energies

Article
Sensors Fault Diagnosis and Active Fault-Tolerant
Control for PMSM Drive Systems Based on a
Composite Sliding Mode Observer
Qinyue Zhu *, Zhaoyang Li, Xitang Tan *, Dabo Xie and Wei Dai
Department of Electrical Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China;
lizhaoyang0818@163.com (Z.L.); TJ_XDB@163.com (D.X.); davy4399@163.com (W.D.)
* Correspondence: zqymelisa@tongji.edu.cn (Q.Z.); xttan@tongji.edu.cn (X.T.); Tel.: +86-136-4189-5725 (Q.Z.);
+86-137-0184-9500 (X.T.)




Received: 26 March 2019; Accepted: 2 May 2019; Published: 5 May 2019


Abstract: Due to the use of multiple observers and controllers in multi-sensor fault-tolerant control of
PMSM drive systems, the algorithm is complex and the system control performance is affected. In view
of this, the paper studies multi-sensor fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control strategies
based on a composite sliding mode observer. With the mathematical model of PMSM built, a design
method of the composite sliding mode observer is proposed. A single observer is used to observe and
estimate various state variables in the system in real time, which simplifies the implementation of
observer-related algorithms. In order to improve the diagnostic accuracy of different types of sensors
under different faults, a method for determining fault thresholds is proposed through global search for
the maximum residual value. Based on this, a fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control strategy
is proposed to realize fast switching and reconstruction of feedback signals of closed-loop control
systems under different faults of multiple sensors, thus restoring the system performance. Finally, the
effectiveness of the proposed algorithm and control strategy is verified by simulation experiments

Keywords: PMSM drive system; sliding mode observer; fault diagnosis; active fault-tolerant control;
sensor fault

1. Introduction
With the increasing use of electric vehicles worldwide, the industry’s technical requirements for
its core component—the electric drive system—continue to increase [1]. In recent years, the Permanent
Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM) concept has attracted more and more attention in electric vehicle
applications due to its high density, great efficiency, small size, light weight, and low cost [2,3].
The corresponding technologies of the PMSM drive system have become a research hotspot among
scholars at home and abroad. Generally, the PMSM drive system is equipped with current, speed
and position sensors to obtain the feedback signals of three-phase stator current, motor speed and
position, which are required for the closed-loop control operation of the system. Obviously, the normal
operation of various types of sensors is a basic guarantee to achieve stable and reliable operation of
the PMSM drive system. However, due to the increasingly complex working environment, aging of
devices and external interference, the sensors in the system are prone to failure, resulting in deviations
in the feedback signals of the control system, which in turn affects the control performance and, in
severe cases, even causes damage to other electrical equipment. Therefore, the fault diagnosis and
fault-tolerance control of sensors in the PMSM drive system of electric vehicles are of great importance.
At present, the methods for sensor fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of PMSM drive
systems can be divided into two categories: data-driven methods and analytical model-based methods.
Data-driven methods do not require the establishment of accurate mathematical models. However,

Energies 2019, 12, 1695; doi:10.3390/en12091695 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2019, 12, 1695 2 of 20

large amounts of data are needed to obtain prior knowledge so as to achieve fault diagnosis through
data analysis. Data-driven methods have good diagnostic effect on sensor faults, but can hardly provide
reliable fault-tolerant control [4,5]. Analytical model-based methods mainly establish a mathematical
analytic model based on the operating state of system, and construct residuals and other physical
signals for fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control. The three main methods are as follows: (1) The
current reconstruction method [6–8]. This method estimates the current by reconstructing space
vectors to achieve sensor fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control. Though it is simple and satisfies
the requirements of corresponding systems for stable operation under current sensor fault, it cannot
be applied universally due to the great difference in the current reconstruction methods of different
systems. (2) The Luenberger-based observer method [9–11]. In this method, the establishment of
the Luenberger observer can solve the universality problem effectively, but the observer is highly
susceptible to the influence of parameter changes and external disturbances, which may even cause
misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis. (3) The sliding mode observer-based method [12,13]. The sliding
mode observer has stronger robustness and anti-disturbance than the Luenberger observer and can
improve the diagnostic accuracy of the system, but its mathematical model is often complicated due to
the high electromagnetic coupling of the motor drive system.
The above methods are widely used in fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of a single sensor
in PMSM drive system, and have achieved good results. In the actual system, faults may occur to all
kinds of sensors, so considering the faults of a single sensor alone cannot guarantee the stable operation
of the system. Hence, the fault-tolerant control for multiple types of sensor faults is particularly
important. Currently, research mainly focuses on the establishment of multiple observers based on
analytical model methods to realize multi-sensor fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of PMSM
drive system [14,15]. Among them, [14] comprehensively considered the faults in three types of sensors:
DC side voltage sensor, AC side current sensor and motor speed sensor of the PMSM drive system.
Two high-order sliding mode observers and one Luenberger observer were designed, in which the
high-order sliding mode observers estimated the system voltage and speed, respectively, while the
Luenberger observer estimated the system current. The three observers operated in parallel so as to
realize diagnosis and fault-tolerant control of the voltage, current and speed sensor faults of the PMSM
drive system. Though it enhanced the robust performance of the system, the integral effect of the
high-order sliding mode had an impact on the fast response characteristics of the system. Ref. [15] also
designed the self-adaptive observer, Luenberger observer and speed sensorless observer for the three
types of sensors to estimate the corresponding voltage, current and speed. High frequency signals
were injected into the low speed interval to improve the system performance. The diagnosis and
fault tolerance control was relatively fast, as there was no integral term. However, both [14] and [15]
required multiple observers to operate at the same time, which not only complicated the algorithm but
also increased the time cost of the system. Also, multiple observers often interacted with each other
when operating in parallel, thus reducing the overall system performance. On the other hand, for the
PMSM drive system, the establishment of multiple observers will reduce the sensitivity of the various
components of the system and the overall reliability of the system to a certain extent [16], which affects
the accuracy of fault diagnosis and the effectiveness of fault-tolerant control.
In summary, accurate diagnosis of sensor faults in PMSM drive systems is the basic premise
for fault-tolerant control. In the process of fault diagnosis based on an observer, the selection of the
threshold of each observation variable affects the accuracy of the sensor fault diagnosis directly. If the
threshold is too small, when there is noise interference in the system or the model is biased, not
only will misdiagnosis occur but also faulty fault-tolerant control will be triggered, which will cause
safety problems for the PMSM system. On the contrary, if the threshold is too large, there will be a
possibility of missed diagnosis, which increases the security risk of the system as well. At present,
there are three main methods to set the thresholds for sensor fault diagnosis of PMSM drive system:
(1) By observing the difference of residuals [17]. This method only considers the single influence of
the observation errors, so the overall diagnostic accuracy of the system is low. (2) By considering
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 3 of 20

noise [12]. The observation errors and measurement noise are both taken into consideration to minimize
misdiagnosis rate and improve fault detection efficiency. (3) By considering parameter variations [14].
This method further considers the influence of system parameter variations on the basis of observation
errors and measurement noise, so the diagnostic accuracy can be further improved. However, in actual
operation, the permanent magnet of the PMSM is prone to demagnetization due to the influence of
temperature, mechanical action, and armature reaction magnetic field, which affects the residual values
of observed variables [18]. If the demagnetization is not considered when setting the threshold, it is
very likely that misdiagnosis will occur.
In view of the multi-sensor fault problems, a composite sliding mode observer is designed in
this paper based on the double closed-loop current and speed control strategy of the PMSM control
system [19]. A single observer is used to observe and estimate the various state variables in real
time, which simplifies not only the implementation of the observer-related algorithm but also the
sensor fault diagnosis and isolation control algorithm. Meanwhile, in order to improve the diagnostic
accuracy of system under multi-sensor faults, a method for determining the fault thresholds is proposed
through global search for the maximum residual value. Based on this, a fault diagnosis and active
fault-tolerant control strategy is proposed to realize fast switching and reconstruction of feedback
signals of closed-loop control systems under different faults of multiple sensors, thus restoring the
system performance. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm and control strategy is verified
by simulating the occurrence of different faults of the three types of sensors.

2. Overall Control Process of the Proposed Fault Diagnosis and Active Fault-Tolerant Control
System
During normal operation, the PMSM drive system requires current, speed and position sensors [20],
in which the position sensor is difficult to install due to its large size and high cost. It also increases
the moment of inertia of the bearing and affects the dynamic and steady-state characteristics and
robustness of the system. In recent years, some scholars have developed sensorless motor position
control technologies based on indirect detection of the rotor position [21,22], which have found wide
applications. With low cost and easy implementation in mind and on the basis of the traditional PMSM
control system based on current and speed double closed-loop, this paper designs a composite sliding
mode observer to observe and estimate multiple variables of the system. Studies are conducted on the
fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control of the three-phase current sensors and motor speed
sensor of the PMSM drive system.
As shown in Figure 1, among the fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control system, the
fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant controller based on sliding mode mainly includes two
parts: a composite sliding mode observer and a fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant controller.
The corresponding fault-tolerant control is as follows: (1) Establish the fault thresholds of the
system-related variables Γ = [Γia Γib Γic Γω ]T offline. Store the values in the fault diagnosis module,
including the three-phase current thresholds Γia , Γib , Γic and the speed threshold Γω . (2) During system
operation, the composite sliding mode observer estimates, in real time, the three-phase current and
speed signals in the system, and inputs the corresponding estimated values and the measured values
of the sensor altogether into the fault diagnosis module. (3) The fault diagnosis module generates
the system residuals in real time according to the estimated values and the measured values of the
three-phase current and speed signals, and compares them with the thresholds for fault diagnosis.
(4) Based on the fault diagnosis results, the active fault-tolerant control module designs a corresponding
algorithm to reconstruct and change the current and speed feedback signals of the original closed-loop
control system, thereby eliminating the influence of the faulty sensor and achieving active fault-tolerant
control under sensor fault.
The following sections will design a composite sliding mode observer as well as a fault diagnosis
and active fault-tolerant controller based on the established PMSM mathematical model to realize fault
diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control of sensors in the PMSM drive system.
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 4 of 20
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 21

idref + ud uα PWM
dq Three-
− PID control signal
+ iqref + uq uβ SVPWM phase PMSM
ωref PID control
control αβ inverter iabc
− −
θ

Γ uαβ , TL iabc
iqr iˆabc iˆabc iˆαβ iαβ
idr iabcr Active iabc Clark
Park iabc Clark -1 iαβ
fault- F Fault Composite
θ
tolerant diagnosis sliding mode
ωr ω̂ ω̂
control module observer
ω ω d
module ω
dt
Fault diagnosis and active
Fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant
fault-tolerant controller
controller based on sliding mode

Figure
Figure 1. The1.schematic
The schematic diagram
diagram of of faultdiagnosis
fault diagnosis and
andactive
activefault-tolerant control
fault-tolerant systemsystem
control based on
based on
sliding mode.
sliding mode.
3. The Design of Composite Sliding Mode Observer
3. The Design of Composite Sliding Mode Observer
3.1. PMSM Mathematical Model
3.1. PMSM Mathematical Model
The mathematical model of PMSM in an α – β two-phase stationary coordinate system includes
The mathematical
stator model
voltage equation, of PMSM
stator flux linkage α − β two-phase
in anequation, stationary
electromagnetic torquecoordinate system
equation and motionincludes
stator voltage
Equationequation,
[23]. stator flux linkage equation, electromagnetic torque equation and motion
The corresponding stator voltage equation is:
Equation [23].
The corresponding stator voltage equation is: diα
uα = Rs iα + Ls dt − ωψ f sin θ
 (1)

 uα = Rs iα + Lsdididtβ − ωψf sin θ
α
u β = Rs iβ + Ls di + ωψ f cos θ

(1)


u = R i + L dt + ωψ cos θ

 β
β s β s dt f

The stator flux linkage equation is:
The stator flux linkage equation is:

ψ α =  (uα − Rs iα )dt
(  R (2)
ψαψ = =R ((uuβα−−RR i dt)dt
s iβs )α
 β
(2)
ψβ = (uβ − Rs iβ )dt
The electromagnetic torque equation is:
The electromagnetic torque equation is: 3
Te = n p (ψ α iβ − ψ β iα ) (3)
2
3
The motion equation is: Te = np (ψα iβ − ψβ iα ) (3)
2
J dω
The motion equation is: Te − TL = (4)
n p dt
J dω
Te − TL = (4)
np dtiα and iβ are stator currents, ψα and ψβ are
In the above equations, uα and uβ are stator voltages,
stator fluxes, Rs and Ls are stator resistance and inductance, respectively, ω is the rotor angular
In velocity,
the above θ isequations, uα and
the rotor position uβ are
angle, ψf isstator voltages,
the rotor iα and
permanent magnetiβ are
flux,stator currents,
Te is the ψα and ψβ are
electromagnetic
stator fluxes, R and L are
torque, TsL is the load
s stator resistance and inductance, respectively, ω is the rotor
torque, np is the pole pair of the motor, and J is the moment of inertia. angular velocity,
θ is the rotor position
From angle,
Equations ψf iswe
(1)–(4), rotor permanent magnet flux, Te is the electromagnetic torque, TL
theobtain:
is the load torque, np is the pole pair of the motor, and J is the moment of inertia.
From Equations (1)–(4), we obtain:

diα
= − RLss iα + Ls ψf ω sin θ + Ls uα
1 1



 dt
 diβ
− RLss iβ − L1s ψf ω cos θ + L1s uβ



 dt = (5)
3n2p 3n2p

np
− 2J ψf iα sin θ + 2J ψf iβ cos θ − J TL
 dω
=


dt
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 5 of 20

Meanwhile, the relationship between the stator currents and voltages in the abc three-phase
coordinate system and the stator currents and voltages in the α − β two-phase coordinate system is
as follows:        
 ia   1 √
0  !  ua   1
√
0  !
    iα 
    uα
 ib  =  −1/2 3/2  ,  u  =  −1/2 3/2  (6)
 iβ  b  
    
   √ √  uβ
ic −1/2 − 3/2 uc −1/2 − 3/2
where ua , ub and uc are the stator voltages in the three-phase coordinate system, and ia , ib and ic are the
stator currents in the three-phase coordinate system.
Then, we have the state space model [24] of the PMSM drive system.
( ·
x = Ax + Bu
(7)
y = Cx

where x = [iα iβ ω]T is the state variable, u = [uα uβ TL ]T is the input vector, y = [ω] is the output vector,
and the coefficient matrixes are:

− RLss Ls ψf sin θ
1
   1
0

   Ls 0 0 
− RLss − L1s ψf cos θ
  h i
1
 
A = 
 0 , B =  0

Ls 0 , C = 0
 0 1 .
 3n2p 3n2p   np 
0 0 −J
− 2J ψf sin θ 2J ψf cos θ 0
 

3.2. Composite Sliding Mode Observer Design

According to the state space model of PMSM in the α − β two-phase stationary coordinate system,
the composite sliding mode observer is constructed as:
 ·
 x^ = Ax^ + Bu + Gn v



 (8)

 ^ ^
 y = Cx
h iT
where x̂ = îα îβ ω̂ , ŷ = [ω̂], îα , îβ and ω̂ are the estimated values of iα , iβ and ω, respectively, v is a
nonlinear discontinuous term, and Gn is a gain matrix.
Suppose that the system state estimation error is defined as:
   
 eiα   îα − iα 
  ^  
e =  eiβ  = x − x =  îβ − iβ
 

 (9)
ω̂ − ω

eω
  

The system output estimation error is defined as:

^
e y = [eω ] = y − y = [ω̂ − ω] (10)

Then, for a composite sliding mode observer, the sliding mode surface is designed as:
   
 eiα   îα − iα 
   
s = e =  eiβ  =  îβ − iβ
 

 (11)
ω̂ − ω

eω
  

The nonlinear discontinuous high-frequency switching term v is likely to cause system

chattering [25], thus increasing the computational burden. Therefore, the discontinuity of v should
be “smoothed” to avoid or alleviate system chattering. In order to make the system state variables
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 6 of 20

approximate the sliding mode surface, this paper uses the sigmoid function to define the approximate
smoothing term as:
h iT
v = ρ( 1−2e
2
eiα − 1) ρ( 2 eiβ − 1) ρ( 1−2e
1−2e
2
eω − 1) (12)

where ρ is a positive real scalar.

Suppose that the gain matrix Gn has the following structure, namely, Gn = diag(g1 ,g2 ,−1), g1 ,g2 ∈
R. From Equations (5), (8), (11), and (12), we can obtain îα , îβ and ω̂ in the system:
 .
− RLss Ls ψf sin θ
1
  
 îα   0  îα


 .
− RLss − L1s ψf cos θ
  
0

 =   îβ
   
 îβ 
3n2p 3n2p
 . 
 ω̂
  
2J ψ sin θ 2J ψf cos θ

ω̂ − 0
  
 1 f (13)
0  ρ( 1−2e 2
    
 Ls 0 0  uα   g1 0 eiα − 1) 

1
0  ρ( 1−2e2
    
+ 0 0  +  0 eiβ − 1) 
 u g2

Ls  β 
np
 
ρ( 1−2e
2

TL 0 0 −1
 
0 0 −J eω − 1)
  

With the above equation, the stator currents and speed of the motor can be observed and estimated
in real time, paving the way for subsequent fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control. It can be
proved that the sliding mode observer designed based on the above method is stable and feasible, and
the corresponding gain matrix Gn and the positive scalar ρ can be derived. What follows is the proof
and the specific derivation process.
According to the structure of the coefficient matrix C in the composite sliding mode observer, the
system state estimation error defined by Equation (9) can be further broken into e = [e1 ey ]T , e1 ∈ R2×1 .
Meanwhile, the Lyapunov function is defined as V = 1/2eT e.
In order for the system to reach the sliding mode surface within a limited time from any initial
state, it must satisfy the condition V & < 0. Namely:
0 i e1 0  1 1 0
" #!
. 
1 T 1h

· ·
V= e e = e1 ey = e21 + e2y = e y · e y + e1 · e1 < 0 (14)
2 2 ey 2 2
.
To prove V < 0, we can first prove that the following two equations are valid:
. ·
V1 = ey · ey < 0 (15)
. ·
V 2 = e1 · e1 < 0 (16)

The proof of Equation (15) is as follows:

According to Equations (7) and (8), we have:
·
e = Ae + Gn v (17)

It can be broken up into:  ·

 e1 = A11 e1 + A12 e y + Gn1 v1


 · (18)
 e y = A21 e1 + A22 e y − v2

 R
Ls ψf sin θ
 " 1 #
 − L s 0  
3n2p 3n2p

where A11 =  s
Rs  , A 12 =
− L1s ψf cos θ
, A 21 = − 2J fψ sin θ 2J f ψ cos θ , A22 = [0],
0 − Ls 
" #
g1 0 h iT h iT
Gn1 = , v1 = ρ( 1−2e 2
eiα − 1) ρ( 2 eiβ − 1) , v2 = ρ( 1−2e
1−2e
2
eω − 1) .
0 g2
Then:
· 2
e y = A21 e1 + A22 e y − ρ( − 1) (19)
1 − 2eeω
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 7 of 20

Multiplying both sides by ey we have:

·
ey · ey = e y · (A21 e1 + A22 e y − ρ(1−2e 2
eω − 1))
 
= ey · ( A21 e1 + A22 e y ) − ρ e y  (20)
< −e y  · (ρ − (A21 e1 + A22 e y ))
   

When the positive scalar ρ satisfies the following:

 
ρ − A21 e1 + A22 e y  > ζ > 0 (21)

y < 0.
where ζ ∈ R+ , then Equation (15) can be proved, that is, V1& = e y ·e&
The proof of Equation (16) is as follows:
When the positive scalar ρ satisfies Equation (21), and assume that there is no model mismatch or
disturbances, the system output estimation error will converge to zero in a finite time. At this point,
Equation (18) can be approximated as:
" #
· A21
e1 = (A11 + Gn1 ) · e1 (22)
A21

In order to make the system in a stable reduced-order motion when entering the sliding mode [26],
it is necessary to ensure that the determinant of coefficient matrix in Equation (22) is less than zero:
 # " #
 −Rs /Ls − 3n2p ψf g1 sin θ/2J 3n2p ψf g1 cos θ/2J
"
 A21  
A11 + Gn1 = 
A21 −3n2p ψf g2 sin θ/2J −Rs /Ls + 3n2p ψf g2 cos θ/2J
 
 (23)
R2s 3Rs n2p 3Rs n2p
= L2s
+ 2Ls J ψf g1 sin θ − 2Ls J ψf g2 cos θ <0

Then, we have:  " #

· A21  2
 · e1 < 0

e1 · e1 = A11 + Gn1 (24)
 A21
Therefore, when the parameters g1 and g2 in the gain matrix Gn satisfy the following equation,
Equation (16) can be proved, that is, V2& = e1 ·e&
1
< 0:

Rs J
g1 sin θ − g2 cos θ < − (25)
Ls n2p ψf

In summary, when the sliding mode observer parameters (g1 and g2 ) and the positive scalar ρ
.
satisfy Equation (26), we have V < 0. Then, the sliding mode observer proposed above is accessible in
the state space:
Rs J

 g1 sin θ − g2 cos θ < − Ls n2p ψf


  (26)
 ρ > A e + A22 e y  > 0


21 1

3.3. Anti-Disturbance Performance Analysis of the Composite Sliding Mode Observer

From the previous analysis, we know that scholars at home and abroad tend to use the classic
Luenberger observer to deal with sensor failures in the motor drive system. By comparison, the
composite sliding mode observer proposed in this paper has better anti-disturbance performance.
The detailed analysis is given below.
Let the interference signal be ξ(t) and its distribution matrix be Q. Then the state space model
described by Equation (7) becomes:
( ·
x(t) = Ax(t) + Bu(t) + Qξ(t)
(27)
y(t) = Cx(t)
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 8 of 20

The distribution matrix Q matches the gain matrix Gn , and there exists a matrix X which satisfies
Equation (28):
" #
Gn1 X
Q= (28)
−X
·
At this time, the state estimation error is e(t) = Ae(t) + Gn v(t) − Qξ(t). After it is partitioned,
Equation (18) is expressed as:
 ·
 e1 (t) = A11 e1 (t) + A12 e y (t) + Gn1 v1 (t) − Gn1 Xξ(t)


 · (29)
 e y (t) = A21 e1 (t) + A22 e y (t) − v2 (t) + Xξ(t)


Then: ·
e y (t) · e y (t) = e y (t) · (A21 e1 (t) + A22 e y (t) − ρ( 1−2e 2
e y − 1)) + Xξ(t))
 
= ey (t) · ( A21 e1 ( t) + A22 e y (t) + Xξ(t)) − ρe y (t ) (30)
< −e y (t) · (ρ − (A21 e1 (t) + A22 e y (t) + Xξ(t)))
   

When ρ > |A21 e1 + A22 ey + Xξ| > 0, the trajectory of the system output estimation error will
converge towards a minimal region from which they do not escape, and Equation (29) can be
expressed as:
( ·
e1 (t) = A11 e1 (t) + 0 + Gn1 v1 (t) − Gn1 Xξ(t)
(31)
0 = A21 e1 (t) + 0 − v2 (t) + Xξ(t)

The approximated reduced-order motion expression of the system can be obtained e& 1
=
" #!
A21
A11 + Gn1 ·e1 , in agreement with Equation (22). It is independent of the interference signal
A21
ξ(t), which means that the composite sliding mode observer of the system is not affected by the
interference signal and has good anti-disturbance performance.

4. Fault Diagnosis and Active Fault-Tolerant Controller Design

4.1. Sensor Fault Description

Most sensor faults are caused by the aging of the internal coil or a change in circuit resistance due
to high temperature. Eventually, it does not work normally and the measured value deviates from
the actual value. According to practical applications, there are mainly three types of sensor faults in
PMSM drive systems: stuck, constant gain and constant deviation [27]. Suppose that the output of
each type of sensor is z(t), z(t) ∈ {ia ,ib ,ic ,ω}, if it fails at moment tf , the measured output of the sensor
after the three types of fault can be expressed as:



 z(t) = K t ≥ tf

z(t) = mx t ≥ tf (32)




 z(t) = x + n
 t ≥ tf

where the constant K represents the instantaneous output value of the sensor when it is stuck, m
denotes the gain coefficient of the constant gain fault, n is the offset of the constant deviation fault, and
x is the normal output before the corresponding sensor fails.
When the sensor of the PMSM drive system is free of faults, the system enters into the sliding
mode and the state estimation error converges. At this time, the estimated value of the observer is
consistent with the measured value of the sensor. When any sensor fails, the difference between the
observer estimation and the sensor measurement will change abruptly, and the magnitude of the
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 9 of 20

change depends on the type of failure. For the convenience of analysis, the system residual error is
established by the estimated value and measured value:
 
γia = ia − îa 




 γib = ib − îb

  

(33)
γic = ic − îc 

  


 γω = |ω − ω̂|



where γia , γib , γic , γω are the residuals of the three-phase currents (a,b,c) and the motor speed,
respectively.
When the system functions normally, the system residual is small or close to zero. When a certain
sensor fails, say, the a-phase current sensor is stuck, the residual will increase suddenly. Thus, by
comparing the residual and the threshold, the fault can be identified.

4.2. Method of Fault Diagnosis

From the above analysis, we know that the sensor fault can be diagnosed by comparing the
residual and the threshold value. Here the fault flag is defined as F = [Fia Fib Fic Fω ]T , and the steps
of fault diagnosis are as follows: (1) Collect the real-time measurement value of each sensor and
the estimation value of the composite sliding mode observer, and calculate the residuals of system
variables; (2) Compare the residuals and thresholds, and assign a value to the fault flag of each variable
through Equations (34) to (37); (3) When the fault flag value is “1”, it indicates that the corresponding
sensor has failed and should be removed from the system to achieve fault isolation. When the fault
flag value is “0”, it indicates that the sensor is not faulty:

γia ≥ Γia
(
1
Fia = (34)
0 else

γib ≥ Γib
(
1
Fib = (35)
0 else

γic ≥ Γic
(
1
Fic = (36)
0 else

γω ≥ Γω
(
1
Fω = (37)
0 else
In the actual system, when the sensor is working normally, the residual errors of the current
and velocity signals obtained by the above observer is not zero but within in a small stable range.
This is mainly due to the inherent steady-state error of the system and the influence of such factors
as permanent magnet demagnetization and load changes in the system. In order to improve the
versatility of threshold selection and the accuracy of fault diagnosis, this paper proposes a method
for searching the maximum value of residuals to determine the system fault threshold Γ = [Γia Γib Γic
Γω ]T . That is, the threshold is determined by searching for the maximum residual value caused by the
system’s global steady-state error, permanent magnet demagnetization and load variation and leaving
2–5 times margin.
Generally, PMSM permanent magnet demagnetization can be divided into four types: weak
demagnetization (0–5%), mild demagnetization (5%–20%), moderate demagnetization (20%–40%) and
severe demagnetization (40%–100%) [28]. In view of the fact that severe demagnetization seriously
affects the working performance of the system, this paper only considers the residual value of 0%–40%
demagnetization. For the system residual in the case of load change, we generally consider the residual
value caused by ±5% fluctuation near the rated load.
 steady-state error, permanent magnet demagnetization and load variation and leaving 2–5 times
margin.
Generally, PMSM permanent magnet demagnetization can be divided into four types: weak
demagnetization (0–5%), mild demagnetization (5%–20%), moderate demagnetization (20%–40%)
and severe demagnetization (40%–100%) [28]. In view of the fact that severe demagnetization
seriously
Energies 2019, 12, affects
1695 the working performance of the system, this paper only considers the residual value
10 of 20
of 0%–40% demagnetization. For the system residual in the case of load change, we generally consider
the residual value caused by ±5% fluctuation near the rated load.
4.3. Active Fault-Tolerant Control Strategy
4.3. Active Fault-Tolerant Control Strategy
As shown in Figure 2, when the system is functioning, the active fault-tolerant control module
As shown in Figure 2, when the system is functioning, the active fault-tolerant control module
designs a fault-tolerant switching control law according to the operating status of each sensor (normal
designs a fault-tolerant switching control law according to the operating status of each sensor (normal
or some type of fault), and generates corresponding control signals. Combined with the fault-tolerant
or some type of fault), and generates corresponding control signals. Combined with the fault-tolerant
reconstruction algorithm
reconstruction algorithmof of
thethe
feedback
feedbacksignal,
signal, the systemautomatically
the system automatically switches
switches andand reconstructs
reconstructs
the closed-loop
the closed-loop feedback signal of the system, and outputs a feedback control signal that meetsthat
feedback signal of the system, and outputs a feedback control signal fault-meets
fault-tolerant requirements,
tolerant requirements, thus
thus achieving
achieving the purpose
the purpose of active
of active fault-tolerant
fault-tolerant control. control.

iabc iˆabc
Fia Sa iar
Fib Fault-tolerant Sb
Fault-tolerant ibr
reconstruction
Fic switching Sc algorithm of the icr
control law
Fω Sω feedback signal ωr

ω ω̂
Figure 2. The block diagram of active fault-tolerant control.
Figure 2. The block diagram of active fault-tolerant control.
The active fault-tolerant control strategy mainly includes two aspects.

(1) Establish a fault-tolerant switching control law. The fault-tolerant switching control law is
designed according to the working status of each sensor of the system, which means that the
fault-tolerant control signal S = [Sa Sb Sc Sω ]T is generated by the system fault flag signal F = [Fia
Fib Fic Fω ]T . The corresponding logical relationship is:



 Sa = Fia

 Sb = Fib


(38)
Sc = Fic





 S =F

ω ω

(2) Reconstruct the fault-tolerant control algorithm for closed-loop feedback signals. In order to
ensure that the closed-loop control of the system functions normally no matter the sensors are
faulty or not, the corresponding fault-tolerant reconstruction target of current and speed feedback
signals is that when the sensors are working normally, the system will use the measured output
values of each sensor as the feedback signal for closed-loop control. When a sensor fails, the
estimated value of the composite sliding mode observer is used instead of the output value of the
faulty sensor, and the measured values of normal sensors are still used for closed-loop feedback
control, thereby isolating the faulty sensor to achieve active fault-tolerant control. The output
closed-loop feedback signals based on this fault-tolerant reconstruction algorithm are:



 iar = Sa ia + Sa îa

 ibr = Sb ib + Sb îb


(39)
icr = Sc ic + Sc îc





 ω = S ω + S ω̂

r ω ω

In this way, the fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control of PMSM drive system under
three-phase current sensors and speed sensor fault are realized based on the above-mentioned composite
sliding mode observer and related algorithms.
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 11 of 20

5. Simulation Verification
In order to validate the fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control strategy based on the
composite sliding mode observer, this paper builds a simulation model of PMSM double closed-loop
control system for electric vehicles based on Figure 1 on the MATLAB/Simulink platform. The proposed
method is verified by simulating various faults of current and speed sensors. The specific simulation
parameters are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. The specific simulation parameters.

Modules Parameters Values

stator resistance RS /Ω 2.875
stator inductance Ls /H 0.0085
PMSM
moment of inertia J/kg·m2 0.008
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW number of pairs of poles np 4 12 of 21
positive scalar of the approximate smoothing term ρ 10
Composite sliding mode observer
sliding simulation
Table 1. The specific mode gain matrix Gn
parameters. diag(1,1,−1)
DC bus voltage Udc /V 300
Three-phase inverter
Modules frequency fs /Hz
switchingParameters Values
5

stator resistance RS/Ω 2.875

Before simulating the sensor fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control, the thresholds of
three-phase current and speed signals need to bestator inductance Ls/H
set first. PMSM under no-load operation, 0.0085
under
PMSM
40% demagnetization of the permanent magnetmoment and under rated load
of inertia J/kg·m 2 is separately simulated,
0.008 and
corresponding simulation waveforms for the residuals of the current and speed signals are shown in
number of pairs of poles np 4
Figure 3. Comparing the three simulation waveforms, the corresponding residuals of the signals under
40% demagnetization of themode
Composite sliding permanent magnet
positive shown
scalar in Figure 3b
of the approximate are all higher
smoothing term ρ than the10 other two
cases, which is γiabcmax = 0.4 A, γωmax ≈ 5 rpm.
observer
Therefore, by searching for the maximum sliding value mode
of thegain matrix Gnglobally and leaving
residuals diag(1,1,−1)
a certain
margin, we can determine the fault thresholds ofDC thebus
signals Udc/VΓia = Γib = Γic = 2 A, 300
voltage are Γω = 9 rpm.
The threshold is equivalent
Three-phase inverterto the value determined by the existing threshold setting method
mentioned above. switching frequency fs/Hz 5
So based on the fault thresholds, simulation analysis and verification can be performed on fault
So based
diagnosis and fault on the faultofthresholds,
tolerance simulation
various types analysis and verification can be performed on fault
of sensors.
diagnosis and fault tolerance of various types of sensors.

Figure 3. The current and speed residual waveforms of the PMSM drive system. (a) No-load operation;
(b) 40%Figure 3. The current
demagnetization and
of the speed residual
permanent magnet;waveforms of the PMSM drive system. (a) No-
(c) rated load
load operation; (b) 40% demagnetization of the permanent magnet; (c) rated load
5.1. Simulation I
5.1. Simulation I
The operating characteristics of the PMSM closed-loop control system based on the composite
sliding modeTheobserver
operatingare
characteristics
analyzed in of the
the PMSM
case ofclosed-loop
no sensor control
fault tosystem
verifybased on the composite
the effectiveness of the
sliding mode observer are analyzed in the case of no sensor fault to verify the effectiveness of the
proposed sliding mode observer.
proposed sliding mode observer.

5.1.1. Normal Operation

Assume the motor starts at t = 0 without load, and the given starting rotation speed is ωref = 300
rpm. After it is steady, apply a load torque TL = 5 N·m at t = 0.25 s. At the moment t = 0.5 s, the given
speed increases sharply to ωref = 500 rpm. The overall simulation time is 1 s, and the simulation result
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 12 of 20

5.1.1. Normal Operation

Assume the motor starts at t = 0 without load, and the given starting rotation speed is ωref = 300 rpm.
After it is steady, apply a load torque TL = 5 N·m at t = 0.25 s. At the moment t = 0.5 s, the given speed
increases sharply to ωref = 500 rpm. The overall simulation time is 1 s, and the simulation result is
shown in Figure 4.
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 21

300
298
10 ia ib ic
5

/A
296 REVIEW
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER 13 of 21

Measured
0

currents
0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29
600
ω̂ ωref ω -5
Speed / rpm Speed / rpm

500 300
400 298
10
-10
ia ib ic
5

/A
300
200
296 10 iˆa iˆb iˆc

Measured
0

currents
0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29
5

/A
600
100
ω̂ ωref ω -5

Estimated
5000 0

currents
400 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 -10
t/s -5
300
10
-10 iˆa iˆb iˆc
200 (a)
5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

/A
100
t/s

Estimated
0 0

currents
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 (b)
t/s -5
×10−10 -10 ×10−11
estimated errorestimated error /rpm

(a)

/A
0 0.1 0.2 0.3e 0.4 e0.5 0.6 eic0.7 0.8 0.9 1
1 2 ia
t ib/ s

estimated error
1
0
/ ACurrent
0 (b)
/rpmSpeed

-1 -1
×10−10 -2×10
−11

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 2 0 0.1 0.2 e0.3
ia 0.4eib 0.5 eic 0.7 0.8 0.9
0.6 1
1
estimated error

t/s 1 t/s
0
Current

0
Speed

-1
(c) -1 (d)
-2
Figure 0 The
4. 0.1 0.2
drive system 0.3 0.4 0.5waveforms
simulation
0based on on
0.1 0.2 the 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
0.3 0.4compositeof sliding
0.5 0.6 0.7 mode
0.8 sliding
0.9 1 1
PMSM
Figure 4. The simulation waveformst/s of PMSM drive system based the t /composite
s mode
observer in the case of no sensor fault. (a) The given speed ωref, the measured speed ω, and estimated
observer in the case of no(c) sensor fault. (a) The given speed ωref , the measured (d) speed ω, and estimated
speed 𝜔; (b) The measured signal iabc and estimated signal 𝚤̂ of the three-phase stator current; (c)
speed ω̂; (b) The measured signal iabc and estimated signal îabc of the three-phase stator current; (c) The
Figure 4. The simulation
The estimated waveforms
error of rotation speedof eω;PMSM
(d) Thedrive system
estimated based
error on the ecomposite
of current i. sliding mode
estimated errorinoftherotation
observer case of no sensoreωfault.
speed ; (d)(a)
TheTheestimated error
given speed ωref, of
thecurrent
measured ei .speed ω, and estimated
It can𝜔be
speed seen
; (b) Thethat the constructed
measured composite
signal iabc and sliding
estimated 𝚤̂
signalmodeofobserver can estimate
the three-phase well the(c)
stator current; PMSM
It can be
stator
The seen
current that the of
anderror
estimated constructed
speed and composite
signals, speed
rotation the
eω; error
(d) The slidingaterror
maintains
estimated mode
a small observer
valueei.nearcan
of current estimate
zero. When thewell the PMSM
system
stator current andor
load torque speed signals,
reference andthe
changes, the errorfluctuations
system maintainsare at small
a smallandvalue nearmode
the sliding zero.tracking
When rate
the system
load torque Itor
is fast.can be seen that
Itreference
indicates the the constructed
good
changes, performance composite
the system sliding mode
of fluctuations
the closed-loop observer
control
are small canthe
system
and estimate
and well
sliding
sliding the PMSM
mode
mode control,
tracking rate
stator
thus current and
verifying the speed signals,ofand
effectiveness thethe error maintains
composite sliding at a small
mode value
observer near zero.
proposed in When
this the system
paper.
is fast. It indicates the good performance of the closed-loop control system and sliding mode control,
load torque or reference changes, the system fluctuations are small and the sliding mode tracking rate
thus verifying
is5.1.2.
the effectiveness
fast. Disturbance Operation
It indicates the
of the composite sliding mode observer proposed in this paper.
good performance of the closed-loop control system and sliding mode control,
thus verifying the effectiveness of the composite sliding mode observer proposed in this paper.
loss of generality, the disturbance signal chosen in this paper is ξ(t) = 0.2sin(300t), and
WithoutOperation
5.1.2. Disturbance
its distribution matrix Q = diag(1,1,−1) matches the matrix Gn. Similarly, the motor starts without load,
5.1.2. Disturbance Operation
Without
with the loss of generality,
given the disturbance
starting rotation speed being ωsignalref = 300chosen
rpm, and inathis ξ(t) =ξ(t)
paper issignal
disturbance 0.2sin(300t),
is added to and its
distribution matrix Q = diag(1,1,−1) matches the matrix Gn . Similarly, the motor starts overall
the Without
system atloss
the of
same generality,
time. the
After disturbance
it is steady, signal
apply a chosen
load in
torque this
TL paper
= 5 is
N·m ξ
at(t)
t =
= 0.2sin(300t),
0.25 s. The and
without load,
its distribution matrix Q = diag(1,1,−1) matches the matrix G n. Similarly, the motor
with the given starting rotation speed being ωref = 300 rpm, and a disturbance signal ξ(t) is added to
simulation time is 1 s, and the simulation result is shown in Figure 5. starts without load,
with the given starting rotation speed being ωref = 300 rpm, and a disturbance signal ξ(t) is added to
the system at the same time. After it is steady, apply a load torque TL = 5 N·m at t = 0.25 s. The overall
the system at the same time.
ω Afterωref it is steady, apply a load 10 torqueiaTL = 5ibN·m at ic t = 0.25 s. The overall
simulation 400
time is 1 s, ω̂and the simulation result is shown in Figure 5.
Speed / rpmSpeed / rpm

simulation
300 time is 1 s, and the simulation result is shown5in Figure 5.
/A
/ A Measured

0
currents

200 300
100 296 -5
4000 ω̂ ω 0.265ω0.275
0.255 ref 10 ia ib ic
-10
300 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 5
10 iˆa iˆb iˆc
t/s
Measured

0
currents

200 300
5
/A

100 296 -5
/ A Estimated

(a)0.265 0.275
0.255 0
currents

0 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 -5
10 iˆa iˆb iˆc
t/s -10
5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s
Estimated

(a) 0
currents

-5 (b)
-10
Figure 5. The simulation waveforms of PMSM drive system 0 0.1 based 0.2 on0.3the0.4composite
0.5 0.6 sliding
0.7 0.8 mode
0.9 1
t/s
observer in the case of disturbance. (a) The given speed ωref, the measured speed ω, and estimated
(b)
speed 𝜔; (b) The measured signal iabc and estimated signal 𝚤̂ of the three-phase stator current.
Figure Figure
5. The5.simulation
The simulation waveformsof
waveforms of PMSM
PMSM drive
drivesystem
system basedbasedon theoncomposite sliding sliding
the composite mode mode
observerAnalysis
observer ofthe
in theincasethe
ofwaveforms
case shows
of disturbance.
disturbance. (a)that
(a) Thethe
The interference
given
given speed
speed ωrefω,signal
the, added
measured
the measured to the speed
speed system
ω, andω, does not
estimated
and affect
estimated
ref
speed 𝜔; (b)ofThe
the operation themeasured
composite sliding
signal iabc andmode observer
estimated 𝚤̂
signal and the
of the estimated
three-phase signal
statorstill matches the
current.
speed ω̂; (b) The measured signal iabc and estimated signal îabc of the three-phase stator current.
Analysis of the waveforms shows that the interference signal added to the system does not affect
the operation of the composite sliding mode observer and the estimated signal still matches the
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 13 of 20

Analysis of the waveforms shows that the interference signal added to the system does not
affect the operation of the composite sliding mode observer and the estimated signal still matches the
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 21
corresponding signal well. It is consistent with the previous theoretical analysis, and verifies the good
robust performancesignal
corresponding and well.
anti-disturbance
It is consistentperformance of the
with the previous composite
theoretical sliding
analysis, andmode observer.
verifies the good
robust performance and anti-disturbance performance of the composite sliding mode observer.
5.2. Simulation II
5.2. Simulation II
In this case, the effectiveness of the fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control strategy
proposedIn inthis
thiscase,
papertheiseffectiveness
verified by of the fault diagnosis
simulating different and active
types fault-tolerant
of sensor fault. In control strategy
the simulation, it
proposed in this paper is verified by simulating different types of sensor fault. In the
is assumed that there are three faults—a-phase current sensor being stuck, b-phase current sensor simulation, it is
assumed
constant that there
deviation, and are
speedthree faults—a-phase
sensor constant gaincurrent
fault,sensor being
and all stuck,
faults b-phase
occur at tf =current
0.6 s. sensor
constant deviation, and speed sensor constant gain fault, and all faults occur at tf = 0.6 s.
5.2.1. a-Phase Current Sensor Being Stuck
5.2.1. a-phase Current Sensor Being Stuck
Assume K =K15= when
Assume 15 whenthethea-phase
a-phasecurrent
current sensor is stuck,
sensor is stuck,and
andthe
the corresponding
corresponding simulation
simulation
waveforms are shown in Figure 6.
waveforms are shown in Figure 6.

25 25
ia ib ic

Threshold / A
10
Residual / A 20 γ ia 20
15 15
/A

5
10 Γia 10
Measured
currents

0 5 5
-5 0 0
-10 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
iˆa iˆb iˆc
t/s
10
5 (b)
/A

0
Estimated

1
currents

-5 Fia
0
-10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (c)
4 ×10
−12
10
/A

γ ib 5
Residual / A

3 1
Fib
Feedback

0
current

2
Flag

1 -5
0 0 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
×10−12
5 t/s
γ ic
Residual / A

4 1
3 Fic (e)
Flag

2
1
/A

0 0 8 idr iqr
currents(dq axis)

×10−11 6
4
Feedback

2 Fω γω 1
Residual / rpm

2
Flag

1 0
-2
0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 t/s
t/s (f)
(d)
Figure
Figure 6. The6. system
The system simulation
simulation waveforms
waveforms whenwhen the a-phase
the a-phase current
current sensorsensor is stuck.
is stuck. (a)measured
(a) The The
measured signal i and estimated signal
signal iabc and estimated signal îabc of the three-phase
abc ̂ 𝒂𝒃𝒄 of the stator current; (b) a-phase current residual γia
three-phase stator current; (b) a-phase current
residual γiaΓ and threshold Γia; (c) The fault flag Fia of a-phase current sensor; (d) b-phase and c-phase
and threshold ia ; (c) The fault flag Fia of a-phase current sensor; (d) b-phase and c-phase current and
current and speed residuals and fault flags; (e) a-phase closed-loop feedback current iar; (f) Closed-
speed residuals and fault flags; (e) a-phase closed-loop feedback current iar ; (f) Closed-loop feedback
loop feedback current idqr in the dq coordinate system.
current idqr in the dq coordinate system.
It can be seen that at t = 0.6 s, the measured signal of a-phase stator current changes abruptly. At
It can be seen that at t = 0.6 s, the measured signal of a-phase stator current changes abruptly.
this time, the estimation of the three-phase stator current by the sliding mode observer is not affected,
At this time,
and the the estimation
estimated of is
current the three-phase
still ̂𝒂 , so 𝜸𝒊𝒂 =stator
|𝒊𝒂 − current
̂𝒂 | > 𝜞𝒊𝒂by the sliding
. Then, mode
Fia changes observer
from is not affected,
0 to 1, indicating
and the estimated current is still î a , so γ ia = |i a − îa | > Γ ia . Then, F
that the a-phase current sensor is faulty. However, the b-phase and c-phase current sensors and the that
ia changes from 0 to 1, indicating
the a-phase current
speed sensor aresensor is faulty.
working normally, However, the b-phase
and the residual is farand c-phase
less than current
the set sensors
threshold. Theandfaultthe
flagspeed
sensor are working
remains 0, whichnormally,
means thatandthey the are residual is farbyless
not affected a
the than the set
-phase threshold.
current The fault
sensor failure. flagway,
In this remains
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 14 of 20

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 21

0, which means that they are not affected by the a-phase current sensor failure. In this way, through
through fault-tolerant
fault-tolerant reconstruction
reconstruction and controland of thecontrol
feedback of the feedback
signal, signal, thefeedback
the closed-loop closed-loop feedback
signals can be
signals can be obtained, iar = 0 × ia + 1 × 𝚤̂
obtained, iar = 0 × ia + 1 × îa , ibr = ib , icr = ic , ωr = ω. So the a-phase current feedback signal changessignal
, ibr = ib, icr = ic , ω r = ω. So the a-phase current feedback from
changes from signal
the measured the measured signal tosignal
to the estimated the estimated
at the time signal at the while
of failure, time ofthe
failure,
a-phasewhile
andthe a-phase
a-phase and
current
a-phase
and speedcurrent
feedback and speed
signals arefeedback
still composedsignals of thearemeasured
still composed
signals ofofcorresponding
the measured signals
sensors. of
Thus,
corresponding sensors. Thus, the a-phase sensor fault does not produce adverse
the a-phase sensor fault does not produce adverse effects on the system. Further analysis of Figure 6f effects on the system.
Further
shows thatanalysis of Figure 6f
the closed-loop shows signal
feedback that the ofclosed-loop
three-phase feedback signal
current still of three-phase
maintains current and
good symmetry, still
maintains good symmetry, and the overall system control strategy and algorithm
the overall system control strategy and algorithm are not impacted by the a-phase current sensor fault, are not impacted
by the ensures
which a-phase the
current
safe sensor
and stablefault, which ensures
operation the safe and stable operation of the system.
of the system.

b-Phase Current
5.2.2. b-phase Current Sensor Constant Deviation
Assume nn= 8= when the b-phase
8 when currentcurrent
the b-phase sensor has a constant
sensor has adeviation
constantfault, and thefault,
deviation corresponding
and the
simulation waveforms
corresponding are waveforms
simulation shown in Figure 7.
are shown in Figure 7.

10 10
8 8

Threshold / A
Residual / A
ia ib ic γ ib
10 6 Γib 6
/A

5 4 4
Measured

2 2
currents

0
-5 0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-10 t/s
10 iˆa iˆb iˆc (b)
5
/A
Estimated

0 1
currents

Fib
-5
-10 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
(a) t/s
(c)
×10−12
current / A

3 γ ia 1 5
Residual / A

Feedback

2 Fia 0
Flag

1
-5
0 0
5
×10−12 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
4 1 t/s
Residual / A

3 Fic γ ic
(e)
Flag

2
1
/A

0 0 8 idr iqr
currents(dq axis)

×10−11 6
1 4
Feedback
Residual / rpm

2 γω
Fω 2
Flag

1
0
0 0
-2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(d) (f)
The system simulation waveforms in the case of constant deviation fault. (a) The measured
Figure 7. The
signal iabc andestimated
abcand signal 𝚤̂îabc of
estimatedsignal ofthe
thethree-phase
three-phase stator
stator current; (b) b-phase
current; (b) b-phase current residual γγibib
current residual
and threshold Γ ib;; (c)
Γib (c) The
The fault
fault flag Fibib of b-phase current
of b-phase current sensor;
sensor; (d) a-phase and c-phase current and
(d) a-phase
speed residuals and fault flags; (e) b-phase closed-loop feedback current iibr br; (f) Closed-loop feedback

current idqr
dqr in
in the
the dq
dq coordinate
coordinate system.
system.

It can
It can bebe seen
seen that at tt =
that at 0.6 s,
= 0.6 s, the
the measured signal iibb of
measured signal b-phase stator
of b-phase stator current
current is is superimposed
superimposed aa
constant deviation. At this time, the estimation of the three-phase stator
constant deviation. At this time, the estimation of the three-phase stator current by the slidingcurrent by the sliding mode
mode
observer is
observer is not
not affected,
affected,and
andthe theestimated
estimatedcurrent
currentisisstill so 𝛾γib =
still𝚤̂ îb,,so − î𝚤̂b | |>>ΓΓib . .Then,
= |𝑖|ib − Then,FFibib changes
changes
from 0 to 1, indicating that the b-phase current sensor is faulty. However, the a-phase and c-phase
from 0 to 1, indicating that the b-phase current sensor is faulty. However, the a-phase and c-phase
current sensors
current sensors andand the
the speed
speed sensor
sensor areare working
working normally,
normally, and and the
the residual
residual is is far
far less
less than
than the
the set
set
threshold. The fault flag remains 0, which means that they are not affected by the b-phase current
sensor failure. In this way, through fault-tolerant reconstruction and control of the feedback signal,
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 15 of 20

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 21

threshold. The fault flag remains 0, which means that they are not affected by the b-phase current
sensor failure. In this way, through fault-tolerant reconstruction and control of the feedback signal, the
the closed-loop feedback signals can be obtained, ibr = 0 × ib + 1 × 𝑖𝑏 , iar = ia, icr = ic, ωr = ω, so the
closed-loop feedback signals can be obtained, ibr = 0 × ib + 1 × îb , iar = ia , icr = ic , ωr = ω, so the b-phase
b-phase current feedback
current feedback signal changes
signal changes from thefrom the measured
measured signal to signal to the estimated
the estimated signal at thesignal
time atof
the time
failure,
of failure, while the a-phase and c-phase current and speed feedback signals
while the a-phase and c-phase current and speed feedback signals are still composed of the measured are still composed of the
measured signals of corresponding
signals of corresponding sensors.
sensors. Thus, the Thus,
b-phase thesensor
b-phase sensor
fault doesfault does notadverse
not produce produceeffects
adverse on
effects on the system. Further analysis of Figure 7f shows that the closed-loop
the system. Further analysis of Figure 7f shows that the closed-loop feedback signal of three-phase feedback signal of
three-phase current still maintains good symmetry, and the overall system
current still maintains good symmetry, and the overall system control strategy and algorithm are not control strategy and
algorithm
impacted by arethe
not impacted
b-phase by the
current b-phase
sensor fault, current sensor the
which ensures fault,
safewhich ensures
and stable the safe
operation of and stable
the system.
operation of the system.
5.2.3. Speed Sensor Constant Gain Fault
5.2.3. Speed Sensor Constant Gain Fault
Assume m = 0.85 when the speed sensor has a constant gain fault, and the corresponding
Assumewaveforms
simulation m = 0.85 when are shown the speed sensor
in Figure 8. Ithas
canabe constant
seen that gainat tfault,
= 0.6and
s, the themeasured
correspondingsignal
simulation waveforms
of speed changes are shown
abruptly. in Figure
At this time,8.theIt can be seen that
estimation at t = 0.6
of speed bys,the
thesliding
measured modesignal of speed
observer is
changes abruptly. At this time, the estimation of speed by the sliding mode observer
not affected, and the estimated speed is still ω̂, so γω = |ω − ω̂| > Γω . Then, Fω changes from 0 to 1, is not affected, and
the estimated
indicating thespeed still 𝜔is
speedissensor , so
faulty. |𝜔 − 𝜔| >the
𝛾 =However, Γ .three-phase
Then, Fω changes
current from 0 to 1,are
sensors indicating
workingthe speed
normally,
sensor is faulty. However, the three-phase current sensors are working normally,
and the residual is far less than the set threshold. The fault flag remains 0, which means that it is and the residual is not
far
less than the set threshold. The fault flag remains 0, which means that it is not
affected by the speed sensor failure. In this way, through fault-tolerant reconstruction and control of affected by the speed
sensor failure.signal,
the feedback In this the
way, through fault-tolerant
closed-loop feedback signalsreconstruction and control
can be obtained, ωr = of 0×the
ω feedback
+ 1 × ω̂ =signal,
ω̂, iar =theia ,
ibr = ib , icr =feedback
closed-loop ic , so the signals can be obtained,
speed feedback ωr = 0from
signal changes × 𝜔 = 𝜔, signal
× ω +the1 measured iar = iato
, ibrthe
= estimated
ib, icr = ic, so the
signal
speed feedback
at the time signalwhile
of failure, changes from the measured
the three-phase signal to the
current feedback estimated
signals are stillsignal at theof
composed time
the of failure,
measured
while
signalsthe three-phase current
of corresponding feedback
sensors. signals
Thus, the speedare still fault
sensor composed
does notof produce
the measured
adversesignals of
effects on
corresponding
the system. sensors. Thus, the speed sensor fault does not produce adverse effects on the system.

600

Threshold / rpm
80 80
Residual / rpm

ωref
Speed / rpm

500 γω
400 60 60
300 40 Γω 40
200 ω̂ ω 20 20
100
0 0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (b)
×10−12
γ ia 1
Residual / A

3 1
2 Fia Fω
Flag

1
0
0 0
×10−12 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
γ ib t/s
Residual / A

3 1
2 Fib (c)
Flag

1
0 0 600
/rpm

×10−12 500
400
Feedback

4 1 300
Residual / A

γ ic
speed

3 Fic 200
Flag

2 100
1 0
0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 t/s
t/s (e)
(d)
Figure 8.
Figure The system
8. The system simulation
simulation waveforms
waveforms in in the
the case
case of
of speed
speed sensor
sensor constant
constant gain
gain fault.
fault. (a)
(a) The
The
given speed
given speed ω ωrefref, ,measured speedωωand
measuredspeed andestimated speed 𝜔
estimatedspeed ω̂;; (b) Speed residual γγω threshold ΓΓibib; ;
and threshold
ω and

(c) The
(c) The fault flag FFωωof
fault flag ofspeed
speedsensor;
sensor;(d)
(d)Three-phase
Three-phasecurrent
currentresiduals
residualsand
andfault
faultflags;
flags;(e)
(e)Closed-loop
Closed-loop
feedback speed
feedback speed ω ωrr..

Based on the simulation and analysis of the above three modes of failure, the effectiveness of the
fault diagnosis and active fault-tolerant control strategy proposed in this paper is verified.
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 16 of 20

Based on the simulation and analysis of the above three modes of failure, the effectiveness of the
Energies 2019, 12, x and
fault diagnosis FOR PEER
activeREVIEW
fault-tolerant control strategy proposed in this paper is verified. 17 of 21

5.3. Simulation III

In
In this
this case,
case, the
the design
design methods
methods of of the
the Luenberger
Luenberger observer
observer oriented
oriented for for motor
motor speed
speed sensor
sensor and
and
current sensorand
current sensor andthethetraditional
traditionalsliding
sliding mode
mode observer
observer in [10,12]
in [10,12] areare applied
applied in PMSM
in the the PMSM closed-
closed-loop
loop control
control system
system constructed
constructed inpaper.
in this this paper. The speed
The speed and three-phase
and three-phase current current signals
signals are observed
are observed and
and estimated
estimated to formto aform
sensora sensor fault diagnosis
fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant
and fault-tolerant controlwith
control system system withobservers.
multiple multiple
observers.simulation,
Through Through simulation, its performance
its performance is compared
is compared with thatwith that
of the of the proposed
proposed control control
system system
with a
with a single composite sliding
single composite sliding mode observer. mode observer.
In the simulation,
In the simulation, it is assumed
it is assumed that that the
the a-phase
a-phase current
current sensor
sensor isis stuck
stuck (K(K == 15)
15) and
and there
there is a
is a
speed sensor constant gain fault (m = 0.85), and the faults all occur at tf = 0.6 s. The simulation output
speed sensor constant gain fault (m = 0.85), and the faults all occur at t f = 0.6 s. The simulation output
waveforms based
waveforms based on on multi-observer
multi-observer and and single
single composite
composite observer
observer system
system for for different faults are
different faults are
shown
shown inin Figures 9–11. The
Figures 9–11. The dynamic
dynamic and and steady-state
steady-state performance indexes of
performance indexes of the
the two
two types
types of
of system
system
are calculated and
are calculated and shown
shown in in Table
Table 2.2.

ia ib ic ia ib ic
/A

/A
10 10
Measured
currents

Measured

0 0
currents

-10 -10
iˆa iˆb iˆc iˆa iˆb iˆc
/A

10 10
/A
Estimated
currents

Estimated
currents

0 0
-10 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (b)
306 306
/rpm

600 600
/rpm

300 300
0.04 0.07 0.1 0.04 0.07 0.1
400
Measured

501 400
Estimated

500 501
speed

200
speed

499 200 500

0 0.635 0.65 0.67
0 0.635 0.65 0.67
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(c) (d)
Figure 9. The observed
observed signal
signal output
output waveforms
waveforms of of two types of system when the a-phase current
(a) The
sensor is stuck. (a) The measured current iiabc
measured current abc and
and estimated
estimated current𝚤̂ îabc based
current based on composite
composite sliding
The measured
mode observer; (b) The current iiabc
measured current abc and
and estimated
estimated current
current 𝚤̂ î abc based
based on
on traditional sliding
mode observer (Multi-observer
(Multi-observer system);
system); (c)
(c)The
Theestimated speed 𝜔
estimatedspeed ω̂ based
based on on composite sliding mode
observer; (d) The estimated speed ω̂𝜔based
basedon onLuenberger
Luenbergerobserver
observer(multi-observer
(multi-observersystem).
system).

305 600 305

600 301 301
Speed / rpm

0.04 0.07 0.1

Speed / rpm

400 400 0.04 0.07 0.1

ω ω̂ ω ω̂
200 200

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (b)
10 iˆa iˆb iˆc 10 iˆa iˆb iˆc
/A

5
/A

5
Estimated

0
Estimated

currents

0
currents

-5 -5
-10 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
0.1 0.2
0 0
-0.1 -0.2
0.1 0.103 0.106 0.109 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14
(c) (d)
 (d)
Figure 9. The observed signal output waveforms of two types of system when the a-phase current
sensor is stuck. (a) The measured current iabc and estimated current 𝚤̂ based on composite sliding
mode observer; (b) The measured current iabc and estimated current 𝚤̂ based on traditional sliding
mode
Energies 12, 1695 (Multi-observer system); (c) The estimated speed 𝜔 based on composite sliding mode
2019,observer 17 of 20
observer; (d) The estimated speed 𝜔 based on Luenberger observer (multi-observer system).

305 600 305

600 301 301
Speed / rpm

0.04 0.07 0.1

Speed / rpm
400 400 0.04 0.07 0.1
ω ω̂ ω ω̂
200 200

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 tf 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 t f 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (b)
10 iˆa iˆb iˆc 10 iˆa iˆb iˆc

/A
5
/A

Estimated
0
Estimated

currents
0
currents

-5 -5
-10 -10
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
0.1 0.2
0 0
-0.1 -0.2
0.1 x FOR PEER
Energies 2019, 12, 0.103 REVIEW
0.106 0.109 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14
18 of 21
(c) (d)
Figure 10. The observed signal output waveforms of two types of system in the case of speed sensor
Figure 10. The observed signal output waveforms of two types of system in the case of speed sensor
constant gain fault. (a) The measured speed ω and estimated speed 𝜔 based on composite sliding
constant gain fault. (a) The measured speed ω and estimated speed ω̂ based on composite sliding
mode observer; (b) The measured speed ω and estimated speed 𝜔 based on Luenberger observer
mode observer; (b) The measured speed ω and estimated speed ω̂ based on Luenberger observer
(Multi-observer system); (c) The estimated current 𝚤̂ based on composite sliding mode observer;
(Multi-observer system); (c) The estimated current îabc based on composite sliding mode observer;
(d) The estimated current 𝚤̂ based on traditional sliding mode observer (multi-observer system).
(d) The estimated current îabc based on traditional sliding mode observer (multi-observer system).

×10−11 ×10−11
4
/rpm
/rpm

2
2
residual

0
Speed
residual
Speed

0
-2
-2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(a) (b)
×10−12 ×10−12
eia eib eia eib
/A

15
/A

2
10
Current
Current

residual
residual

0 5
-2 0
-5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
t/s t/s
(d)
(c)
Figure The estimation
Figure 11. The estimationerror
errorwaveforms
waveforms of observation
of observation signals
signals of types
of two two types of system
of system under
under normal
normal
operatingoperating conditions.
conditions. (a) The (a) Theestimation
speed speed estimation erroronbased
error based on composite
composite sliding
sliding mode mode
observer;
(b) The speed
observer; estimation
(b) The error basederror
speed estimation on Luenberger observer (multi-observer
based on Luenberger system); (c) system);
observer (multi-observer The current
(c)
estimation
The currenterror based on
estimation composite
error sliding
based on mode sliding
composite observer; (d) The
mode current
observer; estimation
(d) error
The current based on
estimation
traditional
error based sliding mode observer
on traditional (multi-observer
sliding mode system).
observer (multi-observer system).

Table 2. The dynamic and steady-state performance indexes based on different observers.
Table 2. The dynamic and steady-state performance indexes based on different observers.
Rise Time (s) Time (s) Adjust
Rise TimeTime
Adjust (s) (s) Steady-State Error
Steady-State (%)(%)
Error
Type
Type
Speed CurrentCurrent
Speed SpeedSpeedCurrent
Current Speed
Speed Current
Current
Composite
Composite sliding
sliding mode
mode observer 0.0361
observer 0.0361
0.0025 0.0025
0.09950.0995 0.0162
0.0162 0.4 0.4 6.256.25
Traditional sliding mode
Traditional sliding 0.0362 - 0.0995 - 0.5 -
Multi-observer
Multi-observer observer 0.0362 - 0.0995 - 0.5 -
mode observer
system
system Luenberger
Luenberger - 0.0025 - - 0.0165 -
observer - 0.0025 0.0165 - 6.3 6.3
observer

According to the above waveforms and data, it is not difficult to find that from the perspective
of control objective, both the composite sliding mode observer control system proposed in this paper
and the multi-observer control system based on [10,12] can realize diagnosis and fault-tolerant
control under current and speed sensor faults, as shown in Figure 9a,b and Figure 10a,b. From the
perspective of control accuracy, the composite sliding mode observer control system has higher
precision and lower probability of misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis, and thus reducing the
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 18 of 20

According to the above waveforms and data, it is not difficult to find that from the perspective of
control objective, both the composite sliding mode observer control system proposed in this paper
and the multi-observer control system based on [10,12] can realize diagnosis and fault-tolerant control
under current and speed sensor faults, as shown in Figure 9a,b and Figure 10a,b. From the perspective
of control accuracy, the composite sliding mode observer control system has higher precision and lower
probability of misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis, and thus reducing the chattering phenomenon of the
system considerably, as shown in Figure 9c,d, Figure 10c,d, Figures 11a and 10d. From the perspective
of control performance, the rise time and adjustment time of the composite sliding mode observer
control system is shorter than that of the multi-observer control system, and the fault diagnosis and
isolation control are more rapid, which can better meet the actual engineering application requirements.
In addition, in the steady-state operation stage, the error between the steady-state response and the
expected response is kept in a smaller range, which indicates its better steady-state performance, as
shown in Table 2.

6. Conclusions
This paper, with the PMSM drive system as research object, studies the fault diagnosis and
fault-tolerant control strategies after the failure of multiple sensors. The main work and contributions
are as follows:

(1) A composite sliding mode observer for multiple current and velocity signals in a PMSM drive
system is proposed, which enables fast and accurate observation and estimation of different
types of signals. It simplifies the implementation of observer-related algorithms and sensor fault
diagnosis and isolation control algorithms, and facilitates engineering applications.
(2) A method is proposed for determining fault thresholds by searching for the maximum impact of
global steady-state error, parameter variation and load variation on residuals. The various factors
of changing residuals are considered, which fully ensures the diagnostic accuracy of the system
under different faults of different sensors.
(3) The proposed fault diagnosis and fault-tolerant control strategy applies to three types of
fault—stuck, constant gain and constant deviation of the three-phase current sensor and speed
sensor of the PMSM drive system. Compared with the existing methods, the control strategy
contributes to better dynamic, steady-state and anti-interference performance of the system, and
can maintain stable operation of the system under severe working conditions. It can serve as
reference for the reliability design of the motor drive system of electric vehicles.

The fault threshold of three-phase current and speed signals in this paper is based on the actual
system simulation results and the application experience. There is still a lack of scientific theoretical
basis, which is the problem that needs to be studied and solved in the future. Meanwhile, compared with
the existing methods, the better dynamic, steady-state performance, and anti-disturbance performance
of the proposed method in fault-tolerant control can be further verified by experiments.

Author Contributions: Q.Z. conceived, designed the research work and contributed in the paper writing; Z.L.
performed the research work and wrote the paper; D.X. and W.D. gathered the necessary data; Q.Z. and X.T.
handled the paper revisions.
Funding: This research work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NO. 51777141),
Science and Technology Research and Development Plan of China Railway Corporation (NO. 2017X009-D).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 19 of 20

Symbols and Acronyms

PMSM Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor
uα , uβ PMSM stator voltages
iα , iβ PMSM stator currents
ψα , ψβ PMSM stator flux linkage
Γ Fault threshold matrix
Γix (x = a, b, c) abc three-phase current fault threshold
Γω Speed fault threshold
x System state vector
u System input vector
y System output vector
e State estimation error matrix
ey Output estimation error matrix
s Sliding mode observer sliding face (matrix)
v Sliding mode observer switching matrix
Gn Sliding mode observer gain matrix
ξ(t) System interference signal
z(t) Sensors measurement output
γix (x = a, b, c) abc three-phase current residuals
γω Speed residual
F Fault flag matrix
Fix (x = a, b, c) abc three-phase current sensor fault flag
Fω Speed sensor fault flag
Sx (x = a, b, c) abc three-phase current fault-tolerant control signal
Sω Speed fault-tolerant control signal

References
1. Miyama, Y.; Hazeyama, M.; Hanioka, S.; Watanabe, N.; Daikoku, A.; Inoue, M. PWM Carrier Harmonic Iron
Loss Reduction Technique of Permanent Magnet Motors for Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016,
52, 2865–2871. [CrossRef]
2. Du, B.; Wu, S.; Han, S.; Cui, S. Interturn Fault Diagnosis Strategy for Interior Permanent-Magnet Synchronous
Motor of Electric Vehicles Based on Digital Signal Processor. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 1694–1706.
[CrossRef]
3. Zhongshi, Z.; Ruihai, M.; Lifang, W.; Junzhi, Z. Novel PMSM Control for Anti-Lock Braking Considering
Transmission Properties of the Electric Vehicle. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2018, 67, 10378–10386.
4. Zhao, H.; Luo, P.; Wang, N.; Zheng, Z.J.; Wang, Y.T. Fuzzy Logic Control of the Fault-tolerant PMSM Servo
System Based on MRAS Observer. In Proceedings of the 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference
(2018 CCDC), Shenyang, China, 9–11 June 2018; pp. 1812–1817.
5. Cai, B.P.; Zhao, Y.B.; Liu, H.L.; Xie, M. A Date-Driven Fault Diagnosis Methodology in Three-Phase Inverters
for PMSM Drive Systems. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 5590–5600. [CrossRef]
6. Hao, Y.; Xu, Y.; Zou, J. A Phase Current Reconstruction Approach for Three-Phase Permanent-Magnet
Synchronous Motor Drive. Energies 2016, 9, 853–868.
7. Khil, S.K.E.; Jlassi, I.; Estima, J.; Mrabet, B.; Cardoso, A.J.M. Current Sensor Fault Detection and Isolation
Method for PMSM Drives, Using Average Normalized Currents. Electron. Lett. 2016, 52, 1434–1436.
[CrossRef]
8. Wang, X.Q.; Wang, Z.; Xu, Z.X.; Cheng, M. Fault Diagnosis and Tolerance of Dual Three-phase PMSM Drives.
In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Energy Conversion and Exposition (ECCE), Portland, OR, USA, 23–27
September 2018; pp. 325–330.
9. Grouz, F.; Sbita, L.; Boussak, M. Current Sensors Gain Faults Detection and Isolation based on an Adaptive
Observer for PMSM Drives. In Proceedings of the 10th International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals
and Devices 2013 (SSD13), Hammamet, Tunisia, 18–21 March 2013; pp. 1–6.
Energies 2019, 12, 1695 20 of 20

10. Wu, C.; Guo, C.; Xie, Z.; Ni, F.; Hong, L. A Signal-Based Fault Detection and Tolerance Control Method of
Current Sensor for PMSM Drive. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 9646–9657. [CrossRef]
11. Grouz, F.; Sbita, L.; Boussak, M. Current Sensors Faults Detection, Isolation and Control Reconfiguration for
PMSM Drives. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Software
Applications, Hammamet, Tunisai, 21–23 March 2013; pp. 1–6.
12. Xia, J.; Guo, Y.; Dai, B.; Zhang, X. Sensor Fault Diagnosis and System Reconfiguration Approach for Electric
Traction PWM Rectifier Based on Sliding Mode Observer. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2017, 53, 4768–4778.
[CrossRef]
13. Veluvolu, K.C.; Kommuri, S.; Defoort, M.; Karimi, H.R. A Robust Observer-based Sensor Fault-Tolerant
Control for PMSM in Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 7671–7681.
14. Kommuri, S.K.; Sang, B.L.; Veluvolu, K.C. Robust Sensors-Fault-Tolerance with Sliding Mode Estimation
and Control for PMSM Drives. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2018, 23, 17–28. [CrossRef]
15. Foo, G.H.B.; Zhang, X.; Vilathgamuwa, D.M. Sensor Fault-Resilient Control of Interior Permanent-Magnet
Synchronous Motor Drives. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 2015, 20, 855–864.
16. Chybowski, L.; Twardochleb, M.; Wisnichi, B. Multi-criteria Decision Making in Components Importance
Analysis Applied to a Complex Marine System. Nase More 2016, 63, 264–270. [CrossRef]
17. Zhang, G.Q.; Wang, G.X.; Wang, G.L.; Huo, J.Y.; Zhu, L.H.; Xu, D.G. Fault Diagnosis Method of Current
Sensor for Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Drives. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Power
Electronics Conference (IPEC-Niigata 2018-ECCE Asia), Niigata, Japan, 20–24 May 2018; pp. 1206–1211.
18. Tang, X.; Wang, X.H.; Li, Y.; Yang, Y.B.; Zhang, R. Demagnetization Study for Line-start Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Motor During Starting Process. Proc. CSEE 2015, 35, 961–970.
19. Huangfu, Y.; Wang, S.; Rienzo, L.D.; Zhu, J. Radiated EMI Modeling and Performance Analysis for PWM
PMSM Drive System Based on Field-circuit Coupled FEM. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2017, 53, 1–4. [CrossRef]
20. Corradini, M.L.; Ippoliti, G.; Longhi, S.; Orlando, G. A Quasi-Sliding Mode Approach for Robust Control
and Speed Estimation of PM Synchronous Motors. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2012, 59, 1096–1104. [CrossRef]
21. Im, J.H.; Kim, R.Y. Improved Saliency-based Position Sensorless Control of Interior Permanent-magnet
Synchronous Machines with Single DC-Link Current Sensor using Current Prediction Method. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 5335–5343. [CrossRef]
22. Abdelrahem, M.; Hackl, C.M.; Kennel, R. Finite Position Set-Phase Locked Loop for Sensorless Control of
Direct-Driven Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Generators. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2018, 33, 3097–3105.
[CrossRef]
23. Zhou, C.; Yang, G.; Su, J.; Sun, G. The Control Strategy for Dual Three-phase PMSM Based on Normal
Decoupling Transformation under Fault Condition Due to Open Phases. Trans. China Electrotech. Soc. 2017,
32, 86–96.
24. Cunha, G.D.; Adalberto, J.R.; Alves, J.A.; Eduardo, C. Control of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Machines
for Subsea Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2017, 54, 1899–1905. [CrossRef]
25. Zhao, K.; Yin, T.; Zhang, C.; He, J.; Li, X.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, R.; Leng, A. Robust Model-free Nonsingular Terminal
Sliding Mode Control for PMSM Demagnetization Fault. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 15737–15748. [CrossRef]
26. Sellami, T.; Berriri, H.; Jelassi, S.; Darcherif, M.A.; Mimouni, F.M. Short-Circuit Fault Tolerant Control of
a Wind Turbine Driven Induction Generator Based on Sliding Mode Observers. Energies 2017, 10, 1611.
[CrossRef]
27. Ma, Z.; Zhang, X. FPGA Implementation of Sensorless Sliding Mode Observer with a Novel Rotation
Direction Detection for PMSM Drives. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 55528–55536. [CrossRef]
28. Xu, L.; Zhao, J.W.; Song, J.C.; Song, X.W.; Dong, F.; Zong, K.F. Research on Uniform Demagnetization
Diagnosis of Permanent Magnet Synchronous Linear Motors Based on ALE-MRAS Flux Observers. Proc. CSEE
2019. Available online: http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2107.tm.20190227.1119.005.html (accessed on
22 April 2019).

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).