ARTICLE IN PRESS

Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693– 2701

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Neurocomputing
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/neucom

A fuzzy learning—Sliding mode controller for direct field-oriented

induction machines
Habib-ur Rehman , Rached Dhaouadi
Department of Electrical Engineering, School of Engineering, American University of Sharjah, P.O. Box 26666, Sharjah, UAE

a r t i c l e in fo abstract

Available online 9 May 2008 This paper presents a direct field-oriented induction motor drive system with two distinct features: a
Keywords: sliding mode voltage mode flux observer (SMVMFO) and a fuzzy model reference learning controller
Fuzzy control (FMRLC). The speed of the induction motor is regulated using an FMRLC, which does not require
Induction machine rigorous tuning of the controller’s parameters. The rotor flux estimation for the direct field orientation
Sliding mode (DFO) is realized by a newly proposed SMVMFO, which is insensitive to the stator resistance variation.
Flux observers The complete drive system is shown to have very good speed tracking performance, accurate flux
estimation and field orientation, and high robustness to stator resistance variation, which has been a
long-standing problem in the area of motor drives. Extensive simulations are presented for performance
evaluation and validation of the proposed control scheme.
& 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The recent advances in the area of field-oriented control along
with the rapid development and cost reduction of power
electronics devices and microprocessors have made variable
speed induction motor drives an economical alternative for
many industrial applications. These AC drives are nowadays
replacing their DC counter part and are becoming a major
component in today’s sophisticated industrial manufacturing
and process automation.
The field-oriented control of AC machines provides a high
performance torque control. The two main techniques to realize
field orientation are: direct field orientation (DFO) and indirect
field orientation (IFO). The IFO is based on the rotor slip
calculation in a feed-forward open-loop mode, while the DFO is
a closed-loop feedback system based on the rotor flux estimation.
Both techniques show usually comparable performance for most
cases. In some applications, however, the DFO is preferred over
the IFO because it is less sensitive to the rotor time constant. On
the other hand, if the flux estimation performed in the DFO is
inaccurate, the system performance will be degraded.
In the literature, two main methods have been used for
flux estimation: (a) rotor saliency method based on signal injection
[2,4,27,28], and (b) terminal quantities method based on measure-
ments of stator voltages and currents [1,6,7,11–14,22–26,29,32,34].
The saliency-based technique with fundamental excitation [2,4]
 Corresponding author. Tel.: +971 6 5152987; fax: +971 6 5152979.
E-mail addresses: rhabib@aus.edu (H. Rehman),
rdhaouadi@aus.edu (R. Dhaouadi).
often fails at low and zero speeds. When applied with high-
frequency signal injection [27,28], this method may cause torque
ripples, vibrations, and audible noise. Also, the saliency-based
technique is machine specific and cannot be used for an off-the-
shelf machine. Therefore, the most practical approach for the DFO
control implementation is the estimation of flux from the motor
terminal quantities, i.e. stator voltages and currents without adding
flux sensors or additional hardware. One of the major problems
with the terminal quantities-based flux observers designed in the
past is their sensitivity to the machine parameters, specifically, to
rotor resistance for the current model observer and to stator
resistance in case of the voltage model flux observer.
To overcome these problems various control techniques have
been tried to improve the rotor flux estimation such as the
Luenberger observer, the model reference adaptive scheme, and
the extended Kalman filter. Model reference adaptive schemes are
proposed in [22,26,34], where one of the flux estimators acts as a
reference model, and the other acts as the adaptive estimator. To
overcome the integration problem, Tajima [26] and Peng [22]
suggested the use of back emf and instantaneous reactive power
as alternative ways of forming the errors used to estimate the
velocity in the adaptive controller. However, an accurate flux
estimation problem still remains. Another problem arises because
the rotor velocity adaptation is error driven. This causes an
inherent lag in the velocity estimate. Reduced order observers are
designed in [7], in which only the rotor flux, not the stator current
is estimated. The correction is then applied by using the error
between the actual stator voltage vector and its estimated value.
However, this requires adding voltage sensors to the system,
which is not desirable. The extended Kalman filters have also been
proposed [13,14] as a potential solution for better flux estimation

0925-2312/$ - see front matter & 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2007.08.037
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

2694 H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701

Nomenclature Tr rotor time constant

Vds stator voltage along d-axis
dq synchronous frame of reference Vqs stator voltage along q-axis
ia phase a current Vdr rotor voltage along d-axis
ib phase b current Vqr rotor voltage along q-axis
ids stator current along d-axis Vas stator voltage along a-axis
ids* command stator current along d-axis Vbs stator voltage along b-axis
iqs stator current along q-axis ab stationary frame of reference
iqs* command stator current along q-axis m low-pass filter coefficient
idr rotor current along d-axis lds stator flux along d-axis
iqr rotor current along q-axis lqs stator flux along q-axis
Ls stator inductance ldr rotor flux along d-axis
Lr rotor inductance lqr rotor flux along q-axis
Lm magnetizing inductance lar rotor flux along a-axis
P number of pole pairs lbr rotor flux along b-axis
p differential operator las stator flux along a-axis
r rotor lbs stator flux along b-axis
Rs stator resistance oe synchronous speed
Rr rotor resistance or actual rotor speed
s stator or* command rotor speed
S sliding surface ye synchronous angle
T sampling time C sliding mode function
Te torque ^ estimated value

when using the motor terminal quantities alone. Unfortunately,
this approach contains some inherent disadvantages such as its
heavy computational requirements and difficult design and
tuning procedure. The voltage model flux observers on the other
hand are sensitive to the stator resistance [6,11,29,32].
Lately, sliding mode flux observers and speed estimators are
being designed [1,12,23–25]. The sliding mode control is a special
mode of operation of variable structure control (VSC) systems and
is known for its robustness property to system parameters
variation [31].
Recently, substantial research efforts have also been devoted to
intelligent controllers such as artificial neural networks (ANN)
and fuzzy logic to deal with the problems of nonlinearity and
uncertainty of system parameters. ANN have proven to be very
successful in different areas of engineering sciences [3,5,17]. The
fundamental characteristics of neural networks are: ability to
produce good models of nonlinear systems; highly distributed and
paralleled structure, which makes neural-based control schemes
faster than traditional ones; simple implementation by software
or hardware; and ability to learn and adapt to the behavior of any
real process. ANN can also be trained using data taken from the
system or when directly connected to the system, and can be used
on multivariable systems.
Today, interest has also been increasing in the use of recurrent
neural networks as elements to represent dynamical systems [18].
In [19–21], the authors developed a neural network (NN)-based
MRAS control system to control the speed of a dc motor drive
system. A NN adaptation method is used as the optimization
engine for a comprehensive inverse control strategy. The self-
learning feature of the NN made the nonlinear adaptation design
easy at different operating conditions. The training algorithm is
based on the extended Kalman filter and is used to tune on-line
the NN-based MRAS system. In [10] new scheme based on
recurrent neural network (RNN) is used to design a self-tuning
PID control system to overcome the robustness problem of the
fixed-gain PI-type controller. In this new approach, a RNN-based
controller (RNNC) is trained first, and the trained RNNC then
serves as the dynamic gain supplier that will output suitable
control gains according to the operating conditions.
Fuzzy-logic controllers on the other hand, have also proved to be
very successful in different applications [8,9,15,30,33,35,36]. The
fundamental characteristics of fuzzy-logic controllers are their ability
to provide a systematic way to incorporate the operator expertise into
the controller, their convenient way to design the controller non-
linearities, in addition to the fact that no a-priori knowledge about the
process under control is needed. These properties make fuzzy-logic
controllers attractive for various control system applications.
Different schemes of fuzzy controllers have been designed and
applied for various control applications including ac machines. A
comparative performance analysis between direct fuzzy and PI
controllers is presented in [9] and the advantage of fuzzy logic over
the standard controllers are highlighted. The authors in [8,30,35,36]
explored the potential of direct fuzzy controllers for an indirect field-
oriented drive system. It was shown that fuzzy controllers are
capable of improving the tracking performance under external
disturbances, or when the IFO drive system experiences imperfect
decoupling due to variations in the rotor time constant. The author
in [35] used three fuzzy-logic controllers to regulate the speed in an
IFO drive system. Two of these fuzzy compensators are combined to
correct the detuning of field orientation. It has been found also in
[36] that fuzzy model reference learning controller (FMRLC) provides
a good closed-loop response for an IFO drive system that experiences
external disturbances.
This paper attempts to addresses the above design issues and
provides a viable solution by designing a FMRLC for the speed
regulation and a sliding mode voltage mode flux observer (SMVMFO)
for the rotor flux estimation. The objective of the proposed flux
observer is to eliminate the stator resistance sensitivity, which
represents a long-standing problem in the area of motor drives. The
FMRLC is shown to be more robust than the PI controller or the direct
fuzzy controller because of its adaptive nature and does not require
any parameters tuning when speed command changes.
2. FMRLC-based DFO drive system
Fig. 1 shows the proposed DFO drive system with FMRLC
for speed regulation and the SMVMFO for the flux observation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701 2695

The generalized model for such a field-oriented induction such that the desired speed performance is achieved. Next, we
machine is expressed in the synchronous frame of reference as briefly describe each component of the FMRLC system.
follows:

V qs ¼ Rs iqs þ plqs 2.1. Reference model for the induction machine

V ds ¼ Rs ids þ plds
0 ¼ V qr ¼ Rr iqr þ plqr  or ldr The task of the reference model is to provide the desired speed
response for various speed commands. The drive system designed
0 ¼ V dr ¼ Rr idr þ pldr þ or lqr (1)
in this paper is field oriented, hence a perfect reference model
The stator and rotor fluxes are represented by would be the one that behaves like an ideal field-oriented drive.
Such a reference model has been proposed in [16] and is shown in
lqs ¼ Ls iqs þ Lm iqr
Fig. 4. This figure also shows that the rotor flux, ldr, is controlled by
lds ¼ Ls ids þ Lm idr
(2) the current, ids. Practically, the value of flux is kept constant for a
lqr ¼ Lm iqs þ Lr iqr given range of speed. Once this flux is established for a certain
ldr ¼ Lm ids þ Lr idr speed range, the machine output torque is controlled by controlling
the torque command current, iqs , which is generated by a
Finally, the torque of the induction machine is given by
band–band controller shown in Fig. 4. The rest of the reference
3P model shows how this torque command current is processed by the
Te ¼ ðl iqs  lqr ids Þ (3)
2 dr motor inertia to generate the reference motor speed, om r .

The d and q represent the direct and quadrature axes of the

synchronously rotating frame of reference. The objective of 2.2. The direct fuzzy controller
the field-oriented controller is to design a controller, which aligns
the entire flux along the d-axis such that the flux along the q-axis This part of the FMRLC is the conventional direct fuzzy
is zero. As a result, the current along the d-axis, ids , controls the controller. The learning mechanism will be used later to tune
flux and the current along q-axis, iqs , has no effect on the flux and the rule base of the direct fuzzy controller to adapt to the system
provides an instantaneous torque and speed response. This changes. The error between the command speed and the actual
current iqs is represented as the output of the FMRLC block shown speed, and the derivative of this error are the inputs to the direct
in Fig. 1. When the machine is ideally field oriented, its model can fuzzy controller. These inputs are defined as
be represented by the simplified block diagram shown in Fig. 2.
The architecture of the FMRLC system designed for the DFO e1 ðkÞ ¼ g e ðor ðkÞ  onr ðkÞÞ (4)
drive is presented in Fig. 3. The FMRLC has four main parts: the
plant, the fuzzy controller to be tuned, the reference model, and
the learning mechanism. The plant in this case is the induction Lm
motor, which is working under DFO. The main parameters of the 1 + Trs λdr
Ids
learning mechanism are: ye, gye and gyc. The parameter ye is the
error between the reference model speed and the actual speed of
the plant. The gains gye and gyc are used to scale the error ye and
the error rate dye/dt. If the performance is satisfactory then ye ¼ 0, Te
Iqs 3 P Lm
thus the learning mechanism makes no modification to the direct
fuzzy controller. Otherwise, it will tune the rule base of the fuzzy 2 2 Lr
controller and adjust the control parameters ge and gc. The fuzzy
controller accordingly adjusts the torque/current command iqs Fig. 2. Block diagram of induction motor under FOC with stator current control.

Fig. 1. Block diagram of the designed drive system.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

2696 H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701

Fig. 3. FMRLC controller design.

Fig. 4. The reference model of induction machine.

ðe1 ðkÞ  e1 ðk  1ÞÞ Ei

e2 ðkÞ ¼ g c (5)
T NH NM NS ZE PS PM PH
1
The output from the direct fuzzy controller is an incremental
current command Dinqs rather than the current command, inqs . The
final command current inqs is the integral of Dinqs and is given by

inqs ðkÞ ¼ inqs ðk  1Þ þ T Dinqs ðkÞ. (6)

-1 -2/3 -1/3 0 1/3 2/3 1
e, de/dt
Thus, the designed fuzzy controller behaves like an integral type
controller, which reduces the steady-state error to zero. The input Ui
variables go through the process of fuzzification, inference, and NH NM NS ZE PS PM PH
defuzzification as shown in Fig. 3. The fuzzification process maps 1
a crisp input to a fuzzy set with a degree of certainty determined
by the associated membership functions. The fuzzy controller has
seven standard triangle-type membership functions for each
input and output fuzzy set as shown in Fig. 5. The linguistic set
used is negative high (NH), negative medium (NM), negative small
-1 -2/3 -1/3 0 1/3 2/3 1
(NS), zero (ZE), positive small (PS), positive medium (PM), and
e, de/dt
positive high (PH). The real axis represent either the error e(t) or
the error rate de/dt, both in per-unit, i.e. normalized with respect Fig. 5. Membership functions for (a) input fuzzy sets and (b) output fuzzy set.
to their maximum range. The rule base comprises the fuzzy rules
describing how the fuzzy system performs. It is the heart of the
system in the sense that the other three controller components The expert experience is incorporated in this rule base as
are used to interpret and combine these rules to form the final illustrated in Table 1. The inference engine uses the appropriate
output of the system. IF–THEN rules in the knowledge base to make an appropriate
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701 2697

Table 1 Tr is the rotor time constant and or is the rotor speed.

Knowledge base of fuzzy-logic controller Furthermore, the SMFs are chosen as
Rule base de(t)/dt
Cas ¼ u0 sign ðSas Þ
(9)
U 1 2/3 1/3 0 1/3 2/3 1 Cbs ¼ u0 sign ðSbs Þ

e(t)
1 1 1 1 1 2/3 1/3 0 where u0 is the coefficient of the SMFs. By selecting a large value
2/3 1 1 1 2/3 1/3 0 1/3 of u0, the convergence of the current observer can be guaranteed.
1/3 1 1 2/3 1/3 0 1/3 2/3 The sliding surface is defined as
0 1 2/3 1/3 1/3 2/3 1
^
Sas ¼ ias  ias
1/3 2/3 1/3 0 1/3 2/3 1 1 ^ (10)
2/3 1/3 0 1/3 2/3 1 1 1 Sbs ¼ ibs  ibs
1 0 1/3 2/3 1 1 1 1

where
8
> þ1 if Sab 41
decision and produces an implied output fuzzy set corresponding <  
sign ðSab Þ ¼ Sab if Sab p1 (11)
to the output membership functions. The membership functions >
: 1
for the output universe of discourse are initially set to zero. The if Sab o  1
learning mechanism then adjusts this output universe of
discourse. The Product operation is used for the premise and the With this choice of SMFs, the sliding surface is given by
Min operation is used for the implication. The decision-making
process produces an output fuzzy set, which is finally converted Sn ¼ ½Sas Sbs T (12)
back to the crisp value by the center of gravity (COG) defuzzifica- ^ ^
tion technique [33]. In the above equations {ias ; ibs } and {ias, ibs} are the observed and
actual stator current components, respectively. When the estima-
2.3. The learning mechanism tion error trajectories reach the sliding surface (Sn ¼ 0), the
observed
^ currents
^ in (7) will converge to the actual currents
( i as ¼ ias and i bs ¼ ibs ). The SMF will not only drive the estimated
The fuzzy inverse model takes the error between the reference
values of currents to the actual ones but will also provide an
model speed, om r , and the actual motor speed, or, and computes
estimate of the stator fluxes along the a- and b-axis. However, Cas
the error and the derivative of the error as shown in Fig. 3. These
and Cbs will take the extreme values of u0 and u0 at high
are next used to modify the rule base of the direct fuzzy controller
frequency and will oscillate about their actual values. To define
in order to achieve the desired speed response set by the reference
the control action, which maintains the motion on the sliding
model. Thus, the direct fuzzy controller eventually generates a
manifold, an ‘‘equivalent control’’ [31] concept is used. The
command current, iqs , which forces the plant to behave like the
equivalent control term can be found by isolating the continuous
reference model.
term using a low-pass filter. The low-pass filter is implemented as

1
3. Flux observer design Ceq
abs ¼ Cabs (13)
ms þ 1

The flux observer of the drive system, shown in Fig. 2, is based The stator flux estimation in Eq. (8) is modified as
on a sliding mode function (SMF), which is designed by using the
actual and estimated value of the stator currents. The SMF is the 2 3
^ " eq #
core of the proposed observer, which is carefully designed around pl
6 as 7 Cas
4 ^ 5¼ (14)
the stator flux terms present in the current estimation equations. Ceq
bs
plbs
Thus, the current and the flux observer equations in the stationary
frame of reference are represented as
2 3 From the estimated stator flux, the rotor flux is calculated as
2 3
^ " # " # ^ 2 3
6 pias 7 1 Cas 1 Z or 6 las 7 ^ " # " #!
6 7 4^ 5 Ceq
4 ^ 5 ¼ sLs C þ
sLs or Z 6 pl ar 7 Lr as ias
bs 4 ^ 5¼  sLs (15)
pibs lbs Lm Ceq
bs ibs
" Z #" # plbr
 s or ias
þ Z (7)
or s ibs Once the rotor flux is estimated, it is used to estimate the flux
angle ye as
2 3 0^ 1
^ " # " #! " #
6 plas 7 V as ias Cas lbr
4 ^ 5¼  RS ¼ (8) ye ¼ tan1 @ ^ A (16)
V bs ibs Cbs
plbs lar

where the parameters are defined as follows: The angle ye is then used for the DFO control of the induction
machine as shown in Fig. 1. Thus, the overall designed drive
Rr L2 system incorporates FMRLC for speed regulation and SMVMFO for
Z ¼ 1=T r ¼ and s ¼ 1  m .
Lr Ls Lr flux observation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

2698 H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701

4. Simulation results step speed command of 500 rpm followed by step disturbances
caused by the variation of the stator resistance. The speed in
The proposed drive system is simulated using a 5 HP induction Fig. 6(a) is regulated by the FMRLC and the DFO is realized by the
machine whose parameters are given in Table 2. Figs. 6 and 7 proposed SMVMFO. Fig. 6(b) investigates the drive system
show the speed tracking performance of the drive system for a insensitivity to the stator resistance by varying the stator
resistance within a wide range, the nominal stator resistance is
0.6 O as indicated in Table 2. The actual current and flux are
Table 2 obtained from the exact machine model, while the proposed
Parameters used for the 5 hp cage rotor induction motor observer is used to obtain the estimated values of the current and
flux. The actual and estimated values of the stator currents in the
220 V 14.8 A 5 hp
stationary frame of reference along the a-axis are plotted on top of
Lls ¼ Llr ¼ 1.9 mH Lm ¼ 41.2 mH 1750 rpm
Rs ¼ 0.6 O Rr ¼ 0.41 O 4 poles
each other in Fig. 7(a), while the rotor fluxes along the a-axis are
plotted in (b). Fig. 7(c) shows the SMF, which drives the estimated

Fig. 6. Speed regulation for a step command of 500 rpm.

Fig. 7. Actual and estimated currents (a) and fluxes (b) for a step command of 500 rpm.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS

H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701 2699

current to the actual one. The match between the command and
actual speed shown in Fig. 6, proves that the FMRLC can regulate
the speed very well, while the match between the estimated and
actual current and the estimated and actual flux, shown in Fig. 7(a)
and (b), respectively, proves that the proposed flux observer can
estimate the flux very well and realize the DFO control without any
knowledge of the stator resistance information.
Figs. 8–11 show the simulation results for a 500, 1000, and
20 rpm trapezoidal wave speed references, respectively. Fig. 8(a)
shows speed tracking, and (b) shows the torque command current
generated by the FMRLC for 500 rpm speed command. Fig. 8(c)
and (d) represent the estimated as well as the actual values of
current and flux plotted on top of each other, validating the drive
system performance. Fig. 9 shows the speed tracking performance
of the drive system for a 1000 rpm trapezoidal speed command.
The initial deviation from the command signal is due to the
response time of the learning mechanism which is needed to tune
the gains of the membership function that are initially set to zero.
Fig. 10(a) shows the estimated and the actual currents, (b) shows
the estimated and the actual flux, and (c) represents the SMF
function for the same trapezoidal speed profile. Finally, Fig. 11
presents the speed performance of the proposed drive system at

Fig. 8. Speed regulation at 500 rpm for a trapezoidal command signal with the actual and estimated currents (c) and fluxes (d).

Fig. 9. Speed tracking of a trapezoidal command signal of 1000 rpm.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

2700 H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701

Fig. 10. Motor variables for a trapezoidal speed profile of 1000 rpm.

Fig. 11. Low speed performance of FMRLC and SMVMFO.

low speeds (20 rpm). Fig. 11(a) shows the performance of the
FMRLC for speed regulation and Fig. 11(b) shows the estimated
and actual rotor flux along the a-axis plotted on top of each other.
These plots show a good low speed performance, which is always
a concern for any proposed drive system.
In these simulations, the membership functions for the output
universe of discourse are initially centered at zero. All of the above
results show that the FMRLC has tuned the rules of direct fuzzy
controller by itself. Simulations were also performed with a PI and
direct fuzzy controllers to compare the performance of FMRLC
with PI and direct fuzzy controllers. The results of these
simulations show that compared to the PI controller, the FMRLC
has a better speed tracking performance with lesser overshoot and
oscillation [8]. Compared to the fuzzy controller, it requires less
tuning and is more robust because of its adaptive nature.
5. Conclusions
An fuzzy model reference learning controller (FMRLC)-based
and sliding mode voltage mode flux observer (SMVMFO)-based
DFO drive system is designed and validated through intensive
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Rehman, R. Dhaouadi / Neurocomputing 71 (2008) 2693–2701
simulations. The proposed drive system has two salient features: a
FMRLC and a SMVMFO. The FMRLC designed for the speed
regulation is robust, and unlike PI or direct fuzzy controller does
not require tuning of the controller parameters. The flux observer
incorporated in the drive system is completely insensitive to the
stator resistance of the machine thus providing an accurate flux
estimation and hence an accurate field orientation.
References
[1] M. Comanesscu, L. Xu, Sliding-mode MRAS speed estimators for sensorless
vector control of induction machine, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 53 (1) (2006)
146–153.
[2] R.M. Cuzner, R.D. Lorenz, D.W. Novotny, Application of non-linear observers
for rotor position detection on an induction motor using machine voltages
and currents, in: IEEE-IAS Annual Meeting Conference Record, October 1990,
pp. 416–421.
[3] R. Dhaouadi, K. Nouri, Neural network-based speed control of two-mass
model system, J. Adv. Comput. Intell. 3 (5) (1999).
[4] A. Ferrah, K.G. Bradely, G.M. Asher, Sensorless speed detection of inverter fed
induction motors using rotor slot harmonics and fast Fourier transform, in:
IEEE-PESC Conference Record, October 1992, pp. 279–286.
[5] T. Fukuda, T. Shibata, Theory and applications of neural networks for
industrial control systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 39 (6) (1992) 472–489.
[6] R. Gabriel, W. Leonhard, C. Nordby, Field oriented control of standard AC
motor using microprocessor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. IA-16 (2) (1980) 186–192.
[7] L. Harnefors, Design and analysis of general rotor-flux oriented vector control
systems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 48 (2) (2001) 383–389.
[8] B. Heber, L. Xu, Y. Tang, Fuzzy logic enhanced speed control of an indirect
field-oriented induction machine, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 12 (5) (1997)
772–778.
[9] Z. Ibrahim, E. Levi, A comparative analysis of fuzzy logic and PI speed control
in high-performance AC drives using experimental approach, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl. 38 (5) (2002) 1210–1218.
[10] R. Jafari, R. Dhaouadi, Self-tuning PID controller based on recurrent neural
networks, in: Proceedings of the Eighth IASTED International Conference
on Control and Applications (CA2006), Montreal, Canada, May 24–26, 2006,
pp. 332–337.
[11] P.L. Jansen, R.D. Lorenz, A physical insightful approach to the design and
accuracy assessment of flux observers for field oriented induction machine
drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 30 (1) (1994) 101–110.
[12] S.H. Joen, K.K. Oh, J.Y. Choi, Flux observer with online tuning of stator and
rotor resistances for induction motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 49 (3) (2002)
653–664.
[13] Y.R. Kim, S.K. Sul, M. Park, Speed sensorless vector control of induction motor by
using extended Kalman filter, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 30 (5) (1994) 1225–1233.
[14] Y.S. Kim, S.U. Kim, L.W. Yang, Implementation of a speed sensorless vector
control of induction machine by reduced-order Kalman filter, in: IEEE APEC
95 Conference Record, Dallas, TX, March 1995.
[15] J.R. Layne, K.M. Passino, Fuzzy model reference learning control, J. Intell.
Fuzzy Syst. 4 (1) (1996) 33–47.
[16] T.A. Lipo, D.W. Novotny, Principles of vector control and field orientation,
IEEE-IAS Introductory Field Orientation High Performance Drives, Tutorial
Course (October 1985).
[17] K.S. Narendra, K. Parthasarathy, Identification and control of dynamical
systems using neural networks, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 1 (1) (1990)
4–27.
[18] K. Nouri, R. Dhaouadi, N.B. Braiek, A comparative study of RTRL algorithm and
DEKF approach for training recurrent multilayer perceptrons, in: International
Arab Conference on Information Technology, ACIT’02, Doha, Qatar, 2002.
[19] K. Nouri, R. Dhaouadi, N.B. Braiek, Decoupled extended Kalman filter-based
dynamic neural network for adjustable speed motor drive systems, in:
Proceedings of the 17th International Congress IMACS 2005, Paris, France, July
2005.
[20] K. Nouri, R. Dhaouadi, N.B. Braiek, Nonlinear speed control of a dc motor drive
system with online trained recurrent neural network, in: Proceedings of the
9th International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control (AMC06), Istanbul,
Turkey, March 2006, pp. 704–708.
[21] K. Nouri, R. Dhaouadi, N.B. Braiek, A new adaptive control scheme using
dynamic neural networks, in: Third AUS International Symposium on
Mechatronics (AUS-ISM06), American University of Sharjah, April 18–20,
2006.
[22] F.-Z Peng, T. Fukao, Robust speed identification for speed-sensorless vector
control of induction motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 30 (5) (1994) 1234–1240.
[23] H. Rehman, Elimination of stator resistance sensitivity and voltage sensor
requirement problems for DFO control of induction machine, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron. 52 (1) (2005) 263–269.
2701
[24] H. Rehman, A. Derdiyok, M.K. Guven, L. Xu, A new current model flux observer
for wide speed range sensorless control of an induction machine, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 17 (6) (2002) 1041–1048.
[25] M. Rodic, K. Jezernik, Speed-sensorless sliding-mode torque control of an
induction motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 49 (1) (2002) 87–95.
[26] H. Tajima, Y. Hori, Speed sensorless field-orientation control of the induction
machine, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 29 (1) (1993) 175–180.
[27] N. Teske, G.M. Asher, M. Sumner, K.J. Bradely, Suppression of saturation
saliency effects for the sensorless position control of induction motor drives
under loaded conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 47 (5) (2000) 1142–1150.
[28] N. Teske, G.M. Asher, M. Sumner, K.J. Bradely, Encoderless position estimation
for symmetric cage induction machines under loaded conditions, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 37 (6) (2001) 1793–1800.
[29] M. Tsuji, S. Chen, K. Izumi, E. Yamada, A sensorless vector control system for
induction motor using q-axis flux with stator resistance identification, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 49 (1) (2001) 87–95.
[30] M.N. Uddin, T.S. Radwan, M.A. Rahman, Performance of fuzzy-logic-based
indirect vector control for induction machine, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 38 (5)
(2002) 1219–1225.
[31] V.I. Utkin, J.G. Guldner, J. Shi, Sliding Mode Control in Electromechanical
Systems, Taylor & Francis, New York, 1999.
[32] X. Xu, D.W. Novotny, Implementation of direct stator flux orientation control
on a versatile DSP based system, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 27 (4) (1991) 694–700.
[33] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy logic, IEEE Mag. Comput. 21 (4) (1988) 83–93.
[34] L. Zhen, L. Xu, A mutual MRAS identification scheme for position sensorless
field orientation control of induction machines, in: IEEE-IAS Annual Meeting
Conference Record, Orlando, FL, October 1995, pp. 159–165.
[35] L. Zhen, L. Xu, On-line fuzzy tuning of indirect field-oriented induction
machine drives, IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 13 (1) (1998) 134–141.
[36] L. Zhen, L. Xu, Fuzzy learning enhanced speed control of an indirect field
oriented induction machine drive, IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 8 (2)
(2000) 270–278.
Dr. Habib-ur Rehman received his B.Sc. degree in
electrical engineering from the University of Engineer-
ing and Technology Lahore, Pakistan, in 1990. He
received M.S. and Ph.D. degrees, both in electrical
engineering, from the Ohio State University, Columbus,
Ohio, in 1995 and 2001 respectively.
Dr. Rehman has a wide experience in the area of
power electronics and motor drives in industry and
academia. From July 1998 to December 1999, he
worked as a design engineer in the Ecostar Electric
Drives and Ford Research Laboratory, where he was a
member of the Electric, Hybrid and Fuel Cell vehicles
development programs. From 2001 to 2006 he worked
in the department of electrical engineering at the United Arab Emirates (UAE)
University, Al-Ain, UAE, as an Assistant Professor. He is the recipient of Best
Teacher Award from the College of Engineering, UAE University for the academic
year 2002/2003. In 2006, he joined the department of electrical engineering at the
American University of Sharjah where he is currently working as an Assistant
Professor. He has chaired various sessions in ICEE 2005, IEEE PESC 2004 and IEEE
CCA 2003 in the area of power electronics and motor drives.
Dr. Rehman’s primary research interests are in the areas of microprocessor/
digital signal processor-based adjustable-speed drives and power electronics.
Currently, he is also investigating effective delivery of design skills in engineering
education specifically in the field of electrical engineering.
Dr. Rached Dhaouadi is an Associate Professor of
Electrical Engineering at the School of Engineering,
American University of Sharjah, UAE. He received the
Dipl. Ing. degree from the National Engineering School
of Tunis (ENIT), Tunisia, in 1985 and the M.S. and Ph.D.
degrees from the University of Minnesota, Minneapo-
lis, in 1988 and 1990, respectively, all in electrical
engineering. From 1990 to 1994 he was a Visiting
Researcher with the Hitachi Research Laboratory,
Hitachi Ltd., Japan, where he was engaged in the
design and development of motor drive systems for
rolling mills. In 1994, he was a Visiting Researcher at
Trondheim Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Nor-
way. From 1994 to 2000 he was with the Polytechnic School of Tunisia, University
of Tunis. He also held Visiting Scholar positions at Rice University, Houston, TX, in
1998, 1999 and 2001. His research interests are in the areas of power electronics,
motor drives and control systems. Dr. Dhaouadi’s current research programs cover
modeling and control of electric drive systems with harmonic drive gears, and
modeling and control of complex electromechanical systems including nonlinear
friction and flexible couplings. Dr. Dhaouadi is a Senior Member of the IEEE Control
Systems Society, and Industrial Electronics Society.