Evaluates a fuzzy logic controller's effectiveness in induction motors, indicating enhanced performance and simplicity.
This paper presents a self-tuning minimal-rule fuzzy logic controller for high-performance induction motor drives operating under field-oriented control. Unlike conventional full-rule fuzzy controllers and reduced-rule designs with fixed post-design scaling, the proposed method combines a fixed nine-rule Mamdani inference structure with a bounded online output gain adaptation mechanism. The nominal gain and adaptation sensitivity are determined offline using Particle Swarm Optimization, thereby retaining operating-condition responsiveness without requiring online optimization, rule reconstruction, or membership-function retuning. The closed-loop behavior is analyzed using a discrete-time Lyapunov framework derived from the induction motor mechanical dynamics under bounded disturbances. The controller is evaluated through fixed-step simulations incorporating measurement noise, 12-bit signal quantization, and a one-sample computational delay. Comparative results against a conventional PI controller and a classical 49-rule fuzzy controller show that the proposed scheme achieves a rise time of 0.15 s, a settling time of 0.26 s, a post-transient mean absolute tracking error of 4 RPM, negligible overshoot, and a torque ripple of approximately 0.44 Nm. Relative to the classical 49-rule FLC, the proposed design reduces the maximum number of fuzzy-rule evaluations per control update from 49 to 9, corresponding to an 81.6% reduction in structural fuzzy-inference complexity. The results indicate a favorable simulation-level trade-off between dynamic performance, disturbance rejection, and structural algorithmic simplicity. Generated-code SIL, Hardware-in-the-Loop testing, target-processor timing measurements, and experimental implementation remain necessary to establish practical embedded feasibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Omar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: