You are on page 1of 110

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
pre-defined 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
d-q

Vd*

-
Iq
Id

Space
Vector
PWM
Vabc
d-q
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

d-q
V

d-q 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 (100-800) RPM, Tl=(1-2-0.5 )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 (100-800) RPM, Tl=(1-2-0.5 )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 (300-800-1200-1500-1800) 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 (300-800-1200-1500-1800) 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 (300-800-1200) 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 (300-800-1200) 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 (500-1200-1500) 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