2015 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM)
July 7-11, 2015. Busan, Korea
Torque Ripple Reduction of Switched Reluctance Motor Drive with
Adaptive Sliding mode Control and Particle Swarm Optimization
Mohammad Masoud Namazi1,2 , Mojtaba Mansouri Borujeni1 , Amir Rashidi1,2 ,
Sayed Morteza Saghaeian Nejad1 and Jin-Woo Ahn2
Abstract In this paper, for speed control with torque ripple
minimization of switched reluctance motor drives an optimal
speed controller based on Elitist-Mutated Multi-Objective Par-
ticle Swarm Optimization (EM-MOPSO) with good accuracies,
and performances is presented. The control mechanism is com-
posed of an adaptive sliding mode speed controller to determine
the appropriate current command and a hysteresis current
controller. In the adaptive sliding mode controller, the heuristic
parameters are usually determined by a tedious and repetitive
trial-and-error process. By using EM-MOPSO, the trial-and
error process is eliminated. The optimal parameters of adaptive
sliding mode conrtoller and turn-on and turn-off angles are
chosen by applying a multi-objective function, including both
Integrals Squared Error (ISE) of speed and torque ripple. The
performance of this EM-MOPSO based controller has been
demonstrated by simulation in MATLAB/SIMULINK software
for a four phases, 4-kw SRM.
Index Terms Switched Reluctance Motor (SRM), Speed
control,Torque Ripple Minimization, Elitist-Mutated Multi-
Objective Particle Swarm Optimization (EM-MOPSO).
I. I NTRODUCTION
The attractive characteristics of a switched reluctance
motor (SRM) such as simple structure, low cost, high-
torque density, low maintenance cost and operate in a
wide range of speeds makes it a rival for other industrial
motors [1]. SRMs are used for industrial applications such
as pumps, vacuum blowers, starter/generators, electric and
hybrid vehicles and servo applications [2]. Need to know
the position of the rotor at any instant of time due to the
structure of the motor and innate nonlinearities, acoustic
noise and high-torque ripple, which is due to discrete torque
production mechanism are disadvantages of these motors [3].
Several control methods and schemes have been proposed
to overcome these problems and achieve high dynamic
performances, involving adaptive fuzzy control scheme [4],
adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) [5], [6],
that needs a lot of designer experience. Some studies have
succeeded in torque ripple reduction of SR motors using
DTC method [7]. For the above-mentioned control strategies
of the SRM it is assumed that its parameters are known
exactly or the unknown parameters can be identified by the
adaptive technique. However, the parameters of the SRM
are not exactly known and always vary with current and
1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Isfahan
University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran {mm.namazi,
m.mansouri, a.rashidi}@ec.iut.ac.ir and
saghaian@cc.iut.ac.ir
2 Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Kyungsung university, busan,
korea jwahn@ks.ac.kr
978-1-4673-9107-8/15/$31.00 2015 IEEE
position. Actually, control is difficult to implement owing
to its complex algorithm when considering the structural
uncertainties of SRM in design. Improving the applicability
of the SRM by taking the structural characteristics into
account is a significant step in designing the controller of the
SRM. In this paper, adaptive sliding mode speed controller
used to determine the appropriate current command and a
hysteresis current controller for torque ripple reduction. The
selection of sliding coefficients affects the performance of the
controller in terms of transient response. Proper selection of
these coefficients causes the system to become robust, stable
and achieve fast response. These coefficients are usually
identified by a trial-and-error process and needed to be
determined in an optimal way. One proper way to choose
these factors is to use an effectual evolutionary algorithm,
such as particle swarm optimization, the genetic algorithm,
etc. In these algorithms, irrespective of basic information
about the model of the process, control parameters can be
considered as a single-objective optimization problem to
improve system performance [8]. Since the responses of the
system are dependent together, improve one response can
worsen another. In order to improve the responses of the
system simultaneously, using evolutionary multi-objective
optimization (EMOO) algorithms is recommended. EMOO
algorithms has been used in several studies; in [9] sug-
gested a speed control mechanism to reduce torque ripple
of the SRM based on NSGA-II algorithm, in [10], NSGA-
II algorithm is used to adjust the parameters of the PI
controller and sliding mode observer. In this paper, PSO used
for multi-objective optimization mainly because of the high
speed of convergence, computing accuracy that the algorithm
presents for single-objective optimization compared with
other methods such as machine learning, neural network
learning, and genetic computation [11], [12]. Elitist-Mutated
Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization (EM-MOPSO)
is used to eliminate the menial and repetitive trial-and-error
process and to find the optimal sliding mode parameters
and turn-on and turn-off angle by applying a multi-objective
function, including both Integrals Squared Error (ISE) of
speed and torque ripple.
II. P RINCIPLES O F P ERFORMANCE A ND M ODELING O F
SRM
Figure 1, shows the cross-sectional view of an 8/6 SRM.
This is a doubly salient synchronous motor, which has a
simple structure. There is no coils or the magnets on the
rotor and the concentrated field windings on the stator are
371
 A Unlike single-objective optimization, there is not a single
B D0 solution that simultaneously optimize conflicting objectives
together, but rather a set of solutions exists are known
as Pareto-Optimal solutions. For each of these solutions,
C C0 none of the objectives have a devastating impact on other
objectives [13]. In other words, none of these solutions do
not dominate each other and are non-dominated with respect
D B0 to F (F is the feasible region). The set of all Pareto Optimal
A0 solutions is called Pareto Optimal Set and shown with P :
Fig. 1: Cross-sectional view of an 8/6 SRM P = {x F|x is P areto optimal} (5)
1

As shown in Figure 3a, the solution x dominates the

wound around each tooth. The principle of operation of the solutions available in first region and solutions in the third
SRM is based on the tendency of the electromagnetic system region dominate the solution x but existing solutions in
to be located in stable equilibrium point with the minimum the second and fourth region are not comparable with the
magnetic reluctance. When one of the stator winding is solution x. In the general case, x1 dominates x2 when:
excited, the nearest rotor poles are aligned with the excited i {1, 2, . . . , Nsolution } : fi (x1 ) fi (x2 )
stator poles and thus the torque produced. By consecutive
and (6)
excitation of the stator winding with the rotor position, the
motor start to spin. The total torque is the sum of the torques j {1, 2, . . . , Nsolution } : fj (x1 ) < fj (x2 )
generated by each phase. According to Faradays Law, the Solutions that cannot be dominate by other is called the
voltage at the motor phases are as follows [1]: non-dominated solution. A set of objective function values
dj (, ij ) corresponding to the Pareto-optimal solutions, called the
Vj = Rs ij +
dt
(1) Optimal Pareto Front PF that shown in Figure 3b:
In which, Vj , ij , j and Rs are jth phase voltage, phase
current, flux linkage and one phase resistance, respectively. P F = {f(x) Rk |x p } (7)
given by: IV. E LITIST-M UTATED M ULTI -O BJECTIVE PARTICLE
j (, ij ) = Lj (, ij )ij (2) S WARM O PTIMIZATION
where Lj is jth phase inductance and is rotor position. At A. Overview on PSO
constant speed, the rate of change of the flux-linkage is: PSO is a population-based search algorithm based on the
dj (, ij ) j dij j dij artificial life and social behavior of birds within a flock that
= + r = lj (ij , ) + ej (3)
dt ij dt dt 1

where ej is the back-emf. and lj is incremental inductance. 0.9

30
28
26
24
0.8
22

Figure 2a and 2b shows the experimentally measured static 0.7

20

18

flux linkage and torque characteristics of a four-phase 8/6

Phase flux linkage [wb-turn]

16
0.6
14

SRM whose parameters are specified in the Table III and 0.5 12

10
used in this investigation. Using numerical methods, the 0.4
8
0.3 6

incremental inductance and back-EMF characteristics of the 0.2
42
0

SRM can be obtained from the measured flux linkage data. 0.1

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

III. M ULTI -O BJECTIVE O PTIMIZATION AND PARETO Phase current [A]

O PTIMALITY (a)
Multi-objective optimization problem in various disci-
40

plines has been always a challenging problem for inves- 30

tigators. Because the relationship between objectives and 20

their impact on each other is obviously unknown to the 10

6 4
5
2
3 1 0
Torque [N.m]

8
9 7

13
121110
1514
16
researchers, so decide on the simultaneous optimization 0 1817

-10

objectives is difficult. Multi-objective optimization problem -20

can be expressed as follows: -30

M inimize : f(x) = [fi (x), i = 1, 2, ..., M ]

-40 0
60 50 5
40 30 10
20 10 15
0 20

Current [A]
Rotor position [degree]

(4) (b)
gj (x) 0 j = 1, 2, ..., J
constraints : Fig. 2: Nonlinear characteristics of tested 8/6 SRM. (a) Measured
Flux linkage. (b) Measured Torque.
hk (x) = 0 k = 1, 2, ...K

372
 f1
2 1
Incomparable Strongly dominate
X Identify non-dominated solutions in the
3 4
Strongly dominate Incomparable
f2
(a)
f1
Optimal Pareto Front
Non-dominated solution
f2
(b)
Fig. 3: (a) Dominate and nondominate solution. (b) Pareto Front.
used to optimization continuous nonlinear function [11]. PSO
maintains a set of particles that the position of each particle
represents a solution to the problem. The new position of the
particle updated by using velocity vector that include expe-
riences of the particle and its neighbors. Thus, particles are
flown in d-dimensional search space [14]. Suppose xi,j , vi,j
and pi,j are position, velocity and best individual position of
the jth particle in dimension j respectively, then Equation
for update velocity and position of the particle is as follows
[15]:
vi,j (t + 1) = wvi,j (t) + c1 r1 (pi,j xi,j (t))
+ c2 r2 (pg,j xi,j (t))
xi,j (t + 1) = xi,j (t) + vi,j (t + 1)
Where w is the inertia weight, c1 and c2 are positive
acceleration constants, r1 and r2 are random values in the
range [0, 1] and pg,i is the best position found by the swarm.
In Eq. 8, the second and third term so-called cognition
and social components that represent the confidence of the
particle to itself and its neighbors, respectively.
B. Principle of EM-MOPSO
Recent research on evolutionary algorithms has shown that
these algorithms are a good candidate for solving multi-
objective optimization problems due to their ability to syn-
chronously search for multiple Pareto optimal solutions. In
[16] for first time a method for multi-objective optimization
by using PSO presented. In this work we use elitist-mutated
multi-objective particle swarm optimization (EM-MOPSO)
[17]. In this method for selecting non-dominated solutions
is used Pareto dominance criteria; an external repository
Initializing population, velocity, weight
and iteration counter and evaluate them
current population and store them in an ERP
find global best
update the particle velocity and position and
evaluate them
search for nondominated solutions
update local and global best
Update the contents of REP. Inserting all the
currently nondominated solutions into the
repository and eliminate dominated solutions
from the REP
update weight
crowding distance operator
iteration=iteration+1
Perform EM operation on specified number of
particles.
NO
Stopping criteria
met?
YES
stop
Fig. 4: The EM-MOPSO procedure
(ERP) for establish property of elitism and storing best
solutions found; crowding distance operator for facilitate the
possibilities of flying swarm towards the Pareto Optimal
(8) front; and merges an effective elitist-mutation (EM) strategy
for effective investigation of the search space, maintaining
and creating diversity in the population. The EM-MOPSO
(9) procedure is expressed in Figure 4.
V. D ESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF EM-MOPSO
BASED CONTROLLERS
In this paper, a control mechanism for speed control
of SRM with torque ripple reduction using EM-MOPSO
is presented. Figure 5 shows the block diagram of SRM
with EM-MOPSO based controller. The control mechanism
provides the optimal values for five operating parameters
such as sliding mode parameters for speed controller along
with the turn on and turn off angles using EM-MOPSO.
The proposed controllers are capable of giving speed control
along with fine torque control in regard to ripple content,
therefore it may be considered to a high performance drive
system control.
A. speed loop conroller design
Compared with other nonlinear control methods, SMC is
more insensitive to internal parameter variations and external
373
disturbance once the system trajectory reaches and stays on B. Current loop controller design
the sliding surface. The chattering phenomenon is caused by The torque ripple is a consequence of the nonlinear torque-
the use of a discontinuous function or using high value for current-angle (T i ) characteristics of SRM and the
the sliding gain. Therefore, a method has been adapted to discrete nature of torque production mechanism. As SRM has
estimate the unknown uncertainties of lump without using the doubly salient structure, the torque ripple is particularly
sgn(.) that it reduces chattering [18], [19]. For speed con- enhanced at the commutation instants when torque produc-
troller design, consider the mechanical equation : tion is being transferred from one active phase to another.
Positive (or motoring) torque is produced when the motor
= (1/J) [Te (, ik ) TL D] (10) inductance is rising as the shaft angle is increasing. Similarly,
a negative (or braking) torque is produced by supplying
With uncertainties as:
the SRM winding with current while motor inductance is
d
= (a + a) + (b + b)(Te TL ) (11) decreasing. To reduce the torque ripple in motoring mode
dt needs to be prevented from entering to negative torque
Where a = D/J, b = 1/J Defining the state variable of district. Hence, controlling the current and selecting the
speed error as e = switching surface as: suitable turn on and turn off angles will lead to the minimized
torque ripples in the SRM drives. For this purpose, each
Sd = e + e (12) phase current control loop has identical hysteresis controller.
and choosing Lyapunov function as: The aim of the SMC approach is to define asymptotically
stable surfaces such that all system trajectories converge
V1 = 1/2 Sd 2 (13) to these surfaces and slide along them until achieving the
origin at their intersection. Nevertheless, the heuristic sliding
we have:
parameters are required to be chosen properly. In order
V1 = Sd Sd to eliminate the trial-and-error process, a powerful multi-
[ ] (14)
= Sd ( + a) bu + bTL b(P + P ) objective algorithm is used to determine the proper parame-
ters. Adaptive sliding mode control parameters such as , K1
Where: in Eq.18, in Eq.20 and the turn on angle (on ) and turn
[ ] off angle (of f ) have been optimized by using EM-MOPSO
P (t) = 1/b a + b(Te TL ) by considering the magnetic saturation of SRM. In order to
(15)
P (t) = P (t) P (t) optimize these parameters, minimization of Integral Squared
Error (ISE) of torque ripple and speed can be considered as
The estimated value of the lumped uncertainty is P (t) and objectives. The Integral Squared Error of torque and speed
P (t) is the estimated error between the actual value P (t) and are calculated using Eqs. 22 and 23 respectively.
the estimated value of the lumped uncertainty. Therefore, the
new candidate function is ISE Speed = (ref )2 dt (22)
( )
V2 = 0.5 Sd 2 + (1/) P 2 (16)
ISE T orque = (Tref Te )2 dt (23)
So we have:
[ ]
So the two objectives are given as follows:
V2 = Sd ( + a) b(u + P ) + bTL + K1 Sd
1 (17) f1 = min(ISE Speed) (24)
P ( P + bSd ) K1 Sd 2

If control input u is chosen as: f2 = min(ISE T orque) (25)
1[ ]
The torque ripple coefficient is obtained as follows:
u= ( + a) bP + bTL + K1 Sd (18)
b Te max Te min
One can obtain: Ti = (26)
Te mean

V2 = K1 Sd 2 P (1/ P + bSd ) (19) Where Te max , Te min and Te mean are the maximum,
minimum and mean values of the total torque.
Hence, adopting the adaptation law:
VI. T HE SIMULATION RESULTS

P = bSd (20) In this section, to demonstrate the effectiveness of the op-
Eq. 19 gives: timal adaptive sliding mode controller, simulation of simple
V2 = K1 Sd 2 0 (21) adaptive sliding mode controller and optimal controller were
made. Simulations are established in MATLAB/SIMULINK
and the speed error tends to zero at infinite time can be software for a four phases, 4-kw SRM. The model takes
concluded, by using the Lyapunov stability theorem. magnetic saturation into account. At first the parameters of

374
 Iphase/act
A

B D0

ref Adaptive sliding Iref Hysteresis

mode speed Limiter Current Converter C C0

controller controller
D B0

A0

on of f 1

d
dt

Commutation
EM-MOPSO
Angle

Fig. 5: The closed-loop SRM drive speed controller based on EM-MOPSO

1
Population particle Repository member
TABLE I: PARAMETER SELECTION 0.9

0.8
0.19
Parameters EM-MOPSO 0.7
0.18

0.17

Number of variables 5

Normalized ISE Torque

0.16
0.6
0.15
Population size 50 0.5 0.14

Number of iteration 100 0.4

0.13

0.12

Inertia weight (w) 1 0.3

0.11

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Inertia weight damping rate (wdamp ) 0.99 0.2

c1 , c2 2,3 0.1

Mutation rate 0.3

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Repository size 30 Normalized ISE Speed

Fig. 6: The obtained Pareto fronts by using EM-MOPSO for the

optimal adaptive sliding mode controller

TABLE II: OPTIMUM PARAMETERS 220

200
Parameters EM-MOPSO With try and error
180

523.75 80 160

K1 670.7 1200 140

100 3
Speed [rpm]

120
202
on 20 30 100
201

of f 51 51 80 200

5.8 107
199
Best ISE-Speed - 60
198

Best ISE-Torque 7.3 105 - 40

0.146 0.148 0.15 0.152 0.154

20
ref OASMC ASMC

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
Time [sec]

Fig. 7: Motor speed comparison between simple adaptive sliding

adaptive sliding mode controller are obtained by trial and
error, then these parameters obtained by EM-MOPSO.
The parameters for EM-MOPSO actually used in the
simulations are summarized in Table I. All the particle of
population are randomly initialized within the search space
specified by their lower and upper bounds, [0, 60] for turn
on and off angles and [0, 2000] for parameters of controller.
The best and maximum values of the ISE-speed, ISE-torque
in the time interval [0, 0.3] seconds and their corresponding
optimal adaptive sliding mode control parameters for speed
controller, turn on and off angles by using EM-MOPSO
are reported in Table II. The best value of the ISE-speed,
ISE-torque ripple were obtained according to the minimum
distance to the origin. The obtained Pareto front by using
EM-MOPSO is given in Figure 6, that objective function
values are normalized by the maximum of the ISE-speed
and ISE-torque ripple. The desired rotor speed is set to
200rpm and the external load torque is suddenly changed
at t = 0.2s from 4 to 8N.m. The simulation results of
mode controller(ASMC) and optimal controller(OASMC)
the closed-loop speed controlled system such as total torque
and step response of speed for parameters that are obtained
from trial and error and from optimization are demonstrated
in Figure 7, 8 and 9. Figure 9 shows that performance
of electromagnetic torque has been increased to a value
corresponding to the load and obviously can be observed
that torque ripple associated with using optimal controller
operation is significantly decreased.
VII. C ONCLUSION
This paper presented an multi-objective optimization
method, which is called Elitist-Mutated MOPSO, to design
an optimal robust sliding mode tracking controller with
good accuracies for a four-phase SRM drive. The target
was to reduce the ripple of torque and speed at the same
with consideration of ISE-speed and ISE-torque. Since the

375
 5
OASMC Tref ASMC [2] M. Alrifai, M. Zribi, M. Rayan, and R. Krishnan, Speed control of
4.5
switched reluctance motors taking into account mutual inductances
4
and magnetic saturation effects, Energy Conversion and Management,
3.5
vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 12871297, 2010.
3
[3] I. Agirman, A. M. Stankovic, G. Tadmor, and H. Lev-Ari, Adaptive
Torque[N.m]

2.5

4.5
torque-ripple minimization in switched reluctance motors, Industrial
2
Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 664672, 2001.
1.5 4
[4] S. Rafael, P. Santos, and J. Pires, An adaptive pid speed controller
1 3.5
for an 8/6 switched reluctance machine, in Power Engineering, En-
0.5 3
ergy and Electrical Drives (POWERENG), 2013 Fourth International
0
0.121 0.122 0.123 0.124
Conference on, pp. 11471150, IEEE, 2013.
0.105 0.11 0.115 0.12 0.125
Time[sec]
0.13 0.135 0.14 0.145 0.15
[5] H. Hasanien, Speed control of switched reluctance motor using an
adaptive neuro-fuzzy controller, in Proceedings of the World Congress
Fig. 8: Motor torque comparison between simple adaptive sliding on Engineering, vol. 2, 2013.
mode controller(ASMC) and optimal controller(OASMC) [6] L. O. Henriques, L. G. Rolim, W. I. Suemitsu, P. J. Branco, and J. A.
Dente, Torque ripple minimization in a switched reluctance drive by
neuro-fuzzy compensation, Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 36,
10 no. 5, pp. 35923594, 2000.
18
9
[7] M. Feyzi and Y. Ebrahimi, Direct torque control of 5-phase 10/8
16 8
switched reluctance motors, Iranian Journal of Electrical & Elec-
14 7

6
tronic Engineering, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 205214, 2009.
12
0.382 0.384 0.386 0.388 0.39 0.392 [8] H. Tahersima, M. Kazemsaleh, M. Tahersima, and N. Hamedi, Opti-
Torque [N.m]

10
mization of speed control algorithm to achieve minimum torque ripple
8
for a switched reluctance motor drive via ga, in Power Electronics
6
Systems and Applications (PESA), 2011 4th International Conference
4 on, pp. 17, IEEE, 2011.
2 [9] L. Kalaivani, P. Subburaj, and M. Willjuice Iruthayarajan, Speed
0
0.15 0.2 0.25
OASMC

0.3
Tre f

0.35
ASMC

0.4
control of switched reluctance motor with torque ripple reduction us-
Time [Sec] ing non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (nsga-ii), International
Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, vol. 53, pp. 6977,
Fig. 9: Torque step change for both controllers 2013.
[10] M. Feyzi, M. Shafiei, M. B. Kouhshahi, and S. Mozaffari Niapour,
Position sensorless direct torque control of brushless dc motor drives
based on sliding mode observer using nsga-ii algorithm optimization,
reduction in torque ripple is one of the most important issues in Power Electronics, Drive Systems and Technologies Conference
in SRM driver, adjust the parameters of the speed controller (PEDSTC), 2011 2nd, pp. 151156, IEEE, 2011.
is important with consider the torque ripple. The selection [11] J. Kennedy, J. F. Kennedy, and R. C. Eberhart, Swarm intelligence.
Morgan Kaufmann, 2001.
of sliding coefficients affects the performance of the con- [12] C. A. C. Coello, G. T. Pulido, and M. S. Lechuga, Handling
troller in terms of transient response. Here by appropriately multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization, Evolutionary
selecting coefficients of the adaptive sliding mode controller Computation, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 256279, 2004.
[13] A. Konak, D. W. Coit, and A. E. Smith, Multi-objective optimization
based on EM-MOPSO, the system became robust, stable and using genetic algorithms: A tutorial, Reliability Engineering & System
achieve fast response with low ripple in steady state speed Safety, vol. 91, no. 9, pp. 9921007, 2006.
and torque responses than non-optimized system. [14] A. P. Engelbrecht, Computational intelligence: an introduction. John
Wiley & Sons, 2007.
[15] P. K. Tripathi, S. Bandyopadhyay, and S. K. Pal, Multi-objective
ACKNOWLEDGMENT particle swarm optimization with time variant inertia and acceleration
coefficients, Information Sciences, vol. 177, no. 22, pp. 50335049,
2007.
[16] C. A. C. Coello, G. T. Pulido, and M. S. Lechuga, Handling
TABLE III: SRM PARAMETERS multiple objectives with particle swarm optimization, Evolutionary
Computation, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 256279, 2004.
Stator Poles 8 [17] M. J. Reddy and D. Nagesh Kumar, Multi-objective particle swarm
optimization for generating optimal trade-offs in reservoir operation,
Rotor Poles 6 Hydrological Processes, vol. 21, no. 21, pp. 28972909, 2007.
Rated Power 4kw [18] C.-A. Chen, H.-K. Chiang, and B.-R. Lin, The novel adaptive
Rated Voltage 280V /phase sliding mode control for current sensorless synchronous reluctance
motor speed drive, in Industrial Technology, 2008. ICIT 2008. IEEE
Rated phase current 18A International Conference on, pp. 16, IEEE, 2008.
Phase Resistance 0.7 [19] M. N. Isfahani, A. Rashidi, and S. Saghaian-Nejad, Energy-based
SR motor Inertia 0.008N m.s2 adaptive sliding mode speed control for switched reluctance motor
drive system, Iranian Journal of Electrical & Electronic Engineering,
Max. Inductance 110mH vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 6875, 2012.
Min. Inductance 10mH [20] R. Marino and P. Tomei, Nonlinear control design: geometric, adaptive
System Inertia 0.08N m.s2 and robust. Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd., 1996.
System friction coeff. 0.0065N m.s

R EFERENCES
[1] R. Krishnan, Switched reluctance motor drives: modeling, simulation,
analysis, design, and applications. CRC press, 2001.

376