Proc. Natl. Sci. Counc.

ROC(A)
Vol. 25, No. 2, 2001. pp. 107-114

Speed Estimation of Induction Motor Using a Non-linear

Identification Technique
JUI-JUNG LIU*, I-CHUNG KUNG**, AND HUI-CHENG CHAO*
*
Department of Electrical Engineering
Chung Cheng Institute of Technology
Taoyuan, Taiwan, R.O.C.
**
Chinese Naval Academy
Kaohsiung, Taiwan, R.O.C.

(Received October 4, 1999; Accepted February 18, 2000)

ABSTRACT

This paper considers the problem of estimating the speed of an induction motor using a non-linear identification
technique. A discrete-time non-linear identification approach, NARMAX (Non-linear Auto Regressive Moving Average
model with eXogenous inputs), is presented to describe a polynomial modeling between the speed and voltages of
an induction motor for estimating the motor speed. This approach is useful for identifying the non-linear relationship
between the speed and voltages of an induction motor. The feasibility and accuracy of the proposed method are verified
through laboratory tests. This approach will replace the speed sensor used in a speed control closed loop motor system.
In addition, a future robust controller design based on the NARMAX model will apply an innovative and simplified
speed control algorithm for an induction motor. The last research is now underway.

Key Words: induction motor, modeling, NARMAX, non-linear identification

I. Introduction sensors have several disadvantages in terms of drive cost,

Motors play an important role in daily life, e.g., in
industrial manufacturing and in many other applications. In
their early days, DC motors had the advantage of precise speed
control when utilized for the purpose of accurate driving.
However, DC motors have the disadvantages of brush erosion,
maintenance requirements, environmental effects, complex
structures and power limits. On the other hand, induction
motors are robust, simple, small in size, low in cost, almost
maintenance-free and possess a wide range of speeds com-
pared to DC motors. The main obstacles to using induction
motor drives are the high cost of conversion equipment, the
complexity of signal processing and poor precision. Neverthe-
less, control schemes have been developed which provide a
feasible approach of speed control to induction motors
(Blaschke, 1972). The equations of motion describing the
steady state behavior of an induction motor are highly non-
linear, time varying and coupled (Vas, 1990). Hasse and
Blaschke developed a vector control theory to simplify the
structure of speed control used to drive like DC motors by
using coordinate transformations. In recent years, the vector
control theory has become more feasible due to progress in
the development of electronics techniques and high speed
microprocessors. In most applications, speed sensors are
necessary and essential in the speed control loop. However,
reliability, and noise immunity. Various approaches have been
proposed for estimating speed using some electric parameters,
such as current, voltage, frequency, and flux. They are based
on a combination of state estimation theory and vector control
theory known as speed sensorless motor control (Holtz, 1993;
Ilas et al., 1994; Hurst et al., 1994). However, the algorithm
of vector control theory requires manipulation of the electric
parameters of the motor so that the governing equations in
rectangular coordinates can be developed, prior knowledge
of the state equations is necessary when the estimation theory
is used to estimate the speed precisely. However, the values
of the electric parameters may deviate from the designated
values due to changes in the working environment, temperature,
speed, external load and noise. The equations of motion of
an induction motor, which are converted by means of vector
control to the type of DC motor control, may be not suitable
due to the same reasons, such as changes in the working
environment, etc. as mentioned above. Consequently, these
unpredicted factors make the actual behavior of a sensorless
control motor non-linear and hard to describe. The accuracy
will improve if this non-linearity can be governed using other
methods in practical applications.
System identification models the relation between the
input and output without knowledge of the equations of motion
a priori. Much work has focused on developing identification

− 107 −
 J.J. Liu et al.
techniques, including those which employ linear filtering to
estimate linear transfer function (Schoukens, 1990), to esti-
mate the physical parameters (Moons and Moor, 1995), and
to estimate the coefficients of linear transfer function based
on measurements of the magnetic force and speed (Gahler and
Herzog, 1994; Lee et al., 1994), etc. Here, a non-linear iden-
tification technique, NARMAX (Non-linear Auto Regressive
Moving Average model with eXogenous inputs), is employed
(Leontaritis and Billings, 1985) to model the relation between
the speed and voltages of an induction motor.
Our research on developing an identification technique
for estimating the speed of an induction motor was divided
into two steps. The objectives of the first step included: (1)
choosing the proper parameters of the motor as inputs, cor-
responding to the output, i.e. speed, by analyzing the governing
equation of the motor, (2) designing and constructing an
induction motor system in order to obtain input/output data,
(3) modeling a NARMAX equation using designated input/
output data, and (4) validating the NARMAX model. The
second step involved designing a robust controller for con-
trolling the speed by adjusting the inputs. This was done by
transforming a non-linear, difference and polynomial NAR-
MAX model in the time domain into the frequency response
in the frequency domain using an FRF technique.
This paper will focus on the attained objectives in the
first step and will discuss the research, traditional control of
speed and sensorless drive motors, and the application of the
NARMAX model to speed estimation. The procedure for
constructing and validating a NARMAX model of the speed
and voltages of a motor is demonstrated through an experi-
mental case study. The results of the NARMAX model shown
in this paper show that it can replace the speed sensor, such
as tachometer or encoder in a closed loop speed control motor.
Based on the NARMAX model, an innovative speed control
algorithm for induction motors will be presented in the near
future when the robust controller design is completed. Before
this, the motor speed is still controlled by the traditional way.
II. NARMAX Method
Successful system identification requires correct model-
ing. In this paper, a NARMAX modeling of identification
is proposed. For a non-linear system, representing the current
output by mapping the previous input, outputs and prediction
error can be done precisely and efficiently using a NARMAX
model.
1. NARMAX Model
A wide range of discrete time multiple variable non-
linear stochastic systems can be represented by the following
NARMAX model:
y(k) = α + Fl[y(k−1), ..., y(k−ηy), u(k), ..., u(k−ηu),
− 108 −
ε(k−1), ..., ε(k−ηε)] + ε(k), (1)
where y(k), u(k) and ε(k) represent the system output, input,
and prediction error, respectively. Also, l is the degree of non-
linearity, α is a constant dc level, Fl[.] is some vector valued
non-linear function, and ηu, ηy and ηε represent the number
of lags in the input, output and prediction error, respectively.
The prediction error term ε(k), defined as ε(k) = y(k) − y(k) ,
is included in the model to accommodate noise, where y(k)
is the prediction output. Expanding Eq. (1) by defining the
function Fl[.] as a polynomial of degree l gives a representation
of all the possible combinations of y(k), u(k) and ε(k) up to
degree l. For example, the current output can be presented
as
y(k) = α + θ1y(k−1) + θ2u(k−1) + θ3u(k−1)y(k−1)
+ θ4u(k−1)ε(k−1) + θ5ε(k−1) + ε(k),
by defining p1(k) = y(k−1), p2(k) = u(k−1), p3(k) = u(k−1)y
. (k−1), p4(k) = u(k−1)ε(k−1), p5(k) = ε(k−1), p0(k) = 1, and
θ0 = α. If N input and output measurements are available,
and if there are M terms in the model, then the above equation
can be written in a matrix form as
Y = pθ + ε , (2)
where
YT = [y(1) y(2) ... y(N)]
θ T = [θ0 θ1 ... θM]
ε T = [ε(1) ε(2) ... ε(N)]
p 0(1) p 1(1) p M(1)
p 0(2) p 1(2) p M(2)
. . . .
p= ,
. . . .
. . . .
p 0(N) p 1(N) p M(N)
where p represents a term in the NARMAX model, and θ
represents unknown parameters to be estimated. The param-
eter vector θ in Eq. (2) can be estimated using some well-
known methods, such as a least-squares-based or prediction
error method, Choleski or U-D factorization, the Q-R algorithm,
singular value decomposition or principle component regression.
The present study employed an orthogonal estimator algorithm
to conduct parameter estimation (Korenberg et al., 1998; Bil-
lings and Leontaritis, 1981, 1982).
 Nonlinear ID of Motor Speed

2. Orthogonal Parameter Estimation parsimonious representation of a non-linearity is desirable.

This means that the representation of the polynomial terms
The orthogonal algorithm estimates the parameters θ must be as simple as possible. The selected model degree
by transforming Eq. (2) into an equivalent auxiliary model: l should not be too low; otherwise, none of the dynamics of
nθ
the system will be described properly. On the other hand,
y(k) = Σ g i w i (k) + ε(k) , k = 1, 2, ..., N, nθ = M, (3) it should not be too high since the higher the model order,
i =1 the more parameters will have to be estimated, and this may
lead to numerical problems and over-fitting. There are several
where wi(k) are constructed so as to be orthogonal over the
possible ways to determine which terms are significant and
data record and gi represents constant coefficients. The pa-
should be included in the model. An alternative and much
rameters can be estimated by computing one parameter es-
simpler method can be derived as a by-product of estimation
timate at a time because of the orthogonal property. Conse-
by using the error reduction ratio (ERR) to select the relevant
quently, a family of orthogonal vectors can be constructed over
terms (Billings and Voon, 1983, 1986). To demonstrate
the given data records as
structure selection using ERR, Eq. (3) is multiplied by itself,
j –1 yielding
w1(k) = p1(k); w j (k) = p j (k) – Σ αijw i(k) ,
i =1
(4)
nθ

where
y 2(k) = Σ g 2i w 2i (k) + ε 2(k) ,
i =1
(8)

N
where ε(k) is assumed to be a zero mean white noise sequence
Σ w i(k)p j(k) which is not correlated with the input and output data records.
α ij = k =1
N
Σ w 2i (k)
k =1
The mean-squared prediction error will be the maximum error
when no terms are included in the model, that is nθ = np +
nε = 0. As a result, we have [ε(k)2]nθ = 0 = y2(k). Equation
for j = 1, 2, ..., nθ; i = 1, 2, ..., j − 1, j, (8) shows that the reduction in the mean squared error, achieved
by including the ith term, giwi(k), in the auxiliary model of
and in this case the orthogonality property holds, i.e., Eq. (3), is g 2i w 2i (k). Expressing this quantity as a fraction of
the total mean squared error yields the ERR for the ith term
wi(k)wj(k) = 0, i ≠ j. (5) as

The second step consists of estimating the coefficients gi and N

g 2i w 2i (k) g 2i Σ w 2i (k)
transforming them back into the system parameters θi. The ERR i = × 100% = k =1
× 100% ,
parameters gi in the auxiliary model are given by y 2(k) N
Σ
k =1
y 2(k)
N
Σ w i(k)y(k) for 1 ≤ i ≤ nθ. (9)
g i = k = 1N . (6)
Σ w 2i (k)
k =1
The ERRi value can be computed together with the parameter
estimates to indicate the significance of each term, and then
Therefore, the original unknown system parameters can be the terms can be ranked according to their contributions to
the overall mean-squared prediction error. Insignificant
obtained from g i according to the following formulas:
terms can be discarded from the model structure by defin-
ing a threshold value of ERRi. Terms are considered to
θ nθ = g nθ
contribute negligible reduction to the mean-squared prediction
nθ error when their ERRi values are smaller than the threshold
θi = gi – Σ αij θ j ,
j =i +1
i = nθ − 1, nθ − 2, ..., 1. (7) value. The process of selecting terms is continued until the
sum of the error reduction ratio reaches a value close to
The auxiliary regressors wi(k) are orthogonal, so additional 100%.
terms can be added to the model without computing all the
previous g j , j < i. Therefore, the orthogonal parameter es- 4. Model Validation
timation algorithm is very simple and easy to implement.
Once the significant terms have been identified and the
3. Structure Selection estimates of associated parameters have been obtained, the
model can be constructed. It is important to know whether
Determining a simple polynomial model is vital. A the model has successfully captured all the system dynamics.

− 109 −
 J.J. Liu et al.

the stator voltages, v γ′ s and v δ′ s , as inputs, a dynamic model

for an induction motor in a fixed reference axis can be obtained
as follows (Krause, 1987; Lorenz and Laeson, 1990; Miki et
al., 1991):

R s R r(1 – σ ) L mR r
– – 0
σL s σL s σ L sL 2r
i γs i γs
Rs
p i δs = 0 – 0 i δs
Fig. 1. Vector control diagram of the induction motor. σL s
λ γr λ γr
L mR r Rr
0 –
Lr Lr
Therefore, a strategy for evaluating the correctness and validity
of the model is necessary. If validation shows that the model
is not good, then some of the design variables should be
changed, and the identification procedure should be redone. v γ′ s
Two model validation strategies, one using the model predicted 1
+ v′ , (12)
output and the other using a model validity test, will be σ L s δs
discussed in the following. 0

A. Model Predicted Output (MPO) 1 3 P L m )i λ

ωrm = ( (13)
pJ m + B m 2 2 L r δs γ r
The model predicted output is defined as
(no external load assumed), where
l
y mpo(k) = F [y(k – η y) , , y(k – 1) , u(k – η u ) , ,
iγs, iδs : γ-δ-axis stator currents;
u(k), 0 , 0] , (10)
Rr, Rs : rotor, stator resistance;
where the measured input is used to generate the model output.
For the model to be accepted, it is essential that the estimations Lm : magnetized inductance;
of the model predicted outputs be in good agreement with the
measured output. ωrm : mechanic angle speed;

B. Model Validity Tests P : poles of induction motor;

For a non-linear system, the residuals usually can not λγr, λδr : γ-δ-axis rotor flux;
be predicted from the linear and nonlinear correlation of past
inputs and outputs. This will be true if the following correlation Ls, Lr : stator, rotor inductance;
tests are passed (Billings and Chen, 1989):
σ : total leakage factor;
φεε(τ) = δ(τ); φu ε (τ) = 0; φuε(τ) = 0; φεεu(τ) = 0;
2' 2'

vγs, vδs : γ-δ-axis stator voltages;

φu ε(τ) = 0,
2' (11)
s : derivative operator;
where φab(τ) = E[a(k − τ)b(k)], δ(τ) is the Kronecker delta
function, u(τ) and ε(τ) are the input and residual sequences, Jm, Bm : mechanical inertia moment, friction coefficient;
respectively, and the prime ′ indicates the quantities with the
mean removed. v δs = v δ′ s + ωσ L si γ s + M ωrλ γ r ;
Lr

III. Induction Motor Modeling Using Vec- v γ s = v γ′ s – ωσ L si δs .

tor Control Theory
The objective of vector control is to decouple the γ and δ-
By choosing the stator current of the γ-δ axis, irs and axis terms in order to simplify control of the induction motor;
iδs, the rotor flux of the γ axis, λγr, as state variables, and treating otherwise, the coupled terms will spoil the simplicity and

− 110 −
 Nonlinear ID of Motor Speed

Fig. 2. Vector control diagram of the induction motor with controllers.

Fig. 3. Diagram of NARMAX identification.

controllability by causing disturbance. Equation (13) shows

that the speed is linear to the stator current, iδs, if the rotor
flux coincides with the γ axis and stays at a fixed rating value.
This means that iδs can dominate the dynamics of the motor
linearly, just as in DC motors, as shown in Fig. 1. The stator (a)
currents, iγs and iδs, and the rotor flux, λγr, are controlled by
three designed controllers, as shown in Fig. 2. The rotor flux
command keeps a fixed value to ensure linearity between ωrm
and iδs, as shown in the lower half of in Fig. 2. The measurement
Eq. (13) will obviously be non-linear if λγr does not stay
properly fixed.

IV. Identification of an Induction Motor

Using the NARMAX Approach
Figure 2 shows that three controllers are needed to
accomplish speed control. Figure 3 shows the identification
approach using the NARMAX model. The feasibility of the
proposed approach has been verified through an experimental
study, and the performance will be verified as discussed in
a previous section. The experimental setup and schematic
diagram are shown in Fig. 4(a) and (b), respectively. The
experimental apparatus consists of a personal computer con-
nected to an induction motor with the physical parameters
listed in Table 1, to some input/output and power unit interfaces.
Table 1. Physical Parameters of the Motor
Parameter Rs Rr Ls M P Bm
Value 1.0977 Ω 0.6667 Ω 0.0487H 0.0463H 4 0.009 0.009 Kg-m2
(b)
Fig. 4. (a) The experimental setup for the induction motor. (b) Schematic
diagram of the experimental induction motor.
Software written in the turbo-C language activates the system.
The commands are input using a keyboard, and the data is
read from a monitor.
The voltages v δ′ s and v γ′ s are treated as inputs and the
speed ωrm as output in Eqs. (12) and (13). The data of 100
sets of v δ′ s , v γ′ s and ωrm are available to model and verify.
Jm
The parameters l, ηy, ηu and ηε in Eq. (1) of the NARMAX
model need to be determined first. Ideally, l equals 1 for a
linear model and equals an integer larger than 1 for a non-

− 111 −
 J.J. Liu et al.

input v δ′ s of lag b. The result was obtained through the fol-

lowing steps:
(1) Assume the prediction errors are zeros and estimate all
the parameters that do not include ε.
(2) Estimate the prediction error, ε = y − y .
(3) Estimate all the parameters including the prediction
error, ε.
(4) Go to (2) and continue to be converged. This depends
on the parameter change after iteration.
(5) Determine the final parameters, y .
A comparison of the predicted outputs obtained using
the theoretical system and model is shown in Fig. 5(a). They
are almost identical because of the large scale of the y-axis
in relation to the wide speed range. The prediction error be-
tween the system output and model predicted output, shown
in Fig. 5(b), is almost negligible. This means that the output
predicted by the model agrees with the output predicted by
the system. The correlation tests are implemented and illus-
trated in the system very well. The correlation tests are imple-
mented and illustrated in Fig. 6. It shows the correlation be-
tween the error and two inputs (time step versus magnitude)

Fig. 5. (a) System output and model predicted output. (b) Difference between
the outputs predicted using the system and model.

linear one. The other parameters have to be positive integers

and must be as small as possible. Actually, all the parameters
for the NARMAX model must represent the systematic behavior
very well. After trying several times (a detailed discussion will
be provided in the next section), the result of the NARMAX
model for the data set employed using the orthogonal esti-
mation and ERR ranking of l = 2, ηy = 9, ηu1 = 8, ηu2 = 14,
ηε = 9, is

y(k) = 0.21u(1,k−1)u(2,k−1)+0.09u(1,k−2)u(2,k−1)

+0.038u(1,k−3)u(2,k−1)+0.016u(1,k−4)u(2,k−1)

+0.007u(1,k−5)u(2,k−1)+0.003u(1,k−6)u(2,k−1)

+0.001u(1,k−7)u(2,k−1)+0.014u(2,k−1)0.14ε
Fig. 6. Model validity test results obtained in the experimental study. (the
×(k−9)+0.12ε(k−2), upper left figure is first then right, and the lower figure is next,
according to the order φεε, φu1ε, φu2ε, φε2u1, φε2u2, φu12'ε, φ(u1u2)'ε,
where u(1, k−a) is the input v γ′ s of lag a, and u(2, k−b) is the φu22'ε, φ(u1u2)'ε2, φ(u1u1)'ε2, φ(u2u2)'ε2)

− 112 −
 Nonlinear ID of Motor Speed
and the auto-correlation between errors. The dash lines for
the upper and lower bounds imply a deviation band of 5%.
This shows that the model validity test results are all inside
the 95% confidence band and indicates that the fitted model
is almost unbiased and has correctly captured the system
dynamics. The excellent output predicted by the model and
validity test results reveal that the multi-input single output
(MISO) second degree NARMAX model can sufficiently
represent the speed dynamics of an induction motor.
V. Discussion and Conclusions
In Section IV, we presented the parameters of the
NARMAX model for the induction motor assigned to the
system. How can reasonable parameters for the NARMAX
model, l, ηy, ηu and ηε, be assigned in physical applications?
The non-linear order l depends on the non-linearity of the
strong or weak intensity, and the values of ηy, ηu and ηε depend
on the available input, output and error. The other requirement
for model parameter assignment is numerical accuracy. Simply
increasing the number of parameters in the polynomial ex-
pansion to achieve the desired prediction accuracy will, in
general, result in an excessively complex model and possibly
in numerical ill-conditioning. Simulation has shown that,
usually, less than ten key terms in the NARMAX model are
dominant, and that the remainder can be deleted with little
distortion subsequent in the prediction accuracy of the model
(Billings and Fadzil, 1985). Here, in this motor system, if
Eq. (12) is linear, and the measurement Eq. (13) is non-linear
with two states multiplied by each other, then the non-linear
order assigned to l = 2 is appropriate. If the available input
and output measurements are sufficient for a NARMAX
model, then the key terms can be determined through numeri-
cal constraint with ERR ranking.
The popular sensorless drive motor has been realized
by applying the estimation theory to the governing equation
in the state space. The estimation theory includes least-squares,
maximum likelihood, Kalman filtering etc. The governing
equation is corrupted by noise, as mentioned in Section I, and
the speed estimation obtained using the estimation theory also
deteriorates. The proposed method using the NARMAX
model to estimate the motor speed constructs the governing
equation based on experimental data, including the effect of
noise. The prediction error in the NARMAX model is defined
as the difference between the real and model output, and this
term takes into consideration noise in the sense of its physical
meaning. The mathematical NARMAX model can represent
a physical motor accurately to estimate the speed.
A robust controller design is the final goal of this research.
Glass and Franchek (1999) gives a promise of success of the
robust control using a describing function representation and
loop shaping approach of a non-linear model. In other words,
once the NARMAX model has been developed, the model
is mapped into a describing function so that it can be used
− 113 −
to design controllers in frequency domain, and the design
satisfies a pre-specified output tolerance in time domain.
There are three major disadvantages in applying the
vector control theory to induction motors to control speed:
(1) For the purpose of speed control, three controllers are
employed to keep the rotor flux and to control the stator
current according to the speed. As a result, a higher
drive cost and more complex structure are added.
(2) Rotor flux is hard to be kept at a steady value by a
controller due to noise. Therefore, the linearity of the
vector control destroys.
(3) At low speed, the current and flux have low values and
are easily disturbed. The behavior of an induction motor
at low speed deviates greatly from expectations.
Therefore, the designs of the controllers, the predictions of
the electric parameters and the responses of the whore system
are inaccurate. Consequently, the performance of the motor
deteriorates.
For the sake of improving the disadvantages of the
sensorless control motor, an identification strategy has been
presented here in which voltages and speed are used as inputs
and outputs to create a model. Modeling by means of data
collection over a wide range of speed improves the accuracy,
reduces the complexity, increases the immunity to noise, and
fewer controllers are needed. The main contribution of this
paper has been to extend the NARMAX methodology to the
application of speed estimation for induction motors. The
results obtained here have demonstrated that the estimated
model can sufficiently capture all the system dynamics over
the desired operating range. In practical applications, the
number of times that the speed sensor is measured is the lag
assigned by the parameter in the NARMAX model, i.e., ηy
= 9 in this experimental study, so the sensor is discarded. In
other words, the sensor is employed only at the beginning or
before the beginning, and the NARMAX model with a
measurement of motor voltages can be used to estimate the
remaining speeds. After all, voltage measurement is easier
than speed measurement. Furthermore, for a black-box motor
system or a more complicated one, not much a priori infor-
mation is available, but a NARMAX model can represent the
system by simply starting with the needed inputs and outputs.
A design of a closed loop speed controller based on the
NARMAX model is being studied now, and a PC-based
controller can possibly be used to integrate the whole operating
process. This paper has discussed the value of the model based
on validation test results. The NARMAX model approach has
been shown capable of accurately estimating the speed through
non-linear identification. Eventually, a robust controller will
be designed and will be presented in a forthcoming paper.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank the National Science Council,
R.O.C., for financially supporting this research under contract NSC 87-2218-
E-014-005.
 J.J. Liu et al.
References
Billings, S. A. and W. S. F. Voon (1983) Structure detection and model
validity tests in the identification of non-linear systems. IEE Proceedings,
130(4), 193-199.
Billings, S. A. and M. B. Fadzil (1985) The practical identification of systems
with non-linearity. Proc. 7th IFAC Symposium on Identification and
System Parameter Estimation, pp. 155-160, York, U.K.
Billings, S. A. and I. J. Leontaritis (1981) Identification of non-linear system
using parameter estimation techniques. Proc. IEE Conf. Control and
Its Applications, pp. 183-187, Warwick, U.K.
Billings, S. A. and I. J. Leontaritis (1982) Identification of non-linear system
using parameter estimation. Proc. 6th IFAC Symposium on Identifi-
cation and System Parameter Estimation, pp. 505-510, Washington
D.C., U.S.A.
Billings, S. A. and S. Chen (1989) Identification of non-linear rational
systems using a prediction-error estimation algorithm. Int’l. J. System,
SCI, 20, 467-494.
Billings, S. A. and W. S. F. Voon (1986) Correlation based model validity
tests for non-linear models. Int’l. J. Control, 44(1), 235-244.
Blaschke, F. (1972) The principle of field orientation as applied to the new
trans. vector closed loop control system for field machines. Siemesns
Review, 34, 217-220.
Gahler, C. and R. Herzog (1994) Identification of magnetic bearing system.
Fourth International Symposium on Magnetic Bearings, ETH, Zurich.
Glass, J. W. and M. W. Franchek (1999) NARMAX modelling and robust
control of inter combustion engines. Int’l. J. Control, 72(4), 289-304.
Holtz, J. (1993) Methods for speed sensorless control of AC drives. In:
Sensorless Control of AC Motor Drives, pp. 21-29. IEEE Press, New
York, NY, U.S.A.
非線性識別技術於感應馬達轉速估測之應用
劉瑞榮 *　龔一中 **　趙惠誠 *
*
中正理工學院電機工程學系
**
海軍軍官學校
摘　要
本論文以一個非線性識別技術進行感應馬達之轉速估測。此離散非線性之識別方法稱為NARMAX。藉由馬達轉
速及電壓間之多項式模式以估測馬達轉速。此方法在識別馬達轉速及電壓間之非線性關係是可行的，且可以取代現行
感應馬達轉速控制迴路中之轉速量測器。此外，基於此理論獲得之結果，正研究設計一控制器以作為轉速控制之用。
相較於現行感應馬達轉速控制理論，此轉速控制提供一創新且簡便方式。
− 114 −
Hurst, K. D., T. G. Habetler, G. Griva, and F. Profume (1994) Speed
sensorless field-oriented control of induction machines using current
harmonic spectral estimation. In: Sensorless Control of AC Motor
Drives, pp. 71-77. IEEE Press, New York, NY, U.S.A.
Ilas, C., A. Bettini, L. Ferraris, and G. Griva (1994) Comparison of different
schemes without shaft sensors for field oriented control drives. In:
Sensorless Control of AC Motor Drives, pp. 30-39. IEEE Press, New
York, NY, U.S.A.
Korenberg, M., S. A. Billings, Y. P. Liu, and P. J. McIlroy (1998) Orthogonal
parameter estimation algorithm for non-linear stochastic system. Int’l.
J. Control, 48(1), 193-210.
Krause, P. C. (1987) Analysis of Electric Machinery. McGraw-Hill, New
York, NY, U.S.A.
Lee, C. W., Y. H. Ha, and C. S. Kim (1994) Identification of active magnetic
bearing system using magnetic force measurement. Fourth International
Symposium on Magnetic Bearing, ETH, Zurich.
Leontaritis, I. J. and S. A. Billings (1985) Input-output parametric models
for non-linear systems. Int’l. J. Control, 41(2), 303-328.
Lorenz, R. D. and D. B. Laeson (1990) Flux and torque decoupling control
for field-weakened operation of field-oriented induction machines. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., 26(2), 290-295.
Miki, I. (1991) A new simplified current control method for field-oriented
induction motor drives. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 27(6), 1081-1085.
Moons, C. and B. de Moor (1995) Parameter identification of induction
motor drives. Automatica, 31(8), 1137-1147.
Schoukens, J. (1990) System Identification, a Frequency Domain Modeling
Approach. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.
Vas, P. (1990) Vector Control of AC Machine. Clarendon Press, Oxford,
U.K.