1
Sensorless Control of PMSM for
Electric Vehicle Application
Author
Mohamed Hassan Abou El Ella
Supervisors:
Prof. Dr. Osama Mahgoub
Prof. Dr. Abdelatif El Shafei
Ass. Prof. Dr. Sherif Zaid
Cairo University, Egypt
6/3/2014
2
6/3/2014
Contents
Introduction
Sensorless Control Techniques
PMSM Mathematical Modeling
Control basics of PMSM
Field Weakening Control of PMSM
Introduction to MRAS based estimators
MRAS speed Estimator for PMSM
ANFIS based MRAS speed estimator for PMSM
Conclusion
3
6/3/2014
Introduction
4
6/3/2014
Introduction
Permanent Magnet Motors have received great
attention in research in recent time due to:
High Power Density
High Efficiency
Maintenance free operation.
High reliability
High torque to inertia ratio
5
6/3/2014
Introduction Cont
Permanent Magnet Motor Types
PMAC motor
Named as permanent
magnet Synchronous
motor PMSM.
Sinusoidal back EMF.
Sinusoidal stator
current.
PMDC motor
Named as brushless DC
motor BLDC.
Trapezoidal back EMF.
Square wave stator
currents.
6
6/3/2014
Introduction Cont
PMSM Types
Surface Mounted
Magnets are mounted on
the rotor Surface.
D, Q axis inductances are
equal.
Zero reluctance torque
Interior Magnet
Magnets are buried inside
the rotor
D, Q axis inductances are
not equal.
Reluctance torque exists
7
6/3/2014
Introduction Cont
PMSM Control Techniques
Open Loop Control
Direct Torque Control
Vector Control
Sensorless Control
8
6/3/2014
PMSM Mathematical
Modeling
9
6/3/2014
PMSM Mathematical Modeling
Voltage Equations:
Where;
Cross section in the PMSM
10
6/3/2014
PMSM Mathematical Modeling Cont
Voltage Equations in the frame
Voltage
Equation
Back
EMF
Current
Model
11
6/3/2014
PMSM Mathematical Modeling Cont
Voltage Equations in the DQ frame
Voltage
Equation
Current
Model
12
6/3/2014
Control Basic of PMSM
13
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
A. Open Loop Control:
Maximum torque is achieved by maintaining V/f ratio
constant.
Valid for high speed values near to the base speed
where the stator resistance voltage may be neglected.
The speed command should be from reference speed
curve to avoid losing of synchronization.
14
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
B. Direct Torque Control:
The basic idea is to control the torque and flux linkage
by selecting the voltage space vectors properly using a
predefined switching table.
The selection of the voltage vector is based on hysteresis
controller for both the stator flux linkage and Torque.
Torque is controlled by changing angle between stator
and rotor flux when stator flux is kept constant.
IPM
SPM
June 3, 2014
15
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
B. Direct Torque Control:
Block Diagram For the conventional DTC.
16
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
B. Direct Torque Control:
The Voltage vector is always maintained within a defined
hysteresis band according to values of and .
17
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
C. Current Vector Control (FOC):
The basic idea is to control the torque and flux linkage
independently by comparison of the motor currents and
reference values in the rotor reference frame.
Reference values of the currents are obtained from
Torque or Speed command.
Hysteresis or space vector based switching may be
applied.
Torque is controlled by changing Iq while keeping Id
constant.
IPM
SPM
18
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
C. Current Vector Control:
Feed back required data:
Stator Current is measured and transformed to the rotating
DQ reference frame using Parks transformation.
Decoupling between Id and Iq for independent control for
torque and flux is achieved by Feed Forward compensation.
Rotor position is obtained by the aid of hall effect sensors,
resolvers and optical shaft encoders.
19
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
C. Current Vector Control:
Vector Control Block Diagram:
20
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
D Sensorless Control:
Position data is always required in PMSM vector
control.
Position Sensors used may be:
Resolvers
Hall Effect Sensors.
Shaft Encoders
21
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Techniques
D Sensorless Control:
Elimination of Sensors is recommended for the
following:
Reduction of the overall drive cost
Increasing the system reliability
Reduction of system complexity.
All the previous mentioned reasons caused great
motivation for research in the Sensorless control
of PMSM
22
6/3/2014
Sensorless Control of PMSM Cont
Techniques Used in Sensorless Control:
1. Back EMF Estimation
Has great performance at high speed
Suffers at low speed and standstill due to low back
EMF values.
Affected by the value of stator resistance.
23
6/3/2014
Sensorless Control of PMSM Cont
Techniques Used in Sensorless Control:
2. Saliency based methods
Depends on inductance variation due to
saliency.
Shows great performance at low speed range and
standstill.
Causes torque ripples at high speed ranges
24
6/3/2014
Sensorless Control of PMSM Cont
Techniques Used in Sensorless Control:
3. Extended Kalman Filters
Suffers from parameter sensitivity, complex
computations
Requires initial conditions.
25
6/3/2014
Sensorless Control of PMSM Cont
Techniques Used in Sensorless Control:
4. Sliding Mode Observers
Great immunity against parameter variation.
Suffers from chattering problems
Requires great computational power.
26
6/3/2014
Sensorless Control of PMSM Cont
Techniques Used in Sensorless Control:
5. Model Reference Adaptive System (MRAS).
Great dynamic performance
High immunity against parameter variations.
We Will discuss the MRAS based Sensorless Control
in this literature
27
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Regions Of Operation
Below base speed the operation is in the Constant torque
With the voltage and power increasing as the speed increases.
T
Constant
Torque
MTPA
28
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Regions Of Operation
Above the rated Speed Voltage is limited to its maximum
value and the operation is in the constant Power speed range
with flux weakening.
T
n
nb
Constant
Torque
MTPA
Constant
Power
FW
29
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Regions Of Operation
Phasor
Diagram
Below
Rated
Speed
Phasor
Diagram
Above
Rated
Speed
30
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Voltage constraint
All PMSM operation should be within the specified
and current limits.
The voltage constraint:
From the voltage equations of the motors.
voltage
31
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Voltage constraint
The voltage constraint:
Referring the voltage constraint equation to the id and iq
axis
Ellipse Equation
Centre at (m/Ld,0)
Iq
Id
m/Ld
32
6/3/2014
Control Basics of PMSM
Voltage constraint
The voltage constraint:
For Surface Mounted Motors. Ld=Lq=Ls
Voltage constraint will be equation of a circle.
Iq
Id
m/Ls
33
Control Basics of PMSM
Current constraint
The current constraint:
6/3/2014
Equation of a circle
with radius Ismax
Iq
Voltage
Constraint
Ismax
Id
Current
Constraint
34
Control Basics of PMSM
Voltage and Current constraint
6/3/2014
PMSM are divided into two main types from the
constraints point of View
Type I:
Voltage limit circles
10
Voltage Limit Circle
w1
w2
6
w3
current
Limit
Circle
4
w4
iq(A)
Extending Speed is
Limited by Current
Constraint
0
2
4
6
8
10
16
14
12
10
8
6
id (A)
4
2
35
Control Basics of PMSM
Voltage and Current constraint
6/3/2014
PMSM are divided into two main types from the
constraints point of View
Type II:
Voltage / Current limit circles
10
Voltage Limit Circle
w1
8
w2
6
w3
w4
current
Limit
Circle
iq(A)
Speed Can be increased
to infinity
w5
0
2
4
6
8
10
16
14
12
10
8
6
id (A)
4
2
36
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
6/3/2014
1. Maximum Torque Per Ampere (MTPA) Current Control:
Applied when speed <b.
The relation between Id and Iq in MTPA
IPM
SM
37
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
6/3/2014
1. Maximum Torque Per Ampere (MTPA) Current Control:
Voltage / current limit circles
10
W1
voltage limit
circle
8
6
4
current
limit
circle
MTPA trajectory
iq(A)
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
16
14
12
10
8
6
id (A)
4
2
38
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
2. Flux Weakening Control:
6/3/2014
Applied at speed > b.
Flux weakening can be achieved by applying negative armature
reaction by (Id ve).
Voltage is limited to its rated value.
Current vector should be maintained within its limit
Relation between Id and Iq during FW control
39
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
6/3/2014
2. Flux Weakening Control:
For Type I motor
Voltage / current limit circles
10
W1
voltage limit
circle
W2
6
W3
4
MTPA trajectory
FW trajectory
W4
iq(A)
2
0
current
limit
circle
2
4
6
8
10
16
14
12
10
8
6
id (A)
4
2
40
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
6/3/2014
2. Flux Weakening Control:
For Type II motor
Voltage / current limit circles
5
FW
4
3
voltage limit
circle
LVMT
W1
B
MTPA
W2
2
Current
limit
Circle
W3
iq(A)
W4
0
C
1
2
3
4
5
5
4
3
2
1
id (A)
41
Control Basics of PMSM
Control Regions
6/3/2014
2. Flux Weakening Control:
Region 1: MTPA will be applied where
Region 2: FW will be applied where
Region 3 (For type2 motors only): , LVMT will be applied where
Motor Used in this Thesis a Type
Motor
42
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
Of PMSM
43
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
The main aim in FW control is selection of a proper Id
value that meets the motor constraints
Id reference Value is calculated from the torque demand
of the speed loop.
r*
+
PI
Iq*
Id*
+FW
Vq*
+
PI
PI
V
dq
Vd*

Iq
Id
Space
Vector
PWM
Vabc
dq
abc Iabc
Position / Speed sensor
PMSM
Motor
44
Field Weakening Control
6/3/2014
Reference Id is affected by the transient response in
torque demand and the motor speed.
The proposed trajectory depends on setting a
predefined value depending on the desired speed
The optimum current trajectory at a certain speed is
calculated from the voltage and current constraints
45
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
The Graph representing this trajectory
Voltage / current limit circles
5
Voltage Limit
4
B
3
Te 3
2
Te 2
iq(A)
1
Te 1
0
A
1
2
Current Limit
3
4
5
5
4
3
2
1
id (A)
46
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
The Offline Reference values of Id is
Id reference values
2
id
1
id (A)
1100 RPM
1
1200 RPM
2
1300 RPM
1400 RPM
3
1500 RPM
1600 RPM
4
1700 RPM
5
1
1800 RPM
0
iq(A)
47
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
A look up table will be used containing the reference Id
value according to each speed demand.
The reference value represents the average of each curve
The trajectory is described by the following figure
Voltage / current limit circles
5
Voltage Limit
4
B'
Te 3
2
Te 2
iq(A)
1
Te 1
A'
A
1
2
Current Limit
3
4
5
5
4
3
2
1
id (A)
48
Field Weakening Control
6/3/2014
A smooth transition will take place after transient
response to the optimum value of the current.
The transition will only take place if :
Id(Optimum) < Id (LUT)
This is done to increase the efficiency of the motor.
For the case of:
Id(optimum) > Id (LUT)
No transition will take place which will only require a
small increase in the DC bus voltage
The proposed trajectory will result in greater efficiency
of operation and better dynamic response
49
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
Graphical Representation of Proposed Trajectory
Voltage / current limit circles
Voltage
Limit
B'
C'
iq(A)
C
0
Te
A'
1
2
Current Limit
3
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
id (A)
1
0.5
50
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
Graphical Representation of Proposed Trajectory
Voltage / current limit circles
Voltage
Limit
B'
1500 RPM
1200 RPM
C'
iq(A)
C
0
Te
A'
1
2
Current Limit
3
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
id (A)
1
0.5
51
6/3/2014
Field Weakening Control
No
No
* < base
Vs < Vsm
Yes
Yes
Id*(LUT)
No
 *  <
error
Yes
Get Id** (iq*)
No
Id** (iq*) < Id*(LUT)
Yes
MTPA
FW id**(iq*)
52
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 0.5 NM
Actual Vs Desired Id
2
id
id*
id Vs. id* (A)
1
2
3
4
5
0
10
time (Sec)
15
53
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 0.5 NM
Id and Iq
Ia and Ib
id
iq
ia
4
stator Currents (A)
Id / Iq (A)
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
10
time (Sec)
15
10
time (Sec)
15
54
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 0.5 NM
Magnitude of Voltage vector
Magnitude of current vector
100
Vs
IS
90
80
70
60
Vs (V)
IS (A)
1
0
50
40
1
30
2
20
3
10
4
0
5
10
time (Sec)
15
10
time (Sec)
15
55
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case II : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Actual Vs Desired Speed
Actual Vs Desired Id
2500
Sp
Fb
id
id*
id Vs. id* (A)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
2000
1500
1000
1
2
3
500
4
10
time (Sec)
15
5
0
10
time (Sec)
15
56
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case II : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Id and Iq
Ia and Ib
id
iq
ia
4
stator Currents (A)
Id / Iq (A)
1
0
1
2
1
0
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
10
time (Sec)
15
10
time (Sec)
15
57
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case II : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Magnitude of current vector
Magnitude of Voltage vector
100
Vs
90
80
70
60
Vs (V)
IS (A)
IS
4
50
40
1
30
2
20
3
10
4
0
5
10
time (Sec)
15
10
time (Sec)
15
58
Field Weakening Control
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case III : Speed Demand of 1200 , 1500 , 1800 RPM Tl = 0.5 NM and 2 NM
Comparing two techniques
Actual Vs Desired Speed
2500
2000
2000
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
Actual Vs Desired Speed
2500
1500
1000
1500
1000
500
500
Sp
Fb
10
time (Sec)
15
10
time (Sec)
15
59
Field Weakening Control
Experimental Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 500, 800, 1200 , 1500 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Actual Vs Desired Id
Actual Vs Desired Speed
2
2500
Sp
Fb
id
id*
2000
id Vs. id* (A)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
1500
1000
1
2
3
500
4
5
0
time (Sec)
10
12
14
16
time (Sec)
10
12
14
16
60
Field Weakening Control
Experimental Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 500, 800, 1200 , 1500 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Actual Vs Desired Id
Actual Vs Desired Id
0.4
id
id*
0.6
id
id*
2
0.8
2.2
id Vs. id* (A)
id Vs. id* (A)
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
2.4
2.6
2.8
1.8
3
2
3.2
2.2
2.4
3.4
7.5
8.5
time (Sec)
9.5
11.5
12
12.5
time (Sec)
13
13.5
61
Field Weakening Control
Experimental Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Speed Demand of 500, 800, 1200 , 1500 RPM Tl = 2 NM
Actual vs. Desired Iq
Current Vector Is
10
iq
iq*
Is
9
Is (A)
Iq* vs. Iq (A)
1
2
3
4
5
time (Sec)
10
12
14
16
time (sec)
10
12
14
16
62
Field Weakening Control
Experimental Results
6/3/2014
Case I : Comparing Two Techniques
Actual Vs Desired Speed
Sp
FW with transition
FW without Transition
1800
1600
1400
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
200
8
10
11
12
time (Sec)
13
14
15
63
6/3/2014
MRAS
Based Estimators
64
6/3/2014
MRAS based Estimators
MRAS is based on the comparison of two
models:
The reference Model
Adjustable Model
Each Model Has its input
In 1
In 2
Reference Model
Adjustable Model
65
6/3/2014
MRAS based Estimators
The error between the two model is processed to
a certain adaptation mechanism
The output of the adaptation mechanism is used
to tune the adjustable model.
In 1
In 2
Reference Model
Adjustable Model
Adaptation
Mechanism
error
66
6/3/2014
MRAS based Estimators Cont
The adaptation mechanism results in minimizing
the error between both models
At minimum error both models will be the same
In 1
Reference Model
=
In 2
Adaptation
Mechanism
Adjustable Model
error
67
6/3/2014
MRAS based on
Popov Theory
Speed Estimators
68
MRAS based Speed Estimator
BlockV Diagram
6/3/2014
Vq
Reference Mode
(PMSM Motor)
Id
Adjustable Model
(Current Model)
+
+

Adaption
Mechanism
ed
For Hybrid
Learning
69
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Current Model
6/3/2014
Current
Model in
DQ Frame
where
70
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Current Model
6/3/2014
Replacing Actual Values with the estimated values, the adjustable model used is
Adjustable Model
71
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Adaptation Mechanism
The generalized error equation is
where
6/3/2014
72
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Adaptation Mechanism
6/3/2014
According to Popov hyperstability Theory the following conditions should be
satisfied:
Positive Definite
From these two conditions the speed can be calculated from the following
Equation
Position
73
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
r*
PI
+
Iq*
Id*
FW +
Vq*
+
PI
PI
Vd*

Iq
Id
Space
Vector
PWM
dq
V
dq Vabc
abc Iabc
 iq
Adjustable Vd
+
Model
Vq
 i
d
r
PMSM
Motor
74
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
Case I: speed demand (100800) RPM, Tl=(120.5 )NM , Nominal Parameters
Desire, Actual, Estimated Speed (RPM)
speed error
1000
20
Sp
Fb
Estimate
900
800
error
15
600
error(RPM)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
10
700
500
400
5
0
5
300
10
200
15
100
0
20
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
75
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
Case I: speed demand (100800) RPM, Tl=(120.5 )NM , Nominal Parameters
Actual vs. Estimated position
Id and Iq
Act
Est
2
5
Id / Iq (A)
Thetam (Rad)
id
iq
4
3
1
0
1
2
3
1
4
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
Time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
5
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
76
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
Case II: speed demand (300800120015001800) RPM, Tl=(2 )NM , Nominal
Parameters
Desired, Actual, Estimated Speed (RPM)
speed error
2000
Sp
Fb
Estimate
1800
1600
error
15
10
1400
1200
error(RPM)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
20
1000
800
5
0
5
600
10
400
15
200
0
time (Sec)
10
20
time (Sec)
10
77
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
Case II: speed demand (300800120015001800) RPM, Tl=(2 )NM , Nominal
Parameters
Actual vs. Estimated position
8
Act
Est
Thetam (Rad)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Time (Sec)
10
78
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
Case III: speed demand (3008001200) RPM, Tl=(2 )NM , 30% increase inductance
Desired, Actual, Estimated Speed (RPM)
speed error
2000
20
Sp
Fb
Estimate
1800
1600
error
15
1200
error(RPM)
nsp vs. nfb (RPM)
10
1400
1000
800
5
0
5
600
10
400
15
200
0
time (Sec)
20
time (Sec)
79
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Simulation Results
6/3/2014
Case III: speed demand (3008001200) RPM, Tl=(2 )NM , 30% increase inductance
Actual vs. Estimated position
8
Act
Est
Thetam (Rad)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Time (Sec)
80
6/3/2014
MRAS based Speed Estimator
Experimental Results
Case I: speed demand (50012001500) RPM, Tl=(2 )NM, Nominal parameters
Actual Vs. Estimated Speed
Speed Error
2000
200
Act speed
Estimated Speed
1800
Speed Error
150
1600
100
Speed Error (RPM)
Speed (RPM)
1400
1200
1000
800
600
50
0
50
400
100
200
150
time (Sec)
10
11
12
200
time (Sec)
10
11
12
81
6/3/2014
ANFIS based MRAS
Speed Estimators
82
6/3/2014
ANFIS based MRAS Speed Estimator
Vd
Vq
Reference Mode
(PMSM Motor)
Adjustable Model
(Current Model)
ANFIS
Adaption
Mechanism
For Hybrid
Learning
+

83
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture
84
6/3/2014
ANFIS Introduction
ANFIS is Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System
Advantages:
Combines advantages of both
1. Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
Learning ability
2. Fuzzy Logic Controllers
Linguistic representation
Can handle the non linearities of a system such as
the PMSM
Have high convergence rate due to hybrid learning
algorithm
85
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture
ANFIS consists of 5 network layer with two
inputs DQ currents and one Output, electrical
angular speed.
Layer 1 (Fuzzification layer):
Each node is an adaptive node.
Node is square represented.
Three membership functions are assigned to
each input.
86
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 1 (Fuzzification layer):
The mathematical formula for each node is
Member Ship
Functions
87
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 1 (Fuzzification layer):
Parameters of this layer are called Premise
parameters .
Premise parameters will be tuned through back
propagation technique
88
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 1
89
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 2 ( Multiplication layer):
Multiplies the incoming signals.
Each node is circle represented symbolized with
.
Mathematical formula
90
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 1
Layer 2
91
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 3 ( Normalization layer):
Calculates the normalized firing strength of each
rule
92
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer
1
Layer
2
Layer
3
93
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 4
Consists of adaptive nodes
Multiplies the normalized firing strength with
the Input
Parameters are known as consequent
parameters.
Consequent parameters will be tuned by
Recursive Least Square Estimate(RLS)
94
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer
1
Layer
2
Layer
3
Layer
4
95
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer 5 ( output layer)
Calculates the overall output of the system.
The output r is used to tune the adjustable
model.
The mathematical formula is
96
6/3/2014
ANFIS Architecture Cont
Layer
1
Layer
2
Layer
3
Layer
4
Layer
5
97
6/3/2014
ANFIS Training
Algorithm
98
6/3/2014
ANFIS Training Algorithm
Hybrid Learning Algorithm
Premise
Parameter
Consequent
Parameter
Back
Propagation
RLS
99
6/3/2014
ANFIS Training Algorithm Cont
Back Propagation Method
The error used will be the quadrature current
error
The updating formula will be
100
6/3/2014
ANFIS Training Algorithm Cont
RLS Method
The updating formula will be
101
6/3/2014
Simulation Results
102
6/3/2014
Simulation Results
Simulation is carried out by Matlab/Simulink
A simple FOC is used to control the speed of the
PMSM
The drive system used will be
103
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 1: Speed variation at No Load and nominal
parameters
2000
Estimated vs. Actual speed (RPM)
Act
Est
1500
1000
500
500
0.5
1.5
2.5
3.5
4.5
104
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 1: Speed variation at No Load at nominal
parameters
1000
Act
Est
speed error
800
Speed Error (RPM)
Estimated vs. Actual position Rad
600
400
200
2
0
0
0
200
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
105
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 2: Speed variation at with load and nominal
parameters
1800
Act
Est
Estimated vs. Actual speed (RPM)
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
200
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
106
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 2: Speed variation at with load and nominal
parameters
1000
Act
Est
speed error
800
Speed Error (RPM)
Estimated vs. Actual position Rad
400
200
0
0
600
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
200
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
107
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 3: Speed variation with 20% resistance
increase , with and without torque.
2000
Act
Est
Estimated vs. Actual speed (RPM)
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
108
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 4: Speed variation with 20% resistance and
inductance increase , with constant torque.
2000
Estimated vs. Actual speed (RPM)
Act
Est
1500
1000
500
500
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
109
6/3/2014
Simulation Results Cont
Case 4: Speed variation with 20% resistance and
inductance increase , with constant torque.
1000
Act
Est
speed error
800
Speed Error (RPM)
Estimated vs. Actual position Rad
400
200
0
0
600
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
200
0.5
1.5
2.5
time (Sec)
3.5
4.5
110
6/3/2014
Thank You
Questions