2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)
Enhanced Double Exponential Reaching Law based
Sliding Mode Controller for Induction Motor Drives
Jisha Kuruvilla P
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Dept.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES) | 978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/PEDES49360.2020.9379413
Mar Athanasius college of Engineering
Kothamangalam, India
jishakuruvillamace@gmail.com
Abstract—A new reaching law for Sliding Mode Controller
(SMC) called ”Enhanced Double Exponential Reaching Law”
(EDERL) is proposed in the paper.The reaching law is an im-
proved version of Enhanced Exponential Reaching Law (EERL)
and is tested on a three phase, 1hp, vector controlled Induction
Motor(IM) drive. The proposed reaching law guarantees fast
response, negligible chattering and superior dynamic tracking
performance in the presence of uncertain disturbances compared
to conventional reaching laws. The proposed reaching law is
validated by simulation using Matlab platform and the hardware
implementation is accomplished using dSPACE rti 1104 control
desk.
Index Terms—Double Exponential Reaching Law (EDERL),
Sliding mode control (SMC),Reaching law.
I. I NTRODUCTION
The exciting technical applications of inductions motor
drives are opening new horizons in the field of research.
The characteristic advantages of modern advanced drives are
not yet completely explored as suitable control strategy is
invariably required to produce a well regulated response .
Extensive research is advancing to explore control strategies
that make good use of the complete performance of industrial
drives. Sliding mode control (SMC) is a variable structure
strategy which guarantees dynamic and robust performance
in unreliable operating environments[1]-[5]. In this paper a
new reaching law based sliding mode controller is introduced
and its performance characteristics is examined on a vector
controlled IM drive.
The research field on sliding mode control is introduced
before the research community by Emelyanov in [1] and in
sliding mode control the structure of the control loop switches
infinitely such that the state dynamics are forced to follow
a predefined trajectory called sliding manifold in state space
plane which contributes towards the excellent performance of
the controller. The switching nature of the feedback control
law is dependent on the sign of a control variable called the
sliding variable which is a function of the state variables of the
system. The complete process of SMC consists of a reaching
segment and a sliding segment. In [6] a reaching condition
is defined based on the value of the sliding variable but this
condition specified does not guarantees fixed reach time. In [7]
Gao and Hung specified the dynamics of the sliding function
by a differential equation called Reaching Law to ensure fixed
978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Anasraj R
Electrical and Electronics Engineering Dept.
Government Engineering College
Thrissur, India
anasrajr@gmail.com
reach time and also to shape the movement of the trajec-
tory. They introduced the Reaching law based sliding mode
controllers which enhances chattering free response by the
suitable design of the reaching law. Later this control method
was extended to discrete systems in [8]-[9].In [10]the authors
proposed the Exponential Reaching Law (ERL)to assure im-
proved performance of a modular robotic arm by making the
reaching law adaptive. The adaptiveness to the control law
is introduced by changing the control gain according to the
distance of the system state variables away from the sliding
manifold. Though the control gain is adaptive in ERL, it shows
performance similar to Gao’s Constant Reaching Law during
sliding motion along the manifold. The controller switches
with a constant control gain resulting in significant amount
of chattering during sliding period of the control process. In
[14] the authors proposed the Enhanced Exponential Reaching
Law (EERL) which is a modified version of ERL by adding
a proportional term and a power rate term of the sliding
variable. This reaching law highlights improved reach time
and negligible chattering. But the controller exhibits slow
response towards sudden disturbances acting on the system
during steady state condition. This is because of the presence
of power rate term in the control gain which is a function
of the sliding variable.In [11]-[14]the authors introduced new
generalized version of reaching law approach to the sliding
mode control techniques.In [15]-[22] the application oriented
literatures on the reaching law based controllers are published.
This paper introduces an enhanced double exponential
reaching law which has the improved characteristics of dy-
namic response and reduced chattering when compared to
ERL and EERL. The proposed control law ensures dynamic
tracking performance than EERL when field oriented control is
validated on a 1hp IM drive using dSPACE rti 1104 platform.
II. S LIDING M ODE C ONTROL
A. Basic Concept
Sliding mode control is a variable structure type control
as the control law is switching type. The feedback controller
of SMC works on the basis of a set of decision rules. In
this control the system state variables are represented by a
function or a variable called the sliding function or sliding
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)
Fig. 1: Schematic of Sliding Mode Controller process
variable S(x1 ,x˙1 ). The decision rules are formulated tracking
the location of the state variables in the state phase plane
as shown in Fig.1. Hence the entire phase plane is divided
into two unstable regions S(x1 ,x˙1 ) > 0 and S(x1 ,x˙1 )< 0
according to the sign of the sliding variable as shown in Fig.1.
The convention used is that if the state trajectory resides in
S(x1 ,x˙1 ) > 0 then the sliding variable is considered to be
positive and if it is in the S(x1 ,x˙1 ) < 0 region then sliding
variable is negative.
The region in between the two unstable regions of the phase
plane S(x1 ,x˙1 ) = 0, is considered as a stable region. Hence the
control process aims to direct the state trajectory towards the
manifold S(x1 ,x˙1 ) = 0 (reaching phase) and also to maintain
the trajectory in the locality of this region by continuous
switching (sliding phase).
In reaching law based SMC the reaching phase is designed
by a suitable function which directly depends on the sliding
variable called the ”reaching function”. During reaching phase
the sliding variable moves towards the sliding plane and there-
fore its position continuously changes. Hence the reaching law
is derived by equating the dynamics of the sliding variable
Ṡ(x, ẋ) to the reaching function. The dynamics Ṡ(x, ẋ) lit-
erally describes the speed with which the sliding variable is
moving towards the sliding manifold.The following section
gives a throwback to the conventional reaching law based
SMC’s:
Gao and Hung introduced three reaching laws namely [7]:
1. Constant reaching law
Ṡ(x, ẋ) = −Qsgn(S)
2. Constant plus proportional reaching law
Ṡ(x, ẋ) = −Qsgn(S) − K|S|
3. Power rate reaching law
Ṡ(x, ẋ)=-Q | S | β sgn(S)
In the first reaching law the feedback control gain Q is a
constant and by choosing higher values of Q the reaching time
can be made fast. But in this case the trajectory after hitting
the sliding plane will switches with an amplitude equal to the
value of the control gain Q.Hence the choice of fast reach
time introduces significant chattering in the system response.
978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
In the second reaching law, a proportional term is added with
the aim of making the reaching law a function of sliding
variable | S |. However this control law also gives sluggish
response during reaching phase. In the third law the control
gain is multiplied by fractional power of sliding variable. This
control law has substantially reduced chattering phenomenon
but results in steady state error as the control gain is a function
of | S |. This is because when the trajectory arrives near the
sliding manifold the speed by which the trajectory approaches
the sliding plane gets reduced as it is a function of distance
|S| .
To bring forth adaptiveness to the control law Fallaha
introduced the Exponential reaching law[10].
Qsgn(S)
Ṡ(t) = - δ +(1−δ )e−α|S|P
0 0
The adaptiveness aids to achieve better reach time but during
the motion along the sliding plane the control gain converges
to a constant gain value Q. Hence this method also exhibits
the same chattering as the constant reaching law.
The Enhanced Exponential reaching law [14]
Q|S|γx sgn(S)
Ṡ(t) = -KS - δ +(1−δ P
0 )e−α|S|
0
has superior characteristics among all other reaching laws
described in this section.It benefits the merits of proportional,
power rate and exponential reaching law. But due to the
presence of the power rate term during transients or sudden
disturbances occurring in the input channel, the controller
shows difficulty in tracking the steady state condition back.
The reaching law proposed in this paper is ”Enhanced
Double Exponential Reaching Law”
−α|S|p
))sgn(S) −|S|β
Ṡ(t) = - Q(δ1 +δ 1 (1−e
δ0 +(1−δ0 )e −α|S| p e
tries to mitigate the issues of ERL and EERL.Instead
of multiplying the gain with the power rate term | S |β as
in EERL, here an exponential term of | S | is multiplied
with the control gain. Therefore chattering gets reduced
to an appreciable level like the power rate reaching law.
β
Also this exponential term e−|S| decays out during the
motion along the sliding plane, and hence this control law
exhibits excellent tracking control in the presence of uncertain
transient disturbances.
The control law assures fast reaching time as the control
gain is adaptive. The adaptiveness is initiated by a Numerator
exponential function and a Denominator exponential function.
The function converges to 2Qδ δ0 when the sliding variable | S |
1
is at an infinite distance from the sliding manifold.For the same
condition the control gain converges to δQ0 for both exponential
and enhanced exponential reaching laws. Hence the high gain
coefficient of the proposed reaching law ensures fast reach
time for the trajectory.
The new reaching law promises negligible chattering as
during sliding motion the control gain converges to Qδ1
whereas for EERL it is Q| S |.In EERL due to the presence
of | S | term in the gain during sliding motion it has law
tracking capability.The requirement for fast tracking is that
the controller gain should converges to a constant value as
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

in ERL when the system state dynamics reaches the steady control such that Ṡ = 0.Therefore substituting this condition
state condition. A comparison of the three reaching laws are in (2) gives the equivalent control input ,
illustrated in Table I. B
uc = e (3)
TABLE I: Comparison between controllers KT
Reaching Law Features
The switching part is derived from the reaching law of the
ERL[10] Adaptive control gain controller, hence the control input is defined as
Qsgn(S) p
Ṡ(t) = - −α|S|P
Chattering same B Q(δ1 + δ1 (1 − e−α|S| ))sgn(S) −|S|β
δ0 +(1−δ0 )e
as Constant Reaching Law u= e+− e (4)
KT δ0 + (1 − δ0 )e−α|S|p
Good tracking response
EERL[14] Adaptive control gain δ0 ,δ1 ,and Q are the controller gains where δ0 < 1 and δ1 ≤
Q|S|γx sgn(S)
Ṡ(t) = -KS - P Reduced chattering 1.The value of control gain Q is selected as a compromise
δ0 +(1−δ0 )e−α|S|
Poor tracking response between reach time and chattering.The value of β is a very
β
EDERL[Proposed] Adaptive control gain small value to ensure that the term e−|S| decays out once the
−α|S|p
))sgn(S) −|S|β state trajectory arrives the sliding plane.
Ṡ(t) = - Q(δ1 +δ1 (1−e
δ +(1−δ −α|S|p e Reduced chattering
0 0 )e
Excellent tracking response III. S IMULATION S TUDY
A. Block schematic of the control scheme
B. Control Law Design using Proposed Reaching Law Fig.2 depicts the block schematic representation of the
control scheme when implemented on a VSI fed vector con-
The control law is applied in the speed controller of an trolled induction motor drive. The machine parameters used
induction motor vector control drive.The speed dynamics of for simulation are same as the actual machine parameters.The
the drive in terms of error is defined by a first order differential Sliding mode controller is implemented using the speed error
equation in state space as follows: input. The controller output is taken as the q axis reference
current i∗qs and the d axis reference current i∗ds is chosen as
KT B a constant value to satisfy the requirement of rated flux in
ė = u− e (1)
J J the machine.The gate pulses for the switches in the inverter is
The state variable is the angular speed of the machine ω driven such that the current is always limited within a certain
and error e is the difference between the measured value and band using a hysteresis controller.
reference value of angular speed. J is the inertia constant, B
is the frictional coefficient and KT is the torque constant.u
is the control input required to make the state variable track
the reference under the occurrence of any uncertain dynam-
ics.Initially for the design of the sliding mode controller the
sliding variable has to be defined and can be represented in
terms of error as
S(x, ẋ) = e (2)

The control aim is to track the reference within a certain

time with negligible steady state error.At steady state the
error becomes equal to zero, therefore the sliding variable
S(x,ẋ) = 0 which defines a location at the origin of the
phase plane.Therefore the state variables reach steady state
condition when the trajectory converges to the origin of the
phase plane.Any sign of the trajectory to leave away from Fig. 2: Schematic of the control scheme
this equilibrium point will be opposed by the control law by
infinite discontinuous switching.
As reaching law approach is a free order switching B. Simulation results
scheme[]the control law formulation is quite straight forward The simulation study is accomplished in Matlab simulink
and simple. The control law is defined by equating the state platform. The controller parameters are Q=1,K=5,δ1 =
dynamics of the system to the reaching function. But design of 0.4,δ0 = 0.9, β = 0.001,α = 1,p=1. The value of β is chosen
control law using equivalent control method makes less oscil- a very small value as its value affects the amount of chattering
lations in Ṡ than the direct method described above.Therefore and also the tracking response during steady state condition
to incorporate the advantage of equivalent control, the control to any unpredicted load torque disturbances.The value of the
input consists of two terms: a linear term and a switching term. proportional gain K improves the reach time but chattering is
The linear term is derived from the condition for equivalent more.This draw back of the proportional term can be nullified

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

by the power rate term. But the gain factor of the power
rate term should be decayed once the steady state is reached
otherwise results in oscillations and poor tracking response.
Fig.3 shows the control input for the reaching laws, the
Enhanced Double Exponential reaching law (EDERL) shows
reduction in chattering as it contains the power rate factor
in it but reach time more compared to EERL because of the
exponential decay of the power term near the sliding plane.The
EERL shows significant improvement in reach time due to
the presence of proportional gain K compared to EDERL and
ERL. But in ERL and EERL there is same chattering effect,
because along the sliding plane the control gain converges to
a value Q in both the reaching laws.
Fig. 4 shows the speed response of the motor drive for a Fig. 5: The variation of (a) power rate term (b) coefficient of
reference speed of 1400 rpm, when the proposed reaching law signum function and (c) Ṡ during transient and steady state.
is implemented.

the operation of the speed in forward and reverse direction with

the proposed controller.The speed is reversed at 2.5 seconds
from +1400 rpm operation to -1400 rpm. The transient change
in the current during the reversal is also shown in the Figure.
Fig. 8 depicts the response of the controller to a load torque
(a) EDERL (b) EERL (c) ERL of 2Nm applied .The response of the three controllers EDERL,
Fig. 3: The switching control input (a) Enhanced Double Ex- EERL and ERL are demonstrated. The Enhanced Double
ponential Reaching Law (b) Enhanced Exponential Reaching Exponential reaching law exhibits good tracking response as
law (c) Exponential reaching law.(y axis:5V/div and x axis it takes only 0.8 seconds to retain the steady speed whereas
1sec/div) in ERL it shows 2 seconds. In EERL a steady state error of
50 rpm exists in the response. This is due to the presence of
the power rate term of sliding variable existing during sliding
operation. In DERL and ERL this term does not exists during
sliding mode of operation.

Fig. 4: Speed response

From Fig. 5(a) it can be seen that the power rate term is
exponentially varying and settles down at a value equal to
one when steady state is reached.Therefore the power rate Fig. 6: Speed change mode of operation
term vanishes off at steady state and this is the requirement
for good tracking response under sudden disturbances. Oth-
erwise the power rate term being a function of the sliding
variable slows down the trajectory when it is near the sliding
manifold. The variation of the coefficient of signum function
including the power rate is depicted in Fig.5(b).The signum
function switches between values +1 and -1 following the
movement of the trajectory.This switching makes the sliding
mode controllers to reach the trajectory and to sustain there.
Fig.5(c)shows the variation of Ṡ which is the dynamics of the
sliding variable during transient and steady state.
Fig.6 demonstrates the performance of motor at various
speeds and the associated change in current.Fig. 7 illustrates Fig. 7: Speed reverse mode of operation at 50Hz

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)

inductance= 211mH,rotor inductance=211 mH, mutual in-

ductance=189mH, inertia coefficient J=0.169 kg.m2,frictional
coefficient B=0.01kg/s, Rated torque=2.7Nm. Fig.10 shows
the hardware results of the control input when Enhanced
Double Exponential,Enhanced Exponential and Exponential
reaching laws are implemented as the speed controller of
(a) EDERL the drive.It shows that the proposed reaching law exhibits
remarkable performance considering reach time and negligible
chattering. Experimentation results of the drive under steady
state and transient operation is detailed in Fig.11.

(b) EERL

(c) ERL
Fig. 8: Speed response when a load torque of 2Nm is applied
at 3sec of simulation

IV. H ARDWARE SETUP AND R ESULTS (a) EDERL

Fig.9 shows the hardware set up of the proposed control
scheme when implemented on a VSI fed vector controlled
induction motor drive.Angular speed is fed back using an
encoder with 512 pulses per revolution and compared with
the reference speed.The error signal serves as the input to the
sliding mode controller. The phase currents of the machine is
sensed using ACS 712 hall effect based sensors and hysteresis
controller is used so that current is limited within the rated
current of the machine.

(b) EERL

Fig. 9: Hardware setup (c) ERL

Fig. 10: Hardware results of control input and speed re-
The machine specification :Three phase,1 horse power, star sponse.(y axis scale:current:500 rpm/div, 10 volts/div and x
connected,415 volts,4poles,1440 rpm, rated current=1.8 A, axis scale:2sec/div)
stator resistance=1.04 ohm, rotor resistance=0.8 ohm, stator

978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
2020 IEEE International Conference on Power Electronics, Drives and Energy Systems (PEDES)
Fig. 11: Hardware results of phase current during (a)steady
state and acceleration transients (b) a load torque of 2 Nm ap-
plied at 10th second of operation (y axis scale:current:1A/div
and x axis scale:2sec/div)
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper a novel reaching law for sliding mode control
is proposed .By the results of simulation and hardware it
is demonstrated that the reaching law guarantees remarkable
performance during steady state and transient operation of the
motor drive.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. V.Emelyanov, ”Control of first order delay systems by means of
an astatic controller and nonlinear correction,”Autom. Remote Con-
trol,vol.8,1959, pp. 983-991.
[2] V.Utkin,” Variable structure systems with sliding modes,”IEEE Transac-
tions on Automatic control,vol.AC-22,April 1977,pp. 212-222.
[3] V.Utkin,” Sliding mode control design principles and applica-
tions to electric drives,” IEEE transactions on industrial electron-
ics,vol.40,no.1,February 1993,pp. 23-36.
[4] K. D. Young,V. I. Utkin and U.Özgüner,”A Control Engineers Guide to
Sliding Mode Control,”IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technol-
ogy,vol.7,n0.3,May 1999,pp.328-342.
[5] A.Šabanovic,” Variable structure systems with sliding modes in motion
controlA survey”,IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics,vol.7,May
2011,pp. 212-223.
[6] W.Gao and J.C.Hung,”Variable Structure Control of Nonlinear Sys-
tems: A New Approach ,”IEEE transactions on Industrial Electron-
ics,vol.40.no.1,February 1993,pp.45-55.
[7] J.Y.Hung,W.Gao and J.C.Hung,”Variable Structure Control: A Sur-
vey,”IEEE transactions on industrial electronics,vol.40,no.1,February
1993,pp.2-22.
978-1-7281-5672-9/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Walchand College of Eng. Downloaded on January 09,2023 at 12:16:39 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[8] W.Gao,Y.Wang and A.Homaifa,”Discrete-Time Variable
Structure Control Systems,”IEEE transactions on Industrial
Electronics,vol.42,no.2,April 1995,pp.117-122.
[9] A.Bartoszewicz,”Discrete-Time Quasi-Sliding-Mode Control Strate-
gies,”IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,vol.45,no.4,August
1998,pp.633-637.
[10] C.J.Fallaha, M.Saad,H.Y.Kanaan and K.Al-Haddad, ”Sliding-Mode
Robot Control with Exponential Reaching Law,”IEEE Transactions on
industrial electronics,vol.58,no.2,February 2011,pp.600-610.
[11] A.Bartoszewicz and P.Leśniewski,”Reaching Law Approach to the
Sliding Mode Control of Periodic Review Inventory Systems,”IEEE
Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering ,vol.11,no.3,July
2014,pp.810-817.
[12] S.Chakrabarty and B.Bandyopadhyay,”A generalized reaching law for
discrete time sliding mode control,”Automatica,vol.52,2015,pp.83-86.
[13] S.Chakrabarty and B.Bandyopadhyay,”A generalized reaching law with
different convergence rates,”Automatica,vol.63,2016,pp. 34-37.
[14] S.M.Mozayan,M.Saad,H.Vahedi,H. Fortin-Blanchette and
M.Soltani,”Sliding Mode Control of PMSG Wind Turbine Based
on Enhanced Exponential Reaching Law,”IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics,vol. 63,no.10,2016,pp. 6148-6159.
[15] P.Latosiński,”Sliding mode control based on the reaching law ap-
proach - a brief survey,”22nd International Conference on Methods
and Models in Automation and Robotics(MMAR),IEEE International
Conference,2017,pp.519-524.
[16] K.K.Shyu and C.K.Lai,”Incremental Motion Control of Synchronous Re-
luctance Motor Via Multisegment Sliding Mode Control Method,”IEEE
Transactions on Control Systems Technology ,vol.10,no.2,March
2002,pp.169-176.
[17] S.Ryvkin,R.Schmidt-Obermoeller and A.Steimel,”Sliding-Mode-Based
Control for a Three-Level Inverter Drive,”IEEE Transactions on Indus-
trial Electronics ,vol.55,no.11,November 2008,pp.3828-3835.
[18] C. Lascu and A.M. Trzynadlowski,”Combining the principles of sliding
mode, direct torque control, and space-vector modulation in a high-
performance sensorless AC drive,” IEEE Transactions on Industry Ap-
plications,vol.40,no.1,February 2004,pp.170-177.
[19] Y.Wang,Y.Feng,X.Zhang and J.Liang,”A New Reaching
Law for Anti-disturbance Sliding-mode Control of PMSM
Speed Regulation System,”IEEE Transactions on Power
Electronics,”vol.35,n0.4,2019,pp.4117-4126.
[20] F.Sebaly,H.Vahedi,H.Y.Kanaan,N. Moubayed and K. Al-
Haddad,”Design and Implementation of Space Vector Modulation
Based Sliding Mode Control for Grid-Connected 3L-NPC Inverter
,”IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.vol. 63,no.12,2016,pp.
7854-7863.
[21] A.Šabanović and D.B.Izosimov,”Application of Sliding Modes to Induc-
tion Motor Control,”IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,vol.IA-
17,no.1,February 1981,pp. 41-49.
[22] V.M. Panchade,R.H. Chile and B.M. Patre,”A survey on sliding
mode control strategies for induction motors,”Annual Reviews in
Control,vol.37,2013,pp.289-307.
[23] R. Krishnan, Electric Motor Drives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall, 2001.
[24] R. Krishnan, Electric Motor Drives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall, 2001.
[25] B. K. Bose, Modern Power Electronics and AC Drives. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2001.
[26] Leonhard, Werner. Control of electrical drives. Springer Science and
Business Media, 2001.
[27] Vas, Peter. Sensorless vector and direct torque control. Oxford Univ.
Press, 1998.