Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 13

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO.

2, JUNE 2003

271

A Review of RFO Induction Motor Parameter Estimation Techniques


Hamid A. Toliyat, Senior Member, IEEE, Emil Levi, Senior Member, IEEE, and Mona Raina, Student Member, IEEE
AbstractAn induction motor is the most frequently used electric machine in high performance drive applications. Control schemes of such drives require an exact knowledge of at least some of the induction motor parameters. Any mismatch between the parameter values used within the controller and actual parameter values in the motor leads to a deterioration in the drive performance. Numerous methods for induction machine online and offline parameter estimation have been developed exclusively for application in high performance drives. This paper aims at providing a review of the major techniques used for the induction motor parameter estimation. The paper is illustrated throughout with experimental and simulation examples, related to various parameter estimation techniques. Index TermsInduction motor drives, parameter offline identification, parameter online estimation, vector control.

I. INTRODUCTION IELD oriented (or vector) control is the most popular ac machine control method that is widely used in high performance industrial applications of electric drives. In the case of an induction machine, rotor flux oriented (RFO) control requires an accurate value of at least some of the motor parameters in order to yield robust control. Which parameters are required depends on the applied RFO control scheme. If the applied parameter values within the control system do not match the actual values in the motor, detuned operation results. Impact of parameter variations on various vector control schemes has been studied in detail in the past and extensive discussions are available in many books [1][5]. A vector controlled induction motor can be used within a torque drive, a speed drive, or a position drive. The type of the drive that exhibits the highest sensitivity to the incorrect parameter values is the torque drive. Although the motor parameter variations affect the speed control applications too, existence of the PI speed controller considerably reduces negative consequences of the parameter detuning. Induction motor parameters change with temperature, frequency, and saturation. The consequence of any mismatch between the parameter values used in the controller and those in the motor is that the actual rotor flux position does not coincide with the position assumed by the controller. The situation is illustrated in Fig. 1, [4]. This means that the actual rotor
Manuscript received January 21, 2002. H. A. Toliyat and M. Raina are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-3128 USA (e-mail: toliyat@ee.tamu.edu; Mona@ee.tamu.edu). E. Levi is with the School of Engineering, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, L3 3AF, U.K. (e-mail: e.levi@livjm.ac.uk). Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TEC.2003.811719

Fig. 1. Illustration of commanded (d q ) and actual (dq ) rotor flux oriented reference frames in detuned operation, caused by a parameter mismatch. Because the commanded reference frame does not coincide with the actual one, decoupled rotor flux and torque control does not take place.

flux contains both - and -axis component, leading to a loss of decoupled flux and torque control. Performance of the drive therefore deteriorates from the desired. In order to avoid such a situation, it is necessary to provide the vector controller with accurate induction motor parameter values. These parameters have to be obtained somehow from measurements, during initialization of the drive. Since any vector controlled induction motor drive is inverter fed, numerous tests based on an inverter supply have been developed in recent past for determination of the required parameter values [4][7]. Such methods are further on called offline parameter identification methods. In addition, numerous possibilities exist nowadays to update the parameter values during the drive operation [3][7]. The techniques that enable parameter adaptation during the drive operation are further on termed online parameter estimation methods. The aim of this paper is to provide a review of the major techniques used for the induction motor offline and online parameter identification and estimation, respectively. II. INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETERS The parameters that may need to be identified offline or tracked online depend on the vector control scheme under consideration. If the drive operates with the constant rated flux reference, the required parameters will be some or all of the following: rated magnetizing inductance, stator resistance, rotor resistance, and stator/rotor leakage inductance or transient stator inductance. If the drive operates with a variable flux

0885-8969/03$17.00 2003 IEEE

272

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

reference (optimal efficiency drives, operation in the field weakening region, etc.), magnetizing curve will usually be required as well. Finally, if the drive controller includes some kind of compensation of the iron losses (that may be especially important for torque drives in electric or hybrid vehicles), one will need to know the variation of the equivalent iron loss resistance with operating frequency [8]. The most important offline identification and online parameter estimation techniques are reviewed in the remainder of this paper. III. OFFLINE PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION TECHNIQUES It is often the case in practice that one manufacturer supplies the inverter with a vector controller, while the machine comes from another manufacturer. It is then not possible to set the parameters of the controller in advance and these have to be set onsite, once when the inverter is connected to the machine. Such a situation has led to the development of the so-called self-commissioning procedures for vector controlled induction machines [9], [10]. The main idea behind this concept is that the controller automatically determines all of the parameters of an induction machine, required for vector control. The automated procedure of testing and calculation is done following the first enabling of the controller. As the induction machine may already be coupled to a load, the tests aimed at self-commissioning have to identify the required parameters at standstill. The identification is therefore performed with single-phase supply to the machine. In principle, two types of excitation may be applieddc or ac. The one ideal for true self-commissioning is dc. From applied dc voltage and resulting dc steady state current, one finds the value of the stator resistance. Determination of the remaining parameters is then based most frequently on transient current response that follows application of the dc voltage. Self-commissioning schemes that rely on this approach are those described in [11][16]. The methods regarded as suitable for commissioning but inappropriate for self-commissioning are those that either require some special conditions to be satisfied during the commissioning (for example, the machine is allowed to rotate) or they require substantially more complicated mathematical processing of the measurement results, when compared to the self-commissioning methods. For example, procedures described in [17][19] are all based on some tests with single-phase supply to the machine. However, the method described in [17] involves application of pseudo-random binary-sequence voltage excitation and requires an adaptive observer. The procedure of [18] relies on maximum likelihood method to obtain transfer function parameters. A step voltage is applied at the stator terminals and the stator voltage and stator current responses are recorded. The Laplace transformation is used to get the transfer function along with the maximum likelihood estimation. The method of [19] requires application of the recursive least squares algorithm, this being the same as for the procedure of [20]. The second possible excitation for parameter identification at standstill is single-phase ac. Standstill frequency response test forms in this case the basis for the parameter identification [21][24]. A particularly interesting procedure based on

single-phase ac excitation is the rotor time constant identification method of [25]. It is based on trial-and-error and essentially does not require any computations. Some of the offline identification procedures surveyed so far enable identification of the machines magnetizing curve in addition to other rated parameter values. Such is the case for the methods described in [13], [15], [21][23]. It should be noted that the requirement for magnetizing curve identification often adds to the complexity of the commissioning procedure since more than one test needs to be performed. A significant step forward in this sense is the method of [26], where magnetizing curve is identified at standstill using only one test with singlephase ac supply. Other possibilities of the magnetizing curve identification for self-commissioning purposes have been explored in [27][30]. If the conditions of the commissioning are less stringent, the drive may be allowed to rotate for the purposes of parameter identification. A whole array of additional parameter determination methods opens up in this case. For example, an extremely simple procedure for rotor time constant tuning [31] is based on the tests performed while the machine is rotating. The drive is operated in the torque mode for the purposes of the rotor time constant tuning, with rated rotor flux reference. An alternating square-wave torque reference is applied at certain speed of rotation. If the rotor time constant value used in the controller is correct, the actual torque is an alternating square-wave as well, so that the speed response follows a triangular function. If the rotor time constant setting is not correct, situation of Fig. 1 results and the actual torque response is not the same as the torque reference. Speed response then deviates from triangular. An experimental illustration of this trial-and-error method of rotor time constant tuning is given in Fig. 2. Standard no-load test and locked rotor test may be performed with a PWM inverter supply if the commissioning situation allows for such testing. Parameters that are calculated are the same as those obtained with sinusoidal supply, provided that the calculations are based on the fundamental components [32]. This feature is exploited in [33], where the parameters are identified using the dc, no-load and the pseudo-locked rotor tests. A method for pseudo-locked rotor test is presented since the mechanical locking of the rotor is undesirable in any onsite commissioning scenario. Identification of the machines magnetizing curve becomes a simple and straightforward task if the machine is allowed to rotate under no-load conditions during the onsite commissioning. By defining the magnetizing curves analytical approximation in a suitable functional form and by performing a series of steady state fundamental harmonic voltage measurements in the field weakening region, it becomes possible to determine the correct magnetizing curve approximation purely by visual inspection of the measurement results [34]. An experimental illustration of this method is given in Fig. 3, where measured line-to-line fundamental voltage component is shown, together with the reconstructed magnetizing curve. Another magnetizing curve identification procedure is described in [35]. It relies on the signals that are already present within the drive controller (stator currents and the dc link voltage), so that additional measurements are not required.

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

273

Fig. 3. Measured fundamental stator voltage for different settings of the parameter a of the inverse magnetizing curve per-unit analytical approximation i = a + (1 a) and reconstructed magnetizing curve (2.3-kW machine, field-weakening starts at 1150 r/min; results taken from [34]). The correct value is a = 0:9 since it gives the flattest voltage behavior in the field-weakening region.

Fig. 2. An experimental trial-and-error method of rotor time constant tuning in indirect vector controller: speed response to alternating square-wave torque command with correct rotor time constant and with 1.7 times correct rotor time constant (0.75-kW machine). Speed response is a triangular function of time when the rotor time constant is correctly set (upper figure). The method was originally proposed in [31] and the results shown are from [4].

A special identification function, proposed in [35], ensures precise acquisition of the magnetizing curve, robust against the stator resistance variation, and the inverter lock-out time. The algorithm does not require any test signals. It is sufficient to perform the measurements during running of the unloaded motor at around 100 r/min. Performing measurements at such a low speed enables the impact of iron and mechanical losses on identification accuracy to be minimized. This, in turn, enables accurate identification down to 10% of the rated magnetizing flux, including the point of infliction. An illustration of the results of the procedure of [35] is given in Fig. 4. Some other approaches to the magnetizing curve identification, described in [36][38] are more involved and therefore less suitable for onsite commissioning of the drive. Method of [36] performs identification at standstill and only current measurements are needed. However, all the three phases of the machine are energized and standstill condition is achieved by means of closed loop speed control. The method requires that the vector controlled induction motor is coupled to a controllable load and is therefore not suitable for onsite commissioning. Similar conclusion applies to the broad-band excitation method [37], which requires injection of multiple frequency supply into the machines stator terminals. Method of [38], although apparently very accurate, is rarely applicable in practice since it requires that the neutral point of the stator star connected winding is accessible.

Fig. 4. Experimentally identified magnetizing curve and magnetizing inductance (100 r/min, no-load conditions, 7-kW machine, method of [35]).

It is worth noting that offline magnetizing curve (or magnetizing inductance) identification suffices for saturation compensation schemes and that identification of dynamic (differential) inductance is usually not required. However, there are methods that enable identification of the dynamic inductance as well, for example [37] and [39]. Compensation of iron losses in vector controlled induction machines usually requires knowledge of the equivalent iron loss

274

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

resistance for the fundamental harmonic, which is a function of the fundamental frequency [8]. The equivalent iron loss resistance can be identified during the drive commissioning using the procedure outlined in [40]. A series of no-load tests are performed at various fundamental frequencies, using the same PWM voltage source inverter that will be subsequently used for the normal drive operation. Fundamental harmonic input power needs to be measured, mechanical losses are separated from the fundamental iron losses using the customary no-load test procedure, and equivalent iron loss resistance is eventually calculated. The procedure requires that rotation is permitted and that no-load condition is available. An illustration of the experimental results related to fundamental iron loss component and the corresponding equivalent iron loss resistance is given in Fig. 5. Tests at standstill, which would enable identification of the equivalent iron loss resistance, do not seem to exist at present. It should be noted that accuracy of parameter determination in all offline identification techniques depends on the sample rate selection, quantization errors, resolution and accuracy of sensors, etc. [41]. Identified parameter values will therefore always be characterized with certain error margin. The major problem encountered in offline parameter identification at standstill is undoubtedly the inverter lock-out time and nonlinearity, which make the accurate parameter determination on the basis of reconstructed voltages very difficult without prior knowledge of the inverter voltage drop characteristics [42]. A technique for overcoming this problem has recently been proposed, based on recursive least squares [43]. Further important works describing various approaches to self-commissioning and commissioning are those of [44][55]. IV. ONLINE ROTOR TIME CONSTANT ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES The major effort has been put into development of rotor time constant (rotor resistance) online estimation methods. Due to a huge number of proposed solutions of very different nature, these are further classified into four subgroups. A. Spectral Analysis Techniques This group of methods encompasses all of the cases where online identification is based on the measured response to a deliberately injected test signal or an existing characteristic harmonic in the voltage/current spectrum [56][66]. Stator currents and/or voltages of the motor are sampled and the parameters are derived from the spectral analysis of these samples. In the case of spectral analysis, a perturbation signal is used because under no-load conditions of the induction motor, the rotor induced currents and voltages become zero, so slip frequency becomes zero, and hence, the rotor parameters cannot be estimated. In [56] and [57], the disturbance to the system is provided by injecting negative sequence components. An online technique for determining value of the rotor resistance by detecting the negative sequence voltage is proposed in [56]. Special precautions need to be taken to circumvent the torque-producing action when an induction motor, equipped with this system, is used as a torque drive; otherwise, the outer loop might prevent the perturbation from being injected into the system. The main drawback of this method is

Fig. 5. Fundamental component of the iron loss identified using the procedure of [40] and the corresponding equivalent iron loss resistance (4-kW machine).

Fig. 6. Rotor inductance and rotor resistance identification using the method of [57] (simulation results).

that the strong second harmonic torque pulsation is induced due to the interaction of positive and negative rotating components of MMF. In [57], an online estimation technique is proposed, based on the model in the frequency domain. The -axis component of the injected negative sequence component is kept at zero, so that the machine torque is undisturbed. The -axis component affects the flux of the machine. FFT is used to analyze the currents and voltages and the fundamental components of the sampled spectral values are used to determine the parameters. Average speed is used for the identification of parameters. The simulation results, obtained using this method, for rotor resistance and rotor inductance identification are given in Fig. 6 [57].

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

275

In [58], an attempt to create online tests similar to the no-load and full-load tests is made. In [59], a pseudo-random binary sequence signal is used for perturbation of the system by injecting it into the -axis and correlating with -axis stator current response. The sign of correlation gives the direction for rotor time constant updating. This method however does not work satisfactorily under light loads. In [60], a sinusoidal perturbation is injected into the flux producing stator current component channel. Though rotor resistance can be estimated under any load and speed condition, the cost is high due to the installation of two flux search coils. Solutions described in [61][63] all belong to the same category. A very different approach is the one described in [64][66], where rotor slot harmonics in stator current are tracked and used for online updating of the rotor time constant. B. Observer-Based Techniques In [67], Loron and Lalibert describe the motor model and the development and tuning of an extended Kalman filter (EKF) for parameter estimation during normal operating conditions without introducing any test signals. The proposed method requires terminal and rotor speed measurements and is useful for autotuning an indirect field-oriented controller or an adaptive direct field-oriented controller. In [68], Zai, DeMarco, and Lipo propose a method for detection of the inverse rotor time constant using the EKF by treating the rotor time constant as the fifth state variable along with the stator and rotor currents. This is similar to a previously mentioned method that injected perturbation in the system, except that in this case, the perturbation is not provided externally. Instead, the wide-band harmonics contained in a PWM inverter output voltage serve as an excitation. This method works on the assumption that when the motor speed changes, the machine model becomes a two-input/twooutput time-varying system with superimposed noise input. The drawbacks are that this method assumes that all other parameters are known and the variation in the magnetizing inductance can introduce large errors into the rotor time constant estimation. The application of the EKF for slip calculation for tuning an indirect field oriented drive is proposed in [69]. Using the property that in the steady state the Kalman gains are asymptotically constant for constant speeds, the Riccati difference equation is replaced by a look-up table that makes the system much simpler. The disadvantage is that, although the complexity of the Riccati equation is reduced, the full-order EKF is computationally very intensive as compared to the reduced order-based systems. In [70], an online estimation of rotor resistance and the magnetizing inductance, using continuous form of the Kalman filter is proposed, though the actual estimation is done offline using the discrete form of the KF. For using the KF online, it is important to estimate the magnetizing inductance accurately as an inaccurate magnetizing inductance gives improper value of the rotor time constant. The method is based on the assumption that since the value of the magnetizing inductance follows the motor flux level, the magnetizing inductance can be estimated along with the rotor resistance and the rotor time constant using the KF. Other solutions, based on the Kalman filter, are those described in [71][76].

An extended Luenberger observer (ELO) for joint state and parameter estimation was developed in [77][79]. In [78] and [79], the authors have provided a comparison of the operation of the ELO and the EKF. In [78], a deterministic approach to designing the ELO with joint online estimation of motor states and parameters is presented. In [79], Du and Brdys implemented the scheme using three different full-order ELOs. The first ELO was used for rotor time constant and rotor flux estimation. The second one was used for shaft speed and rotor flux estimation and the third for shaft speed, load torque, and rotor flux estimation. In the case of joint state and parameter estimation, ELO turns out to be the advantageous solution. Since the induction motor is a nonlinear system, the observations from the EKF at individual time instants do not lead to an overall optimal observation. For the ELO, there is a great deal of flexibility in choosing the gain, unlike the EKF and the rate of convergence can be tuned without adversely affecting the steady state accuracy of the observer. The main advantage of the ELO over the EKF is that the observer performance can be greatly enhanced by simply adjusting the gain matrix for rapid convergence of the estimates, which gives an unbiased estimation in the case of the ELO. The major problems related to EKF and ELO applications are computational intensity and the fact that all the inductances are treated as constants in the motor equations. In order to improve the accuracy of the EKF-based rotor resistance identification, it is suggested in [68], [70], and [73] to simultaneously identify the magnetizing inductance. Another possibility of improving the accuracy is the inclusion of the iron loss into the model [72]. C. Model Reference Adaptive System-Based Techniques The third major group of online rotor resistance adaptation methods is based on principles of model reference adaptive control. This is the approach that has attracted most of the attention due to its relatively simple implementation requirements. The basic idea is that one quantity can be calculated in two different ways. The first value is calculated from references inside the control system. The second value is calculated from measured signals. One of the two values is independent of the rotor resistance (rotor time constant). The difference between the two is an error signal, whose existence is assigned entirely to the error in rotor resistance used in the control system. The error signal is used to drive an adaptive mechanism (PI or I controller) which provides correction of the rotor resistance. Any method that belongs to this group is based on utilization of the machines model and its accuracy is therefore heavily dependent on the accuracy of the applied model. The number of methods that belong to this group is vast [80][100] and they primarily differ with respect to which quantity is selected for adaptation purposes. Reactive power-based method is not dependent on stator resistance at all and is probably the most frequently applied approach [80][85]. A method based on special criterion function, derived again from stator voltage and current measurement, is described in [86]. Next, air gap power can be selected as the quantity on which adaptation is based [87], [88]. The reference air gap power is calculated from reference torque and frequency values, while the actual one has to be calculated from measured input power

276

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

and estimated stator losses in the machine. Alternatively, dc link power can be measured instead of the machines input power. In both cases, the accuracy of the method is heavily undermined by the need to estimate stator loss (and inverter losses if dc link power is measured). Other possibilities include selection of torque [83], [89], rotor back emf [90], [91], rotor flux magnitude [83], rotor flux -, and -components [92], stored magnetic energy [93], product of stator -axis current and rotor flux [94], stator fundamental rms voltage [95], stator -axis or -axis voltage components [94], or stator -axis current component [96]. There are a couple of common features that all of the methods of this group share. First, rotor resistance adaptation is usually operational in steady-states only and is then disabled during transients. Thus, the adaptation can be based on steady-state model of the machine. Second, in the vast majority of cases, stator voltages are required for calculation of the adaptive quantity and they have either to be measured or reconstructed from the inverter firing signals and measured dc link voltage. Third, in most cases, identification does not work at zero speed and at zero load torque. Finally, identification heavily relies on the model of the machine, in which, most frequently, all of the other parameters are treated as constants. This is at the same time the major drawback of this group of methods. Indeed, an analysis of the parameter variation influence on accuracy of rotor resistance adaptation [101] shows that when rotor flux magnitude method is applied and actual leakage inductances deviate by 40% from the values used in the adaptation, rotor resistance is estimated with such an error that the response of the drive becomes worse than with no adaptation at all. Similar study, with very much the same conclusions, is described in [102] where parameter sensitivity is examined for -axis stator voltage method, -axis stator voltage method, air gap power method, and reactive power method. Due to high sensitivity of the model-based methods to other parameter variation effects, it is desirable to account for at least some of these in the process of rotor resistance adaptation. Variation of the magnetizing inductance with saturation is for this reason sometimes taken into account, so that the accuracy of rotor resistance identification is improved [84], [86], [103], [104]. The other drawback of this group of methods, impossibility of adaptation at zero speed and zero load torque, is successfully eliminated in certain cases. For example, the schemes of [86] and [96] are operational at zero speed and at light loads although they do fail at zero load. Operation of a MRAS rotor resistance adaptation scheme is illustrated in Fig. 7 by means of experimentally recorded traces. The method based on special criterion function of [86], which enables rotor resistance adaptation at zero speed and under light loading conditions, is implemented. The error function, which serves as the input into the PI controller, is shown together with the rotor resistance estimate in per unit (i.e., ratio of rotor resistance in the controller to the actual one in the machine). The drive operates at zero speed with 0.2 per unit load torque. The adaptation mechanism operation is illustrated for step variation of rotor resistance used in the controller, of 50 . As can be seen from Fig. 7, rotor resistance adaptation works well as the resistance in the controller always returns, after the introduced ). disturbances, to the previous value (i.e., to

Fig. 7. Experimental recording of the operation of the rotor resistance adaptation in indirect rotor flux oriented induction machine, using the method of [86] (scales: time10 s/div, error function0.5 p.u./div, rotor resistance estimate0.4 p.u./div; 0.75-kW machine). Figure provided courtesy of the author, Dr. S.N. Vukosavic.

Other methods of online rotor resistance adaptation, that do not belong to any of the three main groups, are reviewed next. D. Other Methods There exist a number of other possibilities for online rotor resistance (rotor time constant) adaptation, such as those described in [105][107]. For example, the method of [107] does not require either a special test signal or complex computations. It is based on a special switching technique of the current regulated PWM inverter, which allows measurement of the induced voltage across the disconnected stator phase. The rotor time constant is then identified directly from this measured voltage and measured stator currents. The technique provides up to six windows within one electric cycle to update the rotor time constant, which is sufficient for all practical purposes. A simulation illustration of the method is given in Fig. 8, where estimated and actual rotor time constant are shown. The updating is performed only twice (rather than six times) during one electrical cycle. Another possibility, opened up by the recent developments in the area of artificial intelligence (AI), is the application of artificial neural networks for the online rotor time constant (rotor resistance) adaptation. Such a possibility is explored in [108][112]. The other AI technique that can be utilized for online rotor time constant adaptation is the fuzzy logic [113][120]. Recent emphasis on sensorless vector control has led to a development of a number of schemes for simultaneous rotor speed and rotor time constant online estimation, that are applicable in conjunction with the appropriate speed estimation model-based algorithms [121][134]. These methods of rotor time constant estimation belong in vast majority of cases to one of the groups already reviewed in this section. An excellent review of the rotor resistance compensation schemes, available at the time, is the one of [135]. V. ONLINE ESTIMATION OF STATOR RESISTANCE An industrially accepted standard for sensored rotor flux oriented control has become the indirect rotor flux oriented control (IRFOC), which does not require the knowledge of the stator resistance. Since the rotor time constant is of crucial importance

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

277

Fig. 8. Estimated and actual rotor time constant using the procedure of [107]. The estimate is updated twice per electrical cycle, on the basis of the measurement of the voltage across a disconnected phase.

for decoupled flux and torque control in IRFOC, the major effort was directed toward development of online techniques for rotor time constant identification, as shown by the review in Section IV. The situation has however dramatically changed with the advent of sensorless vector control, which requires rotor speed estimation. Vast majority of speed estimation techniques are based on the induction machine model and involve the stator resistance as a parameter in the process of speed estimation. An accurate value of the stator resistance is of utmost importance in this case for correct operation of the speed estimator in the low speed region. If stator resistance is detuned, large speed estimation errors and even instability at very low speeds result. It is for this reason that online estimation of stator resistance has received considerable attention during the last decade, as witnessed by a large number of publications devoted to this subject [136][163]. The other driving force behind the increased interest in online stator resistance estimation was the introduction of direct torque control (DTC), which in its basic form relies on estimation of stator flux from measured stator voltages and currents. The accuracy of DTC, especially in the low frequency region, therefore heavily depends on the knowledge of the correct stator resistance value. In general, methods of stator resistance estimation are similar to those utilized for rotor time constant (rotor resistance) estimation and include application of observers, extended Kalman filters, model reference adaptive systems, and artificial intelligence. VI. ONLINE COMPENSATION OF SATURATION AND IRON LOSS In contrast to temperature-related resistance variation that is slow, change in machines inductances is very rapid. Compensation of such variations is therefore most easily accomplished by means of modified nonlinear machine models that account for the variable degree of saturation and invariably ask for the knowledge of an appropriate magnetizing curve. Compensation of main flux saturation, that will simultaneously yield online magnetizing inductance estimation, requires that the basic machine model is modified in such a way that the nonlinearity of the magnetizing curve is accounted for. The standard assumption is that leakage flux and main flux components of the stator and rotor flux can be treated independently. It is assumed further on that leakage inductances are constants and that only main flux saturates.

Derivation of the complete dynamic axis models that account for main flux saturation is rather involved and the final form depends on the selected set of state space variables [164][166]. However, if one is interested only in modifying the rotor flux estimators or the indirect vector controller in such a way that the main flux saturation is compensated, then this task can be accomplished in a relatively simple way, because all of the estimators and the indirect vector controller are based on the reduced order models of an induction machine [1], [167][170]. Very much the same applies to the utilization of a full order observer for rotor flux estimation, provided that the observer is constructed using stator current and rotor flux axis components as state space variables [171]. In all of these cases, knowledge of the induction machines magnetizing curve is a prerequisite, since this characteristic has to be incorporated into the control system. Magnetizing curve has therefore to be identified offline during the commissioning of the drive. The other existing approaches to online magnetizing inductance estimation are predominantly based on standard axis machine model and they do not require a-priori knowledge of the magnetizing curve. Such is the situation with methods reported in [103], [172][178]. While the estimation is sufficiently good in steady state, it is usually of limited accuracy during transients, since the schemes are based on the induction machine model that accounts for the main flux saturation in a very approximate way (only through continuous variation of the steady state magnetizing inductance). A couple of theoretical/ simulation attempts were made recently to apply AI techniques (ANNs and FL) in the estimation of the saturated magnetizing inductance [179], [180]. Online magnetizing inductance estimation is illustrated in Fig. 9 for a model-based method, described in [181], which requires knowledge of the magnetizing curve of the machine. An experimental recording of the start-up transient, with set speed of 1350 r/min, is shown. The machine is initially premagnetized and the field weakening operation starts at 650 r/min by means of the IRFOC scheme described in [34]. The magnetizing inductance exhibits substantial variation, from unsaturated value in premagnetized state to rated saturated value and then back toward unsaturated value as the speed of rotation in the field weakening region increases. Rotor leakage flux saturation can be included in the model of the machine by making rotor leakage inductance a variable parameter, dependent on the rotor current. Frequency-related variation of rotor parameters can be accounted for by representing the rotor winding with two branches. A scheme with air gap flux oriented control, that includes both compensation of rotor leakage flux saturation and frequency dependent variation of rotor parameters, derived from a modified induction machine model that accounts for both of these phenomena, is described in detail in [182][184]. It is demonstrated in [182][184] that, for the chosen machine in which both of these effects are severely pronounced, vector control scheme derived from such a modified model provides superior performance when compared to the performance obtainable with vector control scheme based on the constant parameter model. It is worth noting that the scheme of [182][184] additionally compensates for main flux saturation as well. The intrinsic difficulty in implementation of such a vector control scheme is that the number of rotor parameters

278

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

Fig. 9. Online estimated magnetizing inductance and speed of rotation for the accleration transient of a loaded machine, using the method of [181]. Field weakening starts at 650 r/min.

that have to be determined during the commissioning is now five rather than two. One possibility is to use finite element calculations, as suggested in [182]. Alternatively, a series of locked rotor tests, executed for different current values at various operating frequencies, can be used to experimentally identify offline the parameters of this modified model. Compensation of iron loss is nowadays almost exclusively done using the model-based approach, which consists of development of a modified vector control scheme on the basis of a machines model that takes into account the existence of the iron loss. Iron loss is represented within the machine model with either a parallel or a series equivalent iron loss resistance and a modified vector control strategy is then derived. This approach requires equivalent iron loss resistance offline identification at the commissioning stage. The examples of utilization of this compensating strategy are numerous and include [8], [40], [185][205]. A very different approach to equivalent iron loss identification and adaptive iron loss compensation is described in [206], [207]. It is based on the fact that an error in the rotor flux position estimate is inevitably introduced by the existence of the iron loss [8]. This error can be brought down to zero only if the iron loss-compensating signal relies on the correct value of the equivalent iron loss resistance for the given operating conditions. An online tuning scheme is hence developed, which provides quasi steady state tuning of the equivalent iron loss resistor on the basis of the stator -axis voltage error signal. The method requires stator voltage and current measurement but avoids the need for offline equivalent iron loss resistance identification. VII. CONCLUSION High performance control schemes of an induction motor invariably rely on the knowledge of at least some of the motor pa-

rameters. Parameter values are used within the drive controller and they have therefore to be identified offline, during the drive commissioning. However, since all of the parameters inevitably vary during the drive operation, it is often desirable to improve the performance of the drive by adding an online parameter estimator. Such a situation has led to development of a large number of offline parameter identification and online parameter estimation methods during the last two decades. An attempt is made in this paper to review the existing methods and to provide a comprehensive bibliography on the subject. The attention is at first focused on self-commissioning and commissioning techniques that serve the purpose of the offline parameter identification at the stage of the drive initialization. Available methods for induction motor equivalent circuit parameter identification are reviewed, along with the possibilities for the magnetizing curve and equivalent iron loss resistance determination. Since an accurate value of the rotor time constant is of utmost importance for tuned operation of the vast majority of vector controlled induction motor drives, a substantial space is further devoted to the methods that enable online rotor time constant estimation. This is followed by discussion of the online stator resistance estimation methods, since the exact knowledge of the stator resistance is of paramount importance in a number of sensorless vector and direct torque control schemes. In contrast to the resistance variations that are slow, variations in the magnetizing inductance and iron loss are rapid and are therefore most easily compensated by utilizing a modified vector controller, that is developed using an appropriately modified motor model (that accounts for the flux saturation and/or iron loss) as the starting point. Methods aimed at online estimation and compensation of the magnetizing inductance variation and the iron loss are surveyed in the last section of the paper. The paper is illustrated throughout with numerous experimental and simulation results, related to different offline parameter identification and online parameter estimation techniques, taken from various publications of the authors. REFERENCES
[1] D. W. Novotny and T. A. Lipo, Vector Control and Dynamics of AC Drives. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. [2] R. Krishnan, Electric Motor Drives: Modeling, Analysis and Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2001. [3] M. P. Kazmierkowski and H. Tunia, Automatic Control of Converter-Fed Drives. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 1994. [4] E. Levi, Magnetic variables control, in Wiley Encyclopedia of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, J. G. Webster, Ed. New York: Wiley, 1999, vol. 12, pp. 242260. [5] P. Vas, Sensorless Vector and Direct Torque Control. London, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998. [6] , Parameter Estimation, Condition Monitoring, and Diagnosis of Electrical Machines. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. [7] R. D. Lorenz, T. A. Lipo, and D. W. Novotny, Motion control with induction motors, in Power Electronics and Variable Frequency DrivesTechnology and Applications, B. K. Bose, Ed. New York, NY: IEEE Press, 1997, pp. 209276. [8] E. Levi, Impact of iron loss on behavior of vector controlled induction machines, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 31, pp. 12871296, Nov./Dec. 1995. [9] H. Schierling, Self-commissioningA novel feature of modern inverter-fed induction motor drives, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Conf. Power Electron. Variables Speed Drives, 1988, pp. 287290. [10] R. Jtten and E. D. Lettner, Adaptive and self-commissioning control for a drive with induction motor and current source inverter, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1989, pp. 627632.

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

279

[11] M. Sumner and G. Asher, Self-commissioning for voltage-referenced voltage fed vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Spec. Conf., 1992, pp. 139144. , Autocommissioning for voltage-referenced voltage-fed vector [12] controlled induction motor drives, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., pt. B, vol. 140, no. 3, pp. 187200, 1993. [13] M. Ruff, A. Bnte, and H. Grotstollen, A new self-commissioning scheme for an asynchronous motor drive system, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1994, pp. 612623. [14] A. M. Khambadkone and J. Holtz, Vector-controlled induction motor drive with a self-commissioning scheme, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 38, pp. 322327, Oct. 1991. [15] W. H. Kwon, C. H. Lee, K. S. Youn, and G. H. Cho, Measurement of rotor time constant taking into account magnetizing flux in the induction motor, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1994, pp. 8892. [16] M. Globevnik, Induction motor parameters measurement at standstill, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1998, pp. 280285. [17] P. J. Chrzan and H. Klaassen, Parameter identification of vector-controlled induction machines, Electrical Engineering, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 3946, 1996. [18] S. I. Moon and A. Keyhani, Estimation of induction machine parameters from standstill time-domain data, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 30, pp. 16061615, Nov./Dec. 1994. [19] M. Ruff and H. Grotstollen, Identification of the saturated mutual inductance of an asynchronous motor at standstill by recursive least squares algorithm, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 5, 1993, pp. 103108. [20] A. Consoli, L. Fortuna, and A. Gallo, Induction motor identification by a microcomputer-based structure, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. IE-34, pp. 422428, Nov. 1987. [21] A. Bnte and H. Grotstollen, Parameter identification of an inverter-fed induction motor at standstill with a correlation method, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 5, 1993, pp. 97102. [22] N. R. Klaes, Parameters identification of an induction machine with regard to dependencies on saturation, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1991, pp. 2127. [23] A. Bnte and H. Grotstollen, Offline parameter identification of an inverter-fed induction motor at standstill, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 3.4923.496. [24] R. J. Kerkman, J. D. Thunes, T. M. Rowan, and D. Schlegel, A frequency based determination of the transient inductance and rotor resistance for field commissioning purposes, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1995, pp. 359366. [25] C. Wang, D. W. Novotny, and T. A. Lipo, An automated rotor time constant measurement system for indirect field-oriented drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 24, pp. 151159, Jan./Feb. 1988. [26] M. Bertoluzzo, G. S. Buja, and R. Menis, Self-commissioning of RFO IM drives: One-test identification of the magnetization characteristic of the motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 18011806, Nov./Dec. 2001. [27] M. Ruff and H. Grotstollen, Off-line identification of the electrical parameters of an industrial servo drive system, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1996, pp. 213220. [28] H. Rasmussen, M. Knudsen, and M. Tonnes, Parameter estimation of inverter and motor model at standstill using measured currents only, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1996, pp. 331336. [29] M. Bertoluzzo, G. Buja, and R. Menis, Identification techniques of induction motor parameters for self-commissioning field-oriented drives, Automatika, vol. 38, no. 34, pp. 103115, 1997. [30] G. Buja and R. Menis, Identification of the magnetizing characteristic of an induction motor incorporated into a field-oriented drive for selfcommissioning purposes, in Proc. Int. Conf. Power Electron. Motion Contr., 1998, pp. 3.753.80. [31] R. D. Lorenz, Tuning of field oriented induction motor controllers for high performance applications, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1985, pp. 607612. [32] A. Boglietti, P. Ferraris, M. Lazzari, and F. Profumo, Induction motor equivalent circuit parameters determination from standard tests made with inverter supply, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Elect. Mach. Drives Conf., 1993, pp. 271276. [33] Y. N. Lin and C. L. Chen, Automatic induction motor parameter measurement under sensorless field-oriented control, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1996, pp. 894899. [34] E. Levi, M. Sokola, and S. N. Vukosavic, A method for magnetizing curve identification in rotor flux oriented induction machines, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 15, pp. 157162, June 2000.

[35] E. Levi and S. N. Vukosavic, Identification of the magnetizing curve during commissioning of a rotor flux oriented induction machine, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 146, no. 6, pp. 685693, 1999. [36] E. Levi, Method of magnetizing curve identification in vector controlled induction machines, Europe. Trans. Elect. Power, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 309314, 1992. [37] A. Ganji, P. Guillaume, R. Pintelon, and P. Lataire, Induction motor dynamic and static inductance identification using a broadband excitation technique, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 13, pp. 1520, March 1998. [38] A. Stankovic, E. R. Benedict, V. John, and T. A. Lipo, A novel method for measuring induction machine magnetizing inductance, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1997, pp. 234238. [39] V. Staudt, Measuring differential inductances of asynchronous machines, Europe. Trans. Elect. Power, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 2733, 1994. [40] E. Levi, M. Sokola, A. Boglietti, and M. Pastorelli, Iron loss in rotor flux oriented induction machine: Identification, assessment of detuning and compensation, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 11, pp. 698709, Sept. 1996. [41] D. E. Borgard, G. Olsson, and R. D. Lorenz, Accuracy issues for parameter estimation of field oriented induction machine drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 31, pp. 795801, July/Aug. 1995. [42] G. S. Buja, R. Menis, and M. I. Valla, MRAS identification of the induction motor parameters in PWM inverter drives at standstill, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1995, pp. 1041-1041-. [43] M. Bertoluzzo, G. S. Buja, and R. Menis, Inverter voltage drop-free recursive least-squares parameter identification of a PWM inverter-fed induction motor at standstill, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1997, pp. 649654. [44] A. Gastli, Identification of induction motor equivalent circuit parameters using the single-phase test, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 14, pp. 5156, Mar. 1999. [45] T. Kudor, K. Ishihara, and H. Naitoh, Self-commissioning for vector controlled induction motors, in Power Electronics Technology and Applications II, F. C. Lee, Ed. New York, NY: IEEE Press, 1997, pp. 509516. [46] A. Bellini, G. Franceschini, C. Tassoni, and F. Filippetti, A self-commissioning scheme for field-oriented induction motor drives, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1999, [CDROM] Paper no. 379. [47] H. S. Choi and S. K. Sul, Automatic commissioning for vector controlled ac motors using Walsh functions, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 12841289. [48] J. Godbersen, A stand-still method for estimating the rotor resistance of induction motors, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 900905. [49] C. B. Jacobina, J. E. Chaves, and A. M. N. Lima, Estimating the parameters of induction machines at standstill, in Proc. IEEE Int. Elect. Mach. Drives Conf., 1999, pp. 380382. [50] F. Barrero, J. Perez, R. Millan, and L. G. Franquelo, Self-commissioning for voltage-referenced voltage-fed vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 10331038. [51] H. B. Karayaka and M. N. Marwali, Induction machine parameter tracking from test data via PWM inverters, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1997, pp. 227233. [52] L. A. de S. Ribeiro, C. B. Jacobina, A. M. N. Lima, and A. C. Oliviera, Real-time estimation of the electric parameters of an induction machine using sinusoidal PWM voltage waveforms, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 36, pp. 743754, May/June 2000. [53] Z. M. A. Peixoto and P. F. Seixas, Electrical parameter estimation considering the saturation effects in induction machines, in Proc. IEEE Power Elect. Spec. Conf., 2000, pp. 15631568. [54] , Identification at standstill of induction machines including the saturation effects, in Proc. Power Electron. Motion Contr. Conf., 2000, pp. 6.116.16. [55] J. K. Seok and S. K. Sul, Induction motor parameter tuning for highperformance drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 3541, Jan./Feb. 2001. [56] T. Matsuo and T. A. Lipo, A rotor parameter identification scheme for vector controlled induction motor drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. IA-21, pp. 624632, May/June 1985. [57] H. A. Toliyat and A. A. GH. Hosseiny, Parameter estimation algorithm using spectral analysis for vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1993, pp. 9095.

280

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

[58] H. Chai and P. P. Acarnley, Induction motor parameter estimation algorithm using spectral analysis, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., pt. B, vol. 139, no. 3, pp. 165174, 1992. [59] R. Gabriel and W. Leonhard, Microprocessor control of induction motor, in Proc. Int. Semiconductor Power Conversion Conf., 1982, pp. 385396. [60] H. Sugimoto and S. Tamai, Secondary resistance identification of an induction motorApplied model reference adaptive system and its characteristics, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. IA-23, pp. 296303, Mar./Apr. 1987. [61] T. Saitoh, K. Okuyama, and T. Matsui, An automated secondary resistance identification scheme in vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1989, pp. 594600. [62] E. Cerruto, A. Consoli, A. Raciti, and A. Testa, Slip gain tuning in indirect field oriented control drives, Electric Machines and Power Systems, vol. 23, pp. 6379, 1995. [63] K. Tungpimolrut, F. Z. Peng, and T. Fukao, A robust rotor time constant estimation method for vector control of induction motor under any operating condition, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1994, pp. 275280. [64] J. Cilia, G. M. Asher, J. Shuli, M. Sumner, K. J. Bradley, and A. Ferrah, The recursive maximum likelihood algorithm for tuning the rotor time constant in high-performance sensorless induction motor drives, in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect. Mach., 1998, pp. 926930. [65] R. Beguenane and G. A. Capolino, Induction motor rotor time constant measurement for vector control drives without rotary transducer, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Power Eng. Power Technol., vol. 3, 1995, pp. 1317. [66] R. Beguenane, C. Ghyselen, and H. Schoorens, A proposed induction motor speed sensor without contact from slot harmonics. Application to rotoric time constant identification, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Conf. Power Electron. Variable-Speed Drives, 1994, pp. 9095. [67] L. Loron and G. Lalibert, Application of the extended Kalman filter to parameters estimation of induction motors, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 5, 1993, pp. 8590. [68] L. C. Zai, C. L. DeMarco, and T. A. Lipo, An extended Kalman filter approach to rotor time constant measurement in PWM induction motor drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 28, pp. 96104, Jan./Feb. 1992. [69] J. W. Finch, D. J. Atkinson, and P. P. Acarnley, Full-order estimator for induction motor states and parameters, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 145, no. 3, pp. 169179, 1998. [70] T. Kataoka, S. Toda, and Y. Sato, On-line estimation of induction motor parameters by extended Kalman filter, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 4, 1993, pp. 325329. [71] A. DellAquila, S. Papa, L. Salvatore, and S. Stasi, A delayed state Kalman filter for online estimation of induction motor parameters and rotor flux space vector position, in Proc. IEEE Mediterranean Electrotech. Conf., vol. 1, 1996, pp. 269273. [72] S. Wade, M. W. Dunnigan, and B. W. Williams, Improvements for induction machine vector control, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.5421.546. [73] R. S. Pena and G. M. Asher, Parameter sensitivity studies for induction motor parameter identification using extended Kalman filter, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 4, 1993, pp. 306311. [74] D. J. Atkinson, J. W. Finch, and P. P. Acarnley, Estimation of rotor resistance in induction motors, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 8794, 1996. [75] D. J. Atkinson, P. P. Acarnley, and J. W. Finch, Parameter identification techniques for induction motor drives, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1989, pp. 307312. [76] G. G. Soto, E. Mendes, and A. Razek, Reduced-order observers for rotor flux, rotor resistance and speed estimation for vector controlled induction motor drives using the extended Kalman filter technique, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 146, no. 3, pp. 282288, 1999. [77] T. Du and M. A. Brdys, Algorithms for joint state and parameter estimation in induction motor drives systems, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Conf. Contr., 1991, pp. 915920. [78] T. Du, P. Vas, and F. Stronach, Design and application of extended observers for joint state and parameter estimation in high-performance AC drives, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 142, no. 2, pp. 7178, 1995. [79] T. Du and M. A. Brdys, Implementation of extended Luenberger observers for joint state and parameter estimation of PWM induction motor drive, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 4, 1993, pp. 439444.

[80] M. Koyama, M. Yano, I. Kamiyama, and S. Yano, Microprocessor-based vector control system for induction motor drives with rotor time constant identification function, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1985, pp. 564569. [81] R. Krishnan and F. C. Doran, A method of sensing line voltages for parameter adaptation of inverter-fed induction motor servo drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1985, pp. 570577. [82] L. J. Garces, Parameter adaption for the speed-controlled static ac drive with a squirrel-cage induction motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. IA-16, pp. 173178, Mar./Apr. 1980. [83] T. M. Rowan, R. J. Kerkman, and D. Leggate, A simple on-line adaption for indirect field orientation of an induction machine, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 27, pp. 720727, July/Aug. 1991. [84] M. Sumner, G. M. Asher, and R. Pena, The experimental investigation of rotor time constant identification for vector controlled induction motor drives during transient operating conditions, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., vol. 5, 1993, pp. 5156. [85] G. Griva, M. C. Ficcara, and F. Profumo, Design of a speed regulator for induction motor drives based on model reference robust control, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1997, pp. 485488. [86] S. N. Vukosavic and M. R. Stojic, On-line tuning of the rotor time constant for vector-controlled induction motor in position control applications, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 40, pp. 130138, Feb. 1993. [87] D. Dalal and R. Krishnan, Parameter compensation of indirect vector controlled induction motor drive using estimated airgap power, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1987, pp. 170176. [88] D. Y. Ohm, Y. Khersonsky, and J. R. Kimzey, Rotor time constant adaptation method for induction motors using DC link power measurement, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1989, pp. 588593. [89] R. D. Lorenz and D. B. Lawson, A simplified approach to continuous, on-line tuning of field-oriented induction machine drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 26, pp. 420424, May/June 1990. [90] R. Lessmeier, W. Schumacher, and W. Leonhard, Microprocessor-controlled AC-servo drives with synchronous or induction motors: Which is preferable?, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. IA-22, pp. 812819, Sept./Oct. 1986. [91] M. P. Kazmierkowski and W. Sulkowski, Transistor inverter-fed induction motor drive with vector control system, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1986, pp. 162168. [92] A. A. Ganji and P. Lataire, Rotor time constant compensation of an induction motor in indirect vector controlled drives, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.4311.436. [93] K. Tungpimolrut, F. Z. Peng, and T. Fukao, Robust vector control of induction motor without using stator and rotor circuit time constants, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 30, pp. 12411246, Sept./Oct. 1994. [94] L. Umanand and S. R. Bhat, Adaptation of the rotor time constant for variations in the rotor resistance of an induction motor, in Proc. IEEE Power. Electron. Specialists Conf., 1994, pp. 738743. [95] F. Loeser and P. K. Sattler, Identification and compensation of the rotor temperature of AC drives by an observer, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 21, pp. 13871393, Nov./Dec. 1985. [96] M. Akamatsu, K. Ikeda, H. Tomei, and S. Yano, High performance IM drive by coordinate control using a controlled current inverter, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 18, pp. 382392, July/Aug. 1982. [97] N. R. Klaes, Online tuning of the rotor resistance in an inverter fed induction machine with direct-self-control, Europe. Trans. Electr. Power, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 511, 1994. [98] K. Ohnishi, Y. Ueda, and K. Miyachi, Model reference adaptive system against rotor resistance variation in induction motor drive, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. IE-33, pp. 217223, Aug. 1986. [99] R. J. Wai, D. C. Liu, and F. J. Lin, Rotor time-constant estimation approaches based on energy function and sliding mode for induction motor drive, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 52, pp. 229239, 1999. [100] G. Kang, J. Jung, and K. Nam, A new rotor time constant update rule using stator flux estimates for an induction motor, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 12781283. [101] R. Krishnan and P. Pillay, Sensitivity analysis and comparison of parameter compensation schemes in vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1986, pp. 155161. [102] A. Dittrich, Parameter sensitivity of procedures for on-line adaptation of the rotor time constant of induction machines with field oriented control, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 141, no. 6, pp. 353359, 1994. [103] S. K. Sul, A novel technique of rotor resistance estimation considering variation of mutual inductance, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 25, pp. 578587, July/Aug. 1989.

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

281

[104] S. Sivakumar, A. M. Sharaf, and K. Natarajan, Improving the performance of indirect field orientation schemes for induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1986, pp. 147154. [105] C. C. Chan and H. Wang, An effective method for rotor resistance identification for high-performance induction motor vector control, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 477482, 1990. [106] A. Ba-razzouk, A. Cheriti, and V. Rajagoplan, Real time implementation of a rotor time-constant online estimation scheme, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 927932. [107] H. Toliyat, M. S. Arefeen, K. M. Rahman, and M. Ehsani, Rotor time constant updating scheme for a rotor flux oriented induction motor drive, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 14, pp. 850857, Sept. 1999. [108] A. Ba-Razzouk, A. Cheriti, and G. Olivier, Artificial neural networks rotor time constant adaptation in indirect field oriented control drives, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., 1996, pp. 701707. [109] W. Hofmann and Q. Liang, Neural network-based parameter adaptation for field-oriented ac drives, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.3911.396. [110] D. Fodor, G. Griva, and F. Profumo, Compensation of parameters variations in induction motor drives using a neural network, in Proc. IEEE Power Elect. Specialists Conf., 1995, pp. 13071311. [111] S. Mayaleh and N. S. Bayindir, On-line estimation of rotor-time constant of an induction motor using recurrent neural networks, in Proc. IEEE Workshop Comput. Power Electron., 1998, pp. 219223. [112] H. T. Yang, K. Y. Huang, and C. L. Huang, An artificial neural network based identification and control approach for the field-oriented induction motor, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 30, pp. 3545, 1994. [113] F. Zidani, M. S. Nait-Said, M. E. H. Benbouzid, D. Diallo, and R. Abdessemed, A fuzzy rotor resistance updating scheme for an IFOC induction motor drive, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 4750, Nov. 2001. [114] E. Bim, Fuzzy optimization for rotor constant identification of an indirect FOC induction motor drive, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48, pp. 12931295, Dec. 2001. [115] J. Soltani and B. Mirzaeian, Simultaneous speed and rotor time constant identification of an induction motor drive based on the model reference adaptive system combined with a fuzzy resistance estimator, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Drives Energy Syst. Ind. Growth Conf., 1998, pp. 739744. [116] A. Cataliotti and G. Poma, A fuzzy-logic control system for an induction motor drive compensating the variation of rotor resistance, in Proc. Power Electron. Motion Contr. Conf., 1998, pp. 5.2135.217. [117] P. Vas, Artificial-Intelligence-Based Electrical Machines and Drives. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999. [118] L. Zhen and L. Xu, On-line fuzzy tuning of indirect field oriented induction motor drive, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Elec. Conf., 1996, pp. 369374. [119] E. Cerruto, A. Consoli, A. Raciti, and A. Testa, Fuzzy adaptive vector control of induction motor drives, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 10281040, Nov. 1997. [120] M. Ta-Cao and H. Le-Huy, Rotor resistance estimation using fuzzy logic for high performance induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1998, pp. 303308. [121] C. Attaianese, I. Marongiu, and A. Perfetto, A speed sensorless digitally controlled induction motor drive estimating rotor resistance variation, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.7411.746. [122] C. Attaianese, G. Tomasso, A. Damiano, I. Marongiu, and A. Perfetto, On line estimation of speed and parameters in induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1997, pp. 10541059. [123] A. Kelemen, T. Pana, and F. Stugren, Implementation of sensorless vector-controlled induction motor drive system with rotor resistance estimation using floating point DSP, in Proc. Power Electron. Motion Contr. Conf., 1996, pp. 2.1862.191. [124] S. H. Lee, I. J. Ha, H. S. Yoo, B. Y. Hong, and S. J. Yoon, An on-line identification method for both stator and rotor resistances of induction motors without rotational transducers, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1996, pp. 325330. [125] T. Pana, Sensorless vector-controlled induction motor drive system with rotor resistance estimation using parallel processing with floating point DSP, in Proc. Power Conversion Conf., 1997 , pp. 7984. [126] N. Hur, K. Hong, and K. Nam, Real-time parameter identification scheme for the sensorless control of induction motors using a reduced order model, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1996, pp. 11611166.

[127] H. Kubota and K. Matsuse, Speed sensorless field-oriented control of induction motor with rotor resistance adaptation, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 30, pp. 12191224, Sept./Oct. 1994. [128] J. Faiz and M. B. B. Sharifian, Different techniques for real time estimation of an induction motor rotor resistance in sensorless direct torque control for electric vehicle, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 16, pp. 104109, Mar. 2001. [129] K. Akatsu and A. Kawamura, Online rotor resistance estimation using the transient state under the speed sensorless control of induction motor, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, pp. 553560, May 2000. [130] V. Ambrozic, D. Nedeljkovic, and J. Nastran, Sensorless control of induction machine with parameter adaptation, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1999, pp. 724728. [131] K. Akatsu and A. Kawamura, Sensorless very low and zero speed estimations with on-line secondary resistance estimation of induction motor without adding any signal, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 187193. [132] V. Ambrozic, J. Nastran, and D. Nedeljkovic, Induction machine sensorless control with stator and rotor resistance adaptation, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf., 1999, pp. 12371243. [133] H. Kubota, D. Yoshihara, and K. Matsuse, Rotor resistance adaptation for sensorless vector-controlled induction machines, Elect. Eng. Japan, vol. 125, no. 2, pp. 6572, 1998. [134] S. Y. Lin, H. Wu, and Y. T. Tzou, Sensorless control of induction motors with on-line rotor time constant adaptation, in Proc. IEEE Power Elect. Specialists Conf., 1998, pp. 15931598. [135] R. Krishnan and A. S. Bharadwaj, A review of parameter sensitivity and adaptation in indirect vector controlled induction motor drive systems, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 6, pp. 695703, Oct. 1991. [136] L. Umanand and S. R. Bhat, Online estimation of stator resistance of an induction motor for speed control applications, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 142, no. 2, pp. 97103, 1995. [137] R. J. Kerkman, B. J. Seibel, T. M. Rowan, and D. Schlegel, A new flux and stator resistance identifier for ac drive systems, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1995, pp. 310318. [138] E. Akin, H. B. Ertan, and M. Y. Uctug, A method for stator resistance measurement suitable for vector control, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1994, pp. 2122-2126. [139] J. Weidauer and A. Dittrich, A new adaptation method for induction machines with field-oriented control, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1991, pp. 2.1512.156. [140] R. Blasco-Gimenez, G. M. Asher, and M. Sumner, A new method of stator resistance estimation for enhanced dynamic performance of sensorless vector control drives, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.6891.694. [141] M. Rodic and K. Jezernik, Speed sensorless sliding mode torque and flux control of induction motor with stator resistance adaptation algorithm, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 2001, [CD-ROM] Paper no. pp01010. [142] M. Tsuji, S. Chen, K. Izumi, and E. Yamada, A sensorless vector control system for induction motors using q -axis flux with stator resistance identification, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48, pp. 185194, Feb. 2001. [143] H. Tajima, G. Guidi, and H. Umida, Consideration about problems and solutions of speed estimation method and parameter turning for speed sensorless vector control of induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 2000, pp. 17871793. [144] R. Marino, S. Peresada, and P. Tomei, On-line stator and rotor resistance estimation for induction motors, IEEE Trans. Contr. Syst. Technol., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 570579, May 2000. [145] G. Guidi and H. Umida, A sensorless induction motor drive for low speed applications using a novel stator resistance estimation method, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 180186. [146] V. Vasic and S. Vukosavic, Robust MRAS-based algorithm for stator resistance and rotor speed identification, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., pp. 3941, Nov. 2001. [147] J. Cambell and M. Sumner, An artificial neural network for stator resistance estimation in a sensorless vector controlled induction motor drive, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 2001, [CD-ROM] Paper no. pp00917. [148] J. L. Zamora and A. G. Cerrada, On-line estimation of the stator parameters in an induction machine using only voltage and current measurements, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 805816.

282

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 18, NO. 2, JUNE 2003

[149] K. Shinohara, T. Nagano, H. Arima, and W. Z. W. Mustafa, Online tuning method of stator and rotor resistances in both motoring and regenerating operations for vector controlled induction machines, Elect. Eng. Japan, vol. 135, no. 1, pp. 5664, 2001. [150] E. D. Mitronikas, A. N. Safacas, and E. C. Tatakis, A new stator resistance tuning method for stator-flux-oriented vector-controlled induction motor drive, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48, pp. 11481157, Dec. 2001. [151] L. A. Cabrera, E. Elbuluk, and I. Husain, Tuning the stator resistance of induction motors using artificial neural network, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 12, pp. 779787, Sept. 1997. [152] B. K. Bose and N. R. Patel, Quazi-fuzzy estimation of stator resistance of induction motor, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, pp. 401409, May 1998. [153] L. Zhong, M. F. Rahman, K. W. Lim, Y. W. Hu, and Y. Xu, A fuzzy observer for induction motor stator resistance for application in direct torque control, in Proc. IEEE Int. Power Electron. Drive Syst. Conf., 1997, pp. 9196. [154] Y. S. Lai, J. C. Lin, and J. J. Wang, Direct torque control induction motor drives with self-commissioning based on Taguchi methodology, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, pp. 10651071, Nov. 2000. [155] Y. S. Lai, J. C. Lin, and J. Wang, Self-commission of induction motor drives based on direct torque control, in Proc. IEEE Power Eng. Soc. Summer Meeting, 2000, pp. 24812486. [156] S. Mir, M. E. Elbuluk, and D. S. Zinger, PI and fuzzy estimators for tuning the stator resistance in direct torque control of induction machines, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, pp. 279287, Mar. 1998. [157] T. G. Habetler, F. Profumo, G. Griva, M. Pastorelli, and A. Bettini, Stator resistance tuning in a stator-flux field-oriented drive using an instantaneous hybrid flux estimator, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, pp. 125133, Jan. 1998. [158] B. S. Lee and R. Krishnan, Adaptive stator resistance compensator for high performance direct torque controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1998, pp. 423430. [159] A. Monti, F. Pironi, F. Sartogo, and P. Vas, A new state observer for sensorless DTC control, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Power Electron. Variable Speed Drives Conf., 1998, pp. 311317. [160] P. Tiitinen, The next generation motor control method, DTC direct torque control, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Power Electron., Drives Energy Syst. Ind. Growth , 1996, pp. 3743. [161] J. Faiz, S. H. Hossieni, M. Ghaneei, A. Keyhani, and A. Proca, Direct torque control of induction motors for electric propulsion systems, Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 51, pp. 95101, 1999. [162] Y. W. Hu, L. Zhong, M. F. Rahman, K. W. Lim, Y. Xu, M. A. Rahman, and A. R. Bhuiya, Direct torque control of an induction motor using fuzzy logic, in Proc. IEEE Can. Conf. Elect. Comput. Eng., 1997, pp. 767772. [163] B. Dobrucky, F. Chaloupka, P. Kucer, and V. Racek, A neural fuzzy control with stator resistance estimator for IM drives with DSC, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 1.7891.794. [164] Z. Krzeminski, Differential equations of induction motor with nonlinear control synthesis with regard to saturation of main magnetic path, Rozprawy Elektrotechnicki, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 117131, 1988. [165] E. Levi and Z. Krzeminski, Main flux saturation modeling in dq axis models of induction machines using mixed current-flux state-space models, Europe. Trans. Elect. Power, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 207215, 1996. [166] E. Levi, A unified approach to main flux saturation modeling in dq axis models of induction machines, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 10, pp. 455461, Sept. 1995. [167] E. Levi and V. Vuckovic, Rotor flux computation in saturated fieldoriented induction machines, Elect. Mach. Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 741754, 1993. [168] E. Levi, Magnetic saturation in rotor flux oriented induction motor drives: Operating regimes, consequences and open-loop compensation, Europe. Trans. Elect. Power, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 277286, 1994. [169] E. Levi and M. Sokola, A novel saturation adaptive rotor flux estimator for rotor flux oriented induction machines, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1997, pp. 1.5181.523. [170] E. Levi, S. Vukosavic, and V. Vuckovic, Saturation compensation schemes for vector controlled induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Power Elect. Specialists Conf., 1990, pp. 591598. [171] Z. Krzeminski and A. Jaderko, Main magnetic path saturation effect in observer system of the induction motor, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1993, pp. 753758.

[172] J. S. Choi, W. M. Kim, and Y. S. Kim, Speed sensorless control of induction motor considering the flux saturation, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf., 2000, pp. 148153. [173] Y. J. Kim, J. S. Choi, and Y. S. Kim, Speed sensorless control of a saturated induction motor using a hybrid speed estimator, in Proc. IEEE Telecomm. Energy Conf., 1999, pp. 367370. [174] D. H. Choi, S. B. Cho, and D. S. Hyun, Improved torque response by tuning of the magnetizing inductance under field weakening operation region, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1997, pp. 418425. [175] J. S. Choi, Y. S. Han, and Y. S. Kim, A new speed estimation scheme of the induction motor considering the flux saturation, IEEE Trans. Magnetics, vol. 36, pp. 35953598, Sept. 2000. [176] H. Y. Kim, M. S. Shin, and D. S. Hyun, On-line tuning of parameter variations of induction motor for high performance drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1998, pp. 431437. [177] Z. Krzeminski and A. Jaderko, A speed observer system of induction motor with magnetizing curve identification, in Proc. Int. Conf. Power Electron. Motion Contr., 2000, pp. 6.1096.113. [178] C. Mastorocostas, Rotor time constant estimation in induction motor drives, in Proc. Int. Aegean Conf. Elect. Mach. Power Electron., 2001, pp. 562566. [179] D. Balara and J. Timko, Idetification of induction motor parameters with use of neural networks taking into account main flux saturation effect, in Proc. Int. Conf. Power Electron. Motion Contr., 2000, pp. 6.176.22. [180] A. Jaderko and Z. Krzemisnki, Fuzzy-logic algorithm of the mutual inductance identification in nonlinear observer system of the induction machine, in Proc. Int. Conf. Power Electron. Motion Contr., 1996, pp. 481485. [181] E. Levi and M. Wang, A speed estimator for sensorless vector control of induction machines in the field weakening region, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., 2000, pp. 897902. [182] R. C. Healey, S. Williamson, and A. C. Smith, Improved cage rotor models for vector controlled induction motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 31, pp. 812822, July/Aug. 1995. [183] R. C. Healey, The implementation of a vector control scheme based on an advanced motor model, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 1995, pp. 3.0173.022. [184] S. Williamson and R. C. Healey, Space vector representation of advanced motor models for vector controlled induction motors, Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Elect. Power Applicat., vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 6977, 1996. [185] M. Wang, E. Levi, and M. Jovanovic, Compensation of parameter variation effects in sensorless indirect vector controlled induction machines using model based approach, Elect. Mach. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 10011027, 1999. [186] H. Kubota and K. Matsuse, Compensation of core loss of adaptive flux observer-based field-oriented induction motor drives, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1992, pp. 6771. [187] K. Matsuse, S. Taniguchi, T. Yoshizumi, and K. Namiki, A speed-sensorless vector control of induction motor operating at high efficiency taking core loss into account, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 37, pp. 548558, Mar./Apr. 2001. [188] D. Hintze and D. Schrder, Induction motor drive with intelligent controller and parameter adaption, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1992, pp. 970977. [189] T. Mizuno, J. Takayama, T. Ichioka, and M. Terashima, Decoupling control method of induction motors taking core loss into consideration, in Proc. Int. Power Electron. Conf., 1990, pp. 6974. [190] D. Hofmeyer, Torque linearity for high speed drives with a wide field weakening range, in Proc. Europe. Conf. Power Electron. Applicat., 2001, [CD-ROM] Paper no. pp00431. [191] O. Touhami, R. Ibtiouen, S. Moulahoum, and S. Mekhtoub, Analysis and compensation of parameter variation effect in vector controlled induction machine, Archives of Electrical Engineering, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 165182, 2001. [192] K. Namiki, K. Matsuse, T. Kishimoto, and S. Yokomizo, Characteristics of speed sensorless vector controlled induction motor drive operating at high efficiency taking core loss into account, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf., 2001, pp. 2531. [193] J. Jung and K. Nam, A vector control scheme for EV induction motors with a series iron loss model, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 45, pp. 617624, Aug. 1998. [194] K. Matsuse, T. Yoshizumi, S. Katsuta, and S. Taniguchi, High-response flux control of direct-field-oriented induction motor with high efficiency taking core loss into account, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 35, pp. 6269, Jan./Feb. 1999.

TOLIYAT et al.: A REVIEW OF RFO INDUCTION MOTOR PARAMETER ESTIMATION TECHNIQUES

283

[195] S. D. Wee, M. H. Shin, and D. S. Hyun, Stator-flux-oriented control of induction motor considering iron loss, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 48, pp. 602608, June 2001. [196] S. Shinnaka, Proposition of new mathematical models with stator core loss factor for induction motor, Elect. Eng. Japan, vol. 134, no. 1, pp. 6475, 2001. [197] M. Abdel-Salam, S. Abou-Shadi, and Y. Sayed, Analysis of induction motors fed from constant current source taking core-loss and saturation into consideration, Elect. Mach. Power Syst., vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 581599, 1999. [198] J. Jung, K. Nam, C. Han, J. Chung, and D. Ahn, A new vector control scheme considering iron loss for electric vehicle induction motors, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1997, pp. 439444. [199] W. Choi, D. W. Chung, and S. K. Sul, Implementation of field oriented induction machine considering iron losses, in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. Conf., 1996, pp. 375379. [200] T. Noguchi and D. Hiraishi, Core loss compensation of direct fieldoriented induction motor incorporating robust parameter identification, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 14091414. [201] S. Shinnaka, Proposition of new mathematical models with core loss factor for controlling AC motors, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1998, pp. 297302. [202] T. Noguchi, P. Nakmahachalasint, and N. Watanakil, Precise torque control of induction motor with on-line parameter identification in consideration of core loss, in Proc. Power Conversion Conf., 1997, pp. 113118. [203] C. Millet, D. Leroux, Y. Li, B. Feuvrie, and C. Bergmann, Modern automatic tools for an identification and a field-oriented control design of an induction machine: A no linear decoupling structure, in Proc. IEEE Power Electron. Specialists Conf., 1997, pp. 14861492. [204] M. Hasegawa, H. Yamasaki, S. Doki, and S. Okuma, Compensation of stator iron loss of vector-controlled induction motor using robust flux observer, Elect. Eng. Japan, vol. 137, no. 3, pp. 5966, 2001. [205] V. Valouch, Induction motor field-oriented controller, respecting iron losses, in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electron., 1995, pp. 668673. [206] H. Rasmussen, P. Vadstrup, and H. Borsting, Rotor field oriented control with adaptive iron loss identification, in Proc. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1999, pp. 12531258. [207] A. Dittrich, Model based identification of the iron loss resistance of an induction machine, in Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng. Conf. Power Electron. Variable Speed Drives, 1998, pp. 500503.

Hamid A. Toliyat (S87M91SM96) received the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1991. Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering at Texas A&M University, College Station. Dr. Toliyat is an Editor of IEEE TRANS. ENERGY CONVERSION, an Associate Editor of IEEE TRANS.POWER ELECTRONICS, and a member of the Editorial Board of Electric Power Components and Systems Journal. His main research interests and experience include multiphase variable speed drives, fault diagnosis of electric machinery, analysis and design of electrical machines, and sensorless variable speed drives. He has published over 150 technical papers in these fields. He is actively involved in presenting short courses and consulting in his area of expertise to various industries. He has received the Texas A&M Select Young Investigator Award in 1999, Eugene Webb Faculty Fellow Award in 2000, NASA Space Act Award in 1999, and the Schlumberger Foundation Technical Award in 2000 and 2001. He is also Vice-Chairman of IEEE-IAS Electric Machines Committee, and is a member of Sigma Xi. He is the recipient of the 1996 IEEE Power Eng. Society Prize Paper Award for his paper on the Analysis of Concentrated Winding Induction Machines for Adjustable Speed Drive ApplicationsExperimental Results.

Emil Levi (S89M92SM99) was born in 1958 in Zrenjanin, Yugoslavia. He received the Diploma degree from the University of Novi Sad, Yugoslavia, and the M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in 1982, 1986, and 1990, respectively. Currently, he is Professor of Electric Machines and Drives in the School of Engineering at Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, U.K. In 1982, he joined the Department of Electrical Engineering at the University of Novi Sad, where he became Assistant Professor in 1991. He joined Liverpool John Moores University, U.K., in May 1992 as a Senior Lecturer. From 1995 till 2000, he was a Reader in Electrical Power Engineering. His main areas of research interest are modeling and simulation of electric machines, control of high performance drives, and power electronic converters. He has published over 130 papers, including more than 30 papers in major international journals.

Mona Raina (S00) received the Bachelors degree in electrical engineering from the University of Madras, India. She is currently pursuing the M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering at Texas A&M University, College Station. She is currently with Novellus Systems, Inc., San Jose, CA. Her research interests are in the fields of power electronics and motor drives and they include the parameter estimation of induction motors.