6, NOVEMBER 2001


Interconnection and Damping Assignment Approach to Control of PM Synchronous Motors
´ ´ Vladan Petrovic, Romeo Ortega, and Aleksandar M. Stankovic

Abstract—In this paper, we apply a recently developed energy-shaping controller design technique to the speed regulation of permanent magnet synchronous motors. To illustrate different design choices, two controllers are presented along with their stability analysis. The resulting schemes consist of a static state feedback to which a simple nonlinear observer is added to estimate the unknown load torque. It is shown that, for isotropic rotor machines, we can set the tuning gains to recover a controller often used in industrial applications, where a nonlinear observer is used instead of a simple proportional integral (PI) speed loop. Thus, the proposed scheme constitutes a possible upgrade to current practice which—in view of the availability of a complete stability analysis—should be easier to tune and yield improved performance. Simulations and experimental results are presented to illustrate the performance of the proposed scheme. Index Terms—Design methodology, motion control, motor drives, permanent magnet machines, port-controlled Hamiltonian systems.

I. INTRODUCTION FTER the introduction of rare-earth magnetic materials, permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSMs) rapidly gained popularity in high-performance, variable frequency drive applications. This popularity is justified by several advantages over commonly used motors. The absence of the external rotor excitation eliminates losses on the rotor and makes PMSMs highly efficient. In addition, the absence of the rotor winding renders slip rings on the rotor and brushes obsolete, and thus reduces the maintenance costs. New magnetic materials are capable of creating high magnetic fields which yield high power density. This in turn implies rapid dynamic response due to high torque-to-inertia ratio. Several globally stable position and velocity controllers for PMSMs have been reported in the control literature. These controllers can be designed using, for instance, feedback linearization [4], backstepping principles [3] or passivity methods [13], [17]. Experimental evidence, illustrating the practical viability of these schemes, may also be found in the cited references. The availability of a complete theoretical analysis gives the user additional confidence in the design, and may provide some guidelines in the difficult task of
Manuscript received June 11, 1999; revised October 4, 2000. Manuscript received in final form July 25, 2001. Recommended by Associate Editor K. Schlacher. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grants ECS-9502636 and ECS-9820977, and the Office of Naval Research under Grant N14-95-1-0723. Part of this work was carried out while R. Ortega was visiting Northeastern University. ´ ´ V. Petrovic and A. M. Stankovic are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115 USA. R. Ortega is with Laboratoire des Signaux et Systèmes Supelec, 91192 Gif-sur-Yvette, France. Publisher Item Identifier S 1063-6536(01)09475-1.


commissioning the controller. In spite of these unquestionable advantages, the new control schemes for PMSMs have received an—at best—lukewarm reception within the electric drives community. In contrast with this situation passivity-based control (PBC) of induction motors has triggered the interest of several drives groups [2], [5].1 It is the authors belief that PBC of induction motors has received some attention, because 1) the control action has a nice physical interpretation in terms of energy-balancing, and 2) it is downward compatible with the industry standard field-oriented control. More precisely, it has been shown in [15] that, under some simplifying modeling assumptions, PBC exactly reduces to field-oriented control. In this way, PBC can be thought of as an upgrade to current practice that might yield improved performance. Unfortunately, this nice feature of “classical” PBC of induction motors is conspicuous by its absence when applied to PMSMs. In other words, the relationship between the PBC proposed in [13] for PMSMs and current industrial practice is far from obvious. In this paper, we apply the recently developed energy-shaping controller design technique developed in [11] to derive a new “almost” globally stable controller for PMSMs. Analogously to “standard” PBC, the new methodology is based on energyshaping and passivation principles, but attention is now focused on the interconnection and damping structures of the system, thus the name interconnection and damping assignment (IDA) PBC. The resulting scheme consists of a static state feedback to which a nonlinear observer is added to estimate the unknown load torque. In a view of the above mentioned PBC compatibility feature, an important characteristic of the scheme presented in this paper is that, for isotropic rotor machines, we can set the tuning gains to recover a controller consistent with industrial practice, where a nonlinear observer is used instead of a simple PI speed loop. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we briefly describe the IDA-PBC design methodology of [11], which extends the ideas of PBC of Euler–Lagrange systems to the broader class of port-controlled Hamiltonian (PCH) systems [10]. PCH models result from the network modeling of energy-conserving lumped-parameter physical systems with independent storage elements, and strictly contain the class of Euler–Lagrange models, therefore describing the dynamics of the generalized electric machine, and in particular the PMSM. We present two asymptotically stabilizing PBCs for PMSMs. The first one—which is given in Section III—preserves the natural interconnection of the PMSM. For the second controller, we propose to modify the interconnection to emulate the behavior of a nonsalient rotor, and present the result in Section IV,
1We should also mention that feedback linearization for induction machines is already cited in the new edition of the classical book [8].

1063–6536/01$10.00 © 2001 IEEE



where we also discuss connections of the latter controller with industrial practice. Section V shows closed-loop performance of the proposed controller in simulations, while Section VI compares experimental results and simulations and discusses issues of practical importance for controller implementation. We conclude the paper with some final remarks. II. CONTROLLER DESIGN PROCEDURE In this section, we review the basic material of [11] and [12] presented in a form suitable for the problem considered in this paper.2 We consider so-called PCH models of the form (see [19] for a list of references) (1)

and a vector function


(3) and such that 1) (Integrability) That is

is the gradient of a scalar function.

(4) 2) (Equilibrium assignment) , at , verifies (5)

where state vector; total stored energy; control input; external disturbance; matrix of internal interconnection; dissipation. From the derivative of it is clear that the energy of the uncontrolled system without disturbances (i.e., with ) is nonincreasing, that is, , and it will actually decrease in the presence of dissipation. Since the total energy function is bounded from below, the system will eventually stop at a point of minimum energy. The point where the energy is minimal is usually not the one of practical interest, and control is introduced to operate the system around some nonzero equilibrium point, say . Stabilization in IDA-PBC is achieved aiming at the closed-loop dynamics smooth function (2) is the desired total energy function, which has a where and minimum at , and are some desired interconnection and damping matrices, respectively. The proposition below (originating from [11]) shows that the control problem reduces to the solution of a linear partial differential equation (PDE). and the Proposition II.1: Given desired equilibrium to be stabilized . Assume we can find a , and square matrices function such that . An estimate of the domain of attraction is given by equals . the largest bounded level set Remark: In [11] it is shown that if there exists a (continuously differentiable) static state feedback such that the closed-loop is asymptotically stable, then there exist (continwhich satisfy the conditions of uous) Proposition II.1. Remark: Replacing (7) in (3) we see that the controller design procedure described above essentially reduces to finding and such that the solution of the partial differential equation 3) (Lyapunov stability) The Jacobian of fies the bound , at , satis-

(6) Under these conditions, the system (1) in closed-loop with will be a PCH system with dissipation of the form (2) and with new energy function (7) will be a (locally) stable equilibrium. It will be asympand totically stable if, in addition, the largest invariant set under the closed-loop dynamics contained in (8)

difference from the material presented in [12] is that here we have introduced particular notation for disturbance input to separate it from the control inputs.


satisfies the constraints (5) and (6) at . This simple idea has proven instrumental in the solution of several interesting control problems [11], [14], [18]. We will apply it in



the following sections to obtain two different controllers for the PMSM. III. NATURAL INTERCONNECTION CONTROLLER A PMSM is modeled with the standard dq model given as follows [7]:

with . Equations (11) and (12) determine the controller action, and the PDE , and thus . This is (13) needs to be solved to determine easily done using symbolic solvers (e.g., Maple) and the solution is

(14) where and are some differentiable functions that have to be is a minimum of [i.e., such chosen such that desired that conditions (5) and (6) are satisfied]. The desired equilibrium state for synchronous machines is usually selected based on the so called “maximum torque per ampere” principle as , with the desired speed reference.4 Now, since only depends on , the function is easy to select, for instance, as

(9) is the number of pole pairs, and In these equations are stator inductances in the dq frame (which are equal in the is stator winding resistance, is case of cylindrical rotor), a constant unknown load torque, and and are the dq back emf constant and the moment of inertia both normalized with .3 The angular velocity is measured in electrical radians per second (the connection between electrical and mechanical ). variables is simply The energy function of the system is given by

where we have introduced the notation , and is some positive design parameter. With this selection of , it can be shown that the required minimum condition is satisfied if

defined the state vector as . The system (9) can then be rewritten in the PCH form (1) with




where , . As proposed in [16], a selection of that satisfies the above conditions for all . values of (i.e., load torque) is Replacement of proposed functions and in (14) yields



A key step for the success of the IDA-PBC methodology is the adequate choice of the desired interconnection and damping matrices. To motivate our latter developments we will first briefly present the controller that results applying the technique without modifying these matrices, i.e., we choose (more details on this derivation may be found in [16]). In this case, (3) results in (11) (12) (13)
the model we have neglected the presence of viscous friction, which is usually a small and uncertain term.

which, upon replacement in (11) and (12), completes the description of the (known load torque) controller. The following remarks concerning this design, further elaborated in [16], are in order. • It can be shown that the above design verifies the conditions of Proposition II.1. Therefore, the desired equilibis asymptotically stable. rium • A key step in the analysis is the proof that, in spite of the presence of a state-dependent denominator, the control law remains globally defined, provided the initial conditions belong to the set

and the load torque is different from zero. This is estabsatisfies lished showing that the signal
4Strictly speaking, in the case of L = L torque can be made even larger 6 by additional reluctance component (x 6= 0), but increase in complexity of control versus the gain in torque typically does not justify this additional effort.



a smooth differential equation of the form , where for all and all . • In practical applications the load torque (and consequently ) is, of course, unknown, and we propose to estimate it using the nonlinear observer

where is the desired equilibrium point, and are arbitrary, and satisfying design parameters, with (18) Under these conditions, the closed-loop is a PCH system of the given by (16), , and energyform (2) with Lyapunov function

(15) , and some positive design pawith rameters. This observer will also be used in the controller presented in the next section. IV. ISOTROPIC INTERCONNECTION CONTROLLER In this section we propose to modify the interconnection matrix of the motor dynamics. To motivate our choice we notice ), a first that in the isotropic nonsalient rotor case ( different factorization of the model (9) is also possible. Namely, with the same definition of state vector and energy function, the , , and system can also be written in PCH form with as before, and a new interconnection matrix

(19) Furthermore, the equilibrium is asymptotically stable with minus a set of zero domain of attraction the whole state space measure. and the definition of , we Proof: From (10) for see that the interconnection matrix (16) is achieved with

The key equation (3) becomes now (20) (21) It is well known that isotropic PMSMs are easier to control, therefore for the control of our nonisotropic machine we propose a desired interconnection matrix of the form and the PDE in (22) is readily solved as (16) where is a parameter to be defined. with a function to be defined. To make we propose a simple polynomial form (23) , (22)

A. Known Load Torque The main result of our paper is contained in the following two propositions. For ease of presentation, we first treat the case of a known load torque. This will be extended to the actual ( unknown) case in the following section. Proposition IV.1: Consider the PMSM (9) in closed-loop with the control law

which, upon substitution in (23) and this in turn in (20) and (21), yields the control law of the proposition IV.1. Finally, the Hessian


evaluated at is positive definite iff the conditions (18) are satisfied. This proves stability of with Lyapunov function . We will now prove that—besides —the closed-loop system has two more equilibrium points, which are however unstable.



Indeed, since is full rank, the equilibria—which we where denote by —are the solutions of

It is clear that . On the other hand, using

has the only solution can be rewritten as (24)

unstable subspace, and the nonlinear system will have corresponding invariant manifolds tangent (at these points) to these subspaces. The trajectories starting on the stable manifold will converge to , however, this set of initial conditions has zero measure, and consequently the basin of attraction of our controller is an open dense set in the state space. Remark: The role of the design parameters on the performance of the proposed controller is clear from the Lyapunov function (19). Indeed, positive values of these parameters make “steeper” the Lyapunov function and convergence will be faster. On the other hand, the controller can be significantly simplified with a suitable choice of the tuning parameters; for , , as we did in our instance, setting does not enter in the simulations and experiments [note that nor its derivative, and afclosed-loop energy function fects only the coupling between the system states]. B. Unknown Load Torque In practical implementations load torque is unknown and it is necessary to estimate it. As in the previous section, this is done using the observer (15). Proposition IV.2: Consider the PMSM (9) in closed-loop is replaced by with the control law (17) where generated by (15). Under the conditions of Proposition IV.1 we for almost all initial conditions. have that Proof: The proof is established invoking a novel theorem on stability of cascaded systems stated in [9]. Let us then de, and write the closed-loop fine the estimation error system in the following form: (25) with

, has two real roots that which, besides the solution . To prove that these equilibria are unstable we we denote will show that they are saddle points of the Lyapunov function. Toward this end we evaluate the determinant of the 2 2 upper at corner block of the Hessian of

where the last identity—which is valid for —is obsatisfying (18), we can verify tained using (24). Now, for while . Consequently, the dethat is negative and the Hessian matrix terminant evaluated at is a nonincreasing is sign indefinite. Recalling that function and that the trajectories cannot remain in the set outside the equilibrium points implies that these equilibria are unstable. Let us now establish asymptotic stability of . An invariant set analysis for

The estimator (15) combined with the motor dynamics, produces the following linear tracking error dynamics: leads successively to (26) . This is an autonomous linear system, which where is asymptotically stable for all positive and . Thus, the estimation errors decay exponentially to zero. The overall error dynamics is a cascade composition like the ones studied in [9, Th. 2 ], whose conditions we will now verify. First, the nominal part of the first subsystem (25), namely , is “almost” globally asymptotically is polynomial, thus it stable. Further, the Lyapunov function satisfies the bounds

Consequently, converges to an equilibrium point. It only remains to show that the result is “almost” global, in the sense that the domain of attraction is the whole state-space minus a set of measure zero. This follows from the fact that the other two are unstable. Thus the equilibria of the closed-loop system system linearized around the unstable equilibrium points will have a one-dimensional stable subspace and a one-dimensional



for some positive constants . This is condition (A.1) of [9, Th. 1]. Second, from inspection of the definitions of above, and the fact that is bounded, we have that the interconnection term satisfies the bound

for some , as required by condition (A.2). Finally, the last condition of the theorem, requiring that the second subsystem in (25) be globally uniformly asymptotically stable and that its response to initial condition be absolutely integrable, is satisfied since the subsystem (26) is linear and exponentially stable. This completes the proof of our proposition. C. Connections With Current Practice In order to recover linear dynamics of the electrical subsystem in (9), it is a common practice to attempt to cancel the nonlinear terms with an appropriate voltage action. This approach is particularly suited for the isotropic rotor machines ), since in this case the full system (e.g., dynamics become linear, and thus both currents and speed can be regulated with standard linear controllers. The voltage output of such controllers is then of the form
Fig. 1. Actual load torque (dash-dotted line) and its estimate (solid line).

where and account for the additional control voltage produced by the classical controllers. An objection raised to this feedback linearization approach by many practicing engineers is its lack of robustness. An alternative to feedback linearization also exists. Instead of an attempt to cancel the nonlinear terms exactly, the cancellation can be achieved asymptotically by the following control:

Since the load torque is unknown, we can use a time separation assumption, and produce torque command (and thus current ) by a classical (e.g., PI) controller in the reference outer loop. The resulting structure is a feedforward controller in current loops with a PI controller in the speed loop. Although the use of the time separation assumption is usually justified in practice, a rigorous proof of the stability of the above controller is, to our knowledge, yet to be established. ), the isotropic interconnecIn the isotropic rotor case ( tion controller presented in Proposition IV.1 reduces to a form similar to the controller given above. Namely, by setting the deand , the voltage sign parameters equations become exactly of the form (27), now with the difference that the torque estimate provided by (15) is used to de). It can be verified termine desired current value ( that the stability proof of Proposition IV.1 still holds for this particular case. V. SIMULATION RESULTS The simulations were performed in Matlab toolbox Simulink. Throughout, the PM synchronous motor was modeled using (9) with parameters of a three-phase, Y-connected PMSM in our , laboratory (Pacific Scientific model R43H): Vs, , and kg m . Although this PMSM has rotor with surface mounted magnets, implying isotropic geometry and equal and axis inductances, in simmH and mH to examine the ulations we set controller performance in the salient rotor case. The simulation results for the energy-based controller from Proposition IV.1 are given in Figs. 1–3. Fig. 1 shows the load torque ( ) applied to the motor, along with its dynamic estimate ( ) which is used in the controller. The rate of convergence of the load torque estimate is determined by the pole placement of the system (26). For these simulations, both system poles were by the estimator parameter set (arbitrarily) to , and . selection Fig. 2 shows a family of the closed-loop system responses to step changes in speed reference parameterized with the controller parameter . As expected, increased action proportional

(27) where . The closed-loop error dynamics is then

under the assumption of a known constant load torque. This is a stable system with Lyapunov function


which directly shows that current errors decay to zero, while the . use of LaSalle’s invariance principle further establishes



Fig. 2. Motor speed transients for various values of parameter .

Fig. 3. Control voltage transients for various values of parameter .

to the speed error (increase in ) leads to the increase in the speed of the response, but also increases the response overshoot. In addition, this increase also leads to more aggressive control, and the control voltages experience large peaks during the transients. This phenomenon is depicted in Fig. 3. On the other hand, better disturbance rejection is achieved with larger control action, as Fig. 2 and the zoom on this transient show. Note that motor inertia constant is very small implying substantial drops in speed as response to large steps in load torque. A tradeoff between rapid transient response and good disturbance suppression on one hand and low control voltage peaks and small response overshoots on the other is reached with the selection of . VI. EXPERIMENTS AND PRACTICAL ISSUES To support simulations, laboratory tests for the above motor were performed. A universal test bed built around a DS1103 controller board (made by dSPACE GmbH) is used for this purpose. The experimental setup consists of the following components: R43H PMSM (2 horse power; continuous stall torque and

current: Nm, A ), DS1103 controller DSP board, interface electronics (including optical insulation of low- and high-voltage modules), three-phase voltage source inverter (consisting of six IGBTs and gate drivers integrated in Mitsubishi PM15CSJ060 intelligent power module) supplied from the 200-V programmable power supply, torquemeter and hysteretic load cell mechanically coupled with PMSM, Hall effect current sensors, and an incremental encoder. Rotor position is measured with two channel quadrature output incremental encoder with index pulse and line drivers. Each channel produces 1024 pulses per revolution, and the use of the quadrature decoder/counter (contained in DS1103) rad. results in position resolution of The controller board’s main processor (Motorola 604e PPC, floating-point) is used for calculation of the controller equations. A simple first-order Euler approximation with sampling s was used for the controller discretization. time of The on-board slave processor (TMS320F240, fixed-point) performs lower level functions such as PWM generation and speed calculation from position feedback. Both tasks utilize slave processor’s event manager that consists of compare and



Fig. 4. Comparison of simulations (plots on the left) and experimental results (on the right) for the constant load torque  = 1:09 Nm and speed reference steps.

capture subsystems. Compare system automatically compares the timer and appropriately scaled signal values, thus giving PWM output. For our experiments, a 10-kHz PWM with a dead-time of 2 s (produced by the programmable deadband generator—a unit of the slave DSP) was used. Capture system is used for frequency measurement of incremental encoder pulses, thus providing very accurate measurement of motor rotational speed (especially at low speeds when pulses are scarce). Of course, an upper limit on measurable speed exists due to a finite DSP clock frequency, but that limit is way above the operating speeds for the used motor and setup.5 DS1103 also houses an analog to digital conversion subsystem including 16 and 12 bit A/D converters. The 12-bit 0.8 s SAR type A/D converters are used in discretization of two phase current feedback signals from the Hall effect sensors (the third phase current does not need to be measured since the motor is connected in Y). For all experimental tests, the appropriate tests in simulations were performed as well, and both sets of results are shown for better comparison. To completely simulate the motor behavior, a friction term ( ) is also included into the motor model (9) with , and simulations friction constant were performed with the actual inductance values mH. First, we will discuss the results of the speed reference tracking test with constant load torque. Those results are shown
5In the used configuration maximum measurable frequency of incoming signal is 80 kHz. Given the number of encoder pulses per revolution (1024), the resulting electrical speed range is ! 2 (0; 982) rad/s.

in Fig. 4. The constant load torque is set to Nm and several speed reference steps are imposed. As figures show, the simulations closely predict the closed-loop performance. Steady-state speed reference tracking is established at all speeds without error. Both in simulations and experiments, the torque estimate changes with motor speed since the load torque actually comprises of both the friction term ( ) and the unknown load torque.6 Speed transients in experiments differ slightly from the transients resulting from simulations (the overshoots are slightly higher in experiments), but the basic behavior is essentially the same. To evaluate the controller disturbance suppression, a step in load torque with a constant rotating speed was simulated and tested in experiments. Due to limitations of the equipment in our lab (primarily hysteretic load cell), it was impossible to achieve a step load torque command in experiments. In order to simulate the exact experiment as closely as possible, the experimental ) load torque estidata from an auxiliary (fast, mator (corrected for the friction term) is used as the load torque input in simulations. With such an input, simulations represent actual experiment accurately enough for the comparison purposes since the experimental estimate can be considered equal to the actual load torque due to the fast auxiliary load torque estimator dynamics and monotonous estimator input. The comparison of results is shown in Fig. 5. The electrical rad/s. speed reference is kept at constant value of
6Note that the torque in experiments has ripple due to inverter and motor nonidealities not modeled by the basic PMSM model (9). Refer to [17] for an effort to eliminate effects of these nonidealities.



Fig. 5. Comparison of simulations (plots on the left) and experimental results (on the right) for a rapid load torque change at constant speed ! = 37:69 rad/s.

Load torque is rapidly increased from Nm to Nm (which is the motor rated torque). As we can see from the plots, the motor speed quickly recovers to the desired value after initial dip caused by disturbance. In addition, the simulation and experimental transients of all signals of interest match very well. There are several issues of interest that have to be solved for successful implementation of the controller. Controller implementation is relatively sensitive to the selection of the value of motor inertia ( ) used in calculation of estimator equations. Estimator is stable for every choice of , but incorrect value of manifests clearly in the estimate as excessive peaks during term which is the speed transients [caused by the incorporated into along with the friction term and the load torque itself]. Using the sign and magnitude of those peaks the correct value of the motor inertia can easily be tuned and found. is one of the hardest motor parameters to measure and the above procedure might be necessary for fine tuning of the manufacturer provided data. For the motor used in experiments and kg m and fine simulations, manufacturer given kg m (8% diftuned value was found to be ference, which is within manufacturer’s tolerance range). In addition to fine tuning of motor inertia, issues like switch voltage drop and inverter dead-time excess should also be addressed. Those two phenomena essentially impose additional voltage and inject dc and higher harmonics into the system. The additional voltages can be significant, and proper compensation (e.g., [20]) of those phenomena should be incorporated into the system to ensure good controller performance. Even after the compensation, residual voltage may remain, of course much smaller in magnitude. An additional estimator of this parasitic

voltage might be employed to correct for the remaining voltage offset. VII. CONCLUSION This paper presents an almost globally convergent controller for permanent magnet synchronous motors that consists of a nonlinear static state feedback and a simple nonlinear observer. While being similar to standard industrial controllers, our algorithm offers both analytical and performance advantages. We demonstrate the speed servo performance of the controller both in simulations and in experiments. Practical implementation requires additional tuning of the crucial motor parameter and a simple method for achieving this goal is provided in the paper. After the compensation of nonidealities of the voltage source inverter, experimental results match very well with the theoretical predictions and simulations. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The second author would like to thank Northeastern University for its hospitality. The authors would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading and many constructive suggestions that considerably improved the quality of the present paper. REFERENCES
[1] T. M. Jahns, “Variable frequency permanent magnet ac machine drives,” in Power Electronics and Variable Frequency Drives, B. K. Bose, Ed. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press, 1997, pp. 277–331.



[2] C. Cecati, A. Quintiliani, and N. Rotondale, “Low cost induction motor drive based on the passivity theory approach,” in Proc. Conf. Rec. 31th IEEE IAS Annu. Meet., San Diego, CA, Oct. 1996, pp. 581–586. [3] J. J. Carroll and D. M. Dawson, “Tracking control of permanent magnet brushless dc motors using partial state feedback,” in Proc. 2nd IEEE Conf. Contr. Applicat., Sep. 1993, pp. 147–152. [4] B. Grˇ ar, P. Cafuta, and M. Žnidariˇ , “Nonlinear control of synchronous c c servo drive,” in Proc. IEE Int. Conf. CONTROL ’94, Coventry, U.K., March 1994, pp. 1198–1203. [5] L. U. Gokdere and M. A. Simaan, “Passivity-based method for induction motor control,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 44, pp. 688–695, Oct. 1997. [6] H. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996. [7] P. C. Krause, Analysis of Electric Machinery. New York: McGrawHill, 1986. [8] W. Leonhard, Control of Electrical Drives, 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1996. [9] E. Panteley and A. Loria, “On global uniform asymptotic stability of nonlinear time-varying systems in cascade,” Syst. Contr. Lett., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 131–138, Feb. 1998. [10] B. M. Maschke and A. J. van der Schaft, “Port controlled Hamiltonian systems: Modeling origins and system theoretic properties,” in Proc. 2nd IFAC Symp. Nonlinear Contr. Syst. Design, NOLCOS’92, Bordeaux, France, June 1992, pp. 282–288. [11] R. Ortega, A. J. van der Schaft, and B. M. Maschke, “Stabilization of port-controlled Hamiltonian systems via energy balancing,” in Stability and Stabilization of Nonlinear Systems, D. Aeyels, F. Lamnabhi-Lagarrigue, and A. van der Schaft, Eds. London, U.K.: Springer-Verlag, 1999, vol. 246, LNCIS, pp. 239–260.

[12] R. Ortega, A. J. van der Schaft, I. Mareels, and B. Maschke, “Putting energy back in control,” IEEE Contr. Syst. Mag., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 18–33, Apr. 2001. [13] R. Ortega, A. Loria, P. J. Nicklasson, and H. Sira-Ramirez, Passivity-Based Control of Euler–Lagrange Systems. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, Sept. 1998, Communications and Control Engineering. [14] R. Ortega, A. Astolfi, G. Bastin, and H. Rodriguez, “Output feedback stabilization of mass-balance systems,” in Output-Feedback Stabilization of Nonlinear Systems, H. Nijmeijer and T. Fossen, Eds. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1999. [15] R. Ortega, P. J. Nicklasson, and G. Espinosa-Perez, “On speed control of induction motors,” Automatica, vol. 32, pp. 455–460, Mar. 1996. ´ ´ [16] V. Petrovic, R. Ortega, and A. M. Stankovic, “A globally convergent energy-based controller for PM synchronous motors,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Contr., Phoenix, AZ, USA, Dec. 1999, pp. 334–340. ´ ´ [17] V. Petrovic, R. Ortega, A. M. Stankovic, and G. Tadmor, “Design and implementation of an adaptive controller for torque ripple minimization in PM synchronous motors,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, pp. 871–880, Sep. 2000. [18] H. Rodriguez, R. Ortega, G. Escobar, and N. Barabanov, “A robustly stable output feedback saturated controller for the boost dc-to-dc converter,” Syst. Contr. Lett., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 1–8, May 2000. [19] A. J. van der Schaft, L -Gain and Passivity Techniques in Nonlinear Control. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1999. [20] D. Leggate and R. J. Kerkman, “Pulse-based dead-time compensator for PWM voltage inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 44, pp. 191–197, 1997.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful