Optimal parameter estimation for PEMFC using modified monarch butterfly optimization
Corresponding Author
Zhi Yuan
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Correspondence
Zhi Yuan, Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830047, China.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorWeiqing Wang
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Search for more papers by this authorHaiyun Wang
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Zhi Yuan
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Correspondence
Zhi Yuan, Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, 830047, China.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorWeiqing Wang
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Search for more papers by this authorHaiyun Wang
Engineering Research Center of Renewable Energy Power Generation and Grid-connected Control, Ministry of Education, Xinjiang University, Xinjiang, China
Search for more papers by this authorSummary
The present study develops a new optimization method called monarch butterfly optimization algorithm for optimal parameter estimation of the polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC). After designing the proposed methodology, it is implemented to 250 MW PEMFC stack under different operating conditions to show the system efficiency and the results are compared with some state-of-the-art methods including Grass Fibrous Root Optimization Algorithm, hybrid Teaching Learning Based Optimization-Differential Evolution Algorithm, and the basic MBO algorithm. Two operational conditions in 3/5 bar and 80°C and 2.5/3 bar, 70°C are used for model verification. The main idea is to minimize the sum of square error (SSE) between the estimated and the actual data. Simulation results in the first condition give an SSE of value 7.277667729 with 9.28434e−16 SD value and in the second condition, an SSE of value 4.52810115 with 0.043581628 standard deviations has been reached as the minimum value among the other compared methods that indicate the accuracy and the robustness of the suggested method toward the analyzed methods. The algorithm also gives a convergence speed of 540 iterations and 370 iterations for conditions 1 and 2, respectively that are the fastest in the study.
REFERENCES
- 1Aghajani G, Ghadimi N. Multi-objective energy management in a micro-grid. Energy Rep. 2018; 4: 218-225.
- 2Ahadi A, Ghadimi N, Mirabbasi D. An analytical methodology for assessment of smart monitoring impact on future electric power distribution system reliability. Complexity. 2015; 21(1): 99-113.
- 3Selvaraj AS, Rajagopal TKR. Numerical investigation on the effect of flow field and landing to channel ratio on the performance of PEMFC. Int J Energy Res. 2020; 44(1): 171-191.
- 4Omrani R, Seif Mohammadi S, Mafinejad Y, Paul B, Islam R, Shabani B. PEMFC purging at low operating temperatures: an experimental approach. Int J Energy Res. 2019; 43(13): 7496-7507.
- 5Lin D, Yehong H, Khodaei H. Application of the meta-heuristics for optimizing exergy of a HT-PEMFC. Int J Energy Res. 2020; 44: 3749-3761.
- 6Selem SI, Hasanien HM, El-Fergany AA. Parameters extraction of PEMFC's model using manta rays foraging optimizer. Int J Energy Res. 2020; 44: 4629-4640.
- 7Mekhilef S, Saidur R, Safari A. Comparative study of different fuel cell technologies. Renew Sust Energ Rev. 2012; 16(1): 981-989.
- 8Cao Y, Li Y, Zhang G, Jermsittiparsert K, Nasseri M. An efficient terminal voltage control for PEMFC based on an improved version of whale optimization algorithm. Energy Rep. 2020; 6: 530-542.
- 9Bernardi DM, Verbrugge MW. A mathematical model of the solid-polymer-electrolyte fuel cell. J Electrochem Soc. 1992; 139 (9): 2477-2491.
- 10Taleb MA, Béthoux O, Godoy E. Identification of a PEMFC fractional order model. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2017; 42(2): 1499-1509.
- 11Husar A, Strahl S, Riera J. Experimental characterization methodology for the identification of voltage losses of PEMFC: applied to an open cathode stack. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2012; 37(8): 7309-7315.
- 12Cheng S-J, Liu J-J. Nonlinear modeling and identification of proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC). Int J Hydrog Energy. 2015; 40(30): 9452-9461.
- 13Duan B, Cao Q, Afshar N. Optimal parameter identification for the proton exchange membrane fuel cell using satin bowerbird optimizer. Int J Energy Res. 2019; 43: 8623-8632.
- 14Cao Y, Li Y, Zhang G, Jermsittiparsert K, Razmjooy N. Experimental modeling of PEM fuel cells using a new improved seagull optimization algorithm. Energy Rep. 2019; 5: 1616-1625.
- 15Mirzapour F, Lakzaei M, Varamini G, Teimourian M, Ghadimi N. A new prediction model of battery and wind-solar output in hybrid power system. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput. 2019; 10(1): 77-87.
- 16Razmjooy N, Khalilpour M, Ramezani M. A new meta-heuristic optimization algorithm inspired by FIFA world cup competitions: theory and its application in PID designing for AVR system. J Control Autom Electr Syst. 2016; 27(4): 419-440.
- 17Razmjooy N, Ramezani M. An improved quantum evolutionary algorithm based on invasive weed optimization. Indian J Sci Res. 2014; 4(2): 413-422.
- 18Yang L, Wang W, Ghadimi N. Electricity load forecasting by an improved forecast engine for building level consumers. Energy. 2017; 139: 18-30.
- 19Corrêa JM, Farret FA, Canha LN, Simoes MG. An electrochemical-based fuel-cell model suitable for electrical engineering automation approach. IEEE Trans Ind Electron. 2004; 51(5): 1103-1112.
- 20Aouali FZ, Becherif M, Ramadan HS, Emziane M, Khellaf A, Mohammedi K. Analytical modelling and experimental validation of proton exchange membrane electrolyser for hydrogen production. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2017; 42(2): 1366-1374.
- 21Cao Y, Wu Y, Fu L, Jermsittiparsert K, Razmjooy N. Multi-objective optimization of a PEMFC based CCHP system by meta-heuristics. Energy Rep. 2019; 5: 1551-1559.
- 22Kandidayeni M, Macias A, Khalatbarisoltani A, Boulon L, Kelouwani S. Benchmark of proton exchange membrane fuel cell parameters extraction with metaheuristic optimization algorithms. Energy. 2019; 183: 912-925.
- 23Turgut OE, Coban MT. Optimal proton exchange membrane fuel cell modelling based on hybrid teaching learning based optimization–differential evolution algorithm. Ain Shams Eng J. 2016; 7(1): 347-360.
- 24Fei X, Xuejun R, Razmjooy N. Optimal configuration and energy management for combined solar chimney, solid oxide electrolysis, and fuel cell: a case study in Iran. Energy Sources, Part A. 2019; 1-21.
10.1080/15567036.2019.1680770 Google Scholar
- 25Yu D, Ghadimi N. Reliability constraint stochastic UC by considering the correlation of random variables with copula theory. IET Renewable Power Gener. 2019; 13(14): 2587-2593.
- 26Hamian M, Darvishan A, Hosseinzadeh M, Lariche MJ, Ghadimi N, Nouri A. A framework to expedite joint energy-reserve payment cost minimization using a custom-designed method based on mixed integer genetic algorithm. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 2018; 72: 203-212.
- 27Bandaghiri PS, Moradi N, Tehrani SS. Optimal tuning of PID controller parameters for speed control of DC motor based on world cup optimization algorithm. Tech J Eng Appl Sci. 2016; 2: 106-111.
- 28Razmjooy N, Sheykhahmad FR, Ghadimi N. A hybrid neural network–world cup optimization algorithm for melanoma detection. Open Med. 2018; 13(1): 9-16.
10.1515/med-2018-0002 Google Scholar
- 29Leng H et al. A new wind power prediction method based on ridgelet transforms, hybrid feature selection and closed-loop forecasting. Adv Eng Inform. 2018; 36: 20-30.
- 30E. Atashpaz-Gargari and C. Lucas. Imperialist competitive algorithm: an algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition. Paper presented at: IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, 2007. CEC 2007. 2007: IEEE. pp. 4661–4667.
- 31Razmjooy N, Ramezani M, Ghadimi N. Imperialist competitive algorithm-based optimization of neuro-fuzzy system parameters for automatic red-eye removal. Int J Fuzzy Syst. 2017; 19(4): 1144-1156.
- 32J. Pierezan and L. D. S. Coelho. Coyote optimization algorithm: a new metaheuristic for global optimization problems. Paper presented at: 2018 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). 2018: IEEE. pp. 1–8.
- 33Brammya G, Praveena S, Ninu Preetha N, Ramya R, Rajakumar B, Binu D. Deer hunting optimization algorithm: a new nature-inspired meta-heuristic paradigm. Comput J. 2019.
10.1093/comjnl/bxy133 Google Scholar
- 34Dhiman G, Kumar V. Emperor penguin optimizer: a bio-inspired algorithm for engineering problems. Knowl-Based Syst. 2018; 159: 20-50.
- 35Wang G-G, Deb S, Cui Z. Monarch butterfly optimization. Neural Comput Applic. 2019; 31(7): 1995-2014.
- 36Na J, Yang Z, Kamal S, Hu L, Wang W, Zhou Y. Bio-inspired learning and adaptation for optimization and control of complex systems. Complexity. 2019; 2019: 1-13.
- 37Akkar HA, Mahdi FR. Grass fibrous root optimization algorithm. Int J Intell Syst Appl. 2017; 11(6): 15.
- 38Wang G-G, Guo L, Gandomi AH, Hao G-S, Wang H. Chaotic krill herd algorithm. Inf Sci. 2014; 274: 17-34.
- 39Mo ZJ, Zhu XJ, Wei LY, Cao GY. Parameter optimization for a PEMFC model with a hybrid genetic algorithm. Int J Energy Res. 2006; 30(8): 585-597.
- 40El-Fergany AA. Extracting optimal parameters of PEM fuel cells using Salp swarm optimizer. Renew Energy. 2018; 119: 641-648.