PI and Fuzzy Estimators for Tuning the Stator Resistance in Direct Torque Control of Induction Machines

Say& MiP

Malik E. Elbuluk*

Dept. of Electric Engineering

** Dept. of Elect& Engineering

Northern Illinois University L Dekalb, I 601152854. USA

Donald S.Zinger**

University of Ahon Akron, OH 44325-3904, USA

Abstract------Direct torque control (DTC) uses the stator resistance of the machine for the estimatlon of stator flux. The variation of stator resistance due to temperature changes in the machine, makes the operatlons difflcult at low speeds. A method for the estimatlon of changes In stator resistance during the operation of the machine Is presented. T h e estimation method I s Implemented wlth PI control The estimators and fuzzy logic control schemes. observes the stator current vector of the machlne to detect the changes In stator resistance. The performance of the two methods is compared using simulation and experlmental results.

1.

INTRODUCTION

The variation of induction motor parameters and their effect on the performance of the induction motor drives has long been recognized [ 1,2,3]. In perfect rotor field-orientedcontrol methods, the controller is dependent on both rotor and stator parameters[l,2]. Direct torque control (DTC), a variation of field-oriented-control minimizes the use of machine parameters [4,5]. Fig. 1 shows the block diagram of the DTC. It is essentially a sliding mode stator flux-orientedcontrol. The sliding mode control uses a hysteresis band to directly control the flux and torque of the machine. When the stator flux falls outside the hysteresis band, the inverter switching states are changed so that the flux takes an optimal path towards the desired value [4,5].In spite of its simplicity it is capable of generating a fast torque response. One of the limitations of DTC is the use of stator resistance for the estimation of stator flux [4]. The variation of stator resistance due to temperature changes in the machjne, makes the controller operation difficult at low speeds. If the stator resistance is measured or estimated during the operation of the machine, the use of direct self controller at low speeds can be made more reliable. This paper discusses the effects of the change in stator resistance on the DTC. The relation between the change in the stator current vector and change in stator resistance is derived. A method for the estimation of changes in stator resistance during the operation of the machine is presented. The estimation method is implemented with PI and fuzzy logic control schemes. The performance of the two methods is compared using simulation and experimental results. 2. EFFECT OF VARIATION IN STATOR RESISTANCE ON DTC

Variables in motor

k, + A= X , jV-I+I),d (,(,A,R)t te+Ate,=K(I,+AI,)(h,+Aksm)

Estimated controller variables k,+ AkSc=J(V,- (I,+AI,)R,)dt te+Atec=K(I,+AI,)(k,+AXsc)

In DTC, the stator flux is estimated by taking the integral of the difference between the input voltage and the voltage drop across the stator resistance as h, = j(Vs-IsR&lt . . . . . . . . . (1) The value of stator resistance changes due to the change of temperature during the operation of the machine. At low
0-7803-1859-5/94/%4.00 0 1994 IEEE

Flux angle e

Fig. 1. Direct Torque control of an induction machine.

7 44

Ak,,=O

Akc=O K(AI~h~+AIsA~sc+ ) = 0 ISA& Therefore changes in the actual torque and flux from the command values are given by
AXs,= ~(AIsRs+IsARs) dt At,, = K(AI,A~sm+IsA~sm)
= K (Is+ AIs)/(Is+AIs) ARs dt These changes are same as the difference between estimated and actual torque and flux given by equations (4) and (5). Rearranging equation (5) we have

JAI~R,~~=O

AR,

1! I (A-) K dt I, + AIs = . . . (6) I, + AIS

Variabks in motor
ks+Aksm= kV,-(Is+AIs)(R,+AR,))dt

Estimated controller variables ks + Aksc =

kvs - (1s +d ) dt s RJ
k+At,=K(I,+ AIs)(&+Aksc)

Equation (6) gives the change in stator resistance as a function of changes in stator current and electric torque. As the controller tries to keep the torque constant therefore the stator current is not affected by the change of load of input dc voltage. The model of the machine used in DTC is independent of all machine parameters other than the stator resistance. Therefore the current is not a f c e by the fetd variation of any machine parameter other than the stator resistance. The current vector is determined by the command torque and commands, the stator flux. This means, for a constant flux and torque command stator current vector is only dependent on stator resistance of the machine. Therefore any change in stator current vector indicates a change in stator resistance [6]. To obtain the relation between the stator current and stator resistance, a simulation was run in which the stator resistance was changed as shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 3 shows the change in stator current for this change in stator resistance.

te+Ate,=K(Is+AIs)(~s+A~sm)

0.24
5

10

Time

15

2(

n Fig. 2 Change i stator resistance.

I

Variables in motor

Estimated controller variables Aksc= lAIsRs dt AAsm= J ( A I ~ R , + I ~ A R ~ + A I ~ dt R Ate,= A ~)

At,,= K(AI,k,+AI,Ak,,+IsAkSm) K(hI,k,+hI,Aksc+ IsAXsc

1
0.2

0.3

0.4 0.5 0.6 Stator resistance

0.7

0.8

Fig. 3 Graph between the magnitude of stator current vector and stator resistance

7 45

The value of the stator current vector simulated has been filtered to eliminate any ripple. It can be seen from the figure that the trajectory of the current is not the same for the increase and decrease in the stator resistance. Thus the relation between the two variables is nonlinear.

3. CORRECTION OF THE STATOR RESISTANCE

An estimator has been designed to estimate the change in stator resistance of the machine during the operation. The estimator observes the stator current vector, and if a change is detected, a corresponding changes in the stator resistance is made. The estimator has been designed based on PI control and fuzzy logic control schemes.
a)

Fuzzy Resistance Estimator:

Fig. 4 shows the resistance estimator based on fuzzy logic control. Stator current vector error and change in stator current vector error are used as inputs to the estimator [6]. The magnitude of the stator current vector is obtained from the measured stator currents given by:
Is&) = . . . . . . . . 0 This is filtered and fed to the fuzzy resistance estimator. Current vector error and change in current vector error are dehedas: e&) = I~&)*-I,&) . . . . . . . . (8) Ae&) = e@)- e&-1) . . . . . . . . (9) Where I, is the current vector corresponding to the flux and torque commands and Is is the measured stator current vector. Each of the two input variables, e@) and Ae&), and output variable ARs is divided into five fuzzy segments namely NL, NS, ZE, PS and PL. The range of control (or universe of discourse) for stator current vector error is chosen between - l A and 1A and a triangular function was used for the membership distribution. Fig. 5 shows the membership distribution of the stator current error. The universe of discourse for change in stator current vector error i chosen s between -0.4A and 0.4 A and a triangular function is used for the membership distribution. Fig. 6 shows the membership

4& 2

distribution for the change in current error. The universe of discourse for change in stator resistance is chosen between -0.008 ohms and 0.016 ohms and a triangular function is used for membership distribution. Fig. 7 shows the membership distribution for the change in stator resistance, These values are chosen for a 3 hp induction machine with values of command torque and command flux of 11.9 (rated) and 0.342 Volt-sec respectively. The control rule applied can be described in terms of the input variables e and Ae and the output variable AR,. The ith rule Ri: can be written as Ri: If e is Ai, Ae is Bi then ARs is Ci where Ai, Bi and Ci are the fuzzy segments of e, Ae and ARsrespectively. The control rules are formulated using the stator current response of the induction motor for a change in stator resistance as shown in Figs. 2 , 3 and 8. There are total of twenty five rules as shown in Fig. 9. The distribution of the rules in the table shows symmetry. Product operation rule of fuzzy implication is used as inference method. The firing strength a1 and a2 of first and second rules may be expressed as [81: a 1 = PNLW . P a ( A d a2 = CL * CrNS(W Similarly the firing strength of ith rule is given by $) a i = &e * WAei(Ae) Where ki(e) is the grade of membership of ei segment of current error e and PAei is the grade of membership of Aei segment of change in current error Ae.

Fig. 5 Membership distribution of stator current vector error.

.I

NS

Z E

PS

PL

Fig. 6 Membership distribution of change in stator current vector error.

NS

ZE

ps

PL

-0.008 0 0 3 0 0.007 0.016 .0

Fig. 7 Membership distribution of change in stator resistance Fig. 4 DTC with fuzzy resistance estimator.

7 46

b)

PI Resistance Estimator:

Fig. 10 shows the resistance estimator based on PI control. The error in the stator current vector is used as an input to the estimator. The equation for the PI resistance estimator is given by: AIS . . . . . (12) ARs = KpAI, + Ki - .
S m.oJ
5

10

Tm ie

1 s

2(

Fig. 8 Error i the stator current vector for linear n change i the stator resistance. n

where Kp and Ki are the proportional and integral gains of the PI estimator. Gradient decent method was used for tuning the estimator. (See Appendix) [91. An emor was inserted in the stator resistance of the motor and this error was used to tune the gains of the controller. Fig. 11 shows the block diagram of the tuning system. The gains are updated using the following equation: AKp = C (AR* - AR) AIS

and

AKi

= C (AR* - AR) P I s dt

where C is a constant. The gains are adjusted iteratively till their values converge. For the motor specifications given earlier the values of the gains obtained after tuning are: Kp = 0.00923 Ki = 0.000876

Fig

According to the product operation rule, as a fuzzy implication ith rule leads to the control decision [81: pARnRulei(ARs)= suP(ai wARn'(ARs)) Where pARnRulei(ARs) is the grade of membership of the control decision ARn in the ith control rule, and ~AR;(AR)is the grade of membership of the ARn' segment of the output variable AR in the ith control rule. The membership function p m n of the control decision ARn is pointwise given as: maxPARiRulej(ms) . * j= 1 The fuzzy output obtained after the inference needs to be defuzzified to get the actual output. The center average method is used for the defuzzification. According to this method the output in a discrete universe is given by [81:

T . V

pARn =

25

Fig. 10 DTC with PI resistance estimator

*

(10)

Ircf

.=1 AR, = J

25

. . . . .

AIS

(11)

pms(ARsj) j=l where ~ A R ~ ( A Ris~the grade of membership of the , ) fuzzy output segment ARsj given by jth rule and C(ARsj) is value of output fuzzy segment in the actual universe of discourse at the maximum membership point. ARs is the actual value of the change in stator resistance of the motor.
7 47

Fig. 11 Block diagram of the tuning setup for the PI resistance estimator.

4. SIMULATION RESULTS

15
h

c
<

With fuzzy resistance estimator

b - / - -

Simulation results for a DTC system with resistance estimator when controlling a 3 hp, 4 pole induction machine were obtained. The resistance of the machine was changed from 0.43552 to 0.8m linearly in 4 secs. This value is retained for 0.5 sec and then decreased back to 0.435Q at the same rate. The command torque and the command flux are kept wnstant at 11.9 N-m and 0.234 Volt-sec respectively. The magnitude of the stator current vector under these conditions is 19.1 amps. A switching frequency of 20 KHz was used in DTC and stator resistance was updated every 50 switching cycles. F g . 12(a) and Fig. 12@) show the actual is and estimated stator resistance of the machine with fuzzy and I resistance estimators respectively. In both estimators, the P o estimated stator resistance follows very closely t the actual stator resistance of the machine. The Fuzzy estimator is able to estimate the resistance change better than the PI estimator. Figs. 13(a) and 13@)show the f l e e electric torque with and itrd without the resistance estimator for fuzzy and PI estimators respectively. The electric torque of the machine is constant with resistance estimator but without the resistance estimator the torque drops down from 11.9 to about 7 Nm. With fuzzy estimator the torque stays constant all the time but with PI estimator there are very small changes in torque during the resistance changes. The error in stator flux position, which is more important as it may cause the controller to choose a wrong switching state, is almost zero using the fuzzy estimator and is very small with PI estimator as shown in Figs. 14(a) and 14(b). Without correction the value of the stator flux angle error reaches 0.2 radians. From the performance of the two estimators it is obvious that the

H i .z 5 9

%l l l l j
10:

'-.
- L

e -

/\ d <

Without fuzzy rcsistancc cslimator

3 3

: ,

0-r

Fig. 13@) Electric torque with and without PI resistance estimator 0.20 I
0.15
0.10

0.05

0.00
15 20 Time (sec) Fig. 14(a) Error i flux position angle with and without n fuzzy resistance estimator.
5

10

i2 16 Time (sec) Fig. 12(a). Estimated and actual stator resistance of the induction machine using fuzzy resistance estimator.
8
09 .
0.8

02 .

1
Actual stat01

$
4

0.7
0.6

0.5

0.4: 4

- - ~. -

W .

- .- .

12

, .-

,
16

10

15

20

- - .-

-3
20

Time(SeC)

Time (sec) Fig. 14(b) Error in flux position angle with and without PI resistance estimator.

Fig.lZ(b). Estimated and actual stator resistance of induction machine using PI resistance estimator.

748

resistance estimator based on fuzzy logic control is better than the resistance estimator based on PI control. The fuzzy resistance estimator was found to give trouble at low torque levels (below 2 N-m) and high command flux. The resistance varies irradically causing the controller to produce improper torque and flux. Thus it was necessary to decrease the command flux for the command torque below 2N-m. The PI resistance estimator performed reasonably at torque levels below 2.0 N-m.
5 . EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND RESULTS

U
RUiStUlW

.
Estimator

AC p o w a

I'

Direct Toque controlla

&Vice DriVCr

Volt.Pp SWmG InwIter *

Voltage Feedback

QlrrmtFecdbrL

Experimental implementation of the resistance estimators was carried out to verify the simulation results. Fig. 15 shows a block diagram of the experimental setup. The direct torque controller and resistance estimator were implemented with a single board computer that uses a 16 bit digital signal processor with a 25 MHz clock, the Th432OC14 DSP [ ] A 7. 3 hp, 22OV induction motor was used in the experiment. The stator resistance of the motor, calculated from tests on the motor, was found to be 1.31 ohms. The amplitude of the ac input voItage to the bridge rectifier was adjusted to have a constant 120 volts dc at the inverter input. The two currents, ia and ib, and the dc bus voltage V k were interfaced into the controller through an analog to digital converter already build into the digital signal processor board. The A D and the MUX available were veay slow. Each transition of channel and conversion took 80 msec. This caused the total switching time to be 380 msec. The command torque and command stator flux used are 7.5 Nm and 0.246 volt-sec respectively. The stator current vector at these values of

Fig. 15 Block diagram of Experimental implementation of resistance estimator.

command torque and command flux was found to be 10.4 A. The direct torque controller and the resistance estimator were programmed in assembly language. The program flow chart for the controller is shown in Fig. 16. The controller was programmed to be interrupt driven with DTC in the foreground and resistance estimator in the background. This enabled us to implement the DTC and resistance estimator on the same DSP without lowering the switching frequency. Every 100 switching cycles the magnitude of the stator current vector was fed into the resistance estimator, and the estimation was processed between the interrupts for the next 100 cycles. At the end of the 100 switching cycles the updated stator resistance was fed into the DTC from the resistance estimator. Since the machine was not run with an outer speed control loop. for a constant torque, the machine ran out of control due to the weakening of flux as the speed increased. All the results were obtained when the machine speed was very low. It was difficult to control the machine

Fig. 16 Experimental control program f o chart. lw

7 49

for longer time till the temperature of the machine changes causing a change in resistance. To insert an error in the resistance the value of resistance used in the controller was decreased from 1.24R to 0.612R after running the machine for 5 minutes as shown in Fig. 17. Figs. 18. 19 and 20 show the electric torque of the induction machine, without resistance correction, using fuzzy resistance estimator and using PI resistance estimator respectively. Electric torque shown in the figures has been filtered to get rid of the high frequency ripple. The scale in the graphs has a factor of 25 which means 0.3 corresponds to the command value (7.5 Nm) of the torque. It can be seen that the average electric torque falls from 7.5 Nm to about 4 Nm after the resistance error is inserted. With fuzzy resistance estimator the torque drops to about 6.5 Nm and then rises back to its original value with a little transient. With PI resistance estimator the drop in the torque is a little more than the fuzzy estimator and takes a longer time to get back to the original value. The experimental results indicate that both PI and fuzzy resistance estimators are able to estimate for the changes in stator resistance.
1 1

0.350 I 0.300 0.250

0.200 0.150

0.050
0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

Fig. 20 Electric torque with PI resistance estimator used for stator resistance correction.

6. LIMITATIONS OF RESISTANCE ESTIMATOR

CONTROLLER STATOR RESISTANCE

0.0

4
0.00
0.20 0.40

4
0.60

1
0.80

1.00

1.20time

Fig. 17 Change in stator resistance inserted in the DTC.

IELECTRW:TORQUEWIWTEYSTPNaCMWTICN
0.350

It was shown earlier that the stator cument of the machine is not affected by any machine parameter other than that stator resistance. But at lower switching frequencies (below 10 KHz), variation in rotor resistance changes the stator current vector in the machine. This is shown in Figs. 21, 22 and 23. Fig. 21 shows the changes in stator and rotor resistances of the machine. Fig 22 shows the stator current at 50 KHz switching frequency. It can be seen that during the changes in stator resistance the stator current falls from 18.6 amps to about 18 amps but there is no change in stator current vector during the changes in rotor resistance. Fig. 23 shows the stator current at 10 KHz switching frequency. At this frequency there is a drop in stator current during the changes in rotor resistance but the changes are small compared to the changes due to the changes in stator resistance. This shows that the resistance estimator fails at lower switching frequencies. Further investigation are being made to incorporate current and flux angles to distinguish between rotor and stator resistance changes at lower switching fquencies.

a300
0 250 0 200

0150

0 100

aoso am
0.20
000

020

0.40

OM)

0.80

100

1 20

Fig. 18 Electric torque without stator resistance correction.

time ( o w )

Fig. 21 Stator and rotor resistance changes.

I I I
I

0.300
0.250

0.200

=: I
c
L

2
0

18.6

185184,

0.150 0.100
0 050 0m .
0.M)

18.3-

B
0.20

18.1

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.M)

l0 . w 2

18.0

~,
3

Fig. 19 Electric toque with fuzzy resistance estimator used for resistance correction.

tlme ( a c e )

,
12

is

ia

Fig. 22 Change in stator current vector at 50 KHz switching frequency.

750

10.0

: -

[q

5 -: : g
3 C
v)

18.8. 18.6 18.2 16.4

18.0.

1 7 . 8 . .

LP
6

S . A. Mir, D. S . Zinger, M. E. Elbuluk, "Fuzzy Implementation of Direct Torque Control of Induction Machines", 1992 IEEE IAS Conference Record, pp 464-471.

[8]

Chuen Chien Lee, "Fuzzy Logic in Control Systems: Fuzzy Logic Controller - part 11," IEEE Transaction on System, Man and Cybernetics, Vol 20, No. 2, MarchiApril 1990, pp 419435

12

15

ia

[9]

B. Kosko,"Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems: A Dynamic System Approach to Machine Intelligence", New Jersey, Rentice Hall, 1992.
APPENDIX

A resistance estimator to estimate the changes in stator resistance of induction motors due to the temperaturechanges has been presented. Two methods based on fuzzy logic and PI control have been used. The simulation and experimental results show that both estimators are able to compensate for the changes in stator resistance. The fuzzy resistance estimator showed a better performance than the PI estimator. The fuzzy resistance estimator fails at lower switching frequencies as the stator current begins to change due to changes in rotor resistance. Thus the estimator can be used at high switching frequencies otherwise some method should be used to reduce the ripple at lower switching frequencies. REFERENCES K. H. Nordin, W. D. Novotny, D. S. Zinger,"The influence of motor parameter deviation in feedforward field oriented controls," IEEE Trans. on Industrial Applications, Vol. IA-21, No. 4, Aug./Sep. 1985, pp. 1009-1015. D. J. Atkinson, P. P. Acarnley and J. W. FInch, " Observations for induction motor state and parameter estimation"IEEE Transaction on Ind. App., vol27, NO. 6 , Nov./D~c.1991, pp 1119-1127. Joachim Holtz, "Identificationof machine parameters in a vector controlled induction motor drive",IEEE Transaction on Ind. App., vol. 27, No. 6, Nov./Dec., 1991, pp 1111-1118. M. Depenbrock, "Direct Self Control of Inverter-Fed Induction Machine,"IEEE Trans. on Power Electronics , Vol. .3, No. 4 , Oct 1988, pp 420-429. T. Habetler and D. Divan, "Control Strategies for Direct torque Control of Induction Machines Using Discrete Pulse Modulation,"IEEE Trans. on Industrial Applications, SepUOct 1991, pp 893-901. S . A. Mir, D. S . Zinger, M. E. Elbuluk,"Fuzzy Controller for Inverter Fed Induction Machines",IEEE Trans. on Industrial Applications, Vol. IA-21, NO. 4, Jan./Feb. 1993, pp 1009-1015.

PI ResistanceEstimator Using Gradient Decent Method

Given a function f(x), it can be expanded using Taylor's series around a point xo as: (X-XOP f(x) = f(x0) + (x-XO) f(x)lx=xoT + f'(x)lx=xo . (AI) The minimum of f(x) is given by:

W=,
Differentiating equation (Al) we have: f(x)lx=xo + (x-xo) f'(x)lx=xo = 0

ax

* x-xo = -[fyx)lx=xo 1-1 f(x)lx,xo

Since it is difficult to fmd the inverse of the 2nd derivative of __ f(x), to simplify the solution it is assume that: [f'(x)lx=Xo I-' = C where C is a constant. Thus we have x-xo = - C f(x)lx=xO . . . . . . (A2) m e PI resistance estimator is given by:

. .

ARs = KpAIs + Ki

AIS

. . .

. .

In the PI estimator the variable are the gains Kp, Ki. Thus x can be substituted by K's and f(x) by Ek i equation (A2) n
K(n+l) - K ( ~ ) = A K = - C = ~ ( E ~ ) I K = Q . where Ek 1

(A41

=z(AR* - AR)2, where AR* is the actual change in

resistance inserted for training and AR is the resistance estimated by PI estimator. Equation (A4) can also be written as:

From equation (A3)

. . . . . . .
.
Using equation (A5) - (A7) we get: AKp = - c ~ . A I s I K p , K p o AKp = C (AR* - AR) AIq

(A6)
(A7)

AKi = C (AR* - AR) AIs d t

75 1