Analysis shows type-3 fuzzy logic controller reduces settling times in induction motors, indicating improved speed control despite nonlinear dynamics.
Induction motors require effective speed controllers to handle challenging conditions such as indirect vector control, nonlinear dynamics, load-disturbances, and changes in rotor resistance. Although proportional–integral (PI) controllers and type-1 fuzzy logic controllers (T1-FLC) are relatively straightforward to implement, they can produce significant overshoot and slow recovery; type-2 fuzzy logic controllers (T2-FLC), on the other hand, improve uncertainty management at the cost of higher computational complexity. This study proposes a type-3 fuzzy logic controller (T3-FLC) that balances robustness with a single α-slice using two inputs and seven membership functions per input (49 rules). In six comparison scenarios, the type-3 FLC (T3-FLC) consistently offers a lower overshoot percentage and shorter recovery/settling times than the PI controller and type-1 FLC (T1-FLC). Overshoot drops to 0.13% with T3-FLC during a high-speed positive step, while this value for the PI controller is 4.43%. During a low-amplitude positive step, T3-FLC reaches 1.37%, while the PI controller reaches 11.12% and T1-FLC reaches 4.13%. After load torque is removed, the recovery time trec under T3-FLC is 0.064 s at high speed and 0.158 s at low speed, while for PI, these values are 0.400 s and 1.975 s, respectively. Under variations in rotor resistance, T3-FLC maintains a significantly smaller overshoot value: with a −20% change (3–6 s window), the values are 1.45% (T3-FLC) versus 9.59% (PI) and 4.51% (T1-FLC); with a +20% change (3–6 s), the values are 0.14% (T3-FLC) versus 4.36% (PI) and 0.15% (T1-FLC). Although there are isolated cases in which PI or T1-FLC shows a marginal advantage in a single metric (e.g., slightly smaller overshoot during transition or lower peak error during disturbance), T3-FLC generally provides the best balance, combining low overshoot with short settling/recovery time while keeping steady-state error at zero in all scenarios.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cafer Bal (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: