IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO.
6, NOVEMBER 2001
Interconnection and Damping Assignment Approach to Control of PM
Synchronous Motors
Vladan Petrović, Romeo Ortega, and Aleksandar M. Stanković
Abstract—In this paper, we apply a recently developed en-
ergy-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
A 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 ca-
pable 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. Petrović and A. M. Stanković 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.
1063–6536/01$10.00 © 2001 IEEE
811
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 energy-
shaping 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 compat-
ibility feature, an important characteristic of the scheme pre-
sented in this paper is that, for isotropic rotor machines, we can
set the tuning gains to recover a controller consistent with in-
dustrial practice, where a nonlinear observer is used instead of
a simple PI speed loop.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec-
tion II, we briefly describe the IDA-PBC design methodology
of [11], which extends the ideas of PBC of Euler–Lagrange sys-
tems 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 nat-
ural interconnection of the PMSM. For the second controller,
we propose to modify the interconnection to emulate the be-
havior 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].
812 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001

where we also discuss connections of the latter controller with and a vector function satisfying
industrial practice. Section V shows closed-loop performance of
the proposed controller in simulations, while Section VI com-
pares experimental results and simulations and discusses issues
of practical importance for controller implementation. We con- (3)
clude the paper with some final remarks.
and such that
II. CONTROLLER DESIGN PROCEDURE 1) (Integrability) is the gradient of a scalar function.
In this section, we review the basic material of [11] and [12] That is
presented in a form suitable for the problem considered in this
paper.2 We consider so-called PCH models of the form (see [19] (4)
for a list of references)
2) (Equilibrium assignment) , at , verifies
(1)
(5)
where
state vector; 3) (Lyapunov stability) The Jacobian of , at , satis-
smooth function total stored energy; fies the bound
control input;
external disturbance;
matrix of internal inter- (6)
connection;
dissipation. Under these conditions, the system (1) in closed-loop with
From the derivative of it is clear that the energy of the un- will be a PCH system with dissipation of the form (2)
controlled system without disturbances (i.e., with with new energy function and
) is nonincreasing, that is, , and it will ac-
tually decrease in the presence of dissipation. Since the total
energy function is bounded from below, the system will even- (7)
tually stop at a point of minimum energy. The point where the
energy is minimal is usually not the one of practical interest, and and will be a (locally) stable equilibrium. It will be asymp-
control is introduced to operate the system around some nonzero totically stable if, in addition, the largest invariant set under the
equilibrium point, say . Stabilization in IDA-PBC is achieved closed-loop dynamics contained in
aiming at the closed-loop dynamics
(8)
(2)
equals . An estimate of the domain of attraction is given by
where is the desired total energy function, which has a the largest bounded level set .
minimum at , and and
are some desired interconnection and damping matrices, re- Remark: In [11] it is shown that if there exists a (con-
spectively. tinuously differentiable) static state feedback such that the
The proposition below (originating from [11]) shows that the closed-loop is asymptotically stable, then there exist (contin-
control problem reduces to the solution of a linear partial dif- uous) which satisfy the conditions of
ferential equation (PDE). Proposition II.1.
Proposition II.1: Given and the Remark: Replacing (7) in (3) we see that the controller de-
desired equilibrium to be stabilized . Assume we can find a sign procedure described above essentially reduces to finding
function , and square matrices and such that the solution of the partial dif-
such that ferential equation

2A
satisfies the constraints (5) and (6) at . This simple
difference from the material presented in [12] is that here we have intro-
duced particular notation for disturbance input to separate it from the control idea has proven instrumental in the solution of several inter-
inputs. esting control problems [11], [14], [18]. We will apply it in
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001 813

the following sections to obtain two different controllers for the with . Equa-
PMSM. tions (11) and (12) determine the controller action, and the PDE
(13) needs to be solved to determine , and thus . This is
III. NATURAL INTERCONNECTION CONTROLLER easily done using symbolic solvers (e.g., Maple) and the solu-
tion is
A PMSM is modeled with the standard dq model given as
follows [7]:

(14)
where and are some differentiable functions that have to be
chosen such that desired is a minimum of [i.e., such
(9) that conditions (5) and (6) are satisfied]. The desired equilib-
rium state for synchronous machines is usually selected based
on the so called “maximum torque per ampere” principle as
In these equations is the number of pole pairs, and , with
are stator inductances in the dq frame (which are equal in the the desired speed reference.4 Now, since only de-
case of cylindrical rotor), is stator winding resistance, is pends on , the function is easy to select, for instance, as
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 where we have introduced the notation , and
variables is simply ). is some positive design parameter. With this selection of ,
The energy function of the system is given by it can be shown that the required minimum condition is satisfied
if

where we have defined the state vector as

where , . As proposed
. The system (9) can then be
in [16], a selection of that satisfies the above conditions for all
rewritten in the PCH form (1) with
values of (i.e., load torque) is .
Replacement of proposed functions and in (14) yields

and

(10)
A key step for the success of the IDA-PBC methodology is the
adequate choice of the desired interconnection and damping ma-
trices. 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)
3In 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 de-
scription of the (known load torque) controller.
The following remarks concerning this design, further elabo-
rated in [16], are in order.
• It can be shown that the above design verifies the condi-
tions of Proposition II.1. Therefore, the desired equilib-
rium is asymptotically stable.
• 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 condi-
tions belong to the set
and the load torque is different from zero. This is estab-
lished showing that the signal satisfies
4Strictly speaking, in the case of L = 6 L torque can be made even larger
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.
814 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001

a smooth differential equation of the form where is the desired equilibrium point, and are
, where for all and all . design parameters, with arbitrary, and satisfying
• In practical applications the load torque (and consequently
) is, of course, unknown, and we propose to estimate it (18)
using the nonlinear observer
Under these conditions, the closed-loop is a PCH system of the
form (2) with given by (16), , and energy-
Lyapunov function
(15)

with , and some positive design pa-

rameters. This observer will also be used in the controller (19)
presented in the next section.
Furthermore, the equilibrium is asymptotically stable with
IV. ISOTROPIC INTERCONNECTION CONTROLLER domain of attraction the whole state space minus a set of zero
In this section we propose to modify the interconnection ma- measure.
trix of the motor dynamics. To motivate our choice we notice Proof: From (10) for and the definition of , we
first that in the isotropic nonsalient rotor case ( ), a see that the interconnection matrix (16) is achieved with
different factorization of the model (9) is also possible. Namely,
with the same definition of state vector and energy function, the
system can also be written in PCH form with , , and
as before, and a new interconnection matrix
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 pro- (22)
pose a desired interconnection matrix of the form
and the PDE in (22) is readily solved as
(16)
(23)

where is a parameter to be defined. with a function to be defined. To make ,

we propose a simple polynomial form
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 ( which, upon substitution in (23) and this in turn in (20) and
unknown) case in the following section. (21), yields the control law of the proposition IV.1. Finally, the
Proposition IV.1: Consider the PMSM (9) in closed-loop Hessian
with the control law

evaluated at is positive definite iff the conditions (18)

are satisfied. This proves stability of with Lyapunov function
.
(17) We will now prove that—besides —the closed-loop system
has two more equilibrium points, which are however unstable.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001 815

Indeed, since is full rank, the equilibria—which we unstable subspace, and the nonlinear system will have corre-
denote by —are the solutions of where sponding 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 con-
troller 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 Lya-
punov function (19). Indeed, positive values of these parame-
ters make “steeper” the Lyapunov function and convergence will
It is clear that has the only solution be faster. On the other hand, the controller can be significantly
. On the other hand, can be rewritten simplified with a suitable choice of the tuning parameters; for
using as instance, setting , , as we did in our
simulations and experiments [note that does not enter in the
(24) closed-loop energy function nor its derivative, and af-
fects only the coupling between the system states].
which, besides the solution , has two real roots that B. Unknown Load Torque
we denote . To prove that these equilibria are unstable we
will show that they are saddle points of the Lyapunov function. In practical implementations load torque is unknown and it is
Toward this end we evaluate the determinant of the 2 2 upper necessary to estimate it. As in the previous section, this is done
corner block of the Hessian of at using the observer (15).
Proposition IV.2: Consider the PMSM (9) in closed-loop
with the control law (17) where is replaced by
generated by (15). Under the conditions of Proposition IV.1 we
have that for almost all initial conditions.
Proof: The proof is established invoking a novel theorem
on stability of cascaded systems stated in [9]. Let us then de-
where the last identity—which is valid for —is ob- fine the estimation error , and write the closed-loop
tained using (24). Now, for satisfying (18), we can verify system in the following form:
that while . Consequently, the de-
terminant evaluated at is negative and the Hessian matrix (25)
is sign indefinite. Recalling that is a nonincreasing
function and that the trajectories cannot remain in the set with
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, pro-
duces the following linear tracking error dynamics:

leads successively to (26)

where . This is an autonomous linear system, which

Consequently, converges to an equilibrium point. It only re-
mains 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
equilibria of the closed-loop system are unstable. Thus the
system linearized around the unstable equilibrium points will
have a one-dimensional stable subspace and a one-dimensional
is asymptotically stable for all positive and . Thus, the esti-
mation 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
stable. Further, the Lyapunov function is polynomial, thus it
satisfies the bounds
816 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001

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 sub-
system 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 sub-
system 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
(e.g., ), since in this case the full system
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
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:
Fig. 1. Actual load torque (dash-dotted line) and its estimate (solid line).
Since the load torque is unknown, we can use a time separation
assumption, and produce torque command (and thus current
reference ) by a classical (e.g., PI) controller in the
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.
In the isotropic rotor case ( ), the isotropic interconnec-
tion controller presented in Proposition IV.1 reduces to a form
similar to the controller given above. Namely, by setting the de-
sign parameters and , the voltage
equations become exactly of the form (27), now with the dif-
ference that the torque estimate provided by (15) is used to de-
termine desired current value ( ). It can be verified
that the stability proof of Proposition IV.1 still holds for this par-
ticular case.

(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
and
which directly shows that current errors decay to zero, while the
use of LaSalle’s invariance principle further establishes
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 sim-
ulations we set mH and mH to examine the
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
set (arbitrarily) to by the estimator parameter
selection , and .
Fig. 2 shows a family of the closed-loop system responses
to step changes in speed reference parameterized with the con-
. troller parameter . As expected, increased action proportional
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001
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 tran-
sients. This phenomenon is depicted in Fig. 3. On the other hand,
better disturbance rejection is achieved with larger control ac-
tion, 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 be-
tween rapid transient response and good disturbance suppres-
sion on one hand and low control voltage peaks and small re-
sponse overshoots on the other is reached with the selection of
. results in position resolution 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 pur-
pose. The experimental setup consists of the following compo-
nents: R43H PMSM (2 horse power; continuous stall torque and
817
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 ef-
fect 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.
The controller board’s main processor (Motorola 604e PPC,
floating-point) is used for calculation of the controller equa-
tions. A simple first-order Euler approximation with sampling
time of s was used for the controller discretization.
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
818 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001
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
friction constant , and simulations
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
data from an auxiliary (fast, ) load torque esti-
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 pur-
poses since the experimental estimate can be considered equal
to the actual load torque due to the fast auxiliary load torque es-
timator dynamics and monotonous estimator input.
The comparison of results is shown in Fig. 5. The electrical
speed reference is kept at constant value of rad/s.
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.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001
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 imple-
mentation is relatively sensitive to the selection of the value of
motor inertia ( ) used in calculation of estimator equations. Es-
timator is stable for every choice of , but incorrect value of
manifests clearly in the estimate as excessive peaks during
the speed transients [caused by the term which is
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 man-
ufacturer provided data. For the motor used in experiments and
simulations, manufacturer given kg m and fine
tuned value was found to be kg m (8% dif-
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 ad-
dressed. Those two phenomena essentially impose additional
voltage and inject dc and higher harmonics into the system. The
additional voltages can be significant, and proper compensa-
tion (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
819
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 al-
gorithm offers both analytical and performance advantages. We
demonstrate the speed servo performance of the controller both
in simulations and in experiments. Practical implementation re-
quires 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 in-
verter, experimental results match very well with the theoretical
predictions and simulations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The second author would like to thank Northeastern Univer-
sity for its hospitality. The authors would also like to thank the
anonymous reviewers for their careful reading and many con-
structive 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.
820 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CONTROL SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 9, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 2001
[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. Grčar, P. Cafuta, and M. Žnidarič, “Nonlinear control of synchronous
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: Pren-
tice-Hall, 1996.
[7] P. C. Krause, Analysis of Electric Machinery. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 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-La-
garrigue, 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 en-
ergy 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, Pas-
sivity-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 Stabiliza-
tion 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. Petrović, R. Ortega, and A. M. Stanković, “A globally convergent en-
ergy-based controller for PM synchronous motors,” in Proc. IEEE Conf.
Decision Contr., Phoenix, AZ, USA, Dec. 1999, pp. 334–340.
[17] V. Petrović, R. Ortega, A. M. Stanković, 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 con-
verter,” 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.