35

CHAPTER 4

SPEED CONTROL OF SEPARATELY EXCITED

DC MOTOR

This chapter presents the different methods for speed control of

separately excited DC motor. Four types of controllers, namely fuzzy logic
controller, fuzzy PI controller, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) based
tuning of Fuzzy PI controller and new hybrid PSODE based tuning of Fuzzy
PI controller have been proposed to control the speed of DC motor. The main
objectives are to provide stability and to reduce overshoot in response, due to
disturbance and sudden change in reference speed of the separately excited
DC motor. The performances of all the controllers are analyzed and compared
on the basis of their applicability, adaptability, and controllability under
various operating conditions such as varying speed at no load, varying speed
at constant load, varying load at constant speed and varying speed and load
simultaneously. The developed controllers are also compared with the
conventional PI controller. The system is simulated using Matlab/ Simulink
GUI environment. In addition, an FPGA based hardware setup is also
developed to implement the above controllers for the speed control of DC
motor, shown in Figure A 1.25. The results of the simulation and
experimental setup are discussed. Dynamic characteristics and stability of the
controllers are also discussed.

4.1 INTRODUCTION

In recent years, the power electronics devices play an important

role in the control of electrical engineering. Due to the invention of power
 36

electronics switches, the control of electrical machines became very easy. It is

interdisciplinary in nature and used in wide variety of industries from small
scale to large scale industries. The importance of power electronics control
has grown over the years due to the invention of smart power devices with no
environmental pollution. Some of the applications of power electronics are
DC and AC servo drives, high efficiency industrial drives, electrical traction
and flexible AC transmission.

DC motors are preferred over AC motors because of their lower

manufacturing costs, ease of controller implementations, and simpler
mathematical model. Separately excited DC motors are frequently utilized as
actuators in industrial applications. The following features of DC motors
make them most suited for actuators:

Small Size

Low friction

High speed

Low construction cost

No gear backlash

Safe operation without the use of limit switches and

Moderate torque generation at a high torque to weight ratio.

In earlier days, DC motors were used as the primary means for

electric traction. But recently, brushless DC motors, induction motors, and
synchronous motors have gained widespread use in electric traction.
However, there is a persistent effort towards making them behave like dc
motors through innovative design and control strategies. Hence DC motors
have always proved to be the best for advanced control algorithms, since the
theory of DC motors is extendable to other types of motors. The speed torque
 37

characteristics of DC motors can be varied in different ranges to achieve

higher efficiency, and it has rapid acceleration and de-acceleration. DC
motors are conveniently portable and are most suitable for remote area
applications. DC motors are used in automobiles, robots, rolling mills,
electrical vehicles and movie camera due to precise, wide, simple and
continuous control characteristics (Ong 1998; Ahmed 2005).

4.2 CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF DC MOTOR

A DC motor is comprised of three main parts, a current carrying

conductor called armature, a circuit for magnetic field provided by magnets of
poles called field system and a commutator that switches the direction of
current in the armature as it passes a fixed point in space. DC motor has two
important parts, one is armature winding and the other is field system. Both
windings are excited by DC source. With help of excitation, armature flux and
field flux are created. Torque is developed on the rotor due to magnetic
interaction between the armature flux and field flux.

4.3 MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF SEPARATELY EXCITED

DC MOTOR

In this section, the basic equations of DC motor and relationship

between the parameters are discussed.

Applied voltage of the field winding (Vf) is given by,

dif
Vf if R f Lf (4.1)
dt

Vf = Voltage applied to the field winding in volts.

 38

i f = Field current in amps

R f = Field resistance in ohms

Lf = Inductance of field winding in hendry

di f
= Rate of change of field current with respect to time
dt

Field current is given by

Vf
if (4.2)
Rf

Armature voltage equation can be written as,

di a
Va ia R a La Eb (4.3)
dt

Va = Applied voltage to the armature winding in volts

i a = Armature current in amps

R a = Armature resistance in ohms

La =Inductance of armature winding in hendry

di a
= Rate of change of armature current with respect time
dt

E b = Generated Back emf in volts

Armature voltage under steady state condition is

Va=iaRa+Eb (4.4)

Back emf can be calculated by

Eb=K r (4.5)
 39

K= Back emf constant and its value depends on the armature winding.

= Flux in webers

r = speed of motor in rad/sec

From the equation (4.5), internally generated emf is directly

proportional to velocity of the motor.

The output motor torque can be calculated by,

Te K vi a (4.6)

Te= Torque developed by the armature in N-m

Kv=Torque constant

Developed torque can be divided into three components as follows

d r
Te J B r TL (4.7)
dt

J= moment of inertia in Kg-m2

B = damping or friction co-efficient in Nm-sec/rad

TL= Load torque in N-m

Power developed by the armature is given by

Pa=EbIa (4.8)

Replacing E b K r power developed by armature is given by,

Pa K i
r a (4.9)

If is constant,

Pa K r ia (4.10)
 40

4.4 BLOCK DIAGRAM FOR SPEED CONTROL OF

SEPARATELY EXCITED DC MOTOR

The output speed of the separately excited DC motor is compared

with given reference speed. From the comparison, the speed error and change
in speed error are calculated and given as input to the controllers. Output of
the controller is given to the current controller as reference current. The
current controller performs the comparison between reference current and
actual armature current of DC motor. Based on the comparison, it generates
the gate signal for chopper drive which is turn controls the input voltage given
to the motor.

PSO/ PSODE

Hysteresis
r Fuzzy /Fuzzy Current Chopper Drive DC Motor
PI Controller Controller

Ia

Figure 4.1 Block Diagram for Speed Control of Separately Excited DC Motor

4.5 WORK CARRIED OUT ON DC MOTOR

Speed control of separately excited DC motor is achieved by four

controllers, namely fuzzy logic controller, fuzzy PI controller, PSO based
tuning of Fuzzy PI controller and the new hybrid algorithm of PSODE based
tuning of Fuzzy PI. The speed control of separately excited DC motor is
achieved using Chopper fed drive with single switch which in turn used to
vary the armature voltage. The gate pulse of the chopper fed drive is adjusted
by the controllers based on the difference between the reference speed and the
 41

actual speed. Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor (IGBT) is used as switch in

chopper fed drive. Initially, a FLC has been developed and implemented for
the speed control of the motor in Matlab/Simulink environment.

The inputs to the FLC are speed error and change in speed. Speed
error is defined as the difference between the actual speed and reference speed
of the motor. Seven membership functions are created for each input and
output. The FLC has been built with two inputs and one output. The
membership functions are Negative Small, Negative Medium, Negative Big,
Zero, Positive Small, Positive Medium, and Positive Big. Based on the values
of error and change in error of speed, the output of the FLC is in terms of
current. This is the reference value for the current controller. The difference
between the reference current from the fuzzy controller and actual armature
current is given as an input to the current controller. Based on the current
limit, the current controller generates the gate current to the chopper drive.
The armature voltage of the separately excited DC motor is varied when
variation occurs in the gate pulse of the chopper. Thus, the speed of the motor
is controlled.

In fuzzy PI controller, the gain value is added with speed error and
change in speed error. Gain value is used as P and I value of PI controller.

In PSO tuned the fuzzy PI controller, the range of membership

functions are tuned to achieve better speed control than fuzzy and fuzzy PI
controllers. Each membership function of the inputs and output is considered
as a particle. So, the number of particles for the controller is 21. Mean Square
Error (MSE) is considered as the fitness function for the PSO algorithm. The
minimum of MSE is obtained by using PSO algorithm. The range of
membership functions are tuned by PSO, and based on the result of PSO
tuning, the range of input and output membership functions are changed to
obtain minimum value for the fitness function. MSE is given by,
 42

MSE (y(k) y(k)) 2 (4.11)

y(k) is crisp value of actual range of membership function

y(k) is the calculated output value of membership function by

evaluating the Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) function. After attaining the
minimum value of MSE, the corresponding crisp value y(k) gives the new
range of values for inputs and output membership functions.

The mutation function of DE is implemented in PSO, when the

velocity of the PSO is out of the specified range. If the calculated velocity is
out of boundary or closely to zero [Velocity < rand(0,1)], a mutation operator
of the DE is activated, and the velocity of this particle is recalculated by using
mutation operator as,

Vi(t+1) = F x ((xk(t)- xi(t))- (xq(t)- xi(t))) (4.12)

After calculating the velocity using DE mutation operator, the same

PSO procedure is carried out for tuning fuzzy membership functions with
same objective function.

4.6 ANALYZING THE PERFORMANCE OF CONTROLLERS

UNDER THE VARIOUS CONSTRAINTS

4.6.1 Varying Speed at No Load Conditions

To demonstrate the system performance of controllers, a sudden

change of reference speed at no load is introduced. The response due to
sudden change of reference speed is illustrated in the graphs depicted in
Figures 4.2 and 4.3 for various controllers. The performance analysis of the
controllers due to sudden change of speed reference is summarized in
Table 4.1, from the graphs.
 43

Speed (rads/sec)

Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.2 Change in Speed under No-Load Condition for Fuzzy and
Fuzzy PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)

PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.3 Change in Speed under No-Load Condition for PSO Fuzzy
PI and PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
 44

Table 4.1 Performance Analysis of DC Motor for Sudden Change in

Speed at No Load Condition

Fuzzy PSO Fuzzy PSO DE

No load condition Fuzzy
PI PI Fuzzy PI
At ref speed OS( %) - - - -
120 rads/sec ts (sec) 0.1 0.07 0.05 0.04
Speed OS( %) - - - -
increased to ts (sec) 0.1 0.06 0.04 0.03
200 rads/sec

Initially, this research focuses on the performance of the all the

controllers with no load condition at reference speed 120 rads/sec. From the
verification, the settling time of fuzzy logic controller is 0.1 seconds, the
fuzzy PI controller is 0.07 seconds, PSO based fuzzy PI controller is
0.05 seconds and PSODE based fuzzy PI controller is 0.04 seconds. When the
speed is increased to 200 rads/sec, the settling time of fuzzy logic controller is
0.1 seconds, the fuzzy PI controller is 0.06 seconds, PSO based fuzzy
PI controller is 0.04 seconds and PSODE based fuzzy PI controller is
0.03 seconds. From the above comparison, it is proved that the proposed
hybrid PSODE based fuzzy PI controller performs far better when compared
to the other controllers.

4.6.2 Varying Speed at Constant Load

To demonstrate the system performance of controllers, a sudden

change in the reference speed, at constant load is introduced. From the
response, the performances of the controllers are summarized in Table 4.2
from the graphs plotted in Figures 4.4 and 4.5, based on speed response
parameters.
 45

Speed (rads/sec)

Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.4 Change in Speed with Constant Load for Fuzzy and Fuzzy
PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)

PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)
Figure 4.5 Change in Speed with Constant Load for PSO Fuzzy PI and
PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
 46

Table 4.2 Performance Analysis of DC Motor for Sudden Change in

Speed at Load Condition

PSO Fuzzy PSO DE

At load condition Fuzzy Fuzzy PI
PI Fuzzy PI
At ref speed OS( %) - - - -
120 rads/sec ts (sec) 0.15 0.06 0.05 0.04
Speed increased OS( %) - - - -
to 200 rads/sec ts (sec) 0.18 0.05 0.04 0.03

From the investigation, the settling time of fuzzy logic controller is

0.15 seconds, the fuzzy PI controller is 0.06 seconds, PSO based fuzzy PI
controller is 0.05 seconds and PSODE based fuzzy PI controller is
0.04 seconds. When the speed is increased to 200 rads/sec, the settling time of
fuzzy logic controller is 0.18 seconds, the fuzzy PI controller is 0.05 seconds,
PSO based fuzzy PI controller is 0.04 seconds and PSODE based fuzzy PI
controller is 0.03 seconds. From the above verification and comparison, it is
proved that the proposed PSODE based optimized Fuzzy PI controller gives
the better performance in settling when compared to the other controllers.

4.6.3 Varying Load at Constant Speed

The speed of the motor is maintained constant at this condition and

the load is varied. Speed of the separately excited DC motor is decreased,
when the load is changed from no load to loaded condition and returned to
reference speed when load is released. Based on the speed response from the
Figures 4.6 and 4.7, the results are summarized in Table 4.3. From the
analysis of the values tabulated in Table 4.3, setting time of speed response of
the separately excited DC motor with fuzzy PI, PSO fuzzy PI and PSODE
fuzzy PI controllers is close to 0.01seconds. Settling time with FLC is
0.011 seconds. No overshoot occurs in speed response for all the four controllers.
 47

Speed (rads/sec)

Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.6 Change in Load with Constant Speed for Fuzzy and Fuzzy PI
Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)

PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)
Figure 4.7 Change in Load with Constant Speed for PSO Fuzzy PI and
PSODE Fuzzy PI Controllers
 48

Table 4.3 Performance Analysis of DC Motor for Sudden Change in Load

with Constant Speed

At reference speed 120 PSO Fuzzy PSO DE

Fuzzy Fuzzy PI
rads/sec PI Fuzzy PI
OS (%) - - - -
At load applied
ts (s) 0.011 0.01 0.01 0.01
OS (%) - - - -
At load released
ts (s) 0.011 0.01 0.01 0.01

From the above tabulation, it is evident that in this criterion, the

settling time of the speed response of DC for all the controllers is close to
0.01 seconds while applying the load and releasing the load. The speed of the
DC drops from the reference speed when applying the load and again reaches
the reference speed when load is released. In both the cases, the settling time
of speed response is 0.01 seconds in all the controllers.

4.6.4 Varying Speed and Load Simultaneously

In this condition, simultaneous changes in both load and speed are

executed. Here, the motor with reference speed 1 and no load condition is
applied. This resembles first condition of the system. When the system
attains a steady state, the speed of the motor is changed along with the load.
Even though the speed of the motor is changed, there will be slight decrease
in speed due to increase in load. Performance analysis of simulation for this
investigation is summarized in Table 4.4 based on the speed response graph
of the motor from Figures 4.8 and 4.9.
 49

Speed (rads/sec)

Fuzzy
Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.8 Change in Speed and Load for Fuzzy and Fuzzy PI Controllers
Speed (rads/sec)

PSODE Fuzzy PI
PSO Fuzzy PI

Time (sec)

Figure 4.9 Change in Speed and Load for PSO Fuzzy PI and PSODE
Fuzzy PI Controllers
 50

Table 4.4 Performance Analysis of DC Motor for Changes in Speed and

Load Simultaneously

Fuzzy Fuzzy PI PSO PSO DE

Fuzzy PI Fuzzy PI
Sudden OS( %) - - - -
change 1 ts (sec) 0.1 0.07 0.05 0.03
Sudden OS( %) - - - -
change 2 ts (sec) 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.03

Under the sudden change 1, settling time of speed response is

0.1 seconds with FLC, 0.07 seconds with fuzzy PI, 0.05 seconds with PSO
Fuzzy PI and 0.03 seconds with PSODE fuzzy PI.

Under the sudden change 2, settling time of speed response is

0.15 seconds with FLC, 0.05 seconds with fuzzy PI, 0.04 seconds with PSO
Fuzzy PI and 0.03 seconds with PSODE fuzzy PI.

From the performance comparison of the controllers, the PSODE

gives comparatively better results than the other controllers.

4.7 MOTOR PARAMETERS

Armature Resistance (Ra) – 0.5 Ohms

Armature Inductance (La) – 0.01 Hendry

Field Resistance (Rf) – 240 Ohms

Field Inductance (Lf) – 120 Hendry

Total inertia (J) – 0.05 Kg-m2

Viscous friction coefficient (B) – 0.02 N-m-s

Table 4.5 Comparative Analysis of settling time (in seconds) of all the controllers under all four conditions for speed control of DC motor

S – Simulation H – Hardware

PSO PSO DE
PI Fuzzy Fuzzy PI
Conditions Fuzzy PI Fuzzy PI
S H S H S H S H S H
500 Rpm to
Change in 2.0 2.2 0.92 1.28 0.61 1.2 0.52 1.15 0.48 0.84
1000 Rpm
Speed under No
Load 1000Rpm to
1.5 2.4 1.01 1.28 0.6 1.2 0.52 1.15 0.58 0.84
2000 Rpm

Change in 500 Rpm to

1.5 2.4 1.35 2 1.05 1.28 0.85 1.2 0.7 0.9
Speed under 1000 Rpm
Constant Load 1000Rpm to
1.5 2.8 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.8 0.85 1.6 0.7 0.85
2000 Rpm

Change in Load At load

1.53 2.4 1.38 1.48 1.05 1.2 0.88 1 0.71 0.8
under Constant applied
Speed At load
1.5 2.8 0.3 0.9 0.3 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.13 0.78
released

Sudden
Change in both 2.6 3 0.9 1.48 0.62 1.32 0.52 1.28 0.5 0.9
Change 1
Speed and Load
Simultaneously
Sudden
1.5 3 1.45 1.48 1.1 1.32 0.8 1.28 0.7 1
Change 2
51
 52

4.8 WORK CARRIED OUT ON DC MOTOR WITH MODIFIED

PARAMETERS

All the work mentioned in the section 4.5 is carried out in both
simulation and experimental setup for the system with new parameters, given
below:

Armature Resistance (Ra) – 6.2 Ohms

Armature Inductance (La) – 76.3mH

Field Resistance (Rf) – 598 Ohms

Field Inductance (Lf) – 74.2 mH

Total inertia (J) – 0.12Kg-m2

Viscous friction coefficient (B) – 0.008 N-m-s

The performance of the controllers under the various operating

conditions for the speed control of DC motor is tabulated in Table 4.5, based
on the simulation and experimental setup results, shown in Figures A 1.1 to A
1.20 of Appendix 1 (x-axis represents Time in seconds, y-axis represents
Speed in rpm and Current in amperes). Channel 1 represents reference speed,
Channel 2 represents actual speed and Channel 3 represents the armature
current.

From the observation, the proposed PSODE fuzzy PI controller

gives better settling time at all the operating conditions than all other
controllers in both simulation and hardware results.

4.8.1 Stability Analysis

The stability analysis is performed as follows for the DC motor.

The settling time and peak time of the all the responses are obtained for all the
 53

controllers under the four conditions. From the settling time and the peak
time, the damping ratio and natural frequency of the system are calculated.
From the values of damping ratio and natural frequency, the transfer function
and the poles of the response are derived. With the help of the location poles,
the stability of the system is obtained by using the root locus method. From
the observations and calculations, the system is stable for all the conditions
mentioned in this chapter for all the controllers. These observations are
verified by taking the criteria of varying speed with constant load as example
for stability analysis. The settling time and peak time of the response of all the
controllers are tabulated in Table 4.6. With help of this, the values of natural
frequency and damping ratio are derived. By using the second order standard
formulae, the transfer function of the system is derived the stability of the
system is analyzed by root locus method.

Table 4.6 Stability Analysis of controllers for the speed control of DC

Motor under varying speed at constant load

Settling Peak Natural

S. Damping Stability
Controllers time in time in frequency Transfer Function
No. Ratio Analysis
seconds seconds n

13.8
1 Fuzzy 2 1 3.72 0.53 Stable
s2 34 s 13.8

15.77
2 Fuzzy PI 1.28 1.28 4 0.5 Stable
s2 4 s 15.77

PSO 26.5
3 1.2 0.8 5.14 0.64 Stable
Fuzzy PI s2 6.67 s 26.5

PSODE 28.05
4 0.78 0.9 5.2 0.85 Stable
Fuzzy PI s2 8.9 s 28.05
 54

4.8.2 Sample Calculations

Ts 0.9 sec s
Tp 0.78 sec
4 4 (4.13)
n 4.44
Ts 0.9
2
n 1 4.02 (4.14)
Tp 0.78
2
poles j 1 (4.15)
n n

poles 4.44 j 4.02

s1 4.44 j 4.02
s2 4.44 j 4.02
0.85
n 5.2

28.05
Transfer function of the system at this instant is
s2 8.89 s 28.05

From the above calculation, the two poles of the system are derived
from the settling time and peak time. It is observed that the system is stable at
this instant because two poles of the system are located in left half of the S
Plane. The graphs obtained for the transfer functions to analyze the stability
are displayed in Figures A 1.21 to A 1.24 of Appendix 1.

4.8.3 Dynamic behaviour analysis

Dynamic characteristics of the system are analyzed by comparing

the speed and current waveforms for all the controllers, under all the
conditions. From the observations it is found that, while increasing the speed,
the current of the motor increases suddenly and decreases when the speed is
settled down at the desired speed and maintained at constant value. While
increasing the load of the motor, the current is suddenly increased from its
 55

present value. After the peak, the current is settled with increased value than
the previous value up to further changes in the load. When load is released,
the current of the motor is decreased from its present value.

From the graphs, variation of the current in PSODE based fuzzy PI

controller is small, while either changing the speed or changing the load or
changing both simultaneously, when compared to other controllers, for all the
conditions.

4.8.4 Operating Range

All the controllers performed smoothly for all the ranges of speed
within the rated speed. For all the ranges of load, the speed of the motor can
be controlled effectively without overshoot, by all the controllers. The range
of settling time is differed based on the algorithms. The settling times of the
controllers are already compared and the values are illustrated in the Table
4.5.

If the gain value in the transfer function is equal to one, the system
is stable. While increasing the gain value from 1 to 15, the system is stable
with small oscillatory response. While increasing the gain value from 15 to
25, the system becomes oscillatory, but finally settles down. Thus the stability
of the system is decreased. While further increasing the gain value above 25,
the system’s state becomes unstable from stable.

All the four controllers developed and reported in this thesis have
good adaptability and strong robustness than the conventional PI controller.
 56

4.9 CONCLUSION

A PSODE-based fuzzy PI controller for the speed controller system

has been successfully developed to control the speed of a separately excited
DC motor. Simulation has been performed using MATLAB. Also, FPGA
based experimental setup has been developed to control the speed of the
motor. A comparative analysis of the simulation and hardware results has
been done for the fuzzy, fuzzy PI, PSO fuzzy PI, PSODE fuzzy PI and
conventional PI controller. It has been found that the speed regulation by the
proposed PSODE-Fuzzy PI controller is better than the other controllers.