1944 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO.

4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

Online Identification of PMSM Parameters:

Parameter Identifiability and Estimator
Comparative Study
Thierry Boileau, Nicolas Leboeuf, Babak Nahid-Mobarakeh, Member, IEEE, and Farid Meibody-Tabar

i
Abstract—In this paper, a model-reference-based online identi- Current.
fication method is proposed to estimate permanent-magnet syn-v Voltage.
chronous machine (PMSM) parameters during transients and in e Back-EMF.
steady state. It is shown that all parameters are not identifiable
Ω
in steady state and a selection has to be made according to the Rotor angular speed.
Γ
user’s objectives. Then, large signal convergence of the estimated Torque.
parameters is analyzed using the second method of Lyapunov ω Electrical pulsation (= P Ω).
and the singular perturbations theory. It is illustrated that this
I Steady-state current.
method may be applied with a decoupling control technique that
u Current controller output.
improves convergence dynamics and overall system stability. This
method is compared with an extended Kalman filter (EKF)-basedt Time variable.
τ
online identification approach, and it is shown that, in spite of itsFast time variable.
x
implementation complexity with respect to the proposed method, Slow state variable vector.
EKF does not give better results than the proposed method. It is
z Fast state variable vector.
also shown that the use of a simple PMSM model makes estimated
A State matrix.
parameters sensitive to those supposed to be known whatever the
Ar (x) Boundary layer system state matrix.
estimator is (both the proposed method and EKF). The simulation
Subscripts
results as well as the experimental ones, implemented on a non-
d, q
salient pole PMSM, illustrate the validity of the analytic approach Synchronous frame components.
and confirm the same conclusions. Superscripts
Index Terms—Decoupling control, extended Kalman filter ˜ Estimation error.
(EKF), identifiability, nonlinear systems, online parameter ˆ Estimated value.
identification, permanent-magnet (PM) synchronous machines ˇ Small signal variations.
(PMSMs).

N OMENCLATURE I. I NTRODUCTION
P Number of pole pairs.
Rs
L
Stator resistance.
Static inductance.
P ERMANENT-MAGNET (PM) synchronous machines
(PMSMs) are successfully used in different domains be-
cause of their high efficiency and good controllability. Their
l Dynamic inductance. control is frequently realized by the vector control because of
Ψf Magnet flux linkage through the stator windings. its high dynamic performances [1]. Whatever the variable to
Kf Torque constant (= P Ψf ). be controlled (speed, position, or torque) is, the main difficulty
J Inertia coefficient. lies in the necessity of controlling the torque, which implies the
f Friction coefficient. control of the stator currents. To do that, the stator current and
Gv Voltage-source-inverter (VSI) equivalent gain. voltage vectors are mapped into a new plane called d–q Park
reference frame. Then, to control the stator current vector, one
has to control its direct (d−) and quadrature (q−) components.
Manuscript received January 7, 2010; revised January 3, 2011; accepted It is known that the evolution of these d–q currents is given by
February 15, 2011. Date of publication May 12, 2011; date of current version the following model [1]:
July 20, 2011. Paper 2009-IACC-034.R1, presented at the 2008 Industry
Applications Society Annual Meeting, Edmonton, AB, Canada, October 5–9, 
and approved for publication in the IEEE T RANSACTIONS ON I NDUSTRY vd = Rs · id + ld · dt
d
id − ω · Lq · iq + ed
(1)
A PPLICATIONS by the Industrial Automation and Control Committee of the vq = Rs · iq + lq · dt iq + ω · Ld · id + eq .
d
IEEE Industry Applications Society.
The authors are with the Groupe de Recherche en Electrotechnique
et Electronique de Nancy, Institut National Polytechnique de Lorraine, This model, called the electrical model of PMSMs in
54516 Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy, France (e-mail: [email protected]; the d–q Park reference frame, is a two-input–two-output
[email protected]; [email protected] system. In (1), the back-EMF d–q components are
nancy.fr; [email protected]).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online 
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. ed = 0
(2)
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2011.2155010 eq = Ψf · ω = Kf · Ω

0093-9994/$26.00 © 2011 IEEE

BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1945

and vd , vq , id , and iq are d–q voltages and currents, ω = P Ω is efficient and execution time cost-effective online parameter
the rotor electrical angular speed, Ω is the rotor mechanical estimators. The method proposed in this paper can satisfy these
angular speed, and P is the number of pole pairs. The system objectives.
inputs are vd and vq , and its outputs are id and iq . These currents In this paper, three online identification methods are studied.
are controlled according to a proper control law that gives the We begin by a technique based on output error cancellation in a
stator voltage to be applied by a voltage source inverter (VSI). model-reference approach. Then, the same principle is applied
The inverter is often modeled by a constant gain Gv . Then, while the system is decoupled. Finally, the application of an
we have vd = Gv · vdr and vq = Gv · vqr , where vdr and vqr EKF to PMSM parameter identification is studied. For the first
are the current regulator outputs. They are used to regulate two cases, the stability of the augmented system (including the
d-q currents to their references. For nonsalient pole PMSMs, machine, its control, and the parameter estimator) is analyzed
d-current reference (idref ) is often fixed to zero for minimizing using singular perturbation theory and the second method of
the losses and the motor torque and speed are controlled by Lyapunov. This analysis shows that the method based on de-
q-current reference (iqref ). Ψf , Rs , Ld , ld , Lq , and lq are the coupling control provides the best performances.
parameters of the model. It should be noted that PMSMs are This paper is organized in seven sections. In the next sec-
often not saturated magnetically. This allows us to suppose that tion, the identifiability of the machine parameters under oper-
ld = Ld and lq = Lq in this paper. ating conditions for aerospace applications is studied. Then,
In practice, these parameters are not known exactly and/or the identification method based on a model reference out-
may vary slowly. These variations may be due to a variable put error cancellation is presented and analyzed in the third
operating point or a fault [2]–[26]. They are sometimes fatal section. In Section IV, the decoupling control of PMSMs
to the controlled system and may damage the drive. In these and its advantages in online parameter identification are il-
cases, an online identification algorithm is needed. It permits lustrated. In Section V, an EKF is developed for estimating
us to estimate permanently the machine parameters used in the the machine parameters. Simulation and experimental results
control algorithm or to detect a fault. show the validity of presented approaches in the sixth sec-
Several online estimators have been presented in the litera- tion. The last section concludes this paper and presents some
ture: methods based on extended Kalman filter (EKF) [2], [3], remarks.
neural networks [3]–[8], adaptive techniques [9], [10], model-
reference-based approaches [2], [11], [12], or least square-
based methods [13], [14]. These latter methods as well as EKF II. I DENTIFIABILITY OF PMSM
require high computing capacity because of matrix calculations E LECTRICAL PARAMETERS
and particularly matrix inversions. Artificial-neural-network- As aforementioned, our objective is to estimate in real time
based solutions need a training phase (often offline at first, then the most critical parameters of a PM drive for aerospace appli-
online) to learn either the inverse model or another representa- cations. This online identification should be sure and efficient
tive model of the studied machine. However, the convergence with the least execution time possible. Also, no additional
of this type of estimators is studied only by experimentation, sensors are permitted due to certification problems. The only
and there is no theoretical proof for small- or large-signal admitted measurements are those used for the control: stator
convergence. A solution based on the decoupling control is current sensors, rotor position measurement,2 and dc-link volt-
given in [11]. Here, we will show that the decoupling control is age sensor.3 It is, of course, necessary that the online parameter
not necessary for estimating the electrical parameters. Another estimation works at steady state as well as during transient
method, requiring the machine transient electrical response for periods. It is also desirable that the online estimation requires
estimating the electrical parameters, is given in [12]. To do that, the modification of neither the current references (idref and
the authors have to excite the machine even in steady state iqref ) nor the control output voltages (vdr and vqr ). In summary,
in order to create a transient response. In this paper, knowing we have the following requirements:
that our two-input–two-output system (1) has four steady-state
1) no additional sensor;
gains,1 we avoid the transient response. Thus, there is no need
2) no signal injection;
to change the control algorithm for online identification. This
3) online estimation during transitions and in steady state.
issue is important for our application (aerospace systems) be-
cause of practical considerations described in the next section. For satisfying these requirements, we should study at first the
Other papers present important applications of online iden- identifiability of the electrical parameters under the aforemen-
tification of PMSM parameters. In [15] and [16], the authors tioned conditions.
improve the control performances by adapting the controller For a given dynamic system, the identifiability of its parame-
according to the estimated parameters. Fault detection for ters may be evaluated by using the observability criterion when
PMSMs is also realized by parameter identification (online or the state vector of the system is extended to the parameters
offline) in [17]–[22]. The use of online parameter identification [27]. Thus, for a given speed ω = ω0 , the application of this
is reported in [23]–[26] for improving the drive operating concept to our system begins by extending the state vector to
without mechanical sensor. Most of these applications require
2 In[25], this estimator is used without mechanical sensor.
1 Indeed, there are only three gains. It can be easily shown that the system 3 Inpractice, the dc-link voltage sensor may be suppressed if the dc-link
steady-state gains depend on Rs , Ld ω, and Lq ω. capacitance is high enough.
1946 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

the parameters. From (1) and (2) and supposing that ld = Lq state. Indeed from (6), we can relate small variations of the
and lq = Lq (unsaturated machine), we have machine parameters to those of the machine outputs
⎧ d ⎧ 
−Rs Lq
⎨ dˇld ∝ ω0 · Iq · Ľs
dt id = Ld · id + ω0 Ld · iq + Ld vd
1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪  dt

⎪
⎪
d
iq = −R
Lq · iq − ω0 Lq · id + Lq (vq − ω0 Ψf )
s Ld 1
⎩ dˇl ∝ −I · Ř − ω · Ψ̌ .
(7)
⎪
⎨ dt dt q q s 0 f
d ∼
dt Rs = 0 (3)
⎪
⎪ d ∼
⎪ dt Ld = 0
⎪ Thus, the following conditions can be derived for online
⎪
⎪ dt Lq ∼
⎪ d
⎩ =0 parameter estimation in steady state without modifying the
d ∼ control voltages and the current references.
dt f = 0.
Ψ
1) Ls can be identified using the direct current (id ) if ω0 ·
The system (3) is nonlinear, and its local observability de- Iq = 0.
pends on the rank of the Jacobian matrix of the following output 2) Rs can be identified using quadrature current (iq ) if Ψf
vector [27]4 : is known and Iq = 0.
 T It should be noted that the variations of Rs (respectively, Ls )
d d d2 d2
O = id iq id iq id iq . (4) affect also id (respectively, iq ) via the second-order derivatives
dt dt dt2 dt2
[see (6)]. This coupling will be studied in the next section.
Here, for the parameter identifiability, we are only interested In conclusion, it is clear from the aforementioned study that
on the part of the Jacobian matrix concerning the parameters. it is not possible to identify all electrical parameters under the
Taking into account the mentioned requirements on the param- given requirements. Of course, electrical transient periods can
eter identification and particularly that on the estimation in be created and used to get consistent signals for parameter
steady state (worst case), we give here the Jacobian submatrix identification, but this is forbidden for the studied application.
when the electrical currents are settled (id = Id , iq = Iq ) and Thus, we have to choose the most variable parameters (Rs
the stator voltages are constant and Ls ) for online identification and suppose that the other
⎡ ⎤ parameters (Ψf ) are known and constant. In addition, from (7),
−Id 0 ω0 · Iq 0 we need to have
⎢ −Iq −ω0 · Id 0 −ω0 ⎥ 
D=⎣ ⎦. ω = P Ω = 0
Rs Id − ω0 Ld · Iq −ω02 Ld · Id −Rs ω0 · Iq −ω02 Ld (8)
Rs Iq + ω0 Lq · Id Rs ω0 · Id −ω02 Lq · Iq Rs ω0 Iq = 0.
(5)
Then, the chosen parameters (Rs and Ls ) can be identified
In matrix D, according to the local nature of this study, using the stator current estimation error. This will be presented
the rows and columns respectively correspond to small in the next section.
T
variations of [(d/dt)id (d/dt)iq (d2 /dt2 )id (d2 /dt2 )iq ] and Note—In practice, Ψf may vary too. In the case of a wrong
T
[Rs Ld Lq Ψf ] . It is obvious from (5) that the system (3) is nominal Ψf 0 = Ψf , the voltage drop on the estimated resis-
locally nonobservable because D is not full rank. Therefore, the tance (R̂s · iq ) will absorb the voltage error term ω · (Ψf −
parameter vector [Rs Ld Lq Ψf ]T is not entirely identifiable Ψf 0 ) in such a way that the voltage equations (1) and (2)
in steady state. In particular, the second and fourth columns remain verified in transitions and steady state. It is obvious that
are linearly dependent; it means that Ld and Ψf cannot be if we identify Ψf , Rs should be supposed constant and the
identified independently. same statement holds for the variations of Rs and their impact
Meanwhile, most of the drives used in transport applications on Ψ̂f .
are nonsalient PMSMs (Ld = Lq = Ls ) in which the direct
current is often fixed to zero (Id = 0) for minimizing the
machine losses. In this case, the second column of D in (5), III. O NLINE PARAMETER I DENTIFICATION BASED ON
corresponding to Ld , can be suppressed and Id can be replaced M ODEL -R EFERENCE O UTPUT E RROR C ANCELLATION
by zero. Then, we have A. Introduction
⎡ ⎤
0 ω0 · Iq 0 The estimation method that we propose in this section is
⎢ −Iq 0 −ω0 ⎥ a model-reference-based estimation technique. The reference
D=⎣ ⎦. (6)
−ω0 Ld · Iq −Rs ω0 · Iq −ω02 Ld model contains the estimated parameters and generates an
Rs Iq −ω0 Lq · Iq Rs ω0
2
output vector that is compared with the actual outputs of the
system. Then, the estimated parameters are adjusted in order to
Once again, matrix D is not full rank because the first cancel the error between the actual and estimated outputs. The
and third columns are linearly dependent. Thus, the parameter block diagram of this method applied to PMSMs is shown in
vector [Rs , Ld = Lq = Ls , Ψf ]T is not entirely identifiable, Fig. 1. The block Model in this figure represents the reference
i.e., Rs and Ψf cannot be identified at the same time in steady model and has the same form as that of (1), but its parameters
(R̂s and L̂s ) are the estimated ones. The estimator has to
4 Higher order derivatives of d–q currents may be considered, but they are correct these estimations in order to achieve a null output
less useful because of measurement noise. error ι̃s = ι̂s − is = [ι̃d ι̃q ]T . Here, we suppose that Ψf is
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1947

Fig. 1. Model-reference-based online identification of PMSM parameters.

a known constant and the machine is a nonsalient pole one that the parameter estimation errors are described as follows:
(Ld = Lq = Ls ). For the case of Ld = Lq , we will present in ⎧
⎨ d R̃s = KR · iq · R̃s ·(Rs +R̃s2)+L̃s ·(Ls +L̃2 s )·ω
2
Section IV a variant of our method capable of estimating Ld dt (Rs +R̃s ) +(Ls +L̃s ) ·ω 2
and Lq separately. The reference model for a nonsalient pole (13)
⎩ d L̃s = −KL · ωiq · Rs ·(Ls +L̃s )−Ls ·(Rs +R̃s )
machine is the following: dt (R +R̃ )2 +(L +L̃ )2 ·ω 2
s s s s

L̂s · dt
d
ι̂d = −R̂s · ι̂d + ω · L̂s · ι̂q + Gv · vdr where R̃s = R̂s − Rs and L̃s = L̂s − Ls . To study the local
(9)
L̂s · dt ι̂q = −R̂s · ι̂q − ω · L̂s · ι̂d − ωΨf + Gv · vdr .
d stability of the system (13) around its operating point, we
linearize it at the origin (R̃s = L̃s = 0) for a given operating
The estimator has to correct these estimations for achieving a point (id , iq , and ω are constant at the operating point)
null output error ι̃s = ι̂s − is .  Ls ω 2 KR iq Rs KR iq
dt R̃s = Rs2 +L2s ω 2 · L̃s + Rs2 +L2s ω 2 · R̃s
To estimate the machine parameters, we propose the follow- d

ing estimation laws (see Section II): −Rs ωKL iq Ls ωKL iq (14)
dt L̃s = R2 +L2 ω 2 · L̃s + R2 +L2 ω 2 · R̃s .
d
⎧
⎪
⎪ t s s s s

⎪ R̂s (t) = R̂s (t0 ) − KR · ι̃q (σ) · dσ

⎨
t0 Now, from the state matrix of the linear system (14), it can be
(10)
⎪
⎪ t concluded that the system (13) is locally asymptotically stable
⎪
⎩ L̂s (t) = L̂s (t0 ) − KL · ι̃d (σ) · dσ. at R̃s = L̃s = 0 if
t0

The estimator gains KL and KR have to be chosen to ensure ωKL iq > KR iq
(15)
the convergence of the parameter estimation errors to zero. This ωKL KR < 0.
needs a complete study of the closed-loop system behavior.
This system (shown in Fig. 1) is nonlinear, and its order is rela- It means that the parameter estimation errors R̃s and L̃s
tively high. To carry out this study, we make a stability analysis converge to zero if they are initially sufficiently small (local
in two steps. At first, a local stability analysis gives some hints stability) and the conditions (15) are satisfied. One may choose
to find the estimator coefficients KL and KR . Then, the stability the following for satisfying (15):
of the desired equilibrium point is analyzed using the second 
KR = −KR0 · sign(iq )
method of Lyapunov and the singular perturbations theory. (16)
KL = KL0 · sign(ωiq )
Note—To achieve good performances, the time delay due to
sampling of the rotor position should be compensated. where KR0 and KL0 are positive real numbers determining
It is obvious that the estimated parameters must be limited the convergence rate. In the next paragraph, we will study the
to their minimum and maximum values in order to respect the global stability of the system.
physical constraints of the machine

0 < R̂s min ≤ R̂s ≤ R̂s max (11) C. Global Stability Analysis
0 < L̂s min ≤ L̂s ≤ L̂s max .
The augmented system (Fig. 1) is nonlinear and contains
These min and max values are fixed by the user according to its the interaction of very slow (angular speed), slow (estimated
knowledge on the system. parameters), and fast (electrical variables) dynamics. The de-
composition of the system into two lower order subsystems
B. Local Stability Analysis (fast and slow) is well known and permits us to analyze the
For our stability analysis, we suppose that the machine original system more easily. In this paragraph, by using the two-
parameters vary slowly with respect to the electrical variables timescale approach and Lyapunov’s direct stability theorem, the
 d ∼ asymptotic stability of the origin is proved. In order to simplify
dt Rs = 0 (12) the analysis, we make the following hypotheses:
d ∼
Ls = 0.
dt 1) the machine is a nonsalient pole PMSM;
From this hypothesis, we can simplify (1) and (9) to their 2) the real parameters Rs and Ls vary much slower than the
electrical steady-state expressions, and from (10), we can show electrical variables;
1948 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

3) the angular speed ω is more slowly variable than the where τ is the fast timescale. For the boundary layer system
estimated parameters; (20), the origin w = 0 is exponentially stable if [28] the follow-
4) the current controllers are supposed to be proportional– ing are true:
integral (PI), which ensure a null current steady-state 1) x varies slowly;
error. 2) the matrix Ar (x) is bounded;
We decompose the system into two subsystems: a fast and 3) the eigenvalues of Ar (x) have all negative real parts.
a slow one. The global stability of the system depends on the
Taking into account (10) and (12), the first condition on slow
stability of each one of these subsystems and on the interactions
variation of x is verified by a proper choice of KR and RL .
between them [28].
For the second condition, the lower and higher limits on the
Consider the following nonlinear autonomous singularly per-
estimated parameters [see (11)] should be respected. The last
turbed system:
condition may be easily verified by a good design of the current

ẋ = a(x, z) controllers. This condition guarantees the existence of A−1 r (x)
(17)
εż = Ar (x) · z + b(x) too. Thus, the fast state variables z rapidly reach z̄ and remain
there.
where x = [R̃s L̃s ]T and z = [id iq ι̂d ι̂q sd sq ]T are slow and The reduced system (slow subsystem) is nonlinear. It is de-
fast state vectors, respectively, sd and sq are current PI con- scribed by ẋ = a(x, z̄) = f (x), which results in the following
troller variables, the nonlinear function a(x, z) is the following: differential equations:
   
KR iq − KR ι̂q 1 KR iqref · a11 (x) + ωKR idref · a12 (x)
a(x, z) = (18a) a(x, z̄) =
KL id − KL ι̂d d(x) −ωKL iqref · a21 (x) + KL idref · a22 (x)
(21)
and the fast system model is expressed as shown in (18b) at the
bottom of the page. Kp and Ki are the current controller coef- with
ficients and idref and iqref are d-q reference currents supposed
constant or very slowly variable. Supposing that A−1 r (x) exists d(x) = (Rs + R̃s )2 + (Ls + L̃s )2 · ω 2
for any x belonging to the domain Λ in the vicinity of x = 0,
one may use the following change of variable: a12 (x) = a21 (x) = Rs · (Ls + L̃s ) − Ls · (Rs + R̃s )
a11 (x) = a22 (x) = R̃s · (Rs + R̃s ) + L̃s · (Ls + L̃s ) · ω 2 .
w = z − z̄ (19a)

where Knowing that idref = 0 for nonsalient PMSMs, we obtain

⎧
⎨ d R̃s = KR · iqref · R̃s ·(Rs +R̃s2)+L̃s ·(Ls +L̃2 s )·ω
2
z̄ = −A−1
r (x) · b(x) (19b) dt (R +R̃ ) +(L +L̃ ) ·ω 2
s s s s
(22)
⎩ d
= −KL · ωiqref · Rs ·(Ls +L̃s )−Ls ·(Rs +R̃s )
which allows us to represent the boundary layer system (fast dt L̃s (Rs +R̃s )2 +(Ls +L̃s )2 ·ω 2
subsystem) as follows:
d where iqref is supposed to be different from zero (existence
w = Ar (x) · w (20) condition of the motor torque).
dτ

⎡ Rs +Kp ⎤
⎡ ⎤ − Ls ω 0 0 Ki
Ls 0
id ⎢ Rs +Kp ⎥
⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢ −ω − 0 0 0 Ki
⎥
⎢ Ls Ls ⎥
d ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ι̂d ⎥ ⎢ − Kp
⎢ Ls +L̃s 0 −Rs +R̃s
ω Ki
0 ⎥
⎥
⎢ ⎥= ⎢ L +L̃ Ls +L̃s
⎥
dt ⎢ ι̂q ⎥
s s

⎣ ⎦ ⎢ 0
K
− L +pL̃ −ω −Rs +R̃s
0 Ki ⎥
sd ⎢ Ls +L̃s Ls +L̃s ⎥
⎣ −1 s
0
s
0 0 0 0 ⎦
sq
0 −1 0 0 0 0
⎡ Kp ⎤
⎡ ⎤ Ls idref
id ⎢ Kp Ψf ⎥
⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢⎢ Ls iqref − Ls ω
⎥
⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ι̂d ⎥ ⎢ Kp
i ⎥
·⎢ ⎥+⎢ Ls +L̃s dref
⎥
⎢ ι̂q ⎥ ⎢ Kp
⎣ ⎦ ⎢ Ls +L̃s iqref − Ls +L̃s ω ⎥
Ψf
sd ⎥
⎣ idref ⎦
sq
iqref
1 1
= Ar (x) · z + b(x) (18b)
ε ε
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1949

The system (22) is nonlinear, and x = 0 is its equilibrium

point. To study the convergence of the estimated parameters, we
have to analyze the stability of this point. To do that, we propose
here to study the stability of its equivalent Takagi–Sugeno (TS)
multimodel [29]. From (22), the following model can be easily
deduced:

ẋ = As (x) · x (23)

with the equation shown at the bottom of page. It should be

noted that we made no simplification in (22) for obtaining (23)
and the model (23) is exactly the same as that in (22). There
are two nonlinearities in (23) due to the presence of R̃s and L̃s
Fig. 2. Estimated parameter trajectories with the estimator (10). (o) Initial
in As (x). Therefore, according to TS multimodeling [29], we point.
have 22 = 4 local linear models as follows:
overall system is stable at R̃s = L̃s = 0 because both fast and
ẋ = Ai · x, i = 1, 2, 3, 4 (24a)
slow subsystems are exponentially stable at this point.
with Fig. 2 shows the closed-loop system trajectories in the nor-
⎧   malized R̂s − L̂s plane. As can be seen, all of the trajectories
⎪
⎪ A = A [R̃ L̃ ]T
converge to R̃s = L̃s = 0 (R̂s /Rs = 1, L̂s /Ls = 1), owing to
⎪
⎪
1 s

s min s min

⎪
⎪ the choice of KR and KL satisfying (16). However, the con-
⎨ A2 = As [R̃s max L̃s min ]T
  (24b) vergence of the estimated parameters is coupled as expected.
⎪
⎪ A3 = As [R̃s min L̃s max ]T Indeed, an initially correct estimated resistance becomes er-
⎪
⎪  
⎪
⎪ roneous if the estimated initial inductance is wrong and vice
⎩ A = A [R̃ L̃s max ]T .
4 s s max versa. In order to overcome this drawback, we propose another
method based on the decoupling control in the next section.
These models are combined together with normalized non-
linear activation (or membership) functions, noted μi (x), in
such a manner that the obtained model (25) is strictly equivalent IV. M ODEL -R EFERENCE O NLINE I DENTIFICATION
to the nonlinear model (23) U SING D ECOUPLING C ONTROL
A. Decoupling Control of PMSMs

4
ẋ = μi (x) · (Ai · x) (25) To improve the current dynamics and to simplify the current
i=1 controllers design, a decoupling block is often added to the
with system. It eliminates interactions between d- and q-current
controls. The decoupled system should have the following

4
diagonal form:
μi (x(t)) = 1, 0 ≤ μi (x(t)) ≤ 1 ∀t. (26) 
i=1 Ld · dt
d
id = −Rs · id + Gv · udr
(28)
According to (26), (25) is a convex sum. Therefore, the Lq · dt iq = −Rs · iq − ωΨf + Gv · uqr
d

system (23) is exponentially stable if all state matrices Ai where udr and uqr are new outputs of the current controllers.
and their sum are Hurwitz (sufficient condition) whatever the There are two decoupling methods: feedback and feedfor-
activation functions are [29]. Hence, we do not need to specify ward. The method “feedback” used in this paper consists in
μi (x), and it is sufficient to obtain
 conditions for which all finding a feedback matrix K such that the closed-loop system
eigenvalues of Ai and those of Ai have negative real parts. (shown in Fig. 3) is represented by the decoupled model (28).
From (11), (23), and (24), this leads to Comparing (28) with (1), it can be shown that
  
KL ωiqref > 0 ω 0 Lq
(27) K= . (29)
KR iqref < 0. Gv −Ld 0
The desired equilibrium point (R̃s = L̃s = 0) is exponentially The feedforward decoupling control is described and used
stable if the conditions in (27) are verified. These conditions for identification in [11], where the authors showed that the
are satisfied with the choice of KR and KL in (16) because feedback decoupling is better for online parameter identifica-
iq = iqref in slow timescale. Then, we can conclude that the tion purposes.

 
1 KR · iqref · (Rs + R̃s ) KR · iqref · (Ls + L̃s ) · ω 2
As (x) =
d(x) KL · ωiqref · Ls −KL · ωiqref · Rs
1950 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

Then, the linearized model around the origin (R̃s = L̃s = 0) is


dt R̃s = KR · iq · Rs
d R̃s
(34)
dt L̃s = −KL · ωiq · Rs
d L̃s

where iq and ω are supposed constant and different from zero

Fig. 3. Feedback decoupling control. [see identifiability conditions in (8)]. From this model, the local
stability conditions may be concluded easily

KL ωiq > 0
(35)
KR iq < 0.

It should be noted that the choice of the estimator gains

proposed by (16) satisfies the local condition stability (35). It
means that, with KR and KL given in (16), the estimation
errors R̃s and L̃s vanish if they are close enough to the origin
(local stability). In the next paragraph, the global stability of the
overall system will be studied in the same manner, as done in
Section III.
Fig. 4. Online identification based on feedback decoupling control.

In the following, we propose to identify the parameters of a D. Global Stability Analysis

decoupled control PMSM. The analysis given in this paragraph is based on the same
approach presented in Section III-C. We make the same hypoth-
B. Online Identification Algorithm esis, and we obtain a two-timescale system

Fig. 4 shows the identification method using the feedback ẋ = a(x, z)
(36)
decoupling control. The feedback decoupling matrix K and the εż = Ar (x) · z + b(x)
decoupled model (28) contain the estimated parameters
  with x = [R̃s L̃s ]T and z = [id iq ι̂d ι̂q sd sq ]T and
ω 0 L̂q  
K= (29)
Gv −L̂d 0 KR iq − KR ι̂q
a(x, z) = . (37a)
 KL id − KL ι̂d
L̂d · dt
d
id = −R̂s · id + Gv · udr
(31)
L̂q · dt iq = −R̂s · iq − ωΨf + Gv · udr .
d The fast system model is expressed as shown in (37b) at the
bottom of the next page. Then, the boundary layer system (fast
The main idea is to correct the estimated parameters using the subsystem) is the following:
current estimation error. To do this, we propose the same esti-
d
mator, as given in (10) (the case of Ld = Lq will be discussed w = Ar (x) · w (38)
later in this section). In the next paragraph, we give some results dτ
on the convergence analysis. where τ is the fast timescale and

w = z − z̄ (39a)
C. Local Convergence Analysis
Suppose Ld = Lq = Ls . Taking into account that the feed- where
back matrix K given in (30) may fail to entirely decouple the
control of the machine because of the estimation error on the z̄ = −A−1
r (x) · b(x). (39b)
parameters, we can write the following for a partially decoupled
machine: For this system, the origin w = 0 is exponentially stable for the
 same reasons given for the system (18).
Ls · dt
d
id = −R̂s · ι̂d + ω · L̃s · iq + Gv · udr The reduced system (slow subsystem) is modeled by ẋ =
Ls · dt
d
iq = −Rs · iq − ω · L̃s · id − ωΨf + Gv · udr . a(x, z̄) = f (x), which gives the following:
(32) ⎧
⎨ d R̃s = KR · iqref · R̃s
dt Rs +R̃s
From the hypothesis (12), the estimator (10), and the models (40)
⎩ d L̃s = −KL · ωiqref · L̃s .
(31) and (32), we can obtain the following: dt R +R̃
s s
⎧
⎨ d R̃s = KR · iq · R̃s Once again, we suppose that iqref = 0 and ω = 0 for the online
dt Rs +R̃s
(33) identification of Rs and Ls [identifiability conditions (8)]. The
⎩ d L̃s = −KL · ωiq · L̃s .
dt R +R̃ s s slow subsystem (40) has an equilibrium point at x = 0 whose
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1951

stability determines the convergence conditions of the estimated

parameters. Here, we apply again the TS multimodel approach
[29] as in the previous section. We have

ẋ = As (x) · x (41)

with
 
1 KR · iqref 0
As (x) = .
s
Rs + R 0 −KL · ωiqref

The only nonlinear term in (41) is 1/(Rs + R̃s ). We thus have

21 = 2 local linear models according to TS multimodeling [29].
They are characterized by the following state matrices: Fig. 5. Estimated parameter trajectories with the estimator (10) for a “feed-
 back” decoupled system. (o) Initial point.
A1 = As (R̃s min )
(42)
A2 = As (R̃s max ).
Then, as described in [29], the system (41) [or (40)] is exponen- an important advantage, making the parameter estimation more
tially stable if all state matrices Ai and their sum are Hurwitz. stable and the overall system more robust.
It leads us to the following stability conditions: Note—For the case of Ld = Lq , we propose the following
 parameter estimator:
KL · ωiqref > 0
(43) ⎧
KR · iqref < 0. ⎪ t
⎪
⎪ R̂s (t) = R̂s (t0 ) − KR · ι̃q (σ) · dσ
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ t0
Therefore, the origin (R̃s = L̃s = 0) is exponentially stable if ⎨ t
the conditions in (43) are verified. These conditions are the L̂q (t) = L̂q (t0 ) − KLq · ι̃d (σ) · dσ (44)
⎪
⎪
same as in (27) for which the choice of KR and KL in (16) ⎪
⎪
t0
⎪
⎪ t
are satisfactory. Hence, the stability of the whole system at ⎪
⎩ L̂d (t) = L̂d (t0 ) − KLd · ι̃q (σ) · dσ
the origin (R̃s = L̃s = 0) can be concluded from exponential t0
stability of fast and slow subsystems at this point as long as the
convergence conditions (43) are satisfied. where KLd , KLq , and KR are the estimator gains. The first two
The system trajectories with feedback decoupling are shown equations are the same as in (10). Thus, Lq and Rs are estimated
in Fig. 5. Comparing with Fig. 2, it can be concluded that they as before if ω = 0 and iqref = 0. However, the estimation of Ld
converge to the origin more easily, owing to the decoupling con- requires that idref = 0 [see (5)]. In practice, it is not a constraint,
trol. Indeed, contrarily to (22), there is no significant interaction because, in the case of a nonsalient pole PMSM (Ld = Lq ),
in (40) between R̃s and L̃s . In particular, the convergence of the optimal value of idref is not zero. In this case, idref may
R̃s to zero is independent of L̃s . Only the convergence rate take a pulse signal form whose frequency is much more than
of L̃s depends on R̃s and not its convergence itself. This is mechanical natural frequency in such a manner as not to excite

⎡ Rs +Kp ⎤
⎡ ⎤ − Ls − L̃
Ls ω
s
0 0 Ki
Ls 0
id ⎢ Rs +Kp ⎥
⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢ Ls
Ls ω − 0 0 0 Ki
⎥
⎢ Ls Ls ⎥
d ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ι̂d ⎥ ⎢
⎢
K
− L +pL̃ 0 −Rs +R̃s
ω Ki
0 ⎥
⎥
⎢ ⎥= ⎢ L +L̃ Ls +L̃s ⎥
dt ⎢ ι̂q ⎥
s s s s

⎣ ⎦ ⎢ 0
K
− L +pL̃ −ω −Rs +R̃s
0 Ki ⎥
sd ⎢ ⎥
⎣ −1
s
0
s
0
Ls +L̃s
0 0
Ls +L̃s
0 ⎦
sq
0 −1 0 0 0 0
⎡ Kp ⎤
⎡ ⎤ Ls idref
id ⎢ Kp Ψf ⎥
⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢⎢ Ls iqref − Ls ω
⎥
⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢ ι̂d ⎥ ⎢ Kp
i ⎥
·⎢ ⎥+⎢ Ls +L̃s dref
⎥
⎢ ι̂q ⎥ ⎢ Kp
⎣ ⎦ ⎢ Ls +L̃s iqref − Ls +L̃s ω ⎥
Ψf
sd ⎥
⎣ idref ⎦
sq
iqref
1 1
= Ar (x) · z + b(x) (37b)
ε ε
1952 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

the angular speed. In addition, its mean value must be equal to

its optimal value. In this case, the estimator (44) converges if
⎧
⎨ KLd · ωid < 0
KLq · ωiq < 0 (45)
⎩ K · i < 0.
R q

V. PARAMETER E STIMATION BASED ON K ALMAN F ILTER

EKF has found wide application in drive control and param-
eter identification. It is often applied to obtain the angular
speed from noisy mechanical measurements or to estimate the
Fig. 6. Estimated parameter trajectories with the EKF based on model (49).
rotor position in a mechanical sensorless control application (o) Initial point.
or to identify the machine parameters. Here, we are inter-
ested by this latter application for a nonsalient pole PMSM
(Ld = Lq = Ls ).
In this section, an EKF is developed for online parameter
identification of PMSMs. We make the same assumptions as
those in the previous sections on timescale separation of dif-
ferent variables. Therefore, the angular speed is supposed to be
very slowly variable when the machine parameters and currents
represent slow and fast variables, respectively. This leads us to
the following model in the EKF algorithm:
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
id −a · id + ω · iq + b · Gv vdr
d ⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢ −a · iq − ω · id + b · (Gv vqr − ωΨf ) ⎥
⎣ ⎦=⎣ ⎦ (46a)
dt a 0
b 0
⎡ ⎤
  id Fig. 7. Experimental bench.
1 0 0 0 ⎢ iq ⎥
y= ⎣ ⎦ (46b)
0 1 0 0 a
b matrices (Q and R). Using a trial-and-error procedure, these
matrices are chosen as follows:
where a = Rs /Ls and b = 1/Ls . ⎧
⎨ P0 = diag(0.1, 0.1, 100, 100)
It should be noted that the identifiability conditions for a and Q = diag(1, 1, 500, 500) (50)
b are the same as in Section II. Indeed, the identifiability matrix ⎩
R = diag(1, 1).
in steady state is the following:
  Fig. 6 shows the estimated parameter trajectories with the
−bId aId − ωIq EKF based on model (49). It is obvious from this figure that
D= . (47)
−bIq aIq + ωId the convergence of the estimated parameters is coupled, i.e.,
the estimation error on R̂s cannot vanish while L̃s = 0 and
It is obvious that, for the usual case of Id = 0, we obtain the
vice versa. From this point of view, the EKF is not better than
following conditions for the identifiability of a and b:
the previous method (see Fig. 5). In addition, as we will see in

ω = P Ω = 0 the next section, the execution time of the EKF on a real-time
(48)
Iq = 0. digital control card is much higher than that of the previous
methods.
Also, a feedback decoupling control (see Section IV-A) may This online identification algorithm is compared with those
be used. In this case, the following model replaces (46a): proposed in the previous sections by simulation and experimen-
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤ tation. Test results are presented in the next section.
id −a · id + b · Gv udr
d ⎢ iq ⎥ ⎢ −a · iq + b · (Gv uqr − ωΨf ) ⎥
⎣ ⎦=⎣ ⎦ (49) VI. T EST R ESULTS
dt a 0
b 0 A. Simulation Results
with the same output vector y given in (46b). The new current Simulations are performed with Simulink on a model
controller outputs are udr and uqr (see Fig. 3). corresponding to the experimental bench shown in Fig. 7.
Now, the only things needed for completing the EKF real- A nonsalient pole PMSM is modeled and supplied by a
ization are its initial covariance matrix (P0 ) and its weighting VSI whose switching frequency is fixed to 10 kHz. The
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1953

TABLE I
E XPERIMENTAL S YSTEM PARAMETERS

pulsewidth-modulated command signals come from a control

block which is triggered by a 10-kHz clock. Digital PI current
and speed controllers are employed. The proposed estimator
without decoupling is realized by discretizing (9) and (10). For
the variant with the decoupling control, (30) and (31) and (10)
are used. We used the model (49) with the decoupling matrix
in (30) for the estimator based on EKF. The whole system
parameters are given in Table I.
Fig. 8 shows the simulation results for three presented
methods. The direct current reference is set to zero, and the
angular speed is in its steady state at 1000 r/min. The estimator
gains KR0 and KL0 are fixed to 20 and 0.05, respectively. At
t = 0, the estimated parameters are forced to erroneous values
(over- or underestimation). All combinations are tested, and in
each case, all three methods converge. The efficiency of these
methods in PMSM parameter estimation is clear. However, it
can be seen that the first method (without decoupling) is less
efficient than the two others. Indeed, the saturation limit R̂s min
is reached with the first method [see Fig. 8(c) and (d)] when
L̂s (0) is highly overestimated. It is obvious that R̂s cannot
converge to Rs with this method while L̂s is erroneous. On the
other hand, the EKF is sometimes better [see Fig. 7(c) and (d)]
and sometimes worse [see Fig. 8(a) and (b)] than the second
method (with decoupling).
It is clear that the comparison of these methods cannot be
made in terms of the convergence rate. The choice of the esti-
mator gains (KR0 and KL0 ) and the EKF weighting matrices
(Q and R) affects this rate. Evidently, for all the tests, the
parameter estimation may be faster than that presented, but
the assumption on time separation would not be respected. In
fact, good criteria for comparing these methods are the response
shape, the design complexity, and the execution time. The first
method is manifestly less efficient in terms of the response
shape. However, it is quite easy to determine the estimator
gains for the first two methods. The execution time should be
compared after implementing in a real target.

B. Experimental Results Fig. 8. Estimated parameters (simulation): (Green) First method, (red) second
method, and (blue) EKF. (a) L̈s (0) = Ls /5 and R̈s (0) = Rs /5. (b) L̈s (0) =
To verify the efficiency of the proposed methods, they are Ls /5 and R̈s (0) = 5Rs . (c) L̈s (0) = 5Ls and R̈s (0) = 5Rs . (d) L̈s (0) =
implemented in a TI DSP digital control card. Fig. 7 shows the 5Ls and R̈s (0) = Rs /5.
experimental bench whose parameters are given in Table I. The
estimators are realized as described in the previous paragraph. same manner as in Fig. 8 and converge rapidly to the actual
The same tests as in the simulations are performed. The values. This confirms the efficiency of all three methods in
estimated parameters, shown in Fig. 9, behave almost in the estimating PMSM electrical parameters.
1954 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

TABLE II
T IME C ONSUMPTION W ITH TMS320F2407

Fig. 10. Estimated resistance at Ω = 1000 r/min (simulation): (Green)

First method, (red) second method, and (blue) EKF. (a) Ψf 0 = 0.90 × Ψf .
(b) Ψf 0 = 1.10 × Ψf .

method with respect to the other two estimators: The execution

time of the EKF in our bench is about 12 μs, when that of
the second method with the decoupling control is less than
4 μs. The first method requires less than 4 μs too (see Table II).
Hence, the second method presents a good option in terms
of the estimation efficiency, the response shape, the design
complexity, and the execution time.

C. Sensitivity
Another issue that we would like to study here concerns
the sensitivity of the parameter estimation with respect to the
variations of Ψf . In Section II, we supposed that Ψf is constant.
Fig. 9. Estimated parameters (experimentation): (Green) First method, (red)
second method, and (blue) EKF. (a) L̈s (0) = Ls /5 and R̈s (0) = Rs /5.
If it is not the case, the parameter estimation error may not
(b) L̈s (0) = Ls /5 and R̈s (0) = 5Rs . (c) L̈s (0) = 5Ls and R̈s (0) = 5Rs . vanish. As Ψf appears only in the q-current equation [see (1)],
(d) L̈s (0) = 5Ls and R̈s (0) = Rs /5. L̂s is not affected by the variations of Ψf . This will be verified
by experimentation. However, before that, let us evaluate the
Now, we can complete the comparison of these methods by impact of such an error on R̂s .
taking into account their execution times in the real target. Suppose Ψf 0 is the nominal value of Ψf . If Ψf 0 = Ψf , the
As expected, the EKF is computationally the most expensive voltage drop on the estimated resistance (R̂s · iq ) will absorb
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1955

Fig. 11. Estimated resistance at Ω = 500 r/min (simulation): (Green) First

method, (red) second method, and (blue) EKF. (a) Ψf 0 = 0.90 × Ψf .
(b) Ψf 0 = 1.10 × Ψf .

the voltage error term ω · (Ψf − Ψf 0 in such a way that the

voltage equations (1) and (2) remain verified in transitions and
steady state. Figs. 10 and 11 show this fact. For Ω = 1000 r/min
(ω ∼= 419 rad/s), 10% error on Ψf makes an error of about
4.8 V. Knowing that the q-current is about 5.5 A (iq = 5.5 A),
the resistance estimation error is about 4.8/5.5 ∼= 0.87 Ω. This
error corresponds to what we see in Fig. 10. It should be noted
that this steady-state error does not depend on the estimator
type: All three estimators converge to the same erroneous
resistance. This error depends only on the model (1) and (2).
Underestimation of Ψf leads to overestimation of Rs and vice
versa.
To show the dependence of this estimation error on the
angular speed, another test is performed. The rotor speed is
regulated at 500 r/min (ω ∼ = 209 rad/s) while the load torque is
maintained the same as in the previous test (iq = 5.5 A). Now,
for 10% error on Ψf , the voltage error term is about 2.4 V,
yielding a resistance steady state error of 0.43 Ω. Fig. 11
confirms this estimation error on R̂s .
This conclusion is verified by experimentations. Fig. 12
shows the experimental results when Ω = 1000 r/min. As
it can be seen, the estimated inductance L̂s is not affected
by the error on Ψf , whereas the estimated resistance R̂s
Fig. 12. Estimated parameters at Ω = 1000 r/min (experimentation): (Green)
behaves as in the simulations whatever its initial value is. First method, (red) second method, and (blue) EKF. (a) Ψf 0 = 0.90 × Ψf ,
As expected, the resistance estimation error is the same no L̈s (0) = Ls /5, and R̈s (0) = 5Rs . (b) Ψf 0 = 0.90 × Ψf , L̈s (0) = Ls /5,
matter which estimator is used. Table III summarizes these and R̈s (0) = Rs /5. (c) Ψf 0 = 1.10 × Ψf , L̈s (0) = Ls /5, and R̈s (0) =
results. 5Rs . (d) Ψf 0 = 1.10 × Ψf , L̈s (0) = Ls /5, and R̈s (0) = Rs /5.
1956 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 47, NO. 4, JULY/AUGUST 2011

TABLE III PMSM,” in Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Rome, Italy, Oct. 2000,
S ENSITIVITY TO Ψf AT (Ω = 1000 r/min, iq = 5.5 A) W ITH pp. 1283–1290.
EKF AND MRBE A PPLIED TO M ODEL (1) [7] K. Rajesh, R. A. Gupta, and A. K. Bansal, “Identification and
control of PMSM using artificial neural network,” in Proc. ISIE,
Jun. 2007, pp. 30–35.
[8] M. N. Uddin and M. M. I. Chy, “A novel fuzzy-logic-controller-based
torque and flux controls of IPM synchronous motor,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 1220–1229, May/Jun. 2010.
[9] L. Liu and D. A. Cartes, “Synchronisation based adaptive parameter
It can be concluded from these results that the estimation identification for permanent magnet synchronous motors,” IET Control
of Rs is highly sensitive to Ψf variations. According to the Theory Appl., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 1015–1022, Jul. 2007.
[10] Q. An and L. Sun, “On-line parameter identification for vector controlled
identifiability study in Section II, this conclusion is not really PMSM drives using adaptive algorithm,” in Proc. VPPC, Sep. 2008,
surprising. It is inherent to the model (1) and (2) and the pp. 1–6, [CD-ROM].
identification requirements presented in Section II. In fact, this [11] B. Nahid-Mobarakeh, F. Meibody-Tabar, and F. M. Sargos, “On-line iden-
tification of PMSM electrical parameters based on decoupling control,” in
important sensitivity is a good feature for detecting a PM fault Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Oct. 2001, pp. 266–273, [CD-ROM].
in the machine using a resistance estimator. [12] D. Arab Khaburi, F. Meibody-Tabar, and F. M. Sargos, “On-line identi-
Other electrical faults can be detected by estimating the fication of electrical time constants of synchronous machines,” in Proc.
PEMC, Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 1998, vol. 3, pp. 184–188.
resistance. It is known that an interturn short circuit in stator [13] T. J. Vyncke, F. M. L. L. De Belie, R. K. Boel, J. A. A. Melkebeek,
windings creates an electrical unbalance in the machine. This Y. Cheng, and P. Lataire, “Identification of PM synchronous machines
leads to low frequency oscillations on the estimated resistance in the frequency domain by broadband excitation,” in Proc. SPEEDAM,
Jun. 2008, pp. 1253–1258.
which can be used as a fault feature. The mean value of the [14] M. Khov, J. Regnier, and J. Faucher, “On-line parameter estimation of
estimated resistance also changes and proposes another fault PMSM in open loop and closed loop,” in Proc. ICIT, Feb. 2009, pp. 1–6,
feature. [CD-ROM].
[15] J.-S. Ko, K.-G. Kim, Y.-J. Lee, and I.-D. Kim, “Precision speed control of
PMSM using disturbance observer and system parameter compensator,”
in Proc. PESC, Jun. 2003, vol. 1, pp. 251–255.
VII. C ONCLUSION [16] L. Sun, H. Li, and B. Xu, “Precise determination of permanent magnet
synchronous motor parameters based on parameter identification tech-
Three online identification methods for PMSM parameters nique,” in Proc. ICEMS, Nov. 2003, vol. 1, pp. 34–36.
have been studied and compared in this paper. The identifia- [17] L. Liu and D. A. Cartes, “On-line identification and robust fault diagnosis
bility of the machine parameters was analyzed. This analysis for nonlinear PMSM drives,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., Jun. 2005,
vol. 3, pp. 2023–2027.
showed that all parameters are not identifiable in steady state. [18] S. Bachir, S. Tnani, J. C. Trigeassou, and G. Champenois, “Diagnosis
Hence, according to desired objectives, one has to choose by parameter estimation of stator and rotor faults occurring in induc-
some parameters for online estimation while the others are tion machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 963–973,
Jun. 2006.
supposed to be known. It is obvious that the precision of the [19] S. S. Williamson, A. Khaligh, and A. Emadi, “Impact of utilizing selec-
estimation is related to the certainty on known parameters tive motor topologies and control strategies on the overall performance
independently from the nature of the estimator (EKF or others). of Integrated Starter Alternator (ISA) based HEVs,” in Proc. IEMDC,
May 2007, vol. 1, pp. 134–139.
Then, an online estimator was proposed and the stability of [20] A. Bruyère, T. Henneron, E. Semail, F. Locment, A. Bouscayrol,
the augmented system was studied. This study gives the con- J. M. Dubus, and J. C. Mipo, “Identification of a 7-phase claw-pole starter-
vergence conditions of the estimated parameters. It is shown alternator for a micro-hybrid automotive application,” in Proc. ICEM,
2008, pp. 1–6, [CD-ROM].
that the method using the decoupling control has the best [21] P. Kumar and P. Bauer, “Improved analytical model of a permanent-
characteristics: The convergence of the estimated parameters magnet brushless DC motor,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 44, no. 10,
is decoupled, and the execution time is much less than that pp. 2299–2309, Oct. 2008.
[22] B. Vaseghi, N. Takorabet, and F. Meibody-Tabar, “Fault analysis and pa-
of EKF. The simulation and experimental results illustrate the rameter identification of permanent-magnet motors by the finite-element
validity of the analytical study. The proposed model reference method,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 3290–3295, Sep. 2009.
online identification method can be used for detecting some [23] B. Nahid-Mobarakeh, F. Meibody-Tabar, and F.-M. Sargos, “Robustness
study of a model-based technique for mechanical sensorless PMSM,” in
electrical faults in the drive. Proc. PESC, Jun. 2001, vol. 2, pp. 811–816.
[24] K.-W. Lee, D.-H. Jung, and I.-J. Ha, “An online identification method
for both stator resistance and back-EMF coefficient of PMSMs without
R EFERENCES rotational transducers,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, no. 2,
[1] W. Leonhard, Control of Electrical Drives. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 507–510, Apr. 2004.
1996. [25] B. Nahid-Mobarakeh, F. Meibody-Tabar, and F.-M. Sargos, “Back EMF
[2] T. Boileau, B. Nahid-Mobarakeh, and F. Meibody-Tabar, “On-line identi- estimation-based sensorless control of PMSM: Robustness with respect to
fication of PMSM parameters: Model-reference vs EKF,” in Proc. Conf. measurement errors and inverter irregularities,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Oct. 2008, pp. 1–8, [CD-ROM]. vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 485–494, Mar./Apr. 2007.
[3] S. Wang, S. Shi, C. Chen, G. Yang, and Z. Qu, “Identification of PMSM [26] Y. Inoue, K. Yamada, S. Morimoto, and M. Sanada, “Effectiveness of
based on EKF and Elman neural network,” in Proc. ICAL, Aug. 2009, voltage error compensation and parameter identification for model-based
pp. 1459–1463. sensorless control of IPMSM,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 45, no. 1,
[4] T. Liu, I. Husain, and M. Elbuluk, “Torque ripple minimization with on- pp. 213–221, Jan./Feb. 2009.
line parameter estimation using neural networks in permanent magnet [27] S. Diop and M. Fliess, “Nonlinear observability, identifiability, and per-
synchronous motors,” in Proc. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Oct. 1998, vol. 1, sistent trajectories,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Control, Dec. 1991,
pp. 35–40. vol. 1, pp. 714–719.
[5] M. A. Rahman and M. A. Hoque, “On-line adaptive artificial neural [28] H. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
network based vector control of permanent magnet synchronous motors,” 1996.
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 311–318, Dec. 1998. [29] M. Chadli, D. Maquin, and J. Ragot, “Nonquadratic stability analy-
[6] B. Nahid-Mobarakeh, F. Meibody-Tabar, and F. M. Sargos, “A sis of Takagi-Sugeno models,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Decision Control,
self-organizing intelligent controller for speed and torque control of a Dec. 2002, vol. 2, pp. 2143–2148.
BOILEAU et al.: ONLINE IDENTIFICATION OF PMSM PARAMETERS 1957

Thierry Boileau received the M.S. degree (DEA Babak Nahid-Mobarakeh (M’05) received the
PROTEE) and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engi- Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the In-
neering from the Institut National Polytechnique de stitut National Polytechnique de Lorraine (INPL),
Lorraine (INPL), Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France, in France, in 2001.
2004 and 2010, respectively. From 2001 to 2006, he was with the “Centre
Currently, he is with the “Groupe de Recherche en de Robotique, Electrotechnique et Automatique,”
Electrotechnique et Electronique de Nancy,” INPL. Amiens, France, as an Assistant Professor with the
His main research interests are diagnostics and University of Picardie, Amiens. Currently, he is with
control of electrical machines supplied by static the “Groupe de Recherche en Electrotechnique et
converters. Electronique de Nancy,” “Institut National Polytech-
nique de Lorraine,” Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
His main research interests are in nonlinear and robust control techniques
applied to power systems.

Farid Meibody-Tabar received the Engineer degree

Nicolas Leboeuf received the Engineer degree from
from Ecole Nationale d’Electricité et de Mécanique
Ecole Nationale d’Electricité et de Mécanique of
of Nancy (ENSEM), Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France,
Nancy (ENSEM), Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France, in
2009. He is currently working toward the Ph.D. in 1982, and the Ph.D. and “Habilitation à diriger
des recherches” degrees from the Institut National
degree in the “Groupe de Recherche en Electrotech-
Polytechnique de Lorraine (INPL), Vandoeuvre-lès-
nique et Electronique de Nancy,” “Institut National
Nancy, in 1986 and 2000, respectively.
Polytechnique de Lorraine,” Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy.
His main research interests are fault detection and Since 2000, he has been a Professor with INPL.
His research activities in the Groupe de Recherche
modeling and control of electric machines.
en Electrotechnique et Electronique de Nancy deal
with electric machines and their supply and control.