Sunteți pe pagina 1din 6

A SEMI-CLOSD LOOP TORQUE CONTROL OF A BURIED PERMANENT MAGNET MOTOR

BASED ON A NEW FLUX WEAKENING APPROACH

Akita Kumamoto and Yoshihisa Hirane

Faculty of Engineering, Kansai University


Yamatecho 3-3-35, Suita City, Osaka 5 6 4 JAPAN

ABSTRACT - The paper deals with a semi-closed loop torque reaction torque due to a large Q-axis reactance, exhibits a high power
control of a Buried Permanent Magnet Motor, based on a new flux operation over a comparatively wide speed range [ 1,4,5,71.This high
weakening approach. Following the modeling of the motor, power power capability is deeply related to an effective flux weakening in the
capability of the machine is briefly summarized. The available motor's high speed. In practice, however, the actual operation speed range
power in a steady state, assuming a constraint to both the terminal tends to be limited within two times the base speed mainly because the
voltage and line currents of a motor, widely varies according to failure of current control in high speed will result in an increased
motor parameters. A buried permanent magnet motor, with additional terminal voltage, eventually causing inverter's destruction. In order
reaction toque due to a large Q axis reactance, exhibits a high- power that the machine be safely operated over a wide speed range, a
operation over a wide speed range. Although a good selection of satisfactory stator current programming strategy is essential. It is only
machine parameters theoretically results in a broader operation range, recently that a couple of effective flux weakening methods appeared in
it is only after a certain control method is implemented to stably d i e the references [ 1,2,4,5] and yet it seems that some more studies are
the high-power steady state condition in a flux weakening region that required to appropriately implement a both practical and simple flux
this particular set of parameters is meaningful. Conventional weakening scheme [71.
representative methods to attain flux weakening, when available DC Presented in the paper is a new type of flux weakening method
voltage source is limited, are discussed from the viewpoint of in which stator current commands are generated in the controller so
feasibility of implementation to a control system. After discussions on that the operating point of a motor satisfactory shifts from a normal
this point, a new flux weakening method is presented, in which the mode to a voltage limited mode requiring flux weakening and vise
controller generates current commands so that the operating point of a versus. Since this presented method originates from the pioneering
motor satisfactory shifts from a normal mode to a voltage limited work by Jahns [4], a brief summary of his work is given with some
state and vise versus. This flux weakening approach is then extended additional discussions from the viewpoint of feasibility of
into a torque control system, which enables an almost open loop implementation into a control system. The fundamental concept of a
torque control of a motor , although a hundred percent open loop new flux weakening in programming stator current command is that
control is unrealizable. The presented system utilizes an estimator, or the controller utilizes the information of intermediate current
more precisely, its alternative, for a shaft generated torque. The commands to moderately adjust the original current commands. This
system thus realizes a semi-closed loop torque control. Some is done by introducing an torque estimator, or more precisely, its
simulation results are given to verify the effectiveness of the presented alternative, for a shaft generated toque.
control method. It is shown that the shaft torque follows its torque This estimator plays an important role in the presented system
command with a certain time delay when the reference varies rapidly. not only in the new flux weakening but also in the next stage of flux
In the steady state, however, the average shaft toque is well regulated weakening to extend the method to a semi-closed loop toque control.
to coincide with its command in spite of inadequate feedback. Effects Since it is without doubt impossible to attain a perfect open loop
of deviation of motor parameters adopted in the controller from their torque control, even a semi-closed loop control may be beneficial
actual values is also investigated and some other factors to affect the when a simple torque control is required. Inherent to the new method
system performances are discussed. is the study of an effect of variation of motor speed, because the built-
in controller generates current commands calculated assuming an
1. Introduction electrically steady state at a given speed. Furthermore, deviation of
some motor's parameters used in the controller may affect system
A buried permanent magnet synchronous motor has recently performances when they are mismatched. A computer simulation
been in progressive practical use resulting from the improvement of following the Jahns' 3 hp
magnet materials. This type of a motor, in comparison with its model machine is carried out considering these points and the
counterpart of a surface-mountedpermanent magnet motor, finds its effectiveness of the proposed method is described in the followings.
advantage in that it can be operated in a comparatively high speed
range because of the reduced speed limit imposed on the motor. In 2. Power cambilitv of a mnnanent mamet motor
case of a surface type, the magnet material is fixed around the rotor's
peripheral and eventually brings a lower mechanical speed limit. On 2.1 Motor model
the contrary, a buried type,or an interior permanent magnet motor, as Although there are some discussions as to whether a
it is frequently called, is somehow free from this mechanical speed permanent magnet motor ca be successfully modeled with a
limitation because all the magnet material is totally buried into the conventional D-Q theory or not [2], it is still certainly one of the most
rotor as the name indicates. convenient candidates to describe the machine. Considered in this
Despite the above mentioned advantage, little has been so far paper is a lossless (or resistances-neglected) motor shown in Fig. 1
studied as to the nature of a buried permanent magnet motor in where a current regulated PWM inveter supplies sinusoidal currents.
variable-speed drives, partly because the machine exhibits a strongly In proportion to the progress of motor's capacity of a few kilowatts
salient characteristics. The field orientation technique is one of the up to almost a hundred kilowatts, neglecting stator resistances is
most commonly adopted variable-speed drive methods and its becoming a good approximation and actually previous works deal
resulting quick torque response has widely broadened the application with such a model [ 1,3,4,5,61.
area of a permanent magnet motor into various practical fields In terms of a rotor referred reference frame, the D-Q model
including robotics. However in such an application where the fast assuming a lossless machine is given by
torque is not necessarily the major concern, it is reasonable to put an
emphasis on how to attain the maximum power-handling capability in
the steady state, rather than to be inclined to adoption of a
sophisticated control strategy in the transient, occasionally falling into
a complicated and costly system.
It has been well known that a buried motor, with its additional
.oO 0 1989 IEEE
89CH2792-0/89/0000-0656$01

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
capability of the motor. While the speed is low, the stator current
Rotor position feedback components are calculated so as to yield in a Maximum Torque /
Minimum Current condition for a given current amplitude. This is
done by choosing an optimal current angle y* given by a simple
algebra.
Figure 2 shows how this maximum torque varies according to
the stator current amplitude. It is clearly shown from the figure that,
given an allowable current limit Ilim, the operation with this Is'Ilim
yields in the maximum power at a given speed.

T 1 I /Feedback
*1.6 . O - l d
Fig. I A current regulated PWM inverter drive
system of a permanent magnet motor
using a standard nomenclature. Phase quantities are related to D-Q
quantities by the conversion of

where 8 is the angle of qr axis measured from the stator a-phase axis.
Given the current angle y and current angle 6, both measured from qr IS
axis, we obtain Fig. 2 Variation of maximum available power
unuder the Maximum Torque with
iqs = h~,cosy , ids = - h~,siny Minimum current condition
(3)
vqs = h v s c o s 6 , Vds= - f i V @ l S
With an increase of speed N, the machine can no longer
where Is and Vs are rms phase values of the stator. operate at y* and Ilim ,since motor terminal voltage increases rapidly.
Introducing the upper case letters as Because of a limitation by the DC source voltage, the current angle y
should be appropriately advanced. This advancing current eventually
Iqs = Iscosy , Ids = - 1,siny causes a decrease of generated power in the motor with normal
(4) design parameters. However it is first shown by Schiferl [ I ] that
vqs =vscoss , Vds=-VSsin6 appropriately selected motor parameters will brake this power
decrease and, ideally speaking, the high power operating range will
be extended to some multiples,of the base speed. Figure 3 shows
The steady state equations result in some examples of power capability curves with a constant stator
current amplitude for different machine designs. As is shown in the
figure, a particular machine, say #3 in this case, guarantees a non-
decreasing power capability at high speed.

Max. Per Unit Output Power


1.0-
Machine parameters are normalized here using a base speed Oe,BASE -
as
xds = ae,BASE Lds%ASE 0.8-
-
We,BASELqs'%ASE (6)
0.6-
E0 = w e,BASE%m'fi 'BASE -
0.4-
to yield in the normalized equation of -
vqs= N(EO + xdslds) 0.2-
V = - NXqJqs (7) -
ds x -x
P = NT, = N[EnIscosy + 1isin2yl
- 1 2 3 4 5
where both voltages and currents are normalized values of quantities Per Unit Speed
defined by Eq. (4) although using a same notation.
Fig. 3 Examples of power capability curves for
2.2 Power caDabilitv 111 differrent motor parameter designs, both
Let us consider the maximum power available from the motor
at a given speed and stator current. The envelope in a P(power)- stator voltage and line current at 1.OPU.
N(speed) plane of this maximum power is the resulting power (Ref. Ill)
651

il

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The motor's output power P becomes zero when y reaches
d2 as the current angle changes. In this final state,

Therefore, given the maximum allowable voltage of Vlim, the power


becomes zero at a maximum speed Nmax of I
I X A
'Iim
(9) \ 01 // -
Nm, =
6s
if operated with a constant Is . The machine #3 in Fig. 2 is an
example of such parameters as to satisfy Nmar-.
The effect of demagnetization [8] is neglected in the above Vg. limited ellipse
discussion and in practice there arises both the limit of operating I Ids
speed and a decrease of power capability especially in high motor
speed range. Furthermore, Fig. 2 is the power capability with only a Fig. 4 Current loci in the D-Q current plane
fixed stator current Is. That is, the actual power capability in its real
sense is the overall envelope of each curve obtained with stator His method of flux weakening is to use this excursion. Figure
current changed. In any case, this steady state calculation suggests 5 is a block diagram of Jahns' flux weakening. Blocks f1 and f2 are
nothing more than the fact that a burried permanent magnet motor current programming tables to produce a minimum current condition
basically has a potential ability to be operated over quite a wide range for a given torque reference Ts. The deviation of D-axis current is
if and only if a proper flux weakening strategy is figured out to safely sensed and fed to a PI controller, which finally adjusts the maximum
guarantee a stable steady state operation. Q-axis current command. Thus the controller generates a new current
command, point C for example, instead of point B in Fig. 4,
3. Drive svstem consideration guaranteeing a shift of the operating point from point A to upwards
along the voltage limited ellipse. Figure 6 is his experimental results
3. I Feasibilitv requirement for a drive svstem for a prototype of a 3-hp and 4-pole ferrite magnet motor,
We are concerned with how to realize an effective flux intentionally driven with a low DC voltage of 100 volts.
weakening of a motor. Before going into details, let us first discuss a
feasibility of any control strategy for a computer-based variable-speed
drive stem. The remarkable recent features of a drive system using a
computer are:
a) A sophisticated control strategy, utilizing an Yector E
intelligent function of a microprocessor,
b) An even faster control using a DSP (Digital Signal Aid' Rotator
Processor) if necessary. P- I
The advent of a microprocessor has brought the above features into Regulator
power electronic control scheme. There are some arguments still
going on , however, that even a DSP based system is not fast enough
to fully control the fast-switching power electronic devices. From a
viewpoint of feasibility of implementation, the allowable calculation
incorporated in the controller should be, at present, within the scope
of either a table look up (if a nonlinear calculation is required) or a
sequence of simple mathematics. In calculating stator current
commands in flux weakening, therefore, the system should not
require a complex mathematics. Assuming that each motor parameter
is precisely identified and that the motor speed variation is very slow, Limiter 2
we can compute required currents in flux weakening by solving a set
of multidimensional nonlinear equations. This will result in an almost Fig. 5 A Hod( diagram of flux wakening method
open-loop torque control but this method is for the moment beyond a by Jahns (Ref [41)
reasonable approach of a controller design due to the discussion given
above.
7T
3.2 Conventional flux weakeninnl4.51
The behavior of D-Q axis stator currents of a buried type
motor is examined in Jahns' pioneering work [4]. He treated a system
in which a feedfonvard torque control is incorporated. Given a torque
command, D-Q current components are so determined to give
Maximum Torque 1 Minimum Current condition. This is done by
chasing the current loci of OAB shown in Fig. 4. Each current
component is supplied to a vector rotator, which produces phase P o i n t Key
current commands to a current regulated PWM inverter. The system Weakening
thus attains a drive including a basic feedforward torque control.
Inactive
This scheme is assuming a good current regulating ability of an Active
inverter.
Jahns has shown in his paper that an increasing torque It
command, let's say, point B in the Minimum Current Trace in Fig. 4, 0w
-
brings the system far beyond its voltage limited ellipse in the same 0 2000 4000
figure. As the current commands move from the origin toward point Rotor Speed o r (r/min>
B with the increase of torque reference, passing point A, it was
shown that actual D-Q currents move downwards to point D, for Fig. 6 Experimental resuts of f l u weakening
example, instead of point B. by Jahns (Ref 141)
658

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Another approach has been recently presented by Bose who
uses different control configurations for a constant torque and a
constant power operation [51. The basic principle of flux weakening
is to switch from a constant torque mode to sin6 adjusting mode in the
constant power operation by forcing the system construction to race
change. After the switching into flux weakened mode, the inverter
supplies a square wave to the motor, while Jahns’ method still keeps
a sinusoidal excitation.
3.3 Discussion of conventional methods
We have seen the two representative flux weakening methods
thus far developed. Among them Jahns’ method is an excellent idea in
the sense that it keeps the basic feedforward torque control framework
both in voltage saturated and non-saturated modes. It must be
noticed, however, that his method no longer guarantees that the shaft
torque be controlled to coincide with its command. In his
experiments, the actual torque Te begins to deviate from a reference
at some point where the latter increases beyond 2.7 Nm when a
linearly time varying torque command is applied to the system at
fl
Ids
Vg. limited ellipse

or=3200rpm. As can be understood from Fig. 5 , the D-axis current is


fundamentally decided by the function block of fl whose input is a Fig. 8 Principle of generating a currennt compo-
command torque. In other words, if one wishes to adjust the shaft nent command point B. using an inteme-
torque at will, an additional torque feedback is necessary and the
resulting system will look something like the one shown in Fig. 7. diate current iqs in the D-Q current plane

Flux This is done in our case by using an intermediate current command


Weakening iqsin the previous stage of control. Basically this iqs is the delayed
Current
PI Program quantity which is the output of a first order delay with an input of
T’ current command. We first compute a point C which is the cross point
of a hyperbola of an equal torque curve T=T2 and a straight line of
Iqs=iqs. This computation requires nothing more than a simple
algebra and is easily implemented into a controller. The next step is to
i \b find point B which yields the same D-axis current on a voltage
limited ellipse as the point C. The corresponding torque at point C is
Te or Te 0 Enc slightly different to have a value of T=Ti, but this difference between
T I and T2 is normally small. To find the point B again is a simple
U calculation which can be done by adopting a table look up. The whole
Fig. 7 Extension of Jahns’ flux weakening to a procedure thus remains within the scope of the feasibility discussed
previously. In this way, the controller generates a new current
closed loop torque control system command point B, corresponding to a slightly different torque
Either the average shaft torque of Te or its estimate Te is calculated by command.
The flux weakening strategy in the preceding section is easily
some means and the error between the command T* and Te (or Te) is extended to an almost open loop or a semi-closed loop torque control
fed to a PI controller. The output of the PI controller determines initial system given in Fig. 9. In order to control a shaft torque in any sense,
current commands using functions fl and f2. These outputs are at least some information related to the shaft toque must be fed back.
introduced to Jahns’ flux weakening to modify Q-axis current In the figure, this is fulfilled by a Torque Computing Block, which
command. calculates Te* based on current commands to the PWM inverter.
A torque control system based on Jahns’ method therefore
will have the following characteristics: Precisely speaking, this block computes a shaft torque’s alternative
a) Multiple PI controllers are required, value Te* using outputs of the first order delay blocks whose inputs
b) Either shaft torque or its estimate is to be detected, are current commands to the inverter. This delay may be considered to
c) The flux weakening block of Fig. 7 itself is rather model the current regulating function of the inverter, but it has a more
complicated and requires tuning. positive meaning to produce the previously mentioned intermediate
From the control system design point of view, a more simplified current commands required in flux weakening.
control scheme with a fewer tuning parameters will be required. This
standpoint leads us to a nextly presented new flux weakening
approach.
Current
PI Program
4. New flux weakeninn method

4.1 Flux weakeninn stratem


In such an application that does not necessarily require a quick
torque response, the motor speed varies rather slowly so that current
commands can be calculated assuming an electrical steady state at a
I b
N, 0 Enc
constant speed. This standpoint is basically the same as Jahns’ work
although he does not use a speed information in his controller design.
Given the motor speed N and its corresponding voltage limited ellipse
as in Fig. 8, current command point B is calculated in the following
manner. Suppose some additional information of intermediate current
commands can be used. While current commands, calculated in the
same manner as in the case of Jahns using functions f l and f2, remain
s orque

Fig. 9 A schematic block diagram of a semi-


within the portion of OA of the Min. Curr. Trace, they are directly
supplied to the inverter. As the torque reference increases, for closed loop torque control based on a
example when T=T2, beyond the cross point A of the Min. Curr. new flux weakening
Trace and the ellipse, the actual current commands must be modified.
659

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
In Fig. 9, the error between T* (command torque) and Te* is
fed to a PI controller whose output Ts becomes an input to a current
programming block. This block normally generates current 1
commands according to the Min. Curr. condition. With the increase
of Ts , going beyond voltage saturation, this current programming
block modifies current commands according to the discussion
described in section 4.1. It is shown in the figure that the output of a
current programming block is the voltage V,* and a voltage angle 6* ,
but this is a rather conceptual presentation to demonstrate that an
appropriate voltage limitation by the controller is successfully
attained. The output of a current programming block can of course be
utilized as input commands to the inverter.
This system thus follows the principle illustrated in Fig. 8,
when interpreted replacing T in Fig. 8 with Ts in Fig. 10. The
resulting system contains only a single PI controller and its tuning is
not so difficult. Furthermore, the necessary procedure within a
controller is also a simple mathematics easy to be implemented into a
microprocessor.
It must be noticed here that this approach loses its meaning if Ts
exceeds the maximum available torque at a given speed. In such a
situation the cross point between curves of a constant torque 0 J’
hyperbola and a voltage limited ellipse can never be found. The point 0 5 10 15
D in Fig. 8 is such a point where torque is in its maximum. The Time T (mS)
output TS o f a PI controller in Fig. 9 therefore must remain a little bit
apart from such maximum point at a given speed. In other words, the
maximum torque point D in Fig. 9 is an unstable equilibrium. This Fig. 10 Torque response of the presented drive
resembles the fact that the load angle must be less than TO in a normal (I
system at N= I . OPU. :torque reference.
non-salient synchronous motor to resume controllability. Te:shaff torque, Te’:intermediate torque)

1 j
1 1
4.3 Simulation results of a torque resuonse
The performance of the presented flux weakening and a semi-
closed loop torque control is simulated using a simulation language.
The model motor is the same 3-hp Jahns’ unloaded motor [4]. A
hysterisis type current regulator is assumed in the inveter. Since we /
are concerned with a high speed operation, examples of base values
are as follows.
Wr,BASE = 3200 rpm
TBASE = 6.6786 Nm
IBASE = 7.46 A
These values indicate that a point which lies far beyond the constant
power locus of P= 1650W in Fig. 6 is selected as a reference point.
Figure 10 is one of the examples of a torque response for a
stepwise torque command at a constant speed of N=l.OPU. The
motor is initially free-running at N= 1.OPU without stator currents
supplied. The shaft torque Te gradually increases from zero to the
reference value of T*=0.3PU. After about 2.5 mS, the average value
of torque Te is well regulated to stay near the reference. This steady
-3i
state point is within the region requiring no flux weakening as can be
seen from Jahns’ experiment of Fig. 6.
At time T=5mS, the torque reference is increased up to
l.OPU, which inevitably requires flux weakening. Here, again, it is
observed that the torque control is successfully attained even in the
high power operation. The output o f a torque computing block of Fig. F@. 1 1 Bahavior of the motor current trace in the
9 is also plotted in the simulation result. It is interesting to notice that
transient in the D-Q current plane over-
Te*, as a matter of course, differs from actually generated shaft
lapped on a voltage limited ellipse and
torque Te, and yet, Te satisfactory follows Te* after a certain time the Minimum Current Trace.
delay mainly due to large inductances of the stator. Since Te* is the
signally processed output using continuous current commands, no
fluctuation is seen in Te*, while the actual Te fluctuates because of 5. Sensitivitv simulation
switching of the inverter. The control system illustrated in Fig. 9 is
therefore considered to be utilizing a filtered value of Te in the steady The presented control strategy generates current commands
state. based on the calculation in the electrically steady state. This is a
Figure 11 shows the motor‘s actual current trace in the D-Q reasonable assumption since we are dealing with a rather slowly
current plane for the same condition as in the case of Fig. 10. It is changing system in terms of speed. However it is interesting to carry
seen that the current loci stays for a while on the Min. Curr. Trace and out a sensitivity simulation to examine the effect of speed change over
then moves toward point A on the voltage limited ellipse at N = l .OPU. system performance. Assuming an inertia, which causes 0.7PU speed
The point B corresponds to the maximum torque point and it can be change within 0.1s for 0.8PU torque, the effect of speed change is
seen that the operation generating a torque close to the maximum is investigated and shown in Fig. 12 for a torque reference of 0.75PU.
stably realized. Although this is a rather small inertia, causing a comparatively fast
660

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
speed change, it is seen that the effect of motor speed is not so
significant.
There are some other parameters incorporated in the controller
2 affecting the system performance. Among all, motor parameters, used
in the current programming block, are usually uneasy to identify
correctly. This effect of mismatching has not completely been studied
z so far, but some examples are shown in Fig. 13 where both D and Q
3
inductance values used inside the controller are increased by a factor
B
VI
of 5% compared with the simulated machine’s values. A
.*
-4
comparatively large oscillation of shaft torque is observed as the
motor speed increases beyond some 0.45PU. The average torque
5 itself, however, still remains within an endurable error range.
b
a Illustrated in the small rectangular box with the same scaling is the
result for 2.5% increase of inductances. Such amount of mismatching
1 may not be significant to greatly affect the system’s behavior.
6. Conclusions
The paper has dealt with a semi-closed loop torque control
based on a new flux weakening. The investigation is still being done
to fully explore the actual feasibility of the presented system. At
present, the confirmed results are as follows:
a) The buried type permanent magnet motor‘s potential ability
of high power capability will find its attractive characteristics into
many applications.
n I ! ‘ 0
b) This potential ability must be backed up by figuring out an
0 50 100
appropriate flux weakening strategy, which has been the major target
Time T (mS) of this research.
c) A practical computer-based control scheme, at present,
should incorporate only a sequence of a simple algebra or a table look
Fig. 12 An example of torque response of the pre- up and so forth. The flux weakening scheme to be explored is not
also free from this bondage.
sented drive system for a reference torque d) Following the work by Jahns, a new flux weakening
of 0.75PU when motor speed varies. The method is studied which effectively utilizes an intermediate current
inertiais properly asumed to cause0.7PU commands so that the operating point gradually shifts along the
speed change within 0. lsec for 0.8 shaft voltage limited ellipse.
torque. e) A semi-closed loop torque control is presented based on the
new flux weakening. Essential to this torque control is the adoption of
a torque estimator using the intermediate current commands. This
method realizes an almost open loop torque control when the motor
speed change is slow.
0.7 f) The presented control system is robust up to a certain degree
as to the speed change and the built-in controller‘s mismatching of
motor parameters. Still, a more detailed scanning of sensitivity study
will be required to fully explore the nature of the presented scheme.
z
U

0.6 T*
-
VI
.-
7. References
5
L
a” [ 11 Rich Schiferl, ”Design considerations for salient pole permanent
0.5 magnet synchronous motors in variable speed drive applications”, Ph.
D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, pp.5 I , 1987
[2] B. Sneyers, D. W. Novotny and T. A. Lipo, ”Field w a k e n i n g
in buried permanent magnet AC motor drives”, IEEE Trans. on
Ind. A d . , vol. IA-21, MarJApr., pp. 398-407, 1985
[3] T. M. Jahns, G. B. Kliman and T. W. Neumann, ”Interior
0.4 permanent magnet synchronous motors for adjustable-speed drives”,
IEEE Trans. on Ind. ADD~. ,vol. IA-22, JulJAug., pp. 738-747,
1986
[4]T. M. Jahns, ”Flux-weakening regime operation of an interior
permanent magnet synchronous motor drive”, IEEWAS Annual
0.3 Meeting Conf. Rec. ,pp.814-823, 1986
0 50 100 [5] B. K. Bose, ”A high performance inverter-fed drive system of an
interior permanent magnet synchronous machine”, IEEWAS Annual
Time T (mS) Meeting Conf. Rec. ,pp.269-276, 1987
[61 P. Pillay and R. Krishnan, ”Modeling,analysis and simulation of
a high performance vector controlled permanent magnet synchronous
Fig. 13 An example of torque response of the pre- motor drive”, IEEEYIAS Annual Meeting Conf. Rec. , pp.253-261,
sented drive system when the motor para- 1987
meter values utilized inside the controller [71 A. Kumamoto and Y. Hirane, ”A flux weakening control of a
permanent magnet motor”, IEEJAA Annual Meeting Conf. Rec.
are intentionally deviated from actually si- ,1989 to appear (in Japanese)
mulated motor model by a factor of 5% or [81 Y. Takeda and T. Hirasa, ”Current phase control methods for
2.5%(in a small box). permanent magnet synchronous motors considering saliency”, PESC
Conf. Rec., pp.409-414, 1988
66 1

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on January 15, 2009 at 12:52 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

S-ar putea să vă placă și