Adaptive Iterative Learning Control of Switched

Reluctance Motors for Minimizing Energy

Conversion Loss and Torque Ripple
1*
Shun-Chung Wang, 2Yi-Hua Liu, 3Shun-Jih Wang, 1Yih-Chien Chen, 1Shou-Zhuang Lin
1
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Lunghwa University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
2
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Far East University of Science and Technology, Tainan 744, Taiwan
3
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 106, Taiwan
*
corresponding author e-mail: wangsc.hinet@msa.hinet.net, wangsc@mail.lhu.edu.tw, scwang.hinet@msa.hinet.net

Abstract-In this paper, an adaptive iterative learning
control based on the accurate magnetization
characteristics of the SRM is proposed to minimize the
torque ripple and electromagnetic energy conversion losses
by tuning the energization parameters of commutation
angles and duty ratio. The electromagnetic energy
conversion and torque in SRM are functions of the flux-
linkage, current, and rotor angle. The optimal excitation
current profile will result in optimal speed response, co-
energy generation, and minimum torque ripple. An
automatic characterizing system is developed to identify
the SRMs’ static magnetization curves accurately and take
the nonlinearity of the magnetic circuit into account. The
dSPACE DS1104 controller is utilized to setup the drive
system for simulation and implementation. Experimental
tests of a 4-phase 8/6 pole SRM at different operation
conditions are given to demonstrate the effectiveness and
performance of the proposed method.
I. INTRODUCTION
Switched reluctance motors (SRMs) drives have gained
popularity for industrial servo-control applications due to their
outstanding features, including simple and rugged structure,
easy maintaining and cooling, high torque-inertia ratio,
robustness and reliability, wide speed range capability, high
efficiency, smaller dimension, and low cost, etc. However, the
performance of the SRM is naturally affected by the non-
linear characteristics of the motor’s magnetic structure and the
used material. Consequently, the induced electromagnetic
torque varies nonlinearly with the rotor position because of the
heavily magnetic saturation.
In SRM, commutation angles (turn-on Ton and turn-off Toff)
are the key factors that influenced the energy conversion loss
and torque ripple. Commutation angles predominate the rising
time and falling time of the current waveform because the
machine inductance varies with both current and rotor position.
Therefore, at low speed the back emf is lower than the supply
voltage, and the current can be regulated by chopping. A
simple strategy is to apply constant current through the
positive slope regions of phase inductance. On the other hand,
the advanced Ton control have to be applied at high speed
operation. This permits fluxing current to grow to an adequate
level for satisfying speed requirement, and the Toff must be
controlled according to Ton tuning to satisfy the torque
requirement and avoid the de-fluxing falling current touching
the negative slope regions of the inductance profile to produce
the negative torque. The shape of the energy-conversion loop
is another important guide to the effectiveness of the basic
control strategies, and it is often the main objective in optimal
efficiency control to minimize its area for adjusting Ton and
the duty ratio of the applied PWM voltage.
Recently, several papers have considered the energy
optimum control strategy of the SRM. These presented
approaches demonstrate well overall efficiency in drive
system, especially when they are operated at high-speed
conditions. In [1], an energy optimizing control strategy,
based on the adjustment of the exciting turn-on angle, is
suggested to minimize the DC-link power consumption under
desired operating conditions. However, the searching time of
optimal-energy algorithm is strongly dominated by the initial
guess of turn-on and turn-off angles, and the torque ripple at
low speed is considerable. Y. A. Kwon [2] presents an optimal
excitation method for the SRM drive. A variable voltage
source is applied to maximize the overall drive efficiency,
expand range of operating torque and speed, and reduce the
torque ripple. In general, direct change of the supply voltage
of the SRM is not appropriate in practical application, and the
current waveform is not easy to profile. Torrey and Lang [3]
used detailed simulations of a motor model to predict the
numerical optimization of the motor drives, and then
experimental drives are implemented to demonstrate that the
maximum drive efficiency was indeed obtained by using the
predicted excitation control parameters. However, there are
two factors, including battery power source variation and
angular resolution limitation, make the drive efficiency have
an experimental error within 6%. The torque control of SRM
is normally divided into two control phases. At first a suitable
phase current profile for the desired torque is determined so
that torque ripples are minimized. Then a current controller is
designed to generate this desired current. Panda etc. propose a
series of papers that research and design the torque and current
controller of SRM using iterative learning control (ILC)-based
method [4]-[8]. The proposed controller uses a sliding mode
controller (SMC) combined with ILC for accurate current and

1-4244-0655-2/07/$20.00©2007 IEEE 1796

torque tracking. Due to the finite time limited for ILC learning,
an SMC for improving control performance during transient
periods is adopted. Then, the ILC iteratively learns and
compensates for any model inaccuracy. The proposed scheme
does not require an accurate plant model and is easy for rea-
time implementation.
Problems of minimization energy conversion loss and
torque ripple are investigated in this paper. At first, an
experimental measurement work is performed in advance to
identify the magnetization characteristics of the SRM
precisely, and the measured static model is used as an accurate
knowledge to minimize the objective functions of the SRM
drive system. Then, according to the operation conditions, a
set of starting control parameters (Ton-s, Toff-s, and Iref-s) is
provided based on the calculation and interpolation of the
lookup table to agree with the torque-speed requirement and
speed up the starting response. Finally, an adaptive iterative
learning control (AILC) strategy is proposed to optimize the
exciting current profile by iteratively tuning the control
parameters of the turn-on angle, turn-off angle, and duty ratio
of the applied PWM voltage waveform to achieve the
purposes of minimization electromagnetic energy conversion
loss and torque ripple.
II. MODELING OF SRM MAGNETIZATION CHARACTERISTICS
A. Mathematical Derivation
Illustrated in Fig. 1(a) and (b) are the cross-section profile
and single phase equivalent circuit of a four-phase 8/6 pole
SRM, respectively. Assuming the SRM is single phase
excitation, and the elementary equivalent circuit can be
derived ignoring mutual inductance between the phases as
follows. The voltage across a phase winding is equal to the
sum of the resistive voltage drop and the rate of the flux
linkages, and can be given by
Fig.1. (a) Structure profile of 4 phase 8/6 poles SRM. (b) Single-phase
equivalent circuit.
d O (T r , i )
v(t ) R ˜ i (t )  (1).
dt
Where v(t) is the voltage, i(t) is excitation current, R is
winding resistance, Tr is rotor angle, and O is the flux linkage
of per phase. Because single phase energization and the
magnetic mutual coupling between the adjacent phases is
neglected hypothetically, the induced flux linkage is
uninfluenced by the other phase currents, and it will be only
1797
related to the excitation current and self-inductance, i.e.
O=L(Tr, iʼ˜i(t). Hence (1) can be rewritten as
di dL(T r , i )
v(t ) R ˜ i (t )  L(T r , i )  iZr (2).
dt dT r
Where Zr is the rotor angular speed. In (2), the terms on the
right-hand side express the resistive voltage drop, inductive
voltage drop, and induced back emf, respectively. In SRM, the
coenergy Wce is equal to the area enclosed by the curve of flux
linkage versus current over an exercitation cycle, and can be
indicated by
i
Wce (T r , i ) ³0 O (T r , i) di T constant (3).
r
Substituting O into (3), the coenergy can be derived as
1
Wce (T r , i ) L(T r , i ) ˜ i 2 (4).
2
The induced electromagnetic torque of the SRM is related to
the coenergy change. For the case of constant excitation, the
electromagnetic torque Te can be obtained from the derivative
of coenergy versus rotor displacement and indicated by
wWce (T r , i ) 1 2 dL(T r , i )
Te (T r , i ) i constant i (5)
wT r 2 dT r
B. Automatic Identification System
As mathematical derivation above, the flux linkage
evaluation is the starting point for modeling the SRM. Then,
the phase inductance profile, coenergy, and induced
electromagnetic torque can be determined from the obtained
curves of flux linkage versus current under different rotor
positions. Rearranging and integrating (1) over a time period,
the flux linkage is expressed by
t
O (t ) O (0)  ³0 ª¬ v(t )  R ˜ i (t )  VQD º¼ dt (6).
Where O(0) is the flux linkage at time t = 0, VQD is the total
on-state voltage drops of the power transistors or diodes in the
converter.
Thus, if the winding resistance R and VQD are known, the
instantaneous voltage and current of the winding are measured,
and a pulsed dc voltage source with variable duty ratio is used
to energize a motor winding at a locked rotor position, the flux
linkage versus current as a function of rotor position under all
desired test rotor angles can be obtained by using (6) and a
digital integration technique. An improved indirect
measurement and post experimental method based on a fully
automatic measurement apparatus is presented to determine
the flux linkage. Shown in Fig. 2 is the hardware architecture
of the proposed automatic identification system. When the
flux-linkage is obtained by using the procedure described
above, the value of the self-inductance under different rotor
angle can be calculated by LːO(Tr, iʼ/i(t). The inductance
profile derived in this manner has covered the geometrical
factor and saturation effect. Under the converter control, the
inductance can be merged with the analytical model of an
SRM to predict the drive performance. Moreover, the co-
energy and induced electromagnetic torque can be determined
from the flux linkage curves versus current under different
rotor positions by using (4) and (5) respectively. The
measured static magnetization characteristics under the rotor
angles from aligned position (0o) to unaligned position (30o)
of the test SRM in this study is shown in Fig. 3.
III. ADAPTIVE ITERATIVE LEARNING CONTROL
A. Control Parameters
In SRM, exciting commutation angles (Ton, Toff) and duty
ratio D (gain) of the current controller are the dominate
control parameters for current profile. The current regulation
is an equation of the timing and width of the voltage pulses.
The discussion of the influence effect as follows.
Fig.2. Automatic parameter identification system.
(a) flux-linkage-current curve.
(b) inductance-angle profile.
(c) coenergy-torque profile.
Fig. 3. Magnetization characteristics of the studied SRM.
1798
„ Duty ratio versus current profile: The step response of
current in the SRM equivalent circuit can be expressed by
R
v(t ) v(t ) ( L )t
i (t )  e (7)
R R
The current i(t) varies with the function of time t.
Therefore, the duty ratio of the applied PWM voltage will
predominately influence the rise time, falling time, and
amplitude of the excitation current waveform. These
factors will affect the machine speed, electromagnetic
energy conversion loss, and torque ripple.
„ Ton versus current profile: For the operation speed above
base value, a typical advanced turn-on angle strategy is
used to assure that the current can reach the command
value in time to avoid partial current waveforms presenting
on the negative slop ranges of the inductance and produce
the required load torque and speed. However, the advanced
exciting angle will lead to the more current presenting on
the segment of the almost constant inductance (unaligned
position). Injecting current and voltage on the constant
inductance segment can not contribute in effect torque
generation, and the invalid current will induce serious
copper loss and switching loss to result in worse operation
efficiency. Therefore, the optimal turn-on angles can
minimize area of the energy conversion loop and reduce
the invalid region of the current profile.
„ Toff versus current profile: In the commutation period, the
outgoing phase winding release the energy to the DC bus,
and the exciting current decreases toward the zero. The Toff
and duty ratio predominate the falling time of the
demagnetization current. To minimize the torque ripple,
the Toff must be appropriate control to avoid the falling
current presenting on the negative slope region of the
inductance where will generate the opposite torque to
induce worse torque ripple effect. However, the advanced
Toff will decrease the exciting conduction angle (Toff-Ton),
such that will decrease the produce torque.
B. Problem Formulation
The minimization problem of the energy conversion loss
and torque ripple through the adaptive iterative learning
control of the exciting commutation angles and duty ratio
based on the accurate magnetization characteristics
identification can be formulated by
­° fTr (T on , T off , D)
Minimize ®
°̄ f Pec (T on , T off , D) (8).
Subject to Zr Zdesired , i (Ton , v)  I max , v  VDC  max
Where fTr is the torque ripple function, fPec is the energy
conversion loss function, Zdesired is desired speed, Imax and VDC-
max are current and voltage constraints. The objective functions
for minimizing the energy conversion loss and torque ripple
are depicted as follows.
„ Energy conversion loss minimization: Typical operating
waveforms and the corresponding energy conversion loops
for voltage control SRM are shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b),
respectively. The current may be conveniently regarded as
a function of flux linkage, exciting turn-on angle, and duty
ratio. The minimum phase current results in minimum
copper loss and converter loss, i.e. the power supplied
from the source is also minimum. For the purpose of the
best efficiency drive, we need to minimize the enclosed
area of the energy conversion loop. Shown in Fig. 4(a)
illustrates the exact turn-on angle (Ton_p) results in less rms
amplitude and maximum overshoot of the current in start
transient, that is significantly smaller than the improper
turn-on angle (Ton). As a result of the improper Ton made
(b)
the current controller spend more switching time
Fig. 4. (a) Typical operating waveforms; (b) Energy conversion loop.
regulating the current to reach the required value. So the
„ Torque ripple minimization: Shown in Fig. 5 is the
enclosed area of the energy conversion loop (ATon) at Ton is
relationship between the phase currents and the average
greater than the conversion loop (ATon_p) at Ton_p, as shown
output torque. In practice situation, the demagnetization of
in Fig. 4(b). The larger loop area means the more power
the outgoing phase and the magnetization of the incoming
consumption at the operating point, and results in worse
phase can not complete immediately during the process of
drive efficiency. In addition to the energy conversion loop
the phase commutation. Such that the falling and rising
affected by the current profile, the drive system efficiency
rate of the exciting current are too slow to follow the
is also affected by the exciting angle. Turn-on angle
desired command, and result in worse torque ripple.
advance control at high-speed operation is necessary for
Maybe a current controller with high dynamic response
producing the required torque and speed. However, the
can provide a feed-forward compensation to improve the
exciting angle is advanced toward constant inductance
response dynamic and obtain a flat-topped current profile.
segment (angles between TT and Ton as shown in Fig. 4(a)).
In addition, for the optimal current profile programming,
According to the torque equation, constant inductance area
the turn-on angle and duty ratio must be controlled
is not contributing in torque generation, and the invalid
simultaneously to increase the rising rate and limit the
current will induce serious copper loss and switching loss
maximum overshoot of the current. On the other hand, for
to result in worse operation efficiency. Therefore, the
the purpose of the minimization torque ripple, the turn-off
optimal turn-on angles can minimize area of the energy
angle and duty ratio must be controlled simultaneously to
conversion loop and reduce the invalid region of the
increase the falling rate of the current and avoid generating
current.
opposite torque.

(a)

Fig. 5. Relationship between current profile and torque ripple.

1799
C. Adaptive Iterative Learning Control Method According to the convergence criterion of the AILC, the
The adaptive iterative learning control (AILC) is an iterative following inequality must satisfy
algorithm based on the adaptive tuning control parameters to U j  D p /  1, for all t  [0, td ] (11).
reach the optimal output. It is adequately to improve the Where Uj is an identity matrix of size (j×j). For the purpose of
transient behavior of the problems that are processed the minimization torque ripple of the SRM, the Dp can be
recurrently in nature. A simple approach is repeatedly applied presented by
to the plant until perfect tracking is achieved. Through the
wT
iterative learning control, it can speed up system start response, Dp T (12).
produce the optimal system input, and yield the system output wi p
which is as close as possible to the command requirement. According to the (11), the learning ratio can be obtained by
The basic architecture of the AILC is shown in Fig. 6. In order
to feature a good learning ratio and convergence, a fixed time ­ 1
° D  G , if D p ! 0
interval dominates the algorithm operation. In general, a ° p
nonlinear multivariable system can be described by / ® (13).
° 1 , if D p  0
­° x (t ) Ap (t , x)  B p (t )u (t ) ° Dp  G
¯
® (9). Where G is a small positive number that avoid / becoming
°̄ y (t ) C p (t , x)  D p (t )u (t ), t ! 0
infinite when the Dp goes through zero. Then the learning rule
can be defined as

­°'I n 1 (M ) 'I n (M )  /('T n (M ))

Fig. 6. The block diagram of the proposed AILC.
Where x(t )  'i , u (t )  ' k , y (t )  ' j are system state variables,
system inputs, and system outputs, respectively, and
Ap (t , x)  'i , B p (t )  'iuk , C p (t , x)  ' j , D p (t )  ' juk . If tl
is the iterative learning time of the desired output. Assuming
the nonlinear functions, Ap (t , x) and C p (t , x) , are satisfied
with the uniformly globally Lipschitz on the interval [0, tl].
The system input un(t)is stored along with the system output
yn(t), where n is the iteration number. The iterative learning
controller calculates the output for present input, and
compares with the desired output ydesired(t). If the error is not
zero or agrees with the tolerance constraint, a new input un+1(t)
is evaluated to reduce the error from iteration to iteration. The
learning experiences will be stored in the system memory for
use the next time the system operates. The accurate knowledge
base consists of several lookup tables that are created based on
the identified parameters of the SRM. It can provide a set of
sub-optimal start control parameters to improve and speed up
the start response, and provide an accurate knowledge of the
SR model to the iterative controller to increase the
computation accuracy and learning ratio, as well as reduce the
iteration number.
If /  ' k u j is the learning ratio, the learning rule can be
expressed as
u n 1 (t ) u n (t )  / ( ydesired (t )  y n (t )), t  [0, td ] (10)
® n 1 (14).
n 1
°̄ I (M ) I o  'I (M )
Where Io is initial current, 'T=Tdesired-Te is the torque error,
and M is the sampling number of iteration.
D. Control System Configuration
Shown in Fig. 7 is the control system configuration. In the
Fig. 7, two adaptive iterative learning controllers, TCIL
(torque ripple controller) and ECIL (energy conversion loss
controller), are developed to minimize the objective functions
of energy conversion loss and torque ripple, respectively.
While the speed error less than the specified value and the
speed command greater than the command, the system is
enabled to start the tuning mechanism of the duty ratio and
commutation angles. The TCIL takes charge the tuning of the
turn-off angle and duty ratio. The ECIL takes charge the
tuning of the turn-on angle and duty ratio. The input of the
TCIL is the average that is obtained from the T-i-T lookup
table embedded in the accurate knowledge base. The learning
target is the specified torque ripple. The input of the ECIL is
the speed that is obtained from the O-i-T lookup table
embedded in the accurate knowledge base. The learning target
is the power of the DC bus.
Fig. 7. The control system configuration.

1800
 IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The experimental results of a 4-phase 8/6-pole SRM, rated
torque 5.48 N-m, rated voltage 100V, rated current 50A,
maximum speed 6000 rpm, are given to verify the validity of
the proposed control strategy. The asymmetrical half-bridge
converter is used to drive the SRM. The dSPACE DS1104
controller with 10 kHz sampling frequency is utilized to setup
the drive system for simulation and implementation. The
measured waveforms (v, I, O) and energy conversion loops at
the operation condition of 1 Nm and 2000 rpm using the
proposed AILC are shown in Fig. 8. Obviously, the optimal
turn-on angle (Ton=3o) results in less rms current and the
maximum overshoot is significantly smaller than the improper
turn-on angle (Ton=2o and 1.5o). The enclosed area of the
energy conversion loop at Ton=2o and 1.5o (ATon-2 and ATon-1.5)
is greater than the conversion loop at Ton=3o (ATon-3). The
larger loop area means the more power consumption, and
results in worse drive efficiency. Moreover, the power loss of
the Ton advanced effect agrees with the theoretical derivation.
The area A3 is less than A2 and A1.5. Shown in Fig. 9 is the
experimental result for operation conditions of 0.5 Nm 2000
rpm. The starting control parameter (Ton-s, Toff-s, Iref) is (3o,
27.7o, 15A). Obviously, the motor is run smoothly with the
initial parameters control. While the speed fulfils the
command, the minimum energy conversion loss algorithm is
executed by tuning the turn-on angle successively to minimize
the input power Pdc. Fig. 10 shows the output of the command
500 rpm and 1.8 Nm by tuning Ton only. The test result using
the proposed AILC with the same operation command as in
Fig. 10 is shown in Fig. 11. Obviously, the current profile is
advanced improvement to reduce the torque ripple (within 0.2
Nm) and energy conversion loss.
Fig. 8. The energy conversion loop and operating waveforms.
1801
V. CONCLUSIONS
An adaptive iterative learning control based on the accurate
magnetization characteristics of the SRM has been developed
in this paper. An experimental measurement work is
performed in advance to identify the magnetization
characteristics of the SRM precisely, and the measured static
model is used as an accurate knowledge. Then, according to
the operation conditions, a set of starting control parameters
(Ton-s, Toff-s, and Iref-s) is provided based on the calculation and
interpolation of the parameter lookup tables to agree with the
torque-speed requirement and speed up the starting response.
Finally, an adaptive iterative learning control (AILC) strategy,
including ECIL and TCIL controller, is proposed to optimize
the exciting current profile by iteratively tuning the control
parameters of the Ton, Toff, and duty ratio of the applied PWM
voltage waveform to achieve the purposes of minimization
electromagnetic energy conversion loss and torque ripple.
Experimental tests on a 4-phase 8/6 pole SRM at different
operation conditions verify the effectiveness and performance
of the proposed method.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the National Science Council
of Taiwan under grant Contract NSC 92-2213-E-262-011.
Fig. 9. Operation results for n=2000 rpm and T=0.5 Nm.
 REFERENCES
[1] P.C. Kjaer, P. Nielsen, L. Andersen, and F. Blaabjerg, ”A new energy
optimizing Control strategy for switched reluctance motors,” IEEE
Trans. on Industry Applications, vol. 31, no.5, pp.1088-1095, 1995.
[2] Y.A Kwon, “Computation of optimal excitation of a switched reluctance
motor using variable voltage,” IEEE Trans. Industrial Electronics, vol.
45, no. 1, pp. 177-180, 1998.
[3] D.A. Torrey and J.H. Lang, “Optimal-efficiency excitation of variable-
reluctance motor drives,” IEE Proceedings-B, vol. 138. no.1, pp. 1-14,
1991.
[4] N.C. Sahoo, S.K. Panda, and J.X. Xu, “Low torque ripple control of
switched reluctance motors using iterative learning,” IEEE Trans. On
Energy Conversion, vol. 16. no.4, pp. 318-326, 2001.
[5] N.C. Sahoo, S.K. Panda, and J.X. Xu, “Indirect torque control of
switched reluctance motors using iterative learning control,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electronics, vol. 20. no.1, pp. 200-208, Jan. 2005.
[6] N.C. Sahoo, S.K. Panda, and J.X. Xu, “Iterative learning-based high-
performance current controller for switched reluctance motors,” IEEE
Trans. On Energy Conversion, vol. 19. no.3, pp. 491-498, Sept. 2004.
[7] N.C. Sahoo, S.K. Panda, and J.X. Xu, “Iterative learning control based
direct instantaneous torque control of switched reluctance motors,”
IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conference, PESC 2004, vol. 6. pp.
4832-4837, June 2004.
[8] N.C. Sahoo, S.K. Panda, and J.X. Xu, “Iterative learning based torque
controller for switched reluctance motors,” IEEE IECON Annual
Conference, IECON 2003, vol. 3. pp. 2459-2464, Nov. 2003.

Fig. 10. Result of Z*=500 rpm, 1.8 Nm, only tuning șon.

Fig. 11. Result of Z*=500 rpm, 1.8 Nm, tuning with AILC.

1802