IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO.

9, SEPTEMBER 2018 6901

A New Adaptive SMO for Speed Estimation of

Sensorless Induction Motor Drives at Zero and
Very Low Frequencies
Mohamed S. Zaky , Member, IEEE, Mohamed K. Metwaly , Haitham Z. Azazi , and Said A. Deraz

Abstract—A speed control of sensorless induction motor are essential to be mounted on the rotor shaft for position and
(IM) drives at zero and very low frequencies is designed in speed information [1]. However, the position encoder leads to
this paper. A new adaptive sliding mode observer (SMO) extra cost, larger size, and extra wiring of IM drives, and limits
to estimate the stator current, rotor flux, and rotor speed
is proposed. To improve the robustness and accuracy of their applications in a relatively harsh environment. In recent
an adaptive SMO during very low frequency operation, the years, the development of sensorless IM drives without position
sliding mode flux observer uses independent gains of the encoders or sensors has become more and more popular due to
correction terms. The gains of current and rotor flux SMOs their advantages of minimizing production costs and develop-
are designed using Lyapunov stability theory to guarantee
ing a reliable and robust control system. Sensorless techniques
the stability and fast convergence of the estimated vari-
ables. A Lyapunov function candidate utilizing the error of are employed in hostile environments and also for emergency
rotor fluxes and speed estimation error is synthesized for operations in safety-critical applications in case of failure of the
speed estimation. Detailed simulations and experiments sensor. Currently, the sensorless control of IMs is possible due
are given showing the operation of the sensorless speed to the advances in digital signal processor (DSP), which allows
control at very low frequency. The results prove the
for implementing sophisticated control algorithms [2].
accuracy and robustness of the proposed adaptive SMO.
Also, comparison results with the state-of-the-art methods Current research efforts have concentrated on replacing the
prove that the proposed method shows excellent transient position encoder to produce sensorless drives without deterio-
and steady-state speed estimation, particularly at very low rating their dynamic performance. Several speed and position
and zero frequency operations. estimation methods of the sensorless drives have been presented.
Index Terms—Adaptive sliding mode observer (SMO) They are classified as machine model-based schemes and high-
gains, induction motors (IMs), observers, observability frequency signal injection schemes [2]–[4]. The high-frequency
issues, sensorless control, SMO, very low and zero signal injection schemes are independent of the machine model.
frequencies. So, these schemes are insensitive to parameters variation and
give an accurate speed and position estimation, particularly at
I. INTRODUCTION very low and zero stator frequencies. However, they cause high-
frequency noise which leads to system performance degrada-
HE induction motors (IMs) have attracted the research
T community in the field of electric motor drives. They are
characterized by robustness, ruggedness, simple construction,
tion; in addition, they require a special design [4].
Machine model-based schemes give accurate and robust
speed estimation at high and medium speeds. However, their
minimum cost, and low maintenance. Vector control theory has accuracy and robustness rely mainly on the accuracy of the
significantly improved the dynamic performance of IM drives as motor model for the good operation of the drive at very low
a separately excited dc motors. Thus, IM drives are employed in and zero stator frequencies [4]. For operation at very low stator
many applications which require precise control such as actua- frequency, machine model-based methods with more accurate
tion, robotics, and numerically controlled machinery and guided models and robust estimators continue to be researched to
manipulation. The correct knowledge of rotor position signal for increase their reliability in this operating region [2]–[3].
field orientation is required. Moreover, the precise speed signal Different schemes in the literature have been widely employed
for closed-loop control is needed; therefore, position encoders such as model reference adaptive system (MRAS) observers
[5], adaptive flux observer (AFO) [6]–[10], extend Kalman
Manuscript received May 16, 2017; revised July 27, 2017, October
4, 2017, and November 16, 2017; accepted December 21, 2017. Date filter [11], and sliding-mode observer (SMO) [12].
of publication January 15, 2018; date of current version May 1, 2018. SMO, as variable structure control, is one of these techniques
(Corresponding author: Mohamed Shaban Zaky.) that gained great attractiveness because of its robustness, insen-
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering, Menoufia University, Shebin El-Kom 32511, sitivity to parameters variation, simplicity, and ease of imple-
Egypt (e-mail: mszaky78@yahoo.com; mohkamel2007@yahoo.com; mentation [13]. MRAS speed-estimation methods that are based
haitham_azazi@yahoo.com; saidderaz@yahoo.com). on SMO have been introduced in [14] to improve the estimation
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. accuracy of classic MRAS scheme.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2018.2793206

0278-0046 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
6902 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

Speed and flux estimation schemes based on adaptive SMO

have been reported in [15]–[20]. These schemes utilize sliding
surfaces which incorporate stator-current errors in flux estima-
tion. Generally, the adaptive SMO schemes use a time-variable
IM model for flux estimation. This model includes a speed-
dependent term. So, the observer needs to be a speed adaptive.
The estimated speed of these adaptive methods is considered
the final stage of the estimation procedure. Therefore, the errors
in the estimated speed due to parameters mismatch and noises
reflect directly on the rotor flux estimation, and consequently,
decrease the accuracy of flux and speed estimators. These unde-
sirable effects worsen the drive performance, particularly at very
low and zero stator frequencies, since the fundamental excita-
Fig. 1. Block diagram of IFOC of the speed controlled sensorless IM
tion is low. A solution to these issues is to employ nonadaptive drive with the proposed SMO-based speed observer.
observers. SMO and controller for sensorless direct torque con-
trol (DTC) of IM drives have been presented in [15], [16]. In
these works, the flux estimation was based on nonadaptive SMO. and p is the time derivative operator.
Inherently sensorless observers, without speed adaptation for a The electromechanical equation can be introduced as
wide-speed-range operation, have been presented and compared
in [17], [18]. dωr
Te = Jm + Bm ωr + TL (2)
Usually, the sensorless IM drives-based SMO are considered dt
as a speed adaptive observer. In this adaptive observer, SMO where the electromagnetic torque is expressed as
employs discontinuous correction terms using the current esti-
mation error. Therefore, the errors in the estimated speed reflect 3 P Lm  s s
Te = · iq s λdr − isds λsq r (3)
on flux estimation and degrade the estimation accuracy. Unlike 2 2 Lr
the works in [19], [20], this paper uses a current model-based
s
SMO for speed and flux observers to improve their estimations. where vss = [ vds vqss ]T is the stator voltage vector,
This can be realized by designing the flux estimation algorithm iss = [ isds isq s ]T is the stator current vector,
with a correction term using current estimation error with sep- isr = [ isdr isq r ]T is the rotor current vector,
arate gains than those used for current estimation. These gains λss = [ λsds λsq s ]T is the stator flux vector,
are designed based on stability conditions of Lyapunov theory. λsr = [ λsdr λsq r ]T is the rotor flux vector,
This solution improves the estimation accuracy of both the rotor
Rs , Rr are the stator and rotor resistances, Lm , Ls , Lr are
flux and the speed through the operation at very low frequency.
the magnetizing inductance, the stator inductance, and the rotor
The indirect field oriented control (IFOC) for speed control of
inductance, respectively, ωr is the rotor speed, Jm is the moment
a sensorless IM drive using the proposed estimation algorithms
of inertia, Bm is the viscous friction, Te and TL are the motor
is built by MATLAB/ Simulink. A complete IM drive is
developed torque and the load torque.
executed in the laboratory by DSP-DS1103. The simulation and 2

experimental results are extensively presented under sensorless σ = 1 − LLs mL r is the leakage coefficient.
speed control performance to validate the effectiveness of the The block diagram of the proposed sensorless for IFOC of
suggested estimation and control algorithms. the IM is shown in Fig. 1.

II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF IM III. DESIGN OF AN SMO

The IM is described in a stationary reference frame using the A. Structure of an SMO
stator current and rotor flux as [20] Using the IM model described in (1) with taken the stator
⎫
pisds = bvdss
+ aisds + cλsdr + dωr λsq r (a) ⎪ currents as the system outputs, the SMO in a stationary reference
⎪
⎪
⎪ frame is designed as follows:
pisq s = bvqss + aisq s + cλsq r − dωr λsdr (b) ⎬
(1) ⎫
(c) ⎪ pîsds = bvds + aîsds + cλ̂sdr + dω̂r λ̂sq r + K1 ld (a) ⎪
s
pλsdr = gisds − ωr λsq r − f λsdr ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎭ ⎪
⎪
pλsq r = gisq s + ωr λsdr − f λsq r (d) pîq s = bvq s + aîq s + cλ̂q r − dω̂r λ̂dr + K2 lq (b) ⎬
s s s s s
(4)
where pλ̂sdr = g îsds − ω̂r λ̂sq r − f λ̂sdr − K3 ld (c) ⎪
⎪
⎪
  ⎪
⎪
⎭
Rs L2m 1 1 Lm pλ̂sq r = g îsq s + ω̂r λ̂sdr − f λ̂sq r − K4 lq (d)
a=− + , c= , d= , g=
σLs σLs Tr Lr εTr ε Tr
where K1 , K2 , K3 , and K4 are the current and flux observer
σLs Lr 1 L2 Lr 1 gains, ld = sgn(eid ), lq = sgn(eiq ), eid = îsds − isds and eiq =
ε= , b= , σ = 1 − m , Tr = , f=
Lm σLs Ls Lr Rr Tr îsq s − isq s , respectively.
ZAKY et al.: NEW ADAPTIVE SMO FOR SPEED ESTIMATION OF SENSORLESS INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES AT ZERO AND VERY LOW FREQUENCIES 6903

The error equations are derived by subtracting (1) from (4) the following inequalities:
under the assumption that motor parameters are accurate  ⎫
 
⎫ K1 < − ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr ⎪⎬
peid = aeid + ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr + K1 ld (a) ⎪
⎪   . (8a)
⎪  ⎪
⎪
⎪ K2 < − ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr ⎭
peiq = aeiq + ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr + K2 lq (b) ⎬
.
peλd = eeid − ωr eλq − λ̂sq r Δωr − f eλd − K3 ld (c) ⎪
⎪
⎪
To fulfill the inequality of (8a), the values of K1 and K2 can
⎪
⎪ be designed as given in the following equation:
⎭
peλq = eeiq + ωr eλd + λ̂sdr Δωr − f eλq − K4 lq (d) ⎧  ⎫
⎪  
(5) ⎨K1 = k1 − ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr ⎪ ⎬
The stability analysis of this system can be considered to   (8b)
determine the observer gains K1 and K2 of the current estima- ⎩K2 = k2 − ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr ⎪
⎪ ⎭
tors to guarantee the occurrence of the sliding surface ei = 0.
Then, the observer gains K3 and K4 of the flux estimators are where k1 and k2 are negative numbers (k1 = −10 and k2 =
determined. −0.25). They are selected for initial conditions where the system
Proof 1: Define a Lyapunov function candidate as starts with zero states and to fulfill the inequality of (8a).
Assumption: In practical applications where the actual speed
1 2 1 and rotor fluxes are not available, the following assumptions can
V = eid + e2iq . (6)
2 2 be used for calculation of the gains K1 and K2 .
1) The estimated speed ω̂r replaces the actual one ωr for
The derivative is derived as calculation of the gains K1 and K2 . This is due to that
the proposed SMO proves its effectiveness and accuracy
V̇ = eid ėid + eiq ėiq under different operating conditions. A good convergence
⎧ ⎫
⎪ between the actual and estimated speeds is maintained.
⎨eid aeid + ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr + K1 ld ⎪
⎬
2) The actual fluxes λsdr and λsq r are calculated based on the
=  .
⎪
⎩eiq aeiq + ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr + K2 lq ⎪⎭ measured stator currents and the estimated speed instead
of the actual speed using (1c) and (1d).
(7a) 3) Since, the stability of the speed estimator based on the
designed gains is guaranteed. So, the convergence of Δωr
The conditions of a stable current estimator based on Lya- to zero is ensured. This agrees with the physical interpre-
punov stability criterion are maintained when a positive definite tation that, at steady state, the speed error is accurately
Lyapunov function has a negative definite first derivative. equal to zero, since ω̂r is set equal to ωr . Also, the simula-
The two terms eid aeid and eiq aeiq are negative since a is tion and experimental tests confirm that speed estimation
negative. Therefore, the following two terms of V̇ should be error Δωr is very small and can be neglected. So, it is
negative to ensure a stable current estimator based on a Lya- assumed that Δωr  0.
punov theory Then, for practical implementation, (8b) becomes
⎧  ⎫  
⎨eid ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr + K1 ld < 0⎪
⎪ ⎬ K1 = k1 − |ceλd + dω̂r eλq |
. (8c)
 . (7b) K2 = k2 − |ceλq − dω̂r eλd |
⎩eiq ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr + K2 lq < 0⎪
⎪ ⎭
The sliding surface S is designed as
According to the sign of the two error signals eid and eiq , S (t) = ei = îss − iss = 0 (9)
the inequality (7b) has four cases: 1) if eid > 0 and eiq > 0,
2) if eid > 0 and eiq < 0, 3) if eid < 0 and eiq > 0, and 4) if while, the switching function of SMO can be introduced by
eid < 0 and eiq < 0. But, it should be noted that the change of 
∗
1, if ∗ > 0
the error signals causes a change in the sign of ld and lq , and sgn( ) = . (10)
consequently, the sign of the gains K1 and K2 is changed in −1, if ∗ < 0
(7b). So, the values of K1 and K2 are found to be the same in
the four cases. B. Current Estimation
To simplify the solution, the modulus of (7b) is applied as The dynamics of the SMO can be described by the equiv-
⎧    ⎫ alent control approach. The aim is to find the conditions such
⎪  
⎨ ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr  + |K1 ld | < 0⎪⎬ that the state trajectory stays on the switching surface S = 0.
   . (7c) The equivalent control can be created by defining that Ṡ = 0
⎩ ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr  + |K2 lq | < 0⎪
⎪ ⎭ is a necessary condition for the state trajectory to stay on the
switching surface S = 0 [21].
This condition can be fulfilled by selecting the observer gains On the sliding surface and using this principle, the estimated
K1 and K2 sufficiently large negative numbers in order to satisfy currents will converge to the actual ones, i.e., îss = iss . This
6904 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

means that S = Ṡ = 0. As a result of (9), one can obtain V̇ = eλd ėλd + eλq ėλq
 
ceλd + K1 ld
eid = ėid = 0 and eiq = ėiq = 0. (11) = eλd − f eλd − K3 ld
d
 
Therefore, if the current estimator gains K1 and K2 are prop- ceλq + K2 lq
+ eλq − f eλq − K4 lq
erly selected and configured, the sliding mode occurs in (9) d
along the manifolds eiq = îsq s − isq s = 0 and eid = îsds − isds =   
c K 1 ld
0. Then, in the sliding mode, the estimator error dynamics de- = eλd − f eλd + − K 3 ld
scribed in (5) behave as reduced-order dynamics, as given in the d d
  
following equation: c K 2 lq
+ eλq − f eλq + − K 4 lq (15)
⎫ d d
0 = ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr + K 1 ld (a) ⎪
⎪    
⎪
⎪ K1 K2
⎪ − K3 + eλq lq − K4 .
0 = ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr + K2 lq (b) ⎬ V̇ = eλd ld
d d
(16)
. (12)
peλd = −ωr eλq − λ̂sq r Δωr − f eλd − K3 ld (c) ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
To guarantee that V̇ is a negative definite, the two terms of V̇
⎭
peλq = ωr eλd + λ̂sdr Δωr − f eλq − K4 lq (d) should be negative. Then
 ⎫
eλd ld Kd1 − K3 < 0 ⎬
The reduced-order error dynamics are controlled only by the . (17a)
 
error of rotor fluxes eλd and eλq , because eid = ėid = 0 and eλq lq Kd2 − K4 < 0⎭
eiq = ėiq = 0. This is considered the main important feature
where the reduced-order error dynamics replace the full order Therefore, the following sufficient condition should be main-
error dynamics. So, (12) represents the reduced-order dynam- tained to select the gains K3 and K4 to guarantee V̇ < 0:

ics. From which, the flux error based on the equivalent control K3 > Kd1
approach (S = Ṡ = 0) can be determined, as given later in (19). . (17b)
After the sliding mode happens in eid = 0, the equivalent K4 > Kd2
control components ldeq and lqeq of the discontinuous functions The actual values of the gains K3 and K4 are designed as
ld and lq can be obtained using (12a) and (12b) as follows [21]: follows:

−1 ⎫ K3 = k3 + Kd1
ldeq = ceλd + dωr eλq + dλ̂sq r Δωr ⎪⎬ (17c)
K1 K4 = k4 + Kd2
−1  . (12e)
⎪
lqeq = ceλq − dωr eλd − dλ̂sdr Δωr ⎭ where k3 and k4 are positive numbers (k3 = 0.2 and k4 =
K2
0.005). They are selected for initial conditions where the system
Remark 1: starts with zero states and also to fulfil the inequality of (17b).
1) An important note is that the equivalent controls using Then, the time derivative of the Lyapunov function, (16), will
ldeq and lqeq are only for the analysis of the proposed be negative definite if the observer gains K3 and K4 are selected
SMO convergence. It is not necessary to obtain them in using (17c). Therefore, the equilibrium point of the flux errors
observer implementation [21]. eλd , eλq that are given in (12) will be exponentially stable.
2) The equivalent control approach makes that the observers
are reduced-order error dynamics. This reflects actually IV. SPEED OBSERVER
on the design of the rotor flux and the speed observers, as The error equations of (12) are arranged in matrix form as
shown in the current paper analysis and implementation. (18) to simplify the derivation of the speed equation
Proof 2: A Lyapunov function candidate is applied to exam- 
ine the stability of this system, and consequently, selecting the 0 = a11 eλ − Jdλ̂sr Δωr + Ki L (a)
(18)
flux observer gains K3 and K4 ėλ = J λ̂sr Δωr + a22 eλ + Kλ L (b)
where
1 1 a11 = cI − dωr J, a22 = −f I + ωr J
V = e2λd + e2λq . (13)
2 2    
K1 0 −K3 0
The time derivative of V gives Ki = , Kλ =
0 K2 0 −K4
   
V̇ = eλd ėλd + eλq ėλq  T 1 0 0 −1
  L = ld lq , I = , J= .
= eλd −ωr eλq − λ̂sq r Δωr − f eλd − K3 ld 0 1 1 0
  From (18), ėλ in a sliding phase becomes
+ eλq ωr eλd + λ̂sdr Δωr − f eλq − K4 lq (14)
ėλ = (a11 + a22 ) eλ − J λ̂sr Δωr Z + (Kλ + Ki ) L (19)
ZAKY et al.: NEW ADAPTIVE SMO FOR SPEED ESTIMATION OF SENSORLESS INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES AT ZERO AND VERY LOW FREQUENCIES 6905

where Z = (dI − I).

Equation (19) represents the characteristics of SMO during
the sliding phase and can be expressed as
Za11
ėλ = eλ − J λ̂sr Δωr Z + (Kλ + Ki ) L. (20)
d
Lyapunov stability theory must be applied to estimate the
speed.
Proof 3: The Lyapunov function candidate is selected as
1 T d Fig. 2. Block diagram of the new SMO structure for stator current, rotor
V = eλ eλ + Δωr2 . (21) flux, and rotor speed estimations.
2 2
The time derivative of (21) can be derived as
From which, the speed estimation algorithm can be expressed
dω̂r
V̇ = eTλ ėλ + dΔωr . (22) as
dt     
ω̂r = γ sgn îsds − isds · λ̂sq r − sgn îsq s − isq s · λ̂sdr dt.
In order to calculate V̇ , the values of eλ and ėλ should be first
calculated. (31)
From (18a), eλ can be given by A chattering of (31) is an inherent problem of the SMO be-
 cause of its discontinuous switching function. This is because
eλ = a−1
11 Jd λ̂ s
r Δω r − K i L . (23) that the relay action of SMO supposes a change between posi-
tive and negative values at zero time. But, such instant change
Substitution from (23) into (20), ėλ becomes of discontinuous switching of SMO cannot be achieved practi-
Za11 −1  cally due to a time delay. The main reasons of this finite-time
ėλ = a11 Jdλ̂sr Δωr − Ki L − J λ̂sr Δωr Z delay are due to control calculation, restriction of practical sen-
d
  sors, and dead time of inverter switches. These factors cause
−ZKi high-frequency oscillations or chattering of SMO [22], [23].
+ (Kλ + Ki ) L = + Kλ + Ki L = Z1 L
d This paper suggests a continuous switching function for SMO
(24) using a tan-sigmoid function instead of the discontinuous one. It
is considered a smoother than the saturation switching function
where Z1 = ( −ZdK i + Kλ + Ki ). and completely suppress the chattering problem.
Substitution from (23) and (24) in (22) gives A tan-sigmoid continuous switching function to replace the
dω̂r discontinuous one for chattering suppression and to attain the
V̇ = LT Z1T a−1 T T −1
11 Jdλ̂r Δωr − L Z1 a11 Ki L + dΔωr
s
trajectories of the system states on a switching surface S, is
dt
described by
= V̇1 + V̇2 (25)
2
F (s) = tansig (S) = − 1. (32)
where 1 + e−2S
The speed estimation of (31) becomes
V̇1 = −LT Z1T a−1
11 Ki L (26)     
dω̂r ω̂r = γ F îsds − isds · λ̂sq r − F îsq s − isq s · λ̂sdr dt.
V̇2 = LT Z1T a−1
11 Jdλ̂r Δωr + dΔωr
s
. (27)
dt (33)
A system is stable in the state space using Lyapunov stability Fig. 2 illustrates the schematic diagram of speed estimator.
theory if a positive definite Lyapunov function of the states has The stator currents are estimated using (4a) and (4b). Then, the
a negative definite first derivative. The condition of (25) being rotor fluxes are estimated using SMO from (4c) and (4d). The
negative definite will be satisfied if V̇1 < 0 and V̇2 = 0. current estimation error is employed to construct the sliding sur-
V̇1 < 0 is fulfilled by selecting face of SMO and to develop the switching control law. Finally,
the rotor speed is estimated from rotor fluxes and sliding mode
Z1T = −γa11 , γ > 0. (28) function using (33).
Using this assumption, the condition V̇2 = 0 yields
V. SENSORLESS SPEED CONTROL
dω̂r
0 = −LT γJdλ̂sr Δωr + dΔωr . (29) A. Experimental Drive Setup
dt
A control platform is designed and constructed in real time
The speed estimation algorithm can be obtained using (30) as to execute the practical validation of the sensorless IM using
dω̂r the new SMO. A schematic diagram of the experimental system
= γLT J λ̂sr . (30) is displayed in Fig. 3. Two current transducers are utilized for
dt
6906 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the experimental system of IFOC sensor-

less IM drive using DSP-DS1103 control board with SMO-based speed
estimation.

measuring the motor currents and sent to the DSP via A/D
ports for generating the pulsewidth modulation (PWM) pulses.
These pulses fed the gate of the inverter switches through an
interface circuit. An optional position signal is available from
an encoder with 1024 pulses resolution for comparison purpose
with the estimated position signal. The motor speed signal is
also obtained from the position encoder. It is employed only
for comparison with the estimated speed to verify the speed
estimator accuracy. IM rating and parameters can be found in
Table I, and speed controller parameters can be found in Table II
in the appendix. The IM is combined with a separately excited
dc generator for mechanical loading conditions.
Finally, IFOC of the sensorless IM drive using the pro-
posed SMO-based estimation algorithms of stator currents, ro-
tor fluxes, and rotor speed is carried out. Park’s reference frame
transformations and the calculations of PWM pulses are built in
MATLAB/Simulink.
To validate the proposed SMO-based speed estimation al-
gorithm, IFOC for a sensorless IM drive are constructed by
MATLAB/Simulink and implemented practically using a DSP- Fig. 4. Simulation and experimental results of sensorless speed con-
DS1103 control board. Extensive simulation and experimen- trol with rated load torque at zero speed. First subplot: Actual and
tal results are provided, particularly during very low and zero estimated speeds. Second subplot: Speed error. Third subplot: Load
current. Fourth subplot: Stator currents in αβ frame. (a) Simulation.
speeds under sensorless speed control with the new SMO. The (b) Experimental.
IFOC scheme uses the estimated speed signal for the speed
control loop instead of the measured speed. The d and q axes
transformation is achieved using the estimated rotor flux an- that the sensorless drive shows a stable performance using the
gle. The operation of sensorless drives during very low and proposed SMO. Also, the simulation and experimental results
zero speeds are considered the main issues in state-of-the art are comparable.
observers. Therefore, the obtained results are presented under Although the performance during zero speed is attained using
these operating conditions. the new SMO, a speed estimation error is appeared. It is the
drawback of the proposed SMO method.
B. Performance at Zero Speed
The proposed SMO is examined during zero speed operation C. Performance at Zero and Very Low Speeds Under
under rated load torque, as presented in the results of Fig. 4. Sudden Load Disturbances
The first subplot shows actual and estimated speeds in rpm. Fig. 5 shows the simulation and experimental results with
The second subplot shows the speed error in rpm. The third the new SMO with suddenly load changes at zero speed. The
subplot provides load current in per unit value (p.u). The fourth reference speed is set at zero speed. A sudden variation of the
subplot gives the stator currents in αβ frame in p.u. It is observed rated load is applied at t = 7 s in simulations and t = 6 s in
ZAKY et al.: NEW ADAPTIVE SMO FOR SPEED ESTIMATION OF SENSORLESS INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES AT ZERO AND VERY LOW FREQUENCIES 6907

Fig. 5. Simulation and experimental results of sensorless speed control Fig. 6. Simulation and experimental results of sensorless speed control
with load change (TL = 0 → rated load torque→ 0) at zero speed. (a) with load change (TL = 0 → rated torque→ 0) at very low speed of 2
Simulation. (b) Experimental. r/min. (a) Simulation. (b) Experimental.

experiments, and removed at t = 43 s in simulations and t =

39 s in experiments. Also, the simulation and experimental re- D. Performance Under Step Speed Change and Speed
Reversal
sults under sudden load torque changes at very low speed are
provided in Fig. 6. The reference speed is set at 2 r/min. A To test the effectiveness of the proposed SMO, sudden speed
sudden change of the rated load is applied at t = 13 s in sim- change and speed reversal results at very low speed under full
ulations and t = 12 s in experiments, and removed at t = 45 s load operating condition are presented as shown in Fig. 7. The
in simulations and t = 41 s in experiments. As illustrated, the sensorless drive is operated at zero speed and at t = 6 s a step
estimated speed tracks the actual one smoothly. Also, the two change of reference speed from zero to 5 r/min is applied. The
speeds quickly follow the reference speed. Obviously, the speed sensorless speed drive is operated at speed reference 5 r/min,
estimation error decays rapidly to approximaltly zero after the and then a sudden reference speed change to −5 r/min is ap-
instant of application or removal the load torque. plied at t = 28 s in simulations and t = 26 s in experiments. As
Performance at zero speed, as shown in Fig. 5, is presented seen, the estimated speed tracks the reference and actual speeds
in comparison to the designed AFO as in [7, Fig. 9] and [24, smoothly. It is evident that the speed-sensorless IM drive using
Fig. 12]. This proves the effectiveness of the suggested SMO, the proposed SMO demonstrates a significant performance with
and also shows that the speed control of sensorless IM drives excellent estimation accuracy at zero speed and during very
operates well. low-speed reversals.
6908 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

Fig. 8. Experimental slow speed reversing showing reference, actual,

and estimated rotor speeds. (This figure is presented in comparison to
[25, Fig. 10]).

Fig. 9. Experimental results showing the operation at step speed

change at 10, 40, 70, and 100 rad/s. (This figure is presented in com-
parison to [26, Fig. 7]).

Fig. 7. Simulation and experimental results of sensorless speed con-

trol with rated load torque at step speed change and speed reversal at
5 r/min. (a) Simulation. (b) Experimental.
Fig. 10. Experimental results showing trapezoidal speed change. (This
figure is presented in comparison to [27, Fig. 12]).
VI. NOVELTY AND COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS WORKS
To verify the effectiveness of the proposed adaptive SMO,
a comparison with previous state-of-the art works is presented. The novelty of the proposed adaptive SMO is as follows.
Corresponding experimental results using the proposed adaptive 1) In terms of the performance, the proposed adaptive SMO
SMO to the previous works presented in [25]–[27] are shown is examined at very low and zero speeds and proved the
in Figs. 8–10, respectively. Fig. 8 shows experimental results efficiency in comparison to [20], [28] and gives compa-
at slow speed reversing in comparison to {Fig. 10 in [25]}. rable performance with [12], [15].
Experimental results showing the operation at step speed change 2) The rotor flux is designed with an independent correction
at 10 rad/s, 40 rad/s, 70 rad/s, and 100 rad/s in comparison to term. This allows for accurate rotor flux estimation. So,
[26, Fig. 7] are provided in Fig. 9. Experimental results showing the error in the speed estimation did not reflex on the rotor
trapezoidal speed change in comparison to [27, Fig. 12] are flux estimation as previous methods.
depicted in Fig. 10. It is evident that the sensorless drive with the 3) The gains of the stator current and rotor flux are designed
proposed adaptive SMO proves a substantial performance with in this paper using Lyapunov stability criterion. However,
excellent estimation accuracy in comparison to [25]–[27]. So, no design criteria for the gains of the previous SMO
the proposed adaptive SMO is comparable with previous works. algorithms were used as in [20], [27].
ZAKY et al.: NEW ADAPTIVE SMO FOR SPEED ESTIMATION OF SENSORLESS INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES AT ZERO AND VERY LOW FREQUENCIES 6909

Fig. 11. Experimental results showing the actual and estimated speeds
under the condition of loss of observability. (This figure is presented in
comparison to [40]).

VII. OBSERVABILITY ISSUES AT VERY LOW

AND ZERO SPEEDS

Many works were presented for speed estimation at low and

zero speeds [29]–[34]. The observability of the IM was dis-
cussed and studied in [35]–[39]. It was stated that the IM ob- Fig. 12. Variation of the adaptive observer gains under the speed tra-
servability cannot be ensured in a particular case when the speed jectory of Fig. 11. (a) K 1 and K 3 , (b) K 2 and K 4 .
and rotor fluxes are constants. In [16], the operating condition
was described by unobservability curve in the (TL , ωr ) plane.
Remark 2:
1) During the operation of the IM in the observable area,
the control state variables fulfill the regularly persistent
condition. Thus, asymptotic stability of SMO is ensured.
2) In the unobservable area of the IM, the control state
variables do not fulfill the regularly persistent condition.
Thus, asymptotic stability of the observer is not ensured,
while its practical stability can be assured [14], [16],
[39], [40].
Remark 3: Really, the stator currents are considered the mea-
sured variables to reconstruct the estimate of the other variables.
The high frequency effects of the unmodeled dynamics and the
noise in the measured current components (iα , iβ ) leads to a
practical stability. The adaptation of observer gains K1 and K2
plays a vital role in improving the speed estimation and stability
at very low and zero speeds as well.
It is important to validate the operation of SMO approach
in one point of the unobservability curve. The SMO approach
is tested to attain this particular case. A control benchmark to
evaluate the performances of the sensorless drive in high speed,
low speed, and very low speed (zero frequency at the unobserv-
able condition of IM) with nominal load is introduced, as given
in [14], [16], [39]–[41]. Fig. 11 illustrates the experimental
results of the actual and estimated speeds in comparison to the
previous works of [40]. It is found that proposed SMO in this Fig. 13. Simulation results showing the performance of the proposed
paper confirm practical stability when the loss of observability SMO under the effect of parameters variation during low speed of
10 r/min and rated load torque. (a) 50% step change of stator resis-
occurs. tance. (b) 50% step change of rotor resistance. (c) 50% step change of
The observer gains K1 , K2 , K3 , and K4 play an important mutual inductance.
role in the accuracy of the speed estimation and its stability. They
are selected according to (8) and (17c). The value of the observer
gains are functions of the system parameters and variables. gains with the change of the operating conditions. It is noted
To validate the adaptation of the observer gains K1 , K2 , K3 , that the values of K1 , K2 , K3 , and K4 are tuned to guarantee a
and K4 , Fig. 12 is provided to show the tuned values of these good estimation speed and stability.
6910 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 65, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2018

VIII. PERFORMANCE UNDER PARAMETERS VARIATION TABLE II

PARAMETERS OF SPEED CONTROLLER
To test performance of the proposed SMO under effect of pa-
rameters mismatch, Fig. 13 is provided. The sensorless IM drive Kp ω 1.8 Ki ω 9.9
system is running at 10 r/min and rated load torque. Fig. 13(a)
shows the performance under a stator resistance variation of
+50%. As seen, a speed estimation error between the actual
and estimated speeds is considered which dies out after 0.3 s. In
Fig. 13(b), a rotor resistance variation of +50% is considered. A
mutual inductance variation of −50% is presented in Fig. 13(c). REFERENCES
It is found that there is a change of the estimated and actual [1] J. W. Finch and D. Giaouris, “Controlled AC electrical drives,” IEEE
speeds due to variations of the rotor resistance and the mu- Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 481–491, Feb. 2008.
[2] M. Pacas, “Sensorless drives in industrial applications,” IEEE Ind. Elec-
tual inductance. However, the estimated speed tracks the actual tron. Mag., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 16–23, Jun. 2011.
one with a good convergence. As obvious, these results con- [3] C. S. Staines, C. Caruana, G. M. Asher, and M. Sumner, “Sensorless
firm the effectiveness of the proposed SMO under parameters control of induction machines at zero and low frequency using zero se-
quence currents,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 195–206,
variation. Feb. 2006.
Remark 4: Parameters variation in practical systems is con- [4] J. Holtz, “Sensorless control of induction machines—With or without
sidered very slow. Step changes in machine parameters are pro- signal injection?,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 7–30,
Feb. 2006.
vided in Fig. 13 for verification and investigation of the proposed [5] Y. B. Zbede, S. M. Gadoue, and D. J. Atkinson, “Model predictive MRAS
SMO. This reveals that as long as the proposed SMO is capable estimator for sensorless induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
of tracking the sudden variations in the machine parameters. tron., vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 3511–3521, Jun. 2016.
[6] Z. Yin, Y. Zhang, C. Du, J. Liu, X. Sun, and Y. Zhong, “Research on anti-
Therefore, it is able to track the slow variations of the actual error performance of speed and flux estimation for induction motors based
machine parameters. on robust adaptive state observer,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 63,
no. 6, pp. 3499–3510, Jun. 2016.
[7] M. Hinkkanen, “Analysis and design of full-order flux observers for sen-
sorless induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 5,
IX. CONCLUSION pp. 1033–1040, Oct. 2004.
[8] S. Suwankawin and S. Sangwongwanich, “Design strategy of an adaptive
In this paper, a new SMO for rotor speed estimation of the full-order observer for speed-sensorless induction-motor drives-tracking
speed sensorless control of the IM was designed. Lyapunov sta- performance and stabilization,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1,
bility analysis for stator current and rotor flux was considered pp. 96–119, Feb. 2006.
[9] L. Harnefors and M. Hinkkanen, “Complete stability of reduced-order and
to determine the observer gains of the current and flux estima- full-order observers for sensorless IM drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
tors to guarantee the occurrence of the sliding surface. In the vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1319–1329, Mar. 2008.
steady state, the estimator error dynamics behave as reduced- [10] B. Chen, T. Wang, W. Yao, K. Lee, and Z. Lu, “Speed convergence rate-
based feedback gains design of adaptive full-order observer in sensorless
order dynamics, and consequently, it is controlled only by the induction motor drives,” IET Elect. Power Appl., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 13–22,
error of rotor fluxes. So, the Laypunov function was selected 2014.
to estimate the speed. Simulation and experimental results con- [11] M. Barut, S. Bogosyan, and M. Gokasan, “Speed-sensorless estimation
for induction motors using extended Kalman filters,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
firmed the effectiveness of the new SMO for estimating the rotor Electron., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 272–280, Feb. 2007.
speed of the IM at very low and zero stator frequencies. It was [12] C. Lascu, I. Boldea, and F. Blaabjerg, “Very-low-speed variable-structure
found that the estimation accuracy of rotor speed is improved control of sensorless induction machine drives without signal injection,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 591–598, Mar./Apr. 2005.
at different operating conditions. Also, it was observed that the [13] A. Šabanovic, “Variable structure systems with sliding modes in motion
sensorless drive with the proposed adaptive SMO proves a good control—A survey,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 212–223,
performance in comparison to the previous works. But, since the May 2011.
[14] L. Zhao, J. Huang, H. Liu, B. Li, and W. Kong, “Second-order sliding mode
SMO algorithm is designed using the IM mathematical model, observer with online parameter identification for sensorless induction mo-
its observability is usually lost at zero stator frequency. Observ- tor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 5280–5289,
ability of the IM can be improved by additional stator voltage Oct. 2014.
[15] C. Lascu and G. D. Andreescu, “Sliding-mode observer and improved
change injection, which can be considered to be the future work. integrator with DC-offset compensation for flux estimation in sensorless-
controlled induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 3,
pp. 785–794, Jun. 2006.
APPENDIX [16] M. Ghanes and G. Zheng, “On sensorless induction motor drives: sliding-
mode observer and output feedback controller,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
TABLE I tron., vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 3404–3413, Sep. 2009.
RATED VALUES AND PARAMETERS OF THE IM [17] C. Lascu, I. Boldea, and F. Blaabjerg, “Comparative study of adaptive
and inherently sensorless observers for variable-speed induction-motor
drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 57–65, Feb. 2006.
Rated output power 5.5 kW Stator self-inductance 57.3 mH [18] C. Lascu, I. Boldea, and F. Blaabjerg, “A class of speed-sensorless sliding-
Rated voltage 186 V Rotor self-inductance 57.3 mH mode observers for high-performance induction motor drives,” IEEE
Rated frequency 50 Hz Mutual inductance 56.43 mH Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 3394–3403, Sep. 2009.
No. of pole pairs 2 Stator resistance 0.294 Ω [19] M. Comanescu, “Single and double compound manifold sliding mode
Rotor resistance 0.14325 Ω observers for flux and speed estimation of the induction motor drive,” IET
Elect. Power Appl., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 29–38, 2014.
[20] M. S. Zaky, M. M. Khater, S. S. Shokralla, and H. A. Yasin, “Wide-
speed-range estimation with online parameter identification schemes of
ZAKY et al.: NEW ADAPTIVE SMO FOR SPEED ESTIMATION OF SENSORLESS INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES AT ZERO AND VERY LOW FREQUENCIES 6911

sensorless induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 56, Mohamed Shaban Zaky (M’16) was born on
no. 5, pp. 1699–1707, May 2009. Jan. 11, 1978, in Menoufia, Egypt. He received
[21] Z. Yan and V. Utkin, “Sliding mode observers for: Electric machines - the B.Sc. (Hons.), M.Sc., and Ph.D. degrees in
an overview,” in Proc. IEEE 28th Annu. Conf. Ind. Electron. Soc., 2000, electrical engineering from Menoufia University,
pp. 1842–1847. Shebin El-Kom, Egypt, in 2001, 2005, and 2008,
[22] V. Utkin, “Sliding mode control design principles and applications to respectively.
electric drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 23–36, Since 2013, he has been an Assistant Profes-
Feb. 1993. sor with the Department of Electrical Engineer-
[23] J. Y. Hung, W. Gao, and J. C. Hung, “Variable structure control: A survey,” ing, Faculty of Engineering, Menoufia University.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 2–22, Feb. 1993. His research interests include control of electri-
[24] M. Hinkkanen and J. Luomi, “Stabilization of regenerating-mode op- cal machines, applications of power electronics,
eration in sensorless induction motor drives by full-order flux observer DSP-based real-time control, and sensorless control.
design,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1318–1328,
Dec. 2004.
[25] G. Edelbaher, K. Jezernik, and E. Urlep, “Low-speed sensorless con-
trol of induction machine,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 1,
pp. 120–129, Feb. 2006.
[26] R. P. Vieira, C. C. Gastaldini, R. Z. Azzolin, and H. A. Gründling,
“Discrete-time sliding mode speed observer for sensorless control of in-
duction motor drives,” IET Elect. Power Appl., vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 681–688, Mohamed K. Metwaly was born on Jan. 20,
2012. 1974, in Menoufia, Egypt. He received the B.Sc.
[27] A. Derdiyok, M. K. Güven, H.-ur Rehman, N. Inanc, and L. Xu, “Design (Hons.) and M.Sc. degrees in electrical engi-
and implementation of a new sliding-mode observer for speed-sensorless neering from the Department of Electrical Engi-
control of induction machine,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 49, no. 5, neering, Faculty of Engineering, Menoufia Uni-
pp. 1177–1182, Oct. 2002. versity, Shebin El-Kom, Egypt, in 1999 and 2003,
[28] W. C. A. Pereira et al., “Improved sensorless vector control of induction respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electri-
motor using sliding mode observer,” IEEE Latin Amer. Trans., vol. 14, cal engineering (with distinction) from the Vi-
no. 7, pp. 3110–3116, Jul. 2016. enna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria,
[29] M. S. Zaky, “Stability analysis of speed and stator Resistance estimators in 2009.
for sensorless induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 59, Since 2015, he has been an Assistant Pro-
no. 2, pp. 858–870, Feb. 2012. fessor with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engi-
[30] Z. Qu, M. Hinkkanen, and L. Harnefors, “Gain scheduling of a full-order neering, Menoufia University. His research interests include control of
observer for sensorless induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., ac machines, sensorless speed control techniques of ac machines, and
vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 3834–3845, Nov./Dec. 2014. digital signals processing.
[31] D. Stojić, M. Milinković, S. Veinović, and I. Klasnić, “Improved stator
flux estimator for speed sensorless induction motor drives,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 2363–2371, Apr. 2015.
[32] M. S. Zaky and M. K. Metwaly, “Sensorless torque/speed control of
induction motor drives at zero and low frequencies with stator and rotor
resistance estimations,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 4,
no. 4, pp. 1416–1429, Dec. 2016.
[33] M. Comanescu, “Design and implementation of a highly robust sensorless
sliding mode observer for the flux magnitude of the induction motor,” IEEE Haitham Z. Azazi was born on Oct. 1, 1979,
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 649–657, Jun. 2016. in Sharkia, Egypt. He received the B.Sc., M.Sc.,
[34] I. M. Alsofyani and N. R. N. Idris, “Simple flux regulation for improving and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from
state estimation at very low and zero speed of a speed sensorless di- Menoufia University, Shebin El-Kom, Egypt, in
rect torque control of an induction motor,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., 2003, 2008, and 2011, respectively.
vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 3027–3035, Apr. 2016. Since 2016, he has been an Assistant
[35] W. Sun, X. Liu, J. Gao, Y. Yu, G. Wang, and D. Xu, “Zero stator current Professor with the Department of Electrical
frequency operation of speed-sensorless induction motor drives using sta- Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Menoufia
tor input voltage error for speed estimation,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., University. His research interests include ap-
vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 1490–1498, Mar. 2016. plications of power electronics, power factor
[36] G. Lefebvre, J.-Y. Gauthier, A. Hijazi, X. Lin-Shi, and V. L. Digarcher, correction converters, LED lighting systems, re-
“Observability-index-based control strategy for induction machine sen- newable energy applications, control of electrical machines, and DSP-
sorless drive at low speed,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 64, no. 3, based real-time control.
pp. 1929–1938, Mar. 2017.
[37] C. Canudas De Wit, A. Youssef, J. P. Barbot, P. H. Martins, and F. Matraits,
“Observability conditions of induction motors at low frequencies,” in Proc.
39th IEEE Conf. Decis. Control, Sydney, NSW, Australia, Dec. 2000,
pp. 2044–2049.
[38] M. Ghanes, J. DeLeon, and A. Glumineau, “Observability study and
observer-based interconnected form for sensorless induction motor,” in
Proc. 45th IEEE Conf. Decis. Control, San Diego, CA, USA, 2006, Said A. Deraz was born on May 5, 1976, in
pp. 1240–1245. Menoufia, Egypt. He received the B.Sc., M.Sc.,
[39] D. Traoré, F. Plestan, A. Glumineau, and J. d. Leo, “Sensorless induction and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from
motor: high-order sliding-mode controller and adaptive interconnected Menoufia University, Shebin El-Kom, Egypt, in
observer,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 3818–3827, 1999, 2004, and 2008, respectively.
Nov. 2008. Since 2008, he has been a Lecturer with
[40] S. D. Gennaro, J. R. Domı́nguez, and M. A. Meza “Sensorless high order the Department of Electrical Engineering, Fac-
sliding mode control of induction motors with core loss,” IEEE Trans. Ind. ulty of Engineering, Menoufia University. His cur-
Electron., vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 2678–2689, Jun. 2014. rent research interests include applications and
[41] D. Traoré, D. de Léon, A. Glumineau, and L. Loron, “Speed sensorless developments of power electronics circuits and
field-oriented control of induction motor with interconnected observers: systems, power quality, control of electrical ma-
Experimental tests on low frequencies benchmark,” IET Control Theory chines, and renewable energy systems.
Appl., vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 1681–1692, Nov. 2007.