2842 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO.

11, NOVEMBER 2010

Effects of Mismatched Parameters in MRAS
Sensorless Doubly Fed Induction Machine Drives
Maria Stefania Carmeli, Member, IEEE, Francesco Castelli-Dezza, Member, IEEE, Matteo Iacchetti, Member, IEEE,
and Roberto Perini, Member, IEEE
AbstractThis paper deals with a performance analysis of sen-
sorless drives based on doubly fed induction machines. Asimplied
model of the whole system equipped with a generic model refer-
ence adaptive system (MRAS) observer is introduced, by taking
also into account a mismatch in the parameters. Three MRAS
known in literature are analyzed in detail and meaningful ana-
lytic relations between the mismatched parameters and the error
in the estimated rotor position during a steady-state operation are
deduced. Then, a stability analysis is performed and the stability
regions of each drive are found. Finally, the theoretical results are
experimentally validated.
Index TermsDoubly fed induction machine (DFIM), sensitivity
analysis, sensorless drive, stability.
I. INTRODUCTION
D
OUBLY fed induction machine (DFIM) is extensively
used in wind-energy conversion due to well-known ad-
vantages: the wide range of speed allowed and the low power
demanded to the rotor converter [1], [2]. Usually, back-to-back
rotor inverters are used: an alternative topology useful to mit-
igate the effects of the grid-voltage sags is proposed in [3]. In
order to obtain high dynamic response, DFIMs are generally
eld-oriented controlled: the design of the rotor current loops
is investigated in [4]. Direct torque and direct power controls
are also used, due to higher insensitivity with respect to the
machine parameters [5], [6]. The reduction of the oscillations
in both power and torque in a doubly fed induction generator
(DFIG) under unbalanced stator voltages is discussed in [7]
and [8]. The guidelines for an improved control of the grid-side
inverter in the back-to-back topology are given in [9].
Over the recent years, the interest toward sensorless schemes
has increased in order to improve the reliability and reduce the
costs. Control schemes based on the integration of the rotor volt-
age model cannot work properly near the synchronous speed,
because of the inverter nonlinearities.
An observer for DFIM capable of a wide speed range is
proposed in [10]; the mechanical speed is estimated by a
phase-locked loop based on a steady-state model. Jain and
Ranganathan [11] dealt with a sensorless stand-alone DFIG:
Manuscript received December 28, 2009; revised March 9, 2010; accepted
May 13, 2010. Date of current version December 3, 2010. Recommended for
publication by Associate Editor D. Xu.
M. S. Carmeli, M. Iacchetti, and R. Perini are with the Department of Elec-
trical Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milano 20133, Italy (e-mail: stefania.
carmeli@polimi.it; matteo.iacchetti@polimi.it; roberto.perini@polimi.it).
F. Castelli-Dezza is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politec-
nico di Milano, Milano 20158, Italy (e-mail: francesco.castellidezza@polimi.it).
Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TPEL.2010.2051163
the slip frequency is obtained without speed estimation. Direct
power control based on the rotor-ux linkage is another tech-
nique that does not require mechanical transducers or speed
estimation [12]. A sensorless scheme for a two-converter motor
drive that allows both the speed inversion and a favorable sizing
is proposed in [13].
The model reference adaptive system (MRAS) is a very
common approach to sensorless controls, due to its simple de-
sign rules and implementation. A comparative analysis of four
MRAS in both stand-alone and grid-connected operation is per-
formed in [14]. In the MRAS proposed in [14], the reference
model is a measured current or a ux linkage estimated by the
voltage model, whereas the adjustable model is always based
on the algebraic relations between uxes and currents. In [14],
a detailed small signal analysis is performed in order to ob-
tain the transfer function of the estimation loop, the design of
the estimation-loop controller is also deeply discussed; how-
ever, the parameters mismatch is not considered. A sensitivity
analysis of the orientation error under parameter mismatch is
performed in [15] and [16] for a stator-ux and a rotor-current
MRAS, respectively; however, the effect of the mismatch on the
stability is not discussed. Complete stability, i.e., local stability
in all the operation conditions, is a desirable characteristic for a
sensorless drive [17], but it is not a priori insured, especially if
the observer parameters are not exactly tuned [18]. In the latter
case, it is interesting to evaluate how the mismatch affects the
stability. Moreover, nonlinear systems can have several equilib-
rium points so that local stability does not guarantee a proper
operation for large perturbations. However, a global stability
analysis is an ambitious goal even with tuned parameters [19].
In this paper, a simplied model is proposed to evaluate the
error in the estimated rotor position and to perform a local
stability analysis of a sensorless DFIMdrive based on an MRAS,
for a given mismatch in the observer parameters. As an example,
the MRAS observers proposed in [14] are considered.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section II, the analyzed
vector control scheme is discussed. Section III is devoted to
deduce a simplied model of the whole system comprehensive
of the mismatch in the parameters. In Section IV, the analyt-
ical evaluation of the orientation error due to a mismatch is
explained. Section V deals with the theoretical stability analy-
sis under mismatch condition. Experimental results are given in
Section VI.
II. CONTROL SCHEME
The scheme analyzed is shown in Fig. 1: the stator is grid-
connected, the machine is speed controlled by a eld-oriented
0885-8993/$26.00 2010 IEEE
CARMELI et al.: EFFECTS OF MISMATCHED PARAMETERS IN MRAS SENSORLESS DOUBLY FED INDUCTION MACHINE DRIVES 2843
Fig. 1. Layout of the system under analysis.
control (FOC) based on the stator ux and by generic MRAS
observer, which exploits both stator and rotor currents and stator
voltages.
The machine equations in a dq frame and in per unit [p.u.]
are as follows:
v
s
= R
s

i
s
+
p

b
+ j
(p
s
)

s
(1)
v
r
= R
r

i
r
+
p

b
+ j
(p
r
)

r
(2)

s
= L
s

i
s
+ L
m

i
r
(3)

r
= L
m

i
s
+ L
r

i
r
(4)
2Hp
m
=

L
m
L
s

(
sq
i
rd

sd
i
rq
) T
r
(5)
where

s
,

r
: stator- and rotor-ux linkage vector [p.u.],
respectively;
v
s
, v
r
: stator- and rotor-voltage vector [p.u.],
respectively;

i
s
,

i
r
: stator- and rotor-current vector [p.u.],
respectively;
L
s
,L
r
,L
m
: stator, rotor, and mutual inductance [p.u.],
respectively;
b = : angular frequency of the line voltages [rad/s];
p = d/dt: derivative operator [1/s];

m
: mechanical angular speed [p.u.];

s
(
r
): direct-axis position with respect to the stator
(rotor) [electrical radians];
: rotor position with respect to the stator [electri-
cal radians];

s
: = +
r
;
T
r
: load torque [p.u.];
H: inertia constant of the whole system [s].
In the FOC, the stator-ux linkage is set on the d axis

s
=
sd
=
s
(6)
where

s
is estimated by integrating the stator-voltage model
(1), set on the stator frame (s).
Fig. 2 reports a general scheme of an MRAS observer for
DFIMs. The reference model produces the reference quantity
y and is independent of the estimated position

, whereas the
adjustable model involves a frame transformation based on

and generates the adjustable quantity

y. A PI regulator (PI
M
)
forces the generalized error between y and

y to zero and
Fig. 2. Scheme of an MRAS for a DFIM.
Fig. 3. Frames used to describe the system machineobservercontrol.
generates the estimated speed

m
. Then,

m
is integrated to
nd the estimated position

.
Then, the estimated speed is

m
=

k
pM
+
k
iM
p

Im

y y

K
MRAS

(7)
where the quantities y and y are set on the frame of the reference
model. The gain K
MRAS
in the denominator of (7) is a suitable
function of the state variables at the operation point. K
MRAS
arises from a small-signal model of the MRAS and is used to
get the transfer function of the estimation loop independent of
the operation point [14].
The analysis of sensitivity proposed in this paper will be ap-
plied to the MRAS observers discussed in [14]; they are denoted
as follows:
1) rotor-current MRAS observer (RCMO);
2) stator-ux MRAS observer (SFMO);
3) rotor-ux MRAS observer (RFMO).
The stator-current MRAS observer (SCMO) will not be con-
sidered, due to its low performance already without any mis-
match in the parameters, as explained in [14].
III. MATHEMATICAL MODEL
A. Scheme of the Whole Sensorless Drive
In Fig. 3, the frame axes are shown: we can distinguish the
stator axis s, the rotor axis r, the ux-oriented axis d, and a
ctitious rotor axis r related to the estimated rotor position

.
(The orthogonal axes are not shown.)
In Fig. 4, a scheme of the sensorless drive is provided; the
following remarks apply (refer to the encircled numbers).
1) The DFIM is represented in the eld-oriented frame dq;
according to this, the dq quantities are related to the
2844 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010
Fig. 4. Block scheme of the whole sensorless system involving space-vector quantities. The estimated parameters are denoted by the hat symbol ().
phase quantities by the rotor three-/two-axis T
0
and the
exp(j
r
) (exact angle) transformations.
2) The normal values of the stator voltage and frequency
(1 p.u.) allow a quite correct estimation of the stator-
ux linkage (see Section III-B); therefore, any uncertainty
in
s
is neglected so that, also in the control, the stator
quantities are reported to the dq frame by exp(j
s
).
3) (1 the output of the speed regulator is a reference current
in a dq frame.
4) (2 the input of the current regulator is the error:

i
ref
r(dq)

i
/
r(dq)
where

i
/
r(dq)
is the estimated rotor-current vector. It derives
from the measured rotor currents i
r(123)
((6 ), by the T
0
and exp(j

r
) transformations. The transformation is
possible only by the estimated angle

r
, because the true
one
r
is unknown.
5) (3 The reference voltage v
ref
r(dq)
must be referred to the
rotor by the estimated angle

r
.
6) (4 The inverter delivers the reference voltage v
ref
r(dq)
to the
induction machine, by the voltages v
r(123)
.
7) (5 The exp(j
r
) transformation, inside the machine,
obviously involves the true angle r.
8) (7 All the observers in [14] exploit the stator-ux linkage

s(s)
, the stator currents set on the stator frame

i
s(s)
,
and the rotor currents

i
r(s)
set on the rotor frame: the last
quantities are directly known by measurements. The even-
tuality of a mismatch in the machine parameters imple-
mented into the observer is taken into account by denoting
these parameters with the symbol (). Finally, to complete
the theoretical model of the whole system, the observer
equations must be expressed in the dq frame; this will
be accomplished in the following for each MRAS given
in [14].
B. Orientation Error
Let the quantity be the difference between the estimated
and true rotor position (see Fig. 3)
=

= = (

r

r
) (8)
where is a new state variable equivalent to

, but is constant
when the systemoperates in a steady and stable condition. Since
the stator-ux linkage is considered as exactly known, fully
Fig. 5. Effect of the orientation error on the current loops.
represents the orientation error in the control. Moreover, inverter
and antialiasing lters will be neglected; then, by focusing only
on the current loops in Fig. 4, (9a) and (9b) and the scheme in
Fig. 5 result

i
/
r(dq)
=

i
r(dq)
e
j
(9a)
v
r(dq)
= v
ref
r(dq)
e
j
. (9b)
In the following, the stator will be considered as connected
to a grid at rated voltage and frequency; in these conditions,
the dynamics of the stator-ux linkage on the dq frame can be
neglected, because in (1), v
s(dq)
dominates. It will be also as-
sumed R
S
= 0; this allows to establish meaningful analytical
relations between the orientation error, the steady-state opera-
tion conditions, and the mismatch in the observer parameters.
R
S
= 0 implies:
S
= v
sq
= 1 p.u. and v
sd
= 0.
In Section VI-E, these assumptions will be rediscussed.
C. Dynamical Equations of the Whole System
The model of the whole system consists of (10)(15).
Rotor equations (see (1)(4), two scalar equations)
p

i
r(dq)
=

b
L
r

v
ref
r(dq)
e
j
+ j
L
m
L
s
(
m
1)
s
[R
r
+ j (1
m
) L
r
]

i
r(dq)

(10)
where is the leakage factor: = 1 L
2
m

(L
s
L
r
).
Mechanical equation [from (5)]
2Hp
m
=

L
m
L
s

s
i
rq
T
r
. (11)
Speed regulator
i
ref
rq
=
1

L
s

L
m

k
p
+
k
i
p

ref
m

. (12)
CARMELI et al.: EFFECTS OF MISMATCHED PARAMETERS IN MRAS SENSORLESS DOUBLY FED INDUCTION MACHINE DRIVES 2845
Current regulator (two scalar equations)
v
ref
r(dq)
=

k
pI
+
k
iI
p

i
ref
r(dq)

i
/
r(dq)

k
pI
+
k
iI
p

i
ref
r(dq)

i
r(dq)
e
j

. (13)
Speed observer

m
=

k
pM
+
k
iM
p

Im( y
dq
y
dq
)

K
MRAS
. (14)
Orientation error [by differentiating (8)]
p =
b
(

m

m
). (15)
Equation (14) derives from (7) by setting the variables on the
dq frame. As previously pointed out about the scheme shown in
Fig. 2, the value K
MRAS
is a function of the operation point and
it can also depend on the machine parameters; then, in general,
only an approximation

K
MRAS
= K
MRAS
can be really imple-
mented in the control. It is worth to deduce (14) step-by-step
starting from (7), for instance, in the case of RCMO.
D. Case Study: RCMO
In RCMO, the reference quantity is simply the rotor current

i
r(r)
set on the rotor frame (directly assessed from measure-
ment), the adjustable quantity is deduced from the stator-ux
linkage

s(s)
and the stator current

i
s(s)
(both set on the
stator frame) by using the algebraic equation (3) and the esti-
mated position

[14], [16]. Then
y
r(r)
=

i
r(r)
(16a)

y
r(r)
=

i
r(r)
=

i
r(s)
e
j

(16b)
K
MRAS
= |i
r(r)
|
2
. (16c)
The reference quantity can be expressed as follows:
y
(r)
=

i
r(r)
=

i
r(dq)
e
j(
s
)
= y
(dq)
e
j(
s
)
(17)
and similarly, for the adjustable quantity, it results in

y
(r)
=

i
r(s)
e
j

s(s)


L
s

i
s(s)

L
m
e
j

s(dq)

L
m

L
s

L
m

i
s(dq)

e
j
s
e
j

L
m

L
s

L
m

i
s(dq)

e
j(
s
)
e
j

y
(dq)
e
j(
s
)
.
(18)
Finally, in (18),

i
s(dq)
must be expressed as a function of
the state variables
s
and

i
r(dq)
by invoking (3) (with matched
parameters, because

i
s(s)
is measured). Thus

y
(dq)
=

s
L
s


L
s

L
m
L
s
+

L
s

L
m
L
m
L
s

i
rdq

e
j
. (19)
Fig. 6. RCMO: Effect of a mismatch in

L
s
(
s
> 1), is forced to zero instead
of ; thus, an orientation error occurs.
For compactness, it is useful to introduce the following mis-
match indexes (only two are independent):

s
=

L
s
L
s

m
=

L
m
L
m
=

s

m
. (20)
Then, the formulation of RCMO on the dq frame becomes
y
(dq)
=

i
r(dq)

y
dq
=

s
L
m
1
s

s
+

i
r(dq)

e
j
Im( y
(dq)
y
(dq)
)
=

s
L
m
1
s

s
(i
rd
sin + i
rq
cos ) +

i
2
rd
+ i
2
rq

sin

K
MRAS
= K
MRAS
=

i
r(r)

2
=

i
2
rd
+ i
2
rq

. (21)
In this case (RCMO), the theoretical gain K
MRAS
is simply
the squared normof the rotor currents that are directly assessable
in the r frame from measurements. This is not the case of
SFMO and RFMO, where K
MRAS
depends on the machine
parameters.
The effect of a mismatch in

L
s
(e.g.,

L
s
> L
s

s
> 1)
is qualitatively represented in Fig. 6; the RCMO quantities,
the rotor currents involved in the system (10)(15), and their
composition are sketched during a generic dynamical situation.
Due to the mismatch, it yields

y
(dq)
=

i
r(dq)
e
j
. Then the
PI inside the observer forces the angle between

y
(dq)
and

i
r(dq)
to zero; but differs from . Consequently, a steady-state
operation point is characterized by an orientation error = 0.
In the same manner, the formulations of the other MRAS,
given in [14], can be rewritten in the dq reference by also taking
into account the mismatch in the parameters.
The expressions of the reference and adjustable terms in-
volved in (15) for each MRAS are presented in Table I.
IV. EQUILIBRIA AND ORIENTATION ERROR EQUATIONS
A. Theoretical Analysis
In this section, a single scalar implicit relation among the
error and the mismatch indexes is established for a generic
steady-state operation.
Ordinary differential equations (10)(15) form an eighth-
order dynamical system. Equation (14) must be referred
to a specied observer, according to the Table I. The in-
puts and the state variables are u = T
r
, i
ref
rd
,
ref
m
and
2846 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010
TABLE I
TERMS OF (14) FOR THE MRAS IN [14] REWRITTEN IN THE dq FRAME
TABLE II
EQUILIBRIUM EQUATIONS FOR THE SYSTEM EQUIPPED WITH THE VARIOUS MRAS GIVEN IN [14] (

K
MRAS
= 0)
x = i
rd
, i
rq
, v
ref
rd
, v
ref
rq
, i
ref
rq
,
m
,

m
, , respectively. More-
over, the dynamical system depends on the inductive machine
parameters q = L
s
, L
m
, L
r
, and on the mismatch indexes
q = ,
s
,
m
; , where is the estimated leakage factor
(used only in RFMO). The dependence on further parameters is
not essential for the next analysis; then, it is not highlighted.
The equilibria of (10)(15) can be found by setting p() = 0
and solving the consequent nonlinear system. However, since
the stator resistance is neglected, the equilibrium conditions can
be reduced to a single equation in the single unknown . The
procedure is as follows.
1) Equations (11), (12), and (15) immediately give:

m
=

m
=
ref
m
i
rq
=
T
r

s
L
s
M
=

T
r
(22)
where

T
r
is introduced for compactness.
2) Equation (13) can be solved with respect to i
rd
and i
ref
rq
as
follows:
i
rd
=
i
ref
rd
cos

T
r
tan i
ref
rq
= i
ref
rd
tan

T
r
cos
.
(23)
3) By substituting (22), (23) into (14), according to Table I,
the following equilibrium equation (24a) is obtained:
h(; u, q, q) = 0. (24a)
Equation (24a) is a single scalar equation in the single un-
known . This nal equilibrium equation is reported in Table II
for each MRAS, and it allows a quick evaluation of in a steady-
state condition and for a given mismatch in the parameters. The
specic dependence on the inputs and on the mismatch indexes
is also highlighted. Equations (24b), (24c), and (24d) in Table II
apply only if

K
MRAS
= 0.
B. Comments
Suitable sensitivity functions could be introduced to evaluate
how the solutions of (24a) depend on the mismatch index [20].
However, the main aspects related to the equilibria expressed
by (24a) can be discussed directly.
1) Rotor-Current MRAS Observer: The orientation error is
affected only by a mismatch in

L
s
, i.e.,
s
= 1: if

L
s
is tuned,
(24b) admits the trivial solution = 0. Moreover, for xed,
and for a given mismatch in the parameters, (24b) is quadratic
in

T
r
and i
ref
rd
so that in the inputs plane (T
r
, i
ref
rd
), the iso-
lines are ellipses passing through the origin (see Figs. 8 and 9).
2) Stator-Flux MRAS Observer: The orientation error is af-
fected only by and, by some manipulations, it can be proved
that in (24c) the inputs T
r
and i
ref
rd
are involved only through
their ratio i
ref
rd
/T
r
. Thus, in the inputs plane (T
r
,i
ref
rd
), the iso-
contour lines are represented by a star of straight lines passing
through the origin (see Figs. 10 and 11). Moreover, if T
r
= 0,
CARMELI et al.: EFFECTS OF MISMATCHED PARAMETERS IN MRAS SENSORLESS DOUBLY FED INDUCTION MACHINE DRIVES 2847
Fig. 7. SFMO: Region without equilibria for < 1
(24c) (valid if

K
MRAS
= 0, i.e., i
ref
rd
= 0) admits the closed
solutions (25)
= 2a tan

i
ref
rd

i
ref 2
rd
+ (
2
1)

T
r
2
( + 1)

T
r

. (25)
It can be proven that the two solutions of (25) represent a
stable and an unstable equilibrium, respectively. In the special
case when = 1 (matched parameters) and T
r
= 0, directly
from (24c), SFMO has an equilibrium with = 0.
In (25) the radicand must be positive. If < 1, in the inputs
plane (T
r
, i
ref
rd
), there is a region where equilibria (i.e., steady
operation conditions) cannot exist. This region is bounded by
two straight lines passing through the origin and with a slope
given by (see Figs. 7 and 10)
= a tan

i
ref
rd
T
r

min

= a tan

L
s
L
m

1
2

.
(26)
3) Rotor-Flux MRAS Observer: The orientation error is af-
fected by a mismatch in all the inductive parameters; in fact,
(24d) depends on both
s
and and on the estimated leakage
factor . However, if

L
s
is tuned, (24d) admits the solution
= 0 even if = . As pointed out for RCMO, the iso- lines
in the inputs plane

T
r
, i
ref
rd

are ellipses through the origin (see

Figs. 12 and 13).
It can be directly veried that if the parameters are tuned, all
the equations (24b), (24c), and (24d) admit the trivial solution
= 0, which represents an ideal steady-state operation without
any error of orientation.
A mismatch in the inductive parameters

L
s
and

L
m
can be
caused by a variation of the saturation, as instance, due to a
change in the grid voltage. Since

L
s
and

L
m
have similar de-
pendence on the saturation, the ratio is more stable than the
single indexes
s
and
m
. Under this point of view, SFMO is
more robust than RCMO and RFMO, because in SFMO, the
orientation error in a steady condition depends only on . How-
ever, in RFMO, the dependence on
s
is moderated, because
in (24d),
s
is weighted by , which is normally quite lower
than 1.
Some theoretical results will be shown in Section VI-B to-
gether with their experimental counterpart.
V. THEORETICAL STABILITY DOMAINS
Once is derived from (24a), the other state variables can be
calculated by (13), (22), and (23), which can be easily solved
with respect to the rotor voltages after setting the time derivatives
to zero. The local stability can be discussed by numerically
TABLE III
DATA OF THE ANALYZED MACHINE
evaluating the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix associated to
(10)(15).
For a given mismatch in the machine parameters, the behav-
ior of each observer can be summarized by the stability domain
(SD) that consists of the collection of all the stable steady op-
eration points in the (T
r
, i
ref
rd
) plane. It should be noticed that
for the observers considered here, the reference speed
ref
m
does
not play any role in the orientation error [see (24a)]; then, its
inuence on the eigenvalues is expected to be weak.
Except for SFMO, (24a) needs a numerical solution, for in-
stance, by a Newton method. Near the boundary of the stability
region, the numerical solution of (24a) strongly depends on the
initial point. Thus, if the equilibria are simply evaluated by vary-
ing i
ref
rd
and T
r
, poor convergence or even abrupt jumps to far
equilibria can occur. Thus, to trace the SDs with a good accu-
racy, a continuation strategy is recommended [21]. Moreover
by monitoring suitable test functions based on the Jacobian ma-
trix of (10)(15), one can detect not only the instabilities, but
also how an equilibrium looses its stability, i.e., what kind of
bifurcation occurs and what will be the postcritical behavior (ap-
pearance of limit cycles, etc.) [21], [22]. An approach based on
the transfer functions could also be applied, but their expression
would be too cumbersome.
The theoretical SDs of each observer with unmatched pa-
rameters will be shown in Section VI-C, with overlapped some
experimental points.
VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
A. Experimental Setup
The theory has been applied to the machine, whose data are
given in Table III.
The inverter is controlled by a Dspace platform: a space vector
modulation technique is implemented. The switching frequency
is f
sw
= 4 kHz. Antialiasing lters are also present: four-order
lters with crossover frequency equal to fF = 1250 Hz. This
choice implies a limitation in the crossover frequencies of the
speedestimator andthe current/speedcontrol loops. Their values
are: f
c

= 8 Hz, f
cI
= 33 Hz, and f
c
= 1 Hz. As for the ux
estimation, a high-pass lter is implemented to avoid drift due
to dc components during the integration of the (1) [16].
2848 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010
TABLE IV
RCMO: ROTOR POSITION ERROR (THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL) AS A
FUNCTION OF THE MISMATCH PARAMETER
s
: T
r
= 0.5 P.U. AND i
ref
r d
= 0 P.U.
TABLE V
SFMO: ROTOR POSITION ERROR (THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL) AS A
FUNCTION OF THE MISMATCH INDEX : T
r
= 0.3 P.U. AND i
ref
r d
= 0.3 P.U.
TABLE VI
RFMO: ROTOR POSITION ERROR (THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL) AS A
FUNCTION OF THE MISMATCH INDEX
s
: T
r
= 0.4 P.U. AND i
ref
r d
= 0.11 P.U.
B. Orientation Error
According to the theory developed in Section IV, Tables IV
VI report the orientation error as a function of
s
(for RCMO
and RFMO) or (for SFMO). Moreover, when testing RFMO,
for a given
s
= 1, is varied according to

L
s

1
=
L
s

s

1
=

L

= cost. (27)
which corresponds to the total leakage inductance

L

kept
constant.
Both the theoretical [see (24b), (24c), and (24d)] and the ex-
perimental values are shown: the true rotor position is measured
by encoder for the comparison only. All the tests refer to a steady
synchronous operation fully specied on each table.
The agreement between the theoretical and experimental val-
ues of is good, especially for the range of variation of .
Experimental values = 0 with tuned parameters are compa-
rable to the tolerances of a manual alignment of the encoder.
Finally, a comparison between Tables IV and VI conrms that
RFMO is less sensitive to a mismatch in

L
s
, as theoretically
found in Section IV.
C. Stability Domains
The theoretical SDs in the inputs plane (T
r
, i
ref
rd
) for the sys-
tem equipped with RCMO, SFMO, and RFMO and for some
xed value of
s
or are reported in Figs. 813. In Figs. 8
13, some points representing the experimental stability limits
are shown: each point is marked with (loss of stability by
a sudden jump) and (beginning self-excited oscillations).
Finally, in Figs. 813, the theoretical iso- lines are overlapped.
All the results refer to the synchronous operation. The experi-
mental limit points have been found by slowly varying the d-axis
reference current froma stable steady-state point at xed torque,
along paths similar to those in Fig. 8 (dashdot vertical lines).
The diagrams are commented after Fig. 13.
Fig. 8. RCMO:
s
= 0.8. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental sta-
bility limits ( = oscillations).
Fig. 9. RCMO:
s
= 1.2. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental sta-
bility limits ( = oscillations).
Fig. 10. SFMO: = 0.9. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental sta-
bility limits ( = oscillations, = sudden jump, and

= stable with high-

frequency noise). The limit lines slope from (26) is = 26.6

.
Fig. 11. SFMO: = 1.1. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental sta-
bility limits ( = oscillations, = sudden jump).
CARMELI et al.: EFFECTS OF MISMATCHED PARAMETERS IN MRAS SENSORLESS DOUBLY FED INDUCTION MACHINE DRIVES 2849
Fig. 12. RFMO:
s
= 0.8. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental
stability limits ( = oscillations).
Fig. 13. RFMO:
s
= 1.2. Theoretical SD, iso- lines, and experimental
stability limits ( = oscillations). Note the magnied scale.
1) Rotor-Current MRAS Observer: The boundary of the the-
oretical SD is correctly tted by the experimental points (see
Fig. 8), except for the case

L
s
> L
s
and i
ref
rd
slightly negative,
where the experimental SDis more extended (see Fig. 9). More-
over, if i
ref
rd
< 0, as it generally applies, a mismatch

L
s
< L
s
is less critical. Note that the iso- lines also continue inside the
instability regions, where they represent unstable equilibria that
are surrounded by stable limit cycles; on the boundary of the
SD, a Hopf bifurcation occurs [21], [22].
2) Stator-Flux MRAS Observer: In the case < 1 (see
Fig. 10) and i
ref
rd
> 0, the theoretical-limit straight lines, whose
slope by (26) is = 26.6

, are qualitatively tted by the ex-

perimental points; near to these lines, a further decrease in i
ref
rd
produces a sudden jump with saturation of the controllers, be-
cause the equilibrium gets impossible. These lines represent a
Fold bifurcation.
When i
ref
rd
< 0, the lower theoretical boundary (parabolic)
corresponds to a Hopf bifurcation; when passing this line, a sta-
ble limit cycle arises. However, a further increase of i
ref
rd
rapidly
produces a sudden jump; then, the Fold bifurcation lines for i
ref
rd
< 0 cannot be approached experimentally. They could be ap-
proached only by continuing to followan equilibriumalso when
it becomes unstable after passing the rst stability boundary; this
is evidently impossible in practice.
In the case > 1 (see Fig. 11), theoretical and experimental
points match. It should be noticed that a proper operation with
Fig. 14. RCMO at synchronism with
s
= 0.8 and T
r
= 0.2 (motor): i
ref
r d
is slowly increased from 0.16 p.u. At t 2.8 s with i
ref
r d
= 0.13 p.u., the
operation becomes unstable and a limit cycle arises (Hopf bifurcation).
i
ref
rd
=0 is not possible because, as stated in [14], already without
any mismatch, i
ref
rd

= 0 implies K
MRAS

= 0 .
3) Rotor-Flux MRAS Observer: In the case

L
s
< L
s
(see
Fig. 12), the theoretical SD is correctly reproduced by the ex-
perimental points. When

L
s
> L
s
(see Fig. 13), the instability
region is very small (note the magnied scale); however, a qual-
itative accord with the experimental results can be still recog-
nized. It can be concluded that with respect to RCMO, RFMO
is less sensitive to a mismatch in

L
s
. Moreover, the effect of any
mismatch in

L
s
on the stability is less critical if i
ref
rd
> 0.
D. Two Examples of Instability
For completeness, two experimental transitions through an
instability are shown. Instead of varying the mismatch indexes,
the instabilities are touched by varying i
ref
rd
. The other inputs T
r
,

ref
m
, and the mismatches indexes are frozen, so that the SDs in
Figs. 813 apply.
Fig. 14 shows the behavior of RCMO at
ref
m
= 1 p.u. with

s
= 0.8 and T
r
= 0.2 p.u. (motor) during a slow rise of i
ref
rd
,
starting from i
ref
rd
= 0.16 p.u., and following the path already
shown in Fig. 8 (fourth quadrant). The error increases, and
at t 2.8 s with i
ref
rd
= 0.13 p.u., an Hopf bifurcation occurs
and a limit cycle arises [21], [22]; the oscillations are evident
in and

m
. Due to the inertia,
m
oscillates with a lower
amplitude.
Fig. 15 shows the behavior of SFMO at
ref
m
= 1 p.u. with
= 0.9 and T
r
= 0.3 p.u. (motor) during a slow rise of i
ref
rd
,
starting from i
ref
rd
= 0.19 p.u. The error rises, and at t
4.7 s with i
ref
rd
= 0.15 p.u. , an Hopf bifurcation occurs and a
limit cycle arises, which is quickly followed by a jump at t
5.6 s (Fold bifurcation, Fig. 10). After this, the controllability is
irreversibly lost.
Similar behaviors can be traced in RFMO also.
E. Final Remarks
As already stated in [16], it can be experimentally shown that
the effect of a mismatched R
S
on the error is negligible, if
the stator is fed at rated frequency and voltage. A theoretical
analysis of the equilibria with R
S
= 0 requires the solution of a
2850 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 11, NOVEMBER 2010
Fig. 15. SFMO at synchronism with = 0.9 and T
r
= 0.2 (motor): i
ref
r d
is slowly increased from 0.19 p.u. At t 4.7 s with i
ref
r d
= 0.15 p.u., the
operation becomes unstable and a limit cycle arises (Hopf bifurcation), quickly
followed by an irreversible jump at t 5.6 s (Fold bifurcation): the synchronism
is denitely lost and grows indenitely [here, is forced into ( , )].
nonlinear system consisting of the stator steady-state equation
and (10)(15) with p() = 0. It can be proven that such a system
can be reduced to two nonlinear equations in
S
and , instead
of the single equation (24a) in . Nevertheless, since R
S
is very
low, the values of obtained by the full system and by (24a) are
practically the same (the differences are less than 0.2

).
However, during fast stator-voltage transients as sags or short
circuits, the stator-ux linkage dynamics cannot be neglected
a priori [3]. A comprehensive analysis requires to enhance the
state model (10)(15), by distinguishing between the actual and
the estimated stator-ux linkage (based on the actual and the
estimated value of R
S
, respectively) and by considering their
dynamics. Also, the high-pass lter, used to estimate the ux
linkage instead of the pure integration [16], should be modeled.
Some verication checks on the results previously shown have
been performed by an enhanced model; they showed that local
stability is not signicantly affected by the dynamics of the
stator uxes linkage (actual and estimated). Nevertheless, in
case of large perturbations, it is more relevant to investigate the
global stability; to this aim, time simulations are probably the
only practical tool.
For very slow(quasi-static) perturbations in the stator voltage,
the approach proposed here still applies. Due to a uctuation of
the stator voltage,
S
varies; then, SDs and iso- lines can be
recomputed with the actual value of
S
. As a rst approxima-
tion, SDs and iso- lines in Figs. 813, valid for
S
= 1 p.u.,
can be used after a suitable scaling of T
r
, according to (22).
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the effect of the mismatched parameters on
the performances of sensorless DFIM drives based on MRAS
observers has been analyzed when the stator is grid-connected
at rated voltage and frequency. As an example, three MRAS
known in literature have been considered: the relations between
the error in the estimated rotor position during a steady-state op-
eration and the mismatched parameters have been established.
Moreover a stability analysis has been performed and the stabil-
ity regions have been theoretically found. Finally the analytical
predictions have been validated by some experimental tests.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The paper has not been presented at a conference or submitted
elsewhere.
REFERENCES
[1] W. Qiao, W. Zhou, J. M. Aller, and R. G. Harley, Wind speed estimation
based output maximization control for a wind turbine driving a DFIG,
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 11561169, May 2008.
[2] Z. Chen, J. M. Guerrero, and F. Blaabjerg, A review of the state of the art
of power electronics for wind turbines, IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 18591875, Aug. 2009.
[3] P. S. Flannery and G. Venkataramanan, A fault tolerant doubly fed in-
duction generator wind turbine using a parallel grid side rectier and a
series grid side converter, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3,
pp. 11261135, May 2008.
[4] A. Petersson, L. Harnefors, and T. Thiringer, Evaluation of current control
methods for wind turbines using doubly fed induction machines, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 227235, Jan. 2005.
[5] G. Abad, M. A. Rodriguez, and J. Poza, Two-level VSC based predictive
direct torque control of the doubly fed induction machine with reduced
torque and ux ripples at lowconstant switching frequency, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 10501061, May 2008.
[6] D. Santos-Martin, J. L. Rodriguez-Amenedo, and S. Arnalte, Dynamic
programming power control for doubly fed induction generators, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 23372345, Sep. 2008.
[7] P. Zhou, Y. He, and D. Sun, Improved direct power control of a DFIG-
based wind turbine during network unbalance, IEEE Trans. Power Elec-
tron., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 24652474, Nov. 2009.
[8] D. Santos-Martin, J. L. Rodriguez,-Amenedo, and S. Arnalte, Direct
power control applied to doubly fed induction generator under unbalanced
grid voltage conditions, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 5,
pp. 23282336, Sep. 2008.
[9] J. Yao, H. Li, Y. Liao, and Z. Chen, An improved control strategy of
limiting the DC-link voltage uctuation for a doubly fed induction wind
generator, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 12051213,
May 2008.
[10] S. Shen, B. Mwinyiwiwa, Y. Zhang, and B. T. Ooi, Sensorless maximum
power point tracking of wind by DFIG using rotor position phase locked
loop (PLL), IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 942951,
Apr. 2009.
[11] A. K. Jain and V. T. Ranganathan, Wound rotor induction generator with
sensorless control and integrate active lter for feeding nonlinear loads in a
stand-alone grid, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 218228,
Jan. 2008.
[12] R. Datta and V. T. Ranganathan, Direct power control of grid-connected
wound rotor induction machine without rotor position sensor, IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 390399, May 2001.
[13] G. Poddar and V. T. Ranganathan, Sensorless eld-oriented control for
double-inverter-fed wound-rotor induction motor drive, IEEETrans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 8695, Feb. 2006.
[14] R. C ardenas, R. Pena, J. Clare, G. Asher, and J. Proboste, MRAS observer
for sensorless control of doubly-fed induction generators, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 10751084, May 2008.
[15] R. C ardenas, R. Pena, J. Proboste, G. Asher, and J. Clare, MRAS observer
for sensorless control of standalone doubly fed induction generators,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 710717, Dec. 2005.
[16] R. Pena, R. C ardenas, J. Proboste, G. Asher, and J. Clare, Sensorless
control of a doubly-fed induction generator using a rotor-current-based
MRAS observer, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 330
339, Jan. 2008.
[17] L. Harnefors and M. Hinkkanen, Complete stability of reduced-order
and full-oorder observers for sensorless IM, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 55, no. 31, pp. 13191329, Mar. 2008.
[18] T. Orlowska-Kowalska and M. Dybkowsky, Stator current-based MRAS
estimator for a wide range speed-sensorless induction motor drive, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 12961308, Apr. 2010.
[19] L. Harnefors, Globally stable speed-adaptive observers for sensorless
induction motors drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 2,
pp. 12431245, Apr. 2007.
CARMELI et al.: EFFECTS OF MISMATCHED PARAMETERS IN MRAS SENSORLESS DOUBLY FED INDUCTION MACHINE DRIVES 2851
[20] S. Bolognani, L. Peretti, and M. Zigliotto, Parameter sensitivity analysis
of an improved openloop speed estimate for induction motor drives,
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 21272135, Jul. 2008.
[21] Y. A. Kuznetsov, Elements of Applied Bifurcation Theory. New York:
Springer-Verlag, 2004, pp. 7784, 520529.
[22] A. Kavitha and G. Uma, Experimental verication of Hopf bifurcation
in DC-DC Luo converter, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 6,
pp. 28782883, 2008.
Maria Stefania Carmeli (M00) received the M.Sc.
and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the
Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy, in 1997 and
2000, respectively.
She is currently an Assistant Professor in the De-
partment of Electrical Engineering, Politecnico di
Milano. Her research interests include power con-
verters and drives, including the control of convert-
ers, power quality, and distributed generation.
Dr. Carmeli is a member of the IEEE Industrial
Electronics and Power Electronics Societies.
Francesco Castelli-Dezza (M89) received the
M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
fromthe Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy, in 1986
and 1990, respectively.
He is currently an Associate Professor in the
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico
di Milano. His research interests include studies on
dynamic behavior of electrical machines, electrical
drives control and design, and power electronics for
energy-ow management.
Dr. Castelli-Dezza is a member of the IEEE Power
Electronics and Power Electronics Societies.
Matteo Iacchetti (M10) received the Ph.D. de-
gree in electrical engineering from the Politecnico di
Milano, Milano, in 2008.
He is currently in the Department of Electrical
Engineering, Politecnico di Milano. His research in-
terests include design, modeling, and control of elec-
trical machines.
Roberto Perini (M10) received the M.Sc. and Ph.D.
degrees in electrical engineering fromthe Politecnico
di Milano, Milano, Italy.
He is currently an Assistant Professor in the De-
partment of Electrical Engineering, Politecnico di
Milano. His research interests include the design and
modeling of electrical machines and wind energy
conversion systems.