Robust Nonlinear Position Control of BLDC Motor
with Friction
Maha Sabra, Bashar Khasawneh, Mohamed Zohdy
Oakland University
msabra, bykhasaw, zodyma@oakland.edu
Abstract- In this paper, the Control Lyapunov Function (CLF)
approach is used for position control of permananent magnet
BLDC motors. A nonlinear dynamic DC motor model including
the nonlinear friction torque is used. The closed loop control
used guarantees the system’s stability and achieves the desired
behaviour. The robustness of the control method is also proven
in regards to the system parameters and to the control
parameters which makes it a versatile method with only few
control parameters.
I. INTRODUCTION
The control of the AC motors used for high performance
application such as the automotive electric drive is an
important topic for traction electricfication. The control of
BLDC motor is important since all AC machine utilize
similar control methods. The permanent magnet series DC
motor or brushless DC (BLDC) has the permanent magnets
on the rotor and the windings on the stator. Effectively this
motor is an AC motor. The current alternates from positive to
negative during each electrical cycle with either a trapezoidal
or sinusoidal back-EMF waveform which matches the applied
voltage waveform as closely as possible. For this reason, its
control is similar to that of other motors and many of the
control techniques used with a DC motor can equally be
applied to a permanent magnet synchronous motor.
A nonlinear control method using Control Lyapuov
Functions is introduced. The method consists of designing a
Lyapunov function together with a feedback control that
makes that function decrease. The Lyapunov stability theory
is named after Aleksandr Mikhailovich Lyapunov, a Russian
mathematician who published his book "The General
Problem of Stability of Motion" in 1892. According to this
theory, the stability of dynamic systems can be determined in
terms of certain scalar functions known as Lyapunov
functions. This can be done for both linear and nonlinear
systems in both continuous-time and discrete-time domains
[1]. The nonlinear systems in [2] to [9] are some of the
examples where the Lyapunov stability theory has been
applied.
The feedback control was proven to make the system stable
and the position control of the nonlinear DC motor possible.
In addition, the robustness of the proposed method was
proven. The load torque was not considered as part of the
control; however it was compensated for since it is
considered as a disturbance. The speed control with the load
torque compensation was better than that without load torque
compensation. The robustness of the proposed method was
978-1-4799-2262-8/14/$31.00 ©2014 IEEE
also tested against variations in both the system parameters
and the control parameters. The simulation results
demonstrate the accuracy and the robustness of the proposed
method
The paper is arranged as follows. Section 2 describes the
theory of Control Lyapunov Function. Section 3 describes the
nonlinear DC motor model. The control of the DC motor
using CLF is proposed in section 3, which aims to improve
the response and robustness of the control. In section 4, the
results are discussed, the robustness of the method is shown
and advantages of the proposed method are validated, and the
results are verified by using different system responses. The
conclusion of this paper is given in section 5
II. THEORY OF CLF
A. Background
Consider the non-linear system represented by the state
space equation
, ; ; (1)
Where x is the state vector and u is the control vector.
According to [10], the system is said to be affine with respect
to the input when it has the form
∑ (2)
wher , , , … , , are continuous vector fields in Rn,
is a stable unforced system, is the designated control,
and is a smooth vector field in Rn. When dealing with
affine systems, it is customary that (3) is required.
0 0, 0 0 (3)
B. Choice of a Suitable CLF
V x is said to be a Lyapunov function of (2) if there exists
a region in the neighborhood of the origin such that 4) is
satisfied.This region is called the region of attraction[11].
0, 0, 0 (4)
where
(5)
and

i
, , , , (6)
R L
+
The Lyapunov stability theorem states that if (2) has the
origin as an equilibrium point and a suitable Lyapunov ,
function such that 0 0 0
0 and 0 for all x, then the origin is stable. In -
addition, if 0 for all 0, then the origin is
globally asymptotically stable. The selection of CLF is such
that continuously differentiable and positive definite.
Figure 1: Equivalent circuit model of a series DC motor
Stability is guaranteed if is positive definite and is
negative definite for all . The converse Lyapunov
theorems prove that the existence of a Lyapunov function is
equivalent to asymptotic stability.
There is no systematic approach for finding Lyapunov
functions; in some cases they are natural energy functions for | | (10
mechanical or electrical systems, in other cases it is just a )
matter of trial and error [11].

C. Control Lyaapunov Function Feedback

For nonlinear systems the control input or feedback law has
where:
a very important role in stabilization. Different feedback
i is the motor current in Amperes A, u is the voltage in
controls have been used [12][13]. The feedback law used is
Volts V, R is the armature resistance in Ohms , L is the
shown in (7). This feedback law is referred to as damping
armature inductance in Henrys H, T is the electric torque in
control [2].
Newton-meters Nm, T is the load torque in Newton-meters
Nm, K is the Back-emf constant in V.s/rad, ω is the rotor’s
; 1,2, , (7)
angular velocity in rad/s, K is the torque constant in Nm/A,
K is the viscous friction coefficient Nm.s/rad, is the load
. . (8) torque in Newton-meters Nm, is the rotor position in
radians rad, is the compensation in angular velocity in
for to be negative definite, the first term . rad/s, is the coulomb friction torque in Nm, is the static
has to be negative definite. friction torque in Nm, α is time constant in s.
We will assume that the load torque T is known. We will
set T = 0 for the control algorithm and treat the load torque as
III. NONLINEAR DC MOTOR MODEL a disturbance. Alternatively, one can assume constant load
The permanent magnet series DC motor model is shown in torques. By setting x x x i ω θ , (10) becomes
(8) and represented by an equivalent circuit model in Figure
1. It is represented by the state equations and the output
equation.

(9)
1 2 (11)
| 2|
1 2 2

The permanent magnets in the motor induce a backward 2

electromotive force in the armature or a back emf, K ω. The 1
motor produces an electric torque T which is proportional to 1
the motor current i 0
0
Adding the nonlinear friction torque terms proposed in [14] The added nonlinear friction torques from [14] and [15]
and surveyed in [15], a more accurate nonlinear DC motor represent the transition from static to kinetic friction by an
model becomes as shown in (9) exponential term in velocity and the dead zone nonlinearity
around the zero speed. The effect of the nonlinear friction
torques can be observed on the actual angular velocity around (13)
the zero speed in Figure 2.

To ensure the stability of the proposed control,

Effect of the Friction Term on the Angular Velocity
0 . For to be negative definite, the first term
3
in (8) . has to be negative definite

2 .
1 R
Omega

-1 (14)
-2 | |

-3 Desired_Omega p
Omega_Actual
-4
1.5 2 2.5
Time
3 3.5 is assumed to be slightly greater than and since
| |The control parameters are selected as in
Figure 2: Effect of the Friction Torque  5 to guarantee that V x
1 0 for all x.

(15)
0
Effect of the Load Torque Compensation

100 Desired_Omega B. Control Input

WithLoadTorqueComp
The choice of the control input takes into account the stability
Angular Velocity

50
NoLoadTorqueComp
0 of the system. For V x , x , x to be negative definite
-50 0, 0, 0 has to be zero and , , has to be negative
-100
for x , x , x 0,0,0 .
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 V 0, 0, 0 0 0 0 and by using equation (7), we chose :
Time

15 (16)
Load_Torque
TABLE I
BASELINE PARAMETERS
Load Torque

10
Parameter Values Unit
5
System Parameters R 0.5
L 0.0005 H
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
J 0.01 Kgm2
Time
Kt 0.05 Nm/A
Kb 0.05 V.s/rad
Figure 3: Effects of the load Torque Compensation
Kv 0.04 Nm.s/rad
Control Parameters p1, p2 30 -
Initial Conditions
10 A
A. The Control Lyapunov Function (CLF)
100 rad/s
Let V(x) be the Lyapunov Function of choice.
θ 2π rad
1 1
1 cos (12)
2 2 IV. DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
where p are the control parameters The simulation for the position control of the DC motor is
0,0, 0 0 and is positive definite , , and performed with the baseline parameters.
All the simulations were performed with a step in load
torque at t=1s from 2Nm for 10Nm. As mentioned before the
load torque is not part of the control method. The load torque
is considered as a disturbance and need to be compensated TABLE III
ROBUSTNESS TO CONTROL PARAMETER VARIATIONS
for. The effect of the load torque is best shown on the angular
speed. Figure 3 shows the effect of the load torque Control Parameter Values
p1, p2 6, 15, 30, 60,150
A. Robustness of the Proposed Method
The robustness of the CLF control design is tested against B. Simulation Results
both the system parameters and the control parameters. Figure 4 shows the position control under the conditions in
1. Variations of the System Parameters Table I in the case of a step change in position. Figure 5
The robustness of the CLF is tested against variations in the shows the position control for a constant speed and therefore
system parameters as shown in Table I a sawtooth angular position varying between 0 and 2π
Variations in the armature (R) are due to changes in
temperature. As shown in TableII, ‘R’ is varied over a wide Angular Position
range. The effect of varying ‘R’ for a step change in angular 5

position (theta) and a saw tooth theta corresponding to a 4

3
constant angular velocity was studied. As R increases, the

Theta
2
error in position remains the same but the error in angular 1

velocity increases which is acceptable since the goal is 0 Desired_Theta

PosControl_ConstTheta
position control. -1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

TABLE II 1
ROBUSTNESS TO SYSTEM PARAMETER VARIATIONS
0
System Parameter Values -1

ThetaError
R 0.02,0.25,0.5,1,1.5 -2

-3
L 0.00005,0.0001,0.0005, 0.001, 0.005 -4
ThetaError_ConstTheta

J 0.005,0.0075,0.01,0.015, 0.02 -5
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time

Kt 30*(0.01,0.03,0.05,0.07, 0.1)
Figure 4-a)
Kb 30*(0.01,0.03,0.05,0.07, 0.1)
2

Variations in the Inductance (L) of the DC motor are

0
usually due to the changes in current. As shown in Table II,
‘L’ is varied over a wide range. The effect of varying ‘L’ for -1

a step change in angular position (theta) and a saw tooth theta

ThetaError

-2
corresponding to a constant angular velocity was studied. As
L increases, the error in position is reduced.. -3

Variations in the moment of inertia (J) of the DC motor are -4

usually due to the changes in the motor’s mechanical design.
No effect on the position or current were noted when J is -5

varied. Variations in J, however, resulted into variation on the -6

ThetaError_ConstTheta

0.499 0.5 0.501 0.502 0.503 0.504 0.505 0.506

angular velocity. Time

Variations in Kt and Kb of the DC motor are usually due to Figure 4-b)

the changes in the motor’s electromechanical design. As
shown in TableII, Kt and Kb are varied together. The effect of
varying Kt and Kb was only observed on the current and
therefore the electrical torque of the machine. Variations in Kt
and Kb had no effect on the position and the angular velocity.
2. Variations of the Control Parameters
The robustness of the CLF is tested against variations in the
control parameters as shown in 0
Variations in p1 and p2 affect the control input u1. This
results in variations in only current and angular velocity,
which is consistent with the theory.
 Current
10 2

Desired_Current ThetaError_VarTheta
Current_ConstTheta 1
8

0
6

-1
4

ThetaError
Current

-2

2
-3

0
-4

-2 -5

-4 -6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0.66 0.665 0.67 0.675
Time Time

Figure 4-c) Figure5-b)

Angular Velocity Angular Velocity
100 100

Desired_Omega Desired_Omega
Omega_ConstTheta Omega_VarTheta
80 80

60 60

Omega
Omega

40 40

20 20

0 0

-20 -20
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time Time

Figure 4-d) Figure5-c)

Current
Figure 4: Position Control. with a Step change in Theta 10

a) Desired versus actual angular position and error

b) Close up view of the error in angular position 8
c) Desired versus actual angular velocity
d) Desired versus actual current 6

4
Current

Angular Position
10 2

Desired_Theta
8
PosControl_VarTheta 0
6
Theta

-2 Desired_Current
4
Current_VarTheta
2
-4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0
Time
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

2 Figure 5-d)
0
Figure 5: Position Control. with a variable Theta
a) Desired versus actual angular position and error
ThetaError

-2

-4
b) Close up view of the error in angular position
c) Desired versus actual angular velocity
-6
ThetaError_VarTheta
d) Desired versus actual current
-8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time

Figure 5-a)
 V. CONCLUSION [12] E. D. Sontag, “A Lyapunov-like characterization of asymptotic
controllability,” SIAM Journal of Control and Optimization, vol. 21,
In this paper, a CLF method is used to for position control pp. 462–471, 1983.
of a nonlinear DC motor model. The closed loop control used [13] F. H. Clarke, Y. S. Ledyaev, E. D. Sontag and A. I. Subbotin,
"Asymptotic controllability implies feedback stabilization,"
was proven to make the system stable and the position control Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 42, pp. 1394-1407,
of the non-linear BLDC motor possible.. The load torque was 1997.
not considered as part of the control; however it was [14] De Carli, A., S. Cong, and D. Matacchioni. "Dynamic friction
compensation in servodrives." Control Applications, 1994.,
compensated for since it is considered as a disturbance. In Proceedings of the Third IEEE Conference on. IEEE, 1994.
addition, the proposed method was proven to be robust to [15] B. Armstrong-Hélouvry, P. Dupont and C. C. De Wit, "A survey of
variations in both the system parameters and the control models, analysis tools and compensation methods for the control of
machines with friction," Automatica, vol. 30, pp. 1083-1138, 7, 1994.
parameters. The simulation results demonstrate the accuracy [16] Thomas, Neenu, and P. Poongodi. "Position control of DC motor
and the robustness of the proposed method. Although there is using genetic algorithm based PID controller." Proceedings of the
no systematic way for the choice of the Lyapunov function World Congress on Engineering. Vol. 2. 2009.
and the corresponding control inputs, the CLF method is a [17] X. Shi, M. Krishnamurthy, "Survivable Operation of Induction
Machine Drives with Smooth Transition Strategy for EV
versatile method to use. The advantages of the proposed Applications", IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in
method are its robustness to parameter variations and most Power Electronics, 2014
important is the low number of control parameters needed to [18] Y. Da, X. Shi, M Krishnamurthy, “A new approach to fault
diagnostics for permanent magnet synchronous machines using
get the desired behavior as opposed to the Genetic Algorithm electromagnetic signature analysis”, IEEE Transactions on Power
method proposed in [16] and the standard ZN method also Electronics 28 (8), 4104-4112
shown in [16]. [19] Shao, Baiming, and Ali Emadi. "A digital control for switched
reluctance generators." In Mechatronics (ICM), 2011 IEEE
As a summary, CLF method was used for the nonlinear International Conference on, pp. 182-187. IEEE, 2011.
posiion control of a BLDC motor. The method consists of [20] Shao, Baiming, Srdjan M. Lukic, and Ali Emadi. "A digital current
designing a Lyapunov function together with a control that control for switched reluctance motor drives." In Industrial
Electronics (ISIE), 2010 IEEE International Symposium on, pp. 1163-
makes it decrease. The simplicity of the control and its
1168. IEEE, 2010.
robustness yet with only two control parameters are the main
advantages of this method and can be extended to the control
of other motors such as [17] to [20].
REFERENCES
[1] Z. Gajic, M. Qureshi, “Lyapunov Matrix Equation in System Stability
and Control”, San Diego: Academic Press, 1995, pp.1-15
[2] Taheri, B.; Case, D.; Richer, E., "Design of robust nonlinear force and
stiffness controller for pneumatic actuators," Decision and Control
(CDC), 2012 IEEE 51st Annual Conference on , vol., no.,
pp.1192,1198, 10-13 Dec. 2012.
[3] Pahlevaninezhad, M.; Das, P.; Drobnik, J.; Moschopoulos, G.; Jain,
P.K.; Bakhshai, A., "A Nonlinear Optimal Control Approach Based
on the Control-Lyapunov Function for an AC/DC Converter Used in
Electric Vehicles," Industrial Informatics, IEEE Transactions on ,
vol.8, no.3, pp.596,614, Aug. 2012.
[4] F. Alazabi and M. Zohdy, "Nonlinear Uncertain HIV-1 Model
Controller by Using Control Lyapunov Function," International
Journal of Modern Nonlinear Theory and Application, Vol. 1 No. 2,
2012, pp. 33-39.
[5] K. Gu, M. A. Zohdy and N. K. Loh, "Necessary and sufficient
conditions of quadratic stability of uncertain linear systems,"
Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 35, pp. 601-604, 1990.
[6] A. M. Harb, A. A. Zaher, A. A. Al-Qaisia and M. A. Zohdy,
"Recursive backstepping control of chaotic Duffing oscillators,"
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 34, pp. 639-645, 10, 2007.
[7] A. ABDUL-WAHAB and M. A. ZOHDY, "Generalized linear
transformations on the design of robust dynamic output feedback
controllers," Int J Control, vol. 48, pp. 1241-1266, 09/01; 2013/01,
1988.
[8] A. Al-Qaisia, A. Harb, A. Zaher and M. Zohdy, "Robust estimation-
based control of chaotic behavior in an oscillator with inertial and
elastic symmetric nonlinearities," J. Vibrat. Control, vol. 9, pp. 665-
684, 2003.
[9] A. A. Zaher, "Nonlinear control of systems with multiple equilibria
and unknown sinusoidal disturbance," Communications in Nonlinear
Science and Numerical Simulation, vol. 12, pp. 1518-1533, 12, 2007.
[10] A. Bacciotti, L. Rosier, “Liapunov Functions and Stability in Control
Theory”, London:Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp.19-154
[11] H. K. Khalil, “Nonlinear Systems”, 3rd ed.New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
2002, pp.111-161