IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 53, NO.

3, MAY/JUNE 2017 2517

Generalized Stability Control for Open-Loop

Operation of Motor Drives
Jingbo Liu, Senior Member, IEEE, Thomas A. Nondahl, Fellow, IEEE, Peter B. Schmidt, Member, IEEE,
Semyon Royak, Senior Member, IEEE, and Timothy M. Rowan, Member, IEEE

Abstract—This paper proposes a general approach to designing
a stability control for open-loop operation that can be used for
either induction motor, permanent magnet synchronous motor, or
any other motor drives. A speed or frequency set point is adjusted
by a frequency compensation value to provide the stability control
to mitigate hunting or motor stoppage. The proposed method can
be utilized in either conventional motor drives or motor drives with
an output filter and a transformer used for oil pump applications.
Index Terms—Electric submersible pump (ESP), induction mo-
tor, motor control, oil pump application, permanent magnet syn-
chronous motor (PMSM), position sensorless, stability control.
I. INTRODUCTION
ENSORLESS motor drives are used in a variety of appli-
S cations, particularly where providing position and/or speed
sensors directly at a motor is difficult or impractical. In particu-
lar, sensorless control for permanent magnet synchronous mo-
tors (PMSMs) has led to much research due to attractive features
such as high power density and high efficiency. For example, in
electric submersible pumps (ESPs) for oil pump applications,
there has been an emerging trend of using PMSMs. For those
ESP drives, the installation of a position sensor attached to the
motor shaft is not practical.
Generally speaking, PMSMs are not available with damper
windings in the rotor. Without damper windings, the synchro-
nization of motion of the rotor with the stator applied frequency
under the open-loop control is not guaranteed [3]. This causes
instability problems in those PMSMs under the open-loop con-
trol. For example, motor velocity could oscillate about the set
point after load perturbations.
Manuscript received October 3, 2016; revised December 13, 2016; accepted
December 18, 2016. Date of publication January 30, 2017; date of current
version May 18, 2017. Paper 2016-IACC-1088.R1, presented at the 2015
IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, Addison, TX, USA,
Oct. 18–22, and approved for publication in the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IN-
DUSTRY APPLICATIONS by the Industrial Automation and Control Committee of
the IEEE Industry Applications Society.
J. Liu, T. A. Nondahl, and P. B. Schmidt are with Rockwell Automa-
tion, Milwaukee, WI 53204 USA (e-mail: jliu2@ra.rockwell.com; tanondahl@
ra.rockwell.com; pbschmidt@ra.rockwell.com).
S. Royak is with Rockwell Automation, Cleveland, OH 44124 USA (e-mail:
sroyak@ra.rockwell.com).
T. M. Rowan is with Rockwell Automation, Mequon, WI 53092 USA (e-mail:
tmrowan@ra.rockwell.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2017.2661249
0093-9994 © 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
It is common that sensorless drives utilize the open-loop con-
trol for zero and low speeds and the closed-loop field-orientated
control based on a back-electromotive force (EMF) position es-
timator for higher speeds. In this case, the transition from a
high-speed closed-loop control to a low-speed open-loop con-
trol is challenging. A permanent magnet (PM) motor could even
lose synchronization or stop due to hunting under the open-loop
control without any stability control.
A. Conventional V/f Open-Loop Control
Typical open-loop sensorless systems employ a voltage–
frequency (V/f, alternatively known as volts per hertz, V/Hz)
controller providing a voltage set point according to a desired
motor speed or frequency. A simple open-loop V/f control is the
most commonly used sensorless control for induction motors
for applications such as fans, blowers, and pumps, where high
dynamic performance is not a demand.
It is known that motors by V/f control can be stabilized by the
frequency feedback control [1]–[8], and/or voltage amplitude
adjustment [6], [8], [12]. Existing stability controls are mostly
designed for V/f drives that utilize the calculated/measured
power [1], [2], [4], [5] or sensed dc-link current [3], [5]–[8],
or sensed motor phase currents [11], as input to the stability
control. For example, using sensed dc-link current for the sta-
bility control can be undesirable due to noisy dc-link current
signals and requiring additional hardware (dc-link current sen-
sor) to the existing motor drive products.
However, most of the papers present a specific stability con-
trol method, mostly designed for V/f motor drives. Few papers
cover a generic frequency stability strategy that can be used for
either a V/f control or a current-regulated open-loop velocity
control.
B. Current-Regulated Open-Loop Control for Drives With an
Output Filter and a Transformer
Motor drives with an output filter and a transformer are com-
monly used for applications like ESP for oil pumps. A typical
configuration is shown in Fig. 1, which has the following:
1) a medium-voltage (MV) induction or PMSM motor with
no position sensor;
2) a long cable, which is typically 1000 m or more;
3) an output transformer to increase the low-voltage drive
output voltage to the levels of MV to allow for cable
voltage drop plus motor requirement;

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2518 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 53, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2017

Fig. 2. Simplified small-signal dynamics of a PMSM [1], [3].

Fig. 1. Typical system with a low-voltage drive for oil/pump application.

4) a sine wave filter to mitigate the effect of the reflected

wave due to the use of a pulse-width modulation (PWM)
drive and a long cable;
5) a low-voltage drive.
However, the most commonly used open-loop method such
as V/f control may not work well for PMSM drives. Moreover,
control for motor drive systems with both the transformer and
the sensorless PM drive has been seldom mentioned, if at all, in
the literature [13], [14].
In [13] and [14], a current-regulated open-loop control is
presented for a motor drive with a transformer and an output sine
wave filter. Although the current-regulated open-loop control,
sometimes called “I-F” control [8]–[10], is mentioned in the Fig. 3. Generalized stability control diagram.
literature, the existing “I-F” open-loop control is all designed
for conventional motor drives. For example, stabilization was synchronous motors. Especially, PMSMs without damper
achieved by adjusting the current amplitude according to the windings are prone to see instability problems without any
power factor (PF) angle variation in a motor drive using “I-F” stability control. Therefore, in this paper, a PM motor is used
open-loop control [10]. as an example.
This paper proposes a general approach of implementing the A PMSM model in the synchronous rotating reference (dq)
stability control for position sensorless open-loop operation that frame can be expressed by
can be used for any motor drives, such as conventional motor        
drives or motor drives with an output filter and a transformer vd Rs + dt d
Ld −ωe Lq id 0
= d · + ω λ
e pm .
[15]. The proposed stability control may be successfully utilized vq ωe Ld Rs + dt Lq iq 1
to improve the stability in operating PM and/or induction motors (1)
to avoid or mitigate undesirable “hunting” (oscillation) and/or The electromagnetic torque developed by a PM is exp-
undesired motor stopping or inability to start, particularly, for ressed as
low-speed operation and/or in the presence of changes or per- 3
Te = p · [iq λpm − (Lq − Ld ) · id · iq ] (2)
turbations in the load and/or desired set point operating speed. 2
Specifically, a frequency compensation signal is derived that dωr
uses the estimated electromagnetic torque (per unit—p.u.), or J = Te − TL (3)
dt
the calculated PF, or the calculated torque current (p.u.), or the
where vd and vq are the d- and q-axis stator voltages, respec-
calculated power (p.u.), the PF angle, or the calculated torque
tively, id and iq are the d- and q-axis stator currents, respectively,
angle. The only current sensors required are on the drive side.
Rs is the stator resistance, Ld and Lq are the d- and q-axis sta-
The proposed stability control scheme has been tested with
tor self-inductances, respectively, λpm is the per-phase PM flux
a 15-kW PM motor under the conventional motor drive with
linkage, ωe is the electrical speed, ωr is the mechanical ro-
V/f, and the current-regulated open-loop control with a drive
tor speed, Te is the electromagnetic torque, and TL is the load
equipped with an output filter and a transformer. Experimental
torque.
results presented in this paper have demonstrated the effective-
Analysis of the small-signal dynamics in the quasi-steady-
ness of the proposed stability control strategy.
state approximation of PMSMs under V/f control is provided
in [1] and [3]–[6]. An approximation of the state equation of a
II. SENSORLESS CONTROL STRATEGY OVER FULL SPEED
PM motor can be made around the steady-state point. A simpli-
RANGE fied block diagram of the PM motor small-signal dynamics is
The proposed stability control concept is a generic method provided in [1] and [3], as shown in Fig. 2.
that can be used for electric motors including induction motors, In general, the relationship between Δωr and ΔTe can be
PMSMs, wound field synchronous motors, and reluctance summarized as ΔTe ∼ −Δωr . In the case of perturbation

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LIU et al.: GENERALIZED STABILITY CONTROL FOR OPEN-LOOP OPERATION OF MOTOR DRIVES 2519

Fig. 4. Stability signal generator.

occurs, Δωe is no longer zero. For example, If ΔTL > 0, then

Δωr < 0 and ΔTe > 0. That explains why adding a modula-
tion signal reflecting torque perturbations could add damping
to the system and, hence, reduces or eliminates the undesirable
hunting.
In conclusion, adding a frequency compensation term ex-
pressed in (4) proportional to the perturbation of velocity and Fig. 5. Stability signal using electromagnetic torque based on the stator flux.
ultimately adds damping to the system, i.e.,
 
dωr
Δωe = −Kp · HPF (4)
dt
where Kp is the stability gain, which is greater than zero.
Note that a high-pass filter (HPF) is commonly utilized to
ensure that the speed correction Δωe is only effective in the
Fig. 6. Stability signal based on the PF.
transient state when a motor sees perturbation of speed. Gen-
erally, any signal reflecting speed or torque perturbation can be
used to obtain the frequency compensation value, as expressed
in (4), to reduce or eliminate hunting.

III. GENERALIZED STABILITY CONTROL

Fig. 3 shows a generalized stability control diagram for posi-
tion sensorless open-loop operation. There are five basic compo- Fig. 7. Stability signal based on per-unit power.
nents in the stability control for various systems. Typical options
for voltage command generator are a V/f (volts per hertz) control, The stator flux linkage is calculated via the motor current and
a flux vector control, and a current regulator. Typical options for voltages, as shown in Fig. 5
power amplifier are a two-Level voltage-source PWM inverter 
and a multilevel voltage-source PWM inverter. Typical options λ̂α s = (vα − iα Rs ) (6)
for power components are a power cable, a transformer, and an

output sine wave filter. Typical options for electric motor are
an induction motor, PMSMs, wound field synchronous motors, λ̂β s = (vβ − iβ Rs ). (7)
and reluctance synchronous motors.
In particular, typical options for the stability command gen- Alternatively, the estimated torque can also be computed ac-
erator, as shown in Fig. 4, include calculation of a compensation cording to the rotor flux estimate values for PMSMs, i.e.,
signal proportional to torque, torque current, power, PF, torque
angle, or PF angle. A frequency compensation signal Δf is of- 3P (λ̂α r iβ − λ̂β r iα )
Tes pu = (8)
ten calculated using three-phase currents and voltages (voltage 2Trated
command or voltage feedback).
where
For example, the stability signal generator computes an esti- 
mated torque value Tes pu for deriving the frequency compen- λ̂α r = −iα Ls + (vα − iα Rs ) (9)
sation value, as

3P (λ̂α s iβ − λ̂β s iα ) λ̂β r = −iβ Ls + (vβ − iβ Rs ). (10)
Tes pu = . (5)
2Trated

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2520 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 53, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2017

Fig. 8. Conventional motor drive with V/f open-loop control.

Fig. 9. Stability control for a motor drive with an output Sinewave filter, a transformer, and a long cable. The calculated torque (p.u.) is used as the stability
signal.

Another possible implementation provides an estimated PF
or PF angle computed according to real and imaginary power
values P and Q, as shown in Fig. 6.
Yet another example is shown in Fig. 7, in which the stability
signal generator provides a per-unit power estimate value, upon
which the frequency compensation is calculated. Other possible
examples include computation of an estimated value as an error
between the open-loop angle and an estimated rotor position.
A conventional V/f motor drive system using the calculated
torque as the stability signal is shown in Fig. 8. The illustrated
stability signal generator includes a stationary reference frame
converter for conversion of the current feedback signals and
the voltage command signals or values from the abc reference
frame to a stationary “αβ” reference frame. An estimated (p.u.)
torque value is calculated based on iα and iβ and also based on
the voltage command vα∗ and vβ∗ . The estimated torque is then
used as the stability control signal to compute the frequency
compensation value. Moreover, an HPF is utilized to remove
undesirable dc offsets. A gain is used to amplify the filtered sig-
nal, and a limiter is included to limit the range of the frequency
compensation signal.
In [13] and [14], an open-loop current-regulated control is
designed for a motor drive with the transformer and an output
sine wave filter that are commonly utilized for ESP drives. Fig. 9
shows a current-regulated open-loop velocity system for drives
with an output sine wave filter and a transformer using a stability

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
LIU et al.: GENERALIZED STABILITY CONTROL FOR OPEN-LOOP OPERATION OF MOTOR DRIVES 2521

Fig. 11. Simulation result of V/f open-loop control with a 6.6-kV CHB drive
and an induction motor running at 0.2-p.u. speed, no load, stability control
was disabled first and then enabled at 2.5 s. (Top) Motor phase currents (p.u.).
(Middle) Motor reference and feedback speed (p.u.). (Bottom) Load torque and
electromagnetic torque (p.u.). Time scale is 1 s/div.

TABLE I
15-KW PM MACHINE PARAMETERS
Fig. 10. 6.6-kV CHB motor drive used in simulation.
Parameter (unit) Value

Base speed (r/min) 2000

control. The estimated p.u. torque is utilized as the stability Rated torque (N·m) 62.8
signal. Instead of using the motor parameters in the calculation Rated voltage (V, line–line) 460
of torque, system parameters referred to the transformer primary Rated current (A, rms) 24
Stator resistance (Ω) 0.1850
side need to be utilized in the calculation of the stability signal. L d & L q (no-load, H) 0.0065
Moreover, as shown in Fig. 4, an optional multiplier may be K b e m f (Vr m s /kr p m ) 109.41
required, which multiplies the output of the limiter by a sign Motor inertia (kg·m2 ) 0.0084
Rated power (kW) 15
signal based on the sign (positive or negative, i.e., forward or Poles 8
reverse) of the desired frequency or speed set point input signal.
The output of the multiplier provides the frequency modulation
value for adjustment of the frequency set point. For example,
if PF is used as the stability signal, as shown in Fig. 6, the Fig. 8) is 10. Simulation results shown in Fig. 11 show that
multiplication of the output of the limiter by a sign signal is the proposed stability control works well with a V/f open-loop
required to obtain the frequency compensation signal. motor drive.

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Computer simulation by MATLAB/SIMULINK is performed
with a conventional V/f motor drive system. The system used
is similar to the system shown in Fig. 8 except that 1) a torque
current iq is used as the stability signal; and 2) a 36-pulse diode
rectifier and a 6.6-kV 3000 kVA cascaded H-bridge (CHB) in-
verter is utilized in simulation as a motor drive, as shown in Fig.
10. The motor used in simulation is a 2.1-MW four-pole 6.6-
kV induction motor. The rated speed of the induction motor is
1485 r/min and the rated frequency is 50 Hz.
A common type of oscillation for an open-velocity-loop sys-
tem occurs especially when a motor is running at low speed
with light load. Low-frequency subharmonics may persist due
to the inverter dead time, thus producing beat components and
oscillations. For example, as shown in Fig. 11, oscillation oc-
curs when the motor is running at 0.2–p.u. speed without load.
Shortly after the proposed stability control is applied at 2.5 s,
the oscillation was suppressed.
In this simulation, the cutoff frequency of the HPF utilized
for the stability control is 5 Hz and the stability gain (Kp in
Experiments were performed 1) in a conventional PM motor
drive with a V/f open-loop control and 2) a PM motor drive
with an output filter and a transformer using a current-regulated
open-loop velocity control.
A 15-kW drive is used to drive a 15-kW 460-V PMSM that
is coupled to a dc-load machine. The parameters of the 15-kW
PMSM machine are shown in Table I. For all the experimental
results shown in this section, a 5-Hz HPF was used in the stability
control (shown in Fig. 4). The stability gain was set at 5.
A. V/f Drive With the Stability Control
The experimental setup of a V/f drive with the stability control
is shown in Fig. 12, and the control block is in Fig. 8.
Fig. 13 shows the steady-state waveform when the motor is
running at 300 r/min without any stability control. It shows
that the motor velocity oscillates about the set point. Fig. 14
shows the waveform when the motor is running at 300 r/min
with the proposed stability control. Fig. 15 shows the transient

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2522
Fig. 12. Experimental setup: conventional motor drive with V/f open-loop
control.
Fig. 13. Experimental result of V/f control with a PM motor running at
300 r/min, no load, without any stability control. Ch1: speed (encoder),
100 r/min/div; Ch2: Iq , 2 A/div; Ch3: calculated torque, 0.1 unit/div. Time
scale is 1 s/div.
Fig. 14. Experimental result of V/f control with a PM motor running
at 300 r/min, no load, with the stability control. Ch1: speed (encoder),
100 r/min/div; Ch2: Iq , 2 A/div; Ch3: calculated torque, 0.1 unit/div. Time
scale is 1 s/div.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 53, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2017
Fig. 15. Experimental result of V/f control with a PM motor running at
300 r/min, no load, stability control was disabled first and then enabled.
Ch1: speed (encoder), 100 r/min/div; Ch2: Iq , 2A/div; Ch3: calculated torque,
0.1 unit/div. Time scale is 1 s/div.
Fig. 16. Experimental setup: PM motor drive with an output filter and a
transformer, and an open-loop current-regulated velocity control.
as the stability control is enabled when the motor is running at
300 r/min, steady state.
Clearly, the rotor velocity oscillation is eliminated by the
stability control. Moreover, the waveform in Fig. 15 shows good
dynamic response of the proposed stability control. It quickly
reduces the oscillation when the stability control is enabled.
B. Current-Regulated Open-Loop Velocity Control for Drives
With an Output Filter and a Transformer
Experiments were also performed with a PM motor drive
with an output filter and a transformer that is controlled by
the current-regulated open-loop velocity control, as shown in
Fig. 9. The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 16. A 21-kVA
transformer 380/460 (Δ − Y) is utilized during the test. Due to
lab constraints, the experimental setup shown in Fig. 16 is used
to emulate an ESP drive system, which typically has an MV
motor and accordingly a much higher transformer ratio.
LIU et al.: GENERALIZED STABILITY CONTROL FOR OPEN-LOOP OPERATION OF MOTOR DRIVES
Fig. 17. Experimental result of the current-regulated open-loop velocity con-
trol of a PM drive with an output filter and a transformer. The motor is operating
at 190 r/min at no-load condition with current reference at 0.3 p.u. Stability
control was disabled first and then enabled. Ch1: encoder speed (50 r/min/div);
Ch3: calculated torque p.u. (0.05 unit/div); Ch4: motor current Iu (20 A/div).
Time scale is 500 ms/div.
Fig. 18. Experimental result without any stability control. The motor is oper-
ating at 150 r/min subjected to a step load change from 0.273 to 0.964 p.u. Ch1:
Encoder speed (100 r/min/div); Ch2: Torque_pu (0.5 unit/div); Ch3: Reference
speed (100 r/min/div); and Ch4: Motor current Iu (20 A/div). Time scale is
500 ms/div.
Fig. 17 shows the experimental result of the current-regulated
open-loop velocity control of a PM drive with an output filter
and a transformer. The estimated p.u. torque (shown in Fig. 9)
is utilized as the stability signal. The PM motor is operating at
190 r/min with the current reference at 0.3 p.u. with only the
inertia load of the dyne. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the
proposed stability control, the stability control was disabled first
and then enabled. Obviously, the motor velocity oscillation is
effectively reduced by the stability control.
In Fig. 18, the PM motor without any stability control is
operating at 150 r/min and subjected to a step load change
from 0.273 to 0.964 p.u. Without any stability control, unde-
sirable hunting occurs when there is a step change of the load.
Fig. 19 shows the PM motor subjected to the step load change
from 0.273 to 0.964 p.u. with the stability control. Clearly,
the velocity oscillation on the motor shaft is effectively re-
duced/eliminated by the proposed stability control.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2523
Fig. 19. Experimental result with the stability control. The motor is operating
at 150 r/min subjected to a step load change from 0.273 to 0.964 p.u. Ch1:
Encoder speed (100 r/min/div); Ch2: Torque_pu (0.5 unit/div); Ch3: Reference
speed (100 r/min/div); and Ch4: Motor current Iu (20 A/div). Time scale is
500 ms/div.
Fig. 20. Experimental result without any stability control at no load. It
shows sensorless operation during transition from a closed-loop EMF observer
to a current-regulated open-loop velocity control. Ch1: encoder speed (100
r/min/div); Ch2: torque p.u. (0.5 unit/div); Ch3: reference speed (100 r/min/div);
and Ch4: motor current Iu (20 A/div). Time scale is 500 ms/div.
As aforementioned, sensorless drives could also utilize an
open-loop control for zero and low speeds and a closed-loop
field-oriented control based on an EMF position estimator for
higher speeds. Without any stability control, a PM motor could
even lose synchronization or stop due to hunting without any
stability control during the transition from a closed-loop control
to an open-loop control.
Fig. 20 shows the drive system (shown in Fig. 9) during a tran-
sition from a closed-loop EMF observer to a current-regulated
open-loop velocity control without any stability control.
Fig. 21 shows the system during transition from a closed-loop
EMF observer to an open-loop control with the stability control
to compare with the results shown in Fig. 20. It is shown that the
undesirable hunting under the open-loop control has been effec-
tively suppressed by utilizing the proposed stability scheme.
2524 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 53, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2017
Fig. 21. Experimental result with the stability control at no load. It shows sen-
sorless operation during transition from a closed-loop EMF observer to a current-
regulated open-loop velocity control. Ch1: encoder speed (100 r/min/div); Ch2:
torque p.u. (0.5 unit/div); Ch3: reference speed (100 r/min/div); and Ch4: motor
current Iu (20 A/div). Time scale is 500 ms/div.
The results in Figs. 13–21 have verified that the proposed
stability control works very well on conventional motor drives
or motor drives with an output filter and a transformer. It is clear
that the proposed stability control can effectively suppress the
undesirable hunting of the motor under the open-loop control.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper focused on a generalized stability control scheme
for position sensorless open-loop operation that can be used for
conventional motor drives or motor drives with an output filter
and a transformer. A speed or frequency set point was adjusted
by a frequency compensation value to provide a signal that was
then used in controlling the drive to mitigate hunting or motor
stoppage. Typical options for a stability command generator
include calculation of a compensation signal proportional to
torque, torque current, power, PF, torque angle, PF angle, etc.
Simulation results with a 6.6-kV CHB induction motor drive
have been shown. Experimental results with a 15-kW drive,
which uses the proposed stability control scheme, have been
presented in this paper. Simulation and experimental results
have validated the effectiveness of the proposed stability control
strategy.
REFERENCES
[1] R. S. Colby and D. W. Novotny, “An efficiency-optimizing permanent-
magnet synchronous motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 24, no. 3,
pp. 462–469, May/Jun. 1988.
[2] Y. Nakamura, T. Kudo, F. Ishibashi, and S. Hibino, “High-efficiency drive
due to power factor control of a permanent magnet synchronous motor,”
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 247–253, Mar. 1995.
[3] P. D. C. Perera, F. Blaabjerg, J. K. Pedersen, and P. Thøgersen, “An
efficiency-optimizing permanent-magnet synchronous motor drive,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 783–791, May/Jun. 2003.
[4] M. Matsushita, H. Kameyama, Y. Ikeboh, and S. Morimoto, “Stabilization
control of sensorless sinusoidal wave drive for control of power factor of
PM motor,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Elect. Mach. Syst., Nov. 2009, pp. 1–5.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[5] M. Kiuchi, T. Ohnishi, H. Hagiwara, and Y. Yasuda, “V/f control of
permanent magnet synchronous motors suitable for home appliances by
DC link peak current control method,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Power
Electron. Conf., Jun. 2010, pp. 567–573.
[6] P. D. Chandana Perera, F. Blaabjerg, J. K. Pedersen, and P. Thøgersen,
“Open loop stability and stabilization of permanent magnet synchronous
motor drives using DC-link current,” in Proc. IEEE Nordic Workshop
Power Ind. Electron., 2000, pp. 47–53.
[7] G. Andreescu, C. Coman, A. Moldovan, and I. Boldea, “Stable V/f control
system with unity power factor for PMSM drives,” in Proc. IEEE 13th Int.
Conf. Optim. Elect. Electron. Equip., May 2012, pp. 432–438.
[8] I. Boldea, A. Moldovan, V. Schramel-Coroban, G.-D. Andreescu, and L.
Tutelea, “A class of fast dynamics V/f sensorless AC general drives with
PM-RSM as a case study,” in Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Optim. Elect. Electron.
Equip., Braşov, România, May 2010, pp. 453–459.
[9] S.C. Agarliţă, M. Fătu, L. N. Tutelea, F. Blaabjerg, and I. Boldea, “I-f
Starting and Active Flux Based Sensorless Vector Control of Reluctance
Synchronous Motors, with Experiments,” in Proc. IEEE 12th Int. Conf.
Optim. Elect. Electron. Equip., May 2010, pp. 337–342.
[10] L. Iepure, I. Boldea, and F. Blaabjerg, “Hybrid I-f starting and observer-
based sensorless control of single-phase BLDC-PM motor drives,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 9, pp. 3436–3444, Sep. 2012.
[11] I. Boldea, “Driving control without motion sensors,” in Reluctance Syn-
chronous Machines and Drives. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 1996,
ch. 7.
[12] Y. Xiang, “Method and apparatus for instability compensation of V/Hz
pulse width modulation inverter-fed induction motor drives,” U.S. Patent
5 959 431, Sep. 28, 1999.
[13] J. Liu, T. A. Nondahl, P. B. Schmidt, and S. Royak, “Method and apparatus
for stability control of open loop motor drive operation,” U.S. Patent
9 054 611, Jun. 9, 2015.
[14] T. A. Nondahl, J. Liu, P. B. Schmidt, S. Royak, and T. Rowan, “Method
and apparatus for stability control of open loop motor drive operation,”
U.S. Patent 14 193 329, Feb. 28, 2014.
[15] J. Liu, T. A. Nondahl, P. B. Schmidt, S. Royak, and T. Rowan, “Generalized
stability control for open loop operation of motor drives,” in Proc. IEEE
Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu. Meeting, Oct. 18–22, 2015, pp. 1–8.
Jingbo Liu (S’99–M’06–SM’10) received the
B.Eng. and M.Eng. degrees from the Huazhong Uni-
versity of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China,
in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree
from Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA, in
2005, all in electrical engineering.
She joined Advanced Technology Milwaukee
Labs, Rockwell Automation, Milwaukee, WI, USA,
in 2005. She holds six U.S. patents. Her research
interests include power converters and control of ac
motor drives.
Thomas A. Nondahl (S’73–M’77–SM’96–F’02) re-
ceived the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in electri-
cal engineering from the University of Wisconsin–
Madison, WI, USA.
After graduation, he joined GE’s Corporate
Research and Development Center, Schenectady,
NY, USA, and spent four years analyzing and de-
signing electrical machines. In 1981, he joined
Allen-Bradley’s Corporate Technology Development
Group, Milwaukee, WI, as a Researcher. During the
next six years, he developed technology used in four
ac and dc drive products. In 1987, he transferred to the Drives Product Group
and continued work on motor drives, electrical machines, and digital communi-
cations. In 1996, he joined Advanced Technology Milwaukee Labs, Rockwell
Automation, Milwaukee, as a Research Manager. He holds 35 U.S. patents.
From 1996 until retirement in 2016, he conducted research projects in areas
such as permanent magnet motor control, real-time digital communication, in-
verters for induction motors, and control of ac servo drives.
Dr. Nondahl joined the IEEE Industry Applications Society in 1981. He
has served multiple roles within the society including the Electric Machines
Committee Chair, the Society Treasurer, the Annual Meeting Chair, the Society
President, and the Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY
APPLICATIONS. He received the Rockwell Engineer of the Year Award in 1988.
LIU et al.: GENERALIZED STABILITY CONTROL FOR OPEN-LOOP OPERATION OF MOTOR DRIVES 2525

Peter B. Schmidt (M’79) received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees in physics from John Carroll Univer-
sity, Cleveland, OH, USA, in 1977 and 1979, re-
spectively; the M.S. degree in electrical engineer-
ing and computer science from Marquette University,
Milwaukee, WI, USA, in 1984; and the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering from the University of Wis-
consin, Madison, WI, in 1991.
He started working for the Allen-Bradley Com-
pany (A-B) in Corporate Research and Design, Mil-
waukee, in 1979. The majority of his research projects
were centered on research and development in factory automation, specifically
in the areas of robotics and computer vision. When A-B was purchased by
Rockwell Automation, Milwaukee, he stayed with the company as the corpo-
rate research and development function was transformed into the Advanced
Technology Laboratory. He continues to work in the areas of motion control,
process control, and tuning. His major fields of study included automatic control
systems and energy/power systems.
Timothy M. Rowan (M’87) was born in
Milwaukee, WI, USA, in 1958. He received the B.S.
degree from Marquette University, Milwaukee, in
1980, and the M.S and Ph.D. degrees in electrical
engineering from the University of Wisconsin, Madi-
son, WI, in 1982 and 1985, respectively, all in elec-
trical engineering.
He is currently a Senior Principal Engineer with
Rockwell Automation, Milwaukee, where he works
on the development of low-voltage standard drive
products.

Semyon Royak (M’92–SM’03) was born in Novosi-

birsk, Russia, in 1944. He received the B.S. and
M.S. degrees, and the Ph.D. degree from Novosi-
birsk Electrotechnical University, Novosibirsk,
Russia, in 1966 and 1974, respectively.
He began his career as an Assistant Professor at
Novosibirsk Electrotechnical University in 1967 and
became an Associate Professor in 1976. He joined
Reliance Electric as a Development Engineer in 1990
and Rockwell Automation, Cleveland, OH, USA, in
1995, where he recently became an Engineering Fel-
low. Working in the field of ac and dc motor control and power conversion, he
has most recently been involved in the research and development of the control
design of IPM sensor and sensorless drives for traction and underground oil
pump applications, and the control for active front rectifier under unbalanced
voltage-source condition. He has a number of Russian and U.S. patents in the
field of ac and dc motor control.
Dr. Royak was granted the Engineer of the Year Award in 2016 from Rock-
well Automation. He has received a number of patent and invention awards
from Rockwell Automation.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad de los Andes. Downloaded on December 23,2020 at 15:51:50 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.