Application of One-Cycle Control to Stator Field-Oriented Control

Alberto S. Lock
1
, Edison R. C. da Silva
1
, Malik E. Elbuluk
2
, Cursino B. Jacobina
1

1
Departamento de Engenharia Eltrica/Universidade Federal de Campina Grande
C.P. 10.105, Campina Grande, PB, 58109-970 Brasil. Tel.: +55(83) 3310-1407, Fax: +55(83) 33101418
e-mail: alberto.lock@ee.ufcg.edu.br, [edison. jacobina]@dee.ufcg.edu.br
2
University of Akron, Ohio, USA
e-mail:melbuluk@uakron.edu

Abstract.- Usually, Rotor Field Oriented Control (RFOC) controls the
speed of the motor, while the Stator Field Oriented Control (RFOC)
and the Direct Torque Control (DTC) control the torque. This paper
presents a new approach for SFOC drive, using One Cycle Control
(OCC). In this new approach the motor speed is controlled by SFOC,
which is simplified and has its dynamic response improved. Theoretical
foundation for both SFOC and OCC approaches is provided.
Simulation and DSP-based experimental results confirm the feasibility
of the proposed technique.
I. INTRODUCTION
DC motors were largely used in the past although they
had the drawbacks of being bulky, heavy, spenders, needing
a periodical mechanical maintenance. However, their
control simplicity was one of a major advantages i.e.
separately dc motor control owns a separately armature and
a field current controllers. FOC [1-3][5-7] and DTC [4]
were invented to emulate dc motor control. As there is no a
field coil in ac motor, an artificial one was invented for
control, utilizing a dq decomposing of the spatial vector,
conformed by its three phase components. Herein, these are
named vector controllers. In general, FOC controllers can be
split into two large groups: Rotor FOC (RFOC) [1-3][8],
and Stator FOC (SFOC) [5-7], according with which
magnetic field is oriented to. RFOC greatly depends on
rotor constant and leakage factor and therefore on
temperature [82]. SFOC depends also on these factors, but
its temperature dependence is minor [4],[5]. RFOC is
implemented using an inner current loop, i.e. by hysteresis
control, while SFOC is implemented directly by voltage, i.e.
using space vector modulation (SVM) [6] exhibiting some
control simplicity. Both control methods are based on slip
frequency control, but as SFOC utilizes stator frequency,
slip control can also be used to estimate rotor speed.
However, in spite of its little advantages, according to [2]
there is always a coupling effect between the dq control
components, but in [9] it is pointed out that the effect
disappears on steady state. Above all, in contrast to RFOC,
SFOC is not used for speed control, but torque control.
One Cycle Control (OCC) is a technique commonly
utilized to control power factor in controlled rectifiers [10],
[11], active power filters [12], and single phase inverters
[13]. Similar to PWM, OCC compares the modulating
waves to a triangular carrier to generate drive pulses for
(AC/DC or DC/AC) converter controlling. OCC integrates
the input control variable until this integrating value
matches the output control variable in one control cycle,
generating a variable amplitude sawtooth carrier. In this
sense, OCC is considered a generalized (fixed frequency)
PWM modulator [14].
This paper presents a new approach of flux and rotor
speed controllers for SFOC drives, using One Cycle Control
(OCC). New approach utilizes SFOC to control speed
motor, improving SFOC dynamic response, as well as
simplifying even more, SFOC control strategy, avoiding
complicate SVM control operations.
Theoretical basis is provided for both SFOC and OCC
approaches. Simulation and DSP based experimental results
show the good performance of proposed technique and
confirm the theoretical assumptions.

II. INDUCTION MOTOR MODELING
Equations (1)-(6) constitute the space vector model of an
induction motor with single rotor cage and core loss
neglected [15].
S x S S S S
j
dt
d
i R V + + =
(1)

R m x R R R
j
dt
d
i R + + = ) ( 0
(2)
r m S S S
i L i L + =
(3)
S m r R R
i L i L + =
(4)
] * ) ( Im[ .
R S O e
i i L K m =
(5)
L e
m
m m
dt
d
p
J
=

(6)
where the symbol indicates space vector; R
S
, R
R
are the
stator and rotor resistances; L
S
, L
R
, L
m
are the stator, rotor
and magnetizing inductances;
x
is an arbitrary speed,
S

is the magnetic flux speed;
m
is the mechanical speed; p is
the pole pair number, J is the shaft inertia; m
e
and m
L
are
the electrical and load torque, respectively. In addition

+ =
+ =
O R R
O S S
L L
L L
) 1 (
) 1 (

(7)
) 1 )( 1 (
1
1
R S

+ +
=
(8)
R
S
S
R
R
i
L
=
+

]
) 1 (
[
1

(9)
S
R
R
S
S
i
L
=
+

]
) 1 (
[
1

(10)
where ,
S
, and
R
are general, stator and rotor leakage
factors. Space vector D is defined as
978-1-4577-0541-0/11/$26.00 2011 IEEE 3595

) 3 / 2 exp(
] [ 3 / 2
2
j a
D a D a D D
c b a
=
+ + =
(11)
where D represents stator voltage (V
S
), stator current (i
S
),
rotor current (i
R
), stator (
S
) or rotor flux (
R
). The
quantities D
k
(k = a, b, c) represents k component of D in
relation to a neutral point.

III. VECTOR CONTROL SYSTEM
Analysis of the conventional SFOC principles is given,
followed with the present proposal. Note that RFOC [2] as
well as SFOC theory [4, 5] are based on (2).

A. Conventional SFOC approach
As in the RFOC, the projection of magnetic flux
R
on d
current axis gives a means to visualize electrical variable
relations [2], then
mR O R
i L =
(12)
i
mR
is rotor magnetizing current. Similarly, for SFOC,
assume that the stator flux is proportional to the magnetizing
current imS, see Fig.1, that is,


Fig.1. References frames and space vectors for SFOC control

mS O S
i L =
(13)
Substituting former equation into stator equation (1) and
taking a gyrating synchronous dq axis,
x
=
S
, it is
obtained
Sd S Sd
mS
O
i R V
dt
di
L =
(14)
Sq S Sq O
i R V
dt
d
L =

(15)
where =
b
dt, is angle corresponding to slip
frequency
b
, since
m S b
=

(16)
On the other hand, from (12), (13) and the rotor equation (2)
S S mS R
i i i ) 1 ( + =
(17)
Substituting former equation into (5) and simplifying
Sq mS e
i i K m . . =
(18)
Equation above emulates the torque of a dc motor, as a
product of field (i
mS
) and armature current (i
Sq
). This
confirms the goal of FOC controllers. On the other hand,
from (10),
) 1 ]( [
R S S S R
i L + =
(19)
Substituting (17) and equation above into (2)
] )[ 1 (
] [ ) 1 ( ] ) 1 ( [ 0
S S S R b
S S S R S S mS R
i L j
i L
dt
d
i i R


+ +
+ + + =
(20)
Combining (7), and equations (12)-(14), ( dt d / = ) it is
obtained, for d axis,
Sq R b
S
mS R
Sd R
i
i
i

+
+
+
= +
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
(21)

R
=L
R
/R
R
is constant time rotor. Analogously, for q axis

Sd R b
S
mS
R b Sq R
i
i
i

+
= +
) 1 (
) 1 (
(22)
Equations (21) and (22) depict SFOC control system [5-
7]. To decouple the system, it is assumed that current i
Sd

can be an output flux controller plus a decoupling term i
Sdq
,
see Fig.2, that is,
Sdq S S d
i G i + = )

(
* *
(23)
where
|

\
|

+ =
i
p
K
K G
(24)
and K
p
, K
i
are proportional and integral constants controller,
respectively. Then, substituting (21) into (22)

Fig.2. SFOC control [104]

Sq R b
S
mS R
Sdq R S S R
i
i
i G

+
+
+
= + + +
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 ( )

( ) 1 (
*
(25)
As the first terms of both sides of former equation
correspond to stator flux, the second terms must be equal,
which then gives:
) 1 ( +
=
R
Sq R b
Sdq
T
i
i

(26)
slip frequency
b
is found from (22):
(

+
+
=
Sd
S
mS
R
Sq R
b
i
i
i

) 1 (
) 1 (
(27)
Thus, decoupling factors are given by (26) and (27). Above
all, decoupling effect seems a little more serious when
consider steady state (=0). For instance, from (21)
Sq R b Sd
S
mS
i i
i

=
+ ) 1 (
(28)
Substituting (28) into (22) and simplifying gives:
R b
R b
Sq
Sd
i
i


) 1 (
) ( 1
2

+
=
(29)
3596

In accordance, from (21) and (22)
2
2
) ( 1
) ( 1
) 1 (
R b
R b
S
mS
Sd
i
i


+
+
+
=
(30)
2
) ( 1
) 1 (
) 1 (
R b
R b
S
mS
Sq
i
i


+

+
=
(31)
Equations (30) and (31) show a coupling effect between d
and q control components [2]. In fact, dividing (30) and (31)
leads to expression (29). Notice that (29) depends on the
square of the slip frequency and rotor constant. This
coupling effect does not disappear in steady state.

B. Proposed approach
Note that (13) can be also expressed as, see Fig. 1
Sd S
= (32)
Substituting former equation into stator equation (1)
Sd Sd S Sd
i R v + =
(33)
Sd S Sq S Sq
i R v + =

(34)
Then, from (13), (18) and (26)
Sq Sd t e
i K m =
(35)
Replacing equation above into (28)
Sd S
Sd
e
t Sq
m
K v +

(36)
From (21), (22) in steady state (=0) and from (26)
Sd R b Sd S
R R
Sd
Sd
i i L

+ +

= )
1
(
(37)
On the other hand, from (32) and Fig.1
Sd Sd
i K = (38)
From (33) and (37)
Sq S b
R
Sd
Sd
R
S
S Sd
i L i
L
R v

+ + + = ) (
(39)
Former equation can be expressed as a function of a PI flux
controller, since from (33)
S Sd Sd Sd
R v i / ) ( =
(40)
Then, replacing former equation into (39)
Sq S b S S I p d
i L K K v + = ) )( / (
*
1 1
*
(41)
K
p1
, K
i1
are proportional and integral constants of PI
controller,
*
S
is stator flux reference. On the other hand,
from (6) and (36), and considering constant flux
Sd S L u m t Sq
m K K v + + =

(42)
If load torque m
L
varies slowly with respect to mechanical
speed variations, then
Sd S m t Sq
K v +

(43)
The above equation can be expressed as a PI speed
controller. Then
Sd S m m I p q
K K v + + =

) )( / (
*
2 2
*
(44)
K
p2
, K
i2
are the proportional and integral constants of PI
controller, respectively,
*
m
is the mechanical speed
reference.


IV. CONTROL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
The full control algorithm of the DTC-OCC proposed in
this work is presented in Fig.3. Limiters at output flux (PI

)
and speed (PI

) controllers protect motor against

overcurrent. The main difference with conventional DTC-
SVM (PWM) drives, where flux and speed controllers are
independently used to form the three phase modulating
waves, is the fact that in proposed system the output speed
controller is managing the sinusoidal modulating waves
while it is utilized to manage the OCC variable amplitude
carrier. Moreover, an angle depending on the coefficient
of speed and flux controllers is added to the stator flux angle
to form the sinusoidal modulating waves.

A. Proposed control
Consider the block diagram shown in Fig.2, utilized for
SFOC-SVM (PWM) controller. It can be observed that the
voltage references for PWM modulator depend on flux,
speed controllers, and also the estimated flux angle. This
relation can be written as

(
(

(
(
(

+ +

=
(
(
(

*
*
*
*
*
) 3 / 2

( ) 3 / 2

(
) 3 / 2

( ) 3 / 2

(

q
d
c
b
a
v
v
Sin Cos
Sin Cos
Sin Cos
A
v
v
v



(45)
where
S S
t

= =

is the estimated flux angle and A is an

arbitrary sinusoidal amplitude wave. (45) can be written as
). / (
* *
d q
v v arctg =
(46.a)

(
(
(

+
+ +
+
+ =
(
(
(

) 3 / 2

(
) 3 / 2

(
)

(
) ( ) (
2 * 2 *
*
*
*



Cos
Cos
Cos
v v A
v
v
v
q d
c
b
a
(46.b)

Stator flux must be kept constant during control operation,
even when rotor speed varies roughly due to a speed or
torque command change i.e. motor stop or reverse speed.
So it is reasonable to assume that flux output controller is
much less than speed output controller. This can also be
noticeable from second term of expressions (41) and (44),
where in general
b
L
S
i
Sq
<<
S

S
and can be forced
choosing PI constants of flux and speed controllers K
P1
,
K
I1
<<K
P2
, K
I2
.

Then, if v
d
*
<<v
q
*

(
(
(

+
+ +
+
=
(
(
(

) 3 / 2

(
) 3 / 2

(
)

(
*
*
*
*



Cos
Cos
Cos
v A
v
v
v
q
c
b
a
(47)
As it was pointed out above, amplitude A is an arbitrary
value in conventional PWM modulator. However, OCC can
vary its carrier amplitude for hardware proposes [10,11].
Therefore, the amplitude A could vary with inverse of
output flux controller to improve PWM performance. Thus,
if A=1/v
d
*
then

3597

Fig.3. Proposed control system for DTC-OCC

(
(
(

+
+ +
+
=
(
(
(

) 3 / 2

(
) 3 / 2

(
)

(
*
*
*
*
*



Cos
Cos
Cos
v
v
v
v
v
d
q
c
b
a
(48)
Since in conventional PWM, gate power switches turn on
(off) when modulating waves equal the carrier amplitude.
Then, gate signal can be defined as

= >
=
; 0 ,
1 ,
*
*
k k
k k
q K v
q K v
(49)
where k denotes each one of phase voltages, k = a, b, c; K is
triangular carrier amplitude. Then substituting (48) into
former relation

= > +
= + +
0 , ) 3 / 2

(
1 , ) 3 / 2

(
* *
* *
k d q
k d q
q v K n Cos v
q v K n Cos v


(50)
Since

= =
= =
= =
c k for n
b k for n
a k for n
, 2
, 1
, 0
(51)
As it can be observed from Eq. (51), speed output controller
v
q
*
, controls instantaneous voltage amplitude and the flux
output controller v
d
*
, controls variable amplitude triangular
carrier. Note that (47) can be inferred directly from PWM
modulator depicted in Fig.2, while (48) is an external
condition to satisfy OCC constrains. Note also from
Equation (51) that modulating waves, controlled by v
q
*
, are
now bipolar (ac) waves instead of unipolar (dc) modulating
waves obtained for OCC controllers [10-14].

V. OCC FUNDAMENTALS
Conventional PWM modulators are implemented by
comparing a modulation reference to a constant amplitude
and frequency triangular carrier. OCC varies PWM carrier
amplitude to realize modulation of the output, since OCC
integrates the output signal until the integration value
reaches the reference signal [10].
Fig.4 (a) shows a block diagram of one cycle controller.
On this way, a fixed frequency, variable duty-cycle pulse is
generated comparing a reference V
ref
to a fixed-frequency
variable amplitude sawtooth wave. The comparison process
is realized by hardware using an integrator, a few Flip Flops
and a comparator. Thus, a resettable integrator is
implemented [11] (see the Fig.4(b) for generated
waveforms). This modulation technique is referred to, as a
general constant-frequency PWM [12]. Hence, a sawtooth
or triangular carrier is generated, but always tied to a
hardware scheme. As an example, let us analyze briefly a
three phase rectifier as shown in Fig.4, where X(t) and Y(t)
are input and output variables, respectively, so as it was
reported previously reported in [11]

=
=
=
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
c O
b O
a O
C
B
A
d V
d V
d V
V
V
V
(52)

Using matrix or vector notation, the former equation can be
expressed as
) ( ) ( ) ( t D t Y t X =
(53)
where V
A
,V
B
, V
C
are input voltages; d
a
,

d
b
, d
c
are duty cycles
and V
O
is dc link voltage. Then
O
V t Y = ) ( (54)
(
(
(

=
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
) (
c
b
a
d
d
d
t D
(55)
S S
c
b
a
I R
V
V
V
t X =
(
(
(

=
0
0
0
) (
(56)
where
S
I is the input current vector given by
[ ]
T
c b a S
I I I I = (57)
Resettable integrator originates a variable amplitude ramp
signal, DC output voltage controlled (by Y or a PI
controller (Y(K
p
+K
i
/s)), that when compared to an average
reference signal given by input vector (
f
corresponds to
cut-off frequency of a low pass filter)

S S
f f
ref
I R
s
t X
s
V
) 1 (
1
) (
) 1 (
1
+
=
+
=
(58)
provokes the duty cycle vector
) (t D
and so on. As the three
phase rectifier should keep its power factor nearly 1, and
as it is suggested by former equation, current vector must be
in phase and varies proportionally with the input sinusoidal
voltage vector [11]. Note, however, that constant filter
f

must be large enough to satisfy the former constraint, and
3598



Fig.4. (a) OCC block diagram (b) Generated waveforms

then originates a unipolar (modulating) voltage reference
ref
V
[10-24] and some current delay in the control system.

A. OCC control system approach
Fig.5(a) shows a block diagram for the proposed DTC-
OCC control system. It consists of a general integrator, a
magnitude-controlled triangular carrier and a comparator.
Fig.5(b) shows the generated waveforms for one of the
phase voltages: as one of the
ref
V
components reaches the
magnitude of the triangular carrier controlled V
+
(by a PI
flux controller) a pulse Q is generated. To model the
proposed control from an OCC approach, the idea of an
artificial filtrated delayed pole voltage is used, that is,
P
g
S
V
s
V
) 1 (
1
+
=
(59.a)
{ }
S S
V t v
1
) (

=
(59.b)
where
P
V is pole voltage (P =A, B, C), see Fig.3,
S V is the
filtered pole voltage vector,
1
is Laplace inverse
transform,
) (t v
S
is equivalent to
S V in time domain,
g

corresponds to cut off frequency of the low pass filter. If
time constant
g
is chosen in order to provoke that stator
current
S
i
and voltage
S
v
be in phase, then there exists an
input resistor
0
e
R
such that
) (
0 0
t D
R
V
R
v
i
dq
e
O
e
Sdq
Sdq
= =
(60)
where
(

= =
q
d
dq dq
d
d
t D D ) (
(61)
Accordingly,
(

=
(

=
q
d
e
O
Sq
Sd
Sdq
d
d
R
V
i
i
i
0
(62)

=
=
Sq q
Sd d
i K d
i K d
2
1
(63)
On the other hand, using Fig.5(a)
) ) ( ), ( ( ) ( t D t X Y t Y
dq
=
(64)

=
=
=
)) ( (
) (
) (
t X f V
t X
t Y
ref
m
S

(65)
As from Eq. (16), assuming a small slip frequency
b
0,
then
m

S
and from Eq. (34), if for control purposes, it is
assumed v
Sq
=k i
Sq
, where
Sd m Sq
k i (66)
Substituting (32) into (66) gives

m
Sq
S
i
K

2
=
(67)
m
q
S
d
K

2
=
(68)
in vector or matrix notation
) (
. ) (
. ) (
2
t X
u t D
K t Y
S
=
(69)
where
[ ] 1 0 =
S
u
is a unity vector. Note that former
equation is equivalent to (27), see (13), with constant K
2

absorbing dimensional quantities. On the other hand, the
voltage reference, see (47) and Fig.5 (a), is given by
[ ]
T
c b a ref
v v v V
* * *
=
(70)
ref
V
could be interpreted as an instantaneous vector
depending on mechanical speed X(t), see (42).
Consequently, to control the power converter, modulating
waves (depending on speed controller v
*
q
) are compared
with triangular carrier (depending on flux controller v
*
d
).
This is sort of similar to OCC strategy presented for
rectifiers [10-14]. Notice, on the other hand, that the
proposed control system is deduced from conventional SVM
(PWM) modulator shown in Fig.2.
The stator flux must be seen as the output. Otherwise, the
control system can be viewed as an oscillating one. This
idea is verified in Section VII.

VI. FLUX AND SPEED ESTIMATORS
Stator flux can be estimated from the stator voltages and
currents on frame according to [16]

(
(

=
(
(

=
}
}
dt i R V
dt i R V
S S S
S S S
S
S
S
)

(
)

(71)
In order to avoid accumulated offset effect on flux
estimator, a lead lag compensators array is used instead of
low pass filters array. This could be seen basically as a
generalization of [17]. Then

3599




Fig.5. (a) DTC-OCC block diagram. (b)Generated waveforms


(
(

)
`

+
+
+
+

(
(

=

)

(
)

(
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (
) 1 (

S S S
S S S
h
g
h
h
g
h
S
S
S
i R V
i R V
s
s
G
s
s
G
(72)
2 2

S S S
+ =
(73)

( =

=
S
S
S
arctg
(74)
G
h
is gain,
g
,
h
are the lead, lag compensator constants,
respectively. Stator dq flux can be calculated as
(

+ +
+ +
(
(

=
(
(

) ( ) (
) ( ) (

S S
S S
S
S
Sq
Sd
Cos Sin
Sin Cos
(75)
where
). / (
* *
d q
v v arctg =
It must be notice that in argument
=
S
+, angle handles the argument transitory state.
However, also depends on size used for triangular carrier.
Then, in general,


K K
S S
+ =

(76)
K

, K

are constants. Present work does not present phase

current estimators, since two of phase stator current are read
directly (2/3). To estimate stator voltages, in order to avoid
switching noise originated by filtering estimated-pole
voltages, is used
(
(
(

+
+ +
+
=
) 3 / 2 (
) 3 / 2 (
) (

S
S
S
S
Cos
Cos
Cos
V V
(77)
Estimated flux stator speed can be calculated from (74)
))

( (

S
S S
S
arctg
dt
d
dt
d

= =
(78)
2

S
S S S S S S S S
S
i R V i R V

(79)
On the other hand, the slip frequency can be calculated
using a MRAC (Model reference adaptive controller)
system, since q component stator current is proportional to
slip frequency [18]. Then

) )( / (
*
Sq Sq I p b
i i K K + =

(80)
K
p
, K
I
are proportional and integral constants of PI
controller respectively, i
*
Sq
is current reference.

VII. SIMULATION AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
To demonstrate the present propose, simulation and
experimental results are provided. Simulation results are
given in Figs. 6-10 using PSCAD/EMTDC, while A DSP-
TMS3020F2812-based experimental results are given in
Figs. 11 to 17, for a 1HP IM (
m
=1760rpm, f
S
=60Hz,
V
S
=220V, 4poles), dc link voltage 140V. MATLAB was
used to capture DSP internal data i.e. stator flux and angle,
and laser digital tachometer (DT209X) to measure speed
motor as well as for graphic presentation. Figs. 6 and 7
show output controllers, mechanical speed, stator flux angle
as well as stator currents and stator fluxes and reference
respectively at speed motor inversion from -900 to 900 rpm;
while Figs.8 and 9 show the same electrical variables at
speed motor inversion from 900 to -900 rpm. It can be
noticed from Figs. 6 and 8 that the speed reversal takes
approximately 1 to 2 times the period of the flux angle.
However, some delay in speed response can be appreciated
in Figs 6(c) and 8(c). A similar behavior can be observed in
RFOC drivers [2] and seems to be related to the inertia
motor. Another feature can be noted from Figs 6(b) and
8(b). Since transient angle-response adds to changing
transient stator angle, see (76). Notice also from Figs. 6 and
8 that stator flux is constant, see part (b) and detailed view
in part (c), presenting only a small change at transient speed.
This can be seen as a consequence of fluxes been kept
constant at speed inversion, see also part (d). Figs. 9 and 10
are show to compare present propose and conventional
SFOC at start up and speed inversion. However, due to
computational nature of SVM and that PSCAD utilizes
block diagrams; Fig.10 was simulated using OCC proposed
strategy (keeping SFOC original control equations). In
addition, to calculate stator flux, it is utilized classical pole
voltage estimation from firing pulses [7]. Above all, it can
be notice some flux change at transient speed motor. Figs.
11 through 17 show experimental results at start up and
speed reversal. Figs 11-15 were taken using DSP to action
motor and MATLAB to capture internal data. Figs. 11-13
show stator flux angle at start up and speed reversion.
Notice that flux is kept constant in all of the cases. In
addition, note from Fig.11 that at start up instant t
1
, stator
angle starts from an arbitrary fixed position. This is
consistent with a small dc current injected and a fixed
position rotor, before start up. Figs.14 and 15 show flux and
speed-motor output controllers, as well as angle given by
(76). Notice also from Fig. 14, that v
d
*
<<v
q
*
confirming
simulation results and theoretical assumptions, see Figs.
6(a), 8(a) and Eq.(47). Moreover, note that Fig.15 shows a
change of angle sign (from + to ) for speed inversion,
confirming simulation results. This also can help to speed
inversion and it is not a feature of previous reported works
3600


Fig.6. Electrical waveforms at -900/900rpm speed reversal. (a) Flux
vd* and speed rotor vq* output regulators (1u/div). (b) Angle
=arctg(vq*/vd*) (0.5rad/div). (c) Rotor speed m and reference

m
(450rpm/div). (d) Stator angle S (1rad/div). Hor: 100ms/div.


Fig.7. Electrical waveforms at 900/-900rpm speed reversal. (a)Phase
currents (2A/div). (b) Stator fluxes and reference, x=0.9Wb (0.1Wb/div).
(c) Stator fluxes detailed view, y=0.88Wb (5mWb/div). (d) stator
fluxes(0.4Wb/div) and stator voltages(300V/div).
Hor: 100ms/div.


Fig.8. Electrical waveforms at 900and-900rpm speed reversal. (a) Flux vd*
and speed rotor vq* output regulators (1u/div). (b) Angle =arctg(vq*/vd*
(0.5rad/div) (c) Rotor speed m and reference

m (450rpm/div). (d)
Stator angle S (1rad/div). Hor: 50ms/div.

[5-7, 9]. Figs.16 and 17 show stator currents and rotor speed
at start up and speed reversion, taken from oscilloscope and
laser digital tachometer separately (it was used MATLAB
for graphic presentation) respectively. Notice that speed
transient takes approximately one period of three- phase
stator current, confirming simulation results, see Figs. 6(c)
and 8(c). So, it can conclude that the SFOC-OCC proposed
method presents a reasonable fast speed response.

VIII. CONCLUSIONS
This paper introduces the One Cycle Control strategy as

Fig.9. Electrical waveforms at 900 and -900 rpm speed inverse. (a)Rotor
speed m and reference

m (225rpm/div). (b) Stator fluxes and reference,

x=0.9Wb (0.1Wb/div). (d) Stator angle S (1rad/div). Hor: 180ms/div.


Fig.10. Electrical waveforms at 0, 900 and -900 rpm speed inverse.
(a)Rotor speed m and reference

m (225rpm/div). (b) Stator fluxes and

reference, x=0.9Wb (0.2Wb/div). (d) Stator angle S (1rad/div). Hor:
180ms/div.


Fig.11. Stator flux(0.14Wb/div) and stator flux angle (1.2rad/div) at start up
from 0 to 700rpm. Hor: 15ms/div.


Fig.12. Stator flux (0.14Wb/div) and stator flux angle (1rad/div) at speed
motor reversion from 700 to - 700rpm. Hor: 20ms/div.

applied to Stator FOC (SFOC), in order to simplify, even
more, SFOC control algorithm, avoiding SVM complicated
calculations. In addition, based on stator IM equations, a
decoupled SFOC vector-system is proposed to control speed
motor. Physical and mathematical principles of the new
method are shown and main formulas are demonstrated.
3601

Simulation and DSP based experimental results show a
good performance of proposed technique and confirm the
theoretical assumptions

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to the support given by
Coordenao de Aperfeioamento de Pessoal de Nvel
Superior (CAPES), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Cientfico e Tecnolgico (CNPq) and Fundao de Apoio
Pesquisa da Paraba (FAPESQ).



Fig.13. Stator flux (0.14Wb/div) and stator flux angle (1rad/div) at speed
motor reversion from -700 to 700rpm. Hor: 20ms/div.


Fig.14. Flux vd* and torque vq* controller (1000u/div) at speed
motor reversion from 700 to - 700rpm. Hor: 15ms/div.


Fig.15. Angle =arctg(vq
*
/vd
*
) (1rad/div), at speed motor
reversion from 700 to - 700rpm. Hor: 15ms/div.


Fig.16. Stator currents (2.5A/div) at 0, 700 and -700rpm start up
and speed inversion. Hor: 135ms/div.


Fig.17. Speed motor waveform (300rpm/div) at 0, 700 and
-700rpm start up and speed inversion. Hor: 160ms/div.

REFERENCES

[1] F. Blaschke, The principle of field-orientation as applied to the
transvector closed-loop control system for rotating-field machines,
Siemens Rev., vol. 34, pp. 217220, 1972.
[2] W. Leonhard. Control of Electric Drives. Berlin: Springer Verlag,
second ed., 1996.
[3] K. Hasse. Drehzahlgelverfahren fr schnelle umkehrantriebe mit
stromrichtergespeisten a synchron-kurzschlusslaufer-motoren.
Reglungstechnik, vol. 20, pp. 6066, 1972.
[4] I. Takahashi and T. Noguchi, A new quick-response and high
efficiency control strategy of an induction machine, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Applicat.,vol. IA-22, pp. 820827, Sept./Oct. 1986.
[5] X. Xu, R. De Doncker, D.W. Novotny. A Stator Flux Oriented
Induction Machine Drive. PESC '88 Vol. 2. pp 870-876.
[6] X. Xu, R. De Doncker, D.W Novotny. Stator Flux Orientation Control
of Induction Machines in the Field Weakening Region, Conference
Record. IEEE-IAS. 1988, part I. pp 437-443.
[7] Xu, X.; Novotny, D.W. Implementation of Direct Stator Flux
Orientation Control on a Versatile DSP Based System, IEEE-IAS
Annual Meeting, October 1990.
[8] G. S. Buja, and M. P. Kazmierkowski, Direct Torque Control of
PWM Inverter-Fed AC Motors A Survey, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 744-757. Aug. 2004.
[9] B. K. Bose, S. M. Godoy, D. R. Crecelius, K. Rajashekara, R. Martin.
Speed sensorless hybrid vector controlled induction motor drive,
IEEE 33
rd
IAS Annual Meett-ing, IAS '95., , Vol.1, N., pp.137-143
vol.1, 8-12 Oct 1995.
[10] K. M. Smedley and S. Cuk, One-cycle control of switching
converter, Proc. IEEE PESC91, Cambridge, pp. 888896.
[11] C. Qiao and K.M. Smedley. Unified constant-frequency integration
control of three-phase standard bridge boost rectifiers with power-
factor correction, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electr. Vol. 50, N
o
. 1, Feb.
2003
[12] C. Qiao, K. M. Smedley, Three-Phase Bipolar Mode Active Power
Filters, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl., Vol. 38, N
o
. 1, Jan/Feb. 2002, pp.
149-158.
[13] Z. Lai and K.M.Smedley, "A new extension of one-cycle control and
its application to switching power amplifiers" lEEE Trans. Power
Electron, vol. l I, N
o
. 1, pp. 99-105, 1996.
[14] Z. Lai and K. M. Smedley. A General Constant-Frequency
Pulsewidth Modulator and its Applications IEEE Trans. on Circuits
and Systems Vol. 45, N
o
. 4, April 1998, pp. 386-396.
[15] M. P. Kazmierkowski, R. Krishnan, I. Blaabjerg, Control in Power
Electronics, Selected Problems, Acad. Press 2002.
[16] X. Xue; X. Xu; T. G. Habetler and D. M. Divan, A low cost stator
flux oriented voltage source variable speed drive, IEEE-IAS. Annu.
Meeting, vol. 1, pp. 410415, 1990.
[17] B. K. Bose and N. R. Patel, A Programmable Cascaded Low-Pass
Filter-Based Flux Synthesis for a Stator Flux-Oriented Vector-
Controlled Induction Motor Drive Electron. Lett. IEEE Trans Ind
Electron, vol. 44, No. 1, Feb 1997.
[18] M. Boussak, K. Jarray, A high-performance sensorless indirect stator
flux orientation control of induction motor drive, IEEE, Trans. on
Ind. Electron. Feb. 2006. Vol.53. pp. 41-49.

3602