0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)

107 vizualizări103 paginiDec 10, 2009

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)

107 vizualizări103 paginiAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 103

1.1 Introduction

Although traditional per-phase equivalent circuits have been widely used in steady-

state analysis and design of ac machines, it is not appropriate to predict the dynamic

performance of the motor. In order to understand and analyze vector control of ac

motor drives, a dynamic model is necessary. As the application of ac machines has

continued to increase over this century, new techniques have been developed to aid

in their analysis. The significant breakthrough in the analysis of three-phase ac

machines was the development of the reference frame theory. Using these

techniques, it is possible to transform the machine model to another reference frame.

By judicious choice of the reference frame, it proves possible to simplify vastly the

complexity of the mathematical machine model. While these techniques were

initially developed for the analysis and simulation of ac machines, they are now

invaluable tools in the digital control of such machines. As digital control techniques

are extended to control current, torque and flux of ac machines, the need for

compact and accurate machine models is obvious.

Much of the analysis has been carried out for the treatment of the well-known

induction machine. The induction motor, which is the most widely used motor type

in industry, has been favored because of its good self-starting capability, simple and

rugged structure, low cost and reliability, etc. Along with variable frequency ac

inverters, induction motors are used in many adjustable speed applications, which do

not require fast dynamic response. The concept of vector control has opened up a

new possibility that induction motors can be controlled to achieve dynamic

performance at least as good as that of dc motors. In order to understand and analyze

vector control, the dynamic model of the induction motor is necessary. It has been

found that the dynamic model equations developed on a rotating reference frame is

easier to describe the characteristics of induction motors.

synchronous machines, e.g. the Permanent Magnet Synchronous Machine (PMSM).

The PMSM, sometimes known as sinusoidal brushless machines or brushless ac

machine, is very popular as a high-performance servo drive due to its superior

torque-to weight ratio and its high dynamic capability.

2 Chapter 1

Over the years, many different reference frames have been proposed for the analysis

of ac machines. The most commonly used are the so-called stationary reference

frame, the rotor reference frame for synchronous machines and the synchronously

rotating reference frame for induction machines. Considering synchronous

machines, the rotor reference frame is equal to the synchronous reference frame,

since the supply frequency equals the electrical rotor speed.

The aim of this chapter is to introduce the essential concepts of reference frame

theory and to derive and explain ac machine models in relatively simple terms. It

will be shown that when we choose a synchronous reference frame in which rotor

flux lies on the d-axis, the dynamic equations of both induction and synchronous

machines are simplified and analogous to a dc motor.

key point for their application in speed or torque controlled drive systems. Steady-

state analysis of induction machines or PMSM are typically presented by means of

the so called per phase equivalent circuit. However, these models are inadequate

when applied to dynamic conditions, as needed in variable frequency drives. The

pertaining methods of dynamic analysis concerning field-oriented control have been

developed decades ago. Today, they form part of the fundamentals in electrical

engineering being documented in numerous publications and books, e.g. [Bose 97],

[Hen 92], [Leo 85], [Vas 92].

In the original three phase reference frame the motor windings (a,b,c) are displaced

at 120 deg (electrical) in space and both current and voltage equations are time-

dependent variables. The idea of simplifying the motor equations by transforming

the stator machine variables to the rotor reference frame was first introduced in 1899

by Blondel [Vas 92]. In the late 1920’s, R.H. Park further developed the idea to

transform the stator machine variables as currents, voltages and flux linkages to

another rotating reference frame [Park 29] described by 2 rotating phase variables,

which are perpendicular. This technique was first applied to a synchronous machine

transforming the stator variables to a fictitious frame rotating with the rotor speed.

The method was extended by [Kron 42] to be applicable to any type of ac machine.

Considering squirrel-cage induction motor or PMSM, the transformations are

usually based on following assumptions:

• Slot harmonics and deep bar effects are not considered.

• Iron losses are not taken into account.

• Saturation is introduced on a macroscopic basis.

• Permanent magnets behave linearly.

• Neutral point is isolated.

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 3

The assumption, that ac machines are linear (no saturation) and MMF-harmonic free

is an oversimplification, which cannot describe the behavior of the machine in all

operation modes. However, in a majority of applications, the machine behavior can

be adequately predicted with this simplified representation. Considering the design

of practical machines, the rotor conductors of squirrel-cage induction machines are

often skewed. The conductors are not placed in the plane parallel to the axis of

rotation, but skewed slightly with the axis of rotation. This arrangement helps to

reduce the magnitude of torque harmonics (ripples) due to the harmonic content of

the MMF-waves. Furthermore, the applied transformations are quite general, since

the flux and MMF-waves may be considered as a sum of a fundamental and higher

harmonics.

The restriction to a magnetic linear system without saturation may be dropped, if the

stator and rotor voltage equations are written in terms of the flux linkages. The

transformation of flux linkages is valid even for asymmetrical or magnetic nonlinear

systems and an extensive amount of work can be avoided by transforming the flux

linkages directly. This is especially true in the analysis of ac machines where the

inductances are function of the rotor position. Only the current-flux relation,

represented by affiliated inductances, must be adapted in the case of asymmetry or

non-linearity.

Also iron losses are more or less considered. Due to the braking effect of iron losses,

they are subsequently treated as an equivalent speed-dependent load torque.

these by their two-axes equivalent. Such a redundancy is given for both line currents

and line voltages of three-phase ac machines. By definition, a three-phase machine

with isolated neutral point (figure 1.1) restricts its phase currents to a plane

constructed by two perpendicular static phasors, since the sum of all phase currents

has to be zero at all times according to Kirchoff’s law.

ia + ib + ic = 0 (1.1)

inverter ia ac motor

ib uab

Udc

ic ubc uca

reference- ua0

potential ϕo Not connected!

4 Chapter 1

by two line voltages and two currents since the third value equals the negative sum

of the two others. Thus, describing the dynamic behavior of ac machines, the poly-

phase motor windings can be reduced to a set of two-phase windings. The most

suitable choice, describing the motor behavior by a two-axes equivalent, is a set of

field coils, having their magnetic axes arranged in quadrature as shown in figure 1.2.

This approach eliminates the mutual magnetic coupling of the three-phase windings,

since the flux of one winding of the two-axes equivalent does not interact with the

perpendicular winding and vice versa.

The simplified diagram of a three-phase ac motor (figure 1.2) shows only the stator

windings for each phase displaced 2π/3 radians in space. Of course, the same

transformation is applied to the rotor. The transformation of rotor and stator

variables to a 2-phase reference frame (indicated by subscripts α, β), where the coils

are perpendicular, guarantees that there is no interaction between perpendicular

windings as long as there is no saturation, referred to as cross saturation.

jβ

b β

ib

a

ic α

ia

c' b'

α a

jβ

b c

a' iβ

c

α

iα

Due to the redundancy in (1.1)-(1.2), it is obviously that the voltage and current

equations of any ac machine are reducible to a set of each two appropriate variables

in the α/β-reference frame.

One straightforward way, but unusual option of transferring variables to the α/β-

reference frame, is a simple vector addition (subscript VA) of the three-phase

variables. According to figure 1.2, a geometrical calculation yields:

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 5

Solving the trigonometric functions and replacing ic according to (1.1) results in:

ib (−ia − ib )

⇒ ia − − = iα ,VA (1.4)

2 2

3

⇒ iα ,VA = ia (not used!) (1.5)

2

3 3

⇒ ib − (−ia − ib ) = iβ ,VA (1.7)

2 2

3

⇒ iβ ,VA = ia + 3 ib (not used!) (1.8)

2

However, above transformation, equally applied on both phase current and voltages,

is not power invariant:

3 3 3 3

uα ,VA iα ,VA + u β ,VA iβ ,VA = u a ia + u a + 3 ub ia + 3 ib

2 2

2 2

3 3

= 3 u a ia + 3 ub ib + u a ib + ub ia

2 2 (1.10)

3

= [u a ia + ub ib + (−u a − ub ) (−ia − ib )]

2

3 3

= [u a ia + ub ib + u c ic ] = P (t )

2 2

Note, the variables in the α/β-reference frame are no real values, they are fictitious

values, preferably describing the real electrical and dynamic behavior of the

machine. Obviously, the original current phasor can be equally described by two

other perpendicular vector components multiplied by a constant scaling factor.

According to (1.10), the power in the α/β-reference frame reduced by the scaling

factor 2/3 guarantees power invariance. At first sight, this scaling factor can be

distributed on the α/β-current and voltages in different ways, e.g. the α/β-current

remains and the voltages uα, uβ are reduced by the factor 2/3 (⇒ uα = ua ) or vice

versa (⇒ iα = ia ). However, the air-gap flux is proportional to the voltage whereas

the magneto-motive force (MMF) is proportional to the current. Thus, only a

symmetrical distribution, both α/β-current and voltages are reduced by the same

6 Chapter 1

the α/β-reference frame. Postulating symmetrical distribution of the scaling factor

2/3, following equations are used when quantities in the three-phase reference frame

are transformed to the α/β-reference frame [Hen 92]. For reasons of simplicity, the

coil axis ia coincides with the coil axis iα, perpendicular to iβ (figure 1.2):

2

[ia + ib cos(120°) + ic cos(240°)] = iα (1.11)

3

2 i (−i − i ) 2 3

⇒ ia − b − a b = ia = iα (1.12)

3 2 2 3 2

3

⇒ iα = ia (1.13)

2

2

[ib cos(30°) + ic cos(150°)] = iβ (1.14)

3

2 3 3

⇒ ib − (−ia − ib ) = iβ (1.15)

3 2 2

1

⇒ iβ = ia + 2 ib (1.16)

2

3

iα ia 0 i

2

i = T32 i = 1

a (1.17)

β b 2 b

i

2

The inverse transformations, calculating the phase currents by α/β-values, are as:

2

ia iα 0 i

3 α

i =

−1

i = T32 1 1 iβ

(1.18)

b β −

6 2

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 7

phasors, identically described by two perpendicular vector components. Thus, the

transformation of voltage and flux linkages to the α/β-reference frame is equivalent

to the current transformation.

3

uα u a 0 u

2

= T32 u = 1

a Condition: (uc = - ua - ub) (1.19)

u β b u

2 b

2

2

u a α

u 0 u

3 α

u =

−1

u = T32 1 1 u β

Condition: (uc = - ua - ub) (1.20)

b β −

6 2

3 2

0 0 1 0

T32 T32−1 = 2 3 = (1.21)

1 1 1 0 1

2 −

2 6 2

Unfortunately, while the sum of the line voltages is zero, the phase voltages or

phase-to-neutral voltages may consist of a homopolar component dependent on the

PWM method used. The origin of the homopolar component is exploited later in the

inverter-analysis presented. However, the effect of the homopolar component on a

machine with isolated neutral point is equal to a change of the reference potential

(e.g.: changing the potential ϕ0 in figure 1.1). In other words, the potential of all

three phases is varied uniformly and simultaneously (third harmonics). Fortunately,

the sum of the line voltages is always zero. Thus, this homopolar component is

unseen by the motor terminals and therefore not reflected in motor behavior.

However, since motor voltages are often calculated by means of the reference

voltages (e.g. ua0 in figure 1.1) containing such a homopolar component, the

transformation according to (1.25) must be used for the α/β-voltage calculation. The

transformation matrix is obtained similarly to (1.11)-(1.16) by geometrical

calculations without replacing the phase voltage uc. For completeness, the zero-

component is also given. According to figure 1.3, the zero-component indicates a

displacement of the reference potential ϕ0 with respect to the center m of the line

voltages. Obviously, the phase voltages (ua, ub, uc) are equal to the affiliated line-to-

neutral voltages (uam, ubm, ucm) plus the zero-component um0. Since the sum of the

line-to-neutral voltages is zero, following relation is valid:

8 Chapter 1

!

u am + u bm + u cm = (u a − u m 0 ) + (u b − u m 0 ) + (u c − u m 0 ) = 0 (1.22)

1

⇒ u m0 = (u a + u b + u c ) (1.23)

3

a a

uam

uab ua uca ua

m m

ubm um0 ucm

ub uc

b c b ub ϕ 0 uc c

ubc

Figure 1.3: Zero-component of the phase voltages. Left: Phase and line voltages without zero component.

Right: Phase voltages and displacement of the neutral point.

reference frame:

3 1 2 1

u0 = (u a + u b + u c ) = (u a + u b + u c ) (1.24)

2 3 3 2

1 1

1 − −

uα u a 2 2 u a

u = 2 3 3 u

⇒ u β = T320 0 − (1.25)

b 3 2 2 b

u 0 u c u c

1 1 1

2 2 2

1 0 1

u a uα uα

u = T − 1 u = 2 1 3

− 1 u β (1.26)

b β 3 2

320

2

u c u 0 u 0

−1 −

3

1

2 2

However, the zero-component is required neither for motor control nor for

describing the dynamic motor behavior. Usually in ac motor control, only

equation (1.17) is applied for current transformation. Most inverter control strategies

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 9

space vector modulation directly specifies the switching signals using the α/β-

voltages. Sometimes, the back-transformation (1.20) is applied for the calculation of

the reference voltages, e.g. being the input of a sinusoidal PWM. Special

applications, e.g. phase voltage estimation by means of the reference voltages,

require the transformation (1.25) due to the non-linearity of the inverter and arising

homopolar component. If line voltages are given (e.g. measurement), the α/β-

transformation is:

2 1

uα 3

6 u ab

u = (1.27)

β 0 1 ubc

2

voltages of any ac machine with isolated neutral point.

Note that α/β transformations with different scaling factors are used in literature as

well: e.g. the non power-invariant form [Vas 97], also termed Clark transformation.

Here, all transformations are based on (1.17)-(1.27) guarantying power invariance:

(1.28)

= 2 u a ia + 2 ub ib + u a ib + ub ia

2 2 −1 1 −1 1

Pel = 2 uα iα + 2 uα + u β iα + iβ

3 3 6 2 6 2

2 −1 1 −1 1 2

+ uα iα + iβ + uα + u β iα

3 6 2 6 2 3 (1.29)

4 2 2 2

= uα iα + uα iα + u β i β − uα iβ − u β iα

3 6 6 6

1 1 1 1

− uα iα + uα i β − uα iα + u β iα

3 3 3 3

⇒ Pel = uα iα + u β iβ (1.30)

10 Chapter 1

substituting these by their two-axes equivalent. The current and voltage quantities

are each described by two components in direction of the α-axis and β-axis,

respectively. According to (1.13), the relation of the mean values is:

3

I 2 phase = I 3 phase (1.31)

2

3

U 2 phase = U 3 phase (1.32)

2

windings requires an adaptation of the fictitious two-phase winding number

(figure 1.4), since the resulting flux quantities and magneto-motive force (MMF)

must be identical to the original values. According to [Bel 92], [Hen 91], the MMF

(as well as the magnetic induction B) is proportional to the current, the phase

number m and the coil windings w scaled down by the winding factor ξ due to the

spreading of the windings and the shift of a two layer winding. Identical MMF,

generated by three respectively two coils, is given, if following relation is valid:

4 m 3phase (ξ w) 3phase !

Θ 3phase = 2 I 3 phase = Θ 2phase

2π p

(1.33)

4 m 2phase (ξ w) 2phase

= 2 I 2 phase

2π p

⇒ = = = (1.34)

(ξ w) 3phase m 2phase I 2 phase 2 3 2

According to [Hen 91], the air-gap flux is proportional to the induced voltage and

power supply frequency ωs. Obviously, applying identical (symmetrical)

transformations on current and voltage quantities yields the same relation between

the coil windings as in (1.34):

2 U 3 phase ! 2 Uˆ 2 phase

Φ 3phase = = Φ 2phase = (1.35)

(ξ w) 3phase ω s (ξ w) 2phase ω s

(ξ w) 2phase U 2 phase 3

⇒ = = (1.36)

(ξ w) 3phase U 3 phase 2

Thus, a transformation with the coil ratio according (1.34) yields identical flux

quantities and identical MMF. Also the current density in the α/β-system is identical

to the original value:

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 11

I

J= (qCu = conductor cross-section) (1.37)

qCu

The conductor cross-section qCu expressed in terms of the total electrically effective

copper cross-section ACu yields:

A Cu

q Cu = (1.38)

2wm

w2m

⇒ J=I (1.39)

A Cu

⇒ = = =1 (1.40)

J 3 phase I 3 phase w 3phase m 3phase 2 2 3

the electrical quantities are equally described by their two-axes equivalent as shown

in figure 1.4.

β

b

ia coil ratio: iα

-ic -ib (w 1 ξ) 2phase 3

=

(w 1 ξ) 3phase 2 iβ -iβ

ib ic a α

-ia -iα

c

Additionally, the resistive losses and the stored magnetic energy in the α/β-reference

frame are equal to the values of the original system:

2

2

PR ,losses = 3 Rs I 2

= 3 Rs I = 2 Rs I 22 phase (1.41)

3 phase 3 2 phase

To fulfill (1.41), the resistance and inductance values in the two-phase motor model

must remain identical. The stator resistance is proportional to the averaged

conductor length lm, number of windings w and the conductor cross-section qCu:

12 Chapter 1

w lm

Rs = ρ (1.42)

q Cu

2 m w 2 lm

Rs = ρ (1.43)

A Cu

The inductances are proportional to the phase number m, the number of windings w

scaled down by the winding factor ξ [Hen 91]:

m 4µ 0 τ p l

L= (ξ w) 2 (1.44)

2 δ π2p

Postulating equal resistance and inductance values in the original (m3phase = 3) and in

the α/β-reference frame (m2phase = 2) yields the same coil ratio as in (1.36):

2

(1.45)

(ξ w) 2phase m 3phase 3

⇒ = = (1.46)

(ξ w) 3phase m 2phase 2

affiliated voltage drop divided by the current, remain unchanged, since the

transformation of current and voltage quantities is equivalent. Therefore, the current-

voltage relation stays constant:

U x , 2 phase ! U x ,3 phase

x 2 phase = = = x3 phase (1.47)

I x , 2 phase I x ,3 phase

(w ξ) 2phase 3

Thus, a transformation with the coil ratio = is:

(w ξ) 3phase 2

Symmetrical

Power invariant

Inductance and resistance invariant

Flux, magnetic field and induction, MMF and current density are identical

Note: The flux linkages are coupled to the magnetic induction/field distribution via

the winding number of the three-phase machine, respectively two-phase equivalent.

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 13

Thus, the transformation of the flux linkages contains the coil ration (1.46).

Accordingly, the transformation of flux linkages is equivalent to the transformation

of current and voltage quantities.

voltage equations with Rs and Rr representing the resistance of stator and (stator

related) rotor windings, respectively:

u sa isa ψ sa

u = R i + d ψ (1.48)

sb s sb dt sb

u sc isc ψ sc

u ra ira ψ ra

u = R i + d ψ (1.49)

rb r rb dt rb

u rc irc ψ rc

In the case of synchronous machines, the rotor equation (1.49) vanishes. In the case

of induction machines, the phase voltages of the rotor are equal to zero and the

quantities in (1.49) are related to the real rotor quantities via the winding ratio of

stator and rotor [Hen 91]:

(w ξ) stator

ir = ir ,real (1.50)

(w ξ) rotor

(w ξ) stator

u r = u r ,real (1.51)

(w ξ) rotor

2

(w ξ) stator

Rr = Rr ,real (1.52)

(w ξ) rotor

Instead, the current flows in copper or aluminum bars, uniformly distributed and

embedded in a ferromagnetic material, with all bars terminated in a common ring at

each end of the rotor. This type of rotor is referred to as a squirrel-cage rotor.

However, the uniformly distributed rotor winding is adequately described by its

fundamental sinusoidal component and is represented by an equivalent 3-phase

winding [Hen 91].

14 Chapter 1

phase ac machine is equally described by their two-phase equivalent (figure 1.5).

Applying the transformation matrix T32 on (1.48)-(1.49) yields:

usα isα d ψ sα

u = Rs i + ψ (1.53)

sβ sβ dt sβ

u rα irα d ψ rα

u = Rr i + (1.54)

rβ rβ dt ψ rβ

a αs

Stator

usa, isa usα, isα

jβs

usβ, isβ

b c coil ratio:

usb, isb usc, isc

(w 1 ξ) 2phase 3

=

(w 1 ξ) 3phase 2

θ = ∫ωr dt θ = ∫ωr dt

αr

Rotor

urb, irb

urβ, irβ

jβr

The α/β representation eliminates the mutual magnetic coupling and the redundancy

of the poly-phase windings, but the time-dependence of both current and voltage

equations still remains. Furthermore, the equation set (1.53)-(1.54) is based on two

different reference frames, one stationary for the stator and another for the rotor

rotating at electrical motor speed ωr. In steady state, the stator current/voltage

frequency equals the supply frequency, the frequency of the rotor windings equals

the supply frequency minus electrical rotor speed ωr.

According to figure 1.6, the mutual magnetic coupling of rotor and stator depends

on the current position of the rotor reference frame. The rotating flux phasor,

generated by the rotor currents, can be divided in a flux vector parallel and

perpendicular to the α-axis of the stator. Obviously, only the parallel flux is

magnetically linked to the affiliated stator winding and vice versa. For reasons of

simplicity, the main inductance L1h is assumed to be constant, i.e. there is no rotor or

stator asymmetry. This restriction will be dropped in a subsequent paragraph.

Applying the mentioned simplification, the stator and rotor flux linkages in the α/β-

reference frame are obtained by simple vector addition according to figure 1.6:

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 15

jβs

jβr αr

isβ

L1h(θ) θ = ∫ωr dt

i rα

irβ

αs

isα

L1h(θ)

isα cosθ

irα sinθ

isβ

i rα

irβ cosθ

-isα sinθ

irβ

θ isβ cosθ θ

irα cosθ i sα

Figure 1.6: General two-axes ac machine model and mutual magnetic coupling between stator and rotor.

Top: Stator and rotor windings. Bottom: Geometrical calculations.

cosθ − sin θ

T−θ = (1.59)

sin θ cosθ

cosθ sin θ

T−−θ1 = (1.60)

− sin θ cosθ

ψ sα isα irα

ψ = Ls i + L1h T−θ i (1.61)

sβ sβ rβ

16 Chapter 1

ψ rα irα −1 isα

ψ = Lr i + L1h T−θ i (1.62)

rβ rβ sβ

Annotation: The negative sign in T-θ is introduced to guarantee symbol analogy with

following transfer matrixes. Furthermore, the rotor reference frame rotates at first

sight away from the stator reference frame, whereas the matrix T-θ transfers the rotor

currents contrary to the direction of rotation, i.e. back to the stationary stator

reference frame.

circuit" has been widely used. Note that in this equivalent circuit, all motor

parameters and variables are not actual quantities but are quantities referred to the

stator. Although the per-phase equivalent circuit is useful in analyzing and

predicting steady-state performance, it is not appropriate to predict the dynamic

performance of ac motors. In order to understand and analyze vector control, the

dynamic model of the motor is necessary.

reference frames, one stationary for the stator and another for the rotor rotating at

electrical motor speed ωr. At the transformation to the α/β-reference frame, the α-

axis of the stator reference frame was aligned to the first motor phase. Just as well,

the α-axis aligned to the second or third phase would have been a suitable choice.

Generally, the electrical behavior of the ac machine can be equally described by two

other perpendicular windings, being, with respect to the original α/β-system,

spatially rotated by the arbitrary angle γ. Naturally, the arbitrary angle γ may be also

time-dependent, e.g. itself rotating at the electrical speed ωr.

Similarly to the "per-phase equivalent circuit", the theory of the rotating reference

frames is applied to transfer the stator and rotor variables and equations to one

common reference frame. It has been found that the dynamic model equations

developed on one common reference frame is easier to describe the dynamic

behavior of ac motors. The choice of the common reference frame is the key element

that distinguishes the various vector control approaches from each other.

analysis of electrical machines and power system components. Information

regarding each of these reference frames, namely the stationary, rotor, synchronous

and arbitrary reference frame, is summarized in table 1.1.

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 17

Reference

Interpretation Notation Application

frame speed

Variables referred to the d/q subscripts DTC and steady-state

0

stationary reference frame and 's' superscript analysis

Variables referred to a reference d/q subscripts Vector control of

ωr frame fixed to the rotor and 'r' superscript synchronous machines

Variables referred to an arbitrary d/q subscripts

ωγ rotating reference frame and , superscript

General reference frame

Synchronously rotating reference d/q subscripts Vector control of

ωµ frame no superscripts induction machines

Although the transformation to the arbitrary reference frame involves all other

transformations as a special case, it is didactically preferable to consider at a first

step only the transformation to the stationary reference frame and then modify this

analysis to other reference frames.

In principal, the transformation to the stationary reference frame has already been

introduced. In (1.61), the rotor currents are transformed via matrix T-θ to current

components in α/β-direction of the stationary stator reference frame. Expressing the

rotor current phasor ir in terms of the stationary α/β-components is based on the

transformation shown in figure 1.7. The axes of the stationary α/β-components are

subsequently denoted as d-and q-axis to indicate a common reference frame of stator

and rotor. The superscript 's' indicates the stator-fixed reference frame. The rotor

currents expressed in components of the stator-fixed reference frame are:

cosθ − sin θ

T−θ = (1.65)

sin θ cosθ

cosθ sin θ

T−−θ1 = (hint : T−−θ1 = Tθ ) (1.66)

− sin θ cosθ

the inverse matrix yields the rotor current in α/β-components:

18 Chapter 1

irds irα

s = T− θ i (1.67)

irq rβ

irα −1

irds

i = T− θ s (1.68)

rβ irq

irβ

ir

-irβ sinθ

q

irα

irα sinθ

irα

irβ cosθ

irβ

θ θ

d

irα cosθ isrd= irα cos θ - irβ sinθ

Figure 1.7: Transformation of the rotor currents to the stationary reference frame.

Equally, the rotor voltage phasor and the rotor flux phasor are expressed as a vector

sum of components in the stationary stator reference frame:

u rds u rα

s = T− θ u (1.69)

u rq rβ

ψ rds ψ rα

s = T−θ ψ (1.70)

ψ rq rβ

The rotor voltage equation is obtained by multiplying the voltage equation (1.54)

with T-θ:

T− θ = T− θ Rr + = T− θ Rr + T−θ (1.71)

u rβ irβ dt ψ rβ irβ dt ψ rβ

T−−θ1 T−θ =

− sin θ cosθ sin θ cosθ

(1.72)

cos2 θ + sin 2 θ 0 1 0

= 2

=

0 cos θ + sin θ 0 1

2

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 19

the rotor flux vector multiplied with T-θ-1 T-θ remains unchanged. Using (1.72) in

(1.71) and applying the partial derivative yields:

urds irds d −1 ψ rα

s = Rr s + T− θ T− θ T− θ ψ

urq irq dt rβ

i s d ψ s

= Rr rds + T− θ T−−θ1 rds (1.73)

irq dt ψ rq

i s d ψ rd

s

d −1 ψ rd

s

= Rr rds + T− θ T−−θ1 s + T− θ T− θ s

irq dt ψ rq dt ψ rq

d d −1 dθ − sinθ cosθ dθ

T−θ T−−θ1 = T−θ T−θ = T−θ − cosθ − sinθ

dt dθ dt dt

cosθ − sinθ − sinθ cosθ dθ

= (1.74)

sinθ cosθ − cosθ − sinθ dt

0 cos 2 θ + sin 2 θ dθ 0 1

= = ωr

− cos θ − sin θ dt − 1 0

2 2

0

the transformed rotor voltage equation consists of three parts, namely the resistive

voltage drop, the time-dependent flux variation and the induced voltage due to the

rotation with the electrical motor speed ωr.

s

s = Rr s + s + ωr − 1 0 ψ s (1.75)

urq irq 0 1 dt ψ rq rq

Since the used reference frame is equal to the original α/β-reference frame of the

stator, all stator variables and quantities remain unchanged. Only the notation is

adapted to guarantee symbol analogy. Summarizing, following voltage equations are

valid in the common stationary reference frame:

s = Rs s + s (1.76)

u sq isq dt ψ sq

s = Rr s + s + ωr s

(1.77)

u rq irq dt ψ rq − ψ rd

20 Chapter 1

s = = Ls i + L1h T−θ i = Ls s + L1h s (1.78)

ψ sq ψ sβ isq irq

sβ rβ

L

s = T−θ ψ = T−θ r i + L1h T−θ i

ψ rq rβ rβ sβ

irα isα

= Lr T−θ + L1h T−θ T−−θ1 i (1.79)

i rβ sβ

i s i s

= Lr rds + L1h sds

irq isq

With respect to (1.78)-(1.79), the stator and rotor currents in the d-axis are only

active in the affiliated windings of the d-axis. The same applies for the q-axis. Thus,

the mutual magnetic coupling between d- and q-axes is eliminated.

The voltage equations in the stationary reference frame are easily adapted to the well

known "per-phase equivalent circuit", especially useful in analyzing and predicting

steady-state performance.

In the late 1920s, R.H. Park [Park 29] introduced a new approach to ac motor

analysis. The variables (voltages, currents and flux linkages) associated with the

stator windings are replaced with variables associated with fictitious windings

rotating with the rotor. In other words, the stator variables are transformed to a

reference frame fixed to the rotor. As will be shown, Park's transformation, which

revolutionized electrical motor control, has the unique property of eliminating all

time-varying inductances from the voltage equations of the synchronous machine

occurring due to both electric circuits in relative motion and electric circuits with

varying magnetic reluctance.

In this subsection, the common reference frame is attached to the rotor rotating at

the electrical speed ωr. For some reasons, it may be more instructive to imagine the

whole motor rotating at the electrical speed ωr contrary to the direction of motion.

Then, the α/β-rotor reference frame stands still and a similar condition as in the

previous paragraph is given. Only the transfer direction is opposite, i.e. all stator

variables are transformed in direction of original rotor rotation and all rotor variables

remain unchanged.

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 21

corresponding to the axes used for the rotor quantities (figure 1.6), is based on the

transformation shown in figure 1.8. The axes of the rotating α/β-components are

subsequently denoted as d-and q-axis to indicate a common reference frame of stator

and rotor. The superscript 'r' indicates the rotor-fixed reference frame. In this

paragraph, the electrical rotor angle θ is replaced by the more general angle γ to

guarantee symbol analogy with the subsequent transformation to the arbitrary

reference frame. According to figure 1.8, the stator currents expressed in

components of a rotor-fixed reference frame are:

γ

cos γ sin γ

Tγ = (1.82)

− sin γ cos γ

cos γ − sin γ

Tγ−1 = (1.83)

sin γ cos γ

the inverse matrix yields the stator current in α/β-components:

isdr isα

r = Tγ i (1.84)

isq sβ

isα −1

isdr

i = Tγ r (1.85)

s β isq

isα

isβ sinγ is

isα cosγ

d

isβ

isβ

-isα sinγ

isβ cosγ γ γ

isα

irsq = -isα sinγ + isβ cosγ

Figure 1.8: Transformation of the stator currents to the rotor-fixed reference frame.

22 Chapter 1

Equally, the stator voltage phasor and the stator flux phasor are expressed as a

vector sum of components in the rotor reference frame:

u sdr u sα

r = Tγ u (1.86)

u sq sβ

ψ sdr ψ sα

r = Tγ ψ (1.87)

ψ sq sβ

Tγ = Tγ Rs i + ψ = Tγ Rs i + Tγ (1.88)

dt ψ sβ

u sβ sβ dt sβ sβ

Tγ−1 Tγ =

sin γ cos γ − sin γ cos γ

(1.89)

cos 2 γ + sin 2 γ 0 1 0

= 2

=

0 cos γ + sin γ 0 1

2

u sdr isdr d −1 ψ sα

r = Rs r + Tγ Tγ Tγ

u sq isq dt ψ sβ

i r d −1 ψ sd

r

= Rs sdr + Tγ Tγ r (1.90)

isq dt

ψ sq

i r d ψ sd

r

d −1 ψ sd

r

= Rs sdr + Tγ Tγ−1 r + Tγ Tγ r

isq dt ψ sq dt ψ sq

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 23

d d −1 dγ − sin γ − cos γ dγ

Tγ Tγ−1 = Tγ Tγ = Tγ

dt dγ dt cos γ − sin γ dt

cos γ sin γ − sin γ − cos γ dγ

= (1.91)

− sin γ cos γ cos γ − sin γ dt

0 − cos 2 γ − sin 2 γ dγ 0 − 1

= 2 = ωγ

cos γ + sin γ

2

0 dt 1 0

the transformed stator voltage equation consists of three parts, namely the resistive

voltage drop, the time-dependent flux variation and the induced voltage due to the

rotation with the electrical speed ωγ:

r

r = Rs r + r + ωγ 1 0 ψ r (1.92)

u sq isq 0 1 dt ψ sq sq

Since the used reference frame is equal to the original α/β-reference frame of the

rotor, all rotor variables and quantities remain unchanged. Only the notation is

adapted to guarantee symbol analogy. Summarizing, following voltage equations are

valid in the common rotor-fixed reference frame:

r = Rs r + r + ωγ r (1.93)

u sq isq dt ψ sq ψ sd

r = Rr r + r (1.94)

u rq irq dt ψ rq

According to (1.61)-(1.62) and considering T-θ = Tγ-1 and T-θ-1 = Tγ (valid only for

the rotor-fixed reference frame with θ = γ), the flux linkage can be also expressed as:

L Tγ

r = Tγ ψ = Tγ s i + L1h i

ψ sq sβ sβ rβ

isα irα

= Ls Tγ + L1h Tγ Tγ−1 i (1.95)

i sβ rβ

i r i r

= Ls sdr + L1h rdr

isq irq

24 Chapter 1

r = = Lr i + L1h Tγ i

ψ rq ψ rβ

rβ sβ

(1.96)

i r isdr

= Lr rdr + L1h r

irq isq

components parallel to the flux direction. Thus, d- and q-axis are completely

decoupled.

In the last two paragraphs, each stator and rotor quantities and equations are

transformed to another reference frame. Just as well, a transformation to any

arbitrary reference frame is possible. However regarding drive control, there is no

practical application applying the transformation to two different reference frames

for stator and rotor, respectively. Only a common reference frame contains all

advantages as e.g.: constant main inductance, no mutual magnetic coupling between

d- and q-axes and eliminating time-dependence of current/voltage equations.

In this subsection, the common reference frame may rotate at any constant or

varying angular velocity or it may remain stationary. The angular velocity ωγ

associated with the change of variables is unspecified. Only the angular

displacement γ of the rotating reference frame must be continuous. Usually, this

constriction is automatically fulfilled, since the angle is the time-integral of the

speed.

t

γ = ∫ ω γ dt + γ (0) (1.97)

0

Again, it may be easier to imagine the whole motor rotating at a speed ωγ contrary to

the direction of rotation (figure 1.9). Then, the imaginary reference frame stands still

and the stator windings are rotating with -ωγ and the rotor windings with -(ωγ - ωr).

A comparison with figure 1.8 shows, the stator quantities and equations are

transformed using the same transformation matrix as in equation (1.82). Only the

transformation angle γ is no longer fixed to the rotor position. Obviously, applying

the same transformation matrix and geometrical calculations on the stator variables

and equations yields the same stator equations in any rotating reference frame. Thus,

the results of the previous paragraph are directly used.

As seen from the new reference frame, the rotor rotates at the electrical speed -(ωγ -

ωr) (figure 1.9). Contrary to the stator-fixed reference frame, the applied

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 25

rotating reference frame. Thus, the transformation of the rotor variables and

affiliated rotor equations is obtained by simply replacing the angle -θ of the

transformation matrix T-θ in (1.65) by the angle γ - θ. Strictly replacing the angle in

all rotor equations representing the stationary reference frame yields the rotor

equations in the arbitrary rotating reference frame.

q

βs

βS d stator:

βr γ - θ= ∫(ωγ - ωr) dt

q d

a

αr

γ = ∫ωγ dt

γ = ∫ωγ dt

c' b' αs

αS βr

θ = ∫ωr dt q

rotor:

b c

a' d

γ - θ= ∫(ωγ - ωr) dt

αr

rotating reference frame:

cos γ sin γ

Tγ = (1.98)

− sin γ cos γ

isd, isα

, = Tγ (1.99)

isq isβ

cos(γ − θ ) sin(γ − θ )

Tγ −θ = (1.100)

− sin(γ − θ ) cos(γ − θ )

ird, irα

, = Tγ −θ (1.101)

irq irβ

transformations, calculating the α/β-currents by the d/q-values, are as:

26 Chapter 1

cos γ − sin γ

Tγ−1 = (1.102)

sin γ cos γ

isα −1

isd,

= Tγ , (1.103)

i

sβ isq

cos(γ − θ ) − sin(γ − θ )

Tγ−−1θ = (1.104)

sin(γ − θ ) cos(γ − θ )

irα −1

ird,

= Tγ −θ , (1.105)

i

rβ irq

Considering the speed of the rotating reference frame in (1.77) and (1.93), the

voltage equations in the arbitrary reference frame are:

u sd

,

isd, d ψ sd, − ψ sq,

, = Rs , + , + ωγ , (1.106)

u sq isq dt ψ sq ψ sd

, = Rr , + , + (ω γ − ω r ) , (1.107)

u rq i rq dt ψ rq ψ rd

As mentioned previously, the voltage equations for all reference frames may be

obtained from those in the arbitrary reference frame. A comparison of the different

reference frames shows, the stator and rotor reference frames are just special cases

of the arbitrary reference frame: Setting the speed ωγ in (1.106)-(1.107) to zero

yields the stationary equations (1.76)-(1.77). If the speed of the reference frame

equals the rotor speed ωr, the equations of the rotor reference frame (1.97)-(1.30) are

obtained. Generally, the transformation for a specific reference frame is obtained by

substituting the appropriate reference-frame speed for ωγ into (1.97) to obtain the

angular displacement. In most cases, the initial or time-zero displacement γ(0) is

selected equal to zero.

Equally to the stator and rotor reference frames, the flux linkages of d- and q-axis

are completely decoupled: The flux generation is caused only by current

components parallel to the flux direction. According to (1.61)-(1.62) and

considering

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 27

T−θ Tγ−−1θ =

sin θ cosθ sin(γ − θ ) cos(γ − θ )

cosθ cos(γ − θ ) − sin θ sin(γ − θ ) − cosθ sin(γ − θ ) − sin θ cos(γ − θ )

=

sin θ cos(γ − θ ) + cos γ sin(γ − θ ) − sin θ sin(γ − θ ) + cosθ cos(γ − θ )

cos γ − sin γ −1

= = Tγ

sin γ cos γ

( )

⇒ Tγ T−θ Tγ−−1θ = Tγ T−θ Tγ−−1θ = Tγ Tγ−1 = 1 (1.108)

( ) (

⇒ Tγ −θ T−−θ1 Tγ−1 = Tγ −θ T−−θ1 T−θ Tγ−−1θ = Tγ −θ T−−θ1 T−θ Tγ−−1θ = 1 ) (1.109)

L T−θ

, = Tγ ψ = Tγ s i + L1h i

ψ sq sβ sβ rβ

isα irα

= Ls Tγ + L1h Tγ T−θ Tγ−−1θ Tγ −θ i (1.110)

isβ rβ

i , ird,

= Ls sd, + L1h Tγ T−θ Tγ−−1θ ,

isq irq

ψ , isd, ird,

⇒ sd, = Ls , + L1h , (1.111)

ψ sq isq irq

L

, = Tγ −θ ψ = Tγ −θ r i + L1h T−θ i

ψ rq rβ rβ sβ

irα −1 i

= Lr Tγ −θ + L1h Tγ −θ T−−θ1 Tγ Tγ sα (1.112)

irβ i sβ

i , isd,

= Lr rd, + L1h Tγ −θ T−−θ1 Tγ−1 ,

irq isq

ψ , i , isd,

⇒ rd, = Lr rd, + L1h , (1.113)

ψ rq irq isq

The most practical applied arbitrary rotating reference frames are rotating with

synchronous electrical speed. In steady state, the real stator voltage, current and flux

quantities are equally represented by phasors, rotating with the supply frequency.

28 Chapter 1

The frequency of the real existing rotor quantities equals the supply frequency minus

electrical rotor speed. As seen from a reference frame rotating with synchronous

speed, all stator and rotor phasors stand still (figure 1.10). Thus, dc values, very

practical regarding drive control strategies, are obtained in steady state.

jβ

d iβ (t)

iβ (t) t

q is

id

ωµ

projection on β-axis

γ = ωµ t

iq

t id

iα (t) α

projection on d-axis

projection on α-axis

iα (t)

q

jβ

projection on q-axis

iq

is

iq

t t id d

Figure 1.10: Current phasor, α/β- and d/q-representation and affiliated time charts.

several ways of aligning the zero angular position of the d-axis and perpendicular q-

axis are practically used: rotor-flux-oriented, stator-flux-oriented and magnetizing-

flux-oriented [Vas 97]. In steady state, the speed of the affiliated reference frames is

equal, only a load-dependent angle characterizes the different systems.

As seen in figure 1.11, the angular displacement of stator, rotor and main flux is

marginal. However, aligning the zero angular position of the d-axis to the rotor flux

yields considerable advantages regarding control strategies. The final objective of

the vector control philosophy is to be able to control the electromagnetic torque in a

way equivalent to that of a separately excited dc machine. As shown in the next

chapter, field-oriented control enables control over both the excitation flux-linkage

and the torque-producing current in a decoupled way. Furthermore, the practical

method determining the transformation angle γ will be shown. However, only the

rotor-flux-oriented control yields complete decoupling of torque and flux. Choosing

a different flux orientation may outweigh the lack of complete decoupling for some

special applications [Xu 92].

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 29

1.4 1.5

ψssα

ψs,d 1 ψrsα

1.2 0.5

ψr,d

[V s]

[V s]

0

d

α

1 -0.5

ψh,d

Ψ

Ψ

-1

0.8 -1.5

ψhsα

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

t [s] t [s]

0.6 1.5

ψssβ ψrsβ

ψs,q 1

0.4 0.5

[V s]

[V s]

ψh,q 0

q

β

0.2 -0.5

Ψ

Ψ

ψr,q -1

ψhsβ

0 -1.5

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

t [s] t [s]

Figure 1.11: Rotor-, stator- and main flux of an induction machine (1,5 kW; n = 1500 rpm; p = 2) using

FOC. Left: Flux quantities in a rotor-flux-oriented reference frame. Right: Flux quantities in the

stationary stator reference frame.

reference frame

Since any ac machine with isolated neutral point contains no homopolar current

component, the total power expressed in the αβ variables equals, according to

(1.30), the total power expressed in abc variables. Applying the transformation to a

rotating reference frame on the αβ variables and solving the trigonometric functions

yields:

= (u sd

,

cos γ − u sq

,

sin γ ) (isd, cos γ − isq, sin γ )

+ (u sd

,

sin γ + u sq

,

cos γ ) (isd, sin γ + isq, cos γ ) (1.114)

= u i cos γ + u i sin γ + u i sin γ + u i cos γ

,

sd

,

sd

2 ,

sq

,

sq

2 ,

sd

,

sd

2 ,

sq

,

sq

2

= u sd

,

isd, + u sq

,

isq,

Although the waveforms of the d/q-voltages, currents and flux linkages are

dependent upon the angular velocity of the reference frame, the waveform of the

total power is the same and independent of the reference frame in which it is

evaluated.

In literature (e.g. [Hen 92]), the torque equation is usually obtained by the derivation

of the magnetic system energy as a function of the mechanical angular displacement.

Here, a different approach is introduced, showing the energy flow and motor losses

30 Chapter 1

considered in the dynamic equations. Considering a doubly fed ac motor, i.e. power

is supplied at both stator and rotor terminals, the total electrical power input is:

Pel ,total (t ) = u sd

,

i sd, + u sq

,

i sq, + u rd, i rd, + u rq, i rq, (1.115)

Usually, the rotor voltages are zero (e.g. squirrel-cage induction motor and PMSM).

Then, the universal-valid equation (1.115) equals (1.114). Replacing the voltages by

applying (1.106)-(1.107), the total input power can be rewritten:

dψ sd, dψ sq,

Pel ,total (t ) = R s (i sd, 2 + i sq, 2 ) + i sd, + i sq, + ω γ (i sq, ψ sd, − i sd, ψ sq, )

dt dt

dψ rd, dψ rq,

+ Rr (i rd, 2 + i rq, 2 ) + i rd, + i rq, + ω γ (i rq, ψ rd, − i rd, ψ rq, ) (1.116)

dt dt

+ ω r (i rd, ψ rq, − i rq, ψ rd, )

i sq, ψ sd, − i sd, ψ sq, = i sq, L s i sd, + i sq, Lh i rd, − i sd, L s i sq, − i sd, Lh i rq,

= i rq, Lr i rd, + i rd, Lh i sq, − i rd, Lr i rq, − i rq, Lh i sd, (1.117)

=i ψ ,

rd

,

rq −i ψ

,

rq

,

sd

dψ sd, dψ sq,

Pel ,total (t ) = Rs (isd, 2 + isq, 2 ) + Rr (ird, 2 + irq, 2 ) + isd, + isq,

dt dt

(1.118)

dψ rd, dψ rq,

+i ,

rd + irq, + ω r (ird, ψ rq, − irq, ψ rd, )

dt dt

Obviously, the first two terms in (1.118) are resistive losses. According to

figure 1.12, the current multiplied by the time-derivation of the flux linkages is the

power used for the magnetic field generation:

dψ v n v

t n t ψ

E field (t ) = ∫ Pfield dt = ∑ ∫ iv dt = ∑ ∫ iv dψ v (1.119)

v =1 0 dt

0 v =1 0

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 31

ψ

E

*

E

i

Figure 1.12: Magnetic field energy E and co-energy E*.

current generates electromagnetic torque. Thus, the total electrical input power

(1.118) consists of resistive losses PR,loss, power Pfield stored as magnetic field energy

in the windings and mechanical output power Pmech. Truly, (1.118) contains not all

losses of the motor drive. Among the resistive losses, also friction and iron losses

are active. However, considering the braking effect of iron and friction losses, they

are acting like an equivalent load: e.g., a PMSM with open terminals driven in

generator mode behaves as a load with no electrical output power but with friction

and iron losses. Thus, the iron and friction losses are handled as a part of the

mechanical output power Pmech.

with:

Pfield = i sd, + i sq, + i rd, + i rq, (1.122)

dt dt dt dt

The mechanical output power of any ac machine with p pole-pairs can be also

written as a function of the electromagnetic torque Tel and mechanical rotor speed ω:

ωr

Pmech = Tel ω = Tel (1.124)

p

electrical quantities. Thus, the electromagnetic torque is produced by the interaction

of rotor flux linkages and rotor currents:

32 Chapter 1

produced as well by the interaction of stator flux linkages and stator current. As

illustrated in figure 1.13, this interaction can be pictorially represented by

electromagnetic forces Fel on current-carrying conductors in a magnetic field.

Applying (1.117) on (1.125), the electromagnetic torque expressed in stator

quantities is:

Fel,2

reference frame:

Fel,1

q ψsq

ψsd -isq

isq Tel ~ (Fel,1 - Fel,2)

d isq Tel ~ (isq ψsd - isd ψsq)

Fel,1

isd

-isd

Fel,2

Figure 1.13: Interaction of stator flux linkages and stator current in an arbitrary reference frame.

The electromagnetic torque and the rotor speed are related by the dynamic equation

dω J dω r

Tel − Tload = J = (1.127)

dt p dt

voltage equations with Rs and Rr representing the resistance of stator and (stator

related) rotor windings, respectively. A linear set of rotor and stator inductances

represents the relation of current and flux linkages.

For reasons of simplicity, all motor parameters have been assumed to be constant,

i.e. the rotor and stator geometry as well as all windings are completely symmetrical.

From now on, this restriction will be dropped. It is convenient to treat resistive and

inductive circuit elements separately.

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 33

If the phase resistances are unequal, the representation by a scalar is incorrect and

the voltage equation (1.106) in the arbitrary reference frame is adapted by the

correct transformation of the resistive voltage drop

=1

Rα 0 i sα Rα 0 −1 isα

Tγ

Rβ i = Tγ 0 R Tγ Tγ i

0 sβ β sβ

(1.128)

Rα 0 −1 i sα i sd,

= Tγ T T = R dq ,

0 Rβ γ γ isβ i sq

R dq = Tγ R s Tγ−1 (1.129)

However, all stator phase windings of either synchronous or induction machines are

designed to have the same resistance. Similarly, transformers, transmission lines and

usually all power-system components are designed so that all phases have equal

resistances. Even power-system loads are distributed between phases so that all

phases are loaded nearly equal. If the nonzero elements of the diagonal resistance

matrix are equal

R 0

Rs = s (1.130)

0 R s

cos γ sin γ Rs 0 −1

R dq = Tγ R s Tγ−1 = Tγ

− sin γ cos γ 0 Rs

R cos γ Rs sin γ −1 cos γ sin γ −1

= s Tγ = Rs Tγ (1.131)

−

sR sin γ R s cos γ − sin γ cos γ

= Rs Tγ Tγ−1 = R s

Thus, the resistance matrix associated with the arbitrary reference variables is equal

to the resistance matrix associated with the actual variables if each phase of the

actual circuit has the same resistance. Obviously, the same applies for the rotor

resistance.

Equally, the rotor and stator inductances of symmetrical machines, e.g. induction

machines or cylindrical synchronous machines, are not dependent on the rotor

position and thus independent on the reference frame used. In contrast, the

34 Chapter 1

(figure 1.14) depend on the actual rotor position, since the magnetic path in direction

of the rotor poles is different to the magnetic path in perpendicular direction, i.e. the

air-gap between rotor and stator is not constant.

β β

d d

q a q a

θ = ∫ωr dt θ = ∫ωr dt

c' ωr b' c' b'

α α

b c b c

a' a'

Permanent Magnets

Figure 1.14: PMSM with inset magnets and salient-pole synchronous machine.

In the case of a magnetic linear system, it is customary to express the flux linkages

as a product of inductances and current matrices before performing the

transformation. However, the transformation of flux linkages is valid even for

asymmetrical or magnetic nonlinear systems and an extensive amount of work can

be avoided by transforming the flux linkages directly. This is especially true in the

analysis of ac machines where the inductances are function of the rotor position.

Thus, the stator and rotor voltage equations introduced are universal. Only the

current-flux relation must be adapted in the case of asymmetry or non-linearity.

comparable, only the method of rotor field generation is different. The set of voltage

and flux equations introduced simplifies, since the rotor of synchronous machines

contains no three-phase windings and the rotor flux linkage, generated by permanent

magnets or dc current in a separately exited winding, is not affected by the stator

flux linkage. Due to the high permeability of air, the rotor flux linkage ψr is

completely active only in direction of the poles. Considering the power-invariant

transformation factor, the distribution of the rotor flux linkage in α/β-components of

the stator reference frame yields:

ψ rsα 3 ψ r cos θ

s = ψ sin θ (1.132)

ψ rβ 2 r

Since the voltage equations expressed in terms of flux linkages are still valid, only

the current-flux relation is adapted. If the zero angular displacement θ(t=0) is chosen

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 35

in direction of the poles (according to figure 1.14), the stator flux linkage of the

original three-phase synchronous motor is:

ψ = L Lbb Lcb i + ψ cos(θ − 2π 3) (1.133)

sb ab sb r

ψ sc Lac Lbc Lcc isc ψ r cos(θ + 2π 3)

Due to the magnetic anisotropy of the rotor, the self-inductances of the original

three-phase windings are not constant but rotor position dependent (figure 1.15).

Assuming uniformly and sinusoidal distributed stator windings, the self-inductances

are:

Laa Laa

L2 L2

L0 L0

0 π 2π θ 0 π 2π θ

Left: PMSM with inset magnets. Right: Salient-pole synchronous motor.

Figure 1.16 illustrates the ideal field distribution as a function of the electrical rotor

angle of a non-excited salient-pole synchronous motor in the α/β-reference frame.

To guarantee a clear illustration, the rotor field as well as the leakage field is not

drawn. As seen by the field distribution, the α- and β-axis are not decoupled.

Dependent on the rotor position, the field generated by the current iα is also active in

the β-axis and the current iβ induces in the windings of the α-axis.

36 Chapter 1

iα

iα ψsα

ψsα

iβ iβ

ψsα

iβ -iβ

ψsβ

ψsβ ψsβ

-iα

-iα

Figure 1.16: Schematic main field distribution (no leakage) as a function of the electrical rotor angle of a

non-excited (ψr = 0) salient-pole synchronous motor in the α/β reference frame.

Thus, the stator flux linkage in the α/β-reference frame contains inductances

describing the magnetic coupling:

ψ sα Lα Lβα isα ψ rα

ψ = L Lβ i + ψ (1.137)

sβ αβ sβ rβ

with:

ψ rα 3 ψ r cosθ

ψ = ψ sin θ (1.138)

rβ 2 r

Lα = L1 + ∆L cos 2θ (1.139)

Lβ = L1 − ∆L cos 2θ (1.140)

ψ sd, ψ sα i ψ

, = Tγ ψ = Tγ L αβ sα + rα

ψ sq sβ isβ ψ rβ

isα ψ rα

= Tγ L αβ Tγ−1 Tγ + Tγ (1.142)

i sβ ψ rβ

i , ψ ,

= Tγ L αβ Tγ−1 sd, + rd,

isq ψ rq

of a synchronous machine are eliminated only if the reference frame is fixed to the

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 37

rotor. Consequently, the arbitrary reference frame does not offer the advantages in

the analysis of synchronous machines that it does in the case of induction machines.

Naturally, the rotor-fixed reference frame is equal to the synchronously rotating

reference frame for synchronous motor drives. According to (1.142), the

transformation of the stator quantities to the rotor-fixed reference frame with the

zero angular displacement θ(t=0) chosen in direction of the poles yields:

ψ sdr ψ sα −1

isdr ψ rdr

r = Tθ ψ = Tθ L αβ Tθ r + r (1.143)

ψ sq sβ isq ψ rq

The rotor flux linkage in terms of the original rotor field ψr is active only in the d-

axis:

r = Tθ ψ = ψ sin θ

ψ rq rβ − sin θ cos θ 2 r

(1.144)

3 cos 2 θ + sin 2 θ

= ψr

2 − sin θ cos θ + sin θ cos θ

ψ r 3 ψ r

⇒ rdr = (1.145)

ψ rq 2 0

decoupling and the elimination of time-varying inductances in the rotor fixed

reference frame:

L + ∆L cos 2θ ∆L sin 2θ −1

Tθ L αβ Tθ−1 = Tθ 1 Tθ

∆L sin 2θ L1 − ∆L cos 2θ

(1.146)

L + ∆L 0

= 1

0 L1 − ∆L

Ld 0

⇒ L dq = Tθ L αβ Tθ−1 = (1.147)

0 Lq

reference frame is:

3

ψ sdr = Ld isdr + ψr (1.148)

2

38 Chapter 1

Ld = L1 + ∆L (1.150)

Lq = L1 − ∆L (1.151)

Again, the sign in (1.150)-(1.151) depends on the reluctance in pole direction. For

common PMSM with inset magnets, the d-axis inductance is smaller than the q-axis

inductance (Ld < Lq.). Unfortunately, the original inductances (1.134)-(1.136) are not

suitable to calculate directly the α/β-inductances (1.139)-(1.141), respectively d/q-

inductances (1.150)-(1.151), since a practical measurement does not enable a

splitting of the leakage inductances in parts regarding different causes, e.g. leakage

due to the end winding and slot-leakage, respectively. However, the d/q-inductances

(1.150)-(1.151), required for motor control, are directly measured using the motor

model in the rotating reference frame.

synchronous machines (i.e. the slip frequency is zero) a damper cage has not yet

been considered. Only in open-loop control mode, e.g., the synchronous motor is

directly connected to the electrical grid, the damper cage must be considered to

calculate the transient behavior [Hen 92].

1.5 Conclusions

required for high-performance motion control. The developed theory of reference

frames is equally applicable to various forms of synchronous machines and

induction machines, respectively. From all proposed transformations, it can be

deduced that the mutual magnetic coupling between d- and q-axes is eliminated. The

stator and rotor currents in the d-axis are only active in the affiliated windings of the

d-axis. The same applies for the q-axis. The only difference in the equations is the

variable indicating the speed of the rotating reference frame.

The transformed stator and rotor voltage equations consist of three parts, namely the

resistive voltage drop, the time-dependent flux variation and the induced voltage due

to the relative rotation with respect to the rotating reference frame. The stator and

rotor voltage equations introduced are universal. Only the current-flux relation must

be adapted in the case of asymmetry or non-linearity.

The most commonly used reference frames are rotating with synchronous electrical

speed. As seen from a reference frame rotating with synchronous speed, all stator

Dynamic Model of AC Machines 39

and rotor phasors stand still and all time varying variables become constant (in

steady state). Thus, dc values, very practical regarding drive control strategies, are

obtained.

is, that the rotor-position dependence of inductances due to magnetic asymmetries,

e.g. in salient-pole synchronous machines or in PMSM, is eliminated from the

voltage equations. Considering synchronous machines, the synchronous reference

frame is equal to the rotor reference frame, since the supply frequency equals the

electrical rotor speed.

rotor flux lies entirely in the d-axis, the dynamic equations of both induction and

synchronous machines are simplified and analogous to a dc motor. The Field-

oriented control, using the motor model in a synchronous reference frame, enables

control over both the excitation flux-linkage and the torque-producing current in a

decoupled way.

2. Field Oriented Control

2.1 Introduction

Adjustable speed drives with torque control are required in many applications, e.g.

manufacturing and transportation. Using ac motors and high performance ac drives

that are capable of controlling torque and flux independently offer several

advantages over dc motors and drives such as lower maintenance, smaller size and

higher speeds. Compared to dc drives, the higher cost of ac drives is in part

compensated by a lower ac machine cost. Compared to uncontrolled ac motors,

supplied by a regular grid, the efficiency of inverter-controlled drives can be vastly

increased by, e.g. flux optimization. The resulting energy saving, which depends on

the respective application, may be crucial. It might be expected that in the medium

term future, as ac drives become a mature product state, cost of the additional power

electronics will no longer be an issue.

employing the FOC technique. Suitable motor models are derived and different

control approaches discussed. Motor models are rewritten in a slightly different form

providing an increased performance of the entire control system. The basic speed

control scheme is refined systematically in subsequent paragraphs by, e.g. advanced

speed control and flux optimization.

and synchronous machines, e.g. the PMSM, are very similar. Thus, apart from

modeling, they are handled simultaneously within this text. Considering FOC, a

comprehensive and clear description of the controller design is given in this chapter.

Special care has been taken for the viability of the real-time implementation. The

design concepts differ slightly from literature, e.g. [Leo 85], but they are proven to

result in a very robust and high-performance drive control. This chapter is rather

suitable for engineers implementing FOC in real-time than just simulating the drive

with simplifying assumptions. Differences to common presentations described in

literature are special flux control schemes, current anti-windup with automatic flux

adaptation and the introduction in advanced speed control.

42 Chapter 2

In this chapter, only the rotor-flux-oriented type of vector control, also termed

“Field-Oriented Control” (FOC), is considered. Diagram 2.1 shows the basic speed

control scheme for ac motor drives with FOC [Bla 72]. In this figure, interactions

between the different modules are neglected. However, they are considered by

decoupling within subsequent paragraphs. The control of induction motors and

synchronous machines is handled simultaneously. As will be shown, their electrical

and mechanical behavior is very similar.

The goal of FOC is to maintain the amplitude of the rotor flux linkage Ψr at a fixed

value, except for field-weakening operation or flux optimization, and only modify a

torque-producing current component in order to control the torque of the ac

machine. Considering a complete decoupling of torque and flux, a linear relation

between torque Tel and torque producing current iq is achieved and the torque in the

ac machine can be expressed as [Vas 97]:

Tel = c Ψr iq (2.1)

controlling the q-axis current. In speed control mode, the torque reference Tel* is

calculated by a speed controller. As shown later, the rotor flux can be controlled

directly by controlling the d-axis current.

Power

supply

Udc

ω * Tel* iq* *

uq

Park-1 T.

iq* = f(Tel*) *

uα u*a

PWM

d,q Inverter

ω Speed Current iq - control

*

ub

* * SVM

control mapping ud uβ u*c

Ψ*r id* α,β PWM

id* = f(Ψ*r) generation

γ

Flux Current id - control

reference mapping

iq iα ia

d,q α,β

id iβ ib

α,β a,b,c

Digital control

system Park T. 3⇒2

ac

load

motor

Motor currents are measured in two phases. These measurements feed the ‘3 ⇒ 2-

transformation’ module. The outputs of this projection are designated iα and iβ.

These two current components are the inputs of the Park transformation giving the

current in the d/q rotating reference frame. The current components id, iq are

compared to the reference currents id* and iq* controlling flux and torque generation,

respectively.

Field Oriented Control 43

At this point, this control structure shows an interesting advantage: it can be used to

control either synchronous or induction machines by simply changing the flux

reference and the method of obtaining rotor flux position. As the rotor flux, fixed to

the absolute rotor position due to characterizing poles, of synchronous permanent

magnet motors is generated by the magnets or by separately exited windings in the

case of synchronous machines, there is no need to create one via the stator current.

Hence, when controlling synchronous machines, id* can be set to zero. Advanced

control schemes may exploit additionally the reluctance torque, if available.

As induction motors need a rotor flux creation in order to operate, the flux reference

Ψ*r must not be zero. The FOC conveniently solves one of the major drawbacks of

the “classic” control structures: the portability from induction to synchronous motor

drives. In speed control mode, the torque command T*e l is the output of the speed

controller mapped into a current reference iq*. The current controllers calculates the

voltages ud* and uq* in the d/q reference frame; they are applied to the inverse Park

transformation. The outputs of this projection are uα* and uβ*, being the components

of the stator voltage in the α/β stationary orthogonal reference frame and used as

inputs of the space vector PWM. The outputs of this block are the signals driving the

inverter. Note that both Park and inverse Park transformations need the rotor flux

position γ. Obtaining the rotor flux position depends on the ac machine type used

(synchronous or induction machine).

The different control loops as shown in figure 2.1 are described in detail in

subsequent paragraphs. The basic speed control scheme is further refined in

following subsections adding step by step additional features as, e.g. advanced speed

and flux control/estimation approaches.

The α/β representation eliminates the mutual magnetic coupling of the phase-

windings, but the time-dependence of both current and voltage equations still

remains. Observing the current in a reference frame rotating with the same speed as

the current state phasor, pictorially expressed “sitting on the current space state

phasor”, dc values are obtained in steady state. The so-called Park transformation is

the most important transformation in the FOC. Figure 2.2 presents the relation

between two reference frames for the stator current state phasor. In this chapter, the

d-axis of the rotating frame is aligned with the rotor flux. The real axis is further

denoted as the direct axis (d-axis), and the imaginary axis as the quadrature axis (q-

axis). According to the introduced transformation to the arbitrary rotating reference

frame, the stator current is:

= (2.2)

iq − sin γ cos γ iβ

44 Chapter 2

Of course, voltages and flux linkages are transformed in the same way. The inverse

Park transformation (2.3) is usually used for the calculation of the reference voltages

(figure 2.1) being the input of the PWM module.

*= * (2.3)

u β sin γ cos γ u q

β

jβ

d d

q a iβ

γ Ψr

q

c' ωµ b' id

is

α

γ = ∫ ωµ dt

b c iq

a'

Permanent Magnets for PMSM iα α

Ψr ⇔ Rotor flux linkage for induction and

synchronous machines

Here, only the transformations to a rotor flux reference frame are considered

[Bla 72], [Hen 92]. The angle of the transformation from stator to rotor reference

frame coincides with the rotor flux angle γ rotating at synchronous speed ωµ. Thus,

the rotor flux lies entirely on the d-axis (figure 2.2). In steady state, the frequency of

the rotating reference frame equals the frequency of both flux and stator

voltage/current. In the case of an induction machine, the speed ωµ may differ from

the rotor speed ωr depending on the slip due to load.

ω µ = ω r + ω slip (2.4)

position of the permanent magnets or to the pole direction of separately exited

windings. Thus, the speed ωµ equals the electrical rotor speed ωr. Then, under linear

magnetic conditions, all time-varying (rotor-position dependent) inductances are

eliminated from the voltage equations of the salient-pole machine. This aspect is

especially important when control strategies are to be employed from the

corresponding differential equations. When this reference frame is used, the physical

picture is such that the transformed quantities rotate with the rotor and thus see

invariable magnet paths. Consequently, the inductances Ld and Lq, corresponding to

d-axis and q-axis respectively, are constant.

Field Oriented Control 45

The introduced transformations are first applied to the squirrel cage induction motor

to obtain a clear and comprehensive description of the dynamic behavior. The

results are then easily transformed to the PMSM by neglecting the rotor equations

and considering a possible asymmetry of the rotor geometry. Regarding FOC, the

dynamic and electrical behavior of cylindrical and salient-pole synchronous

machines is similar to the PMSM. Differences due to the excitation and damper

cage, if existing, are treated separately.

voltage equations with Rs and Rr representing the resistance of stator and (stator

related) rotor windings, respectively:

u sa isa ψ sa

u = R i + d ψ (2.5)

sb s sb dt sb

u sc isc ψ sc

u ra ira ψ ra

u = R i + d ψ (2.6)

rb r rb dt rb

u rc irc ψ rc

In the case of squirrel-cage induction motor, the phase voltages of the rotor are equal

to zero. According to (1.106)-(1.107), the transformation to a reference frame

rotating at the arbitrary angular velocity ωµ results in voltage equations consisting of

resistive voltage drops and induced voltages due to both time variation and rotation

of the flux [Kron 42], [Hen 92]. The angular velocity of the rotor is ωr. As seen from

the rotor, the reference frame rotates at (ωµ - ωr) and hence the voltage equations

are:

u sd i sd d ψ sd − ψ sq

u = R s i + ψ + ω µ (2.7)

sq sq dt sq ψ sd

0 ird d ψ rd − ψ rq

0 = Rr i + (

ψ + ω µ − ω r ) (2.8)

rq dt rq ψ rd

The flux linkages are proportional to the currents linked via stator, rotor and main

inductances Ls, Lr and L1h:

46 Chapter 2

ψ sd i sd i rd

ψ = Ls i + L1h i (2.9)

sq sq rq

ψ rd i sd ird

ψ = L1h i + Lr i (2.10)

rq sq rq

From now on, the applied transformation is fixed to the rotor flux linkage aligned to

the d-axis rotating at synchronous speed ωµ. Thus, the rotor flux lies entirely in the

d-axis and the transformation angle γ coincides with the rotor flux angle.

Subsequently, this is indicated by disregarding the indices ‘s’ of stator variables. As

seen from the rotating d-axis, representing the rotor flux direction, the perpendicular

flux linkage ψrq equals zero by definition.

!

ψ rq = 0 (Rotor flux lies entirely in the d-axis) (2.11)

Defining a (fictitious) magnetizing current iµ, representing the rotor flux linkage,

ψ rd = L1h iµ (2.12)

ird L1h i µ − id

i = (2.13)

rq Lr − iq

Substituting (2.10) and applying (2.11)-(2.13) to (2.8), the rotor equations in the

field-oriented reference frame are obtained:

0 = R r

Lr

−i +

dt

(

0 + ω µ − ω r L i ) (2.14)

q 1h µ

L1h d

⇒ 0 = Rr (i µ − id ) + ( L1h i µ ) (2.15)

Lr dt

⇒ 0 = − Rr

L1h

Lr

( )

iq + ω µ − ω r L1h i µ (2.16)

According to (2.15), the relation between the magnetizing current iµ and flux

producing current id is a first-order linear transfer function with the rotor time

constant τ2 as motor parameter:

Field Oriented Control 47

diµ

τ2 + i µ = id (2.17)

dt

Lr

τ2 = (2.18)

Rr

Comparison of (2.4) and (2.16) yields the relation of the slip frequency ωslip and the

torque producing current iq:

iq

ωµ = ωr + (2.19)

τ 2 iµ

Substituting (2.13) and (2.9) to (2.7), the stator voltage equations in the field-

oriented reference frame are:

d

u d = Rs id + ψ sd − ω µψ sq

dt

d

( )

= Rs id + (Ls id + L1h ird ) − ω µ Ls iq + L1h irq

dt

d (2.20)

L

( ) L

= Rs id + Ls id + L1h 1h i µ − id − ω µ Ls iq − L1h 1h iq

dt Lr L

r

L di

2

L di µ

2

L

2

= Rs id + Ls − 1h d + 1h − Ls − 1h ω µ iq

Lr dt Lr dt Lr

d

u q = Rs iq + ψ sq + ω µψ sd

dt

= Rs iq +

d

dt

( )

Ls iq + L1h irq + ω µ (Ls id + L1h ird )

d (2.21)

L L

(

= Rs iq + Ls iq − L1h 1h iq + ω µ Ls id + L1h 1h i µ − id

dt Lr Lr

)

L diq

2

L 2

L 2

= Rs iq + Ls −

1h

+ Ls − ω µ id +

1h

ω µ iµ

1h

Lr dt Lr Lr

With the leakage coefficient σ (Blondel-coefficient) and the stator time constant τ1

as motor parameter, the stator voltage equations (2.20)-(2.21) rewritten in state form

are:

did u diµ

στ 1 + id = d + στ 1ω µ iq − (1 − σ )τ 1 (2.22)

dt Rs dt

48 Chapter 2

diq uq

στ 1 + iq = − στ 1ω µ id − (1 − σ )τ 1ω µ iµ (2.23)

dt Rs

Ls

τ1 = (2.24)

Rs

L2h

σ =1− (2.25)

Ls Lr

described by two voltage equations of the stator (2.22)-(2.23), two rotor equations

(2.17)-(2.19) and a torque equation. The electromagnetic torque is produced by the

interaction of rotor flux linkages and rotor currents (or stator flux and stator current)

[Bose 97]. Considering ψrq = 0 and applying (2.12)-(2.13) to (1.125) yields:

(

Tel = p ψ rq ird − ψ rd irq = p ) L1h

Lr

L2

ψ rd iq = p 1h iµ iq

Lr

(2.26)

The torque equation (2.26) clearly shows the desired torque control property of

providing a torque proportional to the torque command current iq. A block diagram

of the induction motor model used is shown in figure 2.3. The mechanical behavior

of the drive is:

dω J dω r

Tel − Tload = J = (2.27)

dt p dt

(1-σ)τ1

1

id iµ

1/Rs στ1 1/τ2

ωslip

ua uq στ1 1/τ2

a,b

ωr

p

ub uq ωµ

d,q

στ1 ψrd

L1h

γ = ∫ωµ

1

iq pL1h

Tel ω

1/Rs στ1 1/J

Lr

Tload

(1-σ)τ1

Field Oriented Control 49

Figure 2.4 shows typical transients of an induction motor supplied by a stiff grid

calculated by a motor model according to figure 2.3. Obviously, the high torque and

current transients can overheat the motor and are not suitable considering high-

performance motion control. Subsequently, a system is required controlling the

current and electromagnetic torque. Since the current is directly associated with the

applied voltage, variable ac voltages, e.g. generated by an inverter, are required.

2000

500

[V]

1500

0

n [rpm]

ab

u

-500 1000

Load step

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 500

t [s]

100

0

50 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

i [A]

t [s]

a

0

60

-50

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 40

t [s]

50

T [Nm]

20

T [Nm]

0

el

0

el

-20

-50 -40

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 500 1000 1500 2000

t [s]

n [rpm]

Figure 2.4: Transients of a 1,5 kW induction motor (IN = 3,7A) supplied by a stiff grid (U = 400V).

Left: Line voltage uab, current ia and electromagnetic torque Tel.

Right: Motor speed n and torque-speed characteristic.

requires the information of the rotor flux position γ. Furthermore, the magnitude of

the rotor flux, represented by the magnetizing current iµ, is needed for control

purposes. As mentioned earlier, the flux identification can be implemented as

indirect or direct (measurement) method. In this chapter, as also in both industry and

all recent research, only the indirect method is used. In the case of sensorless control

schemes, the flux identification is based on estimation approaches employing

terminal quantities such as voltages and currents in a motor model to calculate the

rotor flux. Employing speed measurement, the indirect method uses the slip relation

to estimate flux position relative to the rotor. Figure 2.5 illustrates this concept and

shows how the rotor flux position can be obtained by adding the slip frequency ωslip

to the sensed rotor speed ωr. Slip frequency and magnetizing current are calculated

according to the rotor equations in the field-oriented reference frame:

50 Chapter 2

iq

ω slip = = ωµ − ωr (2.28)

τ 2 iµ

diµ

τ2 + i µ = id (2.29)

dt

Special care has to be taken at the division of the q-axis current iq by the

magnetizing current iµ: the output of the division block is set to zero if iµ is smaller

than a predetermined value (e.g. 1% of the rated value). Of course, this is only

critical at the initial start-up of the drive.

ia iα id iµ iµ

a,b,c α,β 1/τ2

id

ib iβ iq iq

α,β d,q

ωµ ωslip

1/τ2

ωr ωr

Except in the case of the minimum loss control, the basic control strategy is to

operate the induction machine with constant (rated) flux, represented by the

magnetizing current iµ,R, up to the base speed ωb and at a nearly fixed terminal

voltage above the base speed. The variation of the magnetizing current reference

required to implement this strategy is shown in figure 2.6.

Tel,max = const

i*µ iµ,R

iµ,R Pel,max = const

Tel,max ~ 1/ω

ωr 1 for : ω r ≤ ω b i*µ

ω b for : ω r ≥ ω b

ω

r

-ωmax -ωb ωb ωmax ω

current and thus constant. The operation at constant terminal voltage beyond the

base speed is carried out by reducing the flux reference inversely proportional to the

Field Oriented Control 51

motor speed. In literature, the flux reference value is sometimes fixed to the

reference speed. This is an unsuitable choice since the reference speed may change

directly while the real speed changes much slower: Braking down the motor from a

high speed range to zero may result in a return of the rated flux while the motor

speed is still in the flux weakening range. The inverse applies at acceleration into the

flux weakening range. Thus, the flux reference should be linked to the real motor

speed.

the flux to meet different operating requirements. Flux weakening in the high-speed

range, providing constant power mode as in figure 2.6, is widely known [Bose 97].

Less appreciated is the ability to operate above the rated flux at low speed to

enhance the torque per amp and thus better use the available power supply current

[Lor 90]. This is feasible since the iron losses are negligible at low motor speed.

Thus, operating at a higher saturated level is acceptable and desirable if the torque

per amp relation, accounting for the major portion of losses in low speed operation,

is improved.

In steady state, the d-axis current id equals the magnetizing current iµ and the rms

stator current irms is:

id2 + iq2

irms = (2.30)

3

electromagnetic torque is achieved when the current limit is distributed equally

among magnetizing current iµ and maximum allowed torque producing current iq.

The approach can be further refined by flux optimization. At partial load, the flux

can be reduced in order to increase efficiency of the drive. Of course, the dynamic

performance is reduced simultaneously since the field must return to its rated value,

which is governed by the d-axis current via the relative large rotor time constant,

before maximum electromagnetic torque again can be generated by the motor. This

special control approach is implemented in real-time by using the output of the

speed controller, determining the torque reference, as reference for both q- and d-

axis current. Note that the flux reference must be positive, which can be achieved by

neglecting the sign of the reference. The experimental results of such an approach

are presented in figure 2.7 showing the response of an induction motor drive with

flux optimization (FL-O) and constant flux control at steps of speed and load torque,

respectively.

Figure 2.7 clearly exhibits the reduced dynamic performance during speed or load

steps. However, the enhanced torque per amp relation leads to a higher possible

acceleration of the induction motor. In any case, the efficiency is vastly increased

during partial load. Contrary to the assertions in literature, e.g. [Bose 97], [Van 98],

[Vas 92], this feature makes the induction motor superior compared to the PMSM in

52 Chapter 2

a wide operation range when efficiency is considered. This is especially true in the

range where iron losses are dominant. However, the choice of a suitable flux control

strategy depends on the respective application. In recent drive systems, it can be

switched over easily and in real-time to different flux control strategies.

800

|U| [V]

n [rpm]

600

FL-O 100

400

50

200

0 0

0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1

t [s] t [s]

FL-O iµ = const

ua, ub, uc [V]

100 100

0 0

-100 -100

0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1

t [s] t [s]

Figure 2.7: Response of FOC with flux optimization and constant flux control at steps of speed and load

torque, respectively. Top: Speed and applied voltage. Bottom: Applied (fundamental) phase voltages.

According to (2.29), the magnetizing current follows the d-axis current id via the

rotor time constant τ2. Thus, the rotor flux can be adjusted by simply setting the d-

axis current equal to the reference of the flux-proportional magnetizing current.

However, a control loop is required to achieve high-dynamic flux control as required

for advanced flux optimization schemes. The realization of the discrete flux

controller for real-time applications, considering the delay of the d-axis current

control loop, is shown in figure 2.8.

Induction

motor

iµ* id* 1 id

*

Ψr 1/L1h Kµ Ts /τµ

1 + sτ eq

Flux iµ |i*d| < Imax |i*d| < Imax

reference

-1

z iµ 1

τ2 s +1

Digital flux control Integrator with anti-windup

Figure 2.8: Digital flux control with equivalent current control loop and current anti-windup.

Field Oriented Control 53

Simplifying the current control loop by a first order system with an equivalent time

constant τeq,

id 1

= (2.31)

id* 1 + s τ eq

τµ s +1 1 1

G0 = K µ (2.32)

τ µ s τ 2 s + 1 τ eq s + 1

Within such systems, the time constant τµ of the PI controller is usually chosen equal

to the largest time constant in the loop [Mayr 91]:

τµ = τ2 (2.33)

iµ 1

= (2.34)

*

iµ τ µ τ eq τµ

s2 + s +1

Kµ Kµ

The damping factor ζ of the closed-loop transfer function can be adjusted by the

controller gain Kµ. Considering second order systems as given by (2.34), the

optimum value of the damping factor [Mayr 91] and resulting closed-loop gain are:

1

ς= (2.35)

2

τµ

⇒ Kµ = (2.36)

2τ eq

iµ 1

⇒ = (2.37)

iµ* 2τ eq2 s 2 + 2τ eq s + 1

Figure 2.9 presents an exemplary start-up and the response of the flux control loop

of a 1,5 kW induction motor drive using FOC. At start-up, the d-axis current id

generates a magnetic field in the rotor windings, represented by the magnetizing

current iµ. According to figure 2.8, the d-axis current is limited to the maximum

allowed motor current and the magnetizing current follows the d-axis current with

the time constant τ2. After reaching the flux reference, the applied stator currents are

dc values. Obviously, they induce no rotor current, but the generated field linked to

54 Chapter 2

the rotor windings is not zero. At time t = 0,4s, a load step is applied. In spite of a

reference speed n* = 0, the frequency of the applied stator current is not zero, but

equal to the slip frequency. Since the stator current frequency is not zero, they

induce current in the still-standing rotor windings compensating the load torque.

6 6

4

id 4

i [A]

i [A]

2

q

µ

2

0

Load step

iµ

0 -2

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

t [s] t [s]

6 20

ia ib ic

3 0

n [rpm]

i [A]

0 -20

s

-3 -40

-6 -60

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

t [s] t [s]

Figure 2.9: Flux control loop, start-up of a 1,5 kW induction motor drive using FOC and response to a

load step (80% rated toque) with reference speed n* = 0. Top: Magnetizing current iµ, flux producing

current id, and torque producing current iq. Bottom: Applied stator current and motor speed.

Field Oriented Control 55

The stator windings of permanent magnet synchronous motors are almost equally

arranged as the stator windings of induction machines. However, similar to the

skewed rotor bars of squirrel cage induction machines, the stator slots are often

skewed to avoid (very high) torque ripples due to slot-reluctance torque. Figure 2.10

shows the stator and rotor layout of a 3 kW prototype-PMSM with nearly sinusoidal

back-EMF [Hen 98]. This motor type, referred to as a surface-inset PMSM [Seb 87],

combines some advantages of both surface mounted and interior permanent magnet

motors. From the rotor geometry, it can be seen that the direct axis inductance Ld is

smaller than the quadrature axis inductance Lq. As will be shown, this results in an

additional reluctance torque and allows for maximum torque-per-amp control and an

extended flux weakening range [Jah 86].

d-axis

B [T]

1.95

q-axis 1.83

1.71

c b 1.59

c b

-a a 1.46

b b 1.34

c a

c a 1.22

1.10

0.98

0.86

0.73

0.61

magnets 0.49

0.37

0.24

0.12

0.00

Figure 2.10: Stator and rotor geometry (flux plot) of a 6-pole prototype inset PMSM with the d-axis

aligned with the field direction of the permanent magnets.

Permanent magnet synchronous motors are usually modeled in the rotor reference

frame, i.e. Park’s d-q model. The angle of the transformation from the stator to rotor

reference frame coincides with the center position of the surface magnet as the

permanent magnet flux linkage lies entirely in the d-axis (figure 2.10). As seen from

the rotating rotor, the magnetic path is constant and not longer rotor-geometry

dependent. Thus, modeling the machine in a synchronously rotating reference frame,

the inductances are no longer functions of rotor position. Mathematical models

describing the PMSM motor dynamics in a rotor flux reference frame are well

known [Jah 86], [Hen 92]. The model of the PMSM can also be easily derived from

the equations of the squirrel-cage induction motor (2.22)-(2.23) by neglecting the

rotor equations and considering the flux rotating at the synchronous motor speed ωr.

A possible asymmetry of the rotor geometry is described by Ld and Ld representing

constant inductances of respective directions. Applying the expression of the stator

56 Chapter 2

flux linkages (1.148)-(1.149) to stator voltage equation in the rotor fixed reference

frame (1.93), the voltage equations of the PMSM are:

d 3

u sdr = Rs isdr + Ld isdr + ψ r − ω r Lq isqr (2.38)

dt 2

d

u sqr = Rs isqr + ( Lq isqr ) + ω r Ld isdr + 3 ψ r (2.39)

dt 2

The rotor flux linkage in terms of the original rotor field ψr is active only in the d-

axis. Due to the power invariant transformation to the α/β system, the factor

3 / 2 has to be introduced in the calculation of the flux. The flux generated by the

permanent magnets is assumed to be constant. Thus, the time-derivation is zero.

In the case of synchronous machines, the rotor reference frame is equal to the

synchronous reference frame and the rotor voltage equation vanishes. Subsequently,

the superscripts and the subscripts representing stator values are dropped. Defining

the magnet flux linkage ΨMd in the reference frame used proportional to the original

flux linkage of the permanent magnets ψr = ΨM,

3

ΨMd = ΨM , (2.40)

2

the PMSM without rotor damper cage is generally described by following equations:

did

u d = R s i d + Ld − ω r Lq i q (2.41)

dt

diq

u q = Rs iq + Lq + ω r Ld id + ω r ΨMd (2.42)

dt

With the time constants τd and τq, equations (2.41)-(2.42) can be rewritten in a state

form as required by the current control:

Ld

τd = (2.43)

Rs

Lq

τq = (2.44)

Rs

Field Oriented Control 57

did u

τd + id = d + ω r τ q iq (2.45)

dt Rs

diq uq ΨMd

τq + iq = − ω r τ d id − ω r (2.46)

dt Rs Rs

of the stator (2.41)-(2.42) and a torque equation. The electromagnetic torque is

produced by the interaction of stator flux linkages and stator currents (or rotor flux

and rotor current). Applying the expression of the stator flux linkages (1.148)-

(1.149) to the torque equation (1.126) yields:

Tel = p (isq, ψ sd, − isd, ψ sq, ) = p iq Ld id + 3 ψ r − id Lq iq

2

(2.47)

3

= p iq ψ − ( Lq − Ld ) id

2 r

[

⇒ Tel = p iq ΨMd − Lq − Ld id ( ) ] (2.48)

The model of the PMSM used (figure 2.11) neglects rotor damping and iron losses.

However, it can be adapted taking stator iron losses into account [Hon80],

[Mel 91b].

1

id

1/Rs τd Lq-Ld ΨMd

ua uq τq

a,b

ωr

p

ub uq

d,q

τd

γ = ∫ ωr

1

iq Tel ω

1/Rs τq p 1/J

Tload

1/Rs

In a PMSM with surface-mounted magnets (Ld = Lq), torque control can be achieved

very simply, since the instantaneous electromagnetic torque can be expressed

similarly to that of the dc machine as product of the q-axis current iq and magnet

58 Chapter 2

flux ΨMd. In the case of interior permanent magnets (Ld ≠ Lq), an additional

reluctance torque can be exploited. Of course, the mechanical behavior of the

PMSM is identical to the mechanical behavior of the induction machine:

dω J dω r

Tel − Tload = J = (2.49)

dt p dt

In contrast to the induction motor control, the rotor flux reference frame (with

transformation angle γ) is fixed to the mechanical rotor position. Employing an

incremental encoder for speed/position measurement, the magnet position is

indicated by an index pulse resetting all registers and guarantying the correct

transformation to the d/q plane. However, the rotor must first rotate (up to one

revolution) to find this index pulse. Therefore, a special start-up strategy is required

[Ter 02]. As implemented by recent sensorless control approaches, the magnet

direction can be detected also by an observer exploiting a possible rotor asymmetry.

the magnets), there is no need to create one. Hence, when controlling a PMSM, id*

can be set zero. However, advanced control schemes may additionally exploit the

reluctance torque, if available (Ld ≠ Lq). Furthermore, high-speed operation of the

PMSM is constrained by the back-EMF due to a maximum inverter output voltage.

However, the possible speed range can be expanded by flux weakening adding a

negative d-axis current to counteract the positive magnet flux. The calculation of

suitable d-axis current command values id* is described in the next two paragraphs.

The electromagnetic torque of the PMSM is controlled by the amplitudes and phase

angles of the stator currents with respect to the rotor magnet orientation.

Instantaneous torque control is conveniently achieved by controlling the q-axis

current iq and setting the d-axis current id to zero [Jah 86]. Both current components

are dc quantities under steady-state conditions. However, the optimal control of a

PMSM with Ld ≠ Lq takes advantage of the reluctance torque by introducing a

suitable direct axis current component id. This results in a maximum torque-per-amp

trajectory. According to the torque equation,

[ ( ) ]

Tel = p iq ΨMd − Lq − Ld id (2.50)

the d-axis current id must be positive if Ld > Lq. However, a positive current

increases the field, responsible for the iron losses, and it is therefore not obvious,

that the efficiency increases simultaneously. Here, only Ld ≤ Lq, typical for PMSM

with magnet placing of the inset-type (Ld < Lq) or surface-mounted type (Ld = Lq), is

considered. With Ld < Lq, a positive contribution of the reluctance torque is achieved

Field Oriented Control 59

components, (2.54) yields a maximum torque-per-amp trajectory in the id - iq plane

(figure 2.12), almost equivalent to the maximum drive efficiency [Jah 87], [Mor 90],

[Van 98]. The optimum operation points, corresponding to maximum

electromagnetic torque Tel for a given stator current value is, are obtained by

substituting (2.51) in (2.50) and setting the derivative dTel/did zero:

d d

(Ψ ( ) )

!

Tel = p is2 − id2 − Lq − Ld id = 0 (2.52)

did

Md

did

ΨMd − ΨMd

2

+ 8 ( Lq − Ld ) 2 is2

⇒ id = (2.53)

4 ( Lq − Ld )

ΨMd

⇒ iq2 = id2 − id (2.54)

Lq − Ld

Figure 2.12 highlights the differences of the torque producing mechanism. At one

design extreme, the reluctance term naturally disappears in a non-salient surface

mounted PMSM (Ld = Lq). Torque-per-amp in the non-salient PMSM is maximized

by setting id zero in all operation points.

Tel3

max T/A trajectory iq max T/A trajectory iq

Tel3

i3 Tel2

Tel2 i3

i2 i2

Tel1 Tel1

i1 i1

ΨMd ΨMd

id id

-i1 -T el1 -i1

-T el1

-i2 -T el2 -i2

-i3

-i3 -Tel3 -T el2

-T el3

Figure 2.12: Trajectories of stator current phasors in the d/q reference frame for maximum torque-per-

amp control. Left: Non-salient pole with Ld = Lq. Right: Salient pole with Ld < Lq.

The implementation of the optimum torque control is shown in figure (1.139). Note

that the torque is no longer proportional to the stator current amplitude in the

presence of reluctance torque. Due to lack of a closed algebraic expression, the

torque command Tel* is mapped into a current command i*s via a look-up table,

predetermined from the known motor parameters. In speed control mode, the current

value i*s is usually approximated by:

60 Chapter 2

Tel*

is* ≈ (2.55)

pΨMd

Look-up

Eq. (2.49)

table

i*q

2 2

iS* − id*

sign(Tel*)

integral-acting part of the speed controller. A modification of the torque-current

mapping, avoiding the look-up table, is presented in figure 2.14. The introduced

approach uses the instantaneous d-axis current quantity and motor parameter

variations are compensated by real-time flux adaptation.

Tel*

i*q

ΨMd p

x1

Motor parameter i*d

x2 x12 + x22

id

Lq-Ld 2

Motor parameter

Torque-current mapping

Figure (3.31) presents the optimum torque control at a step of the speed reference

from standstill to 1000 rpm using a 3 kW PMSM. The torque command T*el,

calculated by an overlaid speed controller, is mapped into current references

according to figure 2.14. As illustrated, the optimal control of the motor takes

advantage of the reluctance torque by introducing a negative (Ld < Lq) direct axis

current component. The corresponding speed signal is shown in same figure below,

marked optimum torque control. In the same figure, a comparison is given of motor

control with optimum d-axis current and no d-axis current, respectively. In spite of

identical maximum current amplitude, the maximum torque using optimum torque

control is higher, yielding a faster acceleration of the motor.

Field Oriented Control 61

20 5

15

0

i [A]

i [A]

10

d

q

-5

5

0

-10

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

t [s] t [s]

1200

1000

800

n [rpm]

600

nref id = 0

400

Optimum torque

200

control

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

t [s]

Figure 2.15: Comparison of torque control with optimum d-axis current and no d-axis current at a step of

the speed reference using a 3 kW PMSM with Ld ≤ Lq. Top: Optimal distribution of d- and q-axis current.

Bottom: Speed response with and without optimum torque control.

Since the maximum inverter output voltage is limited, a speed controlled ac motor

cannot operate in speed-regions where the back-EMF, almost proportional to the

field and the motor speed, is higher than the maximum output voltage of the

inverter. Thus, the field must be decreased to enable higher motor speed. However,

flux weakening for PMSM is not as straightforward as in the case of induction motor

drives.

The maximum fundamental motor voltage is limited by the power electronic inverter

due to the limited dc bus voltage Udc. Furthermore, the maximum fundamental

motor voltage depends on the PWM method used. Using space vector modulation,

the maximum fundamental output voltage without over-modulation is, according to

the later described relation (2.87)-(2.88), defined by:

2 2 3 ˆ* 1

u d* + u q* = U phase ≤ U dc (2.56)

2 2

This implies that for a given rotor speed, the current state phasor must lie within a

corresponding boundary. When stator resistance is neglected, these limiting curves

are ellipses decreasing in size when rotor speed increases [Jah 86].

2 2 2

1 U dc

≥ iq2 + Ld

Ψ

id + Md (2.57)

2 ω r Lq

Lq

Ld

62 Chapter 2

Consequently, rated torque cannot be maintained above the speed at which the

voltage limit ellipse intersects with the maximum torque-per-amp trajectory. This

speed is usually the base speed of the PMSM.

1 U dc (2.58)

ω rb =

2 2 2

L Ψ

2

Lq iqN + d i dN + Md

Lq Ld

Reducing the current along with the maximum torque-per-ampere trajectory above

base speed, results in a fast decrease of output torque. Alternatively, the operating

point can be forced to leave the maximum torque-per-amp trajectory resulting in

further flux weakening at maximum current (figure 2.16). The high-speed operating

region is considerably extended using the flux-weakening algorithm. The maximum

speed is reached when all stator current is in the direct axis and is:

1 U dc

ωr3 = (2.59)

2 ΨMd

Ld − 3 I N +

Ld

Note that the presentation (2.57)-(2.59) differs from the equations in [Jah 86] and

[Van 98]. They assume sinusoidal PWM and allow strong over-modulation. In fact,

pure six-step block modulation is applied over the whole flux weakening range. In

real-time implementations, this results in high current harmonics, significant motor

losses and acoustic noise and may lead to instabilities.

ΨMd

= 3I N (2.60)

Ld

Introducing the voltage limited maximum power curve, without regarding the

current limit [Mor 90], the current can be reduced at very high speeds when:

ΨMd

< 3I N (2.61)

Ld

In this case, the control trajectory yielding maximum output at all speeds is indicated

in figure 2.16 on the right.

Field Oriented Control 63

iq Tel3

max. T/A trajectory

Pmax-trajectory T/Amax-trajectory iq

ωr1=ωrb Tel2

ωr2

Tel1 ωrb

ωr3 imax imax

ωr2

id ωr3 id

−ΨMd/Ld −ΨMd/Ld

Figure 2.16: Constant torque hyperbolas, maximum torque-per-amp trajectory, current limit circle,

voltage limit ellipses and optimum current trajectory. Left: ΨMd/Ld > imax. Right: ΨMd/Ld < imax.

Suitable algorithms calculating reference values for the d-axis current in the flux

weakening range are described in literature, e.g. [Bose 97], [Jah 87], [Mor 90],

[Van 98]. However, the algorithms presented, are based on pre-calculations

postulating a constant dc bus voltage Udc.

Frequently, the dc bus voltage is not constant but variable over a wide range. Then,

an alternative approach is required to allow flux weakening. An automatic flux

adaptation scheme may be based on following approach: The flux is automatically

reduced by the d-axis current, whenever the dc bus voltage is too low to reach the

reference speed. A stop criterion of the flux reduction, i.e. the reduction of the d-axis

current, is given, when the q-axis current reaches its maximum allowed value. The

proposed algorithm can be easily implemented using the anti-windup system of the

current controller described in paragraph 2.6.3.

64 Chapter 2

Torque control, constituting the most important motor basic control function, maps

very directly into current control because of the close association between current

and torque generation in any PMSM and induction motor drive. According to the

basic FOC-scheme (figure 2.1), the current controller calculates the reference

voltages used as input of a voltage source inverter. As will be shown, current control

of PMSM and induction motor drives is very similar. The presented controller

design is based on the voltage equations in the rotor flux reference frame.

literature, e.g. [Bose 97], [Hen 92], [Leo 85], is usually based on the stator voltage

equation (2.22)-(2.23) neglecting a change of the magnetizing current. In many

applications, e.g. using flux weakening and flux optimization, the rotor flux is varied

very quickly and over a wide range. Therefore, the stator voltage equations are

rewritten in a slightly different form. Substitutions are made by applying (2.17) to

(2.22) and (2.19) to (2.23), respectively. As will be shown, this approach eliminates

the flux derivative, increases the performance of the decoupling network and

decreases the dominant time constant in the stator voltage equations:

στ 1 did ud στ (1 − σ )τ 1

+ id = + 1 ω µ iq + iµ (2.62)

K r dt K r Rs K r Kr τ 2

στ 1 diq uq στ 1 (1 − σ )τ 1

+ iq = − ω µ id − ω r iµ (2.63)

K r dt K r Rs Kr Kr

with:

(1 − σ )τ 1

K r = 1 + >1 (2.64)

τ 2

control loop much faster than a change of the rotor speed and rotor field, decoupling

of the two current controllers can be achieved by adding voltages ∆ud and ∆uq at the

output of the current controller compensating the cross coupling within the motor:

στ 1 did ud ∆u d

+ id = − (2.65)

K r dt K r Rs K r Rs

Field Oriented Control 65

στ 1 diq uq ∆u q

+ iq = − (2.66)

K r dt K r Rs K r Rs

with:

L12h

∆u d = −σLs ω µ iq − i (2.67)

τ 2 Lr µ

L12h

∆u q = σLs ω µ id + ω r iµ (2.68)

Lr

The structure of the decoupled current control loop is shown in figure 2.17. The

realization of the discrete current controller for real-time applications considering

voltage limitation is shown in figure 2.22.

id* ud* 1 ud 1 1 id

K r Rs στ 1 +

τσ s + 1 s 1

id Kr

PI-controller

∆ud

L2h

Lrτ 2

iµ ωµ Inverter Induction

σLs model motor model

ωr

L2h

iq Lr

∆uq

iq* uq* 1 uq 1 1 iq

K r Rs στ 1 +

τσ s + 1 s 1

Kr

PI-controller

Figure 2.17: Current control and decoupling for the FOC of induction motor drives.

The decoupled current control loop contains a dominant time constant and a time

constant τσ. The latter is the sum of equivalent time constants representing

measurement filter τfilt and time required for the conversion of the reference voltage

to the inverter output voltage, which is mainly depending on sample time Ts and

PWM frequency fPWM = 1/TPWM:

the open-loop current transfer function of both d-axis and q-axis is:

66 Chapter 2

τ i s +1 1 1 1

G0 = K i (2.70)

τ i s K r Rs στ 1 s + 1 τ σ s + 1

Kr

id* ud* 1 ud 1 1 id

K r Rs στ 1 +

τσ s + 1 s 1

Kr

id PI-controller

∆ud ∆ud

Inverter Induction

model motor model

∆uq ∆uq

iq

iq* uq* 1 uq 1 1 iq

K r Rs στ 1 +

τσ s + 1 s 1

Kr

PI-controller

The time constant τi of the PI controller within such systems is optimally chosen to

neutralize the largest time constant in the loop:

στ 1

τi = (2.71)

Kr

id ,q Ki 1

= (2.72)

id* ,q K r Rsτ iτ σ Ki

s

s +2

+

τ σ K r Rsτ iτ σ

Equation (2.72) describes a second order system. The damping factor ζ of the

transfer function can be adjusted by the controller gain Ki. Optimum value of

damping factor and resulting closed-loop gain are [Mayr 91]:

1

ς= (2.73)

2

K r Rsτ i

⇒ Ki = (2.74)

2τ σ

Field Oriented Control 67

For control purpose of overlaid control loops, e.g. the speed or flux control loop, the

closed-loop transfer function (2.72), employing the calculated controller gain Ki

given in (2.74), is often simplified by a first order system with an equivalent time

constant τeq:

id ,q 1 1

= ≈ (2.75)

id* ,q 2τ σ2 s 2 + 2τ σ s + 1 τ eq s + 1

with:

τ eq = 2 τ σ (2.76)

Figure 2.19 shows a typical step response of both d-and q-axis current using a

1,5 kW induction motor. Additionally, the current control loop simplified by a first

order system with the equivalent time constant (τeq ≈ 1ms) according to (2.76) is

drawn in the same figure. As indicated by the current signals marked every sample

time-step (Ts = 200µs), only a few samples are required to reach the current

reference.

i*q

4 iq

i [A]

iq,eq

q

0

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01

t [s]

4

i*d

3

id

i [A]

2

id,eq

d

0

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01

t [s]

Figure 2.19: Step response of the current control loop and equivalent time constant (τeq ≈ 1ms).

The current control of the PMSM is based on the stator equations (2.45)-(2.46) in a

rotor flux reference frame employing PI-controllers and a decoupling network

according to figure (1.71):

68 Chapter 2

did u ∆u

τd + id = d − d (2.77)

dt Rs Rs

diq uq ∆u q

τq + iq = − (2.78)

dt Rs Rs

with:

∆u d = −ω r Lq iq (2.79)

∆u q = ω r Ld id + ω r ΨMd (2.80)

equations valid for the induction motor (2.65)-(2.66), the current control loop and

the parameters of the PI controllers are obtained in the same way. The calculation

method is explained in detail in the previous paragraph. Considering a possible rotor

asymmetry, the different parameters of d-axis and q-axis current controller are:

τ i ,d = τ d (2.81)

Rsτ d

K i ,d = (2.82)

2τ σ

τ i ,q = τ q (2.83)

Rsτ q

K i ,q = (2.84)

2τ σ

id* ud* 1 ud 1 1 id

τσ s + 1 Rs τ d s + 1

id

PI-controller

∆ud

Ld

ωr Inverter PMSM

model model

-Lq

ΨMd

iq ∆uq

iq* uq* 1 uq 1 1 iq

τσ s + 1 Rs τ q s + 1

PI-controller

Figure 2.20: Current control and decoupling for the FOC of PMSM.

Field Oriented Control 69

The resulting closed-loop transfer function and its first order equivalent are equal to

the transfer functions of the induction motor:

id ,q 1 1

= ≈ (2.85)

id* ,q 2τ σ2 s 2 + 2τ σ s + 1 τ eq s + 1

with:

τ eq = 2 τ σ (2.86)

This property reflects the ambivalence of the FOC and the large influence of delays

within the current control loop as e.g.: measurement filter, sample time, PWM

frequency and signal lag in data transmission.

Anti-windup systems for the speed control loop, providing current and torque

limitation of the inner control loops without overrun of the integrator within the

overlaid speed controller, are widely known in literature [Bose 97], [Van 98]. Less

appreciated is an anti-windup system within the current controller since the

maximum voltage is limited by the power inverter itself. Furthermore, the maximum

output voltage can be controlled by the earlier mentioned flux weakening and flux

optimization techniques. However, a variable dc bus voltage or (involuntary) voltage

drops of the power supply may result in instabilities without such a system.

Especially the integrator of the q-axis current control loop will overrun when the

system experiences voltage limitation by the inverter. Then, the supplied voltage is

insufficient to maintain the q-axis current and the motor will accelerate uncontrolled

if the load decreases or the dc bus voltage returns to higher values. This is obviously

since the over-saturated integrator value must be decreased first before a suitable

voltage, maintaining the q-axis current, can be applied.

Compared to the speed control loop, the anti-windup of the current control loop is

more complicated due to the interaction of the two current controllers. Furthermore,

the voltage limitation is physically located outside of the digital motion control.

terminates when the reference voltage phasor Uref in the α/β reference frame touches

the hexagon (figure 2.21), opened up by the six active switching state vectors.

Control in the intermediate range, limited by the outer circle around the hexagon,

can be achieved by over-modulation.

70 Chapter 2

Uβ

Outer

u3 u2

circle

Uref

u4 u1

Uα

Inner

circle

Over-

modulation

u5 u6

Figure 2.21: Hexagon formed by the basic space phasors and over-modulation range.

Since the maximum output voltage is limited by the inverter, also the reference

voltages should be limited to achieve anti-windup of the current controller. This

limit depends on the dc bus voltage Udc and the acceptable range of over-modulation

indicated by the factor Kc:

2 2 3 ˆ*

u d* + u q* = U phase ≤ K c U dc (2.87)

2

Suitable values for Kc are given by the inner and outer circle around the hexagon

shown in figure 2.21. A geometrical calculation yields:

1 2

≤ Kc ≤ (2.88)

2 3

in a much lower maximum fundamental output voltage of the inverter.

results in a firmly increased spectrum of lower current harmonics especially of the

5th, 7th and 11th harmonics. A limitation to the inner circle rejects over-modulation

but the maximum fundamental output voltage is then 15% lower. Usually, a

compromise between current harmonics and voltage exploitation is made (e.g.:

Kc = 0,75) and a limiting factor is chosen according to the given application,

respectively.

The entire current control loop with anti-windup of the reference voltage can be

considered as a master-slave system. The controller is always forced to maintain the

flux at the reference value. The d-axis voltage, controlling the flux of the motor, is

not limited, since the back-EMF of the motor is predominantly active in the q-axis.

Thus, an anti-windup system is only necessary in the q-axis of the current control

Field Oriented Control 71

loop. In contrast to the speed control loop, the maximum allowed value of the q-axis

voltage is not constant but depends on the momentary d-axis voltage as well as on

the dc bus voltage level. Figure 2.22 presents the real-time implementation of the

entire current control loop with a variable limit of the q-axis voltage. The proposed

control scheme is valid for both PMSM and induction motor drives.

Reaching the voltage limit yields a forced reduction of the q-axis current.

Consequently, the speed cannot reach the reference value. In order to return to a

regular operating mode, an adaptation of the flux must be applied. Suitable

(predetermined) adaptation schemes are flux weakening and flux optimization.

Figure 2.23 illustrates the different operating conditions of an induction motor drive

during voltage limitation, flux weakening and flux optimization.

In the beginning of the experiment shown in figure 2.23, flux weakening is disabled

and the speed cannot reach the reference value due to the limited maximum output

voltage. However, the implemented anti-windup system guarantees stable operation.

Flux weakening at t = 0,55 s reduces the required motor voltage and the drive

returns to a regular operation mode. Finally at t = 1,2 s, the system switches in flux

optimization mode, increasing the efficiency of the drive. Among these

predetermined approaches, an automatic flux adaptation scheme is possible. The

flux may be automatically reduced by the d-axis current, whenever the dc bus

voltage is too low to reach the reference speed. However, if the load exceeds the

maximum possible electromagnetic torque, which can be generated at the reduced

flux, the reference speed cannot be reached. Thus, a stop criterion of the flux

reduction is given, when the q-axis current reaches its maximum allowed value.

Then, an expert must decide either to increase the dc bus voltage or to reduce the

load in order to reach the speed reference.

∆ud

id* u*d

Kd Ts / τ d

-1

id z

u*d

Udc uc u c2 − u d*

2

Kc

∆uq

u1 sign(u2)

u*q

u1 > |u2|

iq* u2

Kq Ts / τ q

-1

iq z

Figure 2.22: Current control loop with voltage limitation (variable anti-windup system).

72 Chapter 2

2000

n [rpm]

1000

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

t [s]

i [A]

2

µ

t [s]

300

| [V ]

200

Voltage limit

ref

100

|U

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

t [s]

Figure 2.23: Experimental results during current control with voltage limit, flux weakening and flux

optimization of an induction motor (Udc ≈ 400 V). Top: Speed reference and motor speed. Middle:

Magnetizing current. Bottom: Amplitude of the reference voltage in the α/β reference frame.

Field Oriented Control 73

The motion control algorithms are based on the assumption of nearly ideal

electromagnetic torque control. This assumes ideal field orientation and a current

controller with bandwidth considerably beyond required motion control bandwidth.

The speed control output feeds a cascaded current regulated field oriented drive,

creating electromagnetic torque of the motor. In speed control mode, the torque

reference is calculated by the speed controller. This reference can be easily mapped

into a current command by (2.26) and (2.48) for induction motor and PMSM (see

also figure 2.14), respectively.

The easiest controller type is a proportional gain Kn converting the speed error in a

torque reference value Tel*. This structure is shown in figure 2.24. Keeping torque

and current within predetermined boundaries is achieved by limiting the output of

the speed controller.

Tload

* e Tel* 1 Tel

ω Kn

1 + sτ eq

Speed ω |Tel|<Tmax

reference

ω 1

Js

Digital motion control ac motor

The mechanical property of both PMSM and induction motor drive is:

dω J dω r

Tel − Tload = J = (2.89)

dt p dt

Due to the linear relation between torque and q-axis current, the time constant τeq of

the torque and current control loop are identical. According to (2.85), the transfer

function of the electromagnetic torque is:

Tel iq 1

= * = (2.90)

Tel iq 1 + s τ eq

*

function of the speed is easily obtained by multiplying the open-loop transfer

functions in figure 2.24 with the speed error e:

74 Chapter 2

ω = e Kn

1 1

1 + s τ eq Js

( )

= ω* − ω Kn

1 1

1 + s τ eq Js

(2.91)

1 1

Kn

ω 1 + s τ eq Js 1

⇒ * = = (2.92)

ω 1 1 J τ eq 2 J

1 + Kn s + s +1

1 + s τ eq Js Kn Kn

ω Kn 1 ω 02

⇒ = = (2.93)

ω * J τ eq s 2 + s + K n s 2 + 2 ς ω 0 s + ω 02

τ eq J τ eq

Equation (2.93) describes a simple second order system. The damping ζ of the

transfer function can be adjusted by the controller gain Kn. Optimal values of

damping and resulting closed-loop gain are [Mayr 91]:

1

ς= (2.94)

2

1 J

⇒ Kn = (2.95)

2 τ eq

Note: If the control loop (figure 2.24) is based on speed signals in rpm-unit, the

controller Kn gain (2.95) has to be multiplied by the factor 2π/60.

Assuming a reference speed higher than the measured speed, the speed error is

positive (e > 0) and the (very fast) current/torque control loop generates a positive

electromagnetic torque Tel = Kn e > 0. Without load applied to the motor, also the

input of the integral acting part 1/(J s) in figure 2.24 is positive and the

electromagnetic torque accelerates the drive until the motor speed equals the

reference signal, i.e. the speed error disappears. The same applies for a negative

speed error. Thus, a speed controller consisting of a simple proportional is gain

sufficient if no load is applied.

However, in the presence of load Tload ≠ 0, this simple control approach yields a

steady state error. In steady state, the load torque equals the electromagnetic torque

and the input of the integral acting part 1/(J s) in figure 2.24 is zero, i.e. the motor

speed stays constant (no acceleration). According to (2.96), this simple control

Field Oriented Control 75

approach yields a steady state error proportional to the load torque and the inverse of

the loop gain:

⇒ e = ω* −ω ( ) t →∞

=

Tload

Kn

(2.97)

figure 2.25, the (estimated) load torque, compensating the real load, is added to the

output of the speed controller. This very robust control approach, requiring the exact

information on the load torque but vastly enlarging the dynamic stiffness of the

drive, is explained in detail in a subsequent chapter.

Kn iq* = f(Tel*)

L12h

ω Proportional |Tel|<Tmax Current Tel = p i µ iq

gain mapping

Lr

rejection

Tel = p iq [Ψ Md (

− Lq − Ld id ) ]

Figure 2.25: Speed control with proportional gain, load torque rejection and torque-current mapping.

Accurate information of the load torque is not always available. Then, an integrator

must be added to the speed control loop compensating for the error due to the load.

As long as the speed error is not zero, the integrator adds up the error and varies the

electromagnetic torque. Consequently, the speed error vanishes in steady state. The

discrete structure of the PI controller is shown in figure 2.26.

ω* Tel*

Kn Ts /τn

ω |Tel|<Tmax |Tel|<Tmax

-1

z

Figure 2.26: Discrete structure of the PI speed controller with a simple anti-windup system.

The PI velocity loop is the “de facto” industry standard. Suitable values concerning

controller gain Kn and time constant τn are obtained according to symmetrical

optimization [May 91]. Due to the current/torque limitation, the integrator within the

speed controller must be equipped with an anti-windup system avoiding

uncontrolled overrun of the integrator. A simple system is shown in figure 2.26

limiting the integrator value to the maximum predetermined electromagnetic torque.

More advanced anti-windup systems restrict the value of the integrator to the load

76 Chapter 2

torque, e.g. estimated by an observer, whenever the limit of the torque command is

reached. This results in a very smooth step response with almost no speed overshoot.

To improve the dynamic performance, the speed controller can be equipped with a

derivative part. However, pure PID controllers are rarely used because calculating

acceleration from a speed/position signal suffers from resolution limitations so

severe as to make it impractical: Measurement and quantization errors are vastly

amplified which may result in a strong increased spectrum of current/torque

harmonics. Thus, a PID-speed control requires a very accurate measurement device.

Alternatively, the acceleration signal calculated by an observer can be used as input

of a modified PID controller (figure 2.27). Note that PID-position control is quite

different from PID-speed control. The D term of a PID speed controller is

proportional to acceleration whereas the D term of a PID position controller is

proportional to speed. Other controller types frequently used are PDF and PI+, also

termed PDFF controller [Ell 99]. Their structures, similar to the PI controller, are

shown in figure 2.27. PI+ is a general controller including PDF and PI control (when

KF is 0 and 1, respectively). A PI controlled system is more responsive to speed

commands. However, the change in structure allows PDF to have higher integral

gains while avoiding overshoot. While KF can be set to these extremes, it can also be

set anywhere in between. A comparative study and optimizing KF are treated in

[Ell 99].

KF

αe derivative part

1 − z −1 ω* Tel*

Kd Ts / τ n Kn

Ts

z-1

ω |Tel|<Tmax ω

PI with

anti windup PDF-controller

Figure 2.27: Different speed controller types. Left: Modified PID controller.

Right: PI+ controller (PDF controller indicated by the gray box).

Fuzzy logic applications in power electronics and drives are relatively new. A

comparison of the fuzzy-controlled system performance with that of a PID control is

given in [Li 89] demonstrating the superiority of the former.

The different speed controller types (PI, PID, PI+ and PDF) have been implemented

and tested in [Ter 02]. Experimental results have shown a clear inferior performance

compared to that, which has been achieved with a simple proportional gain together

with the load torque rejection approach. Usually, speed controllers are optimized

regarding an optimum speed response. To the contrary, the proportional gain (2.95)

is optimized still regarding optimum speed response while the observer calculating

the load of the load rejection approach is optimized with respect to an optimum

disturbance rejection.

The proportional gain (2.95) clearly exhibits the only drive parameter possibly taken

into account for adaptation of Kn: a variation of the inertia J; With varying inertia,

Field Oriented Control 77

e.g. rolling mills, conveyors, winding machines, Kn can be tuned in real-time, e.g. if

the inertia is estimated by an observer. However, only an underrated inertia is

critical regarding drive stability. An overrated inertia yields no instabilities, but the

speed control loop is not optimally tuned, i.e. resulting in a slow response to change

of the speed reference.

Figure 2.28 presents a typical speed response to a step of both speed reference and

load torque using a common PI-controller and a simple proportional gain with load

torque rejection, respectively. Avoiding an integral-acting part within the speed

controller, the overshoot at steps of both speed reference and load torque vastly

decreases or even vanishes.

1500

n [rpm]

1000

Reference

500

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

t [s]

1550

Load torque rejection

n [rpm]

1500

1450

PI-controller

1400

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

t [s]

load step (90% rated torque) using a 1,5 kW induction motor drive

2.8 Conclusions

Suitable motor models are derived and different control approaches discussed within

this chapter. Squirrel-cage induction motor and PMSM are handled simultaneously

due to the similarity of the electrical and mechanical behavior. Compared to

literature, the model of the induction motor is rewritten in a slightly different form

with major consequences. This approach eliminates the flux derivative, increases the

performance of the decoupling network and decreases the dominant time constant in

the stator voltage equations. This chapter provides a clear description of the

controller design, taking care for the viability of the real-time implementation.

The basic control scheme is refined systematically adding additional features step by

step. Different flux weakening and flux optimization schemes are described. Flux-

weakening in the high-speed range, providing constant power mode is widely known

in literature. Less appreciated is the ability to operate above rated flux at low speed

to enhance the torque per amp and thus better use the available power supply

78 Chapter 2

current. The approach is further refined by flux optimization and optimum torque

control.

since the maximum voltage is limited by the power inverter itself. However, the

presented approach is essential considering the dc bus voltage variable over a wide

range. Furthermore, the proposed system is refined by an automatic flux adaptation

scheme. Different speed controller types have been implemented and tested and an

introduction in advanced speed control is given within this chapter. Experimental

results have shown a clear superior performance of a speed controller with load

torque rejection.

3. Advanced Speed Control & Speed

Measurement

3.1 Introduction

The de facto industry standard for motion control is to use a PI velocity loop and a

proportional position loop. One input of the motion controller is usually an optical

position feedback device. The optical incremental encoder together with a digital

counter interface is preferred over the less accurate resolver feedback. The encoder

produces a certain number of sine or square wave pulses for each shaft revolution.

The higher the number of pulses, the better the resolution becomes. Subsequently,

the cost of the unit increases.

velocity signal. The speed of the drive is obtained by signal processing in hardware

or software. The speed can be determined by numerical differentiation of the

position information, counting the inner clock pulse time between encoder pulses or

by applying observer based estimation approaches. However, the first approaches

are used in combination with a filter to smooth the speed signal resulting in phase

lags, while the latter method described in literature [Bose 97], [Lor 99] is motor

parameter depending and clearly sensitive to the accuracy and dynamic of the torque

estimation.

This chapter reviews former methods that have become commonplace and explains

a new approach of speed estimation. Along with the speed, also rotor position and

acceleration are estimated. The implemented algorithm is based on a linear Kalman

Filter. This approach is shown to offer a significant improvement of the drive

performance. The noise reduction is especially relevant for servo drives due to the

high current/torque loop bandwidths required for highly dynamic operation. The

proposed observer is vastly insensitive to parameter variations and avoids numerical

differentiation as well as signal lags. Furthermore, the proposed algorithm can be

implemented easily in software with a negligible requirement of computation time.

As will be shown, the entire drive performance is improved by adding acceleration

feedback. Then, the speed controller, consisting of a simple proportional gain

mapping the speed error into a torque command, is optimized with respect to an

optimum speed response. The feedback of the estimated load torque yields an

optimized system regarding disturbance sensitivity.

80 Chapter 3

The discussion extends to the design and implementation of a linear Kalman filter

for position, speed and acceleration estimation using an incremental encoder, the

implementation of an advanced speed control loop and ends by presenting

representative results simplifying a interpretation of the observer function. This

chapter can be also regarded as a smart introduction into observer theory.

Continuous and precise control of speed with long-term stability and good transient

performance is an important feature of machine control. The speed resolution of

feedback devices is the most important property, since erroneous speed-signals are

directly reflected in torque ripples through the speed controller mapping the speed

error into a torque command.

which has the advantages of small size, simple connections and good linearity. In

fact, the tachogenerator is usually a dc motor separately exited by permanent

magnets. Since the resistive voltage drop is negligible when connected to a highly

resistive measurement device, the output voltage is equal to the back-EMF and

proportional to the rotor speed. The common analog tachometer is the only feedback

device providing directly a speed signal. All other devices are in fact position

measurement devices indirectly providing velocity information. The analog

tachometer has no specific limit of speed resolution and owns still a superior

performance in ultra-low-speed applications. However, its mechanical commutator

is often undesired because of the regular maintenance required. Mechanical

tachogenerator normally use silver-graphite brushes for commutation.

Approximately, they have quoted life time of 109 revolutions in industrial

conditions, equivalent to 347 days long-term function with a motor running on

average at n = 2000rpm. When interruptions of the operating cannot be tolerated or

when the transducer is used in inaccessible locations, constant maintenance is

difficult.

construction providing reliable maintenance-free operation at a wide speed range.

Because the resolver is an absolute position device, it intrinsically provides velocity

information. A resolver is, in principle, a rotating transformer fed with a high

frequency voltage ue (figure 3.1).

The resolver is an absolute position feedback device, even able to determine directly

the position after a power supply interruption. Within each electrical cycle, the

voltages ua1 and ua2 maintain a constant (fixed) relationship determining the absolute

rotor position Θ. The excitation voltage ue may be coupled to the rotating winding

by slip rings and brushes, though this arrangement is a drawback. In maintenance-

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 81

free applications, a brushless resolver may be used so that the excitation voltage is

inductively coupled to the rotor windings.

Rotor:

ue Θ = ∫ω dt u e = u 0 sin( 2πf e )

u a 2 ~ u e sin Θ u a1 ~ u e cos Θ

Stator:

ua2

sin Θ u

Θ = arctan = arctan a1

cos Θ ua 2

ua1

devices (resolution: 1,5-5mrad). Presently, resolvers are largely replaced by less

expensive incremental encoders providing equal or even better accuracy. For highly

accurate applications, sine encoders, similar to incremental encoders with sine-wave

interpolation (e.g. interpolation factor 256), are used.

The basic operation principle of incremental optical encoder has changed little over

the past 50 years. Conventional incremental encoders consist of a light source, a

stationary mask with a spoke pattern of clear slots that shutters the light through an

identical pattern on a rotating disc, a photoelectric diode on the side of the disc

opposite to the light source and a signal processor. As the disc rotates, light either

passes through one of the slots or it falls between two slots and is blocked. The

flashes of light passing through are detected by the photo detector and interpreted by

the signal processor. The simplest type of incremental encoder is a single-channel

tachometer encoder that produces a certain number of sine or square wave pulses for

each shaft revolution. The pulses are fed into an up/down counter to produce a

digital word for the rotor position. These relatively inexpensive devices are well

suited as velocity feedback sensors in medium to high-speed control systems, but

run into noise and stability problems at extremely slow velocities due to quantization

errors. In addition to low speed instabilities, single-channel tachometer encoders are

also incapable of determining the rotation direction and thus cannot be used as

position sensors. Phase-quadrature incremental encoders overcome these problems

by adding a second channel with a displaced arrangement of the detectors. The

resulting pulse trains are 90° out of phase (figure 3.2).

82 Chapter 3

1 cycle

Channel A

source

leading the other and hence ascertain the direction of rotation, with the added benefit

of increased resolution. Since each full cycle contains four transitions, or edges, an

encoder provides four edges or counts per encoder line. The resolution of the

incremental encoder depends on the number of encoder lines:

2π

Θ res = (3.1)

4 × number of encoder lines

The typical incremental position resolution used for industrial servo drives is

Θres = 1,5 mrad (1024 lines). Lower and higher resolutions are chosen for special

applications.

The least complicated and often applied technique of speed calculation using an

incremental encoder interface is obtained by numerical differentiation of the position

information

dΘ Θ k − Θ k −1

ω (k ) = ≈ (3.2)

dt Ts

where Ts is the sample time and k is the sample number index. Problems related to

this approach are its lagging nature (small for high sample rates) of the velocity

estimation and the limited velocity resolution:

speed resolution = = (3.3)

sample period Ts

The typical incremental position resolution used for industrial servo drives is 1024

lines. For this encoder type and a sample time Ts = 200 µs, the resolution of the

speed signal is:

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 83

1rev 1 60 sec

speed resolution = = 73.24 min −1 (3.4)

4 ⋅ 1024 0.0002 sec 1min

a real motor speed of 50 rpm and 100 rpm respectively is shown in figure 3.3. The

resolution deteriorates even at higher sample rates, whereas a high sample rate

would be advantageous to get high bandwidth current/torque control loops.

150

real speed

measurement

100

n [rpm]

50

0

0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012

t [s]

A speed reference together with such a noisy speed signal forms the input of a speed

controller calculating the torque commands. Therefore, this quantization error

results in faulty torque commands, increased torque ripple, acoustic noise and motor

heating by current harmonics. Especially a speed controller with a derivative part,

e.g. a PID controller, should be avoided. Then, mainly the higher harmonics of this

quantization noise are amplified.

The speed estimation is often improved by digitally filtering the past values to

smooth the signal. Both finite impulse response (FIR) and infinite impulse response

(IIR) digital filters may be used. Such filtering can produce a very accurate, high-

resolution speed signal at steady state, but the instantaneous accuracy and phase

fidelity is compromised. The gain of the speed controller has to be reduced directly

or indirectly due to stability considerations when applying an additional digital filter

in the speed control loop. Thus, the transient performance during acceleration and

the dynamic stiffness of the drive are reduced. It must be noted, that filtering of a

signal generally is an unacceptable ripple reduction solution for servo drives, where

the dynamic performance cannot be compromised.

84 Chapter 3

Time

pulse counting time is often preferred and implemented. This approach uses the

relatively high temporal resolution of the microprocessor clock Tclk to measure the

time between two encoder pulses [Bose 97]. The speed estimation is obtained by

counting the number ∆N of clock pulses between the most recent pulses from the

digital encoder interface:

dΘ ∆Θ Θ res

ω= ≈ = (3.5)

dt ∆t ∆N Tclk

This clock time measurement improves the resolution especially for low-speed

operation. The incremental velocity resolution is:

speed resolution = − = ≈ clk (3.6)

∆N Tclk (∆N + 1) Tclk Θ res + Tclk ω Θ res

the sample period Ts. The number of clock pulses appearing between two encoder

pulses is almost proportional to the square of the motor speed. Considering (3.6), the

resolution is vastly improved at low velocities.

Problems related to this approach are inherently large word lengths including

possible register overflow at zero speed and problems caused by the manufacturing

process inaccuracy. The individual line spacing directly affects the performance of

this method and any lack of uniformity shows up as a speed jitter on the drive. The

jitter can be softened by implementing an additional digital filter with the same

consequences as mentioned in the previous subsection. Furthermore, the used

development platform does not support this approach.

In many servo drives, the dynamic performance of the velocity loop cannot be

compromised. The problems due to quantization errors and estimation lag of

formerly described approaches to obtain velocity feedback can be greatly reduced by

applying an observer-based velocity estimation method. Steps in that direction have

been taken, though, e.g. [Bose 97], [Lor 91] and [Lor 99]. However, they are motor

parameter depending and clearly sensitive to torque estimation accuracy and torque

dynamics. Torque errors will lead to velocity estimation errors since the observer

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 85

model is being fed the torque command whereas the real motor experiences the

actual torque.

position and the acceleration of the drive are estimated. This approach is shown to

offer a significant improvement of the drive performance. The observer is hardly

sensitive to parameter variations and avoids numerical differentiation as well as

signal lags. The calculation of the observer parameter is based on the linear Kalman

Filter algorithm considering both measurement error and model inaccuracy. These

disturbances are explicitly evaluated. The discussion starts with the selection of a

system model and the design of the affiliated linear Kalman filter using an

incremental encoder interface as input and ends with the implementation of the

proposed observer, influence of motor parameters and presentation of representative

results.

rotor position Θ, whereas the acceleration α is obtained by the time-derivative of the

speed. The following mechanical equations are valid in any case and without any

inaccuracy:

dΘ

ω= (3.7)

dt

dω

α= (3.8)

dt

In addition, the acceleration equals the difference between the electromagnetic Tel

and load torque Tload related to the moment of drive inertia J.

dω

Tel − Tload = J =Jα (3.9)

dt

state. It creates a disturbance of the speed control loop, compensated by the affiliated

controller. Therefore, a variation of the load torque (not the load torque itself) is

handled as model inaccuracy. This inaccuracy is neglected at the moment, but is

taken into account afterwards at the calculation of the observer feedback matrix. The

acceleration (3.9) rewritten in state form as required by the system model yields the

time-derivative of the acceleration:

⇒ = = + model noise (3.10)

dt dt J dt J

86 Chapter 3

acceleration (3.10) requires not the absolute torque value as input, but the time-

derivative of the electromagnetic torque. Therefore, the influence of both an

incorrect estimation of the electromagnetic torque due to electrical parameter

variations and an incorrect identification of the drive inertia vanishes in steady state.

Furthermore, the influence of incorrect parameter estimation is small compared to a

potential load variation. Thus, the erroneous electromagnetic torque calculation and

inertia identification are handled as model noise.

Postulating a very small sample time (Ts ≈ 100-200 µs), the following

transformation from continuous time (3.7)-(3.10) to the discrete time state space

causes a negligible error. Nevertheless, the discretization error can be considered at

the calculation of the feedback matrix through the noise covariance matrix of the

system model as well as the influence of the load variations neglected in (3.10).

ˆ ˆ

Θ k +1 = Θ k + Ts ω̂ k (3.11)

ωˆ k +1 = ωˆ k + Ts αˆ k (3.12)

αˆ k +1 = αˆ k +

1

(Tel ,k − Tel ,k −1 ) (3.13)

J

rotor of the drive is assumed. If this is not the case, the mechanical differential

equations of motion have to be considered in more detail.

The selection of the system model is completed by choosing the mechanical rotor

position, motor speed and acceleration as state variable xk and the inertia related

electromagnetic torque variation as input uk. The output vector yk consists of the

encoder position. The structure of the system model, implemented in discrete form,

is presented in figure 3.4.

Θ ˆ

Tel ,k − Tel ,k −1

x k +1 = A x k + B u k ; u k = ; x k = ωˆ (3.14)

J

αˆ

k

1 Ts 0 0

with: A = 0 1 Ts ; B = 0 (3.15)

0 0 1 1

ˆ =C x ;

yk = Θ k k with: C = (1 0 0) (3.16)

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 87

-1

|Θ|<π z

overflow Θk+1→Θk

protection

Ts ^

Θ

(1,0,0)

z -1 Output

Electromagnetic ωk+1→ ωk Matrix C

torque Tel

Ts

1/J z-1

z-1 αk+1→αk

Input matrix B Model matrix A

The rotor position is limited in speed control mode to |Θk| < π avoiding an overflow

of a register occurring due to a potential rotation of the rotor in one direction over a

long period of time. This non-linearity reflects no negative influence on the

proposed observer. The overflow protection has to be dropped in position control

mode, requiring the absolute position.

Therefore, the system is observable and it is possible to identify the system state

unambiguously by the output of the system [Mayr 92].

C 1 0 0

det (Q B ) = CA = 1 Ts 0 = Ts3 (3.17)

CA 2 1 2T Ts2

s

variations. The sample time is pre-determined depending on the required

computation time and should be as small as possible.

Unfortunately, Figure 3.4 clarifies, that without feedback of a measured signal, the

open-loop observer fails at any system disturbance. Such disturbances are caused by

applying a load torque or an erroneous electromagnetic torque calculation. For

instance setting the input Tel to zero, all estimated values never change and remain at

the initial values. Therefore, the output vector has to be compared to all available

measured signals and the difference must be used to correct the state vector of the

system model. This results in a closed loop observer as shown in the next

subsection.

88 Chapter 3

The closed loop observer proposed is based on the feedback of the measured

encoder position. If additionally speed information is available from a sensor, the

error between estimation and measurement of both speed and position are used by

the observer to get information on the drive acceleration. This can improve vastly

the drive performance and dynamic stiffness. However, a digital incremental

encoder does not inherently produce an instantaneous velocity signal.

information given by the incremental encoder. This information is compared with

the estimation of the encoder position. As illustrated in the signal flow graph of the

closed loop observer (figure 3.5), the difference is used by the feedback matrix

(K1, K2, K3) to correct the state vector xk of the system model.

Measured Θ overflow

|Θ|<π protection

encoder position

index

reset |∆|<π

-1

|Θ|<π z K1

overflow Θk+1→Θk

protection

Ts

-1

z K2

ωk+1→ωk

Electromagnetic

torque Tel Ts Θ̂, ωˆ , αˆ

Output

-1

1/J z K3

z-1 αk+1→αk

Kalman

Input matrix B Model matrix A gains

Figure 3.5: Structure of the closed loop acceleration, velocity and position observer.

Generally, the feedback matrix can be time- or state-dependent and adaptive. As will

be shown, the matrix elements are constant. They can be pre-determined reducing

precious computation time. Calculating the elements can be done by different

approaches, e.g., by pole placement. Pole placement guarantees a stable system, but

results usually in an inferior observer performance, as additional information on the

system is dropped. Due to the noisy characteristic of the position measurement, the

elements are calculated by a linear Kalman filter algorithm considering both

measurement error and model inaccuracy.

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 89

of the position are only required in speed control mode. The overflow protection at

the input of the Kalman filter rejects erroneous calculations at phase jumps of the

angle. The index reset is only used in position control mode, where the absolute

rotor position is required, e.g. rotor position of a synchronous motor drive. The

estimation and measurement registers are set to zero if the index line is found.

The Kalman filter is sometimes referred to as being slowly and having a lagging

characteristic due to the error driven nature of the observer. This might be true, if

only position and speed are chosen as states. Here, the involuntary lag of the speed

signal is avoided by the additional estimation of the acceleration. In fact, the

acceleration is insignificantly lagging at continuous load torque variation.

Nevertheless, apart an initial change, the acceleration is nearly constant during both

changing the speed reference and applying a load torque. This special drive property

is caused by current/torque limitation in the speed control loop. Thus, the

acceleration is almost constant and can be estimated accurately. The performance of

acceleration estimation might be increased by estimating additionally the derivative

of the acceleration. This has been disregarded due to mentioned remarks and the

difficulty of calculating the model inaccuracy of such an approach.

If the measurement and model inaccuracy are known, the Kalman filter algorithm

yields an optimum feedback matrix, minimizing automatically the RMS-error

between measured quantities and estimated states. A more complete introduction to

the general idea of the Kalman filter can be found in literature [Bram 94], [May 79].

Table 3.1 briefly repeats the algorithm of the linear Kalman filter calculating the

gains of the feedback matrix [May 79].

Table 3.1: Calculation of the feedback matrix according to the linear discrete Kalman filter algorithm.

(

K k = Pk|k −1 C T C Pk|k −1 C T + R )−1

=

[P ]

( 1,1 ); Pk |k −1( 2 ,1 ); Pk |k −1( 3,1 )

k |k −1

(3.18)

P( 1,1 ) + R( 1,1 )

All model matrices (A, B and C), initial matrix P0|0 and noise covariance matrices

(Q and R) of the algorithm given are constant. Thus, also the Kalman matrix Kk

with the elements (K1, K2, K3) settles to a constant after a number of iterations

indicated by the arrows in table 3.1. Practically, almost 100 iterations are sufficient

to reach the settle point (figure 3.6).

90 Chapter 3

0.246

K []

0.244

1

0.242

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

k[]

176

K [1/s]

174

2

172

170

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

k[]

3.5

K [10 /s ]

2

3.4

4

3.3

3

3.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

k[]

Figure 3.6: Exemplary iterative calculation of the Kalman gains with respect to the algorithm given in

table 3.1 with iteration number k and subsequently described noise covariance matrices (Q33 = 0,1 Q33,max).

In table 3.1, the state update and state projection are dropped, because they do not

affect the calculation of the Kalman gains. The presented equations are used for the

pre-determination of the feedback matrix, saving computing time with respect to the

subsequent real-time implementation. As illustrated in figure 3.5, the final observer

with the pre-determined and constant feedback matrix is very computing-time

friendly. Only state xk and system model (A, B, C) updates with the pre-determined

constant Kalman-gains remain in real-time. A is the model matrix, B the input

matrix and C the output matrix of the system model.

Still remaining variables of the algorithm calculating the feedback matrix are the

noise covariance matrices Q and R and the initial matrix P0|0 representing the

covariance in knowledge of the initial conditions. They consist only of diagonal

elements due to the lack of sufficient statistical information to evaluate their off-

diagonal terms. Varying P0|0 does not affect the settle point of the Kalman gains and

can be chosen at random.

properties of the corresponding noise. The variance of a variable x with the mean

value µ and the distribution p(x) is defined by:

∞

σ2 = ∫ (x − µ )

2

p( x) dx (3.21)

−∞

In literature, the initial entries of the covariance matrices are often set to the unity

matrix. In order to achieve the optimal filter performance, the filter parameters R

and Q can be obtained by tuning based on experimental investigations. This

describes an iterative process of searching the best values. Increasing R reflects a

stronger disturbance of the measurement. The noise is weighted less by the filter,

causing a more filtered position signal but also a slower transient performance of the

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 91

system. The noise covariance Q describes the system model inaccuracy. Q has to be

increased at stronger noise levels driving the system, entailing a more heavily

weighting of the measured signal and a faster transient performance. Thus, changing

the covariance matrices R and Q affects both the transient duration and the steady

state operation of the observer. Without any previous knowledge of the matrices,

tuning is very arduously or can even lead to an unstable behavior of the observer.

parameters. The following approach reduces the set of unknown parameters to the

only parameter Q33 = Q(3,3), adjusted depending on the given application.

The noise covariance R accounts for the measurement noise introduced by the

incremental encoder and can be easily pre-determined. Assuming a near-normal

distribution p(∆Θ) and a zero mean value µ of the position error, the approximate

distribution of the position error depends only on the digital encoder resolution Θres:

p(∆Θ)

1/Θres

∆Θ

Θres/2 Θres/2

According to (3.21), the variance of a signal with a zero mean value µ and equally

distributed as in figure 3.7 is:

Θ res 2 3

1 1 Θ 1 Θ2

σ = ∫x

2

dx = 2 res

2

= res (3.22)

−Θ 2

Θ res

res

3 2 Θ res 12

Thus, the noise covariance R, describing the measurement error of the position,

depends only on the digital encoder resolution Θres:

Θ 2res

R= (3.23)

12

Since the position is the only measured signal, R is a 1×1 matrix being constant for a

given installation. In simulations, the measurement noise variance is speed

dependent, e.g. the variance at constant speed, being a multiple of the speed

resolution, equals zero. However, the real motor speed is never absolute constant

due to torque ripple, the encoder pulse counting is mostly asynchronous to the fixed

sample time and the encoder lines are individually spaced due to manufacturing

process inaccuracy. Thus, the assumption of a near-normal distribution of the

position error is reasonable. Furthermore, the given assumption of a near-normal

distribution of the position measurement error is backed-up by experiments [Ter 02].

92 Chapter 3

Q11 = Q(1,1) Q22 = Q(2,2) and Q33 = Q(3,3) describe the model inaccuracy of the

position, speed and acceleration estimation, respectively. The model inaccuracy of

speed and position estimation is only caused by the discretization of the continuous

equations. Considering a very small sample time, the error is negligible and may

usually be disregarded. Nevertheless, the worst of all approximations is to set the

model inaccuracy to zero. White noise is a much better approximation than zero

[May 79]. Thus, this discretization error is considered by a very small value in the

noise covariance matrix Q.

acceleration of a drive. An estimation of the acceleration top-limit can be obtained

by assuming a maximum torque-inertia relation of the drive. According to

catalogues of motor manufacturers, this relation is approximately proportional to the

inverse rotor diameter of the motor and varies between αmax ≈ 500 s-2 for large

machines (~500 kW) and αmax ≈ 2000 s-2 for small motor drives (~500 W). Here, a

constant relation of αmax = Tmax/J = 1000 s-2 is assumed.

According to (3.11), the next position value is estimated by the current position plus

the current speed multiplied by the sample time Ts. Since the real rotor position is

the time-integral of the speed, the discretization error of the position within one

computing cycle is the difference between (3.11) and the total area below the speed

signal as illustrated in figure 3.8.

maximum discretization error: no discretization error at

0,5 ∆ωmax Ts = 0,5 αmax Ts2 constant speed: ∆ω = 0

ω ω(t) ωk ω

ωk = ω(t)

∆ωmax

Ts

Ts

(k+1)Ts (k+3)Ts (k+1)Ts (k+3)Ts

The estimated position is indicated by the area of the shadowed rectangle, while the

real position equals the total area below the real speed signal. Thus, the

discretization error is approximately equal to the area of the textured triangle:

( k +1)Ts

∆Θ = Ts ω k − ∫ ω (t ) dt

kTs

(3.24)

1 1

⇒ ∆Θ max ≈ ∆ω maxTs = α maxTs2 (3.25)

2 2

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 93

According to (3.22) and assuming a maximum drive acceleration of α = 1000 s-2 and

a sample time Ts = 200 µs, the maximum variance of the estimated position due to

the discretization error is:

( k +1)Ts 1 1

2

12 2

kTs

Similarly, the variance of the estimated speed due to the discretization error is

appraised. According to (3.12), the discretization error is at its maximum in the case

of a maximally changing acceleration within one computing cycle

( k +1)Ts

∆ω = Ts α k − ∫α (t ) dt

kTs

(3.27)

as illustrated in figure 3.9 by the area of the textured rectangle. The variation of the

acceleration can be caused by applying electromagnetic torque as well as by

applying a load torque to the motor.

maximum discretization error: no discretization error at

∆ωmax = αmax Ts constant acceleration: ∆α = 0

α α(t) α

αk = α(t)

αmax

Ts αk Ts

(k+1)Ts (k+3)Ts (k+1)Ts (k+3)Ts

α = 1000 s-2 and a sample time Ts = 200 µs, the maximum variance of the estimated

speed due to the discretization error is approximately:

( k +1)Ts (α T )2 1

Q(2,2) = var Ts α k − ∫ α (t ) dt << max s ≈ 3,3 ⋅ 10 −3 2 (3.29)

12 s

kTs

The trickiest part of the proposed observer gain calculation is the variance

determination of the acceleration. The load torque is generally unknown. It creates a

disturbance of the speed control loop compensated by the affiliated controller.

Therefore, the load torque is handled as model inaccuracy. Additionally, erroneous

electromagnetic torque calculation and inertia identification are handled as (a small)

94 Chapter 3

part of the model noise. However, the influence of both an incorrect estimation of

the electromagnetic torque due to electrical parameter variations and an incorrect

identification of the drive inertia is small compared to a potential load variation and

subsequently dropped.

An estimation of the variance top-limit can be obtained considering the inner current

control loop. Since the electromagnetic torque is varied with the equivalent time

constant of the earlier derived current control loop (figure 3.10), faster load

variations are not compensated anyway and consequently disregarded.

Tel

Ts

∆Tmax = Tmax Ts / τeq

t

Figure 3.10: Approximate step function response and maximum variation

of the electromagnetic torque within one computing cycle.

Taking an equivalent time constant τeq = 1ms, the maximum process variance of the

acceleration can be estimated by:

T − Tload ,k −1 T

model inaccuracy < load ,k ≈ max Ts (3.30)

J max J τ torque

2

1 T T

≈ 3,33 ⋅ 10 3 1

⇒ Q33 = Q(3,3) < s max (3.31)

12 J τ torque

s4

Equation (3.31) delivers a maximum value for the calculation of the Kalman gains.

All other parameters, only slightly affecting the resulting Kalman gains, are fixed

and, considering very small discretization errors due to the short sample time, set to

the maximum values given in (3.26) and (3.29). Thus, only the acceleration

inaccuracy has to be chosen and adapted depending on the given application. It

should be noted, that the calculation of all process covariance matrices is

proportional to the square of the sample time. The given constants should be adapted

accordingly, if a different sample time is chosen.

Table 3.2 gives a general idea of the observer performance as a function of the

variance Q33. The spread of position, speed and acceleration are indicated by ∆Θ, ∆n

and ∆α. The acceleration at an abrupt load torque variation can be estimated

according to the given time constant τα. Compared to the encoder resolution

Θres = 0,0015 rad, the estimation of the position is for all pre-determined parameters

even more accurate than the measurement. The speed signal is vastly improved

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 95

considering the numerical differentiation approach (∆n = 73,34 rpm). For almost all

applications where the load torque variation is totally unknown, even a ratio

Q33/Q33,max = 10% is fast enough. Of course, this ratio should be chosen much

smaller, if the load torque is known very well or a smooth speed signal is more

important than the dynamic behavior of the loop.

Table 3.2: Kalman gains and observer performance as a function of Q33 (Ts = 200 ms).

Q33/Q33,max K1 K2 K3 ∆Θ ∆n ∆α τα

[%] [] [1/s] [104/s2] [10-4 rad] [1/min] [1/s2] [ms]

10 0,245 175 3,4 ~4 ~2 ~150 ~5

50 0,284 244 7,7 ~5,5 ~5 ~250 ~0,4

100 0,307 290 10,8 ~8 ~7 ~400 ~2,5

inside the unity-circle. Thus, the stability of the observer is proven by calculating the

observer eigenvalues λ1, λ2, ..., λn, being solutions of the characteristic polynomial:

The stability boundary and the eigenvalues with the variance of the acceleration as

parameter are given in figure 3.11 proving the stability of the system. Q33 is varied

in steps of 1% of the maximum variance.

0.2

0.15

0.1 boundary

0.05

Imaginary [ ]

Q33

-0.1

-0.15

-0.2

0.8 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1

R eal [ ]

Figure 3.11: Eigenvalues of the observer as a function of Q33 (Ts = 200 µs).

However, the noise suppression is simultaneously reduced. The variance Q33 = 0 can

be disregarded, since a zero variance is equivalent to the unrealistic assumption of a

96 Chapter 3

never changing load torque resulting in an estimator observing only position and

speed with a phase lag during transients.

as well as eliminating lag of the estimated motor speed. Since the model matrices of

the observer are independent on motor parameters, the closed-loop observer is vastly

insensitive to both electrical and mechanical parameter variations. Furthermore, the

proposed algorithm can be easily implemented in software with a negligible

requirement of computation time. Figure 3.12 shows the closed-loop observer

integrated into the speed/position control loop of a highly dynamic torque controlled

ac motor drive.

reference

ω*

motion

control ω* Tel* a u* SVM

mode Torque

Control u * Inverter

ω & b

1 − z −1 ω* Speed

Torque

Ts / K pn controller uc*

Estimation

Θ* Kpp ib ia

Position Θ Position α Acceleration Tel

reference controller ω Velocity

Θ AC

Θ Position Load

Observer motor

Incremental

encoder

Figure 3.12: Velocity observer integrated into the speed/position control loop.

It should be noted, that the velocity estimation described here can be extended easily

to allow further improvement of the entire drive performance especially at load

torque variations by adding acceleration feedback. The information on load

acceleration can be used either as derivative input part of a modified PID speed

controller (figure 3.13) or directly by compensating the load torque (figure 3.14).

1 − z −1

Tdn

Ts / K pn

Tel*

ω*

anti windup

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 97

ω* Tel* ω* Tel*

Kn

ω PI with |Tel| < Tmax ω Proportional |Tel|<Tmax

anti-windup gain

Tel Tload Tel Tload

rejection rejection

stiffness of the drive. Using this extra information is in any case superior when

compared to applying again a numerical differentiation of the (now smoothed)

velocity signal. Figure 3.15 presents the simulation results of a response to a load

step using a common PI controller and the same controller with additional load

torque rejection according to figure 3.14. The applied load amounts to 90% of the

rated torque. Thus, this feedback causes the disturbance to perceive a more robust

system less sensitive to disturbances.

1550

Load torque rejection

n [rpm]

1500

PI-controller

1450

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

t [s]

15

10

[Nm]

5

load

T

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

t [s]

Figure 3.15: PI-controller versus load torque rejection at a load step (Simulation).

Top: Motor speed. Bottom: Load torque

resolution encoder or a resolver. If additional speed information is directly available

from a sensor, the algorithm has to be changed slightly. Then, the error between

estimation and measurement of both speed and position are used by the Kalman

filter to get information on the drive acceleration, additionally improving the drive

performance and dynamic stiffness.

98 Chapter 3

A drive set-up with a 1,5 kW induction motor has been used to clarify the practical

operation and performance of the introduced observer. The inertia of the drive is

about J = 0,008 kgm2. Generally, such a small inertia causes more problems for an

estimator to track the real speed than a larger one, as the acceleration is much faster.

All presented experimental results are obtained, if not explicitly stated differently,

using the proposed observer with a sample time Ts = 200 µs and 10% of the

maximum acceleration variance as defined in (3.31).

Figure 3.16-3.18 shows experimental results during a step of both speed reference

and load torque. The given speed, acceleration and position estimations are

measurements corresponding to the same time span. The speed and acceleration

estimation are used as feedback to control the motor. The speed reference changes

from zero to 2000 rpm at t =0.1 s. According to common flux weakening algorithms,

the flux is decreased inversely proportionally to the speed above n = 1500 rpm. A

step of the load torque is applied after t =0,7 s. The applied load amounts to 65 % of

the rated torque. Due to the flux weakening, a maximum load of 75 % of the rated

torque can be generated by the motor in the given speed range. Figure 3.16 shows

the vast improvement of the speed estimation during transients compared to a

simultaneously offline measurement with the numerical differentiation approach

using an additional filter to smooth the signal. The implemented filter is chosen to

match the same speed smoothness in steady state. Nevertheless, the speed oscillates

if, instead of using the observer, this filtered speed signal is used as feedback in the

same control loop. The filter causes an extra large time delay in the speed loop. Due

to lagging during transients, the decoupling of the current control loop is extremely

deteriorated. With the filtered speed signal in the loop, the gain of the speed

controller has to be decreased. To the contrary, the speed signal estimated by the

observer requires no supplementary filter.

2500

2000

Flux

n [rpm]

1500

weakening

Load

1000

step

500

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Ka lma n Filte r

t [s] Num. Diffe re ntia tion + Filte r

10 75

[rpm]

[rpm]

5 50

est

filt

0 25

-n

-n

real

real

-5 0

n

n

-10 -25

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

t [s] t [s]

Figure 3.16: Estimation of the speed during start-up and at a step of the load torque. Top: Motor speed.

Bottom: Speed error of the observer (nest) and speed error of a filtered signal (nfilt).

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 99

Figure 3.17 shows the ability of the observer to track the real motor acceleration

during the same step of the speed reference and at variable load torque. Without load

torque, the estimation of the acceleration matches the acceleration due to the

electromagnetic torque. Of course, the total acceleration is zero in steady state and

the electromagnetic torque equals the load. The load can be calculated by the

difference between the total acceleration and the acceleration due to the

electromagnetic torque. The information on the load acceleration is used as part of

the speed controller directly compensating the load torque (figure 3.14). If the

speed-load torque relation of a given installation is known, this information can be

added to the electromagnetic torque input of the observer. Consequently, the pre-

determined variance of the acceleration can be reduced. This results in a further

improvement of the drive performance with a very smooth speed and torque signal.

1600

electromagnetic

1200

torque

1000

800

α [1/s ]

2

600

Load

step

400

200

(estimation)

-400

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

t [s]

Figure 3.17: Estimation of the acceleration during start-up and at a step of the load torque.

-3

x 10

1.5

[rad]

1

0.5

meas

0

-Θ

-0.5

real

-1

Θ

-1.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

-3 t [s]

x 10

1.5

[rad]

1

0.5

est

0

-Θ

-0.5

real

-1

Θ

-1.5

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

t [s]

Figure 3.18:Position error during start-up and at a step of the load torque.

Top: Error between real and measured position. Bottom: Error between real and estimated position.

The variance of the estimated position is even lower than the variance of the

measured position (figure 3.18). Therefore, the estimated signal is preferred in

100 Chapter 3

position control mode or when using a synchronous motor requiring the information

on the absolute rotor position. As mentioned earlier, the observer is not motor type

dependent. Only the maximum torque-inertia ratio of the given machine can be used

to pre-determine the observer parameters.

In speed control loops using a common PI controller, the load torque is compensated

by the integral-acting part, also if the output of the integrator does not match the real

load torque. However, an additional integral-acting part of the speed controller is not

required, if the estimation of the load torque is used as feedback (figure 3.19). In any

case, neglecting the integral-acting part of the speed controller and applying load

torque rejection is superior regarding speed response as well as disturbance

sensitivity. The overshoot at steps of both speed reference and load torque vastly

decreases or even vanishes. In common speed control loops the parameter of the

controller, e.g. a PI-controller, are calculated regarding either optimum speed

response or optimum disturbance rejection. To the contrary, the proportional gain Kn

is optimized with respect to an optimum speed response while the feedback of the

estimated load torque yields an optimized system regarding disturbance sensitivity.

Furthermore, the determination of the speed controller parameter Kn is less

complicated (2.95).

Kn iq* = f(Tel*)

L12h

ω Proportional |Tel|<Tmax Current Tel = p i µ iq

gain mapping

Lr

rejection

[ (

Tel = p iq ΨMd − Lq − Ld id ) ]

In steady state, both real motor acceleration and its estimation is zero. Otherwise, the

acceleration of either the real state or its estimation would not be zero and the

observer obtains an error. This error is equalized by the observer independent on the

inertia or motor parameter estimation. Thus, following equations are valid in steady

state:

αˆ = α real = 0 ; (3.33)

!

⇒ Tel − Tload = Jα = 0 (3.34)

Advanced Speed Control & Speed Measurement 101

Since the estimated and real motor acceleration is zero in steady state, the generated

electromagnetic torque equalizes the load. In fact, the torque calculation might be

incorrect, but the real load is compensated by the real torque. Consequently, the

steady state speed error remains zero, even if the torque estimation is incorrect due

to a parameter mismatch.

Another validation of motor parameter independence is the fact, that the estimated

electromagnetic torque in figure 3.19 is calculated by (possibly incorrect) motor

parameters, whereas the current mapping is calculated by the inverse motor

parameters. Thus, a parameter mismatch is directly compensated. Consequently, the

implemented algorithm together with the speed control loop in figure 3.19 yields no

steady state speed error, is insensitive to a correct calculation of motor parameters

and parameter variations are negligible considering the proposed method.

Figure 3.20 presents the estimated and real speed using this controller type with a

mismatch of motor parameters. The electromagnetic torque is 20%, the motor inertia

50% over calculated. The speed reference changes from zero to 1500 rpm at t =0.1 s.

A step of the load torque is applied after t =0,7 s. The applied load amounts to 80 %

of the rated torque.

2000

1500

n [rpm]

1000

Box 1

500

nest and nm

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

t [s]

1550

nref

n [rpm]

1500

Load

step

1450

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

t [s]

Figure 3.20: Speed control using a P-controller with load torque rejection and mismatch of motor

parameters. Top: Real, estimated and reference speed. Bottom: Details indicated by “Box 1”.

3.10 Conclusions

The quality of the measured speed signal has a dramatic impact on the drive

performance. A noisy speed signal results in erroneous torque commands, increased

torque ripple, acoustic noise and motor heating by current harmonics. Filtering of

the signal is not a generally acceptable solution to reduce the ripple of the speed

measurement. The lag associated with the filter can substantially degrade the closed-

loop drive performance.

102 Chapter 3

parameter depending and clearly sensitive to torque accuracy. This chapter presents

the design and the implementation of a novel observer for position and speed

estimation using an incremental encoder as input offering a significant improvement

of the drive performance.

as well as eliminating lag of the estimated motor speed. The lagging characteristic of

the speed signal due to the error driven nature of the observer is avoided by the

additional estimation of the motor acceleration.

The observer is motor type independent. The variance of the estimated position is

even lower than the variance of the measured position. Therefore, the estimated

signal should be preferred in position control mode or when using a synchronous

motor requiring information on the absolute rotor position.

information on load acceleration is used as input of a speed controller rejecting

directly load variations. Independent of motor parameters, a speed controller with

load torque rejection requires no additional integrator part compensating for the

load. This topology provides a system with extremely high stiffness to disturbance

inputs as well as an improved dynamic performance.

This closed loop observer is very much insensitive to both electrical and mechanical

parameter variations. Furthermore, the proposed algorithm can be easily

implemented in software with a negligible requirement of computing time.

4. Control

4.1 Discretization

There are different approaches to model these systems [Fra 90]. One possibility is to

use a discrete model [Lab 96], using the z-transform and to carry out the controller

design in the z-domain. To enable the use of frequency response methods, a second

transformation is necessary (bilinear transformation). Alternatively, carrying out the

initial design using continuous methods can serve as a guide for a direct discrete

design. The performance of a system when it could be realized with continuous

hardware is a target for how well the digital system should perform and assists in

selecting the sample rate. As shown in [Büh 97], under certain conditions a sampled

data or discrete system can be treated as a pseudo-continuous system. This has the

advantages with respect to the applicability of optimal control formulations. The

effect of A/D and D/A converters, as well as the execution time of the control

algorithm itself are taken into account by using equivalent continuous transfer

functions. The designed optimal controllers can directly be converted to their

discrete equivalents. However, the control algorithms implemented here contain no

fixed discrete transfer functions. They are rather constructed manually (user-defined

library) by unit delays, sums and gains. This has the advantage of all variables being

accessible and avoiding involuntary signal delays. Only where it is necessary to

avoid algebraic loops, an additional delay is added.

To design the controllers and simulate the entire drive, it is necessary to take also the

power converter into account. A power electronic system can be modeled in

different ways, or, as often encountered, not modeled at all. The level of modeling to

be considered depends on the purpose of the simulation. For control design

purposes, the inverter can be simply modeled by a delay. It has been shown that for

the subharmonic PWM and SVM a general delay time of TPWM / 3 is adequate, where

TPWM is the PWM period [Büh 97].