2368
10, OCTOBER 2009
Fuzzy-Logic-Based Sliding-Mode Controller Design
for Position-Sensorless Electric Vehicle
Jian-Bo Cao and Bing-Gang Cao
Abstract—A control system by means of the back electromotive
force method is designed for the position-sensorless electric vehi-
cle (EV) after analyzing the principle of position-sensorless con-
trol for brushless dc motor. Aiming at the main problems of EV:
variation of model and short driving range, a fuzzy sliding-mode
controller (FSMC) with regeneration is designed for the EV. The
controller uses fuzzy switching gain adjustment to avoid the whip-
pings. The experimental results show that the control system of
position-sensorless EV can successfully achieve position-sensorless
commutation control and replace Hall sensors. FSMC possesses
better performance and higher efficiency than the proportional–
integral–differential controller. Additionally, it can recover more
energy and increase more driving range.
Index Terms—Electric machines, fuzzy control, fuzzy logic, mo-
tion control, motor drives, position control, sliding block codes.
I. INTRODUCTION
UE to the dual pressure from environmental pollution
D and energy crisis, the development of electric vehicles
(EVs), called “green vehicles” [1], [2] has become a general
trend. EVs have improved their performance, and have also been
made suitable for commercial and domestic use during the last
decades. At present, EVs commonly comprise five parts: control
system, motor, batteries, bodywork, and charger. Control system
as EV’s brain is a very important part of the whole system, and,
to a great extent, determines the entire vehicle performance,
as it is the key to improve motor efficiency, lengthen the life
of batteries, increase driving range, and optimize control. In
the driving and regenerative-braking process, the road state, the
driving mode, and the voltage of batteries are variational. To
improve the stability and reliability of EV, the control strategy
for driving and braking should be earnestly researched [3]. The
problem that EVs still have not achieved ranges as good as gas-
powered conventional vehicles restricts EV’s fast development.
It is very significant for the increase in range that the technology
of energy-regenerative braking is applied to EVs [4]–[6]. Since
a permanent-magnet motor can work as a dynamo in the braking
process, we designed an intelligent control system for EV, which
can recover electrical energy to batteries from the vehicle’s
kinetic energy while braking, and has the following advantages:
saving energy, increasing driving range, having no mechanical
braking noise, and so on.
Manuscript received June 2, 2008; revised November 9, 2008 and February
14, 2009. Current version published September 11, 2009. Recommended for
publication by Associate Editor A. A. Consoli.
J.-B. Cao is with the Transportation College, Zhejiang Normal University,
Jinhua 321004, China (e-mail: caojianbo2008@163.com).
B.-G. Cao is with the Research and Development Center of Electric Vehicle,
Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2009.2020429
0885-8993/$26.00 © 2009 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO.
Because of a series of advantages such as simple structure,
reliable performance, high efficiency, large starting torque, etc.,
the brushless dc motor (BLDCM) has been widely applied
in the field of EVs [7], [8]. However, BLDCM still suffers from
the extra mechanical position sensor for proper commutation.
As a result, when a disturbance occurs on the position sensor,
BLDCM will run unsteady, and noise is produced. Additionally,
the position sensor is easily damaged and poses difficulty in re-
pair. The cost of BLDCM also increases due to the presence of
the position sensor. Therefore, research on position-sensorless
control for BLDCM has become a focus in recent years [9], [10].
In this paper, a position-sensorless BLDCM is employed for the
EV. In order to eliminate the position sensor, many position-
sensorless control methods of BLDCM with trapezoidal back
electromotive force (BEMF) have been proposed in the litera-
ture over the last two decades, such as the BEMF method, the
phase current method, the magnetic linkage method, the model
reference position estimation method, etc. [11]–[16]. Though
the BEMF method is popular and widely used because of its
easy implementation, yet it has the drawback of measurement
error at low speed. To eliminate the influence of measurement
error at low speed, the BEMF method is improved in this paper
from a hardware and software viewpoint, by suitably discon-
necting the reference point of detection circuit from the battery
cathode, and by phase-shifting compensation of BEMF.
Nowadays, the proportional–integral–differential (PID) con-
troller has been widely used in the industrial field. It has a simple
structure, and can be easily realized. Yet, the PID controller has
its shortcomings, especially for a target that is nonlinear and un-
certain. EV’s working condition is complicated and dynamic, so
the advanced control algorithm should be researched to improve
the performance of EV and the energy-regenerative efficiency.
Using rotational speed and acceleration as the state variables,
the sliding-mode controller (SMC) for EV could improve the
robustness and real-time performance of the system [17]. Yet,
it is unable to resist disturbance while S-function is on the
way of approaching the sliding plane. A fuzzy controller has
good self-adaptability and the merit of not needing a precise
model [18]–[20]. Yet, it does not have the strong robustness
and real-time performance of SMC. This paper combines fuzzy
controller and SMC; the fuzzy controller adaptively outputs the
switching gain adjustment of the SMC online and ensures the
robustness while S-function is approaching the sliding plane.
Based on establishing the mathematical model of the control
system, the fuzzy SMC (FSMC) for the position-sensorless EV
was developed and tested successfully by different experiments.
Additionally, a traditional PID controller was also provided in
this paper, and the experimental comparison between FSMC
CAO AND CAO: FUZZY-LOGIC-BASED SLIDING-MODE CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS ELECTRIC VEHICLE 2369

Fig. 1. Control system of position-sensorless EV.

Fig. 3. Ideal waveforms of BEMFs.

In permitted scope, the assumption [24] is as follows.

1) The stator winding is a concentrative winding with 120◦
equispacing. It is a “Y” connection.
2) The winding is distributed equably on the smooth surface
of the stator.
3) The magnetic saturation is neglected. Vortex and magnetic
hysteresis losses are neglected.
4) The armature reaction is neglected and the distribution of
air-gap field is uniform.
The voltage equation of the three-phase BLDCM is
       
ua ra 0 0 ia La 0 0 ia
Fig. 2. Driving circuit topology of BLDCM.
     d   
 ub  =  0 rb 0   ib  +  0 Lb 0   ib 
dt
and PID controllers was done and analyzed. As a result, FSMC uc 0 0 rc ic 0 0 Lc ic
could obtain a better control effect.    
ea uo
   
+  eb  +  uo  (1)
II. CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS EV
ec uo
The control system of position-sensorless EV designed in this
paper is shown in Fig. 1. The work process of the control system where
is as follows: the control chip detects driving/braking signal ua , ub , uc phase winding voltage of stator (in volts);
and BEMF position signal, then transmits the corresponding ea , eb , ec phase winding BEMF of the stator (in volts);
pulsewidth modulation (PWM) signal and six logic signals to ia , ib , ic phase winding current of stator (in amperes);
IR2103, which modulates the six MOSFETs to drive BLDCM. ra , rb , rc phase winding resistance of stator (in ohms);
Through the velocity calculation and the electric current detec- La , Lb , Lc phase winding inductance of stator (in henrys);
tion, the control chip obtains the feedback results. After control and
algorithm processing, the control chip outputs the corresponding uo neutral voltage of BLDCM (in volts).
results again, and forms a closed-loop control. Because the motor’s three phases are similar, in permitted
scope, ra = rb = rc = rm , La = Lb = Lc = Lm , and (1) can
III. POSITION-SENSORLESS CONTROL OF BLDCM be simplified as
      
This study employed a BLDCM with trapezoidal BEMF and ua rm 0 0 ia Lm 0 0
120◦ electric angle. The equivalent circuit topology of BLDCM      d  
 ub  =  0 rm 0   ib  +  0 Lm 0 
is shown in Fig. 2, where T1–T6 are MOSFETs. dt
uc 0 0 rm ic 0 0 Lm
The BLDCM work involves six states. In accordance with      
the rotor’s position, six MOSFETs work in defined conduct- ia ea uo
ing sequence so that the magnetic field generated by three      
×  ib  +  eb  +  uo  . (2)
phases A, B, and C of BLDCM can make the rotor circumrotate
ic ec uo
[21]–[23]. The ideal waveforms of BLDCM’s BEMFs are shown
in Fig. 3, where m1–m6 are zero-crossing points and n1–n6 are As shown in Fig. 3, the waveforms of BEMFs are good signals
commutation points. to estimate the rotor’s position. However, the BEMFs cannot be
2370 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009

TABLE I
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BEMFS AND MOSFETS

Fig. 4. BEMF detection circuit.

detected directly, and hence should be obtained indirectly. The
zero-crossing points of BEMFs can be obtained from ua , ub ,
and uc . In this case, we take phases A and B conducting as an
example so as to analyze the principle, and, at this time, ia =
−ib , ea = −eb , and ic = 0. So, the neutral voltage equation and
the BEMF equation of phase C can be deduced from (2) as
follows:

ua + ub
uo = (3)
2
ua + ub
ec = uc − uo = uc − . (4)
2

As earlier, the BEMF equations of phases A and B can be

Fig. 5. Waveforms of u a 2 , u b 2 , and u c 2 .
obtained as follows:

ub + uc
ea = ua − (5)
2
ua + uc
eb = ub − . (6)
2
From (4)–(6), BEMFs ea , eb , and ec do not include neutral
voltage uo , and can be obtained from ua , ub , and uc directly.
As shown in Fig. 3, if the zero-crossing points of ea , eb , and
ec are obtained, then by delaying the electric angle by 30◦ , the
commutation points can be obtained. The relationship between
BEMFs and MOSFETs is shown in Table I.
This study involved the design of the detection circuit of
BEMFs, as shown in Fig. 4. To eliminate the influence of the
motor neutral point, the reference point of detection circuit is
disconnected from the battery cathode, and the virtual neutral
point N is taken as the reference point, uN ≈ uo . In addition,
point N is connected to the ground of the controller so that uref
would not change along with the speed of BLDCM, because
the ground of detection circuit is different from that of the main
circuit, and uref is no longer subject to the influence of the
main circuit. After sampling voltages ua1 , ub1 , and uc1 are
compared with uref , zero-crossing signals ua2 , ub2 , and uc2 can
be obtained, as shown in Fig. 5. The controller will carry out
commutation control according to these signals.
Because BEMF detection circuit employs an RC filter, the
phase shifting of zero-crossing point is inevitable, which makes
the position detection inaccurate. The phase-shifting compen-
sation must be done during application [25].
In this case, take phase A as an example. The transfer function
of ua1 –ua can be deduced from Fig. 4 as follows:
ua1 R2
= . (7)
ua R1 + R2 + R1R2C1s
From (7), its phase-shifting angle can be calculated as
2πR1R2C1f
α = arctan (8)
R1 + R2
where f is the frequency of BEMF.
As shown in Fig. 6(a), when 0o ≤ α ≤ 30o , if the influence
of phase-shifting angle α is not considered, the actual commu-
tation point will offset from point n3 to point n 3. Therefore, the
adjusted angle of phase shifting should be: β = 30o − α, i.e.,
when the zero-crossing point is gained, the controller will carry
out commutation after delaying the electric angle β. In this case,
the adjusted angle of phase shifting may also be β = 90o − α; at
this time, the actual commutation point will offset to point n4. As
shown in Fig. 6(b), when 30o < α ≤ 60o , the adjusted angle of
phase shifting is β = 90o − α. Because α is too big to lose com-
mutation point n3, so the actual commutation point must offset
to point n4. So, whenever 0o ≤ α ≤ 30o or 30o < α ≤ 60o , the
adjusted angle of phase shifting can entirely be β = 90o − α,
which can avoid the complexity of program and lead to better
reliability.
CAO AND CAO: FUZZY-LOGIC-BASED SLIDING-MODE CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS ELECTRIC VEHICLE 2371

Fig. 6. Phase-shifting principle. (a) 0o ≤ α ≤ 30 o . (b) 30 o < α ≤ 60 o .

T1_OFF (d · T < t ≤ T )

dim
(La + Lb ) = −ea − eb − im · (ra + rb + rt + rd ) (10)
dt
where d is the duty cycle of T1_PWM, T is the operation period
of T1_PWM, vb is the voltage of batteries, rbat is the equiva-
lent series resistance (ESR) of the batteries, rt is the ESR of a
Fig. 7. Equivalent circuit topology as buck converter. MOSFET conducting, rd is the ESR of the diode, and im is the
phase winding current of stator.
Because the motor’s three phases are similar, in permitted
IV. DRIVING AND REGENERATIVE-BRAKING PROCESS AND scope, have: La = Lb = Lm , ea = eb = em , and ra = rb =
THEIR MATHEMATICAL MODELS [26]–[28] rm . Then, (9) and (10) can be simplified as
A. Driving Process and Its Mathematical Model dim
2Lm = vb − 2em − im · (rbat + 2rm + 2rt ) (11)
The driving circuit topology of the control system is shown in dt
Fig. 2, which includes four batteries, a three-phase full-bridge dim
circuit, and a BLDCM. In this paper, the three-phase BLDCM 2Lm = −2em − im · (2rm + rt + rd ). (12)
dt
works according to six states, and in any state, the two-phase
work principle is the same. The BLDCM could be seen as a According to the deflecting couple equilibrium
dc motor under the condition of two phases conducting. In this
case, take phases A and B as an example to establish the driv- dω
J = Kt im − TL (13)
ing equivalent circuit and mathematical model. During driving dt
process, the current flow direction is shown in Fig. 2 (phases A em = Ke ω (14)
and B); at this time, T1 is PWM, T4 is ON, and other MOSFETs
are OFF. The batteries drive the BLDCM by means of the buck where J is the moment of inertia, ω is the rotational speed of
converter. The equivalent circuit topology for driving is shown motor, Kt is the torque coefficient, TL is the load torque, and
in Fig. 7. Ke is the BEMF coefficient of armature winding.
The mathematical model can be established as follows (see Suppose state variables are x = [ im ω ]T , output is y = im .
Fig. 7, for example). Hence, after average processing, we have (15), as shown at the
While T1 is in conducting state and cutoff state, the state bottom of this page.
equations are, respectively, described as Suppose the intermediate variable is u = d. After handling
by the perturbation method, and separation of steady-state vari-
T1_ON (0 ≤ t ≤ dT )
ables and instant variables, the linear small-signal mathematical
dim model of driving can be obtained as follows (16), as shown at
(La + Lb ) = vb − ea − eb − im · (rbat + ra + rb + 2rt ) the bottom of the next page, where D and X are, respectively,
dt
(9) the circuit steady values of d and x.

  2r +r +(r +r )d + r (1 − d)
 m t bat t d Ke   v d 
b

 − −
 
ẋ =  2L m Lm   2Lm 
x +  
Kt TL . (15)

 0 −

 J J

y = [1 0]x
2372 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009

Fig. 8. Equivalent circuit topology as boost converter.

Fig. 9. FSMC diagram.

B. Regenerative-Braking Process and Its Mathematical Model tem is controlled by making S-function tend to zero, and the
tracking error will also tend to zero. Additionally, FSMC does
While braking, EV works in the regenerative state, and
not require the precise mathematical model, and could soften
BLDCM works as a dynamo. The main circuit topology is the
the control signal to reduce or avoid the whippings that common
same as that of driving. In this case, we still take phases A and B
SMC has, and hence, it has good robustness [29]–[33].
as an example to establish the regenerative-braking equivalent
Fig. 9 shows the FSMC designed in this paper, which uses
circuit and mathematical model. While regenerative braking,
the fuzzy switching gain adjustment to eliminate the distur-
T2 is PWM, other MOSFETs are OFF, and the equivalent circuit
bance according to the condition of sliding-mode motion; there-
topology and the current flow direction are shown in Fig. 8. At
fore, it could avoid the whippings, ensure the robustness while
this time, batteries are charged by the boost converter. In the
S-function is approaching the sliding plane, and improve the sta-
whole regenerative-braking process, T2, T4, and T6 are PWM,
bility and reliability of the system. During the driving process,
in turn, according to the defined sequence, and other MOSFETs
the input of the controller is r = im ref , the output is y = im .
are OFF. As a result, the vehicle’s kinetic energy is converted into
During the regenerative-braking process, the input is r = ibatref ,
electrical energy, which can avoid the waste of energy, lengthen
the output is y = ibat . The uncertainties and disturbances in-
the life of batteries, increase the driving range, and have no
clude the parameter perturbation, the unmodeled dynamics, the
mechanical braking noise.
variation of the battery voltage, the road state, and the driving
Similar to driving, a regenerative-braking mathematical
mode of the vehicle.
model can be obtained as follows.
Suppose state variables are x = [ im ω ]T , output is y =
B. FSMC Design for Position-Sensorless EV
ibat , and intermediate variable is u = d. After average pro-
cessing, handling by perturbation method, and separation of Consider the uncertainty of the control system; its state equa-
steady-state variables and instant variables, the linear small- tion could be expressed as
signal mathematical model of regenerative braking can be ob- ẋ = (A + ∆A)x + (B + ∆B)u + (P + ∆P )f (18)
tained as follows (17), as shown at the bottom of this page.
where x ∈ Rn , u ∈ R, f ∈ R, ∆A, and ∆B are the variable
uncertain parameters, and P and ∆P are the disturbances.
V. FSMC DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS EV
Suppose the system satisfies the match condition
A. FSMC Introduction
∆A = B Ã, ∆B = B B̃, P + ∆P = B P̃ .
FSMC combines fuzzy controller and SMC together, and
Because ∆A, ∆B, B, P , and ∆P have been defined in (18),
has the advantages of both. The control target changes from
Ã, B̃, and P̃ could be deduced from them. Then
tracking error to sliding-mode function, the input is not
[e, ė, ë. . ., e(n −1) ], yet is (s, ṡ), which is always 2-D. The sys- ẋ = (A + B Ã)x + (B + B B̃)u + (B P̃ )f. (19)

  2r + r + (r + r )D + r (1 − D)
 m t bat t d Ke  
rd − rbat − rt
  vb 

 − −
 
 ẋ =  2L m Lm  
0
 Xu + 2Lm u
x + 2Lm
Kt 0 0 0 (16)

 0

 J

y = [1 0]x

  2r + r + r D + (r + r )(1 − D)
 m d t d bat Ke  
rd + rbat − rt
  vb 

 −
 
 ẋ =  2Lm Lm  
0
 Xu + 2Lm u
x + 2Lm
Kt 0 0 0 . (17)

 − 0

 J

y = [ 1 − D 0 ] x + [ −1 0 ] Xu
CAO AND CAO: FUZZY-LOGIC-BASED SLIDING-MODE CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS ELECTRIC VEHICLE 2373

The system can be simplified as

ẋ = Ax + B[u(t) + E(t)] (20)
where E(t) = Ãx + B̃u(t) + P̃ f includes the uncertainty and
disturbance.
In this case, take the driving mathematical model as an ex-
ample; its state equation is like (16), where
x = [ x1 x2 ]T = [ im ω ]T

A11 A12
A=
A21 A22
 2r + r + (r + r )D + r (1 − D) Ke 
m t bat t d
− −
 2Lm Lm 
= 
Kt
0
J
   vb 
 rd − rbat − rt
B1 0
B= = 2Lm  X + 2Lm . Fig. 10. Fuzzy input membership function.
B2 0 0 0
Because B2 = 0, then ẋ1 = A11 x1 + A12 x2 + B1 [u(t) +
E(t)], where B1 E(t) is the uncertainty and disturbance. To
counteract E(t), define
K(t) = max(|B1 E(t)|) + ε (21)
where ε > 0.
In order to satisfy the global sliding-mode condition, define
e = x1d − x1 , where x1d is the reference state vector of x1 .
Now, we define the S-function as follows:
s = ė + ce − F (t) (22)
where c > 0, and F (t) must satisfy the following conditions.
1) F (0) = ė0 + ce0 ;
2) when t → ∞, F (t) → 0; and
3) F (t) has an one-order derivative.
Hence, define F (t) = F (0)e−λt , where λ > 0. Fig. 11. Fuzzy output membership function.
The sliding mode control rule can be designed as
TABLE II
u(t) = B1−1 [c−1 ë + ẋ1d − A11 x1 MOTOR PARAMETERS

−A12 x2 + K(t)sgn(s) − c−1 Ḟ (t)]. (23)

In order to verify the stability of the S-function, we define the
Lyapunov function as
1 2
V = s . (24)
2

Then
V̇ = sṡ = s[ë + cė − Ḟ (t)] = s[ë + cẋ1d − cẋ1 − Ḟ (t)]
= s[ë + cẋ1d − cA11 x1 − cA12 x2
− cB1 u(t) − cB1 E(t) − Ḟ (t)].
When u(t) is substituted by (23), (25) can be simplified as
V̇ = s[−cK(t)sgn(s) − cB1 E(t)]
= −c[K(t) |s| + B1 E(t)s] ≤ −cε |s| .
(25) Because c > 0, ε > 0, we get V̇ ≤ 0, and the S-function is
stable.
In the control rule (23), K(t) is the source that causes whip-
pings, and is used to counteract E(t) so that the sliding-mode
condition could be satisfied. If E(t) is time varying, K(t) should
(26)
be also time varying, and can make the sliding-mode motion
2374 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009

Fig. 12. Waveforms of u a 1 and u a 2 based on different reference points. (a) Battery cathode as reference point. (b) Neutral point N as reference point.

Fig. 13. Phase-shifting compensation experiments. (a) Waveform without compensation. (b) Waveform with compensation.

Fig. 14. Commutation control experiments. (a) Waveforms of u a and u b . (b) Waveforms of u a and u a 2 .

approach the sliding-mode plane. The value of K(t) should be resents the positive middle, and PB represents the positive
great enough to eliminate the influence caused by the uncertainty big.
and disturbance. Define the control rule of K(t) as follows. The universes of input sṡ and output ∆K could be defined,
respectively, as
Rule 1: If sṡ < 0, K(t) should be reduced.
Rule 2: If sṡ > 0, K(t) should be increased.
Define sṡ as input and ∆K as output. Then, their fuzzy sets
sṡ = {−15,−10, 0, 10, 15} ∆K = {−1.5,−0.5, 0, 0.5, 1.5}.
could be defined, respectively, as
sṡ = {NB NM ZO PM PB} ∆K = {NB NM ZO PM PB}
where NB represents the negative big, NM represents the The membership functions of input sṡ and output ∆K are,
negative middle, and ZO represents the zero part, PM rep- respectively, shown in Figs. 10 and 11.
CAO AND CAO: FUZZY-LOGIC-BASED SLIDING-MODE CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS ELECTRIC VEHICLE 2375

The fuzzy rules are defined as follows.

Rule 1: If sṡ is PB, then ∆K is PB.
Rule 2: If sṡ is PM, then ∆K is PM.
Rule 3: If sṡ is ZO, then ∆K is ZO.
Rule 4: If sṡ is NM then ∆Kis NM.
Rule 5: If sṡ is NB then ∆Kis NB.
Use the integral method to estimate the upper bound of K(t)
 t
K(t) = G ∆Kdt (27)
0 Fig. 15. Experimental equipment and environment.

where G is the proportion coefficient and G > 0.

VI. EXPERIMENTS AND ANALYSES

The controller designed in this paper was tested in the EV
made at Xi’an Jiaotong University Boyuan EV Company. The
EV employs a TMS320LF2407A digital signal processor from
Texas Instruments, Incorporated, as its control chip, a 500-W
BLDCM (its parameters are shown in Table II) with 48-V nom-
inal voltage made at Shanghai 21 Research Institute, and four
batteries with 48-V nominal voltage. The position-sensorless
control experiments of BLDCM were first done, and then the
performance experiments of controllers were done and com-
pared on the MTS-1 motor test system. In addition, the driving
and regenerative-braking experiments were, respectively, done
on the position-sensorless EV with the PID controller and the Fig. 16. Performance curves with PID controller.
FSMC. For different control methods, the comparative experi-
ments of the driving range were also done. The voltage, current,
and position signals in the experiments were tested and recorded
by a Textronix TDS1002 oscilloscope.

A. Position-Sensorless Control Experiments

The influence on position waveform, based on different ref-
erence points, is shown in Fig. 12, where (a) represents the
waveforms of ua1 and ua2 when the battery cathode is taken as
the reference point of the BEMF detection circuit, (b) represents
the waveforms of ua1 and ua2 when virtual neutral point N is
taken as the reference point of the BEMF detection circuit. In
contrast, we find that (b) eliminates the influence on the BEMF
detection circuit from the motor neutral point, and whenever
BLDCM runs at high or low speed (about 40 r/min), the zero-
crossing signals will not have undulation, which could improve Fig. 17. Performance curves with FSMC.
the reliability and stability of the control system.
In order to prove the effect of phase-shifting compensation,
we make the controller output the BEMF position waveform The controller designed in this paper could successfully achieve
position-sensorless commutation control and replace Hall
ua2 after phase-shifting compensation by software scheme, and
then compare the waveform ua2 with the actual Hall position sensors.
waveform Ha. As shown in Fig. 13(a), the waveform without
B. Performance Experiments of Controllers
compensation could not be used to drive the motor, because it
is not the actual commutation point. Fig. 13(b) is the waveform The performance of the controller was determined by the ex-
with compensation, which tallies with the actual commutation perimental equipment and environment shown in Fig. 15, which
waveform, and can achieve the expected effect. comprises BLDCM, batteries, controller, and MTS-1 motor test
The experimental results of position-sensorless commutation system. The experimental results were recorded by a special
control are shown in Fig. 14, where (a) is the relationship be- motor test software from Guangzhong Company. The PID con-
tween waveforms ua and ub . Fig. 14(b) is the relationship be- troller and the FSMC were, respectively, tested in the system.
tween waveforms ua and ua2 after phase-shifting compensation. The performance curves are shown in Figs. 16 and 17, where
2376
Fig. 18. Driving experiment comparison. (a) PID controller. (b) FSMC.
Fig. 19. Regenerative-braking experiment comparison. (a) PID controller. (b) FSMC.
U represents the input voltage of the controller, I represents the
input current of the controller, P1 represents the input power of
the controller, P2 represents the output power of the motor, M
represents the output torque of the motor, n represents the rota-
tional speed of the motor, efficiency (EFF) represents the system
working efficiency. When EV runs normally, the current value
of the motor is less than 15 A and the torque range of the motor
is 3–15 N·m. By comparison in the range, as shown in Figs. 16
and 17, we find that the FSMC possesses higher efficiency and
wider effective work sector than the PID controller. For exam-
ple, the maximum efficiency point in Fig. 17 is about 85.6%,
and the one in Fig. 16 is about 84.8%. The performance curves
of the FSMC are also superior to that of the PID controller.
Because FSMC has good self-adaptability and strong robust-
ness, it could adaptively output the switching gain adjustment
of the SMC online to ensure the robustness according to the work
condition. Therefore, the FSMC could make BLDCM work bet-
ter, and, consequently, enables EV to run more smoothly and
efficiently.
C. Driving and Regenerative-Braking Control Experiments
The driving and regenerative-braking control experiments
were done on the EV made at Boyuan EV Company. The
comparative experimental results of driving current, with the
PID controller and the FSMC, are shown in Fig. 18. To facil-
itate analysis and comparison, the output voltage of the sen-
sor was converted to the current value. Approximate step re-
sponse is used to test the startup performance of the controllers.
The reference value of the armature current is: im ref = 20 A.
In the startup process of EV, the FSMC has better perfor-
mance at response speed and steady-state tracking error than
the PID controller, for the PID controller has its shortcomings,
especially for the target that is nonlinear and uncertain. The
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009
three parameters of the PID controller are fixed, which makes
the controller inappropriate for complex nonlinear control
systems. When the working condition of the system is changed,
the PID controller cannot always maintain the best control
effect.
The regenerative-braking experiments were, respectively,
done with the PID controller and the FSMC at an initial speed
of 25 km/h, and the results are shown in Fig. 19. The refer-
ence value of the charge current is: ibatref = 5 A. During the
regenerative-braking process, the actual value of the charge cur-
rent with the PID controller is smaller than the reference one
and has a big undulation. Yet, the FSMC is superior to the PID
controller at response speed, steady-state tracking error, and re-
sisting disturbance, because it has good robustness. As a result,
it can improve the energy-regenerative efficiency and recover
more energy.
D. Driving Range Experiments
The main aim of researching the technology of energy-
regenerative braking is to increase the driving range of EV.
The experimental results with different control methods are
compared and shown in Fig. 20. The experiments were per-
formed at the same EV, load, and road conditions. The outdoor
temperature was about 28 ◦ C. A smooth and nontransportation
road section with 3 km was selected. The EV was braked one
time per 300 m, and the voltage of batteries was recorded one
time per 3 km. The initial voltage of the batteries was 54.2 V,
and the final voltage was 43.2 V. As shown in Fig. 20, the
FSMC with regeneration can recover more energy and increase
more driving range than the PID controller without regenera-
tion by about 20%, than the PID controller with regeneration by
about 5%.
CAO AND CAO: FUZZY-LOGIC-BASED SLIDING-MODE CONTROLLER DESIGN FOR POSITION-SENSORLESS ELECTRIC VEHICLE
Fig. 20. EV’s driving-range experiment comparison.
VII. CONCLUSION
In this paper, based on constructing position-sensorless
EV’s control system, the FSMC algorithm was applied to the
EV, and the following conclusion can be obtained from the
experiments.
The position-sensorless EV control system by means of
BEMF method disconnects the reference point of detection cir-
cuit from battery cathode, and can eliminate the influence on
BEMF detection circuit from motor neutral point, thus mak-
ing zero-crossing detection accurate even if at low speed. After
phase-shifting compensation, position-sensorless commutation
control of BLDCM can be successfully achieved. For using
the fuzzy switching gain adjustment, FSMC could avoid the
whippings of common SMC, so it has better robustness and
self-adaptability, and consequently, possesses higher efficiency
and wider effective work sector. In the driving and regenerative-
braking process of EV, comparing with PID controller, FSMC
possesses better performance at response speed, steady-state
tracking error, and resisting disturbance. Especially in the brak-
ing process, FSMC with regeneration could recover more energy
and increase more driving range than the PID controller with
regeneration by about 5%. This is very significant for saving
energy.
REFERENCES
[1] B. G. Cao, C. W. Zhang, Z. F. Bai, and J. C. Li, “Technology progress
and trends of electric vehicles,” J. Xi’an Jiaotong Univ., vol. 38, no. 1,
pp. 1–5, 2004.
[2] N. Mutoh, Y. Hayano, H. Yahagi, and K. Takita, “Electric braking control
methods for electric vehicles with independently driven front and rear
wheels,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 1168–1176, Apr.
2007.
[3] C. J. Higgins, H. S. Matthews, C. T. Hendrickson, and M. J. Small, “Lead
demand of future vehicle technologies,” Transp. Res. D, Transp. Environ.,
vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 103–114, 2007.
[4] J. W. Dixon and M. E. Ortúzar, “Ultracapacitors + dc–dc converters in
regenerative braking system,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 17,
no. 8, pp. 16–21, 2002.
2377
[5] C. W. Zhang, Z. F. Bai, B. G. Cao, and J. C. Li, “Study on regenerative
braking of electric vehicle,” in Proc. 4th Int. Power Electron. Motion
Control Conf., Xi’an, China, 2004, pp. 836–839.
[6] J. Moreno, M. E. Ortúzar, and J. W. Dixon, “Energy-management system
for a hybrid electric vehicle, using ultracapacitors and neural networks,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 614–623, Apr. 2006.
[7] L. Y. Liao, Z. F. Wang, Y. D. Deng, and X. L. Hu, “Simulation of a
permanent magnet brushless dc motor for electric vehicle using the bond
graph method,” J. Wuhan Univ. Technol., vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 192–195,
2003.
[8] D. K. Kim, K. W. Lee, and B. I. Kwon, “Commutation torque ripple
reduction in a position sensorless brushless dc motor drive,” IEEE Trans.
Power Electron., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 1762–1768, Nov. 2006.
[9] C. L. Xia, J. Wang, T. N. Shi, and S. H. Xu, “A novel method for torque
ripple minimization of the sensorless brushless dc motor,” J. Tianjin
Univ., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 432–436, 2005.
[10] C. T. Lin, C. W. Hung, and C. W. Liu, “Position sensorless control for
four-switch three-phase brushless dc motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 438–444, Jan. 2008.
[11] P. P. Acarnley and J. F. Watson, “Review of position-sensorless operation
of brushless permanent-magnet machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 352–362, Apr. 2006.
[12] T. Kim, H. W. Lee, and M. Ehsani, “Position sensorless brushless dc
motor/generator drives: Review and future trends,” IET Electric Power
Appl., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 557–564, 2007.
[13] N. Matsui, “Sensorless PM brushless dc motor drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 300–308, Apr. 1996.
[14] G. J. Su and J. W. McKeewer, “Low-cost sensorless control of brushless
dc motors with improved speed range,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 296–302, Mar. 2004.
[15] J. X. Shen and K. J. Tseng, “Analyses and compensation of rotor position
detection error in sensorless PM brushless dc motor drives,” IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 87–93, Mar. 2003.
[16] Y. S. Lai and Y. K. Lin, “Novel back-EMF detection technique of brushless
dc motor drives for wide range control without using current and position
sensors,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 934–940, Mar.
2008.
[17] J. C. Li, “Study of drive and regenerate brake control for an electric
vehicle,” Doctoral dissertation, Xi’an Jiaotong Univ., Xi’an, China, 2003.
[18] R. Pusca, Y. Ait-Amirat, A. Berthon, and J. M. Kauffman, “Fuzzy logic
based control for electric vehicle with four separate traction drives,” in
Proc. 55th IEEE Veh. Technol. Conf., 2002, pp. 2089–2096.
[19] J. Paterson and M. Ramsay, “Electric vehicle braking by fuzzy logic
control,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1993, pp. 2200–
2204.
[20] A. A. Ferreira, J. A. Pomilio, G. Spiazzi, and L. De Araujo Silva, “Energy
management fuzzy logic supervisory for electric vehicle power supplies
system,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 107–115, Jan.
2008.
[21] W. Chen and C. L. Xia, “Sensorless control of brushless dc motor based on
fuzzy logic,” in Proc. 6th World Congr. Intell. Control Autom., Dalian,
China, 2006, pp. 6298–6302.
[22] Y. S. Lai, F. S. Shyu, and S. S. Tseng, “New initial position detection
technique for three-phase brushless dc motor without position and current
sensors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 485–491, Mar./Apr.
2003.
[23] X. J. Zhang, “R&D on sensorless control technology for brushless dc
motor,” Doctoral dissertation, Shanghai Univ., Shanghai, China, 2001.
[24] H. X. Wu, S. K. Cheng, and S. M. Cui, “A controller of brushless dc motor
for electric vehicle,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 509–513, Jan.
2005.
[25] H. Yang, “Research of sensorless brushless direct current motor controller
of electric bicycle,” Doctoral dissertation, Xi’an Jiaotong Univ., Xi’an,
China, 2007.
[26] C. Zhang, Theory and Applications of Brushless DC Motor. Beijing,
China: China Machine Press, 2006.
[27] Z. F. Bai, “Research and development on ultracapacitor-battery composite
power system and its H ∞ robust control of electric vehicle,” Doctoral
dissertation, Xi’an Jiaotong Univ., Xi’an, China, 2006.
[28] H. J. Chiu and L. W. Lin, “A bidirectional dc–dc converter for fuel cell
electric vehicle driving system,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 21,
no. 4, pp. 950–958, Jul. 2006.
[29] C. F. Zhang, “Research on intelligent control theory and applications
of sliding mode variable structure,” Doctoral dissertation, Hunan Univ.,
Changsha, China, 2001.
2378 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2009

[30] J. K. Liu, MATLAB Simulation for Sliding Mode Control. Beijing, Bing-Gang Cao received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D.
China: Tsinghua Univ. Press, 2005. degrees in mechanical engineering from Xi’an
[31] Z. Z. Chen, C. H. Shan, and H. L. Zhu, “Adaptive fuzzy sliding mode Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China, in 1976, 1982, and
control algorithm for a non-affine nonlinear system,” IEEE Trans. Ind. 1992, respectively.
Inf., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 302–311, Nov. 2007. He is currently a Professor at the School of
[32] B. Yoo and W. Ham, “Adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control of nonlinear Mechanical Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University,
system,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 315–321, May 1998. where he is also the Director of the Research and
[33] R. J. Wai and K. H. Su, “Adaptive enhanced fuzzy sliding-mode control Development Center of Electric Vehicle. His current
for electrical servo drive,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 53, no. 2, research interests include robust control, intelligent
pp. 569–580, Apr. 2006. control of electric vehicles, noise and vibration con-
trol of liquid systems, and control technology of re-
newable energy.

Jian-Bo Cao was born in Shandong, China, in 1980.

He received the B.S. degree in mechanical engineer-
ing from Dalian Jiaotong University, Dalian, China,
in 2003, and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineer-
ing from Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China, in
2008.
He is currently working at the Transportation
College, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, China.
His current research interests include electric vehicle,
position-sensorless control, hybrid power, and intel-
ligent control.