See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/3483728

Nonlinear position controller design with input-output linearisation

technique for an interior permanent magnet synchronous motor control
system

Article  in  IET Power Electronics · April 2008

DOI: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS

72 466

All content following this page was uploaded by Cheng-Kai Lin on 06 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

www.ietdl.org

Published in IET Power Electronics

Received on 10th April 2007
Revised on 21st June 2007
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177

ISSN 1755-4535

Nonlinear position controller design with

input –output linearisation technique for an
interior permanent magnet synchronous
motor control system
C.-K. Lin T.-H. Liu S.-H. Yang
Department of Electrical Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, 43, Section 4, Keelung Road,
Taipei 106, Taiwan
E-mail: Liu@mail.ntust.edu.tw

Abstract: A novel, advanced position controller design for an interior permanent magnet synchronous motor
control system is proposed. The input – output linearisation technique is used to transfer the system model
into a linearised system model. Then, based on the linearised system model, an H1 controller is designed to
achieve robust performance of the position control system. To improve the system performance, a load
estimator is used to compensate the external load and the influence of the parameter variations as well. In
addition, a maximum torque/ampere control is applied to increase the output torque of the motor. A
digital signal processor, TMS 320LF2407, is used to execute the speed-loop and position-loop control
algorithms. As a result, the hardware circuit is quite simple. Several experimental results show that
the proposed system has fast transient responses, good load disturbance rejection responses and good
tracking responses.

1 Introduction algorithm-based fuzzy logic controller requires a lot of

The interior permanent magnet synchronous motor
(IPMSM) has been widely used in industry because of
its high efficiency, high torque/ampere ratio and
rugged structure. However, a nonlinear controller is
required to achieve maximum torque/ampere for an
IPMSM [1 –6]. Several nonlinear controllers have been
developed for the IPMSM. For example, Butt et al. [1]
proposed a simplified fuzzy-logic-based speed
controller for an IPMSM drive. The idea is good;
however, the design of the simplified fuzzy-logic-based
controller requires a lot of experience [1]. Yang et al.
[2] presented the implementation of an artificial-
neural-network-based real-time adaptive controller for
an IPMSM drive. The experimental results are good;
however, the control algorithm is too complicated [2].
Uddin et al. [3] investigated the genetic-algorithm-
based fuzzy logic controller for an IPMSM drive. The
idea is original; however, the design of the genetic-
knowledge. Mohamed and Lee [4] proposed an
adaptive self-tuning maximum torque/ampere vector
controller for an IPMSM drive system. The
experimental results are satisfactory. However, the
controller is very complicated. As a result, a lot of
computation is required for the digital signal processor
(DSP). Rahman et al. [5] used an adaptive
backstepping technique to control an IPMSM. The
idea of this work is original. However, in [5], the
implementation of the controller is very complicated.
In addition, some parameters of the controller are not
easily selected. Shi et al. [6] proposed an adaptive
controller design for a sensorless IPMSM drive system
with maximum torque control. The experimental
results are good. Unfortunately, it is not easy to
determine some constant parameters of the adaptive
laws. These constant parameters seriously influence
the closed-loop system [6]. Although many different
nonlinear controllers have been applied in the IPMSM

14 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177

drives [1–6], only a few researchers have focused on the
feedback linearisation technique to control an IPMSM.
As we know, the feedback linearisation technique has
many advantages. For example, this method uses
differential geometric transformation to transform
nonlinear system dynamics into a linearised system. As
a result, many well-developed linear control
techniques can be applied. The feedback linearisation
technique has been successfully used in helicopters,
aircraft, robots and biomedical devices [7]. Several
researchers have applied the feedback linearisation
technique to different motor drive systems. For
example, Zribi and Chiasson [8] proposed an exact
linearisation method to control the position of a PM
stepper motor. Chiasson [9] used nonlinear differential
geometric techniques for control of a series DC motor.
Chiasson [10] proposed a dynamic feedback
linearisation control of an induction motor. In
addition, Boukas and Habetler [11] implemented an
exact feedback linearisation with state and state
derivative feedback for an induction motor speed
control. Panda and Dash [12] studied the application
of a feedback linearisation approach to switched
reluctance motors. The published papers used the
linearisation feedback technique to different motor
drive systems [8 –13]; Recently, Chiasson [13] has
proposed a linearisation feedback technique applying in
IPMSM. However, the external load and parameter
variations are not considered. In addition, only
simulation results are shown and no experimental
results are included [13]. The paper proposes some
improvements on previous paper [13]. First, a load
estimator is developed to estimate the external load
with the variations of the motor parameters. In
addition, an H1 controller is used to obtain better
performance, including fast transient responses, good
load disturbance responses and good tracking
responses. Moreover, a maximum torque/ampere
control of the IPMSM is used in this paper as well. To
the authors’ best knowledge, no researcher has done
the realisation of the feedback linearisation technique
applied to an IPMSM drive. This reason motivated us
to study this topic. The idea of this paper therefore is
new and interesting. In addition, by using the DSP to
execute the controller, several experimental results
show the feasibility of the proposed nonlinear control
algorithm. Although the proposed nonlinear in the
paper is complicated, it has several advantages. First,
the proposed nonlinear controller can handle the
nonlinearities in a large-range operation directly. As
we know, when a linear controller is used to control a
system, it requires to neglect the nonlinear terms.
The linear controller’s accuracy thus quickly degrades
as the speed of motion increases. The proposed
nonlinear controller can solve the difficulty. In
addition, the proposed nonlinear controller
intentionally considers the nonlinearities; as a result,
the model uncertainties is tolerated. Moreover, the
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
proposed nonlinear controller is more intuitive than
other controllers. The reason is that the nonlinear
controller design is deeply rooted in the physics of the
plants. Recently, the DSP has become very powerful;
as a result, the applications of nonlinear control have
become more and more popular as well. The paper is
organised as follows. The mathematical model of
the IPMSM is discussed first. Then, the details of the
input-output linearisation technique applied in the
IPMSM are explained. In addition, the design of an
H1 controller based on the linearised system is
presented. Next, the implementation of the proposed
system is described. After that, several experimental
results are shown. Finally, some conclusions are given.
2 Mathematical model
Assuming that the IPMSM is of three-phased with
balanced windings and no saturation, the voltage
equations of the IPMSM in the d–q synchronous
frame can be expressed as
did
vd ¼ Rid þ Ld
Po vr Lq iq (1)
dt
diq
vq ¼ Riq þ Lq þ Po vr Ld id þ Po vr lm (2)
dt
where vd is the d-axis voltage, R the stator resistance, id
the d-axis current, Ld the d-axis inductance, d/dt is the
differential operator, Po the pole pair of the motor, vr
the motor speed, Lq the q-axis inductance, iq the q-axis
current, vq the q-axis voltage and lm the flux linkage.
The electromagnetic torque can be described as
3
Te ¼ Po [lm iq þ (Ld
Lq )id iq ] (3)
2
where Te is the electromagnetic torque of the motor.
The dynamic equation of the speed is
d vr 1
¼ (Te
TL
Bvr ) (4)
dt Jm
The dynamic equation of the position is
dur
¼ vr (5)
dt
In this paper, both the inertia and viscous friction
coefficient are considered. As a result, a more general
description of the mathematical model can be
obtained. The effect of B is negligible in some papers
because of its small effect.
IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 15
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org

3 Nonlinear position controller Next, comparing (10) and (6), we can obtain
design 2 3
Rid Po Lq iq vr
According to (1) – (5), the dynamic equation of the
þ
motor can be expressed as 6 Ld Ld 7
6 7
6 P v L i Ri P v l 7
2 3 6
o r dd

o r m
q 7
_id 6 7
f (x) ¼ 6 Lq Lq Lq 7
6 _i 7 6 7
6 q 7 6 3Po iq lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq v B TL 7
6 7 6
r m

7
4 v̇ r 5 4 5
2Jm Jm Jm
u̇ r vr
2 3 (11)
Rid Po Lq iq vr
6
þ 7
6 Ld Ld 7 and
6 P v L i Ri P v l 7
6
o r d d


q

o r m 7  T
6 7
¼6 Lq Lq Lq 7 x ¼ id iq vr ur
6 7
6 3Po iq lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq v B T 7  T
6
r m
L7 g1 ¼ 1=Ld 0 0 0
4 5
2Jm Jm Jm  T
vr g2 ¼ 0 1=Lq 0 0
2 3 2 3
1=Ld 0
6 0 7 6 1=L 7 In fact, the real system includes an unknown external
6 7 6 q7 load TL , and the deviations of the motor parameters
þ6 7v d þ 6 7v (6)
4 0 5 4 0 5q which include DJm and DBm [16]. Then, the total
0 0 uncertainty can be expressed as

d vr
As you can see, (6) is a nonlinear dynamic equation. As a Te ¼ Jmo þ Bmo vr þ Td (12)
result, the linearisation technique, the external load dt
estimator and the H1 controller can be designed. The dv
details are discussed as follows. Td ¼ DJm r þ DBm vr þ TL (13)
dt

3.1 Input– output linearisation technique where DJm ¼ Jm
Jmo and DBm ¼ Bm
Bmo are the
Lie derivate is a well known mathematical operator to deviations of the motor parameters, and Jmo , Bmo are
obtain a feedback linearisation system [7]. The technique the nominal parameters of the motor. By substituting
is called input–output linearisation technique. In this (12) and (13) into (4), we can obtain
paper, the authors use Lie derivative to transform a
nonlinear system into a linearisation system. First, we 3Po iq lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq vr Bmo Td
define the following operators [7, 14, 15] v̇ r ¼


2Jmo Jmo Jmo
X
n
@h (14)
Lf h ¼ rh  f ¼ fi (x) (7)
i¼1
@xi


 Then, the system dynamic equation can be rearranged as
Lif h ¼ Lf L(i
1)
f h ¼ r L(i
1)
f h f (8)
By using the same way, we define [7, 14] x_ ¼ f^ (x) þ g1  vd þ g2  vq þ g3  DTd (15)

Lg Lf h ¼ r(Lf h)  g (9)
where
Then, according to (1)–(3), we can rearrange the
dynamics of the system as follows DTd ¼ Td
T^ d
 T
x_ ¼ f (x) þ g1 vd þ g2 vq (10) g3 ¼ 0 0
1=Jmo 0

16 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
 www.ietdl.org

and and
2 3
f^ 1 (x) 3Po (Ld
Lq )iq
6 7 Lg1 L2f^ h1 ¼ (25)
6 f^ 2 (x) 7 2Jmo Ld
f^ (x) ¼ 6
6 f^ (x) 7
7
4 3 5 3P lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id
Lg2 L2f^ h1 ¼ (26)
f^ 4 (x) 2Jmo Lq
2 3
Rid Po Lq iq vr

þ Rid Po Lq iq vr
6 Ld Ld 7 Lf^ h2 ¼
þ (27)
6 7 Ld Ld
6 P v L i Ri P v l 7
6
o r dd

o r m
q 7
6 7 Bmo
¼6 Lq Lq Lq 7 Lg3 L2f^ h1 ¼ (28)
6 7 2
Jmo
6 3Po iq lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq v B T^ 7
6
r mo
d 7
4 5
2Jmo Jmo Jmo 3Po (Ld
Lq )iq Bmo
vr L3f^ h1 ¼ f^ 1 (x)
f^ (x)
2Jmo Jmo 3
(16)
3Po lm þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id
where ‘ˆ’ is the symbol of the estimating value. þ f^ 2 (x) (29)
2Jmo
In this paper, we choose the d-axis current and the
rotor position as output variables [7]. The aim of the 1
controller is to maintain the position and the d-axis Lg3 Lf^ h1 ¼
(30)
current in the trajectories as we want. The new state Jmo
variables can be defined as 1
Lg1 h2 ¼ (31)
z1 ¼ ur ¼ h1 (x) (17) Ld
To effectively control the system, the d – q axis voltages
z2 ¼ z_1 ¼ vr ¼ Lf^ h1 (x) (18) can be selected as
  " #
vd u1
L3f^ h1
Lg3 Lf^ h1 T_^ d
DL3f^ h1 (x)
z3 ¼ L2f^ h1 (x) ¼ D(x)
1
vq u2
Lf h2
DLf^ h2
3Po lm iq þ 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq vr Bmo T^ d (32)
¼


2Jmo Jmo Jmo
Where DL3f^ h1 and DLf^ h2 are the parameter variations
(19) of the Lie derivatives. Then u1 and u2 are new control
variables. The D(x) can be expressed as
z4 ¼ id ¼ h2 (x) (20)  
L L2 h Lg2 L2f^ h1
D(x) ¼ g1 f^ 1 (33)
In addition, the dynamic equation of the system can be Lg1 h2 0
expressed as
By substituting (32) into (23) and (24), we can obtain
z_1 ¼ z2 (21)
z_3 ¼ u1 þ Lg3 L2f^ h1  DTd
DL3f^ h1 (x) (34)
z_2 ¼ z3 þ Lg3 Lf^ h1 DTd (22)
z_4 ¼ u2
DLf^ h2 (35)
z_3 ¼ L3f^ h1 (x) þ Lg1 L2f^ h1  vd þ Lg2 L2f^ h1  vq
Because of the influence of the parameter variation,
þ Lg3 Lf^ h1 T_^ d þ Lg3 L2f^ h1 DTd (23) measuring error and external load, the nonlinear
system cannot match the linear decouple Brunovski
canonical form [14]. As a result, the performance of
z_4 ¼ Lf^ h2 þ Lg1 h2  vd (24) the system is deteriorated. If we just consider the
ideal case, which means that DL3f^ h1 ¼ 0, DTd ¼ 0

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 17
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org

and DLf^ h2 ¼ 0, then it is possible to select a linear state solve the problem, a new variable is defined as
feedback control method as follows
...
xc1 ¼ T^ d
L1 vr (42)
 
u1 ¼ ur þ k11 ðu€ r
z3 ) þ k12 (u_ r
z2 ) þ k13 (ur
z1 )
Then, it is not difficult to obtain
(36)
and x_c1 ¼ T_^ d
L1 v̇ r

_ B 1
u2 ¼ k21 (id
z4 ) þ _id (37) ¼ T d
L1
mo vr

^ T^
Jmo Jmo d

Equations (36) and (37) show the pole placement 3Po lm 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq
technique applying in the IPMSM drive system. þ i þ (43)
2Jmo q 2Jmo

3.2 External load torque estimator Assuming that Td and T^ d are close enough, we can easily
obtain
In the real world, the motor is used to convert the
electrical energy into mechanical energy. As a result, 
B 1 3P l
an external load is added to the drive system. For a x_c1 ¼ L1 mo vr þ T^ d
o m iq
fixed sampling interval of the voltage control loop, Jmo Jmo 2Jmo
the external load does not change abruptly. The major 
3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq
reason is the sampling interval is very short. As a
(44)
result, for each sampling interval, we can assume that 2Jmo
the external load Td is a constant, and its derivative T_ d
is equal to zero. According to (3) and letting T_ d ¼ 0, By letting e ¼ Td
T^ d , we can obtain
we can obtain
L
2 3 _e ¼ T_ d
T_^ d ¼ 1 e (45)
  Bmo 1   Jmo
v̇ r

vr
¼ 4 Jmo Jmo 5
T_ d 0 0 Td By suitably selecting L1 , it is not difficult to make the
2 3 2 3 estimating error converge. In the real world, we can
3Po lm 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq obtain the estimating load as T_^ d ¼ x_c1 þ L1 v̇ r , which
þ 4 2Jmo 5iq þ 4 2Jmo 5 (38) can be obtained from (43). The dynamic behaviour of
0 0 the external load estimator can be determined by the
gain L1 . In addition, the influence of the load
and disturbance can be effectively compensated for. Fig. 1
shows the block diagram of the external load torque
  estimator. The T^ d can be obtained from the input
  vr information vr, iq and id and using the parameters of
y o ¼ vr ¼ 1 0 (39)
Td the motor and the gain L1 as well. In the real world,
the estimated load is not equal to the external
Now, we can define the load estimator as load. There exists estimated error. However, the
closed-loop system can effectively compensate the load
disturbance although the estimated error appears.
T_^ d ¼ T_ d þ L1 (v̇ r
v_^ r ) (40)
Substituting (40) into (38)

_T^ ¼ L v̇ þ Bmo v þ 1 T^
d 1 r
Jmo r Jmo d

3P l 3Po (Ld
Lq )id iq

o m iq
(41)
2Jmo 2Jmo
where L1 is the gain of the load estimator.
Unfortunately, in the real world, it is difficult to
obtain v̇ r without causing high-frequency noise. To Figure 1 Block diagram of the external load estimator

18 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
 www.ietdl.org

3.3 H1 controller design
To reduce the influence of the parameter variation,
measuring error and external load, an H1 is proposed
here to achieve the maximum torque/ampere control.
By suitably adjusting the d-axis current, a maximum
torque/ampere characteristic can be achieved. In
addition, the H1 controller can compensate for the
uncertainty caused by the parameter variation,
measuring error and external load disturbance.
The relationship of the d- and the q-axis currents
that can produce the maximum torque/ampere
control is developed in previous papers [6, 17, 18],
and can be expressed as
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

lm l2m
id ¼
þ i2
2(Ld
Lq ) 4(Ld
Lq )2 q
In (46), we assume that the d-axis inductance is not
equal to the q-axis inductance. If the d-axis inductance
is equal to the q-axis inductance, then the motor is a
surface-mounted permanent synchronous motor. The
d-axis current command is set as zero when the
surface mounted motor is operated in the constant
torque region. Equation (46) therefore cannot be
applied for the surface mounted permanent magnet
synchronous motor. According to (23) and (24), we
can obtain
robust. As a result, the H1 controller can reach its
desired responses without seriously being influenced
by the perturbations. Then, the proposed controller
works well. As we know, we can consider the worst
case of the H1 controller. The Du1and Du2 are
related to the nonlinear perturbations. In the real
world, it is impossible to obtain Du1 and Du2 .
However, for every plant, the parameter variations
and external load have their limitations. As a result,
it is possible to set upper bounds for Du1 and Du2 . In
this paper, we assume jDu1 j  0:1ju1 j, and
jDu2 j  0:1ju2 j, which means that the allowed
variations of the control inputs are below +10%. If
the variations of the control inputs beyond +10%, the
performance of the system is deteriorated. Then, new
upper bounds should be selected. However, in the real
world, the influence of the uncertainties is not so
serious. Generally speaking, the u1 and u2 cannot be
(46)
zero under transient responses and load disturbance
conditions. Then, Du1 and Du2 are not zero as well.
However, when the external load is zero and the
system reaches steady state. The u1 and u2 can become
zero if the parameter variations do not exist. If the
parameter variations exist, then the steady-state error
appears. In this situation, the u1 and u2 are not zero,
and the Du1 and Du2 appear to force the system
reducing its steady-state error. From (43) and (44), we
can redefine the new state variables as [13]
x_h2 ¼ (A þ DA)xh2 þ (B þ DB)uh2 þ Dwh2 (53)

...
z_3 ¼ u r ¼ u1 þ Du1 (47)
z_4 ¼ id ¼ u2 þ Du2 (48) zh2 ¼ C1 xh2 þ D12 uh2 (54)

and where

2 3
u1 ¼ L3f^ h1 þ Lg1 L2f^ h1 vd þ Lg2 L2f^ h1 vq þ Lg3 Lf^ h1 T_^ d (49) 0 1 þ a12 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
6 7
6 7
6 0 0 0 0 0 07
u2 ¼ Lf^ h2 þ Lg1 h2 vd (50) A þ DA ¼ 6
6
1
7
6 0 0 0 0 077
6 7
4 0 0 0 1 0 05
Du1 ¼ DL3f^ h1 (x) (51) 0 0
1 0 0 0
2 3
0 0
Du2 ¼ DLf^ h2 (52) 61 þ b 0 7
6 21 7
6 7
6 0 1 þ b32 7
To design the H1 state feedback controller, we should B þ DB ¼ 6
6 0
7
7
assume that the Du1 and Du2 are uncertainties and 6 0 7
6 7
have their bounded values. In the real world, the 4 0 0 5
nonlinear perturbations are unknown and are not
constant values. However, the H1 controller is quite 0 0

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 19
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org

2 3 bounds as 10%. The selection of the percentage

0 0 0
60 depends on the system characteristics and the
6 0 077 specification of the closed-loop system.
6 7
60 0 07
D¼6 61
7 Considering the system with bounded uncertainties,
6 0 077 we can set g . 0 as the disturbance attenuating ratio,
6 7 and 1 . 0 as a constant, and Q . 0 as a positive
40 0 05
definite matrix. Then, it is not difficult to derive the
0 1 0 Riccati equation [19]
2 3
c1 0 0 0 0 0
60 AT P þ PA þ g
2 PDDT P
PBR
1 BT P
6 c2 0 0 0 07 7
6 7 þ 1P(I þ V(D2 ))P þ 1
1 G(D1 ) þ C1T C1 þ Q ¼ 0
60 0 c3 0 0 07
6 7
60 0 0 c4 0 07 (55)
6 7
C1 ¼ 6 7
60 0 0 0 c5 07 where V(D2 )  DBDBT , and G(D1 )  DAT DA. We can
6 7
60 0 0 0 0 c6 7 solve the positive symmetrical matrix P in (55), and then
6 7
6 7 obtain the linear state feedback control law as
40 0 0 0 0 05
0 0 0 0 0 0 u ¼ K  xh2 (56)
2 3
0 0 where K ¼ (
R
1 BT P); R ¼ DT12 D12 . The parameters
60 0 7 of c1 , c2 , c3 , c4 , c5 , c6 , d1 and d2 in (54) are weighting
6 7
6 7 factors. In this paper, the values of the weighting
60 0 7 factors are: c1 ¼ 0.4955, c2 ¼ 0.001, c3 ¼ 0.06,
6 7
60 0 7 c4 ¼ 1.2395, c5 ¼ 0.4, c6 ¼ 0.313, d1 ¼ 0.00025,
6 7
D12 ¼ 6 7 d2 ¼ 0.02, g ¼ 0.5 and 1 ¼ 5. Generally speaking,
60 0 7
6 7 selecting the previous parameters is not easy and
60 0 7 requires a lot of designers’ experiences. According to
6 7
6 7 these parameters, the H1 linear state feedback
4 d1 0 5
controller is shown as
0 d2    
u1
2157
208 0 2109 174 0
and ¼
u2 0 0
36 0 0 153
xh2 ¼ [ vr v̇ r id eu1 eu2 ei2 ]T  xh2 (57)
uh2 ¼ [ u1 u2 ]T , wh2 ¼ [ u̇ r id DTd ]T
Substituting (57) and (41) into (32), and then executing
ja12 j  0:1; jb21 j  0:1; jb32 j  0:1 D(x)
1 , we can obtain the control voltages vd and vq ,
 which are shown in Fig. 2. The whole control system is
eu1 ¼ ur
ur , _eu1 ¼ u̇ r
u̇ r
ð shown in Fig. 3, which includes the controller, the space
vector pulse-width-modulation inverter, an IPMSM and
eu2 ¼ (ur
ur ), _eu2 ¼ ur
ur an external load estimator. The digital signal processor
ð is used to execute all the estimating and control
algorithms. Finally, the d–q axis voltage commands, vd
ei2 ¼ (id
id ), _ei2 ¼ id
id and vq , are outputted to the hardware circuit.

where eu1 is the position error, _eu1 the derivative of the
position error, eu2 the integration of the position error,
ei2 the integration of the d-axis current error, ur the
position command and id the d-axis current command.
In the real world, the percentages of the parameter
variations a12 , b21 and b32 are unknown. However,
they have variation limitations. As a result, according
to the real situations, we can set bounds when we
design the controller. In this paper, we select the
By using the same method, we can design an H1
speed controller. Because of the limitation of the
scope of this paper, only some important results are
discussed here. First, from (36) and (37), we can obtain
u1 ¼ v̈ r þ k31 (v̇ r
z3 ) þ k32 (vr
z2 ) (58)
u2 ¼ k31 (id
z4 ) þ _id (59)

20 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
 www.ietdl.org

Next, from (53) –(56), and selecting suitable weighting and

functions, we can obtain  T
xh3 ¼ vr v̇ r id ev1 ev2 ei2
    ð
u1
3977
2100 0 34875 925 0
¼ ev1 ¼ vr
vr , ev2 ¼ (vr
vr )

u2 0 0
450 0 0 24
 xh3 (60)

Figure 5 Implemented system

Table 1 Parameters of motor

Figure 2 Block diagram of the nonlinear position controller
R 1.9 V
Ld 15.1 mH
Lq 31 mH
lm 0.31 V s/rad
Jmo (without load) 0.0005 kg m2
Bmo (without load) 0.03 N m s/rad
Jmo (with load) 0.0227 kg m2
Bmo (with load) 0.0341 N m s/rad

Figure 3 Proposed closed-loop position control system

Figure 4 Block diagram of the nonlinear speed controller Figure 6 Implemented circuit of the drive system

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008 IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 21
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org
Figure 7 Comparison of transient responses
where vr is the speed command. By substituting (60)
and (41) into (32), and then computing D(x)21, we
can obtain the control voltages vd and vq, which are
shown in Fig. 4.
Figure 8 Measured responses of position control
a Load disturbance responses
b d – q axis currents
c T^ d
d Trajectories
22 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
4 Implemented system
The implemented system is shown in Fig. 5. A digital
signal processor is used to execute the whole control
algorithm. The a- and b-phase currents are obtained
by using Hall-effect current sensors. Then, the A/D
converters are used to convert the analogue signals
into digital signals. Next, the current signals are read
by the DSP. In addition, the shaft position of the
motor is read by the DSP. The d- and q-axis currents
can be computed by using the a-b-c to d-q axis
coordinate transformation. The encoder used in this
paper is 1000 pulses/revolution. However, it increases
to 4000 pulses/revolution after a multiplier circuit is
used. The control algorithm includes the input –
output linearisation technique, the external load
estimator, and the H1 controller, which were
discussed in Section 3 of this paper. Finally, the DSP
computes the d- and the q-axis voltages to the
inverter. A closed-loop control system with the
maximum torque/ampere control is thus achieved. As
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008

Figure 9 Comparison of triangular position commands
you can observe, most jobs in Fig. 4 are executed by the
DSP; as a result, the hardware circuit is quite simple.
5 Experimental results
The motor used in the paper is made by Hsin-Ting
Company, Taiwan. The type of motor is the 130-
750MS-ZK-L2. The IPMSM was a three-phase, four-
pole, rated 0.75 HP, with a 2000 rpm rated speed. In
the experimentation, the maximum voltage and the
continuous rated armature current are set to 230 V
and 12 A. The parameters of the motor are shown in
Table 1. In Table 1, the parameters Jmo and Bmo are
provided by Hsin-Ting Company. The resistance R is
measured from the stator windings directly by using a
metre. The parameter lm is obtained by measuring
the back emf and the motor speed. The procedures of
measuring lm are as follows. First, the axis of the
IPMSM is connected by the axis of a DC motor,
which is controlled by an adjustable DC voltage.
Then, we can adjust the DC voltage to control the
speed of the DC motor and the IPMSM as well. After
that, we can measure the back emf and the rotor
Figure 10 Transient responses at different position
commands
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
Figure 11 Position response with a reverse command
speed. Finally, we can obtain the parameter lm by
computing the ratio of the back emf to speed. On the
other hand, the parameters Ld and Lq can be obtained
from the load test. The procedures are as follows.
First, the axis of the IPMSM is connected to the axis
of a DC motor, which is controlled by an adjustable
DC voltage. Then, we connected the stator windings
of the IPMSM to a three-phase resistance load. Next,
we adjust the DC voltage to control the speed of the
DC motor and the IPMSM as well. After that, we can
measure the three-phase voltages, currents, and speed
of the IPMSM. Finally, we can compute the
parameters Ld and Lq by using a personal computer to
compute the measuring data including the voltages,
currents and speed. The sampling intervals of the
switching time of the inverter are 100 ms. In this
paper, we do not design a current loop. We control
the d- and q-axis voltages only. The sampling intervals
of the speed-loop and position-loop are 1 ms. In fact,
the proposed controller requires a high-performance
DSP to execute the control algorithm in a fixed time
interval.
The design parameters used for the pole placement
control scheme are selected as k11 ¼ 2157, k12 ¼ 208,
k13 ¼ 2109, k21 ¼ 153, k31 ¼ 2110, k32 ¼ 34875,
Figure 12 Responses with varying input voltages
IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 23
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org
Figure 13 Position responses with varying J and B
and k41 ¼ 24. By using the control parameters, we can
obtain a similar response with the proposed control
scheme without considering load disturbance and
uncertainty of the parameter variations. In this
Figure 14 Measured results at 500 rpm and 2 N m load
a Transient responses
b Load disturbance responses
c Currents
d Trajectory
24 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
paper, only the proposed nonlinear controller uses
the load estimator. The PI controller and pole
placement controller do not include the load
estimator. The parameters of the PI controller are
tuned by trial and error. The reason is that it is very
difficult to determine the parameters of the PI
controller. However, the authors have done their
best to show the best experimental results of the PI
controller. The authors have done a lot of
experiment for the PI controller; however, only the
satisfactory results are shown here. Several
experimental results are discussed. Fig. 6 shows the
photograph of the implemented circuits. The circuits
include 6 major parts which is indicated by A – F. As
you can observe, A is the power supply, B the
interfacing circuit and A/D converter, C the DSP, D
the IGBT module, E the driver and F the encoder
circuit. Fig. 7 shows the measured transient response
of the proposed controller, the PI controller and
the pole placement controller. Fig. 8a shows the
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008

measured load disturbance responses. The proposed
controller performs better again. The external load
is obtained by using the following steps. First, the
IPMSM is controlled to reach a fixed position. Then,
a 1 kg weight is put at a certain location from the
motor with a simple mechanism, which was designed
by us. As a result, the weight can provide the
external load 1 N m to evaluate the performance of
position control system. Fig. 8b shows the d- and q-
axis current responses at a 1 N m external load.
Fig. 8c is the estimated load T^ d under 1 N m. Fig. 8d
shows the comparison of the trajectories of the
theoretical maximum torque/ampere control and the
measured results. The measured results are close to
the theoretical trajectory. Fig. 9 shows the responses
of the triangular position command by using the
proposed controller, the PI controller and the pole
placement controller. As you can see, the measured
position response has a phase shift when a PI
controller is used. The major reason is that the PI
controller has a time lag, which produces the phase
shift between the position command and the
measured position. Fig. 10 shows the measured
transient responses at different position commands by
using the proposed controller. According to this
figure, the proposed system has satisfactory
performance for different position commands. Fig. 11
shows the relationship between the position
command and the measured position. The rise time
is around 0.2 ms. Fig. 12 shows the measured
responses when the variations of the Lie derivate are
varied between +10%. Fig. 13 shows the measured
responses when the parameters of inertia J and
viscous coefficient B in the DSP are varied between
+50%. As you can observe, the system has good
robustness when the parameters in the controller are
varied in a wide range. Figs. 14a and b show the
comparison of the proposed method, the PI
controller, and the pole placement technique at
500 rpm and 2 N m external load. As you can
observe, the proposed method has a better
performance. Fig. 14c shows the d- and q-axis
current responses. The proposed method requires
less stator current than that by the traditional
method, which sets the d-axis current as zero.
Fig. 14d shows the comparison of the trajectories of
the theoretical maximum torque/ampere control
and the measured result. The measured result is
close to the theoretical trajectory. According to the
experimental results, we can conclude that the
proposed nonlinear controller has the best
performance. The PI controller cannot work well
when the external load is added. The major reason is
that the whole system appears serious
nonlinear characteristic as the external load is
added. On the other hand, the pole placement has
obvious steady-state error as the external load is
added.
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008
www.ietdl.org
6 Conclusions
In this paper, a linearisation feedback controller has been
designed and implemented for an IPMSM position
control system. The experimental results can validate
the theoretical analysis. By using a digital signal
processor, the controller can be easily executed. In
addition, the proposed position control system has
good transient responses, load disturbance responses
and tracking responses. The paper provides a new
direction for the application of advanced controllers in
an IPMSM position control system.
7 Acknowledgment
The work described in this paper was supported by
National Science Council, Taiwan, under Grant NSC
95-2221-E-011-191.
8 References
[1] BUTT CB, HOQUE MA, RAHMAN MA: ‘Simplified fuzzy-logic-
based MTPA speed control of IPMSM drive’, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., 2004, 40, (6), pp. 1529 – 1535
[2] YANG Y, VILATHGAMUWA DM, RAHMAN MA: ‘Implementation of
an artificial-neural-network-based real-time adaptive
controller for an interior permanent-magnet motor drive’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2003, 39, (1), pp. 96– 104
[3] UDDIN MN, ABIDO MA, RAHMAN MA: ‘Real-time performance
evaluation of a genetic-algorithm-based fuzzy logic
controller for IPM motor drives’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
2005, 41, (1), pp. 246– 252
[4] MOHAMED YAI, LEE TK: ‘Adaptive self-tuning MTPA vector
controller for IPMSM drive system’, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers, 2006, 21, (3), pp. 636 – 644
[5] RAHMAN MA, VILATHGAMUWA DM, UDDIN MN, ET AL.: ‘Nonlinear
control of interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2003, 39, (2), pp. 408 – 416
[6] SHI JL, LIU TH, CHANG YC: ‘Adaptive controller design for a
sensorless IPMSM drive system with a maximum torque
control’, IEE Proc., Electr. Power Appl., 2006, 153, (6),
pp. 823– 833
[7] SLOTINE JJE, LI W: ‘Applied nonlinear control’ (Prentice-
Hall, New Jersey, 1991)
[8] ZRIBI M, CHIASSON J: ‘Position control of a PM stepper
motor by exact linearisation’, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control,
1991, 36, (5), pp. 620– 625
IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26/ 25
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
www.ietdl.org
[9] CHIASSON J: ‘Nonlinear differential geometric techniques
for control of a series DC motor’, IEEE Trans. Control Syst.
Technol., 1994, 2, (1), pp. 35– 42
[10] CHIASSON J : ‘A new approach to dynamic feedback
linearisation control of an induction motor’, IEEE Trans.
Autom. Control., 1998, 43, (3), pp. 391– 397
[11] BOUKAS TK , HABETLER TG : ‘High-performance induction
motor speed control using exact feedback linearisation
with state and state derivative feedback’, IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., 2004, 19, (4), pp. 1022 – 1028
[12] PANDA SK, DASH PK: ‘Application of nonlinear control to
switched reluctance motors: a feedback linearisation
approach’, IEE Proc., Electr. Power Appl., 1996, 143, (5),
pp. 371– 379
[13] CHIASSON J: ‘Modeling and High-Performance Control of
Electric Machines’ (John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, 2005)
[14] ISIDORI A : ‘Nonlinear Control Systems’ (Springer,
New York, 1995)
26 / IET Power Electron., 2008, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 14– 26
doi: 10.1049/iet-pel:20070177
View publication stats
[15] MASSOUM A, FELLAH MK, ABDELKADER M, ET AL.: ‘Input output
linearisation and sliding mode control of a permanent
magnet synchronous machine fed by a three levels
inverter’, JEE, J. Electron. Eng., 2006, 57, pp. 205– 210
[16] KIM KH, YOUN MJ: ‘A nonlinear speed control for a PM
synchronous motor using a simple disturbance estimation
technique’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron, 2002, 49, (3),
pp. 524– 535
[17] EL-REFAIE AM, JAHNS TM: ‘Comparison of synchronous PM
machine types for wide constant-power speed range
operation’, IEEE Conf. Industry Applications, 2005, vol. 2,
pp. 1015 – 1022
[18] HAN SH, JAHNS TM, GUVEN MK, ET AL.: ‘Impact of Maximum
Back-EMF Limits on the Performance Characteristics
of Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Machines’,
IEEE Conf. Industry Applications, 2006, vol. 4,
pp. 1962 – 1969
[19] BURL JB: ‘Linear optimal control-H2 and H1 methods’
(Addison-Wesley, California, 1998)
& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2008