P. 1
Sliding Mode

Sliding Mode

|Views: 80|Likes:
Published by Siva Ganesh Malla

More info:

Published by: Siva Ganesh Malla on Jan 11, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/15/2013

pdf

text

original

Published in IET Control Theory and Applications

Received on 22nd October 2008
Revised on 24th April 2009
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
ISSN 1751-8644
Implementation of sliding mode controller for
linear synchronous motors based on direct
thrust control theory
Y.-S. Huang C.-C. Sung
Department of Electronic Engineering, Chung Cheng Institute of Technology, National Defense University, Tahsi, Taoyuan,
Taiwan
E-mail: yshuang@ndu.edu.tw
Abstract: Permanent magnet linear synchronous motors (PMLSMs) are a type of linear synchronous motors that
are widely used in motor control applications. However, in PMLSMs, the accuracy of position control is easily
affected by variations in its parameters and load disturbances. In this study, the implementation of a direct
thrust control (DTC) method by using a modified integrator for flux estimation is proposed. The proposed
algorithm can be used to obtain accurate flux magnitudes and phase angles of the controlled motors. The
sliding mode control (SMC) method is a well-established control method used in non-linear systems because
of its robustness. The authors use DTC along with SMC to construct a motor control system. The advantage of
the proposed approach is that the control system behaviour can be tracked easily. The authors conducted
simulations and experimental studies, and the results obtained agreed well.
1 Introduction
Permanent magnet linear synchronous motors (PMLSMs)
have several benefits such as no backlash, less friction, high
thrust density and low thermal losses. In recent times,
PMLSMs have been widely employed in industrial
applications involving motor drive, such as linear
transmission or precision servo control [1, 2]. Lin et al.
[3, 4] successfully employed field-oriented control (FOC)
and vector control methods in PMLSM control systems.
However, these control methods are dependent on the
parameters of the motor and are sensitive to changes in
them. Further, they require an inner current loop to serve
as a current controller and involve complicated rotating
frame transformations. For solving these problems, a well-
known control method called direct thrust control (DTC)
method, which is based on decoupling the control of thrust
and flux [5, 6], can be considered. In comparison with the
FOC method, the switching-table-based DTC method has
the following advantages: (i) it does not require current
control loops; hence, the current need not be regulated
directly; (ii) complicated rotating frame transformations are
not required; (iii) it has a simple and robust control
structure; and (iv) it provides excellent thrust dynamics
[7, 8]. However, technical solutions for the implementation
of DTC in PMLSMs have not been sufficiently developed
yet. In particular, it is not easy to obtain the amplitude and
angular position of the actual flux linkage. Therefore
designing an estimator for the flux linkage becomes
important for implementing a high-performance motor
drive [9, 10]. In general, two methods are used for
estimating the flux linkage: one method requires the
currents in the motor to be measured, and the other
requires the voltages [11, 12]. In the current-based method,
the air-gap flux of a motor is identified by solving a set of
equations. Here, the measured motor currents and the
speed/position of the motor are required. The main
drawback of this method is that the parameters may change
with changes in the rotational speed. In the voltage-based
method, the motor flux can be obtained directly from its
back electromotive force (emf) (i.e. using an integrator).
Therefore the voltage-based method is more preferable
[13]. In other words, methods for estimating the flux
linkage are typically based on voltage. However, the
implementation of an integrator for the motor flux
estimation is not an easy task. This problem has been
326 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
addressed in [14–16]. In [14, 15], it is shown that a pure
integrator has DC drift and initial value problems. From
the two approaches, it is clear that the voltage of the DC
component has to be known if one wants to measure the
back emf of the motor in practice. This DC component,
no matter how small it is, can ultimately drive the pure
integrator into saturation. To overcome this problem, a
solution has been proposed – replace the pure integrator
with a first-order low-pass (LP) filter [16]. Unfortunately, a
crucial error both in magnitude and in phase angle is
generated by the LP filter. In this paper, we attempt to
solve the flux estimation problems in a real PMLSM. For
this purpose, a modified integrator for obtaining both
actual flux and actual thrust is proposed and a closed-loop
control system can be realised. By using our control
method, high-performance motor drive can be obtained.
Further, it is well known that the accuracy of PMLSM
positioning control is easily affected by parameter variations
and load disturbances. Reducing these factors quickly and
directly is a very important task. For achieving high-
accuracy tracking in a high-performance position control
system, a sophisticated control strategy is often required.
It is well known that the sliding mode control
(SMC) is insensitive in the presence of external
uncertainties and disturbances, particularly, to the so-called
matched uncertainties/disturbances. Hence, the robustness
properties of SMC can make this approach an intensive,
popular and suitable method for controlled motor systems.
The practical implementation and theoretical development
of various SMC approaches have been investigated
previously [17–20]. Consequently, the SMC has been
widely used in the position/speed control of the motor drives
[21–23]. Here, the dynamic property of the systems can be
described in two phases: reaching phase and sliding phase.
An SMC is designed such that the system trajectories reach
a sliding phase in finite time and tend to an equilibrium
point along this surface [18]. Moreover, the closed-loop
dynamics is completely governed by the sliding manifold as
long as the system trajectories remain on this surface.
This paper proposes a new control method that combines a
modified DTC with the SMC method to implement
position control for PMLSMs. In this control method, we
have attempted to decrease the influence of the parameter
variations and load disturbances. Our experimental results
show that the accuracy of the position control for
PMLSMs has been improved. To our knowledge, this is
the first work to combine a DTC method with the SMC
method for implementing a position control for a real-
world PMLSM.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. A modified
flux estimation algorithm of DTC for a PMLSM control
system is proposed in Section 2. The SMC method for a
PMLSM is presented in Section 3. The simulation and
experimental results are given in Section 4. Finally, Section
5 presents the conclusions.
2 DTC for real PMLSM control
systems
A real PMLSM controlled by DTC policy is stated in this
section. The PMLSM, with the type of LM210-2 brushless
linear motor, is produced by TRILOGY. The PMLSM
comprises a long stationary tubular, called ‘secondary’, that is
supported at both ends, housing a sequence of neodymium–
iron–boron (NdFeB) permanent magnet with guidance rail
and linear scale, and a full stroke (0–30 cm) mover, called
‘primary’, which contains the core armature winding and
Hall sensing elements. The electromagnetic thrust is
produced by the interaction between the secondary NdFeB
magnet and magnetic field of ac windings included in the
primary and driven by a current-controlled pulse-width-
modulation voltage source inverter. The machine structure
of the PMLSM is shown in Fig. 1.
2.1 Mathematical model of PMLSMs
The mathematical analysis of PMLSMs is a key factor in the
development of motor control systems. In general,
the mathematical model of a linear motor is derived from
the structural parameters of a rotating motor. In a linear
motor, when the stator of a rotating motor is considered
the mover, the d–q axis theory is used for the analysis. For
convenience, the more detailed information of the space
relations is constructed in Fig. 2.
The coordinate axes are the three-phase windings (as, bs,
cs) axis, rotating d–q axis and stationary (D, Q) axis. Note
that v
e
represents the rotor electrical angular speed and u
e
represents an angle between d-axis and winding as. The
machine model of the PMLSM can be described in a
synchronous rotating reference frame as follows [3, 7, 24]
u
d
¼ R
m
i
d
þpl
d
Àv
e
l
q
(1)
u
d
¼ R
m
i
d
þpl
q
Àv
e
l
d
(2)
where p denotes the differential operator
l
d
¼ L
d
i
d
þl
F
(3)
Figure 1 Mechanical structure of PMLSM
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 327
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
l
q
¼ L
q
i
q
(4)
v
e
¼ n
p
v
r
(5)
Moreover
v
r
¼
pv
t
(6)
v
e
¼ n
p
v ¼ 2tf (7)
For convenience, the necessary parameters of the PMLSM
are listed in Table 1.
2.2 DTC using space voltage vectors
Fig. 3 shows a basic DTCblock diagram. It is noteworthy that
the DTC method as a kind of subordinated control loop of
electromagnetic thrust and the flux magnitude. In Fig. 3,
two input signals are shown: a thrust command (F
cmd
) and a
flux linkage command (l
cmd
). Further, two errors, F
err
and
l
err
, respectively, are also present. Note that the two errors
can be considered as input signals for the two blocks of the
thrust dead zone and the flux hysteresis controller (i.e.
threshold values r
1
and r
2
). In DTC methods, the selection
of an optimum voltage vector is very important. The
Figure 2 Relativity of stationary and rotating axes
Table 1 Necessary parameters of the PMLSM
Item Symbol Item Symbol
d–q voltages u
d
and
u
q
number of pole
primary pairs
n
p
d–q currents i
d
and i
q
linear velocity of
the mover
v
phase winding
resistance
R
m
pole pitch t
d–q inductances L
d
and
L
q
electrical linear
velocity
v
e
angular velocity v
r
electric frequency F
electrical
angular velocity
v
e
mover mass M
permanent
magnet flux
linkage
l
F
friction factor D
external
disturbance
term
F
L
electromagnet
thrust
F
e
Figure 3 PMLSM control block diagram using DTC policy
328 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
optimum voltage vector can provide a suitable voltage vector
(in time) to the controlled motor system. In this paper, six
effective voltage vectors – V
1
(100), V
2
(110), V
3
(010), V
4
(011), V
5
(001) and V
6
(101) – and two zero voltage
vectors – V
0
(000) and V
7
(111) – have been considered.
The non-zero vectors are apart from each other by 608.
Moreover, their effects on the flux linkage and thrust vary
with the resting positions of the motor. Detailed
information on the voltage vectors is listed in the switching
table (i.e. Table 2). Based on the experimental results, it can
be said that the flux linkages and thrusts can be controlled
by the switching table. It is noteworthy that the difference
between any two close voltage vectors is only of one bit.
Therefore the switching table can increase/decrease the
voltage vector by only changing one bit. Further, the
changing voltage vector has a minimum switching frequency
at which the voltage is called the optimal voltage vector [5].
In this manner, our motor-controlled system can obtain a
thrust response in the minimum possible time. Moreover,
the thrust ripple can be reduced.
The optimumvoltage vector can be determined by using S
F
,
S
l
and S
u
listed in the switching table. Further, the
corresponding voltage vectors (e.g. V
i
, i ¼ 0, 1, . . .
.
, 7) can
be chosen from the switching table constructed for the
improvement of the system performance. For example, if the
values of the actual flux linkage (jl
m
j) and thrust (F
e
) are
smaller than the reference values, from Table 2, S
l
¼ 1 and
S
F
¼ 1. These values of S
l
and S
F
indicate that the
controller has to increase its flux linkage and thrust in sector
S
u
. On the other hand, S
a
, S
b
and S
c
represent the states of
the inverter switching. This is shown in greater detail in Fig. 4.
The phase voltages of the inverter output are as follows
V
an
¼
(2S
a
ÀS
b
ÀS
c
)V
dc
3
ð8Þ
V
bn
¼
(2S
b
ÀS
a
ÀS
c
)V
dc
3
ð9Þ
V
cn
¼
(2S
c
ÀS
a
ÀS
b
)V
dc
3
ð10Þ
where V
dc
is the DC link voltage.
2.3 Modified flux linkage estimation
method
The problem of flux estimation is an important one for the
implementation of a high-performance motor drive.
Typically, the terminal voltage and terminal current are
measured in order to obtain the flux. The value of the flux is
then able to provide the data for the decoupling control
[14]. However, there are two problems when the controller
is used with the DTC method for PMLSM control systems:
during the estimation of the flux linkage, the DC drift is
significantly affected by the offset error, and the variation in
mover resistance causes errors [25]. In the voltage-based
method, the voltage equation of a PMLSM in the stationary
reference frame can be expressed as follows [4, 6, 26]
l
m
¼
_
(u
m
ÀR
m
i
m
) dt ¼
_
e
m
dt (11)
where u
m
¼ [u
D
u
Q
]
T
, i
m
¼ [i
D
i
Q
]
T
, l
m
¼ [l
D
l
Q
]
T
is the flux
linkage vector and e
m
is the back emf. The flux linkage
amplitude and angular position can then be obtained by
using the following equations
jl
m
j ¼
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
l
2
D
þl
2
Q
_
(12)
u ¼ tan
À1
l
Q
l
D
_ _
(13)
where jl
m
j and u are the flux linkage amplitude and angular
position, respectively. Note that the PMLSM naturally
suffers from ‘end effect’ because the length of the core is
finite; this problem does not exist in rotating machines [5].
It can be seen that the end effect affects the thrust
Table 2 Switching table
S
l
S
F
S
1
(230 to 308) S
2
(30–908) S
3
(90–1508) S
4
(150–1808)
(2180 to 21508)
S
5
(2150 to 2908) S
6
(290 to 2308)
" 1 " 1 V
2
(110) V
3
(010) V
4
(011) V
5
(001) V
6
(101) V
1
(100)
0 V
0
(111) V
7
(000) V
0
(111) V
7
(000) V
0
(111) V
7
(000)
# 21 V
6
(101) V
1
(100) V
2
(110) V
3
(010) V
4
(011) V
5
(001)
# 0 " 1 V
3
(010) V
4
(011) V
5
(001) V
6
(101) V
1
(100) V
2
(110)
0 V
7
(000) V
0
(111) V
7
(000) V
0
(111) V
7
(000) V
0
(111)
# 21 V
5
(001) V
6
(101) V
1
(100) V
2
(110) V
3
(010) V
4
(011)
Figure 4 Basic inverter drive system
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 329
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
characteristics of the PMLSM. Hence, a high-performance
motor control system requires a highly accurate estimation of
the thrust value. Therefore a thrust correction coefficient is
required to compensate the end effect. Hence, the developed
electromagnetic thrust can be written as
F
e
¼
3
2
p
t
k
F
n
p
(l
D
i
Q
Àl
Q
i
D
) (14)
where k
F
is the end-effect correction coefficient of the linear
motor thrust. The thrust correction coefficient can be
obtained by comparing the starting thrust computed by the
Maxwell stress tensor method with that given in (14) when
k
F
is not used. In other words, k
F
is defined as follows [5]
k
F
¼
F
Maxwell
(3=2)(p=t)n
p
(l
D
i
Q
Àl
Q
i
D
)
(15)
where F
Maxwell
is the thrust value computed by the Maxwell
stress tensor method (without k
F
). In (15), all the values are
results obtained from the finite element analysis. The thrust
correction coefficient k
F
(i.e. 0.9 [5]) can then be determined.
In the estimations of the flux and thrust, the integration of
(11) –(14) are the key factors. In (11), the flux can be directly
obtained from its back emf using an integrator. Furthermore,
the phase winding resistance (R
m
) can be neglected if the
switching time interval of the voltage vectors is sufficiently
short (e.g. achieved by using 20 kHz in this paper). Hence,
a value of the flux can be obtained from u
m
using an
integrator. Nevertheless, it is still a hard task to implement
an integrator for the motor flux estimation. Some papers
have provided the related issues and shortcomings [14–16].
To overcome these drawbacks, a voltage-based flux
estimator has been proposed previously [27]. However, this
does not seem to solve the problem completely. It is
noteworthy that the modified flux linkage estimator
proposed in this paper is based on [27]. Our estimator has
a correction coefficient (k
w
) in the flux estimation
algorithm. A new modified block diagram is shown in
Fig. 5. The estimator structure consists of a LP filter and a
signal feedback block. Note that the input signals of the
estimator are a train of voltage pulses. The train of voltage
pulses is combined with a sine wave having a fundamental
frequency and higher-order harmonics. From waveform
theory, the input signals can be expressed as a Fourier
series [28]
4A
0
p
sin v
0
t þ
1
3
sin 3v
0
t þ
1
5
sin 5v
0
t þÁ Á Á
_ _
(16)
where A
0
is the amplitude value and v
0
is the fundamental
frequency. The output signals are sine waves having only
the fundamental frequency. The proposed estimator plays
the role of an LP filter to reject the higher-order harmonics
components. Hence, the cutoff frequency of the LP filter is
chosen as v
0
, v
c
, 2v
0
. In fact, the main objective of
this estimator is to obtain the amplitude of the flux linkage
and the angular position. For this purpose, the proposed
estimator structure consists of an LP filter and a feedback
signal [i.e. the correction coefficient (k
w
)]. According to
waveform theory, the amplitude of the correction factor is
between that of the pulse wave and the sine wave. Hence,
the correction coefficient is taken as p/4 in this paper.
Note that a typical input –output characteristic curve with
saturation non-linearity is included in the block diagram (i.e.
see Fig. 5). For small input signals, the output of a saturation
element is proportional to the input. Once the input signal is
large, the output will not increase proportionally. Moreover,
the large input signal should be regarded as a constant
output. In this paper, the constant, called limiting level, is
equal to L. In general, the block diagram can be regarded
as a pure integrator. It is found that the gain of the
feedback loop is close to zero when the frequency e
m
of the
input signals is considerably larger than the cutoff
frequency (v
c
). On the other hand, the functions of the
feedback loop can be used to eliminate the DC drift and
flux saturation. Note that the DC drift is generated by the
pure integrator while the flux saturation is inherent in the
system. It is well known that the level of non-linear
distortion produced by the saturation element can be
reduced at the output of the feedback loop. However, this
paper does not consider this problem since this feedback
loop is essentially an LP filter. Even though predicting the
behaviour of non-linear systems is always difficult, we do
not force the controlled system to become a linear one.
This is mainly because a linear controlled system could be
more expensive than a non-linear one. Moreover, the
performance of the original system will be distorted if
the non-linear system is changed into a linear one. Hence,
the saturation element is retained in our control system.
Furthermore, the actual flux amplitude should have the
value L. As a result, we can conclude that the new
modified integrator will perform better than integrator
proposed in the prior research [27] if a proper compensator
is designed. Further, we can expect the inherent problems
of the system also to be eliminated. We will now discuss
the experimental performances of the different control
systems in detail.
Figure 5 New modified integrator block diagram based
on [27]
330 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
Figs. 6a and b show the system performances of the old
control method [27] and our method, respectively; the
former does not use the correction coefficient k
w
, whereas
the latter does. Note that both performances are shown
with the same position input – a triangular signal moving
6 cm with a velocity of 6 cm/s. For convenience, all the
experimental results of the motor controlled system are
normalised. For example, the normalised position output
(x
p
) is (x
p
/6.096 cm), angle theta is (u/180 degrees) and
the flux linkage flux D is (l
D
/0.425 Wb). Fig. 6a reveals
the disadvantages of the conventional method [27]. From
our experimental results, we conclude that the conventional
method cannot estimate both the amplitude and the
angular position of the flux linkage. The main reason for
this is the absence of the correction factor. This suggests
that the correct voltage vectors cannot be provided (in
time) by the switching table for the motor controlled
system. Nevertheless, the unsuitable voltage vectors increase
the errors, thereby making the system unstable. Fig. 6b
shows that the problem of flux linkage is improved by the
correction factor. The amplitude and angular position of
the flux linkage can be obtained correctly by using our
modified flux linkage estimator. Based on the experimental
results, it can be said that the new angular position u is
more linear, and the new flux linkage l
D
has less distortion
than the old one. In addition, the position-tracking
performance of the new method is better than that of the
old one. As a result, we conclude that the performance of
our control method is better than that proposed in the
prior work [27].
3 Sliding mode controller design
The concept of SMC is based on the introduction of a
‘customised’ function named the sliding function, which
can be properly chosen by the designer [29, 30]. As soon
as the properly designed sliding function becomes equal to
zero, the sliding manifold is established. The proper design
of the sliding function yields a suitable closed-loop system
performance while the system’s trajectories belong to the
sliding manifold. SMC aims to steer the system trajectory
to the properly chosen sliding manifold and then maintain
subsequent motions on the surface by means of control.
The main features of the sliding mode include its
insensitivity to external and internal disturbances, which is
matched by control, ultimate accuracy and finite time
reaching of the transient. The SMC design approach
consists of two components. The first involves the design
of a sliding function so that the system motion on the
sliding manifold (termed the sliding phase) satisfies
the design specifications. The second is concerned with the
selection of a control law. This makes the sliding manifold
attractive to the system state in the presence of external and
internal disturbances/uncertainties.
Definition 1(matching conditions [31, 32]): Consider
the system
_ x ¼ Ax þBu þf (t, x) (17)
where x [ R
n
is the state vector, A [ R
nÂn
, B [ R
nÂm
and
u [ R
mÂ1
are the control inputs and f (t, x) [ R
nÂ1
is the
disturbance term. If there exists g(t, x) [ R
nÂ1
such that
f (t, x) ¼ Bg(t, x), n . m and B has the full rank, (17)
meets the demands of matching conditions.
The design process for matching the conditions in a real
linear motor control system is now introduced. The mover
electromagnetic thrust of the PMLSM can be described in
Fig. 7.
Consider the mover dynamic equation of the PMLSM
F
e
¼ M€ x
p
þD_ x
p
þF
L
(18)
Here, x
p
is the position output and kF
L
k F is the bounded
external uncertainties and disturbance term that may
Figure 6 Comparison between the old and new algorithms
a System performance of the old flux estimate algorithm [27]
b Performance of a new flux estimate algorithm
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 331
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
comprise dry and viscous friction as well as any other
unknown forces. Note that the uncertainties and
disturbance terms have to be assumed for the control
scheme. Here, the values of the terms are bounded and
satisfy the matching conditions. Equation (18) can then be
written in the state-space form
[_ x] ¼
_ x
1
_ x
2
_ _
¼
0 1
0 À
D
M
_ _
x
1
x
2
_ _
þ
0
1
M
_ _
(u ÀF
L
) (19)
where x
1
¼ x
p
is the actual position signal and u ¼ F
e
is the
control input.
Define the position-tracking error e
1
¼ r
1
–x
1
, r
1
¼ x
pcmd
and compute its dynamics as
_ e
1
¼ _ r
1
À _ x
1
¼ r
2
Àx
2
¼ e
2
(20)
where r
1
(r
2
) is the position (velocity) reference signal. The
error-model state equation corresponding to (19) can be
described as
_ e
1
¼ e
2
(21)
_ e
2
¼ € r
1
À _ x
2
¼ € r
1
þ
D
M
(_ r
1
Àe
2
) À
1
M
(u ÀF
L
) (22)
The goal of the SMC method is to derive the control u such
that the motion of the system is restricted to belong to the
sliding manifold S
S ¼ {e : s(e) ¼ Ge ¼ 0}, s ¼ e
2
þce
1
(23)
where G ¼ [c 1]; c, a positive constant that represents the
slope of the sliding manifold; e, the state vector e
T
¼ [e
1
e
2
]; and s(e), the sliding function.
The derivation of the control law begins with the selection
of the Lyapunov function V(s) and an appropriate form of
the derivative of the Lyapunov function
_
V(s). For single-
input –single-output systems that are required to have
motion in a sliding manifold, the natural selection of
Lyapunov function candidate has the form
V(s) ¼ 0:5s
2
(24)
The derivative of the Lyapunov function is then
_
V(s) ¼ s_ s ¼ s(_ e
2
þc_ e
1
)
¼ s € r
1
þ
1
M
(B_ r
1
ÀBe
2
þF
L
) À
1
M
u
t
þce
2
_ _
(25)
Aglobal reaching condition is given by
_
V(s),0 when s =0.
Choosing different time derivatives of the Lyapunov function
_
V(s) leads to different rates of change for s. In this paper, the
derivative of the Lyapunov function
_
V(s) can be chosen as
_
V(s) ¼ s À1 sign(s) Àks þ
F
L
M
_ _
(26)
where 1 and k are positive constants such that
j1 þkjsjj . (F=M). Hence, if the control law is chosen as
(27), which can be determined from (25) and (26), the
asymptotic stability of solution (21) and (22) will be
guaranteed since V(s) . 0, V(0) ¼ 0 and
_
V(s) , 0,
_
V(0) ¼ 0. Here, the control u can drive the state variables
(i.e. e
1
and e
2
) to the sliding manifold (s ¼ 0) in finite time.
Moreover, the state variables can be retained in the sliding
manifold even if the bounded disturbance exists
u ¼ M € r
1
þ
D
M
_ r
1
þ c À
D
M
_ _
e
2
þ1 sign(s) þks
_ _
(27)
This control law gives two different rates of change for s
(i.e. _ s ¼ À1 sign(s) Àks þF
L
=M): one is the equal
velocity trending term [–1 sign(s)] and the other is an
exponential trending term ( –ks). The parameter 1 indicates
the speed of the system reaching the sliding manifold.
Higher 1 implies greater speed. The system response also
generates chattering at higher frequencies. The exponential
term not only shortens the reaching time but also reduces
the chattering. In short, it drives the system states to reach
the sliding manifold in infinite time. However, it cannot be
guaranteed that the reaching phase will be achieved in a
finite time. This seems to suggest that the sliding phase does
not exist. Hence, we have attempted to combine the
constant value term and the exponential term to solve these
problems. By using our new control method, the sliding
manifold can be reached in finite time. Furthermore, the
convergence of the position error will be guaranteed in a
finite time. Based on the experimental results, the new
method gives a good dynamic performance if the parameters
(k and 1) are carefully selected.
It is well known that the presence of chattering because
of the discontinuous control is one of the drawbacks of
SMC. The sign function is the main contributor to the
existence of chattering. The introduction of a boundary
layer can improve the performance but at the cost of
Figure 7 Mover electromagnetic thrust of the PMLSM
332 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
lower steady-state precision and reduced robustness properties.
In this paper, we substitute the sign function with a sat
function to weaken the chattering. The sat function is
defined as
sat(s, d) ¼
sign(s), jsj ! d
s
d
, jsj , d
_
(28)
where d is a small positive constant that defines a boundary
layer. A large boundary layer leads to a larger steady-state
error whereas a too small boundary layer leads to high-
frequency switching. Therefore the designer must select
the value of d carefully. Unfortunately, no simple method
exists to obtain the parameters for the SMC.
Conventionally, a trial-and-error method has been used to
select the parameters of a motor control system.
Simulations have to be conducted and examined to judge
whether the intended aims are achieved; hence, the
designer finds it difficult to obtain precise parameters.
Further, a long time is wasted in many attempts. Hence,
the selection of the parameters complicates the controller
design. Therefore methods to find a parameter vector
P ¼ [1, k, c, d] such that the sliding mode controller with
a better performance can be obtained is an important
issue. In the next section, an optimisation method based
on gradient descent algorithm is introduced to determine
the parameters of the SMC controller.
4 Simulation and experimental
results
The non-linear control design (NCD) toolbox was
investigated by using Matlab/Simulink, which provides a
Table 4 Parameter values of the PMLSM
Parameter Value
(unit)
Parameter Value (unit)
mover mass 1.97 (kg) phase
winding
resistance
11.8/3 (V)
friction factor 5.2982
(N/(m/s)
inductance 4.8/3(mH)
permanent
magnet flux
linkage
0.4849
(Wb)
number of
pole pairs
1
pole pitch 0.06096
(m)
DC voltage
V
dc
280 (V)
Table 3 Related parameters of the DTC controller
Parameter Value
(unit)
Parameter Value
(unit)
thrust threshold
value r
1
0.5 flux hysteretic
value r
2
0.025
cutoff
frequency v
c
100 (Hz) flux linkage
command (l
cmd
)
0.4
(Wb)
Figure 8 Simulation results of the system position response
a Simulation results of the SMC and PI (x
p
)
b Simulation results of the SMC and PI (e
1
)
c Simulation result of the error state phase trajectory (s)
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 333
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
time-domain-based optimisation approach to control system
design [33]. This tool is able to automatically tune system
parameters on the basis of user-defined time-domain
performance constraints. This method can attain the
performance objectives and optimising tunable parameters
intuitively. Hence, one can automatically convert time-
domain specifications into a problem of constrained
optimisation. The problem then needs to be solved using a
state-of-the-art optimisation theory, which uses gradient
methods to adjust tunable parameters to meet the constraint
objectives (i.e. optimisation criteria). The NCD toolbox
transforms the constraints and the simulated system into an
optimisation problem. The optimisation problem is as follows
min
x,g
g s:t:
g(x) Àwg 0
x
l
x x
u
_
(29)
where x is a vector of the tunable variables; x
l
and x
u
, vectors of
the lower and upper bounds on the tunable variables; g(x), a
vector of the constraint bound error; and w, a vector of the
weightings on the constraints. The scalar g imposes an
element of slackness into the problem, which otherwise
imposes that the goals be rigidly met. Basically, g attempts
to minimise the maximum (weighted) constraint error. The
constraint error is defined as the difference between the
constraint boundary and simulated output. This type of
optimisation problem is solved using the sequential
Figure 10 Three kinds of different wave input simulation results
a Simulation result of square wave input (x
p
)
b Simulation result of trapezoid wave input (x
p
)
c Simulation result of square wave input (x
p
)
d Simulation result of square wave input (e
1
)
Figure 9 Simulation results of the DTC and FOC
334 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
quadratic programming (SQP) method [33, 35]. In this
method, a quadratic programming (QP) problem is solved at
each iteration. In addition, the routine updates an estimate
of the Hessian of the Lagrangian [35, 36]. As a result, the
NCD toolbox is able to provide a graphical user interface
(GUI) to assist in time-domain-based control design.
Hence, in this paper, a NCD toolbox is used to obtain the
vector P ¼ [1, k, c, d] for the SMC controller. In the
simulation, we tune parameters P to meet time-domain
performance requirements under a unit step signal input
that is defined as follows: the rise-time t
r
0.2 s, the
settle-time t
s
0.5 s and the overshoot 5%. We hope
that the parameter vector P ¼ [1, k, c, d] will settle
between the lower and upper bounds (i.e. [1, 1, 1, 0] and
[500, 500, 500, 0.1]). For enhancing the system
performance of the robust control method, other
parameters of uncertainty bounds can be used; for this
purpose, the uncertain parameters of the control motor are
allowed to have variations within a range of +20%. The
total mass (M) is acceptable if it lies between the nominal
mass and five times the nominal mass. Finally, the criterion
of the desired system can be met by the suitable parameter
vector P ¼ [13.5, 3.72, 121, 0.01].
4.1 Simulation results
The performance of the proposed integration algorithms is
investigated by using Matlab/Simulink. For this simulation,
controller data are required. The SMC parameters are
obtained by NCD and the information on the PMLSM
parameters are given in Tables 3 and 4. For a comparison of
the system performance, a reference model based on the
FOC policy for a PMLSM [37] is used. In this study, two
PI controllers were used to serve the position and velocity
control, respectively. Under the NCD environment, we give
the same time-domain specification to both the controllers.
In summary, from the simulations, we find the system
performance of our DTC method to be better than that of
the old one. Fig. 8 shows this in detail. The simulated
results of the motor systems under the ramp input signal
with slope 1 cm/0.1 s are shown in Fig. 9. Note that
the input-position-command tracking performance of the
controlled system can be reached in 0.015 and 0.06 s by the
DTC and FOC methods, respectively. This indicates that
the system response of the DTC method is faster than that
of the FOC method. In addition, we have compared the
two control methods (i.e. SMC and PI) based on the DTC
method. This reference model employs a PI controller and a
DTC method, which has been proposed in [38]. The PI
parameters are obtained by a simple genetic algorithm (GA)
to minimise the performance index (i.e. optimisation
criterion). Therefore the sum of square error (SSE), which is
defined as

e
2
1
, is selected by us as a performance index.
The simulated results of the motor system with a triangular-
wave input signal (slope of the rising ramp ¼ 6 and the
descending ramp ¼ –6) are shown in Figs. 8a and b.
The position-tracking error is obviously less than 20 mm
Figure 11 Computer controlled PMLSM servo drive system
Figure 12 Experimental results of position response with
different loadings
a Experimental results of position response at nominal mass (x
p
)
b Experimental results of position response at five times nominal
mass (x
p
)
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 335
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
with the SMC method. However, the error reaches almost
500 mm with the PI method. From a comparison of the
results, it can be seen that the accuracy of the position
control can be effectively improved by our control method.
Fig. 8c shows the simulation result of the phase trajectory of
the error states (e
1
and e
2
); it can be seen that the reaching
phase can be achieved irrespective of the initial condition.
Furthermore, the error states trajectory maintain motion on
the sliding phase. In addition, we have also attempted to
employ a square wave as the reference input in the proposed
control systems. The simulation result is given in Fig. 10a.
Fig. 10a shows that the system response does not have
overshoots and oscillations. Furthermore, we have tried to
use a trapezoid wave as the reference input; the system
performance is shown in Fig. 10b. Moreover, a small signal
of a square wave with 1 mm is considered as the reference
input. Its simulation results under a nominal mass are given
in Figs. 10c and d. From these results, we think that our
controller can provide two brilliant performances (i.e. a fast
response and good trace ability) to meet the designer
requirements. Based on the simulation results, it can be
concluded that the performance of our control method is
suitable for applications to practical PMLSM systems. In the
next section, a practical PMLSM control system is
presented. For comparing the simulation results with the
corresponding experimental results, the same equations and
parameters as above will be used.
4.2 Experimental results
The structure of a practical PMLSM control system using the
current-controlled technique is shown in Fig. 11; the
PMLSM control system consists of a PCI card, a DSP
servo card (TMS320LF2400), a linear synchronous motor
drive (UTP10), a personal computer (Pentium II 300 MHz
with 512 MB RAM) and a PMLSM (LM210-2A-WD3).
The adopted PMLSM is the 220 V 5.0 A 475 N type.
Some experimental results have been provided to demonstrate
the system performance of the proposed control system. To
demonstrate the system performance, two cases have been used
in the experimental study – with and without loading. The
former case, called the parameter variation case, implies loading
a weight (about 8 kg) on the mover. The latter case, called the
Figure 13 Comparison with the tracing performance under different control methods
a Experimental results of position response at nominal mass (x
p
)
b Experimental results of position error at nominal mass (e
1
)
c Experimental results of position response at three times nominal mass (x
p
)
d Experimental results of position error at three times nominal mass (e
1
)
336 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org
nominal case, implies not loading any weight onthe mover. Note
that the weight of the mover is 1.97 kg. Hence, the total mass
(about 9.97 kg) is more than five times the nominal mass. In
fact, 8 kg is the full load condition in our motor system. Based
on this experimental result, our system performance appears to
demonstrate more robustness than the one in the previous
work [4]. For convenience, Figs. 12a and b show the system
responses of the nominal case and the parameter variation case,
respectively. Fig. 12a shows that the entire system response
almost meets the simulation result. Fig. 12b shows that the
entire system response when loaded is four times the nominal
mass case. Note that the transient state suffers very slight
disturbance when the parameter variation is drastic. In
addition, the trace of the output response almost meets the
input command. The system performance of the SMC
method and the PI method [39] is discussed in this paper.
Considering the comparison results, two cases have been
considered in the experimental studies. In Case I, that is the
parameter variation case, a mass (about 4 kg) is added to the
mass of the mover. Note that loading with mass of 8 kg cannot
work well in our system if only the PI method is used. Case II
is the nominal case, that is without any loading. The detailed
experimental results are shown in Figs. 13a–d. Figs. 13a and c
show the system responses of both cases. Figs. 13b and d focus
on the position-tracking error performance of the two cases. It
is found that the transient state errors for the two cases with
the SMC method have maximum values of 0.14 and 0.18 cm,
respectively. In contrast, the transient state errors for the two
cases with the PI method have maximum values of 0.68 and
1.18 cm, respectively. Furthermore, the steady-state errors for
the two cases with the SMC method are both less than
25 mm. However, the steady-state errors of the PI method
almost reach 80 mm. Obviously, the SMC method is more
robust than the PI method. Nevertheless, a large position-
tracking error still exists in the transient state irrespective of the
control method. This is mainly because the starting position of
the controlled motor cannot be identified by the motor drive.
This suggests that a suitable voltage vector cannot be provided
correctly by the switch table for the drive system in the initial
state. Finally, in summary, our proposed approach can thus be
applied to real motor systems.
5 Conclusions
This paper presents an NCD-based SMC controller, a DTC
method and a real PMLSM control system. The SMC
parameters of the real motor are automatically generated by
an NCD optimisation algorithm. For obtaining the actual
thrust, a modified integrator has been proposed, which is
an improvement of a prior work [27]. It has been
experimentally demonstrated that the performance of the
new method is better than that of the previously proposed
one [27]. The advantage of the proposed approach is that
the system behaviour can be tracked easily. Moreover, the
control system is robust with regard to parameter variations
and load disturbances. Our method gives a fast response
and more accurate performance. It is noteworthy that our
method also solves for the inherent flux linkage problems.
From the simulation and experimental results, it can be
concluded that our approach can be applied to position
tracking in an actual PMLSM.
6 Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the National Science Council of
Taiwan, R.O.C., under Grant NSC 97-2221-E-606-018.
7 References
[1] ZHU Y.W., KIM D.S., MOON J.W., CHO Y.H.: ‘Analysis of permanent
magnet linear synchronous motor for advanced control’,
Int. J. Appl. Electromagn. Mech., 2008, 28, pp. 283–289
[2] LIU X., YE Y.Y., ZHENG Z., LU Q.F.: ‘Magnetic field and
performance analysis of a tubular permanent magnet
linear synchronous motor applied in elevator door
system’, J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A, 2008, 9, (4), pp. 572–576
[3] LIN F.J., CHOU P.H., KUNG Y.S.: ‘Robust fuzzy neural network
controller with nonlinear disturbance observer for two-axis
motion control system’, IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, 2,
(2), pp. 151–167
[4] LIN F.J., SHYU K.K., LIN C.H.: ‘Incremental motion control of
linear synchronous motor’, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron.
Syst., 2002, 38, (3), pp. 1011–1022
[5] KWON B., WOO K., KIM S.: ‘Finite element analysis of direct
thrust-controlled linear induction motor’, IEEE Trans.
Magn., 1999, 35, pp. 1306–1309
[6] LIJUN Z., JIEFAN C., JUNZHU W., HEMIN W., LILI J.: ‘Research on
the parameters identification of direct thrust control system
using wavelet transform’. Proc. Int. Conf. on Intelligent
Systems Design and Applications, October 2006, pp. 132–136
[7] BUJA G.S., KAZMIERKOWSKI M.P.: ‘Direct torque control of
PWM inverter-fed AC motors – a survey’, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., 2007, 51, pp. 744–757
[8] BONNET F., VIDAL P.E., MARIA P.D.: ‘Dual direct torque control
of doubly fed induction machine’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
2007, 54, (5), pp. 2482–2490
[9] KASMIEH T.: ‘Adaptive stator flux estimator for the
induction machine direct torque control’. Int. Symp. on
Power Electron. Electr. Drives Autom. Motion, Ischia, Italy,
11–13 June 2008, pp. 1239–1241
[10] SCHAUDER C.: ‘Adaptive speed identification for vector
control of induction motors without rational transducers’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1992, 28, pp. 1054–1061
[11] TAKAHASHI I.: ‘Decoupling control of thrust and attractive
force of a LIM using space vector controlled inverter’, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., 2005, 29, pp. 161–167
IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338 337
doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010
www.ietdl.org
[12] LAI Y., CHEN S.J.H.: ‘A new approach to direct torque
control of induction motor drives for constant inverter
switching frequency and torque ripple reduction’, IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., 2001, 16, pp. 220–227
[13] KABOLI S., ZOLGHADRI M.R., VAHDATI-KHAJEH E.: ‘A fast flux
search controller for DTC-based induction motor drives’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2007, 54, pp. 2407–2416
[14] HURST K.D., HABETLER T.G., GRIVA G.: ‘Zero-speed tacholess
IM torque control: simply a matter of stator voltage
integration’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1998, 34, pp. 790–795
[15] WU R., SLEMON G.R.: ‘A permanent magnet motor drive
without a shaft sensors’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1991, 27,
pp. 1005–1011
[16] LU H., YANG W., XU Y., CHEN Z.: ‘Position sensorless control
of surface-mounted PMLSM with a novel starting
method’. Proc. Int. Conf. on Int. Acquisition, Weihai,
August 2006, pp. 1174–1178
[17] YAN W., HU J., UTKIN V.I., XU L.: ‘Sliding mode pulsewidth
modulation’, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2008, 23, (2),
pp. 619–626
[18] UTKIN V.I.: ‘Sliding modes in control and optimization’
(Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992)
[19] FERRARA A., RUBAGOTTI M.: ‘Second-order sliding-mode
control of a mobile robot based on a harmonic potential field’,
IET Control Theory Appl., 2008, 2, (9), pp. 807–818
[20] VELUVOLU K.C., SOH Y.C., CAO W.: ‘Robust observer with
sliding mode estimation for nonlinear uncertain systems’,
IET Control Theory Appl., 2007, 1, (5), pp. 1533–1540
[21] GHANES M., DE LEON J., GLUMINEAU A.: ‘Cascade and high-
gain observers comparison for sensorless closed-loop
induction motor control’, IET Control Theory Appl., 2008,
2, (2), pp. 133–150
[22] BARAMBONES O., GARRIDO A.J., MASEDA F.J.: ‘Integral sliding-
mode controller for induction motor based on FOC
theory’, IET Control Theory Appl., 2007, 1, (3), pp. 786–794
[23] PENG Y.F., LIN C.M.: ‘Intelligent motion control of linear
ultrasonic motor with H1 tracking performance’, IET
Control Theory Appl., 2007, 1, (1), pp. 9–17
[24] DENG Z., BOLDEA I., NASAR S.A.: ‘Fields in permanent magnet
linear synchronous machines’, IEEE Trans. Magn., 1986, 22,
pp. 107–112
[25] RAHMAN M.F., HAQUE M.E., LIXIN T., LIMIN Z.: ‘Problems
associated with the DTC of an interior permanent-magnet
synchronous motor drive and their remedies’, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., 2004, 51, (4), pp. 799–809
[26] YAN Y., ZHU J.G., GUO Y.G.: ‘Initial rotor position estimation
and sensorless direct torque control of surface-mounted
permanent magnet synchronous motors considering
saturation saliency’, IET Electr. Power Appl., 2008, 2, (1),
pp. 42–48
[27] HU J., WU B.: ‘New integration algorithms for estimating
motor flux over a wide speed range’, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., 1998, 13, pp. 969–977
[28] KREYSZIG E.: ‘Advanced engineering mathematics’ (John
Wiley & Sons Press, 2006, 9th edn.)
[29] http://cce.cinvestav.mx/documentos/Tutorial_SMC_
and_Applications.pdf, accessed 2008
[30] ACKERMANN J., UTKIN V.I.: ‘Sliding mode control design
based on Ackermann’s formula’, IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control, 1998, 43, (2), pp. 234–236
[31] KOSHKOUEI A.J., BURNHAM K.J.: ‘Control of DC motors
using proportional integral sliding mode’. Proc. Int. Conf.
of 18th on Systems Engineering, Coventry, 2006,
pp. 213–218
[32] CORLESS M.J., LEITMANN G.: ‘Continuous state feedback
guaranteeing uniform boundedness for uncertain dynamic
systems’, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 1981, 24,
pp. 437–443
[33] http://www.mathworks.com, accessed 2002
[34] CONSTANTINOS I.B.: ‘An approach for nonlinear
control design via approximate dynamic programming’,
PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1998
[35] POWELL M.J.D.: ‘Variable metric methods for
constrained optimization’, in BACHEM A., GROTSCHEL M., KORTE
B. (EDS. ): ‘Mathematical programming: the state of the art’
(Springer Verlag, 1983), pp. 288–311
[36] SCHITTKOWSKI K.: ‘NLQPL: A FORTRAN-subroutine solving
constrained nonlinear programming problems’, Ann. Oper.
Res., 1985, 5, pp. 485–500
[37] WANG W.C., CHEN G., YU C.H.: ‘Implementation of position
control for permanent magnet linear synchronous motor
systems’. The 26th Symp. on Electrical Power Engineering,
Taoyuan, Taiwan, 2005
[38] SHEN P.H., LIN F.J.: ‘Lyapinov stability based neural
network controller for permanent magnet synchronous
motor drive system’. Master thesis, (Dong Hwa University,
Taiwan, 2003)
[39] SUNG C.C., HUANG Y.S.: ‘Based on direct thrust control for
linear synchronous motor systems’, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., 2009, 56, (5), pp. 1629–1640
338 IET Control Theory Appl., 2010, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 326–338
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta.2008.0485
www.ietdl.org

it is clear that the voltage of the DC component has to be known if one wants to measure the back emf of the motor in practice. 3. The coordinate axes are the three-phase windings (as.org addressed in [14 – 16]. is produced by TRILOGY. a crucial error both in magnitude and in phase angle is generated by the LP filter. Section 5 presents the conclusions. In [14. Hence. Moreover. To our knowledge. particularly. with the type of LM210-2 brushless linear motor. Consequently. it is shown that a pure integrator has DC drift and initial value problems. popular and suitable method for controlled motor systems. The electromagnetic thrust is produced by the interaction between the secondary NdFeB magnet and magnetic field of ac windings included in the primary and driven by a current-controlled pulse-widthmodulation voltage source inverter. a modified integrator for obtaining both actual flux and actual thrust is proposed and a closed-loop control system can be realised. housing a sequence of neodymium – iron – boron (NdFeB) permanent magnet with guidance rail and linear scale. Reducing these factors quickly and directly is a very important task. called ‘primary’. 326 – 338 doi: 10. It is well known that the sliding mode control (SMC) is insensitive in the presence of external uncertainties and disturbances. the mathematical model of a linear motor is derived from the structural parameters of a rotating motor. 2010. To overcome this problem. the robustness properties of SMC can make this approach an intensive. By using our control method. In this control method. The PMLSM comprises a long stationary tubular. The rest of the paper is organised as follows. In general. The SMC method for a PMLSM is presented in Section 3. high-performance motor drive can be obtained. can ultimately drive the pure integrator into saturation. no matter how small it is. the d – q axis theory is used for the analysis. a solution has been proposed – replace the pure integrator with a first-order low-pass (LP) filter [16]. For this purpose. In this paper. a sophisticated control strategy is often required. when the stator of a rotating motor is considered the mover. rotating d– q axis and stationary (D. Here.1049/iet-cta.0485 2 DTC for real PMLSM control systems A real PMLSM controlled by DTC policy is stated in this section. pp. 4.www. This paper proposes a new control method that combines a modified DTC with the SMC method to implement position control for PMLSMs. Our experimental results show that the accuracy of the position control for PMLSMs has been improved. For convenience. 24] ud ¼ Rm id þ pld À ve lq ud ¼ Rm id þ plq À ve ld where p denotes the differential operator (1) (2) ld ¼ Ld id þ lF (3) Figure 1 Mechanical structure of PMLSM 327 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . Unfortunately. the closed-loop dynamics is completely governed by the sliding manifold as long as the system trajectories remain on this surface. the dynamic property of the systems can be described in two phases: reaching phase and sliding phase. The PMLSM. The machine structure of the PMLSM is shown in Fig.2008. to the so-called matched uncertainties/disturbances. 7. 2. 2. From the two approaches. this is the first work to combine a DTC method with the SMC method for implementing a position control for a realworld PMLSM. Further. The machine model of the PMLSM can be described in a synchronous rotating reference frame as follows [3. it is well known that the accuracy of PMLSM positioning control is easily affected by parameter variations and load disturbances. Vol. 15]. cs) axis. Note that ve represents the rotor electrical angular speed and ue represents an angle between d-axis and winding as.ietdl. Iss. that is supported at both ends. This DC component. and a full stroke (0 – 30 cm) mover. called ‘secondary’. which contains the core armature winding and Hall sensing elements.. In a linear motor. The simulation and experimental results are given in Section 4. An SMC is designed such that the system trajectories reach a sliding phase in finite time and tend to an equilibrium point along this surface [18]. Finally. For achieving highaccuracy tracking in a high-performance position control system. we attempt to solve the flux estimation problems in a real PMLSM. IET Control Theory Appl.1 Mathematical model of PMLSMs The mathematical analysis of PMLSMs is a key factor in the development of motor control systems. the SMC has been widely used in the position/speed control of the motor drives [21–23]. bs. Q) axis. A modified flux estimation algorithm of DTC for a PMLSM control system is proposed in Section 2. 1. The practical implementation and theoretical development of various SMC approaches have been investigated previously [17 – 20]. we have attempted to decrease the influence of the parameter variations and load disturbances. the more detailed information of the space relations is constructed in Fig.

2 DTC using space voltage vectors Fig. Iss. In DTC methods.0485 . Further.org Table 1 Necessary parameters of the PMLSM Item d – q voltages d – q currents phase winding resistance d – q inductances angular velocity electrical angular velocity permanent magnet flux linkage external disturbance term Symbol ud and uq id and iq Rm Ld and Lq Item number of pole primary pairs linear velocity of the mover pole pitch electrical linear velocity electric frequency mover mass friction factor Symbol np v t ve F M D vr ve lF Figure 2 Relativity of stationary and rotating axes FL electromagnet thrust Fe lq ¼ Lq iq v e ¼ np v r Moreover (4) (5) 2.www. 2010. 3.e. 4. 326– 338 doi: 10. threshold values r1 and r2).. 3 shows a basic DTC block diagram. are also present. Ferr and lerr . Figure 3 PMLSM control block diagram using DTC policy 328 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 IET Control Theory Appl. the selection of an optimum voltage vector is very important. 3. It is noteworthy that the DTC method as a kind of subordinated control loop of electromagnetic thrust and the flux magnitude. two errors. Vol.1049/iet-cta. respectively. Note that the two errors can be considered as input signals for the two blocks of the thrust dead zone and the flux hysteresis controller (i. In Fig. pp.ietdl. The vr ¼ pv t (6) (7) ve ¼ np v ¼ 2tf For convenience.2008. the necessary parameters of the PMLSM are listed in Table 1. two input signals are shown: a thrust command (Fcmd) and a flux linkage command (lcmd).

It can be seen that the end effect affects the thrust Figure 4 Basic inverter drive system 2. 326 – 338 doi: 10.2008. 26] ð ð (11) lm ¼ (um À Rm im ) d t ¼ em d t where um ¼ [uD uQ]T. im ¼ [iD iQ]T. . it can be said that the flux linkages and thrusts can be controlled by the switching table. the thrust ripple can be reduced. pp. The flux linkage amplitude and angular position can then be obtained by using the following equations jlm j ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi l2 þ l2 D Q   lQ u ¼ tanÀ1 lD (12) (13) where Vdc is the DC link voltage. Detailed information on the voltage vectors is listed in the switching table (i. from Table 2. . In this manner. 2010. there are two problems when the controller is used with the DTC method for PMLSM control systems: during the estimation of the flux linkage..3 Modified flux linkage estimation method The problem of flux estimation is an important one for the implementation of a high-performance motor drive. The optimum voltage vector can be determined by using SF. V4 (011). Based on the experimental results. This is shown in greater detail in Fig. The phase voltages of the inverter output are as follows Van ¼ (2Sa À Sb À Sc )Vdc 3 (2Sb À Sa À Sc )Vdc Vbn ¼ 3 (2Sc À Sa À Sb )Vdc Vcn ¼ 3 ð8Þ ð9Þ ð10Þ where jlmj and u are the flux linkage amplitude and angular position. The value of the flux is then able to provide the data for the decoupling control [14]. Sl and Su listed in the switching table.. V5 (001) and V6 (101) – and two zero voltage vectors – V0 (000) and V7 (111) – have been considered. 4. lm¼ [lD lQ]T is the flux linkage vector and em is the back emf. 3. In the voltage-based method. However. Vi ..org optimum voltage vector can provide a suitable voltage vector (in time) to the controlled motor system. V3 (010). Note that the PMLSM naturally suffers from ‘end effect’ because the length of the core is finite. Table 2). Further. the corresponding voltage vectors (e. 7) can be chosen from the switching table constructed for the improvement of the system performance. 4. In this paper. their effects on the flux linkage and thrust vary with the resting positions of the motor. i ¼ 0. The non-zero vectors are apart from each other by 608. 1. Moreover. the DC drift is significantly affected by the offset error. .ietdl. our motor-controlled system can obtain a thrust response in the minimum possible time. the voltage equation of a PMLSM in the stationary reference frame can be expressed as follows [4. 6. Sl ¼ 1 and SF ¼ 1. Further. Table 2 Switching table Sl "1 SF "1 0 # 21 #0 "1 0 # 21 S1 (230 to 308) S2 (30 – 908) S3 (90– 1508) V2 (110) V0 (111) V6 (101) V3 (010) V7 (000) V5 (001) V3 (010) V7 (000) V1 (100) V4 (011) V0 (111) V6 (101) V4 (011) V0 (111) V2 (110) V5 (001) V7 (000) V1 (100) S4 (150 – 1808) (2180 to 21508) V5 (001) V7 (000) V3 (010) V6 (101) V0 (111) V2 (110) S5 (2150 to 2908) V6 (101) V0 (111) V4 (011) V1 (100) V7 (000) V3 (010) S6 (290 to 2308) V1 (100) V7 (000) V5 (001) V2 (110) V0 (111) V4 (011) IET Control Theory Appl. Sb and Sc represent the states of the inverter switching.1049/iet-cta.g. Vol. six effective voltage vectors – V1 (100).e. It is noteworthy that the difference between any two close voltage vectors is only of one bit.0485 329 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . respectively. These values of Sl and SF indicate that the controller has to increase its flux linkage and thrust in sector Su . if the values of the actual flux linkage (jlmj) and thrust (Fe) are smaller than the reference values. Moreover. and the variation in mover resistance causes errors [25]. V2 (110). For example. the changing voltage vector has a minimum switching frequency at which the voltage is called the optimal voltage vector [5]. Iss. Sa . On the other hand. Typically.www. this problem does not exist in rotating machines [5]. Therefore the switching table can increase/decrease the voltage vector by only changing one bit. the terminal voltage and terminal current are measured in order to obtain the flux.

e. Hence. 2v0 . the correction coefficient is taken as p/4 in this paper. The proposed estimator plays the role of an LP filter to reject the higher-order harmonics components. In the estimations of the flux and thrust. The estimator structure consists of a LP filter and a signal feedback block. vc . we can conclude that the new modified integrator will perform better than integrator proposed in the prior research [27] if a proper compensator is designed. However. a high-performance motor control system requires a highly accurate estimation of the thrust value. the block diagram can be regarded as a pure integrator. To overcome these drawbacks. Moreover. Further. In (11). It is well known that the level of non-linear distortion produced by the saturation element can be reduced at the output of the feedback loop. the proposed estimator structure consists of an LP filter and a feedback signal [i. This is mainly because a linear controlled system could be more expensive than a non-linear one. a voltage-based flux estimator has been proposed previously [27]. the constant. In (15). Hence. the correction coefficient (kw)]. the flux can be directly obtained from its back emf using an integrator. achieved by using 20 kHz in this paper). Once the input signal is large. In general. Nevertheless. On the other hand. it is still a hard task to implement an integrator for the motor flux estimation. kF is defined as follows [5] kF ¼ FMaxwell (3=2)(p=t)np (lD iQ À lQ iD ) (15) where FMaxwell is the thrust value computed by the Maxwell stress tensor method (without kF). the saturation element is retained in our control system.0485 Figure 5 New modified integrator block diagram based on [27] 330 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . Hence. Hence. this paper does not consider this problem since this feedback loop is essentially an LP filter. all the values are results obtained from the finite element analysis. the developed electromagnetic thrust can be written as Fe ¼ 3p k n (l i À lQ iD ) 2t F p DQ (14) estimator are a train of voltage pulses. Note that a typical input – output characteristic curve with saturation non-linearity is included in the block diagram (i. It is found that the gain of the feedback loop is close to zero when the frequency em of the input signals is considerably larger than the cutoff frequency (vc). the input signals can be expressed as a Fourier series [28]   4A0 1 1 sin v0 t þ sin 3v0 t þ sin 5v0 t þ Á Á Á p 3 5 (16) where kF is the end-effect correction coefficient of the linear motor thrust. 0. For this purpose. Some papers have provided the related issues and shortcomings [14– 16]. the cutoff frequency of the LP filter is chosen as v0 . the main objective of this estimator is to obtain the amplitude of the flux linkage and the angular position. However. the output will not increase proportionally. 2010. see Fig. A new modified block diagram is shown in Fig. Our estimator has a correction coefficient (kw) in the flux estimation algorithm. the functions of the feedback loop can be used to eliminate the DC drift and flux saturation. the actual flux amplitude should have the value L. The output signals are sine waves having only the fundamental frequency. According to waveform theory. 4.ietdl. the large input signal should be regarded as a constant output.www. The thrust correction coefficient can be obtained by comparing the starting thrust computed by the Maxwell stress tensor method with that given in (14) when kF is not used. Iss. Hence. In this paper. pp. 326– 338 doi: 10.g. It is noteworthy that the modified flux linkage estimator proposed in this paper is based on [27]. we do not force the controlled system to become a linear one. In fact.2008. Therefore a thrust correction coefficient is required to compensate the end effect. the integration of (11) – (14) are the key factors.9 [5]) can then be determined. Even though predicting the behaviour of non-linear systems is always difficult. is equal to L. we can expect the inherent problems of the system also to be eliminated.1049/iet-cta. the amplitude of the correction factor is between that of the pulse wave and the sine wave. Note that the DC drift is generated by the pure integrator while the flux saturation is inherent in the system. From waveform theory..e. the performance of the original system will be distorted if the non-linear system is changed into a linear one. a value of the flux can be obtained from um using an integrator. The thrust correction coefficient kF (i. called limiting level. Furthermore. this does not seem to solve the problem completely.e. 5).org characteristics of the PMLSM. IET Control Theory Appl. The train of voltage pulses is combined with a sine wave having a fundamental frequency and higher-order harmonics. We will now discuss the experimental performances of the different control systems in detail. In other words. 3. the output of a saturation element is proportional to the input. the phase winding resistance (Rm) can be neglected if the switching time interval of the voltage vectors is sufficiently short (e. Furthermore. Hence. As a result. Vol. Moreover. 5. For small input signals. Note that the input signals of the where A0 is the amplitude value and v0 is the fundamental frequency.

As a result. As soon as the properly designed sliding function becomes equal to zero.1049/iet-cta. the normalised position output (xp) is (xp/6. x) [ RnÂ1 such that f (t..096 cm). ultimate accuracy and finite time reaching of the transient. Definition 1(matching conditions [31. 6a and b show the system performances of the old control method [27] and our method. x). In addition. Note that both performances are shown with the same position input – a triangular signal moving 6 cm with a velocity of 6 cm/s. The main features of the sliding mode include its insensitivity to external and internal disturbances. which can be properly chosen by the designer [29.ietdl. angle theta is (u/180 degrees) and the flux linkage flux D is (lD/0. If there exists g(t. The SMC design approach consists of two components.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . the sliding manifold is established. the unsuitable voltage vectors increase the errors. (17) meets the demands of matching conditions. whereas the latter does. xp is the position output and kFLk external uncertainties and disturbance term that may 331 IET Control Theory Appl. all the experimental results of the motor controlled system are normalised.org Figs. 30]. Based on the experimental results. The design process for matching the conditions in a real linear motor control system is now introduced.www. Vol. Fig. B [ RnÂm and u [ RmÂ1 are the control inputs and f (t. A [ RnÂn . 32]): Consider the system x ¼ Ax þ Bu þ f (t. This makes the sliding manifold attractive to the system state in the presence of external and internal disturbances/uncertainties.425 Wb). which is matched by control. the position-tracking performance of the new method is better than that of the old one. and the new flux linkage lD has less distortion than the old one. we conclude that the conventional method cannot estimate both the amplitude and the angular position of the flux linkage. Consider the mover dynamic equation of the PMLSM € x Fe ¼ M xp þ D_ p þ FL Figure 6 Comparison between the old and new algorithms a System performance of the old flux estimate algorithm [27] b Performance of a new flux estimate algorithm (18) F is the bounded Here. m and B has the full rank. 7.2008. 6a reveals the disadvantages of the conventional method [27]. This suggests that the correct voltage vectors cannot be provided (in time) by the switching table for the motor controlled system. For convenience. Nevertheless. it can be said that the new angular position u is more linear. the former does not use the correction coefficient kw . From our experimental results. thereby making the system unstable. The proper design of the sliding function yields a suitable closed-loop system performance while the system’s trajectories belong to the sliding manifold. Iss. 3 Sliding mode controller design The concept of SMC is based on the introduction of a ‘customised’ function named the sliding function. x) [ RnÂ1 is the disturbance term. For example. pp. 4. 2010. 6b shows that the problem of flux linkage is improved by the correction factor. 3. x) ¼ Bg(t. Fig. The mover electromagnetic thrust of the PMLSM can be described in Fig. we conclude that the performance of our control method is better than that proposed in the prior work [27]. The amplitude and angular position of the flux linkage can be obtained correctly by using our modified flux linkage estimator. SMC aims to steer the system trajectory to the properly chosen sliding manifold and then maintain subsequent motions on the surface by means of control. n . 326 – 338 doi: 10. The first involves the design of a sliding function so that the system motion on the sliding manifold (termed the sliding phase) satisfies the design specifications. The second is concerned with the selection of a control law. x) _ (17) where x [ Rn is the state vector. The main reason for this is the absence of the correction factor. respectively.

(F =M). the state variables can be retained in the sliding manifold even if the bounded disturbance exists    D D _ e þ 1 sign(s) þ ks (27) u ¼ M r1 þ r1 þ c À € M M 2 This control law gives two different rates of change for s (i. Equation (18) can then be written in the state-space form  [_ ] ¼ x x1 _ x2 _  ¼ " 0 0 1 D À M #  x1 þ x2 " 0 1 (u À FL ) (19) M # _ A global reaching condition is given by V (s). it drives the system states to reach the sliding manifold in infinite time. the natural selection of 332 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . the _ derivative of the Lyapunov function V (s) can be chosen as   F _ V (s) ¼ s À1 sign(s) À ks þ L M (26) (24) where x1 ¼ xp is the actual position signal and u ¼ Fe is the control input. and s(e). which can be determined from (25) and (26). the control u can drive the state variables V (i. The parameter 1 indicates the speed of the system reaching the sliding manifold. c. 4. 326– 338 doi: 10. V (0) ¼ 0 and V (s) . 0. 3.org Lyapunov function candidate has the form V (s) ¼ 0:5s2 The derivative of the Lyapunov function is then _ V (s) ¼ ss ¼ s(_2 þ c_1 ) _ e e   (25) 1 1 r € ¼ s r 1 þ (B_ 1 À Be2 þ FL ) À ut þ ce2 M M Figure 7 Mover electromagnetic thrust of the PMLSM comprise dry and viscous friction as well as any other unknown forces. _ (0) ¼ 0.0485  where r1 (r2) is the position (velocity) reference signal. it cannot be guaranteed that the reaching phase will be achieved in a finite time. Here. Hence. pp. e1 and e2) to the sliding manifold (s ¼ 0) in finite time. The system response also generates chattering at higher frequencies. s ¼ e2 þ ce1 (23) where G ¼ [c 1]. Moreover. It is well known that the presence of chattering because of the discontinuous control is one of the drawbacks of SMC.e. Vol. Define the position-tracking error e1 ¼ r1 – x1 . In short. s ¼ À1 sign(s) À ks þ FL =M): one is the equal _ velocity trending term [– 1 sign(s)] and the other is an exponential trending term ( – ks)..ietdl. The exponential term not only shortens the reaching time but also reduces the chattering. 0 when s = 0. By using our new control method. 2010. the asymptotic stability of solution (21) and (22) will be _ guaranteed since V(s) . the state vector e T ¼ [e1 e2]. a positive constant that represents the slope of the sliding manifold. For singleinput – single-output systems that are required to have motion in a sliding manifold. e. the new method gives a good dynamic performance if the parameters (k and 1) are carefully selected.e. we have attempted to combine the constant value term and the exponential term to solve these problems. Based on the experimental results. the convergence of the position error will be guaranteed in a finite time.1049/iet-cta. r1 ¼ xpcmd and compute its dynamics as _ _ e 1 ¼ r 1 À x1 ¼ r2 À x2 ¼ e2 _ (20) where 1 and k are positive constants such that j1 þ kjsjj . Choosing different time derivatives of the Lyapunov function _ V (s) leads to different rates of change for s. if the control law is chosen as (27). Note that the uncertainties and disturbance terms have to be assumed for the control scheme. Furthermore. In this paper. 0. However. Iss. The derivation of the control law begins with the selection of the Lyapunov function V(s) and an appropriate form of _ the derivative of the Lyapunov function V (s). Hence. the sliding function. This seems to suggest that the sliding phase does not exist. Higher 1 implies greater speed. The error-model state equation corresponding to (19) can be described as e 1 ¼ e2 _ € _ e2 ¼ r 1 À x2 _ ¼ r1 þ € D 1 (_ 1 À e2 ) À (u À FL ) r M M (22) (21) The goal of the SMC method is to derive the control u such that the motion of the system is restricted to belong to the sliding manifold S S ¼ {e : s(e) ¼ Ge ¼ 0}.2008. the values of the terms are bounded and satisfy the matching conditions. The sign function is the main contributor to the existence of chattering.www. the sliding manifold can be reached in finite time. The introduction of a boundary layer can improve the performance but at the cost of IET Control Theory Appl. Here.

Further.org Table 3 Related parameters of the DTC controller Parameter thrust threshold value r1 cutoff frequency vc Value (unit) 0. The sat function is defined as ( sat(s. Table 4 Parameter values of the PMLSM Parameter mover mass Value (unit) 1. an optimisation method based on gradient descent algorithm is introduced to determine the parameters of the SMC controller.4 (Wb) lower steady-state precision and reduced robustness properties. Vol. 4.2008. no simple method exists to obtain the parameters for the SMC.1049/iet-cta. which provides a 333 IET Control Theory Appl. Simulations have to be conducted and examined to judge whether the intended aims are achieved. d (28) where d is a small positive constant that defines a boundary layer. Hence. d ) ¼ sign(s). hence. a trial-and-error method has been used to select the parameters of a motor control system. Conventionally.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 .www. 3. we substitute the sign function with a sat function to weaken the chattering. a long time is wasted in many attempts. A large boundary layer leads to a larger steady-state error whereas a too small boundary layer leads to highfrequency switching. Unfortunately. In this paper. pp. k.5 100 (Hz) Parameter flux hysteretic value r2 flux linkage command (lcmd) Value (unit) 0.06096 (m) 4 Simulation and experimental results 280 (V) The non-linear control design (NCD) toolbox was investigated by using Matlab/Simulink.8/3(mH) 1 a Simulation results of the SMC and PI (xp) b Simulation results of the SMC and PI (e1) c Simulation result of the error state phase trajectory (s) friction factor permanent magnet flux linkage pole pitch 5. the selection of the parameters complicates the controller design.2982 (N/(m/s) 0. 326 – 338 doi: 10. c. Therefore methods to find a parameter vector P ¼ [1.ietdl. Iss. In the next section.8/3 (V) Figure 8 Simulation results of the system position response 4.4849 (Wb) 0. 2010. the designer finds it difficult to obtain precise parameters. d ] such that the sliding mode controller with a better performance can be obtained is an important issue.97 (kg) Parameter phase winding resistance inductance number of pole pairs DC voltage Vdc Value (unit) 11. s .025 0.. d js j ! d js j . Therefore the designer must select the value of d carefully.

The problem then needs to be solved using a state-of-the-art optimisation theory. Vol. 4.g s:t: g(x) À wg 0 xl x xu (29) Figure 9 Simulation results of the DTC and FOC time-domain-based optimisation approach to control system design [33]. This method can attain the where x is a vector of the tunable variables. The constraint error is defined as the difference between the constraint boundary and simulated output. which uses gradient methods to adjust tunable parameters to meet the constraint objectives (i. one can automatically convert timedomain specifications into a problem of constrained optimisation. Hence. 326– 338 doi: 10.1049/iet-cta. g(x). and w.org performance objectives and optimising tunable parameters intuitively. The optimisation problem is as follows  min g x.e. The scalar g imposes an element of slackness into the problem. Iss. 3. This tool is able to automatically tune system parameters on the basis of user-defined time-domain performance constraints. g attempts to minimise the maximum (weighted) constraint error. vectors of the lower and upper bounds on the tunable variables. xl and xu .. which otherwise imposes that the goals be rigidly met. 2010.www. The NCD toolbox transforms the constraints and the simulated system into an optimisation problem. This type of optimisation problem is solved using the sequential Figure 10 Three kinds of different wave input simulation results a b c d Simulation result of square wave input (xp) Simulation result of trapezoid wave input (xp) Simulation result of square wave input (xp) Simulation result of square wave input (e1) 334 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 IET Control Theory Appl. optimisation criteria).0485 . a vector of the weightings on the constraints.ietdl. Basically. a vector of the constraint bound error.2008. pp.

. Note that the input-position-command tracking performance of the controlled system can be reached in 0. the uncertain parameters of the control motor are allowed to have variations within a range of +20%. SMC and PI) based on the DTC method. 8a and b. we give the same time-domain specification to both the controllers.06 s by the DTC and FOC methods. Finally. we find the system performance of our DTC method to be better than that of the old one.e. 500. Hence. 9. we tune parameters P to meet time-domain performance requirements under a unit step signal input that is defined as follows: the rise-time tr 0. In this method. 0] and [500.e. For enhancing the system performance of the robust control method. the routine updates an estimate of the Hessian of the Lagrangian [35. This reference model employs a PI controller and a DTC method. Fig.2008.5 s and the overshoot that the parameter vector P ¼ [1. k. For this simulation. 0. respectively. The SMC parameters are obtained by NCD and the information on the PMLSM parameters are given in Tables 3 and 4. In addition.org quadratic programming (SQP) method [33.2 s. 4. 3. Therefore the sum of square error (SSE). a quadratic programming (QP) problem is solved at each iteration. In this study. This indicates that the system response of the DTC method is faster than that of the FOC method. respectively. The simulated results of the motor system with a triangularwave input signal (slope of the rising ramp ¼ 6 and the descending ramp ¼ –6) are shown in Figs. For a comparison of the system performance. 1.www. optimisation criterion). which has been proposed in [38]. 1. other parameters of uncertainty bounds can be used.1 Simulation results The performance of the proposed integration algorithms is investigated by using Matlab/Simulink. The total mass (M ) is acceptable if it lies between the nominal mass and five times the nominal mass. We hope settle-time ts 0. In addition. In summary.01]. controller data are required. Vol. 3.ietdl. for this purpose. which is P 2 defined as e1 .e. the criterion of the desired system can be met by the suitable parameter vector P ¼ [13. a NCD toolbox is used to obtain the vector P ¼ [1. the 5%. pp. 500. 326 – 338 doi: 10. 121. 8 shows this in detail.1]). two PI controllers were used to serve the position and velocity control. 36]. a reference model based on the FOC policy for a PMLSM [37] is used.015 and 0. c. 35]. 2010. Figure 11 Computer controlled PMLSM servo drive system 4.72.5. the NCD toolbox is able to provide a graphical user interface (GUI) to assist in time-domain-based control design. is selected by us as a performance index.0485 Figure 12 Experimental results of position response with different loadings a Experimental results of position response at nominal mass (xp) b Experimental results of position response at five times nominal mass (xp) 335 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . in this paper. Iss.1049/iet-cta. The simulated results of the motor systems under the ramp input signal with slope 1 cm/0. 0. from the simulations. d] will settle between the lower and upper bounds (i. k. [1. we have compared the two control methods (i. Under the NCD environment. The PI parameters are obtained by a simple genetic algorithm (GA) to minimise the performance index (i. The position-tracking error is obviously less than 20 mm IET Control Theory Appl. c. In the simulation. As a result.1 s are shown in Fig. d] for the SMC controller.

0485 . 326– 338 doi: 10. Its simulation results under a nominal mass are given in Figs. The adopted PMLSM is the 220 V 5. The simulation result is given in Fig.0 A 475 N type.ietdl. the error states trajectory maintain motion on the sliding phase. a small signal of a square wave with 1 mm is considered as the reference input. pp. In the next section.e. a personal computer (Pentium II 300 MHz with 512 MB RAM) and a PMLSM (LM210-2A-WD3). Based on the simulation results. called the Figure 13 Comparison with the tracing performance under different control methods a b c d Experimental results of position response at nominal mass (xp) Experimental results of position error at nominal mass (e1) Experimental results of position response at three times nominal mass (xp) Experimental results of position error at three times nominal mass (e1) 336 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 IET Control Theory Appl. However. 10b. Vol. a fast response and good trace ability) to meet the designer requirements. The former case. From a comparison of the results. In addition. the same equations and parameters as above will be used. 2010. Furthermore.org with the SMC method. Furthermore. it can be seen that the accuracy of the position control can be effectively improved by our control method. a practical PMLSM control system is presented. To demonstrate the system performance. the PMLSM control system consists of a PCI card. From these results.2008. we think that our controller can provide two brilliant performances (i. Fig. For comparing the simulation results with the corresponding experimental results.2 Experimental results The structure of a practical PMLSM control system using the current-controlled technique is shown in Fig. 11.www. called the parameter variation case. 4. 10c and d. 8c shows the simulation result of the phase trajectory of the error states (e1 and e2). it can be concluded that the performance of our control method is suitable for applications to practical PMLSM systems. 10a.1049/iet-cta.. two cases have been used in the experimental study – with and without loading. the system performance is shown in Fig. implies loading a weight (about 8 kg) on the mover. a DSP servo card (TMS320LF2400). 10a shows that the system response does not have overshoots and oscillations. it can be seen that the reaching phase can be achieved irrespective of the initial condition. Iss. the error reaches almost 500 mm with the PI method. Moreover. we have tried to use a trapezoid wave as the reference input. 3. Fig. 4. we have also attempted to employ a square wave as the reference input in the proposed control systems. The latter case. Some experimental results have been provided to demonstrate the system performance of the proposed control system. a linear synchronous motor drive (UTP10).

In Case I. 12a shows that the entire system response almost meets the simulation result. 13a–d. From the simulation and experimental results.. October 2006. 2010.ietdl. 6 Acknowledgment This work was supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan. on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications. Note that the weight of the mover is 1. the control system is robust with regard to parameter variations and load disturbances. This suggests that a suitable voltage vector cannot be provided correctly by the switch table for the drive system in the initial state.E.H. 2007. 2008.Y. pp. Appl. IEEE Trans. Based on this experimental result. Ischia. Electron.S.. the SMC method is more robust than the PI method. on Power Electron.org nominal case.. Ind. 2.J. 1054 – 1061 [11] TAKAHASHI I. J. a modified integrator has been proposed. 572 – 576 [3] LIN F. Drives Autom. the steady-state errors for the two cases with the SMC method are both less than 25 mm.D. respectively. Appl. Syst. 9. which is an improvement of a prior work [27]. 1011– 1022 [5] KWON B. 1239 – 1241 [10] SCHAUDER C. LIN C. Vol. 12a and b show the system responses of the nominal case and the parameter variation case.www. implies not loading any weight on the mover. 2005.97 kg. the total mass (about 9. a mass (about 4 kg) is added to the mass of the mover. JUNZHU W. 2007. It is found that the transient state errors for the two cases with the SMC method have maximum values of 0. 13a and c show the system responses of both cases. LILI J. Nevertheless. In addition.F.: ‘Decoupling control of thrust and attractive force of a LIM using space vector controlled inverter’.: ‘Direct torque control of PWM inverter-fed AC motors – a survey’. pp. KIM S. J. Note that loading with mass of 8 kg cannot work well in our system if only the PI method is used. 326 – 338 doi: 10. Fig. KUNG Y. 11– 13 June 2008. Considering the comparison results.S. 151– 167 [4] LIN F.S. WOO K. CHO Y..K. 2482– 2490 [9] KASMIEH T. under Grant NSC 97-2221-E-606-018. 8 kg is the full load condition in our motor system. The system performance of the SMC method and the PI method [39] is discussed in this paper. 2002. Sci.: ‘Magnetic field and performance analysis of a tubular permanent magnet linear synchronous motor applied in elevator door system’. Proc. Ind.: ‘Adaptive speed identification for vector control of induction motors without rational transducers’.1049/iet-cta.. MOON J. Figs.. pp.. JIEFAN C.18 cm. our proposed approach can thus be applied to real motor systems. Fig. Furthermore. pp. 2008. Symp.. 1306 – 1309 [6] LIJUN Z. the trace of the output response almost meets the input command. 1999.. Aerosp. 12b shows that the entire system response when loaded is four times the nominal mass case. Our method gives a fast response and more accurate performance. pp. IET Control Theory Appl. the steady-state errors of the PI method almost reach 80 mm. 744 – 757 [8] BONNET F. two cases have been considered in the experimental studies. Int. Appl. Electromagn. Mech. A.. 132–136 [7] BUJA G. (5).. a DTC method and a real PMLSM control system. CHOU P. IEEE Trans..H. 35. the transient state errors for the two cases with the PI method have maximum values of 0. (2).: ‘Adaptive stator flux estimator for the induction machine direct torque control’.. The advantage of the proposed approach is that the system behaviour can be tracked easily.: ‘Incremental motion control of linear synchronous motor’. Electron. Iss. pp.: ‘Research on the parameters identification of direct thrust control system using wavelet transform’. Int. SHYU K.W.. Hence. It is noteworthy that our method also solves for the inherent flux linkage problems. Zhejiang Univ. pp. Figs. our system performance appears to demonstrate more robustness than the one in the previous work [4].: ‘Dual direct torque control of doubly fed induction machine’. Motion. Electr.. Obviously. 28. a large positiontracking error still exists in the transient state irrespective of the control method. pp. Electron. 7 References [1] ZHU Y. For obtaining the actual thrust. ZHENG Z.97 kg) is more than five times the nominal mass..H. However. Finally. (4).... HEMIN W. 28.J... Conf..14 and 0. 29. 38. VIDAL P. pp. (3). MARIA P. 283–289 [2] LIU X.. that is the parameter variation case. Italy. For convenience. in summary.. Moreover. Note that the transient state suffers very slight disturbance when the parameter variation is drastic. 1992. Case II is the nominal case. pp. The detailed experimental results are shown in Figs. R. Magn..P. 51.0485 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 . 161 – 167 337 5 Conclusions This paper presents an NCD-based SMC controller.: ‘Robust fuzzy neural network controller with nonlinear disturbance observer for two-axis motion control system’. LU Q. 2008. respectively. IEEE Trans. pp. 54. Figs.18 cm. that is without any loading.2008.. 13b and d focus on the position-tracking error performance of the two cases.O. KAZMIERKOWSKI M. IET Control Theory Appl. pp. It has been experimentally demonstrated that the performance of the new method is better than that of the previously proposed one [27].. 3.: ‘Analysis of permanent magnet linear synchronous motor for advanced control’.. it can be concluded that our approach can be applied to position tracking in an actual PMLSM. Ind.. Ind. respectively. YE Y.W. IEEE Trans.C. IEEE Trans. In fact.68 and 1. In contrast. Int. KIM D. IEEE Trans. The SMC parameters of the real motor are automatically generated by an NCD optimisation algorithm. 4. This is mainly because the starting position of the controlled motor cannot be identified by the motor drive.: ‘Finite element analysis of direct thrust-controlled linear induction motor’.

133 – 150 [22] BARAMBONES O. 288–311 [36] SCHITTKOWSKI K. 2407– 2416 [14] HURST K. 2007. 1985. 213– 218 [32] CORLESS M.. Berlin. 790 – 795 [15] WU R. LIMIN Z. 51.. 13. IEEE Trans. ZHU J.H.: ‘Sliding mode pulsewidth modulation’. (5). DE LEON J. August 2006..G.J. 54.. (Dong Hwa University. GARRIDO A. pp. 16. XU Y. LIN F. GROTSCHEL M. HU J. 27. Appl. IET Control Theory Appl. PhD thesis.. IET Control Theory Appl.: ‘Second-order sliding-mode control of a mobile robot based on a harmonic potential field’. IEEE Trans. : ‘A new approach to direct torque control of induction motor drives for constant inverter switching frequency and torque ripple reduction’.: ‘Sliding modes in control and optimization’ (Springer-Verlag. Weihai. 4. Power Electron. IEEE Trans.I. Iss. pp.: ‘New integration algorithms for estimating motor flux over a wide speed range’. 23. Proc....): ‘Mathematical programming: the state of the art’ (Springer Verlag. 56.. pp. Coventry. Energy Convers.: ‘Position sensorless control of surface-mounted PMLSM with a novel starting method’. LEITMANN G. 1992) [19] FERRARA A...(EDS. CHEN G. Acquisition.1049/iet-cta.A. Taoyuan. GUO Y. .) [29] http://cce. 2.. Power Appl..I. Taiwan. 1. Conf. WU B. LIN C.. 1998.. : ‘Variable metric methods for constrained optimization’. IET Control Theory Appl.J. pp.ietdl. accessed 2002 [34] CONSTANTINOS I. pp. 2008. 1629 – 1640 IET Control Theory Appl. Int. Proc. pp. KORTE B.: ‘Intelligent motion control of linear ultrasonic motor with H1 tracking performance’... SLEMON G. Appl. Int. pp. (2).: ‘Advanced engineering mathematics’ (John Wiley & Sons Press.. pp.. pp. 5.. 234 – 236 [31] KOSHKOUEI A. 2008..G..www. 3. (4). 2010. 1. 485 – 500 [37] WANG W.: ‘Robust observer with sliding mode estimation for nonlinear uncertain systems’. ZOLGHADRI M..D. UTKIN V.M.J. pp. pp. 2006. 786– 794 [23] PENG Y. Vol. IEEE Trans.J. : ‘Control of DC motors using proportional integral sliding mode’. 1174– 1178 [17] YAN W.. : ‘Lyapinov stability based neural network controller for permanent magnet synchronous motor drive system’. Autom.: ‘Sliding mode control design based on Ackermann’s formula’... (3). CHEN Z.org [12] LAI Y. of 18th on Systems Engineering..J. 1981.F. 2007. on Electrical Power Engineering. 2005 [38] SHEN P. 1998 [35] POWELL M. IEEE Trans. 807–818 [20] VELUVOLU K. (1). IEEE Trans. MASEDA F. 1983).C. pp. 34. 2006. . Autom. 43. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.0485 . IEEE Trans. Magn.: ‘A fast flux search controller for DTC-based induction motor drives’.. Oper. NASAR S.: ‘Cascade and highgain observers comparison for sensorless closed-loop induction motor control’. HABETLER T.. 969 – 977 [28] KREYSZIG E.. pp.. Ind. HUANG Y. SOH Y. 1986. pp.C. IEEE Trans. 2008.: ‘NLQPL: A FORTRAN-subroutine solving constrained nonlinear programming problems’. 2004.. HAQUE M. 9th edn. 1998. 799– 809 338 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2010 [26] YAN Y.J. 1991. IEEE Trans.B. Ind. pp..: ‘Zero-speed tacholess IM torque control: simply a matter of stator voltage integration’. Electron..J. 24. (5).F. . UTKIN V. Ind. pp. IET Electr. pp. (2).I. VAHDATI-KHAJEH E. BOLDEA I. 1. 42– 48 [27] HU J. pp. 2003) [39] SUNG C. 2008.. Conf. Electron... on Int. 1998.. Ind. in BACHEM A. 326– 338 doi: 10.. pp. The 26th Symp.: ‘A permanent magnet motor drive without a shaft sensors’.C. Ind. 9 – 17 [24] DENG Z.J.C.cinvestav.mx/documentos/Tutorial_SMC_ and_Applications. 107– 112 [25] RAHMAN M. GLUMINEAU A..: ‘Problems associated with the DTC of an interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor drive and their remedies’. GRIVA G. YU C. LIXIN T..pdf. IEEE Trans. IEEE Trans.: ‘Fields in permanent magnet linear synchronous machines’.E. 2. 2007. pp.: ‘Integral slidingmode controller for induction motor based on FOC theory’.: ‘Initial rotor position estimation and sensorless direct torque control of surface-mounted permanent magnet synchronous motors considering saturation saliency’..S. 2009. Power Electron. YANG W.R..: ‘Based on direct thrust control for linear synchronous motor systems’... (1). 22.com. Control. Taiwan.... BURNHAM K. 1005 – 1011 [16] LU H. 619– 626 [18] UTKIN V. pp.: ‘Continuous state feedback guaranteeing uniform boundedness for uncertain dynamic systems’. pp.mathworks. Ann. IET Control Theory Appl. CHEN S. 2007..H. Master thesis. (2). CAO W. Control.. Res. 2. XU L. 220– 227 [13] KABOLI S.G. RUBAGOTTI M.D. (9). Electron.2008. 1533– 1540 [21] GHANES M.: ‘Implementation of position control for permanent magnet linear synchronous motor systems’..: ‘An approach for nonlinear control design via approximate dynamic programming’. IET Control Theory Appl. 2001. accessed 2008 [30] ACKERMANN J.R. 437– 443 [33] http://www.H.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->