024, 19, 207–216. [CrossRef]
25. Shi, X.; Shi, X.; Dong, W.; Zang, P.; Jia, H.; Wu, J.; Wang, Y. Research on Energy Storage Configuration Method Based on Wind
and Solar Volatility. In Proceedings of the 2020 10th International Conference on Power and Energy Systems (ICPES), Chengdu,
China, 25–27 December 2020; pp. 464–468. [CrossRef]
26. Ma, T.; Yang, H.; Lu, L. Development of hybrid battery–supercapacitor energy storage for remote area renewable energy systems.
Appl. Energy 2015, 153, 56–62. [CrossRef]
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 23 of 24
27. Tammineedi, C. Modeling Battery-Ultracapacitor Hybrid Systems for Solar and Wind Applications; The Pennsylvania State University:
University Park, PA, USA, 2011.
28. Ribeiro, E.; Cardoso, A.J.M.; Boccaletti, C. Power conditioning supercapacitors in combination with batteries for stand-alone
power systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Symposium on Power Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and
Motion (SPEEDAM), Sorrento, Italy, 20–22 June 2012; pp. 914–919.
29. Babu, T.S.; Vasudevan, K.R.; Ramachandaramurthy, V.K.; Sani, S.B.; Chemud, S.; Lajim, R.M. A Comprehensive Review of Hybrid
Energy Storage Systems: Converter Topologies, Control Strategies and Future Prospects. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 148702–148721.
[CrossRef]
30. Chen, H.; Cong, T.N.; Yang, W.; Tan, C.; Li, Y.; Ding, Y. Progress in electrical energy storage system: A critical review. Prog. Nat.
Sci. 2009, 19, 291–312. [CrossRef]
31. Spataru, C.; Kok, Y.C.; Barrett, M. Physical energy storage employed worldwide. Energy Procedia 2014, 62, 452–461. [CrossRef]
32. Zhan, Y.; Guo, Y.; Zhu, J.; Li, L. Power and energy management of grid/PEMFC/battery/supercapacitor hybrid power sources
for UPS applications. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2015, 67, 598–612. [CrossRef]
33. Jing, W.; Hung Lai, C.; Wong, S.H.W.; Wong, M.L.D. Battery-supercapacitor hybrid energy storage system in standalone DC
microgrids: A review. IET Renew. Power Gener. 2017, 11, 461–469. [CrossRef]
34. Gu, Y.; Xiang, X.; Li, W.; He, X. Mode-Adaptive Decentralized Control for Renewable DC Microgrid with Enhanced Reliability
and Flexibility. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2014, 29, 5072–5508. [CrossRef]
35. Bahrami, S.; Wong, V.W.S.; Jatskevich, J. Optimal power flow for AC-DC networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International
Conference on Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), Venice, Italy, 3–6 November 2014; pp. 49–54.
36. Che, L.; Shahidehpour, M. DC microgrids: Economic operation and enhancement of resilience by hierarchical control. IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid 2014, 5, 2517–2526.
37. Lahyani, A.; Venet, P.; Guermazi, A.; Troudi, A. Battery/supercapacitors combination in uninterruptible power supply (UPS).
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2013, 28, 1509–1522. [CrossRef]
38. Cao, J.; Emadi, A. A new battery/UltraCapacitor hybrid energy storage system for electric, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2012, 27, 122–132.
39. Cohen, I.J.; Wetz, D.A.; Heinzel, J.M.; Dong, Q. Design and characterization of an actively controlled hybrid energy storage
module for high-rate directed energy applications. IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 2015, 43, 1427–1433. [CrossRef]
40. Kollimalla, S.K.; Mishra, M.K.; Ukil, A.; Gooi, H.B. DC grid voltage regulation using new HESS control strategy. IEEE Trans.
Sustain. Energy 2017, 8, 772–781. [CrossRef]
41. Manandhar, U.; Tummuru, N.R.; Kollimalla, S.K.; Ukil, A.; Beng, G.H.; Chaudhari, K. Validation of faster joint control strategy for
batteryand supercapacitor-based energy storage system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 3286–3295. [CrossRef]
42. Song, Z.; Hofmann, H.; Li, J.; Han, X.; Zhang, X.; Ouyang, M. A comparison study of different semi-active hybrid energy storage
system topologies for electric vehicles. J. Power Sources 2015, 274, 400–411. [CrossRef]
43. Gee, A.M.; Robinson, F.V.P.; Dunn, R.W. Analysis of battery lifetime extension in a small-scale wind-energy system using
supercapacitors. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2013, 28, 24–33. [CrossRef]
44. Bingi, K.; Prusty, R.; Singh, A. A Review on Fractional-Order Modelling and Control of Robotic Manipulators. Fractal Fract. 2023,
7, 77. [CrossRef]
45. Zaid, S.A.; Bakeer, A.; Albalawi, H.; Alatwi, A.M.; AbdelMeguid, H.; Kassem, A.M. Optimal Fractional-Order Controller for the
Voltage Stability of a DC Microgrid Feeding an Electric Vehicle Charging Station. Fractal Fract. 2023, 7, 677. [CrossRef]
46. Morsali, J.; Zare, K.; Hagh, M.T. Applying fractional order PID to design TCSC-based damping controller in coordination with
automatic generation control of interconnected multi-source power system. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 2017, 20, 1–17. [CrossRef]
47. Shaheen, A.; Ginidi, A.; El-Sehiemy, R.; Elsayed, A.; Elattar, E.; Dorrah, H.T. Developed Gorilla Troops Technique for Optimal
Power Flow Problem in Electrical Power Systems. Mathematics 2022, 10, 1636. [CrossRef]
48. Ali, M.; Kotb, H.; Aboras, K.M.; Abbasy, N.H. Design of Cascaded PI-Fractional Order PID Controller for Improving the Frequency
Response of Hybrid Microgrid System Using Gorilla Troops Optimizer. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 150715–150732. [CrossRef]
49. El-Dabah, M.A.; Hassan, M.H.; Kamel, S.; Zawbaa, H.M. Robust Parameters Tuning of Different Power System Stabilizers Using
a Quantum Artificial Gorilla Troops Optimizer. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 82560–82579. [CrossRef]
50. Abualigah, L.; Diabat, A.; Mirjalili, S.; Abd Elaziz, M.; Gandomi, A.H. The Arithmetic Optimization Algorithm. Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Eng. 2021, 376, 113609. [CrossRef]
51. Saad, S.S.; Zainuri, M.A.A.M.; Hussain, A. Implementation of Maximum Power Point Tracking Techniques for PV-Wind Hybrid
Energy System: A Review. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics (ICEEI),
Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia, 12–13 October 2021; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef]
52. IEEE-519; IEEE Recommended Practices and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems. IEEE: New York,
NY, USA, 1992.
53. Bakeer, A.; Mohamed, I.S.; Malidarreh, P.B.; Hattabi, I.; Liu, L. An Artificial Neural Network-Based Model Predictive Control for
Three-Phase Flying Capacitor Multilevel Inverter. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 70305–70316. [CrossRef]
54. Zaid, S.A.; Mohamed, I.S.; Bakeer, A.; Liu, L.; Albalawi, H.; Tawfiq, M.E.; Kassem, A.M. From MPC-Based to End-to-End (E2E)
Learning-Based Control Policy for Grid-Tied 3L-NPC Transformerless Inverter. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 57309–57326. [CrossRef]
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 24 of 24
55. Abid, A.; Bakeer, A.; Zellouma, L.; Bouzidi, M.; Lashab, A.; Rabhi, B. Low Computational Burden Predictive Direct Power Control
of Quasi Z-Source Inverter for Grid-Tied PV Applications. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4153. [CrossRef]
56. Korkas, C.D.; Baldi, S.; Kosmatopoulos, E.B. Grid-connected microgrids: Demand management via distributed control and
human-in-the-loop optimization. In Advances in Renewable Energies and Power Technologies; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
2018; pp. 315–344.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Application of An Optimal Fractional Order Controller-HRES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application of An Optimal Fractional Order Controller-HRES

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application of An Optimal Fractional Order Controller-HRES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

fractal and fractional

Received: 15 September 2024

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629. https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8110629 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fractalfract

optimization technique, the fractional-order controller’s gains were optimally selected.

The wind system consists of a 3 − φ permanent magnet synchronous generator

3. Hybrid Energy Storage Configurations

provide a description and an explanation of each topology.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

3.1. Passive HESS Topology

3.2. Active HESS Topology

3.3. Semi-Active HESS Topology

Ps = µP HPS + PHES (3)

Consequently, anytime a HES is interfaced with a converter, significantly large en-

4. The Proposed Control Framework

4.1. The Wind and PV’s MPPT Controllers

Semiactive Power Circuit

Semiactive HES Controller

4.2. The Output 4.1.

4.3. The Semiactive HESS Controller

4.3.1. The FOPI Controller Principles

where k ∈ K, q − 1 < q < k, and the Gamma function Γ( x ) is defined as,

Completing intricate mathematical computations is required when using the FO oper-

4.3.2. GTO Optimization of the FOPI Parameters

Nowadays, an optimization technique that finds inspiration in the actions of gorilla

GX (i + 1) = X (i ) − M × L × ( X (i ) − Xsb ) + r4 × ( X (i ) − GX ran (i )) (17)

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 25

Simulation of the Proposed

FOPI Cost Function

4.3.3. Determination of the Objective Function

4.3.3. Determination of the Objective Function

5. Simulation Findings and Discussions

Table 2. The proposed microgrid’s specifications.

System Element Variable Value

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 25

5.1. Performance of the Proposed Microgrid Without UC Using Both Controllers

Traditional PI Proposed Optimized FOPI

Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 25

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 25

5.3. HIL Validation Results

Fractal Fract. 2024, 8, 629 20 of 24

Proposed GTO Optimized FOPI Controller (HIL Implementation)

demand management via distributed control and human-in-the-loop optimization could

You might also like