energies

Article
Field Weakening Operation Control Strategies of
PMSM Based on Feedback Linearization
Kai Zhou, Min Ai *, Dongyang Sun, Ningzhi Jin and Xiaogang Wu
Engineering Research Center of Automotive Electronics Drive Control and System Integration, Ministry of
Education. Harbin University of Science and Technology, Harbin 150080, China; [email protected] (K.Z.);
[email protected] (D.S.); [email protected] (N.J.); [email protected] (X.W.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-18-845-116-848




Received: 22 October 2019; Accepted: 26 November 2019; Published: 28 November 2019


Abstract: Based on current research into the mathematical model of the permanent magnet synchronous
motor (PMSM) and the feedback linearization theory, a control strategy established upon feedback
linearization is proposed. The Lie differential operation is performed on the output variable to obtain
the state feedback of the nonlinear system, and the dynamic characteristics of the original system
are transformed into linear dynamic characteristics. A current controller based on the input–output
feedback linearization algorithm is designed to realize the input–output linearization control of the
PMSM. The current controller decouples the d–q axis current from the flux linkage information of
the motor and outputs a control voltage. When the motor speed reaches above the base speed, the
field-forward and straight-axis current components are newly distributed to achieve field weakening
control, which can realize the smooth transition between the constant torque region and weak magnetic
region. Simulation and experimental results show the feasibility and viability of the strategy.

Keywords: permanent magnet synchronous motor; field weakening control; feedback linearization;
current lead angle

1. Introduction
Permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) have been widely used in a variety of industrial
applications due to their high power density, high efficiency, high reliability and wide constant power
operating range [1]. In the running process of the motor, when the speed increases to the base speed, the
stator terminal voltage reaches the inverter output limit value, the current regulator reaches saturation
state, and the motor speed cannot continue to rise. In order to make the motor reach a higher speed, it
is necessary to adopt corresponding measures to make the current regulator desaturated, regain the
control ability of the current, and realize the rebalancing relationship between the motor speed and the
back electromotive force. The flux weakening (FW) control strategy of PMSM first appeared in the
1980s [2]. It is pointed out that the stator current of the motor is constrained by the voltage limit circle
and the current limit circle, and the maximum torque current curve is obtained. Through the study of
vector control theory, there are two main ways to improve the weak magnetic performance: one is to
optimize the structure of the motor body; the other is to study the flux weakening control from the
control algorithm strategy [3]. This paper mainly researches on the flux weakening control algorithm,
so the optimization of the weak magnetic field of the motor body structure is not described in detail.
The PMSM rotor structure is special and the flux linkage is constant, which makes the flux
weakening control more complicated [4]. When the PMSM is running in the field weakening control
zone, once the given torque is suddenly changed, the output voltage of the current controller is easy to
saturate. At this time, the output torque performance of the motor will be affected, and in severe cases,
the entire system will be out of control [5–7]. The six-step voltage method is a representative control

Energies 2019, 12, 4526; doi:10.3390/en12234526 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2019, 12, 4526 2 of 18

approach that can improve the use of direct current (DC) bus voltage [8]. The single current regulator,
including the voltage angle, has the voltage vector angle by proportional-integral (PI) adjustment of
the d-axis current error and the speed expansion effect is good [9]. The feed forward flux weakening
control strategy estimates the d-axis current using the motor parameters and the voltage limit circle,
and the dynamic performance is good. However, when the motor parameters change, the control
strategy is difficult to follow the optimal trajectory. Therefore, it is not common in practical applications,
and is mostly used in the simulation process where the motor parameters are known and will not
change [10–12]. The online parameter prediction control method estimates the d–q axis inductance,
which reduces the dependence on the motor parameters. However, the derivation and calculation
are cumbersome and complicated and are not highly recommended for various applications [13].
The control strategy of the d-axis current compensation is ideal for dynamic performance but requires
precise parameters of the motor [14]. The gradient descent method weak field control can update the
given value of the stator current according to the position of the weak magnetic region. The control
method can adjust the weak magnetic running direction in real time, realize nonlinear control of the
weak magnetic region, high control precision and fast response speed [15–17]. However, this algorithm
is extremely complicated and has a large dependence on motor parameters. Professor Xu Longya
of the Ohio State University proposed a single-current flux weakening control algorithm for various
problems in the above flux weakening control method. In this control strategy, the d-axis reference
voltage is still given by the d-axis current regulator output. However, the q-axis reference voltage is
given externally, so that once the d-axis given current is determined, the q-axis given current can be
directly obtained. This method relieves the shackles on the current regulator and broadens the range
of weak magnetic acceleration [18]. Whereas, the control strategy itself has the disadvantages of poor
load capacity and low power utilization, and can only operate in an electric state and cannot operate in
a power generation state. Direct-flux vector control (DFVC) is derived from the direct torque control
(DTC) idea. DTC is adopted when the motor runs below the base speed, which requires parameter
calculation based on the motor model. When the motor enters the field weakening zone, the parameter
calculation can be omitted. DFVC uses the current constraint condition when the motor runs in the
maximum torque per voltage (MTPV) to determine whether flux weakening control is performed.
The influence of constant power speed ratio (CPSR) on the weak magnetic property of the motor is
fully considered [19–22].
This paper investigates the PMSM, and from the analysis of its topology and principles, a control
strategy based on feedback linearization is proposed. Since the PMSM is a complex nonlinear system,
favorable control performance can be obtained by decoupling the coupling term in its mathematical
equation. The commonly used PI control decoupling is difficult to meet the performance requirements
in the full speed range. Therefore, the feedback linearization theory is applied. The Lie differential
operation of the output variable is used to obtain the required coordinate transformation and nonlinear
system state feedback. The input–output feedback linearization of the PMSM is realized, and the
feedback linearization algorithm is designed. The controller implements the decoupling control of the
system. When the motor speed reaches the turning speed, the stator current vector and the cross-axis
current vector have a certain angle, that is, the current lead angle. The stator current is re-allocated
by controlling the current lead angle to control the current components of the cross-axis and the
straight-axis. As the lead angle of the current increases, the direct current increases inversely, the
cross-axis current decreases, and the motor changes smoothly to the flux weakening control zone.
The simulation and experimental research into the control system demonstrate that the proposed
control strategy is robust, and exhibits both stable and accurate dynamic tracking.
The organization of this paper is as follows: Section 2 analyzes the mathematical model of PMSM.
Section 3 introduces the concept of flux weakening control. Section 4 designs the field weakening
control strategy, and Section 5 provides the simulation results. Section 6 provides the experimental
results. Section 7 summarizes this article.
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 3 of 18

2. PMSM Mathematical Model

To facilitate the analysis and application, the interference of the core parameters, such as core
saturation, higher harmonics and eddy current on the motor parameters is temporarily disregarded.
The voltage equation of PMSM in a synchronous rotating coordinate system is shown [23].

d
ud = Rs id + ψ − ω e ψq . (1)
dt d

d
uq = Rs iq + ψq + ωe ψd . (2)
dt
The flux linkage equation:
ψd = Ld id + ψ f . (3)

ψq = Lq iq . (4)

The electromagnetic torque is:

Tem = 1.5pn (ψd iq − ψq id ). (5)

Based on the theory of magnetic field orientation, the state equation of PMSM in a synchronous
rotating coordinate system is:
 .  
np ωe
   
 id   −Rs /L 0  id   ud /Ld 
 .  
 =  n ω −R −np ψ f /L
  
 +  uq /Lq

s /L  iq
 iq

  p e . (6)
 .   
1.5np ψ f /J ωe

ωe 0 −B/J −TL /J
    

It can be seen from Equation (6) that the PMSM is a multi-variable system. There is a strong
nonlinear coupling relationship between id , iq and ωe , which cannot be adjusted separately. Therefore,
id and iq need to be used in order to achieve decoupling.
The equation of mechanical motion:

dωm
Tem − TL = J + Bωm . (7)
dt
When the motor is in stable operation, the integral amount can be ignored and the voltage equation
can be simplified as:
ud = Rs id − ωe Lq iq . (8)

uq = Rs id + ωe Ld id + ωe ψ f . (9)

When the motor is running at a high speed, the voltage equation can be simplified as:

ud = −ωe Lq iq . (10)

uq = ωe Ld id + ωe ψ f . (11)

Substituting Equations (3) and (4) into Equation (5) yields:

Tem = 1.5pn [ψ f iq + (Ld − Lq )id iq ]. (12)

ud , uq , ψd and ψq are the stator voltage and flux linkage components in the d–q coordinate system,
respectively, where id and iq are the direct axis and the intersecting axis current, respectively, while Ld
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 4 of 18
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 19

and
is Lq load
the are the direct P
torque; axis and the intersecting axis inductance, respectively. Meanwhile, Rs is the stator
n is the motor pole pair; J is the moment of inertia; ωe is the rotor angular
resistance; ψ is the rotor flux; Temangular
velocity and fωm is the mechanical is the electromagnetic
velocity. torque output by the motor; TL is the load
torque; Pn is the motor
In Equation pole
(12), the pair; J is the moment
electromagnetic torque of
Teminertia; ωeof
consists is two
the rotor
partsangular
such as velocity ωm is
andtorque
reluctance
the mechanical angular velocity.
and excitation torque. Since the Ld of the PMSM is usually smaller than Lq, the optimal control of the
PMSM In can
Equation (12), the
be achieved byelectromagnetic torque Tem
changing the reluctance consists of two parts such as reluctance torque
torque.
and excitation torque. Since the Ld of the PMSM is usually smaller than Lq , the optimal control of the
PMSM
3. Fieldcan be achieved
Weakening by changing
Operation Controlthe reluctance torque.

Assuming
3. Field that the
Weakening motor isControl
Operation in a steady state and ignoring its winding voltage drop, the motor
d–q axis flux linkage equation is as follows [24–26]:
Assuming that the motor is in a steady state and ignoring its winding voltage drop, the motor
ψ q[24–26]:
d–q axis flux linkage equation is as follows = Lq iq = ρLd iq

( ψ d = Ld id + ϕ f
. (13)
 ψq = Lq iq = ρLd iq
. (13)
By combining Equation (13) with theψmotor id + φ f Equation (5), the motor d–q axis composite
d = Ldtorque
flux linkage can be regarded as a function of the d-axis current. The functional equation is:
By combining Equation (13) with the motor torque Equation (5), the motor d–q axis composite
flux linkage can be regarded as a function of the d-axis current. ) 2 functional equation is:
( ρ Ld TeThe
(ψ dq ) 2 = ( ρ Ld iq ) 2 + (ψ f + Ld id ) 2 = + (ψ f + Ld id ) . (14)
[ψ f − ( ρ − 1)2Ld id ]2
( ρL T
d e )
(ψdq )2 = (ρLd iq )2 + (ψ f + Ld id )2 = + ( ψ f + L d id ) . (14)
From Equation (14), it can be found that the motor [ψ f − flux 1)Ld id ]2 increases as the d-axis current
(ρ − linkage
increases, and when the d-axis current reachesψ f /( ρ − 1) Ld , the motor flux linkage reaches infinity.
From Equation (14), it can be found that the motor flux linkage increases as the d-axis current
(ψ dq ) 2current
increases, and when thedd-axis 2
Ld 3Te 2 ψ
2 ρ reaches ( ρf /−(1ρ)− 1)Ld , the motor flux linkage reaches infinity.
= + 2 Ld (ψ f + Ld id ) = 0 . (15)
ψddq )2 [ψ2ρf 2−Ld(3ρT−
d(di 21
(
) L−d i1d)]3
ρ
e
= + 2Ld (ψ f + Ld id ) = 0. (15)
di
When the running state of the [motor
d ψ f − (ρsatisfies
− 1)Ld idthe ]3 Equation (15), the flux linkage is a constant,
and the voltage
When amplitude
the running does
state of not
the change under the
motor satisfies thecondition
Equationthat(15),the
therotational speed
flux linkage is is constant.
a constant,
For
and the
the voltage
voltage limit ellipse,
amplitude when
does notthe motor
change speed
under theiscondition
fixed, thethat
voltage amplitudespeed
the rotational of any working
is constant.
point on the ellipse is fixed, and the amplitude of the motor flux linkage is constant.
For the voltage limit ellipse, when the motor speed is fixed, the voltage amplitude of any working The set of
tangent points of the equal torque curve and the voltage limit ellipse is called the minimum
point on the ellipse is fixed, and the amplitude of the motor flux linkage is constant. The set of tangent flux per
torque (MFPT)
points of trajectory.
the equal torqueOn theand
curve equal
thetorque curve,
voltage limitthe variation
ellipse of the
is called theflux amplitude
minimum fluxisper
shown in
torque
Figure 1.
(MFPT) trajectory. On the equal torque curve, the variation of the flux amplitude is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.
Figure Variation of
1. Variation of flux
flux magnitude
magnitude on
on the
the constant
constant torque
torque curves.
curves.

Figure 2 shows the curve of the operating point when the motor was weakly magnetically
Figure 2 shows the curve of the operating point when the motor was weakly magnetically
operated. The boundary line consisting of the maximum torque per ampere (MTPA) trajectory, the
operated. The boundary line consisting of the maximum torque per ampere (MTPA) trajectory, the
MFPT trajectory and the current limit circular trajectory divides the operating range of the motor into
MFPT trajectory and the current limit circular trajectory divides the operating range of the motor
three parts.
into three parts.
 Energies 2019, 12, 4526 5 of 18
Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

Figure 2. Operating point trajectory of flux weakening (FW).

Figure 2. Operating point trajectory of flux weakening (FW).
In the interval I, for a given torque command, the MTPA control algorithm is selected without
In the interval I, for a given torque command, the MTPA control algorithm is selected without
considering the weak magnetic requirement, so the operating point of the motor in the interval I exists
considering the weak magnetic requirement, so the operating point of the motor in the interval I
only on the MTPA trajectory. In interval II, the motor needs to output a larger current for a given torque
exists only on the MTPA trajectory. In interval II, the motor needs to output a larger current for a
command, but it is close to the MFPT track, the required flux linkage amplitude becomes smaller.
given torque command, but it is close to the MFPT track, the required flux linkage amplitude
In the interval III, for a given torque command, the current and flux linkage of the motor are the largest,
becomes smaller. In the interval III, for a given torque command, the current and flux linkage of the
so the actual control should ensure that the motor operating point does not enter the interval III.
motor are the largest, so the actual control should ensure that the motor operating point does not
When the motor needs weak field in the operation of the interval II, its working point should be
enter the interval III.
moved to the MFPT from the MTPA along the equal torque curve. At this time, the motor flux linkage
When the motor needs weak field in the operation of the interval II, its working point should
is minimized, and the motor operating point will not continue to move along the equal torque curve.
be moved to the MFPT from the MTPA along the equal torque curve. At this time, the motor flux
However, as the rotational speed continues to rise, the MFPT trajectory gradually moves toward the
linkage is minimized, and the motor operating point will not continue to move along the equal
C point.
torque curve. However, as the rotational speed continues to rise, the MFPT trajectory gradually
moves
4. Thetoward the C
Improved point.
Flux Weakening Control Strategy

4. TheWhen the motor

Improved speed reaches
Flux Weakening the rated
Control speed, the current regulator reaches saturation state, and
Strategy
the PMSM stator voltage and current reach the voltage limit circle and current limit circle of the inverter
WhenAtthe
output. motor
this time,speed reaches
in order the rated
to further speed,
increase thethe current
motor regulator
speed, PMSM reaches saturation control
flux weakening state,
and the PMSM stator voltage and current reach the voltage limit circle and current
can be realized by increasing the direct shaft demagnetization current. The field weakening control limit circle of the
inverter
usuallyoutput. At this time,
has feedforward in order
control to further
and feedback increase
control. Thethe motor speed,
feedforward PMSM
control flux weakening
is highly dependent
control can be realized by increasing the direct shaft demagnetization current.
on the motor parameters, and the speed regulation performance is poor, which is not commonly The field weakening used
control usually has feedforward control and feedback control. The feedforward
in actual working conditions. Feedback control can be divided into negative straight axis current control is highly
dependent on the
compensation motorand
method parameters,
current lead and the weak
angle speedfield
regulation
control.performance is poor, which is not
commonly
When the PMSM reaches the turning speed, the statorcontrol
used in actual working conditions. Feedback currentcan be divided
is controlled into negative
to slide to the left
straight axis current compensation method and current lead angle weak field control.
along the current limit circle. There is an angle between the stator current vector and the quadrature
axisWhen the
current PMSM reaches
component. the turning speed,
By re-distributing thecurrent
the stator stator current is controlled
by controlling this leadto angle,
slide to
thethe left
system
along the current limit circle. There is an angle between the stator current vector
again controls the current component of the cross-axis. At the same time, due to the non-coupling ofand the quadrature
axis
the current
system, acomponent.
feedback-based By re-distributing
current controller theisstator
designed current by controlling
to decouple the currentthiscomponents
lead angle,inthe the
system again controls the current
synchronous rotating coordinate system. component of the cross-axis. At the same time, due to the
non-coupling of the system, a feedback-based current controller is designed to decouple the current
components
4.1. Currentin the synchronous
Decoupling Control rotating coordinate system.
Vector control is widely used in the traditional alternating current speed control system, because
4.1. Current Decoupling Control
of its simple algorithm, high reliability and strong robustness [27]. Whereas, for the coupling problem
Vector control
of nonlinear systems,is widely used in
vector control the traditional
is processed alternating
by voltage current and
feedforward, speed
the control
couplingsystem,
term is
because
directly of its simple
eliminated algorithm,
from high reliability
the differential and approach
equation. This strong robustness [27].
has a certain Whereas,
impact on thefor the
stability
coupling problem of nonlinear systems, vector control is processed by voltage feedforward, and the
of the system.
couplingAs aterm
kindisofdirectly
nonlinear eliminated from the feedback
control technology, differential equation. This
linearization approach has
has outstanding a certainin
advantages
impact
solving onthe
thecoupling
stabilityproblem
of the system.
of the system. The method is developed based on differential geometry.
As a kind the
By analyzing of nonlinear
mathematical control
modeltechnology, feedback
of the controlled linearization
system, hascontrol
the linear outstanding
law of advantages
the system is
inobtained.
solving This
the coupling problem of the system. The method is developed based on differential
method can realize the linearization of the system by accurately solving the mathematical
geometry. By analyzing the mathematical model of the controlled system, the linear control law of
the system is obtained. This method can realize the linearization of the system by accurately solving
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 6 of 18

model of the controlled object. Since its strong coupling, multivariable and non-linear characteristics,
feedback linearization control is used to decouple the system, which can achieve accurate linearization
of the system.
The main idea of feedback linearization is to make the input and output of the controlled object
linear through coordinate transformation and state feedback [28]. In this way, the system controller
can be designed by applying a more mature linear control method. It has differences between feedback
linearization and traditional linearization method. The traditional linearization method is implemented
by ignoring the higher-order terms of the polynomial when Taylor series is expanded, and the exact
linearization method is for the whole domain of the system [29–31]. This method preserves all state
features of the system, so the mathematical model derived from this method is linear and complete.
A re-writing of the system state Equation (6) in the d–q coordinate system to the affine nonlinear
standard form is as follows:  .

 x = f (x) + g1 (x)ud + g2 (x)uq
y1 = h1 (x) = ψd

. (16)



 y = h (x) = ψ

1 1 q

 −RS id + Lq iq ωe
 

f (x) =  −RS iq − Ld id ωe − ωe ψ f .
 
(17)
 
(Te − Pn TL − Bωe )/J
 h iT
 g1 = 1 0 0



 h iT . (18)
 g = 0 1 0


2

Before proceeding with the derivation, we must first introduce the concept of Lie derivative.
h(x) = h(x1 ,x2 , . . . ,xn ) and f(x) = [f 1 (x), f 2 (x), . . . fn (x)]T are the scalar function and smooth vector
field of the n-dimensional vector x[x1 ,x2 , . . . ,xn ], then the Lie derivative of h to f is a scalar field
defined as:
∂h(x)
L f h(x) = f (x). (19)
∂x
 f1 (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) 
 
 f2 (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) 
 
T
[ f1 (x), f2 (x), . . . , fn (x)] =  .
.

(20)
 .. 
 
fn (x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn )


In fact, the Lie derivative is the rate of change of h(x) along the direction of the vector f(x). Similarly,
if g is another smooth vector field, the scalar function Lg Lf h is:

∂L f h(x)
Lg L f h = · g(x). (21)
∂x
Before the controller can be designed, the conditions under which the feedback linearization
method is established in the direct torque control system must be discussed.
An affine nonlinear system with multiple inputs and outputs is described by the following equation:

· Pm
 x = f (x) + gi (x)ui



 i=1 . (22)
 yi = h j (x), j = 1, 2 . . . m


Energies 2019, 12, 4526 7 of 18

If the system (22) is within a neighborhood of x0 , the following conditions are met:

k k
[L gi L f j h j (x), . . . , L gi L f j h j (x)] = 0
r −1 r −1
[L gi L fj h j (x), . . . , L gi L fj h j (x)] , 0 , (23)
1 ≤ i ≤ m, 1 ≤ j ≤ m, 0 ≤ k j ≤ r j−1

and m × m dimensional matrix is:

r −1 r −1
L g1 L f1 h1 (x), . . . , L gm L f1 h1 (x)
 
 
 
r2 −1 r2 −1
L g1 L f h2 (x), . . . , L gm L f h2 (x) 
 

D(x) =  . (24)

 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 
L g1 Lrfm −1 hm (x), . . . , L gm Lrfm −1 hm (x) 
 

If D(x) is non-singular, then the nonlinear system (22) has a vector relationship r = {r1 , r2 , . . . rm } at
x0 . After satisfying the above conditions, the input and output decoupling is achievable when the
nonlinear system (22) in a neighborhood of x0 [32]. For this system D(x) is:

 g1 ∂ψd ∂ψd
  "
L g1 ψd L g 2 ψd
" # #
∂x
g2 ∂x  = 1
 0
=  ∂ψq ∂ψq = E. (25)
L g 1 ψq L g 2 ψq 0 1

g1 ∂x g2 ∂x

The decoupling matrix is a nonsingular matrix that satisfies exact linearization conditions.
To decouple the equations, two virtual control quantities K1 and K2 are designed, defined as
follows: .
k1 = y1 = L f ψd + L g1 ψd ud + L g2 ψd uq
(
. , (26)
k2 = y2 = L f ψq + L g1 ψq ud + L g2 ψq uq
where: y1 = ψd , y2 = ψq . They are system output variables Lf ψd is the Lie derivative of ψd with respect
to f, and the meanings of Lg1 and Lg2 are similar, and will not be described again.
Bringing Equations (25) and (26) into Equation (16) yields:
#−1 "
L g1 ψd L g 2 ψd k1 − L f ψd
" # " #
ud
= . (27)
uq L g 1 ψq L g 2 ψq k 2 − L f ψq

In order for the changed linear system outputs ψd , ψq to track the given signals ψd * and ψq *, the
controller is designed to:
∗
 k1 = dψdtd − α1 (ψd ∗ − ψd )



∗  , (28)
 k2 = dψq − α2 ψq ∗ − ψq

 
dt

where: α1 and α2 are controller modulation parameters with positive values. Finished, ud and uq can
be expressed as:
ud = −Rid + ωe Lq iq − k1
(
, (29)
uq = −Riq − ωe Ld id + ωe ψ f − k2
and the flux linkage tracking error equation:

d(ψd ∗ −ψd )

= −α1 (ψd ∗ − ψd )


dt

 . (30)

 d(ψq ∗ −ψq ) 
= −α2 ψq ∗ − ψq


dt


It can be seen from these equations that the system’s steady state error can be reduced to be close
to zero by making the controller modulation parameter greater than zero.
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 8 of 18

In order to facilitate the observation of the stator flux linkage, it is necessary to rewrite Equations (1)
and (2) into a form under the α-β coordinate system. The mathematical model of the permanent
magnet synchronous motor in the α-β coordinate system is [33]:

uα = (R + Dl)iα − ωe ψ f sin θ
(
, (31)
uβ = (R + DL)iβ + ωe ψ f cos θ

where D is a differential operator, θ is the rotor flux point angle, and ωe is the electrical angular velocity.
Construct extended flux linkage terms ψα1 and ψβ1 :

uα1 = ψ f cos θ
(
. (32)
uβ1 = ψ f sin θ

The extended flux linkage term is used to represent the permanent magnet synchronous motor
model: (
uα = (R + Dl)iα + Dψα1
. (33)
uβ = (R + DL)iβ + Dψβ1
h iT
Order x = ψαβ1 = ψα1 ψβ1 , a new equation of state is available:
( .
x = Ax + Bu
. (34)
y = Cx

 " #
0 −ωe
ω

A = J =

e

ωe




 0
 " #

 0 0
B=O= . (35)

0 0




 " #
0 −ωe


 C = ωe J = ωe



0


The relationship between the stator flux linkage and the extended flux linkage is:

ψα = Liα + ψα1
(
. (36)
ψβ = Liβ + ψβ1

The electromagnetic torque equation is:

h i h iT
Tem = 1.5pn ψα ψβ JT iα iβ . (37)

The output y of the system can be measured, so the minimum-order state observer is designed to
observe the extended flux linkage. The observer model is:
. .
x̂ = Ax + Bu + K[ y − ŷ], (38)

where: K is the state observer feedback matrix. The state observer is constructed according to the state
equation, and the state variable is selected as the extended flux linkage ψαβ1 .

x = ψαβ1
(
. . (39)
x = Dψαβ1
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 9 of 18

According to the above formula, the minimum-order state observer of the extended flux linkage is:
 .


 x̂ = Dψ̂αβ1


 = ŷ + K( y − ŷ)
. (40)

= ωe Jψ̂αβ1 + K(uαβ − Rs iαβ − LDiαβ − ωJψ̂αβ1 )





 ŷ = ωe Jx̂ = ωe Jψ̂αβ1


The error equation for the state observer is:

Dψ
eαβ1 = (A − KC)(x̂ − x)
(41)
= ω(1 − K) J (ψ̂αβ1 − ψαβ1 )

where: ψ eαβ1 to expand the observation error of the observation flux linkage.
It can be seen from the above formula that by performing pole placement on the feedback matrix
K, the state observer based on the extended flux linkage can be converged, and the convergence speed
is guaranteed to be within a reasonable range.

4.2. The Current Advanced Angle

Whether the motor enters the weak magnetic region is related to the DC bus voltage on the
inverter side. Therefore, when the field weakening is controlled, the current lead angle is also related
to the DC bus voltage [34]. When the output voltage of the inverter reaches the maximum value,
the current conduction angle starts to appear. By controlling the difference between the voltage of
the motor stator terminal and the voltage of the bus on the side of the inverter, the weak magnetic
conduction angle can be adjusted to realize the stator current redistribution [35]. For redistribution,
the current regulator regains the ability to control the current vector run trajectory, allowing the motor
to reach higher speeds.
In theory, the maximum output voltage of the inverter is:

U
Um = √dc . (42)
3

Udc is the DC bus voltage of the inverter. When Us < Um , the PI controller is saturated and the
current lead angle is equal to zero. In Figure 3, the current command can be decomposed into a
cross-axis current and a direct-axis current.

id ∗ = −is sin β. (43)

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW iq ∗ = is cos β. (44)

10 of 19

Figure 3. Space vector permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) diagram.

Figure 3. Space vector permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) diagram.

id * = −is sin β . (43)

iq * = is cos β . (44)
 Figure 3. Space vector permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) diagram.

id * = −is sin β . (43)

Energies 2019, 12, 4526 iq * = is cos β . (44)10 of 18

The stator terminal voltage ud and uq output from the current regulator is made to be different
fromThe stator terminal
the maximum voltagevoltage ud andfrom
Um output uq output from the
the inverter. current
Their regulator
deviation valueisismade
usedtoasbethedifferent
control
from the maximum voltage
amount of the PI regulator, and U m the output value is the current lead angle value. When thecontrol
output from the inverter. Their deviation value is used as the stator
amount
terminal of the PI is
voltage regulator,
less thanand thethe outputoutput
inverter value voltage
is the current lead angle
limit value, value.isWhen
the motor in thethe stator
constant
terminal voltageAtis this
torque region. less than
time,the
theinverter
inverteroutput
output voltage
voltage limit
canvalue,
trackthe
themotor
statorisvoltage
in the constant
output by torque
the
region. At this time, the inverter output voltage can track the stator voltage output
current controller in real time, the deviation is zero, and the current lead angle is also zero. When by the current
controller
the currentincontroller
real time,output
the deviation is zero, and
stator terminal the current
voltage lead
is greater angle
than theisinverter
also zero. When
output the current
voltage limit
controller output stator terminal voltage is greater than the inverter output
value, the output lead angle is a negative value, and the motor enters a constant power weak voltage limit value, the
output
magneticlead angle is a negative value, and the motor enters a constant power weak magnetic state.
state.
The overall control strategy structure
structure isis shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 4:
4:

Figure 4.
Figure Improved FW
4. Improved FW operation
operation control
control strategy.
strategy.

The PI speed controller outputs the stator current through the cross-axis current conversion
The PI speed controller outputs the stator current through the cross-axis current conversion
outputs id** and iq** . At the base speed, the maximum torque current ratio control is adopted. When
outputs id and iq . At the base speed, the maximum torque current ratio control is adopted. When
the motor speed reaches the rated speed and the current regulator output reference voltage is greater
the motor speed reaches the rated speed and the current regulator output reference voltage is
than the inverter output voltage limit value, the output lead angle is used to perform the real-time
greater than the inverter output voltage limit value, the output lead angle is used to perform the
redistribution control of the stator current. The motor runs in the field weakening area. In this system,
the current control loop enabled the current to closely track changes in its given voltage. When the
motor is overloaded, it is guaranteed to obtain the maximum current allowed by the motor, thus
speeding up the dynamic process. The speed outer ring is the dominant regulator of the speed control
system, which has an anti-interference effect on the load change, and can reduce the speed error in
steady state.

5. System Simulation Experiment

During the simulation and testing, the modulation parameters of the current controller are set at
α1 = 4520 and α2 = 1920. The PMSM parameters used are shown in Table 1.
Set the motor speed to 3000 r/min, the load torque was 20 N·m in 0–10 s and increased to 70 N·m
when t = 10 s. Figures 5–7 show the simulation comparison of the traditional decoupling control and
the improved field weakening control. Based on the comparison that compared the traditional control
method, the control strategy designed in this paper had faster speed response and current response
speed, along with improved dynamic tracking properties.
 at α1 = 4520 and α2 = 1920. The PMSM parameters used are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Parameters of PMSM.

Parameter Value
Rated power/(kW) 30
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 11 of 18
Rated speed/(r/min) 2000
Polar logarithm 4
MomentTable
of inertia /(kg·m2)
1. Parameters of PMSM.0.18
Ld, Lq/(mH) 0.13, 0.33
Parameter
Permanent magnet flux Value
0.062
linkage/(Wb)
Rated power/(kW) 30
Rated speed/(r/min) 2000
Set the motor speed to 3000 Polar
r/min,logarithm
the load torque was 20 N·m in 0–10 4 s and increased to 70 N·m
when t = 10 s. Figures 5, 6Moment
and 7 show the
of inertia/(kg·m ) 2
simulation comparison of
0.18 the traditional decoupling
Ld , Lq /(mH)control. Based on the
control and the improved field weakening comparison
0.13, 0.33 that compared the
Permanent
traditional control method, magnet
the control flux linkage/(Wb)
strategy 0.062
designed in this paper had faster speed response and
current response speed, along with improved dynamic tracking properties.

(a) Traditional FW control

(b) Improved FW control

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Figure5.5.Speed
Figure Speed response
response curve.
curve. 12 of 19

(a) Traditional FW control

(b) Improved FW control

Figure
Figure 6. 6.The
Thecurrent
currentresponse
response curve
curveofofthe
thed-axis.
d-axis.
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 (b) Improved FW control 12 of 18
Figure 6. The current response curve of the d-axis.

(a) Traditional FW control

(b) Improved FW control

Figure
Figure 7. 7.The
Thecurrent
current response
response curve
curveofofthe q-axis.
the q-axis.

6. Development of the
6. Development System
of the Experiment
System ExperimentPlatform
Platform
The system
The system experiment
experiment platform
platform is mainly
is mainly composed composed of a motor
of a PMSM, PMSM, motor controller,
controller, dynamometer
dynamometer and measurement and control system. The platform can complete the collection
and measurement and control system. The platform can complete the collection of vital information of
vital information such as torque, rotation, voltage and current curve and power of the motor. Figure
such as torque, rotation, voltage and current curve and power of the motor. Figure 8 is the experimental
8 is the experimental platform of the motor drive control system.
platform of12,
Energies 2019, thex FOR
motor drive
PEER control system.
REVIEW 13 of 19

Figure
Figure 8.
8. Test
Test platform.
platform.

Set the motor speed to 3000 r/min, the load torque was 20 N·m in 0–10 s and increased to 70 N·m
when t == 10 s. the
the current
current and
and speed
speed response
response curves
curves of of the
the traditional
traditional and
and the improved field
weakening control strategy are shown in Figures
Figures 99 and
and 10.
10. When compared, the improved field
response and
weakening control had a faster response and reduced
reduced system
system chattering.
chattering.
 Figure 8. Test platform.

Set the motor speed to 3000 r/min, the load torque was 20 N·m in 0–10 s and increased to 70 N·m
when t = 10 s. the current and speed response curves of the traditional and the improved field
weakening
Energies control strategy are shown in Figures 9 and 10. When compared, the improved field
2019, 12, 4526 13 of 18
weakening control had a faster response and reduced system chattering.

(a) Traditional FW control

(b) Improved FW control

Energies 2019, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Figure9.9.Speed

Figure Speed response
response curve.
curve. 14 of 19

(a) Traditional FW control

(b) Improved FW control

Figure
Figure 10.10.Current
Currentresponse
response curve
curveof
ofthe
thed–q
d–qaxis.
axis.

When the load torque was 20 N·m and the motor increased from standstill to 3000 r/min, the
speed response curves of the two strategies are shown in Figures 11 and 12. When compared, the
improved field weakening control strategy had a faster speed response and the jitter was
substantially eliminated.
 (b) Improved FW control

Energies 2019, 12, 4526 Figure 10. Current response curve of the d–q axis. 14 of 18

When the load torque was 20 N·m and the motor increased from standstill to 3000 r/min, the
When the load
speed response torque
curves of was 20 N·m
the two and theare
strategies motor increased
shown from standstill
in Figures 11 and 12. toWhen
3000 r/min, the speed
compared, the
response curves of the two strategies are shown in Figures 11 and 12. When compared,
improved field weakening control strategy had a faster speed response and the jitter was the improved
field weakening
substantially control strategy had a faster speed response and the jitter was substantially eliminated.
eliminated.

Energies2019,
Energies 2019,12,
12,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW Traditional FW
Figure 11. Traditional FW speed
speed response
response curve.
curve. 15 of
15 of 19
19

Figure12.
Figure
Figure 12.Improved
12. FWspeed
Improved FW
FW speedresponse
speed responsecurve.
response curve.
curve.

Figures
Figures 13
Figures 13 and
13 and
and 1414 show
14 show the
show the current
the current jitter
current jitter curves
jitter curves
curves forfor
for two
two control
two controlstrategies.
control The
strategies. The
strategies. traditional
The traditional field
traditional field
field
weakening control
weakening control
weakening strategy
control strategy had
strategy had obviously
had obviously current
obviously current jitter
current jitter with
jitter with a high
with aa highrisk
high risk of losing
risk of control.
of losing The
losing control. jitter
control. The
The jitterof
jitter
this
of strategy
ofthis
this strategywas
strategy small
was
was and
small
small thethe
and
and stability
the of of
stability
stability the system
ofthe
the system
system was high.
was
was high.
high.

Figure 13.
Figure13.
Figure Traditional
13.Traditional FW
TraditionalFW algorithm
FWalgorithm current
algorithmcurrent jitter
currentjitter curve.
jittercurve.
curve.
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 15 of 18
Figure 13. Traditional FW algorithm current jitter curve.

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Improved
Improved FW
FW current
current jitter
jitter curve.
curve.

When
When the the load
load torque
torque was
was 70 70 N·m
N·m andand the
the motor
motor increased
increased from
from standstill
standstill to
to 4000
4000 r/min,
r/min, the the
current
current dynamic
dynamic response
responsecurves
curvesof ofthe
the two
two control
controlstrategies
strategiesareareshown
shownin inFigures
Figures1515and
and16.
16. Before
Before
1.0
1.0 s,s, the
the motor
motor runsrunson onthe
theMTPA curve,ididand
MTPAcurve, andiqiq remained
remained basically
basically constant;
constant; 1.0–1.2s,
1.0–1.2s, the
the motor
motor
ran
ran inin the
the switching
switching rangerange between
between zone
zone II and
and zone
zone II;II; after
after 1.2
1.2 s,s,the
themotor
motorran
ranin
inzone II,idid and
zoneII, andiiqq
weakened
weakened magneticmagnetic force
force at
at aa constant
constant value.
value. The traditional
traditional flux weakening
weakening control
control strategy
strategy will will
Energies
have a
have a2019,2019,
sharp
sharp12, x FOR PEER
oscillation REVIEW
of d–q current during the weak magnetic acceleration phase. The 16
improved of 19
Energies 12, oscillation of d–q current during the weak magnetic acceleration phase. The improved
x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 19
field
field weakening
weakening control
control strategy
strategy cancan be
be smoothly
smoothly switched between the MTPA MTPA zone
zone and
and the
the field
field
weakening control
weakening control zone,
zone, ensuring
ensuring aa stable
stable operation
operation of of the
the system
system at at full
full speed
speed and
and constant
constant power
power
output over
output over aa wide
wide speed
speed range.
range.

Figure 15.
Figure 15. The
The current
current dynamic
dynamic response
response curve
curve of
of traditional
traditional FW
FW at
at the
the d–q
d–q axis.
axis.

Figure
Figure 16. The
16. The current
The current response
current response curve
curve of
response curve of improved
improved FW
FW at
at the
the d–q
d–q axis.
axis.
Figure 16. of improved FW at the d–q axis.

Figure 17
Figure 17 shows
shows the
the efficiency
efficiency and
and speed
speed curve
curve for
for the
the rated
rated conditions.
conditions. In
In the
the field
field weakening
weakening
control zone,
control zone, this
this is
is when
when the
the speed
speed exceeded
exceeded 2000
2000 r/min
r/min and
and the
the working
working efficiency
efficiency of
of the
the motor
motor
was always above and below 96%, which fully met the efficiency requirements of
was always above and below 96%, which fully met the efficiency requirements of the PMSM inthe PMSM in the
the
field weakening control zone.
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 16 of 18
Figure 16. The current response curve of improved FW at the d–q axis.

Figure
Figure 17
17 shows
shows the
the efficiency
efficiencyand
andspeed
speedcurve
curvefor
forthe
therated
ratedconditions.
conditions. In
In the
the field
field weakening
weakening
control
control zone, this is when the speed exceeded 2000 r/min and the working efficiency ofmotor
zone, this is when the speed exceeded 2000 r/min and the working efficiency of the was
the motor
always aboveabove
was always and below 96%, 96%,
and below whichwhich
fully fully
met the
metefficiency requirements
the efficiency of theofPMSM
requirements the PMSMin thein
field
the
weakening control
field weakening zone. zone.
control

Figure 17.
Figure 17. Efficiency/speed
Efficiency/speed characteristic
characteristiccurve.
curve.

7.
7. Conclusions
Conclusion
This
Thisstudy
studyproposed
proposeda field weakening
a field control
weakening strategy
control based
strategy on feedback
based linearization.
on feedback By using
linearization. By
the principle of feedback linearization, the current controller selected a suitable feedback
using the principle of feedback linearization, the current controller selected a suitable feedback linear
transformation and input transformation for a nonlinear PMSM system, so that the mathematical
model of the system was linear relative to the new output. Decoupling control of d–q axis current was
realized in a wide working area by using the flux linkage information of the motor without losing the
controllability and accuracy of the system. In order to widen the motor speed regulation range and
reduce the difficulty of algorithm implementation, the flux weakening control of PMSM was realized
by using the current lead angle control method. Simulation and experimental results show that the
system had strong robustness against load disturbances and obtains good steady characteristics and
dynamic tracking performances.

Author Contributions: K.Z. and M.A. conceived and designed the experiments; D.S. performed the experiments;
N.J. analyzed the data; X.W. wrote the paper.
Funding: This research was funded by University Nursing Program for Young Scholars with Creative Talents in
Heilongjiang Province [UNPYSCT-2017099].
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
PMSM permanent magnet synchronous motor
DC direct current
FW flux weakening
DFVC direct flux vector control
DTC direct torque control
MTPV maximum torque per voltage
CPSR constant power speed ratio
PI proportional-integral
MFPT minimum flux per torque
MTPA maximum torque per ampere
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 17 of 18

References
1. Gu, W.; Zhu, X.; Quan, L.; Du, Y. Design and Optimization of Permanent Magnet Brushless Machines for
Electric Vehicle Applications. Energies 2015, 8, 13996–14008. [CrossRef]
2. Liu, X.; Chen, H.; Zhao, J.; Belahcen, A. Research on the Performances and Parameters of Interior PMSM
Used for Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 3533–3545. [CrossRef]
3. Fodorean, D.; Sarrazin, M.M.; Marţiş, C.S.; Anthonis, J.; Van der Auweraer, H. Electromagnetic and Structural
Analysis for a Surface-Mounted PMSM Used for Light-EV. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 2892–2899. [CrossRef]
4. Shinohara, A.; Inoue, Y.; Morimoto, S.; Sanada, M. Maximum Torque Per Ampere Control in Stator Flux
Linkage Synchronous Frame for DTC-Based PMSM Drives without Using q-Axis Inductance. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 2017, 53, 3663–3671. [CrossRef]
5. Hoang, K.D.; Aorith, H.K.A. Online Control of IPMSM Drives for Traction Applications Considering Machine
Parameter and Inverter Nonlinearities. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2015, 1, 312–325. [CrossRef]
6. Zhang, Z.; Ge, X.; Tian, Z.; Zhang, X.; Tang, Q.; Feng, X. A PWM for Minimum Current Harmonic Distortion
in Metro Traction PMSM with Saliency Ratio and Load Angle Constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017,
33, 4498–4511. [CrossRef]
7. Liang, W.; Wang, J.; Luk, P.C.; Fang, W.; Fei, W. Analytical Modeling of Current Harmonic Components in
PMSM Drive with Voltage-Source Inverter by SVPWM Technique. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2014, 29, 673–680.
[CrossRef]
8. Yamamoto, K.; Shinohara, K.; Nagahama, T. Characteristics of permanent-magnet synchronous motor driven
by PWM inverter with voltage booster. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2004, 40, 1145–1152. [CrossRef]
9. Zhong, Q.C.; Rees, D. Control of uncertain LTI systems based on an uncertainty and disturbance estimator.
ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 2004, 126, 905–910. [CrossRef]
10. Gu, X.; Li, T.; Li, X.; Zhang, G.; Wang, Z. An Improved UDE-Based Flux-Weakening Control Strategy for
IPMSM. Energies 2019, 12, 4077. [CrossRef]
11. Lin, F.J.; Sun, I.F.; Yang, K.J.; Chang, J.K. Recurrent Fuzzy Neural Cerebellar Model Articulation Network
Fault-Tolerant Control of Six-Phase Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Position Servo Drive. IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst. 2016, 24, 153–167. [CrossRef]
12. Yu, J.; Chen, B.; Yu, H.; Lin, C.; Ji, Z.; Cheng, X. Position tracking control for chaotic permanent magnet
synchronous motors via indirect adaptive neural approximation. Neurocomputing 2015, 156, 245–251. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, T.; Huang, J.; Ye, M.; Chen, J.; Kong, W.; Kang, M.; Yu, M. An EMF Observer for PMSM Sensorless
Drives Adaptive to Stator Resistance and Rotor Flux-linkage. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron 2019,
in press. [CrossRef]
14. Zhou, K.; Ai, M.; Sun, Y.; Wu, X.; Li, R. PMSM Vector Control Strategy Based on Active Disturbance Rejection
Controller. Energies 2019, 12, 3827. [CrossRef]
15. Andersson, A.; Thiringer, T. Assessment of an Improved Finite Control Set Model Predictive Current
Controller for Automotive Propulsion Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 67, 91–100. [CrossRef]
16. Cortes, P.; Kazmierkowski, M.P.; Kennel, R.M.; Quevedo, D.E.; Rodriguez, J. Predictive Control in Power
Electronics and Drives. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2008, 55, 4312–4324. [CrossRef]
17. Chai, S.; Wang, L.; Rogers, E. A Cascade MPC Control Structure for a PMSM with Speed Ripple Minimization.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2013, 60, 2978–2987. [CrossRef]
18. Lin, C.K.; Yu, J.T.; Lai, Y.S.; Yu, H.C. Improved Model-Free Predictive Current Control for Synchronous
Reluctance Motor Drives. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 3942–3953. [CrossRef]
19. Inoue, Y.; Morimoto, S.; Sanada, M. Comparative Study of PMSM Drive Systems Based on Current Control
and Direct Torque Control in Flux-Weakening Control Region. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2012, 48, 2382–2389.
[CrossRef]
20. Foo, G.H.B.; Zhang, X. Robust Direct Torque Control of Synchronous Reluctance Motor Drives in the
Field-Weakening Region. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 32, 1289–1298. [CrossRef]
21. Pellegrino, G.; Bojoi, R.I.; Guglielmi, P. Unified Direct-Flux Vector Control for AC Motor Drives. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 2011, 47, 2093–2102. [CrossRef]
22. Yousefi-Talouki, A.; Pescetto, P.; Pellegrino, G. Sensorless Direct Flux Vector Control of Synchronous
Reluctance Motors Including Standstill, MTPA, and Flux Weakening. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2017, 53,
3598–3608. [CrossRef]
Energies 2019, 12, 4526 18 of 18

23. Liu, H.; Zhu, Z.; Mohamed, E.; Fu, Y.; Qi, X. Flux-Weakening Control of Nonsalient Pole PMSM Having
Large Winding Inductance, Accounting for Resistive Voltage Drop and Inverter Nonlinearities. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2012, 27, 942–952. [CrossRef]
24. Jung, S.Y.; Mi, C.C.; Nam, K. Torque Control of IPMSM in the Field-Weakening Region with Improved
DC-Link Voltage Utilization. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 3380–3387. [CrossRef]
25. Zhang, X.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, Y. Model Predictive Current Control for PMSM Drives with Parameter
Robustness Improvement. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2019, 34, 1645–1657. [CrossRef]
26. Mohseni, M.; Islam, S.M.; Masoum, M.A.S. Impacts of symmetrical and asymmetrical voltage sags
ondfig-based wind turbines considering phase-angle jump, voltage recovery, and sag parameters. IEEE Trans.
Power Electron. 2011, 26, 1587–1598. [CrossRef]
27. Wang, W.; Zhang, J.; Cheng, M. Line-modulation-based flux-weakening control for permanent-magnet
synchronous machines. IET Power Electron. 2018, 11, 930–936. [CrossRef]
28. Lai, G.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, C.L.P.; Xie, S.; Liu, Y. Fuzzy Adaptive Inverse Compensation Method to
Tracking Control of Uncertain Nonlinear Systems with Generalized Actuator Dead Zone. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy
Syst. 2017, 25, 191–204. [CrossRef]
29. Inoue, T.; Inoue, Y.; Morimoto, S.; Sanada, M. Maximum Torque per Ampere Control of a Direct Torque-
Controlled PMSM in a Stator Flux Linkage Synchronous Frame. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 2630–2637.
[CrossRef]
30. Mynar, Z.; Vesely, L.; Vaclavek, P. PMSM Model Predictive Control with Field-Weakening Implementation.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 5156–5166. [CrossRef]
31. Jo, C.; Seol, J.Y.; Ha, I.J. Flux-Weakening Control of IPM Motors with Signifificant Effffect of Magnetic
Saturation and Stator Resistance. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2008, 55, 1330–1340.
32. Schoonhoven, G.; Uddin, M.N. MTPA- and FW-Based Robust Nonlinear Speed Control of IPMSM Drive
Using Lyapunov Stability Criterion. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 4365–4374. [CrossRef]
33. Dong, Z.; Yu, Y.; Li, W.; Wang, B.; Xu, D. Flux-Weakening Control for Induction Motor in Voltage Extension
Region: Torque Analysis and Dynamic Performance Improvement. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65,
3740–3751. [CrossRef]
34. Ren, B.; Zhong, Q.C.; Chen, J. Robust Control for a Class of Nonaffine Nonlinear Systems Based on the
Uncertainty and Disturbance Estimator. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 5881–5888. [CrossRef]
35. Zhang, Z.; Wang, C.; Zhou, M.; You, X. Flux-Weakening in PMSM Drives: Analysis of Voltage Angle Control
and the Single Current Controller Design. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2019, 7, 437–445. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).