Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

ISSN: 2040-7459; e-ISSN: 2040-7467

Maxwell Scientific Organization, 2013
Submitted: January 16, 2013
Accepted: February 18, 2013
Published: May 05, 2013

Speed Control of Induction Motor Fed from Wind Turbine via Particle Swarm
Optimization Based PI Controller
1

A.S. Oshaba and 2E.S. Ali

Electronics Research Institute, Power Electronics and Energy Conversions,
NRC Blg., El-Tahrir St., Dokki, 12311-Giza, Egypt
2
Electric Power and Machine Department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt
1

Abstract: Three-phase Induction Motor (IM) is widely used in the industry because of its rugged construction and
absence of brushes. However, speed control of IM is required depending on the desired speed and application. This
study proposes a design of a Proportional Integral (PI) controller using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)
algorithm to control the speed of an IM supplied from wind turbine. The wind turbine acts as a prime mover to a
connected DC generator. Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) is used to obtain three phase AC voltage from the output
of DC generator. The proposed design problem of speed controller is formulated as an optimization problem. PSO is
employed to search for optimal controller parameters by minimizing the time domain objective function. The
performance of the proposed technique has been evaluated with respect to the variation of load torque and speed
wind turbine. Also the performance of the proposed controller has been evaluated with the performance of the PI
controller tuned by Genetic Algorithm (GA) in order to demonstrate the superior efficiency of the proposed PSO in
tuning PI controller. Simulation results emphasis on the better performance of the optimized PI controller based on
PSO in compare to optimized PI controller based on GA over a wide range of load torque and speed wind turbine.
Keywords: DC Generator, Genetic Algorithm, Induction Motor, Particle Swarm Optimization, Pulse Width
Modulation, Speed Control, Wind Turbine
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, as a consequence of the important
progress in power electronics and micro-computing, the
control of AC electric machines has seen considerable
development and the possibility for application (Hazzab
et al., 2005). The Induction Motor (IM), known for its
robustness, relatively low cost, reliability and
efficiency, is the object of several research works.
However its control presents difficulties because of its
high non-linearity and its highly coupled structure
(Mansouri et al., 2004).
Many intelligent approaches are used for speed
control of IM such as Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
(Zerikat and Chekroun, 2008; Dongale et al., 2012).
The ANN approach has its own advantages and
disadvantages. The performance of the system is
improved by ANN based controller but, the main
problem of these controllers are the long training time,
the selecting number of layers and the number of
neurons in each layer. Another artificial intelligence
approach likes Fuzzy Logic Control (FLC) for
designing adaptive speed control of IM is discussed in
Fonseca et al. (1999), Chitra and Prabhakar (2006) and
Arulmozhiyal and Baskaran (2009) but a hard work is

inevitable to get the effective signals when designing

FLC. Also, it requires more fine tuning and simulation
before operational.
Recently, global optimization techniques have
attracted the attention in the field of controller
parameter optimization (Fogel, 1995). These methods
such as Tabu Search (TS) (Lee, 2005), Genetic
Algorithms (GA) (Chebre et al., 2011) are used in
speed control of IM. Despite these optimization
methods seem to be effective for optimal location and
setting of controller, the efficiency is reduced by the use
of highly epi static objective functions (i.e., where
parameters being optimized are highly correlated) and
the large number of optimized parameters, then these
methods have degraded effectiveness to obtain the
global optimum solution. Further more, it is time
consuming method.
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) is proposed as
a solution to the above-mentioned problems and
drawbacks. Swarming strategies in bird flocking and
fish schooling are used in the PSO and introduced in
Kennedy and Eberhart (1995) for optimal designing of
controller parameters and defining its best location
(Abido, 2002; Panda and Padhy, 2008; Mostafa et al.,
2012).

Corresponding Author: E.S. Ali, Electric Power and Machine Department, Faculty of Engineering, Zagazig University,
Zagazig, Egypt

4594

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

This study proposes the PSO for optimal designing
of PI controller for speed control of IM fed by wind
turbine, which has a simple structure and robust
performance in a wide range of operating conditions.
The design problem of the proposed controller is
formulated as an optimization problem and PSO is
employed to search for optimal controller parameters.
By minimizing the time domain objective function, in
which the deviations in error between the reference and
actual speed is involved; speed control of IM is
improved. Simulation results assure the effectiveness of
the proposed controller in providing good speed control
over a wide range of load torque and speed turbine.
Also, these results validate the superiority of the
proposed method in tuning controller compared with
GA.

SYSTEM UNDER STUDY

The system under study consists of wind turbine
acts as a prime mover to a connected DC generator. The
DC output voltage is converted to three phase voltage
through a Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). The three
phase output voltage of PWM is fed to the three phase
IM. The proposed controller based on PSO is used to
control the speed of IM. The schematic block diagram
is shown in Fig. 1.
IM model: The electrical part of IM is represented by a
fourth-order state-space model and the mechanical part
by a second-order model. All electrical variables and
parameters are referred to the stator. This is indicated
by the prime signs () in the machine equation given
below. All stator and rotor quantities are in the arbitrary

Fig. 1: The schematic block diagram of system under study

Fig. 2: The model of IM

4595

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

two-axis reference frame (q-d frame) (Fitgeraid et al.,
1971; Krause, 1986; Bose, 2002). Figure 2 shows the
Matlab/Simulink model of IM.
Vqs = R s i qs + p qs + ds ,

Vds = R s i ds + p ds qs

' = R ' i ' + p ' + ( ) ' ,

Vqr
r qr
qr
r dr

' = R ' i ' + p ' ( ) '

Vdr
r dr
dr
r qr

(2)

Te = 1.5 P( ds i qs qs i ds )

(3)

' ,
qs = Ls iqs + Lm iqr

'
ds = Ls ids + Lm idr

(4)

' = L' i ' + L i ,

qr
r qr
m qs

' = L' i ' + L i

dr
r dr
m ds

(5)

Ls = Lls + Lm ,

L = L + Lm
'
r

'
lr

(6)

1
d
m = (Te B m TL )
dt
J

(7)

d
m = m
dt

(8)

where,
R s , L ls
, l

L s ,
V qs , i qs

, q
V ds , i ds

, d

qs , ds

, d

Te
TL
J
B

(1)

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

Stator resistance and leakage inductance

Rotor resistance and leakage inductance
Magnetizing inductance
Total stator and rotor inductances
Q axis stator voltage and current
Q axis rotor voltage and current
D axis stator voltage and current
D axis rotor voltage and current
Stator q and d axis fluxes
Rotor q and d axis fluxes
Angular velocity of the rotor
Rotor angular position
Number of pole pairs
Electrical angular velocity ( * P)
Electrical rotor angular position ( *P)
Electromagnetic torque
Shaft mechanical torque
Combined rotor and load inertia
coefficient
= Combined rotor and load viscous friction
coefficient

speed ratio () and the blade pitch angle (). In order to

fully utilize the available wind energy, the value of ()
should be maintained at its optimum value. Therefore,
the power coefficient corresponding to that value will
become maximum also.
The model is based on the steady-state power
characteristics of the turbine. The stiffness of the drive
train is infinite and the friction factor and the inertia of
the turbine must be combined with those of the
generator coupled to the turbine (Heier, 1998).
The tip speed ratio () can be defined as the ratio of the
angular rotor speed of the wind turbine to the linear
wind speed at the tip of the blades. It can be expressed
as follows:

= t R / V

(9)

where,
R = the wind turbine rotor radius,
V = the wind speed and t is the mechanical angular
rotor speed of the wind turbine.
In addition to Eq. (9), the relation between and
can be found in the following relation (Heier, 1998):
1 / i =

+ 0.08 *

(10)

0.035

^3 + 1

A generic equation is used to model C p (,). This

equation, based on the modeling turbine characteristics
of Heier (1998), is:
C p ( , ) =C 1 *(C 2 / i C 3 * C 4 ) * e^ (C 5 / i ) + C 6 *

(11)
where is the pitch angle and the coefficients C 1 to C 6
are:
C 1 = 0.5176
C4 = 5

C 2 = 116
C 5 = 21

C 3 = 0.4
C 6 = 0.0068

The maximum value of C p characteristics (C p max =

0.48) is achieved for = 0 degree and for = 8.1. This
particular value of is defined as the nominal value
(_nom).Wind turbine is designed to have low cut-in
and cut out speed (2-3m/s:7-9m/s). The power output
equation of wind turbine can be described in Eq. (12):
Pt =

1
* * C p * V ( , )^3 * R A ^ 2 / 735
2

where,
Dynamic Modeling of the Wind Turbine: The wind
P t = Wind power (hp)
turbine is characterized by no dimensional curves of the
= Air density (kg/m3)
power coefficient (Cp) as a function of both the tip
V = Wind speed (m/s)
4596

(12)

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Fig. 3: The model of wind turbine

R A = The area of turbine blades (m2)

C p = Wind power coefficient
Figure 3 shows Matlab/Simulink model of the wind
turbine.
DC Generator: The proposed system can be simulated
with proper mathematic modeling. The DC generator
can be written in terms of equations as follows (Krause,
1986; Bose, 2002). These nonlinear equations can be
simulated using Matlab/Simulink in overall system:
Vf = Rf *if + Lf

di f (t )

Va = R L * i a + L L

where,
ia
Va
if
Vf
Ra, La
Rf, Lf

dia (t )
dt

dia (t )
dt

=
=
=
=

The load resistance and inductance

Ra + RL
La + LL
The mutual inductance between stator and
rotor
= The input angular speed
OBJECTIVE FUNCTION

A performance index can be defined by the Integral

of Time multiply Squared Error (ITSE). Accordingly,
the objective function J is set to be:

(13)

dt

i f * r * M af = R * ia + L

RL, LL
R
L
M af

(14)

(15)

J = 0 2 (t)dt

(16)

where,

e=w
w
reference
actual

Based on this objective function J optimization

problem can be stated as: Minimize J subjected to:
=
=
=
=
=
=

The armature generator current

The armature generator terminal voltage
The field generator current
The field generator voltage
The armature resistance and inductance
The field resistance and inductance

K min K K max
p
P
p

K min K K max
i
i
i

(17)

This study focuses on optimal tuning of PI

controller for speed tracking of IM motor using PSO
4597

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

(t + 1)
(t )
(t )
(t )
v j, g = w * v j , g + c1 * r1 ( ) * ( pbest j , g x j , g ) + c 2 * r2 ( ) * ( gbest g x j , g )

algorithm. The aim of the optimization is to search for

the optimum controller parameters setting that
minimize the difference between reference speed and
actual one. On the other hand, in this study the goal is
speed control of IM motor and finally designing a loworder controller for easy implementation.
OVERVIEW OF PSO AND GA OPTIMIZATION
TECHNIQUE
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO): The PSO
method is a member of wide category of Swarm
Intelligence methods for solving the optimization
problems. It is a population based search algorithm
where each individual is referred to as particle and
represents a candidate solution. Each particle in PSO
flies through the search space with an adaptable
velocity that is dynamically modified according to its
own flying experience and also the flying experience of
the other particles. In PSO each particles strive to
improve themselves by imitating traits from their
successful peers. Further, each particle has a memory
and hence it is capable of remembering the best
position in the search space ever visited by it. The
position corresponding to the best fitness is known as
pbest and the overall best out of all the particles in the
population is called gbest (Kennedy and Eberhart,
1995; Abido, 2002).
The features of the searching procedure can be
summarized as follows (Panda and Padhy, 2008):

Initial positions of pbest and gbest are different.

However, using the different direction of pbest and
gbest, all agents gradually get close to the global
optimum.
The modified value of the agent position is
continuous and the method can be applied to the
continuous problem. However, the method can be
applied to the discrete problem using grids for XY
position and its velocity.
There are no inconsistency in searching procedures
even if continuous and discrete state variables are
utilized with continuous axes and grids for XY
positions and velocities. Namely, the method can
be applied to mixed integer nonlinear optimization
problems with continuous and discrete state
variables naturally and easily.
The above concept is explained using only XY axis
(2 dimensional spaces). However, the method can
be easily applied to n dimensional problem. The
modified velocity and position of each particle can
be calculated using the current velocity and the
distance from the , to as shown in
the following formulas (Mostafa et al., 2012 ):

(18)
x

(t + 1)
(t )
(t + 1)
=x
+v
)
j, g
j, g
j, g

(19)

with j = 1, 2,, n and g = 1, 2,, m

where,
n
= Number of particles in a group
m
= Number of members in a particle
t
= Number of iterations (generations)
()
, = Velocity of particle j at iteration t, with

w
=
1 , 2 =

1 , 2 =
()

, =
pbest j =
gbest =

( )

()

,
;

Inertia weight factor

Cognitive and social acceleration factors
respectively
Random numbers uniformly distributed in the
range (0, 1)
Current position of j at iteration t
pbest of particle j
gbest of the group

The j-th particle in the swarm is represented by a g

dimensional vector = ( ,1 , ,2 ,., , ) and its
rate of position change (velocity) is denoted by another
g dimensional vector = ( ,1 , ,2 ,., , ). The
best previous position of the j-th particle is represented
as = ,1 , ,2 ,, , . The
index of best particle among all of the particles in the
group is represented by the .
In PSO, each particle moves in the search space
with a velocity according to its own previous best
solution and its groups previous best solution. The
velocity update in a PSO consists of three parts; namely
momentum, cognitive and social parts. The balance
among these parts determines the performance of a PSO
algorithm. The parameters 1 & 2 determine the
relative pull of pbest and gbest and the parameters 1 &
2 help in stochastically varying these pulls.
In the above equations, superscripts denote the
iteration number. Figure 4 shows the velocity and
position updates of a particle for a two-dimensional
parameter space. The computational flow chart of PSO
algorithm is shown in Fig. 5. The parameters of PSO
are shown in appendix.
Genetic Algorithm (GA): The GA has been used for
optimizing the parameters of control system that are
complex and difficult to solve by conventional
optimization methods. GA maintains a set of candidate

4598

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Social part

Cognitive part

Current motion
influence

Fig. 4: Deception of velocity and position updates in PSO

Fig. 5: Flow chart of PSO algorithm

solutions called population and repeatedly modifies

them. At each step, the GA selects individuals from the
current population to be parents and uses them produce
the children for the next generation. Candidate solutions
are usually represented as strings of fixed length, called
chromosomes. A fitness or objective function is used to
reflect the goodness of each member of population.
Given a random initial population GA operates in
cycles called generations, as follows (Goldberg, 1989):

Each member of the population is evaluated using

a fitness function.

The population undergoes reproduction in a

number of iterations. One or more parents are
chosen stochastically, but strings with higher
fitness values have higher probability of
contributing an offspring.
Genetic operators, such as crossover and mutation
are applied to parents to produce offspring.
The offspring are inserted into the population and
the process is repeated.

The computational flow chart of GA is shown in

Fig. 6.

4599

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Fig. 6: Flow chart of GA algorithm

3

Table 1: The parameters of PI controller

GA
0.1348
KP
0.4285
Ki

Wind Power (hp)

PSO
0.1876
0.7423

Speed of Wind Turbine (m/s)

8.5

2.5

1.5

1
7.5

5
6
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 8: The output power of wind turbine.

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 7: The change of speed wind turbine

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section different comparative cases are
examined to show the effectiveness of the proposed
swarm speed controller for load torque and speed
turbine variations. Table 1 shows the parameters of PI
controller based on two optimization techniques.

Response under variable wind turbine speed: As the

first test case, the system responses under variation of
the wind turbine speed are obtained. Figure 7 shows the
variation of the speed wind turbine as an input
disturbance while the load torque is constant at full load
torque (11.8 N.m). Figure 8 shows the output power of
the wind turbine. The output power is variable due to
the change in wind speed. Figure 9a illustrates the
output phase control voltage of PWM inverter by using
the proposed controller while Fig. 9b illustrates the
zoom for phase voltage. Figure 10 and 11, show a
comparison between the PSO and GA on the controller

4600

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Voltage of Phase A (volt)

3000
2000
1000
0
-1000
-2000
-3000

5
6
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 9a: The output phase voltage of PWM inverter

600

Voltage of Phase A (volt)

400
200
0
-200
-400
-600
4.615

4.61

4.62

4.63 4.635 4.64

Time (sec)

4.625

4.645

4.65

4.655

4.66

Fig. 9b: The zoom for output phase voltage of PWM inverter
45
40

Swarm
Genetic

The Controller Output

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

5
Time (sec)

Fig. 10: The output controller signal for two controllers

4601

10

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500
Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

-500

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 11a: The response of IM speed under different controllers

2300

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2250
2200
2150
2100
2050
2000
1950

Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

1900
1850
0

5
Time (sec)

Fig. 11b: The zoom of IM speed under different controllers

12

Load Torque (NM)

10
8
6
4
2
0
0

5
Time (sec)

Fig. 12: The change of load torque

4602

10

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

45
40

Swarm
Genetic

The Controller Output

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 13: The output controller signal for two controllers

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500
Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

-500

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 14a: Speed response of IM for different controllers

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2150
Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

2100

2050

2000

1950

5
Time (sec)

Fig. 14b: The zoom of speed response of IM for different controllers

4603

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

12

Load Torque (NM)

10

5
Time (sec)

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 15: The change of load torque

9

Speed of Wind Turbine (m/s)

8.8
8.6
8.4
8.2
8
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7

10

Fig. 16: The change of speed wind turbine

6
Swarm
Genetic

The Controller Output

5
Time (sec)

Fig. 17: The output controller signal for two controllers

4604

10

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500
Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

-500

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 18: The IM speed for different controllers

Reference and Actual speed (rpm)

2500
2000

1500

1000
500
Wref
Wswarm
Wgenetic

-500

5
Time (sec)

10

Fig. 19: The IM speed for both controllers under different reference speed

output signal and speed response of IM respectively. It

is clear, the steady state and dynamic operation of IM in
terms of over shoot and settling time has been
enhanced. Moreover, the proposed controller is indeed
more efficient in improving speed control of IM
compared with GA.

Response under variable load torque and wind

turbine speed: In this case, variations of both load
torque and speed wind turbine are applied. Figure 15
and 16 show the change of load torque and speed wind
turbine respectively. Moreover, the system responses
for both controllers are shown in Fig. 17 and 18. It is
clear from these Figs, that the proposed controller is
more efficient in improving speed control of IM
compared with GA. Also, the proposed controller has a
smaller settling time and system response is quickly
driven with the reference speed. In addition, the
superiority of the proposed controller compared with
GA for tracking every change of reference speed is
shown in Fig. 19. Hence, the potential and superiority
of the proposed controller over the GA is demonstrated.

Response under variable load torque: In this case,

the system responses under variation of the load torque
are obtained. Figure 12 shows the variation of the load
torque as an input disturbance while the speed of wind
turbine is constant at 8 m/s. Moreover, the system
responses for different controllers are shown in Fig. 13
and 14. It is clear from these Figs. the proposed PSO
controller outperforms and outlasts GA in controlling
CONCLUSION
the speed of IM effectively and reducing settling time.
Hence compared to the GA based controller, PI based
In this study, a novel method of speed controller of
PSO greatly enhances the system performance.
IM is proposed via PSO. The design problem of the
4605

Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol., 5(18): 4594-4606, 2013

proposed controllers is formulated as an optimization
problem and PSO is employed to search for optimal
parameters of PI controller. By minimizing the time
domain objective function, in which the difference
between the reference and actual speed are involved;
speed control of IM motor is improved. Simulation
results emphasis that the designed PSO tuning PI
controller is robust in its operation and gives a superb
performance for the change in load torque and speed
wind turbine compared with GA tuning PI controller.
Besides the simple architecture of the proposed
controller, it has the potentiality of implementation in
real time environment.
APPENDIX
The optimization parameters are as shown below:

Genetic parameters: Max generation =150; Population size =

50; Crossover probabilities = 0.75; Mutation probabilities = 0.1.
PSO parameters: 1 = 2 = 2.0, = 0.9.

REFERENCES

Abido, M.A., 2002. Optimal design of power system

stabilizers using particle swarm optimization. IEEE
T. Energ. Conver., 17(3): 406-413.
Arulmozhiyal, R. and K. Baskaran, 2009. Space vector
pulse width modulation based speed control of
induction motor using fuzzy PI controller. Int. J.
Comput. Electr. Eng., 1(1): 98-103.
Bose, B.K., 2002. Modern Power Electronics and AC
Drives. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.
Chebre, M., A. Meroufel and Y. Bendaha, 2011. Speed
control of induction motor using genetic algorithmbased PI controller. Acta Polytech. Hungar., 8(6):
141-153.
Chitra, V. and R.S. Prabhakar, 2006. Induction motor
speed control using fuzzy logic controller. World
Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol., 23: 17-22.
Dongale, T.D., T.G. Kulkarni, S.R. Jadhav, S.V.
Kulkarni and R.R. Mudholkar, 2012. AC induction
motor control: A neuro-fuzzy approach. Int. J. Eng.
Sci. Adv. Technol., 2(4): 863-870.
Fitgeraid, A.E., C. Kingsiey and A. Kusko, 1971.
Electric Machinery. 3rd Edn., McGraw -Hill Inc.,
NY.
Fogel, D.B., 1995. Evolutionary Computation toward a
New Philosophy of Machine Intelligence. IEEE
Press, New York.

Fonseca, J., J.L. Afonso, J.S. Martins and C. Couto,

1999. Fuzzy logic speed control of an induction
motor. Microprocess. Microsyst., 22: 523-534.
Goldberg, D.E., 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search,
Optimization and Machine Learning. AddisonWesley, Reading, MA.
Hazzab, A., K. Bousserhane I, M. Kamli and M. Rahli,
2005. Design of fuzzy sliding mode controller by
genetic algorithms for induction machine speed
control. Proceeding of the 3rd IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Signal and Devices
(SSD05), Tunisia.
Heier, S., 1998. Grid Integration of Wind Energy
Conversion Systems. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.,
ISBN: 0-471-97143-X.
Kennedy, J. and R. Eberhart, 1995. Particle swarm
optimization. Proceedings of IEEE International
Conference on Neural Networks, pp: 1942-1948.
Krause, P.C., 1986. Analysis of Electric Machinery.
McGraw-Hill, USA.
Lee, Y.W., 2005. A study on the design of speed
controller for induction motor using tabu search
algorithm. Science and Technology, 2005.
Proceedings
of
the
9th
Russian-Korean
International Symposium on KORUS2005, pp:
818-821.
Mansouri, A., M. Chenafa, A. Bouhenna and E. Etien,
2004. Power nonlinear observer associated with
field-oriented control of an induction motor. Int. J.
Appl. Math. Comput. Sci., 14(2): 209-220.
Mostafa, H.E., M.A. El-Sharkawy, A.A. Emary and K.
Yassin, 2012. Design and allocation of power
system stabilizers using the particle swarm
optimization technique for an interconnected power
system. Int. J. Electr. Power Energ. Syst., 34(1):
57-65.
Panda, S. and N.P. Padhy, 2008. Robust power system
stabilizer design using particle swarm optimization
technique. Int. J. Electr. Syst. Sci. Eng., 1(1): 1-8.
Zerikat, M. and S. Chekroun, 2008. Adaptation learning
speed control for a high performance induction
motor using neural networks. World Acad. Sci.
Eng. Technol., 21: 293-298.

4606