0 views

Uploaded by Sidahmed Larbaoui

article

save

- 5591-13563-1-PB
- Control Systems State Variables
- 1. Pengantar Sistem Pengendalian
- chapter 1.pdf
- C 1 BasicConceptsAndTerminology
- Ch1 Intro Ch2 Transforms L 1 2
- Dockhorn M et al CONTROL ENGINEERING LABORATORY
- Minta Yuwana Seborg
- Adaptive PID Controller for Dc Motor Speed Control
- active suspension system lab course manual
- Process Dynamics and Control
- Automation and Calibration for Discrete Transducer: A Survey
- Coreano PID Thesis
- Adaptive CONTROL UnitIgfh
- Control Systems Engineering Solution Manual (Nise-2004)
- Chapter 8
- IMEKO-XIX-WC-FP_498
- ParametricControlMechanical Wood Thesis1995
- Basic Coontrol Theory (2)
- Gostin Alan
- Process Control Fundamentals.pdf
- 1815_14.pdf
- btech
- Assignment 3
- Control Loops
- 10-1-1
- Proportional + Derivative Controller
- A Survey of Some Sliding Mode Control Designs
- Introduction to Feedback Control Systems
- Centralized Optimal Control for a Multi Machine
- Chapitre (2)
- 05 harmonique_poly2.pdf
- Lithium1.pdf
- j3ea2005707
- Bouch Are Bhana Ne
- Article A42
- cours7_new.pdf
- 121886.pdf
- 05289703.pdf
- cours_asserv.pdf
- Achour_Bédjaia
- annexe i.pdf
- 1erordre.pdf
- ACHOUR Yazid
- تقنية التحكم الآلي عملي
- soutenance.ppt
- TP Modélisation Et Identification Des Systèmes
- 26170017 Electronique de Puissance Elec032
- energies-05-00045
- l200.pdf
- Matlab.pdf
- Modèles de Diapositives Power Point Pour Votre Soutenance PFE
- TP5.pdf
- Modélisation Et Identification Des Systèmes Physiques
- identification.pdf
- TP1_Simulation_régulation_pression.pdf
- 6581.pdf
- soutenance.ppt
- Feuilletage.pdf
- 8_4_4_2014

You are on page 1of 27

**Passivity Based Control for
**

Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors

Achour Abdelyazid

Department of Electrical Engineering,

A. Mira University, Bejaia,

Algeria

1. Introduction

The Passivity based control (PBC) is a well established technique which has proved very

powerful to design robust control for physical system, especially electrical machinery. The

PBC have clear physical interpretation in terms of interconnection system with its

environment, and are robust overlooked non dissipative effects modelled. These features are

extremely valuable in practical implementations of controllers. In this chapter, we show

**(PMSM). In first part, we consider the Euler-Lagrange model in the -referential to design
**

how the PBC can be used to control the speed of permanents magnets synchronous motor

**the Passivity Based Voltage Controller. The dq-model of the PMSM is considered to design
**

the Passivity Based current Controller in the second part.

The idea of Passivity Based Control (PBC) design is to reshape the natural energy of the

system and inject the required damping in such a way that the control objective is achieved.

Expected advantages of this approach are the enhanced robustness properties, which stem

from the fact that conciliation of system nonlinearities is avoided.

The technique has its roots in classical mechanics (Arnold, 1989) and was introduced in the

control theory in the seminal paper (Takegaki & Arimoto, 1981). This method has been

instrumented as the solution of several robot manipulator (Ailon & Ortega, 1993; Ortega &

Spong; Takegaki & Arimoto, 1981) induction motor (Gökder & Simaan, 1997; Kim et al.,

1997; Ortega et al., 1996, 1997; Ortega & Loria), and power electronics (Sira-Ramirez et al.,

1995), which were intractable with other stabilization techniques.

PBC was also combined with other techniques (Achour & Mendil, 2007; Ortega & García-

Canseco 2004a, 2004b; Qiu & Zhao, 2006; Petrović et al., 2001; Travieso-Torres et al., 2006,

2008). The design of two single-input single-output controllers for induction motors based

on adaptive passivity is presented in (Travieso-Torres et al., 2008). Given their nature, the

two controllers work together with field orientation block. In ((Travieso-Torres et al., 2006),

a cascade passivity-based control scheme for speed tracking purposes is proposed. The

scheme is valid for a certain class of nonlinear system even with unstable zero dynamic, and

it is also useful for regulation and stabilization purposes. A methodology based on energy

shaping and passivation principles has been applied to a PMSM in (Petrović et al., 2001).

The interconnection and damping structures of the system were assigned using the Port-

Controlled Hamiltonian (PCH) structure. The resulting scheme consists of a steady state

feedback to which a nonlinear observer is added to estimate the unknown load torque. The

www.intechopen.com

372 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics

**authors in (Qiu & Zhao, 2006) developed a PMSM speed control law based on PCH that
**

achieves stabilization via system passivity. In particular, the PCH interconnection and

damping matrices were shaped so that the physical (Hamiltonian) system structure is

preserved at the closed-loop level. The difference between the physical energy of the system

and the energy supplied by the controller forms the closed-loop energy function. A review

of the fundamental theory of the Interconnection and Damping Assignment Passivity Based

Control technique (IDA-PBC) can be found in (Ortega & García-Canseco 2004a, 2004b). In

the concerned papers it was showed the role played by the three matrices (i.e.

interconnection, damping, Kernel of system input) of the PCH model in the IDA-PBC

design.

The permanent-magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) has numerous advantages over other

machines that are conventionally used for ac servo drives. It has a higher torque to inertia

ratio and power density when compared to the Induction Motion or the wound-rotor

Synchronous Motor, which makes it preferable for certain high-performance applications

like robotics and aerospace actuators. However, it presents a difficult control problem. This

is due to the following reasons: first, the dynamical model of PMSM is nonlinear. Second,

the motor parameters (e.g., stator resistance) can vary considerably from the nominal values.

Also, the state variable (velocity and current) measurements are often contaminated with a

considerable amount of noise. Generally, velocity and current sensors are omitted due to the

considerable saving in cost, and volume.

In Section 2, we propose a design strategy that utilizes the passivity concept in order to

develop a combined controller-observer system for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors

(PMSM) speed control using only rotor position measurement and voltages applied to the

stator windings. To this end, first a desired energy function for the closed loop system is

introduced, and then a combined controller-observer system is constructed such that the

closed loop system matches this energy function. A damping term is included to ensure

asymptotic stability of the closed loop system. The interesting feature of this approach is the

fact that it establishes a duality concept between the controller and observer design strategy.

Such a duality feature is unique for nonlinear systems. Simulation tests on the combined

controller-observer design are provided to show the feasibility and the performances of this

method.

The work of Section 3 is related with previous work concerning the voltage control of

PMSM (Achour & Mendil, 2007). The PBC has been combined with a variable structure

compensator (VSC) in order to deal with important parameter uncertainties plant, without

raising the damping values of the controller. The dynamics of the PMSM were represented

as feedback interconnection of a passive electrical and mechanical subsystem. The PBC is

applied only to the electrical subsystem while the mechanical subsystem has been treated as

a passive perturbation. A new passivity based current controller (PBCC) designed using the

dq-model of PMSM is proposed in this Section 3.

**2. Passivity based controller-observer design for permanent magnet
**

synchronous motors

In this part, we develop a control algorithm based on the passivity concept that forces the

PMSM to track desired velocity and torque vectors without the need for velocity and stator

current measurements, but using only rotor position and stator voltage measurements.

The passivity-based controller design proceeds as follows. First, we carry out a

decomposition of the system dynamics as a feedback interconnection of passive subsystems,

www.intechopen.com

Using passivity concept solves stability of the combined controller-observer design. and his properties. 2. q m ) 2 are the rotor angular position T and velocity respectively. 1997) via direct application of EL equation is given by: qe W 2(qm )qm Re qe U De (1) qm Rm q m (q e . one for the closed loop controller dynamic and the other for the closed loop observer dynamic. The proposed observer is inspired from the passivity based controller design concept. Re diag Ra .intechopen. 1. The main contribution is in the design of an observer that utilizes the high quality position information and voltage for reconstructing the velocity and current signals. The problem is tackled by constructing an observer that forces the estimated error to match a desired energy function. We will introduce a desired energy function that consists of two parts. Ra d ( qm ) W2 ( q m ) .2 we present the two phases design procedure and the stability problem of the combined controller-observer are given in Subsection.4. via the injection of a nonlinear damping term. qm ) W2T (qm ) q e (3) where De diag Ld .1 Permanent-magnet synchronous motor model 2. considering rigid shaft and not model of PMSM obtained in (Ortega et al. qm ) L Dm (2) (q e . concluding remarks are given in Subsection.Lq are www. Finally. 1. Simulation results are presented in Subsection. d qm q e q e . In addition. This last step involves the definition of the desired closed loop energy function whose associated “target” dynamics evolves on a subspace of the state space ensuring zero error tracking.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 373 where the outputs of the forward subsystem are the regulated outputs. 1. the passivity-based technique is applied to this subsystem leaving the feedback subsystem as a “passive perturbation”. -ideal symmetrical phases and sinusoidal distributed phase magnetic material in stator.. thereby preserving the passivity property. the standard two phases windings.3.1 Model The PMSM uses surface mounted rare earth magnets. (qm . Lq . Third. we design an inner feedback loop that. 1.com . -negligible damping effects in the rotor. The The organization of this Section is as follows: In Subsection.1.5. Second. damping has to be included in the loop. The main feature of this approach is in the fact that it establishes a concept duality between the controller and observer design strategy. for asymptotic stabilization. -negligible capacity effects in stator windings. (q m ) is the flux linkages due to permanent magnets. q e 2 is stator current vector. ensures the controlled subsystem defines a strictly passive map from control signals to regulated outputs. Under the assumptions above. model of PMSM described by Euler-Lagrange (EL) equations. Ld . We consider the following assumptions: -No significant saliency effects. - negligible saturation effects.

mechanical and vector transposition respectively. we present three properties of the PMSM model. if U T .)T denotes the electrical. which are useful for the methodology of control design.1 Passivity property of permanent-magnet synchronous motor Lemma 1 The PMSM represents a passive system.1. Passive subsystem decomposition.2. and . 2.com . e U q e q m m L Fig.1.2 Passive Feedback Decomposition Lemma 2 The PMSM can be represented as the negative feedback interconnection of the electrical and mechanical passive subsystems. Rm 0 is the mechanical friction. u is stator voltage vector.intechopen. 1. The subscripts (.)m. e : L32 e L32 e U q e q m www. 2. (.2. qm ) q Te Deq e T ( qm )q e 1 1 2 Dmq m (4) 2 2 Taking the time derivative of H along the trajectory (1)-(3).1. 2. qm ) q T Rq q T d T dt ( qm )q e (5) H from zero to > 0. q m are considered T T as inputs and outputs respectively.374 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics the direct and quadrate stator inductance respectively. L and q q Te . q m .)e. Proof The total energy H of the PMSM is: H ( q e . q m .2 Properties In this subsection. (. and setting H (0) T (qm )q e . Dm is the rotor inertia. we get: H ( q e . U u . proves the Integrating 0 passivity of the PMSM.L are the generated and T load torque respectively.

. Rm M I 2 . - L T T T W (qm ) W2T (qm ) q m .intechopen. q ) 11 C 21 C 22 (11) Where C 11 1 W1 (q m )q m 2 www. q m . Proof Considering the total energy He of the electric subsystem e.1. R diag Re .012 . q Te W2 ( qm ) T (8) Based on the passivity property of the PMSM and the relations (1)-(3). 2.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 375 m : L2 e L2 e - L q m where L32e .2. L2e are the spaces of 3 and 1 dimension respectively of square integral. D diag De . qm ) qT 1 T e (6) 2 A similar procedure used above to prove the passivity of PMSM can be used to establish the passivity of e. the “workless forces” are given by: C C 12 C ( q m . q q Te .e. we deduce that the “workless forces” are given by: W2 (qm ) C (qm ) 0 22 W T (q ) 0 1 1 (9) 2 m as C (qm ) verifies: C (qm ) -C T (qm ) (10) (i. 0 21 . that is: e Deq e ( qm )q e H ( q e . Dm . essentially bounded functions and their extensions.) Remark In the present of the saliency effects.3 Workless forces In order to introduce the third property.com . we note that the model (1)-(3) can be written under the following compact form: q W (q ) q R q MU D (7) Where. C (qm ) is a skew symmetric matrix. and for mechanical m we consider the energy function H m ( q m ) Dm q m 1 2 2 to prove the passivity property.

2..com . these properties have been already derived for Induction machine in (Ortega et al.2 Design procedure The steps to follow are mentioned in section 1. where e eTe . q m )T .376 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics C 12 ( W1 (qm )q e W2 (qm )) 1 2 C 21 ( q Te W1 ( qm ) W2T (qm )) 1 C 22 0 2 as C (q m . as: www. immeasurable outputs (q Te . qm . From equations (1)-(3).e.intechopen. regulated outputs . (i. global torque tracking with internal stability is achieved 2. The problem is to find a control law U. which ensures Limt e(t ) 0 . (D m The previous identification of the workless forces permitted us to write the relation (7) under the following form: q C (qm ) q R q MU D (12) It is with noting that. We consider the ideal case to simplify the procedure.2. The problem consists of constructing an observer- based controller such that for all smooth desired output function (t ) L .1 Problem formulation state vector q q Te .2. q )) is a skew symmetric matrix). q ) C T (q . we deduce the following desired dynamics: qe W2 (qm ) q m Re q e U * De (13) Dm qm* W2T (qm ) q e* Rm q m * L (14) Where q e* .1 Passivity approach to controller design The desired dynamics must be compatible with the bounded constraints of the PMSM..em . q m . q ) m m (q ) .2. inputs U2. 2. The error dynamic are described by: De e e Re ee U U * (15) Dm em W2T (qm ) ee Rm em 0 (16) Where ee q e q e* .2C (q . T To this end.q ) verifies: D (q ) C (q .2 Problem formulation and design procedure 2. with known derivative (t ) L . 1996). where all outputs are supposed available from measurement.q m . em q m q m * are the current error and rotor speed error respectively. we shape the energy of the closed loop to match a desired energy function.2. q m* is the desired current and desired rotor velocity respectively. then we design an observer to reconstruct the states that we not available. measurable output The control problem can be formulated as follows: Consider the PMSM model (1)-(3) with T qm.

along the trajectory (15). we get: H e* ( ee ) eTe ( Re (U-U * )) e e (18) In order to ensure the convergence of the ee to zero. e min e 0 .com . k e 0 . t 2 (20) we conclude that: ee (t ) m e ee (0) e e t (21) Where. min De max De min . we has H e* ( ee ) eTe Re e e min Re ee (t ) .intechopen. are the minimum and maximum eigenvalues respectively. . We have the following result: Proposition 1 Let. we take: U U (19) Since Re RTe 0 . min Re K1 e1 0 max De (24) The control law is: U De qe W2 (qm ) q m Re q e K 1 ee (25) Remarks to expect that we must eliminate the effect on electric subsystem e of the flux linkages due 1. we can not control the magnetic fields from the permanent magnets. Proof Considering the quadratic function (17). it is reasonable www. Since. max . max De R me 0 . Hence the desired current q e* is asymptotically attainable. I2 identity matrix 2x2. U U * K 1 ee (22) where K 1 k e I 2 . and using the same procedure. Then the convergence to the desired state trajectory is faster. we get: ee (t ) m e ee (0) e e 1 t (23) Where.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 377 H e* ( ee ) 1 T ee De ee (17) 2 Taking the time derivative of He.

2. the desired current in reference frame is chosen as: frame d-q (direct-quadrate) equals to zero. between the strategies of PMSM controller and observer design. the convergence rate of the speed error m m does not depend only on the natural mechanical damping.2 Desired current and desired torque The PMSM operating under maximum torque if the direct current id in the general reference Under the above condition. An interesting feature of this approach is that it establishes a conceptual duality. i. Based on the physical structure of the PMSM model (1)-(3) and the controller structure (25). that this scheme has two drawbacks. (29) With this choice. Such a duality feature is rather unique for nonlinear systems. the term from the permanent magnets must be concealed out a drawback of the scheme. stator voltage U and rotor position qm. However.com . we introduce the current and velocity observer systems as follows: www. 2 sin (qm ) q e 3 n pm cos (qm ) (26) where is the desired torque. then it is easy to prove the strict passivity of the closed loop system.3 A passivity Approach to observer design The problem is to construct an auxiliary dynamic system that asymptotically reconstructs the current and velocity signals from input-output measurements.. if we choose high gain ke. and m is the amplitude of the flux linkage established by the permanent magnet. respectively.378 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics to the permanent magnets. this term is a vector in a measurable quantity (position). v De qe Re q e (30) 2.b 0 .e.2. To this end we will use a passivity approach. it is an open mechanical constant time (Dm / Rm ). This rate can be adjusted by means of the positives gains b and a have the same role of proportional-derivative (PD) control law.2.intechopen. 2. v and q e are considered as input and output. we have: Dm qm* Rm q m * L (27) It has been proved in (Kim et al.. 1997). and its convergence rate is limited by the Dm qm* z L (28) z a z b e m . The desired torque is deduced from the desired mechanical dynamic (14). 2. In the closed loop system. np is the number of pole pairs. Remark If. In (14) is defined as: loop scheme (in the speed tracking error).2. and a . Which is seen from (25). the positive definite matrix K1 increases the convergence of the tracking error and overcome the imprecise knowledge of system parameters.

qˆ m is the observer state. L v q Te T From the equation (12) and (34). qˆ e . q e qˆ e q e . along the trajectory (35). we deduce the observer error dynamic: q C (qm ) q ( R L ) q 0 31 D (35) In order to prove the asymptotic stability of the observer estimated error.com . we choose the following desired energy error function: 1 q T D q H o* (q) (36) 2 Taking the time derivative of Ho.q m and L diag L e . qˆ m represents the estimated current and T estimated velocity respectively.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 379 qˆ e W2 (qm ) qˆ m Re qˆ e U Leq e De (31) qˆ m W2T (qm ) qˆ e Rm qˆ m L Lvq m Dm (32) where qˆ qˆ Te . (32) can be written under the following form: qˆ C ( qm ) qˆ R qˆ MU L q D (34) Where q .intechopen. Remark We can notice that the gain matrix L has the same effect than that of matrix K1 in (25).1. o min 0 min D max D We conclude that. q 0 is asymptotically stable. the observer (34) reconstructs asymptotically the current and velocity signals. i.2. 2. when only rotor position is measurable are: qe W2 (qm ) qˆ m Re q e U * De (39) www. e. we conclude that: q(t ) m o q(0) e o t . T Following the same procedure used in section II. Lv 0 (33) The model (31). L is the damping that is injected in the observer system to ensure the asymptotic stability of the observation error. q m qˆ m q m are the estimated current error and estimated velocity error. t.4 Combined Controller-Observer Design The desired dynamics. we get: q T ( R L ) q H o* (q) (37) Since L L 0 . (38) max D R L where mo 0 .2.2. where: Le LTe 0 .

Then. q ) eT D e q T D q cl 1 1 H co (44) 2 2 cl The time derivative of H co along the trajectory (35). gives: H co cl eT G (qm ) e-eT N (qm ) q- q T ( R L ) q (45) Which can be written as.com . G (qm ) N (qm ) 1 Q 2 1 N T (q ) ( R L ) 2 m www. We have the following result: The controller law becomes: U De qe W2 ( qm ) qˆ m Re q e K 2 ee (41) In order to establish the stability of the closed loop system with presence of the observer. the closed loop system is asymptotically stable provided that: ke2 R a2 l e2 4 v2 R m2 l (43) km 4l e2 4 R 4 l v2 Proof To prove the convergence of the vector error zo e T . H co cl zTo Q zo (46) Where. km > 0.intechopen. (42). we consider equation of state error (35). q T . We get from (25). (16).380 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics Dm qm* W2T (qm ) q e* Rm q m * L km em (40) Where. (40) and (41): D e G( qm ) e N (qm ) q 0 (42) Where. ( Re K 2 ) G( qm ) 0 21 W T ( q ) ( R k ) m2 2 qm ) 2 m m N (qm ) e 2 L W ( 0 1 2 ( Rm lm 2 ) Proposition 2 Consider the PMSM model (1)-(3) in closed loop with the observer-controller (32)-(33) and (41)-(43). let consider the desired energy T function error as: ( e .

Fig. We note that if conditions see that the matrix Q is positive definite if conditions (43) are satisfied. 4 illustrate the time response of the closed loop system without load torque. 2Lq. le2=1000 and lv2=1500. a=100. and the estimation error converges. 0. In Fig.75m. we show the robustness of the combined controller-observer system. ke2=100. of the motor. www.65 and –150 rad/s if t>0. We used a PMSM model. 3 shows the time response. whose parameters are given in the Appendix 1. we have chosen: Le 2 le 2 I 2 . but the setting time is increased lightly.N (qm )N T (qm ) 1 4 F21 F22 Where. We note that. where k 2 0. and speed reference of (150 rad/s if t<=0. the rotor speed converges.4s. F11 ( R e K 2 )( R e Le 2 ) (Le 2 Le 2 W2 W2T )R e K 2 ( R e Le 2 ) (Le 2 Le 2 W2 W2T ) 1 1 4 4 F12 lv 2 W2 4 F21 W2 W2T ( R e Le 2 ) lv 2 T 4 F22 ( R m km 2 )( R m lv 2 ) lv22 4 for simplicity. Matrix Q is positive if and only if the following inequality is satisfied: G (qm ) (R L). K 2 k2 I 2 .N (qm )N T (qm ) 0 1 (47) 4 which can be written after calculations.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 381 Then. l e2 0 . 2Rm.5Dm. The rotor speed converges with of setting time of 0. if matrix Q is positive. 2. 5. b=87. the PMSM at the starting phase and we take a speed reference of 150 rad/s. we can conclude that the closed loop system is asymptotically stable. A block diagram representing the passivity-based method is show in Fig.intechopen. The filter and damping parameters taken in the simulation are. We take these uncertainties in the parameters of PMSM (3Ra.35 Nm is applied to observer conditions equal to zero.com .65).5.). F11 F12 G (qm ) (R L). We can see that the rotor velocity tracks its reference. The estimated observer current and speed errors converge to zero. 1. 2Ld. We have limited the desired stator current and chosen the initial Fig.3 Simulation results The performance of the controller-observer system was investigated by simulation. 2. where a load torque L of 1.

Controller v L U v W2 (qm ) q̂ m k e 2 I 2 (q̂ e q e ) Observer q̂ m q̂ e W (q ) q̂ R q̂ U L (q̂ q ) U Deq̂ W T (q ) q̂ R q̂ L (q̂ q ) e 2 m m e e e2 e e Dm q̂ m 2 m e m m L v m m PMSM qm Fig. Control of speed with reference 150 rd/s. www. b) Estimated velocity error. Block diagrams for the passivity-based method. a b Fig.382 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics L Desired Dynamics * 2 D m q z L q e 3 n p m m * W2 ( q m ) m q z d b q e sa d dt e dt q v Deq e R e q e q m . 3. 2.intechopen. a) Estimated current error.com .

Robustness test. Its design avoids the using of the Euler-Lagrange model and destructuring since it uses a flux-based dq-modelling.5Dm 0. This dq-model is obtained through the three phase abc-model of the motor.75m Fig. b) Estimated velocity error. but by imposing a desired damped transient. independent of the rotor angular position. Nominal Parameters 3Ra 2Rm 2Ld 2Lq 1. The proposed control law does not compensate the model workless force terms which appear in the machine dq-model. using Park transform. Another feature is that the cancellation of the plant primary dynamics and nonlinearities is not done by exact zeroing. www. a new passivity-based controller designed to force the motor to track time-varying speed and torque trajectories is presented.65). 3. as they have no effect on the system energy balance and they do not influence the system stability properties. Control of speed with reference (150 rd/s if t<=0. Passivity based controller design for a permanent magnet synchronous motor in dq-frame Within this Section.65 and –150 rd/s if t>0. The effectiveness of the proposed control is illustrated by numerical simulation results. 4. 5.intechopen. a) Estimated current error .com .Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 383 a b Fig.

Its electrical behaviour is described here by the well known dq model (Krause et al. Subsection 2.com . . vd and vq: are the stator voltages in dq frame. f: is the flux linkages due to permanent magnets. respectively. The mechanical equation of the PMSM is given by: J m fVFm e L (49) where J is the rotor moment of inertia. i . The electromagnetic torque e can be expressed in the dq frame as follows: e np Ld Lq id iq f iq 3 (50) The rotor position m is given by Equation (51): 2 m m (51) where d and q are the flux linkages in dq frame.6.intechopen. 2002).. In Subsection 3. Ld and Lq: are the stator inductances in dq frame. flux and the torque references. Rdq S . fVF is the viscous friction coefficient. m: is the mechanical speed. RS: is the stator winding resistance. np: is the number of pole-pairs. Simulation results are presented in Subsection 2. Subsection 2. and L is the load torque. Subsections 2.384 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics The Section 2 is organized as follows. Substituting idq value obtained by Relation (52) in Equations (48) and (50).2. The analysis and proof of the exponential stability of the flux tracking error is introduced. yields: www. the passivity property of the PMSM in the dq-reference frame is introduced.7. The proof of the passivity property of the PMSM in the dq frame is given.1 Permanent-magnet synchronous motor model in dq frame The PMSM uses buried rare earth magnets. 2002): d Ldq idq f q (52) where d and q are the flux linkages in dq frame. The passivity property of the closed loop system and the resulting control structure are given in Subsections 2.5 and 2. given by Equation (48): Ldq idq Rdq idq npm Ldq idq npm f vdq (48) In this equation the following notations have been employed: Ld 0 id R 0 f 0 1 vd Ldq . id and iq: are the stator currents in dq frame.8 concludes this Section. vdq v 0 Lq dq iq 0 RS 0 1 0 q In the above-presented relations. f .4 deals with the computation of the current. The PMSM dq-model and the inner current loop design are presented at Subsection 2. The interdependence between the flux linkage motor dq and the current vector idq can be expressed as follow (Krause et al.. 3.5 contain the proof of the passivity property of the closed loop system.

kqi 0 t (56) 0 Assuming that by the proper choice of positive gains kdp.com . kqp . used to force id iq T to track the reference id iq T . kqp. 3. dq are considered as the input and the output vectors. kdi 0 t (55) 0 vq kqp iq iq kqi iq iq dt . the reference vector idq can be considered as control input for the PMSM model. are of the form of equations below: vd kdp id id kdi id id dt . kdi. idq and the flux linkage vector. respectively. The reference value of the current vector idq is denoted by: id iq idq The proportional-integral (PI) current loops. This result on the simplified dynamic dq-model of the PMSM given below: dq npm dq Rdq idq (57) J m fVFm e L (58) m m (59) e np dq idq 3 T (60) 2 This simplified form of the PMSM model is further used to design the control input idq using the passivity approach.2 Passivity property of dq-model Lemma 3 The PMSM represents a strictly passive system if the reference vector. these loops work satisfactory. (53) and (54). www. of the stator currents. kdp . (51).intechopen. Then.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 385 dq npm dq vdq Rdq idq (53) e np dq idq 3 (54) 2 Current controlled dq-model of PMSM Let us define the state model of the PMSM using the state vector d q m m and T Equations (49). kqi.

as: e fd e f dq dq fq (66) e Rearranging Equation (66) dq e f dq (67) www.3 Analysis of tracking errors convergence using passivity-based method dq d d (65) and the difference between dq and dq representing flux tracking error.com . since Rs dq T dq 0 due to skew-symmetric property of the matrix .. it is identified as the workless forces term. yields dq idq dt 2 Rs dq dq (t ) 2 Rs dq dq (0) T t 1 T 1 T (62) is the input vector and dq is the output vector. Integrating both sides of Equation (61). The desired value of the flux linkage vector dq is: 3. npm Note that the term dq T dq does not appear on the right-hand side of (61). the term 1 T the PMSM also. 1997).intechopen. Thus. yields Rs dq T idq T 1 d dq dq (61) 2 Rs dt where dq T is the transposed of vector dq . multiply both sides of Equation (57) by .386 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics Proof dq T First. with positive 0 Consider that the idq definite function V f dq dq 1 T (63) 2 the energy balance Equation (62) of the PMSM becomes dq idq dt Rs V f (t ) Rs V f (0) T t 1 1 (64) 0 npm Rdq dq dq has no influence on the energy balance and on the asymptotic stability of This means that the PMSM is a strictly passive system (Ortega et al. Then.

1 Proof of the exponential stability of the flux tracking error Consider the quadratic Function (69) and its time derivative in Equation (70). 0 k fq The control input signal. Substituting idq of (71) in (70). is the standard euclidian vector norm.t 0 1 T 2 (74) 2 Multiplying both sides of (74) by ( min K f ) . idq consists of two parts: the term which encloses the reference dynamics and the damping term injected to make the closed-loop system strictly passive. gives ef ef (69) 2 Taking the time derivative of V e f V e f eTf Rdq idq dq npm dq (70) Note that the term npm eTf e f 0 due to the skew-symmetric property of the matrix . yields e f npm e f Rdq idq dq npm dq (68) The aim is to find the control input idq which ensures the convergence of error vector ef to zero. leads to K V ( e ) K e . The PBCC ensures the exponential stability of the flux tracking error.intechopen. The square of the standard Euclidian norm of the vector ef is given as: e 2fd e 2fq eTf e f 2 ef (73) Which combined with Relation (69).t 0 2 min f f min f f (75) www.com . yields V e f eTf K f e f min K f e f (t ) . t0 2 (72) where min K f 0 is the minimum eigenvalue of the matrix Kf and .Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 387 Substituting Equation (16) in Equation (68). The energy function of the closed-loop system is defined as V(e f ) 1 T along the Trajectory (17). 3. gives V(e f ) ef ef ef .3. The convergence to zero of the error vector ef is ensured by taking idq Rdq 1 dq npm dq Rdq 1 K f ef (71) k fd 0 where K f with k fd 0 and k fq 0 .

it results that: The torque set-point value corresponding to is given by Equation (54).intechopen.com . the flux tracking error ef is exponentially decreasing with a rate of convergence of f/2.t 0 (79) The Inequalities (74) and (79) give that: f e f (t ) e f (0) e t 2 (80) The Equation (80) shows that. gives f t 2 f t V (0)e e f (0) e (78) which combined with Relation (77). 3.3 Torque reference and load torque computation www. If the direct current id in the dq frame is maintained equal to zero. yields f t V ( e f ) V (0)e . and multiplying it by e f t . Substituting 3 np f e q (83) 2 Lq Therefore the value of the flux reference is deduced as q e 2 Lq 3 np f (84) The desired torque e is computed by the expressions (28)-(29). requires the desired flux vector dq 3.2 Flux reference computation The computation of the control signal idq .3.3. leads to the following inequality: 2 f t V ( e f ) e f (0) e . t 0 (76) Integrating both sides of the Inequality (76). gives V e f min K f V ( e f ). Under this condition and using Equation (52). Considering the Relation (74) at t=0. then the PMSM operates under maximum torque.t 0 (77) where f min K f 0 . results in d f (81) q Lq iq (82) e dq d from (81) and iq from (82) in (54).388 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics which combined with Relation (72).

the term dq T K f e f becomes insignificant. therefore it must be estimated. According to Relation (80).com . For that purpose. dq T Multiplying both sides of Equation (87) by Rs dq T T 1 d dq dq dq T K f ef (88) 2 Rs dt npm The term dq T dq disappears from (88). gives dq npm dq Rdq K f e f (87) where is given by Relation (86).Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 389 In practical applications. Thus. since dq T dq 0 due to skew- Rs -symmetric property of the matrix . 1997) has been used: ˆL kL (m m ). the load torque is unknown.intechopen. kL 0 (85) 3. Proof Substituting the control input vector idq from (71) in Equation (57). an adaptive law (Kim et al. And Equation (88) is writes as 1 d dq dq dq T T (89) 2 Rs dt Integrating both sides of Equation (45). yields dq dt 2 Rs dq dq (t ) 2 Rs dq dq (0) t T 1 T 1 T (90) 0 Let us consider the positive definite function Vf from Relation (67). respectively.4 Passivity property of the closed loop system in the general dq reference frame Lemma 4 The closed loop system represents a strictly passive system if the desired dynamic output vector given by Rdq 1 dq npm dq (86) and the flux linkage vector dq are considered as input and output. the flux tracking error ef is exponentially decreasing. The Energy Balance (90) of the closed loop system becomes dq dt Rs V f (t ) Rs V f (0) t T 1 1 (91) 0 www..

6. their final values are kfd = kfq = 650. and the controller given by Equations (55).4 as follows. the following signals have been considered as representative for performance analysis: rotational speed (Fig. zoom of voltage at the output of the inverter (Fig. the desired dynamics expressed by the Relations the imposed flux vector.5 Passivity based current controller structure for PMSM The design procedure of the passivity-based current controller for PMSM leads to control structure described by the block diagram in Fig. 7(a)). 7(b)). the load torque is estimated through speed error. In this design . (56) and (71).5 seconds (see Fig. the stator voltages in dq frame (Fig. the gains of the current PI controller are computed as: kdp=95. (81)-(85). The gain of the load torque adaptive law is set to kL=6. electromagnetic torque (Fig. The results of Fig. The rotational speed and line current tracks quickly the www.2 and 2. the term dq dq has no influence on the energy balance and the Rs asymptotic stability of the closed-loop system. kdi=0. It consists of three main parts: the load torque estimator given by Equation (85). 2. Thus. The damping parameters values have been obtained by using a trial-and-error procedure starting from guess values based on the stability Condition (71). The inner loops of the PMSM control are based on well known proportional-integral controllers. is determined from maximum torque operation conditions allowing the computation of the desired currents idq .6 Simulation results The parameters of the PMSM used for testing the previously exposed control structure are given in Appendix. 7(d)).intechopen. 7(f)). 1997). The actuator used in the control application is based on a PWM voltage source inverter. 7(c)). have been increased to a value time 4. From the imposed pole locations. The gains concerning the desired torque are set at a=75 and b=400 using pole placement method also. 7(e)). and kdi=0. To this end. dq (28)-(29). This study load torque step of L=10 Nm has been applied at time 0. Fig. and directly taken into account in the desired dynamics. Furthermore. The parameter values of the control system are determined using the procedures detailed in Subsections 2. 7 show that the response of the rotor speed corresponding to the load applied. The chosen solver is based on Runge-Kutta algorithm (ODE4) and employs an integration time step of 10-4 s. rotational speed and PMSM angular position are considered measurable variables. The plant and its corresponding control structure of Fig. value which ensures the best asymptotic convergence of the speed error. the closed-loop system is a strictly passive (Ortega et al. 7 shows the motor response to square speed reference signal with magnitude ±150 rad/s.com . a to the disturbance is quite and the electromagnetic torque.. and zoom of line current (Fig. e. 3. Park transform is used for passing electrical variables between the three-phase and dq frame. It employs the PMSM model represented by the Equations (48)-(51) whose parameters are given in appendix 2. 7). In all tests performed in this study. currents.6 are implemented using Matlab and Simulink software environment. kqp=95.8. 3.390 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics npm T The previous relation shows that.85.5 second and has been removed at concerns the robustness test of the designed control system to disturbances. it is identified as the workless forces term. line current (Fig. Voltage.

6. The block diagram for the passivity-based current controller. Imposed dynamics d dm d f d e J z ˆ L 1 2 Ld q R dq n pm dq dq d e dt e 3 n p f dt m ̂L z d. b dt sa Load torque Controller estimator i dq R dq 1 k L Kfef d q s iq id dq Ldq i dq f t vd k dp i d id k di i d i d dt 0 id - t vq k qp i q i q k qi i q i q dt iq m * 0 PARK vd vq transform Reverse PARK transform ia ib ic va vb vc PWM Inverter DC supply PMSM voltage m m Fig.intechopen. The peaks visible on the electromagnetic torque evolution are due to high gradients imposed to the rotational speed. However.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 391 reference. www. these peaks can be easily reduced by limiting the speed reference changing rate and by limiting the imposed current i q value. without overshoot and all other signals are well shaped. such situation has been chosen for a better presentation of the control law capabilities and performances. In practice.com .

www.intechopen.com .392 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics a -: actual speed m b -: current reference ia --: line current i*a --: speed reference *m c d -: direct voltage Vd --: quadrature voltage Vq -: current reference i*a e f --: line current ia Fig. 7.5s to t=4. Motor response to square speed reference signal with a load torque step of 10 Nm from t=0.5s.

8.5Rs. J) -.intechopen.5Rs. However.com . from Equation (71).: (Rs. a simultaneous change of +50% of the stator winding resistance Rs and +100% of the moment response.5).: (1. A test of robustness at parameter changes has been performed. 2J) e f . J) -. affects slightly the dynamic motor appearing in Equation (80) is compensated by the imposed damping gain.: (Rs.: (Rs.5Rs.: (1. J) -. The change of the stator winding resistance. 2J) . J).: (1. J) c d . Rs. J) -.5Rs.: (1. 2.5Rs. -.: (1.: (Rs. 2J) . The designed PBCC is based only on the electrical part of the PMSM and has no direct compensation effect on the mechanical part.: (Rs.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 393 a b -. Kf. 2J) Fig. a change of +100% inertia moment J increases the mechanical time constant and hence the rotor speed settling time (see Fig. 8.5Rs. www. 2J) .: (1. 2J) . As presented in Fig. This is due to the fact that the electrical time constant f of closed-loop system inertia J.: (Rs. Motor response to step reference with a change of +50% of the stator winding resistance Rs and a change of +100% of the inertia moment J.

Rated speed = 3000 rpm. np=2 . No3-4.394 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics 4. Inertia = 48 e-4 kg. B. Commande basée sur la passivité associée aux modes de glissements d’un moteur synchrone à aimants permanents.1112 Wb.41. Therefore. References Achour. The design avoids the using of the Euler-Lagrange model and destructuring (singularities effect) since it uses a flux-based dq-modelling. Nominal current line = 31 A. Lq= 3. N=4000 r n/mn.m2.75 KW. pp 311-332.00019 Nm/rd/s.intechopen. JESA. The inner current control loops which have been built using classical PI controllers preserve the passivity property of the current-controlled synchronous machine. Ld=3. m =0. The speed control law contains a damping term ensuring the system stability and the adjustment of the tracking error convergence speed. Stator winding resistance = 173.. Another feature is that the cancellation of the plant primary dynamics is not done by exact zeroing but by imposing a desired damped transient. These latter variables are computed based on the load torque estimation by imposing maximum torque operation conditions. Nominal voltage line = 310 V and the machine type is Siemens 1FT6084-8SK71-1TGO. Conclusion In the section 2. this control loop compensates the nonlinearities by means of a damped transient. vol. Its computation aims at imposing the currents set-points based on the flux references in the dq-frame. This is mainly due to the fact that both of the controller and observer exploit the physical structure of the PMSM system and the injection of the high damping. Rm . 5.8524 e-3 H. Pairs pole number = 4. ISBN 978-2-7462-1854-3 www. Vn=250 V.1 mH.024 Kgm2.2 Wb .9515 e-3 H. a strategy for designing PMSM control system that requires only rotor position and stator voltage measurements was presented. the passivity approach to design a controller-observer is adopted. Unlike the majority of the nonlinear control methods used in the PMSM field. Appendix 1 Ra= 2 . the identification of these terms is a key issue in the associated control design. Pn=3. independent of the rotor angular position. April 2007). The obtained closed-loop system allows exponential zeroing of the speed error. The proposed control law does not compensate the model workless force terms as they have no effect on the system energy balance. A new passivity-based speed control law for a PMSM has been developed in the section 3. Stator winding quadrate inductance = 0. In=15 A. To this end.0085 Nm/rad/s. It was shown that this strategy can provide asymptotically stabilizing solutions to the output feedback motor tracking problem.com . It is shown from simulation results that the robustness of the combined controller-observer with respect to the load and model uncertainties. Its relatively simple structure should not involve significant hardware and software implementation constraints. AY. Simulation studies show the feasibility and the efficiency of the proposed controller. also preserving the passivity property. Viscous friction = 0.77 e-3 . Rotor flux = 0. Appendix 2 Rated power = 6 Kw. Stator winding direct inductance = 0. Mendil.1 mH. (2007). 0. Dm=0. This controller can be easily included into control structures developed for current-fed induction motor commonly used in industrial applications.

A sliding mode controller-observer for DC-to-DC power converters: a passivity approach. pp- 754.9. (1993). H. No.6. . (1996).intechopen. 2004 Petrović. vol. Garcia-Esteban. G. Bahamas. Interconnection and damping assignment passivity- Based control: Towards a constructive procedure-Part I. (1997). vol. Passivity-based control of Euler-Lagrange systems. ISBN 0-387-96890-3. (October 1997).. vol. H. Stanković. Paradise Island. R. R. G. New York. Proceedings 34th IEEE conference on Decision and Control. Atlantis. M.42. ISSN 1063-6536 Ortega. vol. Atlantis. Automatica. Ortega. No. pp 811-820. Proceedings of 43rd IEEE conference on Decision and Control. Island. Nicklasson. . Ortega. R. V. Mathematical Methods of Classical mechanics... A passivity-based control method for Induction motor control.. New Orleans.. A. December 14-17. Vol. A.. M. PMSM control with port-controlled Hamiltonian theory. PJ. (1995). KC.. (October 1993). JP. G. (1998). Adaptive motion control of rigid robots: A tutorial. ISSN 1042-296X Gökder. ISBN 0-7803-8682-5. ISBN 0-7695-2616-0. Ville.com . USA. pp 329-335 Arnold. Pay. 1989 Berghis. R. 1995 www. Charara. No. pp 455-466 Ortega. (1989).5. Loria.. Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Innovative Computing. ISSN 0278-0046 Kim.44. (May 1997). Interconnection and damping assignment passivity- Based control: Towards a constructive procedure-Part II. V I. Proceedings of 43rd IEEE conference on Decision and Control. (November 1989). R. Espinoza–Pérez. (November 2001). Perez-Moreno. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electrical. AM.. pp 3412-3417. (1997). An observer-based set-point controller for robot manipulators with flexible joints. pp 3418-3423. 2004 Ortega. A passivity approach to controller-observer design for robots.. Passivity-based controller of a Class of Blondel-Park transformable electric machines. PJ.6. (2001). IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.9. No. E. ISSN 0018-9286 Ortega. ISBN 0- 7803-2685-7. pp 688-695. System Control Literature 1993.25. No. IEEE Transactions on Control System Techniques.. Nijmeijer. H. R. R. Nicklasson. Ortega. ISBN 0-7803-8682-5. MA. E. (1997)..3. R.4. vol. (2004). García-Canseco. IEEE Transaction on robotic and automatic.. R. (May 1997).. R. Vilain.. New York.. LA.3. A. (2004). No. Zhao. ISBN 1-85233-016-3. Spong. No.. (2006). (1989). pp 275-278.. Automatica. 1998 Ortega.. Espinoza–Pérez. 13-15 December. (March 1996). USA. pp 877-888 Ortega. LU. vol. Interconnection and damping assignment approach to control of Pm synchronous motors. Simaan. On speed control of induction motors. Theoretical and experimental Comparison of two nonlinear controllers for current-fed induction motors. J.5. No. R. (1993). Information and Control (ICICIC’06).5. pp 3379-3384. Springer. 2006 Sira-Ramirez. pp 629-647.Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors 395 Ailon. García-Canseco. vol. IEEE Transactions on Control System Techniques. Ortega.6. pp 338-348.5. (December 1993).. Nicklasson. Bahamas. December 14-17. ISSN 1063- 6536 Qiu. August 30-31.21. PJ.

L2-Gain and Passivity Techniques in Nonlinear Control. M. Journal of Dynamic Systems Measurements Control. Vol. USA. Tracking control of cascade Systems based on passivity: The non-adaptive and adaptive cases. . PC. Estrada. JL. pp 119-125 Travieso-Torres.396 Recent Advances in Robust Control – Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics Sudhoff. No. No. MA. (2000). Wiley-IEEE Press. JC. A. ISA Transactions.2. ISBN 9780470544167. New York. vol. Two simple and novel SISO controllers for induction motors based on adaptive passivity. 2000 www..intechopen. (2008). Analysis of electric machinery and drive Systems. (2006).45. Wasynczuk.. 2002. pp 435-445 Travieso-Torres. S. ISBN 1-85233-073-2. vol.. London. ISA Transactions.1. 103. pp 60-79 Van der Schaft. Springer. Takegaki. Arimoto. (June 1981). King Doom. Duarte Mermoud. (July 2006). JC. SD Krause. (2002). (January 2008). Duarte Mermoud.47..3. A new feedback for dynamic control of manipulators. MA. (1981).. O.com . S.. Transaction of the ASME.

com . China 51000 Rijeka. Passivity Based Control for Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors. Recent Advances in Robust Control will be a valuable reference for those interested in the recent theoretical advances and for researchers working in the broad field of robotics and mechatronics. 200040. feel free to copy and paste the following: Achour Abdelyazid (2011). InTech. The two volumes of Recent Advances in Robust Control give a selective overview of recent theoretical developments and present selected application examples. Dr. November. initially motivated by Kharitonov's theorem. Available from: http://www. 396 pages Publisher InTech Published online 21.).65. ISBN: 978-953-307-421-4. The first volume covers selected problems in the theory of robust control and its application to robotic and electromechanical systems. Yan An Road (West). Recent Advances in Robust Control . 2011 Published in print edition November. Shanghai.intechopen. The second volume is dedicated to special topics in robust control and problem specific solutions. Hotel Equatorial Shanghai Slavka Krautzeka 83/A No. The volumes comprise 39 contributions covering various theoretical aspects as well as different application areas. 2011 Robust control has been a topic of active research in the last three decades culminating in H_2/H_\infty and \mu design methods followed by research on parametric robustness.intechopen. Andreas Mueller ISBN 978-953-307-421-4 Hard cover.Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics Edited by Dr.Theory and Applications in Robotics and Electromechanics. How to reference In order to correctly reference this scholarly work. Andreas Mueller (Ed.com/books/recent-advances- in-robust-control-theory-and-applications-in-robotics-and-electromechanics/passivity-based-control-for- permanent-magnet-synchronous-motors InTech Europe InTech China University Campus STeP Ri Unit 405. Office Block. Recent Advances in Robust Control . Croatia Phone: +385 (51) 770 447 Phone: +86-21-62489820 Fax: +385 (51) 686 166 Fax: +86-21-62489821 www. and other more recent methods. the extension to non-linear time delay systems.

- 5591-13563-1-PBUploaded byAlex Vlad
- Control Systems State VariablesUploaded byjinto0007
- 1. Pengantar Sistem PengendalianUploaded byDavin Angwyn
- chapter 1.pdfUploaded bykibrom atsbha
- C 1 BasicConceptsAndTerminologyUploaded bySteven Jerome M. Ingco
- Ch1 Intro Ch2 Transforms L 1 2Uploaded bytrebeheiram
- Dockhorn M et al CONTROL ENGINEERING LABORATORYUploaded byDamir Mileta
- Minta Yuwana SeborgUploaded byErwinNugraha
- Adaptive PID Controller for Dc Motor Speed ControlUploaded byHilal Permana
- active suspension system lab course manualUploaded byasad_asghar_janjua
- Process Dynamics and ControlUploaded byDonna Joy Mallari
- Automation and Calibration for Discrete Transducer: A SurveyUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Coreano PID ThesisUploaded byAlan
- Adaptive CONTROL UnitIgfhUploaded bySapari Vel
- Control Systems Engineering Solution Manual (Nise-2004)Uploaded byMichael England
- Chapter 8Uploaded bysatish
- IMEKO-XIX-WC-FP_498Uploaded byLéo Ferrari
- ParametricControlMechanical Wood Thesis1995Uploaded byyxiefacebook
- Basic Coontrol Theory (2)Uploaded byGeorge J Alukkal
- Gostin AlanUploaded byToufik Souanef
- Process Control Fundamentals.pdfUploaded byvalimironescu
- 1815_14.pdfUploaded bysiamak001
- btechUploaded bySiva Tejaa Kahul Koyya
- Assignment 3Uploaded byAjit Anbiah
- Control LoopsUploaded bytwinklingstar007
- 10-1-1Uploaded byMahshid Janbozorgi
- Proportional + Derivative ControllerUploaded byJojo John
- A Survey of Some Sliding Mode Control DesignsUploaded byjoe_murat
- Introduction to Feedback Control SystemsUploaded byMark Lora
- Centralized Optimal Control for a Multi MachineUploaded byMuhammad Bilal

- Chapitre (2)Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 05 harmonique_poly2.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Lithium1.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- j3ea2005707Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Bouch Are Bhana NeUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Article A42Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- cours7_new.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 121886.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 05289703.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- cours_asserv.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Achour_BédjaiaUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- annexe i.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 1erordre.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- ACHOUR YazidUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- تقنية التحكم الآلي عمليUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- soutenance.pptUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- TP Modélisation Et Identification Des SystèmesUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 26170017 Electronique de Puissance Elec032Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- energies-05-00045Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- l200.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Matlab.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Modèles de Diapositives Power Point Pour Votre Soutenance PFEUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- TP5.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Modélisation Et Identification Des Systèmes PhysiquesUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- identification.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- TP1_Simulation_régulation_pression.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 6581.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- soutenance.pptUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- Feuilletage.pdfUploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui
- 8_4_4_2014Uploaded bySidahmed Larbaoui