A Design Method of PI Controller for an Induction
Motor with Parameter Variation
Eun-Chul Shin*, Student Member, IEEE, Tae-Sik Park**, Won-Hyun Oh*, and Ji-Yoon
* Department of Electrical Engineering
Korea University
1-5 Anam-Dong, Seongbuk-Gu, Seoul 136.701, Korea
Abstract- This paper proposes a novel design method of speed
and current controller for an induction motor with the variation of
system parameters. Our goal is to establish a reliable and stable PI
gain selecting procedure against the mechanical and the electrical
parameter variation of an induction motor using Kharitonov
robust stability theory. Although the system parametem are varied
within some specific range, the proposed PI controller guarantees
the robust stability and the performance for vector controlled
induction motor. The performance of proposed design method is
proved by digital simulation and experimentation with high
performance DSP based induction motor driving system.
Index Terms-induction motor, Kharitonov robust stability
theory, parameter variation, PI controller.
1. INTRODUCTION
n many applications of vector controlled induction motor
I such as robot manipulator, spindle, and NC machine, high
performance torque and speed control responses are required.
Among several types of vector control scheme, PI controlled
indirect field-oriented vector control in the synchronously
rotating reference frame have been adopted because it is a
effective technique to speed control as well as torque control
overall speed range. This technique is to independently control
the torque and the flux-producing component of the stator
current. It allows an induction machine to achieve torque
control performance similar to separately excited dc machine
and has led to the induction machine replacing the dc machine in
may high performance applications.[ 1][2]
In general, induction motor drive systems can be divided into
inner electrical and outer mechanical subsystems. Because of
the physical properties, the outer mechanical subsystem bas
much slower dynamic response speed in comparison with inner
electrical subsystem. Therefore, the overall control
performance is mostly determined by the outer mechanical
subsystem. The changes of the working environment such as
temperature, load torque and inertia mismatch inevitably
impose parametric uncertainties in the system design. Therefore,
how to efficiently handle these mechanical uncertainties
becomes an important problem in the design of induction motor
controllers.
The assumption of vector control technique is no variation
and no uncertainties in system parameters. For example, the
inertia variation affects the characteristic of speed response
because it plays the role of moving the roots of the system
characteristic equation. For these reasons, overshoot, slow
0-7803-7906-3/03/$17.0002003 IEEE.
Yoo*, Member, IEEE
** Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology
MEMS Lab.
416 Maetan-3Dong, Paldhl-Gu, Suwon City, 442-742 ,
KOREA
speed response and unwanted vibrations are generated in state
feedback system and two-mass system.[3][4] How to get rid of
this is selecting another gains of the PI controller in
Outer mechanical It is well that the
performance Of depends On the
selecting and tuning of PI gains. The classical gain tuning
method of PI controller is Ziegler-Nichols method.[5]
Otherwise this gain may as well be tuned by experience of
specialist. If the system has the continual parameter variation
and uncertainty like inertia, resistance and inductance, the gain
of PI controller should be chosen at each time.
To design the PI gains for the varying motor parameters
uresented in this Daper. . . PI controller comuensates
. . The DroDOsed
the electrical parameter dynamics as well as inertia variation
that exist in the induction motor drives. We first define the
specific variation range of parameter variations and
uncertainties. And using the estimated range and boundary
value, make a modified characteristic equation of closed-loop
system including PI controller. Applying Kharitonov robust
stability theory and Hurwitz stability criterion to this equation,
we can determine and verify the minimum-maximum range of
the robust PI gains.
As a result, the proposed PI gains guarantee the minimum
stability margin, response speed and system stability though
parametric variation and uncertainty.
The effectiveness and usefulness ofthe proposed schemes are
verified with the digital simulation and the experimental results
on the DSP based fully digitalized 2.2kW Induction motor drive
system.
11. THEEFFECT01: PARAMETER
VARIATION
A . The System responsefor varialion of syslem parameler
The first considered scheme is the vector controlled induction
motor that has inertia variation. Fig.1 shows the step response
and the movement of system poles in each cases when the inertia
JM of induction motor varies from its rated value to f 7 0 % . The
inertia variation affects the characteristics of speed response
because it plays a role of moving the roots of the system
characteristic equation.
B. The classical gain seltztion methodof PIcon@oller
The block diagram of PI controlled induction motor is shown
in fig.2. Assuming ideal current control, the transfer function of
408
 ~

hardware of voltage generation has an ideal gain. The back

EMF component regards as disturbance, then current control
loop of induction motor can do equivalence with fig.3.
Fig.3,4 represents current control block diagram of ideal DC
motor and induction motor respectively. If define R a n d o l , as
(3), the current controller of DC motor becomes current control
block diagram of induction motor.

-
(3)

The open loop transfer h c t i o n GP(s) is (4) from figure 3

Fig. I. The system characteristic for inertia variation. (a) Unit-step response
according to inerlia variation. (b) The movement afpole according lo inertia
"?.ri81iO".
For pole-zero cancellation, substitute ( 5 ) to (4) and then get ( 6 ) .

is*T
Fig. 2. Block diagram of induction motor using PI speed controller

H K,+
& is
How to select PI current controller gain in (6) is that the
cut-off frequency of closed-loop transfer function passes
through the -3db from its zero-frequency. It can yield gains of
PI current controller with (7).

Fig. 3. Block diagram of current control for a DC motor

111. KHARITONOV ROBUSTSTABILITY THEORY

I I
Fig. 4. Block diagram of current control for an induction motor
current controller becomes unity between reference signal and1
practical feedback c w e n t . The derived closed-loop transfer
function becomes (1) from fig.2.
where K,,K,,K, are torque constant, proportional gain and1
integral gain of PI controller respectively.
If express damping coefficient <
and natural frequency w,
viewpoint in above equation, the PI speed controller gains can1
he calculated as following.
K , = 2<wnJ- B , K , =-J 02
KJ KJ
The main deciding factors of speed controller gains are the
natural frequency and mechanical parameter.
Although electrical machines can he divided into ac mot01
and dc motor, they have equivalent current control loop as dc
motor. Regardless of machine type, it is possible that the
The Kharitonov robust stability theory represents how to
determine the stability of a polynomial expression. Even if
arbitrary coefficients of a polynomial are changed within
specified range, this theory presents to determine the stability of
a polynomial.[6] We can make modified characteristic
polynomial that includes the PI controller and the coefficients of
parametric variation. Applying the Kharitonov robust stability
theory to modified characteristic polynomial, determine and
verify the minimum-maximum range of the robust PI gains.
Therefore we can choose the controller gain ensuring the
closed-loop system stability about parameters variation and
uncertainty.
The set of real number polynomial expression is expressed as
(8) to determine the system stability. The individual coefficients
change within the independent range and such the polynomial
set P(s) is called the interval polynomial. The interval
polynomial has the same formation of the characteristic
polynomial of the general closed-loop feedback system with
parametric variation and uncertainty.
P(s) = po + p , s + p , s 2 + p3s3 +. ..+p,s"
(8)
P o € [ ~ o , Y o l . PE, [X,,Y,l,..-.PnE [x.,Y.l,oe [X".Y.l
The equation (9) is the Kharitonov polynomial. It enables us
to determine and verify stability for modified interval

409
polynomial. If this Kharitonov polynomial is Hunvitz stable,
every polynomial in the P(s) set of interval polynomials is
Hunvitz stable. However, it is general that the individual
coefficients change interactively in the ordinary closed-loop
system, is suggested the generalized kharitonov theory to solve
such a problem.[6]
K'(s)=xo+x,s+y2s2+y,S3+XqS4+xSS5+yhS6+...
K~(s)=Xo+yls+y2S*+X,S3+x4S4+ySS5+y6s6+...
(9) gains in this area, clos8:d-loop system keeps stability
K 3 ( s ) = y o + ~ I ~ + ~ 2 ~ 2 + y 3 ~ 3 + y 4 ~ 4 + ~ S ~ 5 + ~ ~ ~ 6 + ~ ~ ~
K + ( S ) = yo + ylS +X2S2+ 3s) + y 4 2 + yss5 + X6S +...
6
The previously stated Kharitonov robust control method is to
place the system poles in the left half of the s-plane. This
method is not considering the stability gain margin and the
system damping. By extending this method when the parameters
vary within the specific range, can ensure the minimum speed
and current control characteristics for the closed-loop system
that has additional gain margin. Assuming the gain margin is 6 ,
this range in the s-plane is which is called 6 Hunvitz range and
is shown in fig.5. If we take have an interest in the 2-mass
system with torsional vibration, consider phase margin 6
Fig 5 . S Hwwitz stability area &in s-planes
IV. DESIGN OF THE ROBUST PI CONTROLLER
From fig.2, the transfer functions of motor input torque and
angular velocityG(s) and of PI controller CJs) are (IO), (11)
respectively.
I B
where N(s) = no =-,O(s) = dls + do = s +-
J - J The system goveming equation consists of outer mechanical
and
The characteristic equation of closed-loop is (12). This
equation includes the stability margin 6,and the parametric
variation range.
A(s-6) = g ( S I )
= (s-d)D(s-6)+ K,(s -6+wP,)N(s-6)
2 (12)
= a2 (sI - 6 ) + a , (s, - 6 )+ a o
=P2F2+qF;+pOFo
where
BiK BtK K
a 2 = l , a l = [ , ' , e ] , a o = [ z Jm," '1-J K,,
F2=(~-~2,6=(~-6),Fo=l
P2 = a 2 , 4 = a , , 6 = a,,
Applying generalized Kharitonov's robust stability theory to
( I 2 ) , obtain four Kharitonov polynomials. And applying
Hunvitz stability criterion to (13), find feedback gain region for
satisfying stability condition. That is, if select the controller
margin 6 about specific variation of system parameter
F0aomi, + h a h i " +F2a2max
F~aomin+Flalmm +F2~12max
(13)
Foaomsx + 6ah" + F2L12min
Foaom,u + 4a1max +F202,i"
For discrimination of stability about (12), can be expressed as
A(S - 6 )= a2sz + (al - 26a2)s+ a2B2- a , 6 + a.
(14)
= C*S2 +CIS+CO
where c 2 = a 2 , cI = a , - 2 6 a 2 , c , , ' = a 2 6 2 - a i 6 + a o
Applying Routh-Hurwitz stability criterion to (14), equation
(15) indicates the absolute stability condition with variation of
inertia.
c2 = a 2 = I > O
B .tK
c, = a i -26a2 = - 2 6 + - 2 > 0 (15)
J
c o = a 2 62 - a , 6 + a o = 6 - PB +SK+ - > KO.
J J
The stability condition obtained from (15) according to speed
controller gain.
K. >26J-B
Replacing (16) into (13) yisslds the K , ,Kf conditions as
K , > 265,- -B
K i >-62Jm,,+6(B+.K,)
Therefore, if we choose gains of current controller using (l7),
can secure stability margin about variation of inertia.
subsystem parameters. Because of the physical properties, the
outer mechanical subsystem has much slower dynamic response
speed in comparison with inner electrical subsystem. The
mechanical parameters affect the limit of stability margin 6 .
We obtain the limit of 6 through position of dominant pole.
Multiplying dominant pole by IO in initial condition, get the
limit of stability margin. Simulating from 6 Hunvitz stability
point of view, also obtain 6 . Considering the characteristics of
experimental set, stability margin 6 is selected as 5 .
Fig.6 illustrates speed controller gain area satisfying stability
condition. We assumed the controller gains W p , , Kp exist from
0 to IO and the total inertia of system is varying between -70%
410
and +70%. Considering the hardware specification, we select TABLE1. PI CURRENT CONRRGLLERGAM USE FOR
the value of Wpiand Kp is selected as 9. SIMULATION AND EXPERlMENTATlGN
For obtain robust current controller, applied kbaritonov Simulation Simulation
robust control theory to current control loop. The closed-loop (Classical method) (Proposed method)
transfer function derived from (6). The characteristic equation Kp 4.5813 K p 5.57
of current control loop represented in (1 8). The closed-loop K; 790.6769 K, 10545
feedback system characteristic equation considering stability
margin is (19)
TABLE 2. SYSTEM PARAMETERS
K,s +K j
G,’(s)= Jw Induction motor Inertia 0.0088 kg-m’
uL,s2 + ( R + K J s + K,
JB dc motor Inertia 0.009 kg.m’
J n Round disk Inertia 0.02 kern'
A ( S ) = U L ~ S+~( R + K , ) ~ +K , R, Stator resistance 0.385 n
R, Rotor resistance 0.342 I2
=a2s2+als+ao
L, Stator inductance 0.03257 H
a2 =[(G)),i.,(oLJml3 L, Rotor inductance 0.03245 H
where L., Muhlal inductance 0.03132 H
ut =[Rmi, +K,, R, +K,l,ao =K,
How to achieve robust current controller gain is the same
procedure as speed controller. Then stable condition according
to gain of current controller is as following.
K . > 2 6 ~ L-.R

Replacing (20) into (13) yields the K p ,K , conditions as

K p > 26(0L9), -%in
(21)
K , > Sz(uLs),), +6(R,,,, +K,)
Table I , 2 show the mechanical, the electrical parameters and
PI controller gains used in calculation, simulations.
Fig.’l(a),(b) illustrate current control loop poles. The
electrical parametric variations affect the response speed of Fig 6. Speed controller gain area satisfying stability condition
current control loop. Fig.’l(a),(b) represent classical PI
controller design technique and proposed method respectively.
Suppose that the variations of resistance and inductance are
50%, 30% respectively. The current control loop poles of

-
original system locate between 1300 and 1400. If parameter
variation exists, the modified pole must be designed to get into 07 lm.
this range for stability margin. If choose the current controller (
I.
1
gain as exact stability margin, 1400, the problem occurs to
practical system. The exact stability margin causes excessive
46
111.
-,ia ......., .
+I

%..,& -,ni ,,mo.am ..

& s m
~ ~

value of controller gain and increase of cutoff frequency. From (4 (b)

the simulation result, selecting the stability margin by 1100 Fig. I . Poles of current control loop with parameter vacation. (a)
Conventional design scheme @) Proposed design scheme
guarantees the robust performance of PI controller at 13%
parametric variation. Fig.8 illushates the stability region of
controller gains. This area secures stability margin I100
according to variation of resistance and inductance. If choose
boundary value of stability gains area, it guarantees stability
margin 1100.
Fig.9(a) shows Bode diagram of current control loop applied
classical design method and controller cutoff frequency is to be
.I
chosen 2OOOrads and (b) illustrates bode diagram of current
control loop applied Kbaritonov robust stability theory. The
cutoff frequency of proposed controller is increased than (a) @)
classical PI controller. Fig. 8. Current controller gain area satisfying stability condition. (a) Stability
area of K, (b) Stability area of Ki

411
 (4 (b)
Fig. IO. Characteristics of current control with parameter vanation. (a)
Conventional design scheme (b) Proposed design scheme

- -50 L
0
UIO
i.n. I ".
. ..
('4 Frequency (rad!%)
Fig. 9. Bade diagram of current control system with cur-off frequency 2000
radis. (a) Conventional design scheme (b) Proposed design scheme

0
V. SIMULATION
E 5 : r 7
In this section, the speed and current controller gain best-tit
__..___
method and its control performance are verified with computer
?
simulations. Tahlel,2 show the mechanical, the electrical c" -30
parameters and PI controller gains used in this simulation. ' 0 5 IO
time [roe]
These simulations have been implemented using Matlab.
The RLS method is generally accepted for estimating' v i l o o z
100 -
electrical and mechanical parameters and load characteristics.
0 .~~~ .____
The effectiveness of RLS is proved in several papers. Although
-100
1
we omitted this procedure, these results are transferred to design
PI controller.
Fig.lO(a), (b) show phase current trajectory of current
controllers, which are designed classical PI controller technique
and proposed method respectively. The condition of resistance
variation is 50% from its rated value. In the case of conventional
2P -30 0 3cE3F!3 5

time [.eel
10

design method, there exist errors in phase current trajectory. But (4

in the proposed method, even ifparameter varies within specific Fig.11. Speed and load responsi: charactenstic with proposed PI eonh.01 at
range 50%, the current controller has the desired performance to lOOrpm(a)Withoutvariationafrnotorinertia.ro)Variationofmotorinertia:
phase current control because of securing stability margin. tO.02 kg.,,,1 (c) Variation ofmetor inertia: -0.02 kg."
Fig. 1 1 shows the speed and the load response characteristics
of proposed PI controller of induction motor drive system. The VI. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
PI controller gains are selected as w , = 9 , &=9. Fig.Il(a) is
The proposed design method presented in the previous
the normal condition, (h) and (c) are the speed and the load section was experimentally tested. The experimental system was
response characteristics when the inertia varies between constituted of a three-phase insulated gate bipolar transistor
+0.02kg.m2to -0.02 kgm2 respectively. We can obtain the fast (IGBT) inverter, a 2.2kW four-pole three-phase induction
speed response about inertia variation. Even if closed loop motor with a 2000ppr(polse per revolution) incremental
system inertia changes from -70% to +70%, proposed design encoder and a transputer-based control system. The induction
scheme shows fast speed response in transient region. motor was a standard product, without any efficiency
optimization; its parameters are listed in Table 2. The switching

412
z o
B
R e o
A . . -
(Io

Ek o h . . p-?---
C ao

fI o +
? e o

Fig.13. Speed and load response characteristic with,proposed PI conlroller

at 1500rpm (a) Without variation of motor inertia. (b) Variation of motor
inertia : t0.02kg." (c) Variation of motor inertia : -0.02 kg."

of vector controlled induction motor. In order to improve the

system stability about parametric variation, we assign additional
stability margin 6 to closed-loop system.
The proposed method of PI speed and current controller
guarantees the robust performance and secure stability margin
with respect to uncertainty or variation on the system parameter.
Our theoretical results were validated with some simulation and
experimental evidence.

REFERENCES
B.K. Bose, "Technology Trends in Microcompuler Control of Electrical
Machines."IEEE Tmm.Ind Elecf.,vol35,No.l,pp 160-177, 1988
K. Nandam. Pradeep, "Analog and Digital Speed Control of DC Drives
Using Propotional-htegral and Integral-ProportionalContol techniques', ,
IEEE. Trans. Ind Elecf., vol. IE-34, No.2, pp 227-233, 1987
,
/
P. De Wit, R. Ortega, and 1. Mareek, indirect field oriented control of
induction motors is robustly globally stable, Aufomolicu, vol. 32, no.10,
pp. 1393.1402, 1996.
Masayasu Shimakage, Antonio Mora", Masao Nagai, and Minoru
Hayase, " Design OfVibration Suppression H-infconlral System for
High-Rise Building", IPEC-Yokohama '95, p.464, 1995
Katsujiko Ogata, Modern Control Engirierring, Znd, Prentice-Hall, 1990,
595-605.
S.P. Bhattachalyya, H. Chapellat, and L.H. Kcel, Robust Confml The
Porumebic Approach, Prentice- all, 1995.

413