954 IEEE TRANSACTIONSON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS,VOL. 30, NO.
4,JULY / AUGUST 1994
Deadbeat Flux Level Control of
Direct-Field-Oriented High-Horsepower
Induction Servo Motor Using Adaptive
Rotor Flux Observer
Lipei Huang, Yasuki Tadokoro, and Kouki Matsuse, Senior Member, IEEE,
Abstract-A method for the deadbeat flux level control of
direct-field-oriented high-power induction servo motor drives
has been developed that employs an adaptive rotor flux ob-
server. The observer is a full-order type and is used not only in
the direct-field-oriented controller, but also to determine the
stator and rotor resistances of the servo motor. The observer
reduces the sensitivity of a deadbeat controller to fluctuations in
the motor parameters. The main advantage of this method is
that it improves the efficiency of an induction servo motor
without sacrificing dynamic performance. This paper describes
the method as well as the fundamental characteristics of the
system derived from experimental and simulation results.
I. INTRODUC~ON
T HE indirect-field-oriented control of an induction
servo motor is widely used to obtain good dynamic
torque response. The system generally keeps the rotor
flux level constant, but it has the disadvantage of being
very sensitive to fluctuations in the motor parameters. In
order to overcome this drawback, a direct-field-oriented
control method employing an adaptive rotor flux observer
has recently been proposed [ll, 121.
On the other hand, it has been reported that changing
the rotor flux level in accordance with the load improves
the steady-state efficiency of an induction motor [31-[5].
But those papers do not discuss the transient speed and
torque response. To obtain higher steady-state efficiency
without degradation of the dynamic response, a method of
rapidly controlling the rotor flux level by means of a
deadbeat response has been proposed [6]-[8].
Based on these considerations, a deadbeat flux level
control system applicable to direct-field-oriented induc-
tion servo motor drives has been developed that employs
Paper IPCSD 94-28, amroved by the Industrial Drives Committee of
the iEEE Industry Ap&cations Society for presentation at the 1993
IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting, xxx, m, Date.
Manuscript released for publication April 1, 1994.
L. Huang is with the Department ofElectrica1 Engineering, Tsinghua
University, Beijing 100084,-China.
Y. Tadokoro was with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Meiji University, Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214 Japan. He is now
with the Ebara Comration. Power Electronics DeDartment, 2-1, Honfu-
jisawa 4-chome, Fuj’isawa-shi 251, Japan.
K. Matsuse is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Meiji
University, Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214 Japan.
IEEE Log Number 9402640.
0094-9994/94$04.00 0 1994 IEEE
an adaptive rotor flux observer. The observer is a full-order
type, and has the additional function of determining the
stator and rotor resistances of the motor on the basis of
adaptive control theory.
This paper discusses the operational efficiency of a
servo motor driven by the proposed system in both steady
and transient states, and also the dynamic performance.
The load cycle dependency is also considered, as is appro-
priate for high-horsepower induction servo motors. This is
important because increasing the rotor flux level at mo-
ments of high torque demand requires extra current, and
consequently, extra loss. The principles and fundamental
characteristics of the system are presented and discussed
on the basis of simulation and experimental results.
11. DEADBEAT LEVELCONTROL SYSTEM
FLUX
A. Deadbeat Control of the Rotor F l u Level TakingMagnetic
Saturation into Account
One way to improve the steady-state efficiency of a
motor is to change the magnitude of the rotor flux in
accordance with the topic required. To achieve this, the
approach taken in this study is to employ a deadbeat
response to regulate the rotor flux level. This should yield
a design for a digital controller that produces a flux level
response with zero steady-state error and has a minimum
finite settling time in response to a unit step input.
In a rotating frame of reference, the rotor flux, +,, can
be expressed in terms of the flux current, i,, by (1) taking
magnetic saturation into account:
where & is the rotor flux, i , is the flux current, M is the
mutual inductance, L , is the’rotor self-inductance, and R ,
is the rotor resistance.
In practice, the effects of magnetic saturation can have
a significant impact on rotor flux level control because
both the rotor time ‘Onstant, ‘r7 and the indue-
tanCe, M , Vary ill the Operating region O f the motor.
Tables I and I i list the rafings ofthe-two induction servo
motors tested, and Fig. 1 shows the characteristics of
servo motor I. Fig. l(a> shows the relationship between
HUANG et al.: DEADBEAT FLUX LEVEL CONTROL 955

TABLE I
RATINGSOF SERVO MOTOR 1

170 V 10.5 A 2.2 kW

2000 rpm 120 kg-cm 4 pole

TABLE I1
RATINGSOF SERVOMOTOR11 where * indicates reference value, indicates estimated
A

value, T is the settling time, ~ , [ i T lis the rotor time

140 V 184.0 A 37 kW constant (7, = L , / R , ) at sampling time iT, M[iTI is the
50 Hz 2300 kg-cm 4 pole mutual inductance at sampling time i T , +,[iT] is the flux
level at sampling t i p e iT, and i equals n - 2, n - 1, n.
The flux level, +,, is estimated by the adaptive rotor
flux observer, which also determines the stator and rotor
resistances on the basis of adaptive control theory.
Fig. 2 illustrates how deadbeat flux level control works.
In a conventional linear system, Fig. 2(a), the flux settles
by an amount A+, during the settling time T . But in the
proposed method, Fig. 2(b), the flux settles in a series of
steps by an amount A+; during the subsettling time T'.
This is because the flux current is limited to its maximum
value if the change in the rotor flux is too large. In this
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 study, T' was set to 7.5 msec based on the CPU speed. In
im (A)
Fig. 2(b), the dotted lines A and B show the effects of
(a) Rotor Flux (e,) vs. Flux Current (i,,,) magnetic saturation.
0.048
B. Adaptive Rotor Flux Observer
0.046
Eqs. (3) and (4) are the state and output equations,
g 0.044 respectively, for a stationary frame of reference. Eq. ( 5 )
2 0.042 describes the full-order state observer, which simultane-
ously estimates the stator current and the rotor flux. Eq.
0.040
(6) is the observer gain matrix, which is calculated in such
0.038 a way that the observer poles are proportional to those of
I). 1 . 1
the induction motor (with a constant of proportionality,
0 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 k > 0). An induction motor itself is stable, so the adaptive
observer is also stable under normal operation:
(Wb)
(b) Mutual Inductance ( M ) vs.Rotor Flux (e,)
Fig. 1. Characteristics of servo motor I.

rotor flux and flux current, and Fig. l(b) shows the rela-
tionship between mutual inductance and rotor flux. In the i = CX, (4)
latter, it should be noted that the mutual inductance is
constant when the rotor flux is less than 0.25 Wb. This where
figure demonstrates that the mutual inductance changes
in the region of magnetic saturation, and so its effects
must be taken into consideration when controlling the
flux [9].
Accordingly, the reference flux current, i:, can be given
as follows [8]:
1
i:[nT] =
1 - exp ( - T/T,[n T ]

. +,*[nTl ~
[
-
M[nTl
&[nTI-
M [ ( n - 1)Tl
exp ( - T / T , [ ( -
~ 1)TI)
1 I=[; ;I J = i0l -11
R, stator resistance
L , stator self-inductance
a leakage coefficient ( a = 1 - M 2 / ( L , L , ) )
1 - exp ( - T / T , [ ( -
~ 1)TI)
w, motor angular velocity
956 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 30, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1994

(a) d-axis Equivalent Circuit

n l t

(a) Linear System (b) Proposed System

Fig. 2. Deadbeat flux level control.

and
d
-2
dt
= i- BU, + ~ ( i '-, i s ) , (b) q-axis Equivalent Circuit

Fig. 3. Steady-state equivalent circuits taking core loss into account.

(6)

g,
g3
=

=
(k
-(k2
- l)(UrI, + ur,,)
- l)(UrlI - U r 3 )
g, = (k - 1)Ui2,

+ c ( k - l)(Ur1l + UrZ2) m+ - Or @qr

111. LOSSESI N STEADY AND TRANSIENT STATES

For steady-state operation, the d- and q-axis equivalent
circuits of an induction motor that take loss into
account can be drawn as in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b), respec-
tively. These circuits yield the following equations for the
stator copper loss, the rotor copper loss, and the stator
core loss in the steady state:
For transient-state operation, the circuits are shown in
Figs. 4 a ) and 403). Here, the core loss is accounted for by
the eddy current loops [lo]. These circuits yield the follow-
ing equations for the and the core loss [111:

w,,= R S & 1- i & ) , (9) 9 (12)

~2 = Rr(i2r + i i r ) , (10)

U: = R,,,((ids+ i d r l 2+ ( i q r+ i q r ) 2 ) , (11) where

where i, = [idr i,,lT is the rotor current. i, = [ i d , i,,lT eddy current
 ~

HUANG et al.: DEADBEAT FLUX LEVEL CONTROL 957

h l o o n

$r=0.250Wb Constant
W .......
p o . 3 0 0 Wb Constant
p=0.350 Wb Constant
.... +r=0.400 Wb Constant
I I I I
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Load Torque (kg-cm)
(a) Efficiency
- U
Fig. 5. Block diagram of proposed control system for application to Deadbeat Flux Level Control
direct-field-oriented induction motor drives. (CR: current regulated.) p=0.250 Wb Constant

0 40 80 120
Load Torque (kg-cm)

Fig. 7. Motor efficiency and total loss for servo motor I (2.2 kW, ac).

100 , I
Fig. 6. System configuration.

Zll = ( R , + PL:)Z
- Deadbeat Flux Level Control
.. .......
p=0.200 wb Constant
212 = Z,3 PM'Z
= 2 3 1 = Z32 = ...... p=0.250Wb Constant
+1=0.300 Wb Constant
2 2 1 = 2 2 3 = PM'Z - w,M'J - - - p S . 3 5 0 Wb Constant
2 2 2 = ( R , + PL:)Z - W,Z,J
Z3, = ( R e + PM')Z 0 500 lo00 1500 2000
R , core loss resistance Load Torque (kg-cm)
d
p = - (a) Efficiency
dt
3000 , I
and -m Deadbeat Flux Level Conwol

(13) 5 2000-
-*- @=0.350 Wb Constant

where A
3 1000-

0 I I I

0 500 1000 1500 2000

The total motor loss for transient-state operation is
given by (14). Finally, (15) gives the average motor loss,
which includes the loss during both steady- and transient-
state operation, during one speed command cycle, or in
other words, one load cycle:
where To is the speed command cycle (i.e., load cycle).
Load Torque (kg-cm)
Fig. 8. Motor efficiency and total loss for servo motor I1 (37 kW,ac).
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
AND SIMULATION
A. System Configuration
The configuration of the proposed deadbeat rotor flux
level control system is shown in Fig. 5. This system is used
for the direct-field-oriented control of an induction servo
motor 111, [21. The main components are an adaptive rotor
flux observer; a deadbeat controller; a numerical function
 958 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 30, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1994

500rpn;/div
T
10A/div

0
0' ' :'! : : : : : '
50 m S e C / d
~

(a) Simulation Results 1V

500r pm/d i v
T

r----- __

0. ' -. - t

%
50msec/clv

0 . 1 OWb/d i v
T
--- qr -ir -.-idr
-..-iqr
0
0
I (a') Simularion Results
(a') Simulation Results

0
0
(b) Expenmental Results

( b ) Expenmental Results
Fig. 10. Step-up speed response-stator current (0 + I000 rpm).
Fig. 9. Step-up speed response-motor speed and flux level (0 + 1000
rpm).

operator, F , that sets the appropriate flux command, +,: ___

in response to the torque command, T: ; a direct-field- r*

orientation controller; and a current-regulated voltage 200rpm/div -U ,

source inverter. Fig. 6 shows the experimental setup for
the digital signal processor and CPU.
B. Direct-Field-Oriented Controller Using an Adaptive Flux
Obsemer
In the vector rotation block in Fig. 5, the stator current 0 . 1 OW s / d 1v _-- q * -Fr ---I
-..-$
dr 4'
commands, i2s and i:s, for a stationary frame of reference
are calculated from the estimated rotor flux as follows [l]:

izs = i: cos o - iT e",sin (16)

i:s = i: sin e^ + i: cos e", (17)

10A/div i,
&/& 4,= d m ,
-

where cos e" = O d r / J r , sin e" =

and iT is the torque current command. / -

C. Steady-State EfJiciency and Loss

I
Figs. 7(a) and 7(b) show the relationship between load
torque and motor efficiency, and that between load torque 104/div
and total loss, respectively, of servo motor I. Figs. 8(a) and
8(b) show the same relationships for the high-horsepower
servo motor 11. The dashed and dotted curves are for 0
various values of the rotor flux level, and the heavy black
curves show the characteristics of the motors when driven
by the proposed deadbeat control system. It is clear that Fig. 11. Step-up speed response-experimental (proposed method).
HUANG er al.: DEADBEAT FLUX LEVEL CONTROL 959

-Deadbeat Flux Level Control

200rpm/d i v @=0.400[Wb] Constant
--____

(a) Speed

10A/div -ids

0
1
(b) @i-=O.250-0.400[Wb] Deadbeat Flux Level Control

IOA/div
T
~ ids

( c ) @CO 400 Constant Rotor Flux

1O A / d 1 v -Ids

10A/div __ Ids

I
(d) @r=0.250Constant Rotor Flux
0
Fig. 14. Comparison of proposed method and two cases of constant
rotor flux method. (The data are from Figs. 11-13.)

Fig. 12. Step-up speed response-experimental (constant 4, = 0.400

wb).

___ Ur*
_100rpm/div -U ,
T r-------- --

.*
1 OA/d i v
T
-1,

I
Fig. 13. Step-up speed response-experimental (constant = 0.250 Fig. 15. Ramp speed response-experimental (500 -, -500 vm).
wb).
960 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 30, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1994

o p p
100rpm/div 5 0T 0 r pm/d i v _ _ _U:
T
OOmsec/div

O.lOWb/div I

.*
-[in .*
10A/div 5A/d i v If
T

---- 500msec/div

10A/div -Ids

Fig. 16. Load torque response-experimental. 0 5 0 0 m s e c Id i

Fig. 18. Forward-reverse speed response-simulated (constant 4r =
0.400 Wb).

500rpm/div --_ U,' 500rpm/div ___ U ,*

,
/OOmsec/div /OOmsec/di\j

O.IOWb/div ---$r -qr O.lOWb/div ---$I ~

I

4Jr

.*
5A/d i v 11

1 OOW/d iv 'l O O W /d i v
-Loss Loss
i
~

I
0 0
500msec/div 5 0 0 m s e c/ d 1v
Fig. 17. Forward-reverse speed response-simulated (proposed Fig. 19. Forward-reverse speed response-simulated (constant c$~ =
method). 0.250 Wb).
HUANG el al.: DEADBEAT FLUX LEVEL CONTROL 96 1

' (a) Condition [I] ' (b) Condition [2]

or'(rpm) 4'(rpm)

I
(c) Condition [3] (d) Condition [4]

I 300(rpm) Constant Command

(e) Condition [ 5 ] (0 Condition [6] (g) Condition [ 7 ]

Fig. 20. Speed command conditions (i.e., load cycles).

our method significantly improves the efficiency while TABLE I11

COMPARISON
OF LOSSES
reducing the total loss.
beadbeat 0.400 Wb 0.250 Wb
Condition Constant Constant
Control
D.Transient Response Loss 1 Loss 2 Loss 1 Loss 3 Loss 1
To
Figs. 9 and 10 show the experimental and simulation (s) (W) (w) Loss2 (W) Loss 3
I
results for the step-up speed response of servo motor I
when using the proposed control method. The speed
command was a step function with values in the range of
0-1000 rpm, and there was no load.
Figs. 11-13 show the experimentally obtained speed,
rotor flux, command current, and stator current for a
step-up speed change operation on servo motor I. Fig. 11
is for our proposed method, and Figs. 12 and 13 are for
the conventional constant flux control method. The speed
command was a step function with values ranging from
I
-500 to 500 rpm, and there was no load. In each case, 2.0 65.744 89.055 0.738 80.398 0.818
[7]
the command torque current, if*, was set to the upper
transient-state limit of the motor. Fig. 14 combines these
results for easier comparison, with Fig. 14(a) showing the
speed, and Figs. 14(b)-14(d) showing the currents. Figs. 7,
8, and 14 clearly demonstrate that driving an induction
servo motor with the proposed system improves the Fig. 17 is for our proposed method, and Figs. 18 and 19
steady-state efficiency without sacrificing the dynamic per- are for the constant flux method with values of +r of 0.400
formance. Wb and 0.250 Wb, respectively. These results enable us to
Fig. 15 shows the experimentally obtained forward- compare the total loss of a motor when driven by the
reverse speed response of servo motor I. The speed com- different methods. The loss was calculated using (91-0 11,
mand was a ramp function with values ranging from 500 (13) and (14) for both the steady and transient states.
to - 500 rpm, and there was no load. Fig. 20 shows the various speed command conditions,
Fig. 16 shows the experimental results on the load that is, load cycles, for servo motor I that were put into
torque response of servo motor I. The load torque changed (15) to calculate the results in Table 111, which compares
in steps from 0 to 60 kg-cm. the average loss obtained for our proposed method and
for the constant flux method with the two values of the
E. Discussion of Steady and Transient Losses flux mentioned in the previous paragraph. The table re-
veals that our proposed method yields a significantly lower
Figs. 17-19 show the simulation results on the loss except for condition 4. In this case, the constant flux
forward-reverse speed change response of servo motor I. method with a of 0.400 Wb gives better results.
962 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 30, NO. 4, JULY / AUGUST 1994
V. CONCLUSION
A deadbeat flux level control method for direct-field-
oriented induction servo motor drives that employs an
adaptive rotor flux observer has been developed. The
fundamental characteristics of the system were investi-
gated through experiments and simulations. It was found
that the application of this system to high-horsepower
induction servo motors improves the efficiency in both the
steady and transient states without sacrificing dynamic
performance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank M. Tsukakoshi of Meiji
University, N. Ishii of Tokyo Electric Power C o . , Ltd. and
K. Miyamoto of JR Tokai Co., Ltd. for their support of
the experimental work. They also wish to thank Dr. H.
Kubota of Meiji University and K. Kikuchi of Sanyo
Denki Co., Ltd. for useful discussions.
REFERENCES
Ill H. Kubota, K. Matsuse, and T. Nakano, “New adaptive flux
observer of induction motor for wide speed range motor drives,” in
IEEE, IECON’90, Proc., vol. 11, pp. 921-926, 1990.
[21 H. Kubota and K. Matsuse, “Adaptive flux observer of induction
motor and its stability,” Trans. IEE Jpn., vol. 111-D, no. 3, pp.
188-194, 1991.
H. G. Kim, S. K. Sul, and M. H. Park, “Optimal efficiency drive of
I31
a current source inverter fed induction motor by flux control,”
IEEEE Trans. Industry A p p h t . , vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 1453-1459,
1984.
I41 F. Khater, R. D. Lorenz, D. W. Novotny, and K. Tang, “The
selection of flux level in field oriented induction machine con-
troller with consideration of magnetic saturation effects,” in
IEEE/IAS Annu. Meet. Conf. Record, pp. 124-131, 1986.
I51 R. D. Lorenz and S. M. Yang, “AC induction servo sizing for
motion and control applications via loss minimizing real-time flux
control,” in IEEE/IAS Annu. Meet. Conf. Record, pp. 612-616,
1989.
K. Matsuse and H. Kubota, “Digital control scheme of rotor flux
in induction motor with the deadbeat response,” in IEEE/IAS
Annu. Meet. Conf. Record, pp. 222-226, 1987.
K. Matsuse and H. Kubota, “Deadbeat response of flux control of
induction motor,” in Proc. European Conference on Power Electron-
ics and Applications, vol. 2, pp. 895-898, 1987.
K. Matsuse and H. Kubota, “Deadbeat flux level control of high
power saturated induction servo motor using rotor flux observer,”
in IEEE/IAS Annu. Meet. Conf. Record, pp. 409-414, 1991.
0. Ojo and M. Vipin, “Steady state performance evaluation of
saturated field oriented induction motors,” in IEEE/IAS Annu.
Meet. Conf. Record, pp. 51-60, 1990.
T. Mizuno, J. Takayama, T. Ichioka, and M. Terashima, “Decou-
pling control method of induction motors taking stator core loss
into consideration,” in Proc. IPEC (Tokyo, Japan), 1990, pp.
69-74.
[111 H. Kubota and K. Matsuse, “Compensation for core loss of adap-
tive flux observer-based field oriented induction motor drives,” in
IECON’92 (IEEE), pp. 67-71, 1992.
Lipei Huang was bom in Jiangsu, China, on July
12, 1946. He received the B.E. and M.E. degrees
in electrical engineering from Tsinghua Univer-
sity, Beijing, China, in 1970 and 1982, respec-
tively.
In 1970 he joined the Department of Electri-
cal Engineering at Tsinghua University. Since
1990, he has been an Associate Professor of
Electrical Engineering at Tsinghua University,
where he has been vice-chairman of the De-
Dartment of Electrical Eneineerine since 1992.
In 1987 he was a Visithg Scholar of Electrical kgineeryng at Tokyo
Institute of Technology, Tokyo, for three months, and at Meiji Univer-
sity, Kawasaki, Japan, for nine months. He joined the research projects
of K. Matsuse Laboratory at the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Meiji University, Kawasaki, Japan, as Visiting Professor in 1993. His
research interests are in power electronics, adjustable-speed drives and
ac machines. He has published over 30 technical articles in the field of
power electronics, wind energy utilization, and ac machines.
Yasuki Tadokoro was born in Kanagawa, Japan,
on June 14, 1968. He received the B.E. and
M.E. degrees in electrical engineering from Meiji
University, Tokyo, Japan, in 1991, and 1993 re-
spectively.
He joined Ebara Corporation in 1993, where
he has been engaged in the design and develop-
ment of inverters for pumps.
He is a member of the Institute of Electrical
Engineers of Japan.
Kouki Matsuse (SM’88) was born in Tsingtao,
China, on August 6, 1943. He received the B.E.,
M.E., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineer-
ing from Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan, in 1966,
1968, and 1971, respectively.
In 1971 he joined the faculty at Meiji Univer-
sity as a Lecturer of Electrical Engineering.
From 1974 to 1979, he was an Associate Profes-
sor at Meiji University. Since 1979, he has been
a Professor in the Department of Electrical En-
gineering at Meiii University. In 1980 he was a
Visiting Professor of Elekrical Engineering at Iowa-State University for
five months. His research interests are in power electronics, micropro-
cessor-based controllers for static power converters and drives, ad-
justable-speed drives, electrical linear actuators, and ac machines.
Dr. Matsuse is the author of more than 100 technical articles in the
field of power electronics, ac drives, and ac machines, and he holds three
U.S. patents. He received the Outstanding Paper Award in 1992 from
the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan. He is a member of the
IEEE-IAS Industrial Drives Committee, the IAS Industrial Power Con-
verter Committee, and the Japanese National Committee of IEC-TC22.
He is a member of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan and the
Society of Instrument and Control Engineers of Japan.