PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

Comparison of Field-Oriented Control and

Direct Torque Control for Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Motor (PMSM)
M. S. Merzoug, and F. Naceri

Abstract—This paper presents a comparative study on two most II. THE MODEL OF PMSM
popular control strategies for Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor The electrical and mechanical equations of the PMSM in
(PMSM) drives: field-oriented control (FOC) and direct torque the rotor reference (d-q ) frame are as follows [7]:
control (DTC). The comparison is based on various criteria including
basic control characteristics, dynamic performance, and ⎧d Rs Lq
implementation complexity. The study is done by simulation using ⎪ Id = − I d + ωr I q + Vd
the Simulink Power System Blockset that allows a complete ⎪ dt Ld Ld
representation of the power section (inverter and PMSM) and the
⎨ (1)
⎪ d I = − Rs I − ω Ld I − 1 ϕ ω + V
control system. The simulation and evaluation of both control ⎪ dt q q r d f r q
⎩ Lq Lq Lq
strategies are performed using actual parameters of Permanent
Magnet Synchronous Motor fed by an IGBT PWM inverter.
ϕ d = Ld I d + ϕ f (2)
Keywords—PMSM, FOC, DTC, hysteresis, PWM.
ϕ q = Lq I q (3)
I. INTRODUCTION And the electromagnetic torque Ce is given by:

P ERMANENT magnet (PM) synchronous motors have

attracted increasing interest in recent years for industrial
drive application. The high efficiency, high steady state torque
Ce =
3
2
P[( Ld − Lq ) I d I q + I qϕ f )] (4)

density and simple controller of the PM motor drives The equation for the motor dynamics, on the other hand, is
compared with the induction motor drives make them a good dΩ
alternative in certain applications. Moreover, the availability Ce − Cr − C f = J (5)
dt
of low-cost power electronic devices and the improvement of
PM characteristics enable the use of PM motors even in some ω = PΩ (6)
more demanding applications [1].
It is now recognized that the two high-performance control Fig. 1 presents the model of PMSM in d-q axis:
strategies for PMSM are field-oriented control (FOC) and
direct torque control (DTC). They have been invented
respectively in the 70’s and in the 80’s. These control
strategies are different on the operation principle but their
objectives are the same. They aim both to control effectively
the motor torque and flux in order to force the motor to
accurately track the command trajectory regardless of the
machine and load parameter variation or any extraneous
disturbances. Both control strategies have been successfully
implemented in industrial products.
The supporters of field-oriented control and direct torque
control claim the superiority of their strategy versus the other.
Up to now, the question has not been clearly answered. The Fig. 1 Functional schema of the Park model
purpose of this paper is to present a comparative study on
these two control strategies in order to clarify the “myth”. The III. DESCRIPTION OF FIELD-ORIENTED CONTROL AND DIRECT
comparison is based on various criteria including basic control TORQUE CONTROLS SCHEMES
characteristics, static and dynamic performance, and
implementation complexity [2]. A. Field-Oriented Control System
The primary principle in controlling a PMSM drive is based
on field orientation. Since the magnetic flux generated from

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 300 © 2008 WASET.ORG

 PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

the PM rotor is fixed in relation to the rotor shaft position, the and more popular nowadays. The basic idea of DTC for
flux position in the coordinates can be determined by the shaft induction motor is to control the torque and flux linkageby
position sensor. In (2), if I d = 0 , the d-axis flux linkage ϕ d is selecting the voltage space vectors properly, which is based
fixed. Since ϕ f is constant for a PMSM, the electromagnetic on the relationship between the slip frequency and torque.
In the late 1990's, DTC techniques for the Permanent
torque is then proportional to I q which is determined by Magnet Synchronous Machine (PMSM) machines have
closed-loop control [8]. appeared [4].
Fig. 4 shows a direct torque controlled PMSM drive system.
3
Ce = Pϕ f I q (7)
2
Hence the representation follows: [4]
Ce = kt I q (8)

Where:
3
kt = Pϕ f (9)
2
The rotor flux is produced only in the q axis while the
current vector is generated in the axis in the field-oriented
control. Since the generated motor torque is linearly
proportional to the q-axis current, as the d-axis rotor flux is
constant in (2), the maximum torque per ampere can be
achieved [3].
Hysteresis PWM Current Control
Hysteresis current control is a PWM technique, very simple
to implement and taking care directly for the current control.
The switching logic is realized by three hysteresis controllers,
one for each phase. Fig. 2
The hysteresis PWM current control, also known as bang-
bang control, is done in the three phases separately. Each
controller determines the switching-state of one inverter half-
bridge in such a way that the corresponding current is Fig. 3 System configuration of field-oriented PMSM
maintained within a hysteresis band Δ i [9].
Estimation of the Torque and the flux Linkage
Hysteresis band
Current reference The basic principle of the DTC is to select proper
Switching I voltage vectors using a pre-defined switching table.
logic Real courant
The selection is based on the hysteresis control of the
*
i
a stator flux linkage and the torque. In the basic form the
ia stator flux linkage is estimated with: [5]
*
i t
ϕ s (t ) = ∫ (Vs − Rs I s ) dt + ϕs 0
b
ib 1 / 2U
(10)
* 0
i
c
ic Where ϕ0 is the initial value of the stator flux linkage.
−1 / 2U
Output voltage
Let us replace the estimate of the stator voltage with the
true value and write it as:
Fig. 2 Hysteresis PWM, current control and switching logic
The configuration of a field-oriented PMSM drive system
2
(
VS ( S A ; S B ; SC ) = U 0 S A + S B e j 2π /3 + SC e j 4π /3
3
) (11)
with conventional cascade position and speed control is
shown in Fig. 3. S a , S b and S c represent the states of the three phase
B. Direct Torque Control system legs 0 meaning that the phase is connected to the negative
and 1 meaning that the phase is connected to the positive
Since M. Depenbrock and I. Takahashi proposed Direct
leg.
Torque Control (DTC) for induction machines in the middle
of 1980’s, more than one decade has passed. It is getting more

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 301 © 2008 WASET.ORG

 PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

The stator current space vector is calculated from measured ϕS β

currents i A , iB , iC : θ S = arctg (15)
ϕ Sα
iS =
2
3
(
iA + iB e J 2π /3 + iC e j 4π /3 ) (12) The torque can then be estimated with:
3
Ce = P (ϕ Sα I S β − ϕ S β I Sα ) (16)
2
The voltage vector plane is divided into six sectors so
that each voltage vector divides each region into two equal
parts. In each sector, four of the six non-zero voltage
vectors may be used. Also zero sectors are allowed. All the
possibilities can be tabulated into a switching table (Table
I). The output of the torque hysteresis comparator is
denoted as τ , the output of the flux hysteresis comparator
as φ and the flux linkage sector is denoted as θ .
The torque hysteresis comparator is a three valued
comparator. τ = −1 means that the actual value of the
torque is abovethe reference and out of the hysteresis limit,
and τ = 1 means that the actual value is below the
reference and out of the hysteresis limit. The flux
hysteresis comparator is a two valued comparator. φ = 0
means that the actual value of the flux linkage is above the
reference and out of the hysteresis limit and φ = 1 means
that the actual value of the flux linkage is below the
Fig. 4 System diagram of a typical DTC PMSM drive system reference and out of the hysteresis limit [6].

TABLE I
SWITCHING TABLE PRESENTED BY TAKAHASHI AND NOGUCHI
The voltage vectors obtained this way are shown in Fig.
θ , τ ,φ θ1 θ2 θ3 θ4 θ5 θ6
5.
τ =1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V1
φ =1 τ =0 V7 V0 V7 V0 V7 V0
τ = −1 V6 V1 V2 V3 V4 V5
τ =1 V3 V4 V5 V6 V1 V2
φ=0
τ =0 V0 V7 V0 V7 V0 V7
τ = −1 V5 V6 V1 V2 V3 V4

IV. COMPARISON OF STATIC AND DYNAMIC PERFORMANCE

Fig. 5 Voltage vectors for DTC In this section, static and dynamic performances of FOC
and DTC schemes are obtained by simulation using the
The composite α and β of vector ϕ s can be obtained: MATLAB/ Simulink Power System Blockset.
Since the objective of the work is to compare the control
⎧ t
strategies, the same power section is used in both systems.
⎪ϕ Sα = ∫ (VSα − RS I Sα ) dt It is necessary to make a comparison of static and dynamic
⎪ 0
⎨ t
(13) characteristics of both technical command and under the same

⎪ S β ( Sβ S Sβ )
⎪ϕ = V − R I dt
∫ operating conditions (reference, charges disturbance… etc.),
⎩ 0 and in the same configuration simulation (step sampling, time
Stator flux linkage written: simulation,)
In this paper we will present the advantages and
+ (ϕ S β )
2 2 disadvantages of each type of command, better command will
ϕs = (ϕ S α ) (14)
be the one that best meets the requirement to know:
The angle θ S is equal to: ¾ Best performance static and dynamic.
¾ Best prosecution guidelines control.

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 302 © 2008 WASET.ORG

 PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

¾ Best releases disturbance. Mechanical connected to the tree motor. She presents major
¾ Insensitivity to changes in parameters. problems:
• The absence of mastery of the harmonic ones of couple.
A. Comparison at the level of regulation speed
Fig. 6 illustrates the simulation results of both technical The check vector by orientation of the flux rotorique FOC
command FOC hysteresis and the DTC, where to apply a was developed to eliminate internal coupling of the machine,
torque load equal to 5N.m at t = 0.1s and a reference speed provoking variations of the flux linkage to the Torque.
equal to 100 rad /s. The control vector by orientation of the flux rotorique
It is noted that the FOC hysteresis presents a peak torque at presents a number of advantages:
startup larger than the DTC, and a torque of quick response • To allow a decouplage between the flux and the torque
due to application of the load at t = 0.1s, which allows the rather simple, thus a wide beach of speed.
rapid rejection of the disturbance. And a number of inconveniences:
At speed, we can see that the DTC has a high dynamic • Weak hardiness to the variations Parametric and in
without overshoot, start-up, and the response time are reduced particular to the one of the constant one of time rotorique.
compared to the FOC hysteresis. • Necessitated of a modulation one for the order come close
For the answer stator flux, it reaches its reference value to the inverter that provokes delays, especially down with
without overrun for the DTC, against the FOC hysteresis there frequency of modulation.
is an overrun at startup.
B. Test of Strength for Reversing Rotation of the Machine
To test the robustness of both technical command at the
reverse direction of rotation, it introduced a change in record
speed reference +100 rad/s to -100 rad /s time t=0.1s after a
torque load equal to 3 Nm. In Fig. 7, we can say that the
continuation in speed is normally and without overrun for both
technical commands (DTC and FOC). It notes that the FOC
hysteresis presents a peak torque than the DTC.
C. Test of Robustness for Load Change
Fig. 8 represents speed, torque and Flux stator of the
machine in case starter vacuum and a level of speed equal to
100rad /s.
At the moment t = 0.1s she applies a load torque equal to
5N.m, then at t = 0.15s applying a load torque equal to 0N.m,
we find that the Torque responds instantly, and that its speed
reaches Reference after a small deformation reaches its
reference after a small deformity in the case of FOC. By cons
in the case of DTC speed reaches its reference after a
considerable strain. The trajectory of the flux in ( α , β )
reference is circular.

V. COMPARISON BETWEEN THE DTC AND THE FOC

The DTC does not necessitate any mechanical measure such
as the one of speed or position of the machine; of more the
sensitiveness to the machine parameters clearly is lessened in
the case of the DTC, since the flow estimation is done
according to a single parameter to know the resistance stator.
In addition, PWM is replaced, in this order by a simple (a) (b)
table of commutation which the return, so much easier. Fig. 6 Regulation of speed followed by an application of torque load
The order DTC has for advantages: at the t = 0.1 s
• The reduction of the time of response of the couple.
• The hardiness in comparison with the variation of the
parameters of the machine and nutrition.
• The direct imposition of the amplitude of the undulations
of the couple and flow.
• She adapts herself by nature to the absence of sensor

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 303 © 2008 WASET.ORG

PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

Table II, summary a comparative study of the performances

between the order FOC and the DTC:

TABLE II
COMPARISON OF FOC AND DTC SCHEMES
FOC DTC
Transformation Present Void
Dynamics high high
Robustness Robust Robust
Speed sensor Necessary Less necessary
Parameter
Big Average
sensitivity
Control close Necessary PWM Not of PWM
Necessitate
Découplage Natural
orientation
Three stator - Torque
Regulators regulator regulator
(Hysteresis) - Flux regulator
Behavior down
Good not good
speed

(a) FOC (b) DTC TABLE III

Fig. 7 Comparison of inversion speed PARAMETERS OF THE PMSM USED IN THIS PAPER
(100rad/s, –100 rad/s) Rated output power 1500 Wat
Magnetic flux linkage 0.154 web
Poles 3
Stator resistance 1.4 Ω
q-axis inductance 0.0058 H
d-axis inductance 0.0066 H
Inertia 0.00176 KG.M2
friction Cœfficient 0.00038 N.M.S/ rad

VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, main characteristics of field-oriented and
direct torque control schemes for PMSM drives are studied by
simulation with a view to highlighting the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach. It is difficult to clearly state
on the superiority of DTC versus FOC because of the balance
of the merits of the two schemes.
We one conclude that the vector order it better is adapted
(load variation), and the responses with the DTC are quicker.

REFERENCES
[1] C. Mademlis, V. G. Agelidis, "On Considering Magnetic Saturation with
Maximum Torque to Current Control in Interior Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Motor Drives," IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, vol. 16,
no. 3, Sep. 2001.
[2] H. L. Huy, "Comparison of Field-Oriented Control and Direct Torque
Control for Induction Motor Drives," 0-7803-5589-X/99/$10.00 © 1999
IEEE.
[3] K. K. Shyu, C. K. Lai, Y. W. Tsai, and D. I. Yang, "A Newly Robust
Controller Design for the Position Control of Permanent-Magnet
Synchronous Motor," IEEE Trans on Industrial Electronics. vol. 49, no.
3, Jun. 2002.
[4] L. Tang, L. Zhong, M. F. Rahman and Y. Hu, "A Novel Direct Torque
(a) FOC (b) DTC Control for Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Machine Drive
System with Low Ripple in Torque and Flux-A Speed Sensorless
Fig. 8 Comparison at the variation torque load Approach" 0-7803-7420-7/02/$17.00 © 2002 IEEE.
[5] M. F. Rahman, L. Zhong, E. Haque, and M. A. Rahman, "A Direct
Torque-Controlled Interior Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motor

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 304 © 2008 WASET.ORG

 PROCEEDINGS OF WORLD ACADEMY OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740

Drive Without a Speed Sensor " IEEE Trans. Energy conversion, vol.
18, no. 1, Mar. 2003.
[6] J. Luukko "Direct torque control of permanent magnet synchronous
machines analysis and Implementation" Lappeenranta 2000.
[7] P. Pragasan, and R. Krishnan, "Modeling of permanent magnet motor
drives" IEEE Trans. Industrial electronics, vol. 35, no.4, nov. 1988.
[8] G. Grellet et G. Clerc, "Actuators electric Principe / model / control ".
Eyrolles,.(2nd ed.) 2000, pp. 298-300.
[9] F. Labrique, H. buyse, G. seguier and R. Bausière, "Converters power
electronics command and dynamic behavior " vol. 5, 1998, pp. 68-73.

PWASET VOLUME 35 NOVEMBER 2008 ISSN 2070-3740 305 © 2008 WASET.ORG