Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Jurnal SINTA 1

Optimal turning of a 2-DOF proportional-integral-derivative controller based on a chess algorithm for load frequency control

International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) · Vol. 15 No. 1 (2025)

DOI
10.11591/ijece.v15i1.pp146-155
ISSN
2722-2578, 2088-8708
Published
2025-02-01
Publisher
Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

Abstract

Load frequency control is necessary for power system management. The power system must maintain a frequency range to ensure power supply stability. System faults and demand fluctuations may cause frequencies to change quickly. System stability and integrity suffer. We are optimizing the two-degree-of-freedom (2-DOF) proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers chess algorithm. This article addresses electrical load frequency regulation. We employ classical control theory and current adjustment. It aims for electrical system efficiency and dependability. It checks for errors using integral absolute error (IAE), integral squared error (ISE), integral of time multiply absolute error (ITAE), and integral time squared error (ITSE). Particle swarm algorithm (PSO) compares performance. The IAE of 0.03364, nearly identical to it, shows that chess trumps other algorithms in many scenarios. The chess algorithm's ISE was 0.00035, like PSO's 0.03363. The ISE was 0.00036, indicating PSO's error-reduction capabilities. For the chess algorithm, PSO is 0.07929, and ITAE is 0.07647. This indicates the PSO responds faster to system breakdowns and load changes. Finally, the chess algorithm's ITSE is 0.00072, below the PSO 0.00076. The chess algorithm is better at managing long-term load frequency.

Collaboration network of the authors

5 authors · 10 co-authorship links · 9 across different organisations

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Mahasarakham University
  • Pitchayabundit College
  • Kalasin University
  • Uttaradit Rajabhat University
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

This record comes from Crossref (what the publisher deposited), because the journal's own OAI-PMH endpoint could not be harvested.

Metadata source: Crossref API (cadangan, berdasarkan ISSN) https://api.crossref.org/journals/2088-8708/works, first harvested 27 Okt 2026, last seen 1 Nov 2026.
Metadata as oai_dc, converted from Crossref
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/"><dc:title>Optimal turning of a 2-DOF proportional-integral-derivative controller based on a chess algorithm for load frequency control</dc:title><dc:creator>Buranaaudsawakul, Techatat</dc:creator><dc:creator>Ardhan, Kittipong</dc:creator><dc:creator>Audomsi, Sitthisak</dc:creator><dc:creator>Sa-ngiamvibool, Worawat</dc:creator><dc:creator>Dulyala, Rattapon</dc:creator><dc:description>&lt;jats:p&gt;Load frequency control is necessary for power system management. The power system must maintain a frequency range to ensure power supply stability. System faults and demand fluctuations may cause frequencies to change quickly. System stability and integrity suffer. We are optimizing the two-degree-of-freedom (2-DOF) proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers chess algorithm. This article addresses electrical load frequency regulation. We employ classical control theory and current adjustment. It aims for electrical system efficiency and dependability. It checks for errors using integral absolute error (IAE), integral squared error (ISE), integral of time multiply absolute error (ITAE), and integral time squared error (ITSE). Particle swarm algorithm (PSO) compares performance. The IAE of 0.03364, nearly identical to it, shows that chess trumps other algorithms in many scenarios. The chess algorithm's ISE was 0.00035, like PSO's 0.03363. The ISE was 0.00036, indicating PSO's error-reduction capabilities. For the chess algorithm, PSO is 0.07929, and ITAE is 0.07647. This indicates the PSO responds faster to system breakdowns and load changes. Finally, the chess algorithm's ITSE is 0.00072, below the PSO 0.00076. The chess algorithm is better at managing long-term load frequency.&lt;/jats:p&gt;</dc:description><dc:publisher>Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science</dc:publisher><dc:date>2025-02-01</dc:date><dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:identifier>https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v15i1.pp146-155</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>10.11591/ijece.v15i1.pp146-155</dc:identifier><dc:source>International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE); Vol 15 No 1 (2025); 146</dc:source><dc:source>2722-2578</dc:source><dc:source>2088-8708</dc:source><dc:relation>https://ijece.iaescore.com/index.php/IJECE/article/viewFile/36802/17915</dc:relation><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0</dc:rights></oai_dc:dc>