Komparasi Performansi Antara Proportional Integral Derivative Controller (PID) Dan Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) Pada Penjejak Cahaya Dengan Tiga Sensor

Doni Gunawan, Y. Away, I. D. Sara, Andri Novandri
{"title":"Komparasi Performansi Antara Proportional Integral Derivative Controller (PID) Dan Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) Pada Penjejak Cahaya Dengan Tiga Sensor","authors":"Doni Gunawan, Y. Away, I. D. Sara, Andri Novandri","doi":"10.31961/eltikom.v6i2.552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The technology of light tracking monitors the solar panels to track the sun with full efficiency, and the solar panels can be upright to the sunlight in order to maximize the absorption of solar energy, so this system has a higher efficiency than non-tracking systems. This study aimed to obtain a controller that works accurately between the Proportional, Integral, and Derivative Controller (PID) and the Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) Algorithm by comparing the performance of the two algorithms in regulating the direction of the light tracker to detect the presence of sunlight. This solar prototype uses nine lamps as a simulation to determine the accuracy and precision of the angles of the two light trackers. The parameters compared in this test were the aspects of angular velocity and angle accuracy. The mean value of angular velocity obtained from the PID light tracking test results was 0.16 rad/s and the average linear velocity was 0.092 m/s whereas in the FLC light tracker, the average angular velocity value was 0.207 rad/s. Tests using a PID light tracker resulted in an X-axis accuracy of 45% and a Y-axis accuracy of 30%. The FLC light tracker, on the other hand, had an X-axis accuracy of 80% and a Y-axis accuracy of 30%.The precision value obtained by the PID light tracker on the X axis was 45% and the Y axis was 38%, while the precision value obtained by the FLC light tracker on the X axis was 71% and the Y axis was 33%. Based on the overall calculations, it can be concluded that the FLC light tracker has an increase in the speed value of 29% and an increase in the value of accuracy in the accuracy aspect by 35% and the precision aspect by 26% compared to the PID light tracker in previous studies.","PeriodicalId":33096,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal ELTIKOM Jurnal Teknik Elektro Teknologi Informasi dan Komputer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal ELTIKOM Jurnal Teknik Elektro Teknologi Informasi dan Komputer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31961/eltikom.v6i2.552","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The technology of light tracking monitors the solar panels to track the sun with full efficiency, and the solar panels can be upright to the sunlight in order to maximize the absorption of solar energy, so this system has a higher efficiency than non-tracking systems. This study aimed to obtain a controller that works accurately between the Proportional, Integral, and Derivative Controller (PID) and the Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC) Algorithm by comparing the performance of the two algorithms in regulating the direction of the light tracker to detect the presence of sunlight. This solar prototype uses nine lamps as a simulation to determine the accuracy and precision of the angles of the two light trackers. The parameters compared in this test were the aspects of angular velocity and angle accuracy. The mean value of angular velocity obtained from the PID light tracking test results was 0.16 rad/s and the average linear velocity was 0.092 m/s whereas in the FLC light tracker, the average angular velocity value was 0.207 rad/s. Tests using a PID light tracker resulted in an X-axis accuracy of 45% and a Y-axis accuracy of 30%. The FLC light tracker, on the other hand, had an X-axis accuracy of 80% and a Y-axis accuracy of 30%.The precision value obtained by the PID light tracker on the X axis was 45% and the Y axis was 38%, while the precision value obtained by the FLC light tracker on the X axis was 71% and the Y axis was 33%. Based on the overall calculations, it can be concluded that the FLC light tracker has an increase in the speed value of 29% and an increase in the value of accuracy in the accuracy aspect by 35% and the precision aspect by 26% compared to the PID light tracker in previous studies.
比例积分微分控制器(PID)与模糊控制器(FLC)在三传感器光跟踪器上的性能比较
光跟踪技术对太阳能电池板进行监测,以充分有效地跟踪太阳,并且太阳能电池板可以垂直于太阳光,以最大限度地吸收太阳能,因此该系统比非跟踪系统具有更高的效率。本研究旨在通过比较比例、积分和微分控制器(PID)和模糊逻辑控制器(FLC)算法在调节光跟踪器的方向以检测阳光的存在方面的性能,获得一种在比例、积分、微分控制器(PID)和模糊逻辑控制器(FLC)算法之间精确工作的控制器。这个太阳能原型使用九盏灯作为模拟,以确定两个光跟踪器角度的准确性和精度。该试验中比较的参数是角速度和角精度。从PID光跟踪测试结果获得的角速度的平均值为0.16rad/s,平均线速度为0.092m/s,而在FLC光跟踪器中,平均角速度值为0.207rad/s。使用PID光跟踪器的测试导致X轴精度为45%,Y轴精度为30%。另一方面,FLC光跟踪器的X轴精度为80%,Y轴精度为30%。PID光跟踪器在X轴上获得的精度值为45%,Y轴为38%,而FLC光跟踪器在X轴上得到的精度值是71%,Y轴是33%。基于总体计算,可以得出结论,与先前研究中的PID光跟踪器相比,FLC光跟踪器的速度值增加了29%,精度方面的精度值增加了35%,精度方面增加了26%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信