On-line Identification of PMSM Parameters: Model-Reference vs EKF
Thierry Boileau, Babak Nahid-Mobarakeh, Member, Farid Meibody-Tabar, Member
Groupe de Recherche en Electrotechnique et Electronique de Nancy (GREEN), CNRS UMR 7037
ENSEM-INPL-Nancy University, 2 av. de la foret de Haye, 54516 Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy, France
Tel : +33-3-83595654, Fax : +33-3-83595653
babak.nahidmobarakeh@ensem.inpl-nancy.fr
Abstract―In this paper, a model-reference based on-line
identification method is proposed to estimate PMSM parameters.
The global stability of the augmented system is analyzed using
the second method of Lyapunov and the singular perturbations
theory. It is shown that this method may be applied with a
decoupling control technique that improves convergence
dynamics and overall system stability. This method is compared
with an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) based on-line
identification approach and it is shown that in spite of its
implementation complexity with respect to the proposed method,
EKF does not give better results than the proposed method. The
simulation results as well as the experimental ones, implemented
on a non-salient pole PMSM, illustrate the validity of the analytic
approach and confirm the same conclusions.
Index Terms------Nonlinear systems, parameter identification,
permanent-magnet synchronous machines (PMSMs), decoupling
control.
I. INTRODUCTION
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Machines (PMSMs) are
successfully used in different domains because of their high
efficiency and good controllability. Their control is frequently
realized by the vector control because of its high dynamic
performances [1]. Whatever the variable to be controlled
(speed, position, or torque) is, the main difficulty lies in the
necessity of controlling the torque, which implies the control
of the stator currents. To do this in the vector control, the
stator current and voltage vectors are mapped into a new plane
called d-q Park reference frame. Then, to control the stator
current, one has to control its direct (d-) and in quadrature (q-)
components. The electrical model of PMSMs in d-q reference
frame is a two input-two output system as follow [1]:
⎡vd ⎤ ⎡id ⎤ ⎡ Ld 0 ⎤ d ⎡id ⎤ ⎡ 0 − Lq ⎤ ⎡id ⎤ ⎡ed ⎤ (1)
⎢ ⎥= Rs ⎢ ⎥+ ⎢ ⎥ dt ⎢ ⎥ +ω ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥+⎢ ⎥
⎣vq ⎦ ⎣iq ⎦ ⎣ 0 Lq ⎦ ⎣iq ⎦ ⎣ Ld 0 ⎦ ⎣iq ⎦ ⎣eq ⎦
where ed = 0 and eq = Ψf ω = Kf Ω are the back-EMF vector d-
q components; vd, vq, id and iq are d-q voltages and currents,
ω=PΩ is the rotor electrical angular speed, Ω is the rotor
mechanical angular speed and P is the number of pole pairs.
The system inputs are vd and vq while its outputs are id and iq.
These currents are controlled according to a proper control law
that gives the stator voltage to be applied by a voltage source
inverter. The inverter is often modeled by a constant gain Gv.
Then, we have vd=Gvvdr and vq=Gvvqr where vdr and vqr are the
current regulators outputs. They are used to regulate d-q
currents to their references. For non salient pole PMSMs, d-
978-1-4244-2279-1/08/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE
current reference (idref) is often fixed to zero and the motor
torque and speed are controlled by q-current reference (iqref).
Ψf, Rs, Lq and Ld are parameters of the model. The machine
electrical time constants are τd=Ld/Rs and τq=Lq/Rs. In practice,
these parameters are not known exactly and they vary slowly.
These variations may be due to a variable operating point or a
fault [2]. They are sometimes fatal to the controlled system
and may damage the drive. In these cases, an on-line
identification algorithm is needed. It permits to estimate
permanently the machine parameters used in the control
algorithm or to detect a fault.
Some solutions have been presented in the literature. In [3]
and [4], the authors propose an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF)
to estimate the machine parameters. Here, we use a similar
approach to compare with our method. A solution based on the
decoupling control [5] and another one using artificial neural
networks [6] have been proposed. Another method based on
the machine transient electrical response is given in [7]. To do
that, the authors have to excite the machine even in the steady
state in order to create a transient response. In this paper,
knowing that our two input-two output system (1) has four
steady stats gains1, we avoid the transient response. Thus, the
control algorithm is the same and it has not to be modified for
on-line identification.
In this paper, three on-line identification methods are
studied. We begin by a technique based on output error
cancellation in a model-reference approach. Then, the same
principle is applied while the system is decoupled. Finally, the
application of a Kalman filter to the PMSM parameter
identification is studied. For the first two cases, the stability of
the augmented system (including the machine, its control and
the parameter estimator) is analyzed using singular
perturbations theory and the second method of Lyapunov. This
analysis shows that the method based on decoupling control
shows the best characteristics.
This paper is organized in five sections. The identification
method based on a model reference output error cancellation is
presented and analyzed in the second section. Then, the
decoupling control and its advantages in on-line parameter
identification are illustrated in the third section. In section IV,
an extended Kalman filter is developed for estimating the
machine parameters. Simulation and experimental results
show the validity of presented approaches in the fifth section.
1
Indeed, there are only three gains. It can be easily shown that the system
steady state gains depend on Rs, Ldω and Lqω.
1
 II. ON-LINE PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION BASED ON
MODEL REFERENCE OUTPUT ERROR CANCELLATION
A. Introduction
The estimation method that we propose in this section is a
reference model based estimation technique. The reference
model contains the estimated parameters and generates an
output vector that is compared to the actual outputs of the
system. Then, the estimated parameters are adjusted in order
to cancel the error between the actual and estimated outputs.
The block diagram of this method applied to PMSMs is shown
in Fig. 1. The block Model in this figure represents the
reference model and has the same form of (1), but its
parameters ( R̂s , L̂d and L̂q ) are the estimated ones. The
~ ~
the origin ( Ls = Rs =0 ) is analyzed using the second method
of Lyapunov and the singular perturbations theory.
Note- It is obvious that the estimated parameters must be
limited to their minimum and maximum values in order to
respect the physical constraints of the machine:
0<L̂smin ≤ L̂s ≤ L̂s max (4)
0<R̂smin ≤ R̂s ≤ R̂s max
B. Local Stability Analysis
For our stability analysis, we suppose that the machine
parameters vary slowly with respect to the other variables:

estimator has to correct these estimations in order to achieve a d L ≅0

dt s (5)
null output error ~ ~ ~ T
[ ]
i = ie − i = id iq . Here, we suppose that d R ≅0
dt s
Ψf is a known constant and the machine is a non-salient one
(Ld=Lq=Ls). For the case of Ld≠Lq, we will present a variant of From this hypothesis, we can simplify (1) and (2) to their
our method capable of estimating Ld and Lq separately. The electrical steady state expressions and from (3), we can show
reference model for a non-salient pole machine is the that the parameter estimation errors are described as follow:
following:
d ~ (~
R L + L − Ls Rs + Rs
Ls = −ω K d i q s s ~ 2s
)~
( )
⎡ide ⎤ ⎡ide ⎤ ⎡0 −1⎤ ⎡ide ⎤ ⎡ 0 ⎤
L̂s d ⎢ ⎥ = −R̂s ⎢ ⎥ − L̂s ω ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ −⎢ ⎥
⎡vdr ⎤
+Gv ⎢ ⎥ (2) dt ( ) (
~ 2
Rs + Rs + Ls + Ls ω 2 )
dt ⎣iqe ⎦ ⎣iqe ⎦ ⎣1 0 ⎦ ⎣iqe ⎦ ⎣Ψ f ω⎦ ⎣vqr ⎦ d ~
~
( ~ ~
) (
~
R R + R + Ls Ls + Ls ω 2
R s = K q i q s s ~ s2 (6) )
The estimator has to correct these estimations in order to
~
dt ( ) (
~ 2
R s + Rs + Ls + Ls ω 2 )
achieve a null output error i =ie −i . where R ~ ~
and Ls = L̂s − Ls . To study the local
s = R̂ s − R s
To estimate the machine parameters, we propose the
stability of the system (6), we linearize it around the origin
following estimation laws:
t ( L~s = R~s =0 ) for a given operating point (id, iq and ω constant):
~
L̂s(t )= L̂s(t0 )− ∫ K d id (σ)dσ
t0 d L~ = −ωK i Rs ~ L ~
Ls + ωK d iq 2 s 2 2 Rs
t dt s d q
Rs 2 + Ls 2ω2 Rs + Ls ω
~
R̂s (t )= R̂s (t0 )− ∫ K q iq (σ )dσ (3)
~ Ls ω2 ~ ~
dR R (7)
t0 s = K q iq L + K qiq 2 s 2 2 Rs
2 2 s
dt 2
Rs + Ls ω Rs + Ls ω
The estimator gains Kd and Kq have to be chosen to ensure
the convergence of the parameter estimation errors to zero. Now, from the state matrix of the linear system (7), it can be
This needs a complete study of the closed-loop system concluded that the system (6) is locally asymptotically stable
behavior. This system (shown in Fig. 1) is nonlinear, and its at L~s = R~s =0 if:
order is relatively high. To carry out this study, we make a
stability analysis in two phases. At first, a local stability K q iq <ωK d iq (8)
analysis gives some hints to find the estimator coefficients Kd ω K d K q <0
and Kq. Then, the stability of the desired equilibrium point at

+ Model
ie

~
− e/Gv
Estimator
i +
−
Ωref + Speed iref + Current vr VSI
v + Machine i Machine
Regulator Regulators (electrical) (mechanical)
− − −
e

Fig. 1. Model-reference based on-line identification of PMSM parameters.

2
It means that the parameter estimation errors L~s and R~s
converge to zero if they are initially sufficiently small (local
stability) and the conditions (8) are satisfied. One may choose
the following for satisfying (8):
K d = K d0 sign(ωiq )
K q =−K q0 sign(iq )
where Kp and Ki are the current regulators coefficients and idref
and iqref are d-q reference currents supposed constant or very
slowly variable. Supposing that Ar-1(x) exists for any x
belonging to the domain Λ in vicinity of x=0, one may use the
following change of variable:
(9)
w= z−z (11a)

where Kd0 and Kq0 are positive real numbers determining the
where: z = − Ar−1 ( x )b( x ) (11b)
convergence rate. In the next paragraph, we will study the which allows us to represent the boundary layer system (fast
global stability of the system. subsystem) as follow:
C. Global Stability Analysis d
w = Ar (x ) w (12)
The augmented system (Fig. 1) is nonlinear and contains dτ
the interaction of very slow (angular speed), slow (estimated where τ is the fast time scale. For the boundary layer system
parameters) and fast (electrical variables) dynamics. The (12), the origin w=0 is exponentially stable if [1]:
decomposition of the system into two lower order subsystems - x varies slowly;
(fast and slow) is well known and permits to analyze the - the matrix Ar(x) is bounded;
original system more easily. In this paragraph, by using the two - the eigenvalues of Ar(x) have negative real part.
time scale approach and Lyapunov's direct stability theorem, The second condition is verified thanks to (4). Taking into
the asymptotic stability of the origin is proved. In order to account (5) and choosing the proper estimator gains Kd and Kq,
simplify the analysis, we make the following hypothesis: the first condition will be satisfied, too. The last condition may
- the machine is a non-salient pole PMSM, i.e. Ld=Lq=Ls; be easily verified by a good design of the current controllers.
- the real parameters Rs and Ls vary much slower than the This condition guarantees the existence of Ar-1(x), too. Thus,
electrical variables; the fast state variables z reach rapidly z and remain there.
- the angular speed ω is more slowly variable than the real The reduced system (slow subsystem) is nonlinear. It is
parameters; described by x = a( x , z ) = f (x ) , which results in the following
- the current controllers are supposed to be PI, which ensure
differential equations:
a null current steady state error.
We decompose the system into two subsystems: a fast and ⎡ K d idref a11(x )−ωK d iqref a12(x )⎤ (13)
a(x,z )= 1 ⎢
a slow one. The global stability of the system depends on the d(x ) ωK qidref a21(x )+ K qiqref a22(x )⎥
stability of each one of these subsystems and on the ⎣ ⎦
interactions between them [8].
Consider the following nonlinear autonomous singularly
with: (
~
) (
~ ~
a11(x )=a22(x )= Rs Rs + Rs + Ls Ls + Ls ω2
~
)
perturbed system: ( ~
) (
a12(x )=a21(x )= Rs Ls + Ls − Ls Rs + Rs
~
)
⎧ x = a( x , z )
( ~ 2
) (
d ( x )= Rs + Rs + Ls + Ls ω2 )
~ 2

⎨ (10a)
⎩εz = Ar ( x )z + b( x ) Knowing that idref=0 for PMSMs, we obtain:

where x=[ L ~ ~ ]t and z=[i i i i s s ]t are slow and fast

s Rs d q de qe d q
(
) ( )~
d L~ = f (x )= −ωK i Rs Ls + Ls − Ls Rs + Rs
~
dt s 1 ( ) ( )~ 2 ~ 2
d qref
state vectors, respectively; sd and sq are current PI controllers Rs + Rs + Ls + Ls ω2
variables; the nonlinear function a(x,z) is the following: dR ~
s = f 2( x )= K qiqref
~
( ) ( )
~ ~ ~
Rs Rs + Rs + Ls Ls + Ls ω2 (14)
⎡ K d id − K d ide ⎤
dt ( ) ( )
~ 2 ~ 2
Rs + Rs + Ls + Ls ω2
a( x,z )= ⎢ (10b)
⎥
⎣ K q iq − K qiqe ⎦ where iq ≅ iqref is supposed to be different from zero (existence
condition of motor torque).
and the fast system model is expressed as follow:

⎡ id ⎤ ⎡− Rs L+ K p ω 0 0 Ki
0 ⎤ ⎡ id ⎤ ⎡ Kp
id ref ⎤
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ s
Rs + K p
Ls
⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ K p Ls Ψ f ⎥
i
⎢ q ⎥ ⎢ −ω
Ki iq ⎢ L iq ref − L ω ⎥
− Ls Ls ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
0 0 0
⎢i ⎥ ⎢ K p ~
Rs + Rs Ki ⎥ ⎢i ⎥ ⎢ s
Kp
s
⎥ (10c)
d ⎢ de ⎥=⎢ − Ls + L~s 0 − L + L~
s s
ω ~
Ls + Ls
0 ⎥ ⎢ de ⎥ ⎢
+⎢ K L s +
~ id ref
L s
⎥
dt ⎢iqe ⎥ ⎢ 0 Kp ~
Rs + Rs Ki ⎥ ⎢i ⎥ Ψf ⎥
− L + L~ −ω − L + L~ 0 ~ qe
⎢ Ls + L~s iq ref − Ls + L~s ω⎥
p

⎢ ⎥ ⎢ s s s s Ls + Ls ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎢ sd ⎥ ⎢ −1 0 0 0 0 0 ⎢ d⎥⎥ s ⎢ id ref ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣ sq ⎦ ⎣⎢ 0 −1 0 0 0 0 ⎦⎥ ⎣ sq ⎦ ⎢⎣ iq ref ⎥⎦

3
To study the convergence of the estimated parameters, we
propose the following Lyapunov function candidate
(Krasovkii’s method [1]):
V ( x ) = g t (x )g ( x ) (15)

where g(x) = d(x) f(x). Then, we have V ( x ) = g t ( x )G ( x )g ( x ) ,

with G ( x ) = Ast ( x ) + As (x ) , where As(x) denotes the Jacobian
matrix of g(x):
⎡ − K d ω i q ref Rs K d ω i q ref Ls ⎤
As ( x ) = ⎢ (16)
K
⎣ q ω 2
i (
q ref L s + 2
~
L )
s K i ( )~ ⎥
q q ref R s + 2 R s ⎦

The desired equilibrium point ( L~s = R~s = 0 ) is exponentially

stable if G(x) is strictly negative definite for any x belonging Fig. 2. System trajectories with the estimator (3).
to the domain Λ in the vicinity of the origin. From (16), we
obtain the following conditions for satisfying these ur + vr v + i
VSI Machine
requirements:
− −
ω K d iqref > 0 (17a) e
K q i qref < 0 (17b)
K
~ [ ~
(
Rs − 1 ωτ s K q + ωK d 1 + 2 Ls Ls
> −
2
)]
2
(17c) Fig. 3. Feedback decoupling control.
Rs 2 8K d K q
⎡ −Rs 0 ⎤ ⎡id ⎤ ⎡ L1d 0 ⎤ ⎡Gv udr −ed ⎤
with τs = Ls/Rs. The first two conditions are satisfied with the d ⎡id ⎤ =⎢ Ld ⎥ (20)
choice of Kd and Kq in (9). The third condition gives a dt ⎢iq ⎥ ⎢ 0 − Rs ⎢ ⎥ + ⎢ 1 ⎢
⎥ ⎥
0
sufficient condition for the convergence of the parameters. It ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ Lq ⎥
i
⎦ ⎣ q ⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎦ ⎣Gv uqr −eq ⎦
Lq ⎥

can be shown that the following relation allows to balance the where udr and uqr are new outputs of current controllers.
convergence dynamics of L~s and R~s : There are two decoupling methods: feedback and
K q0 = ω K d 0 (18) feedforward. The method "feedback", used in this paper,
consists in finding a feedback matrix K such that the closed-
In this case, we have: loop system (shown in Fig. 3) is represented by the decoupled
~ ~ 2
Rs − 1 ω 2τ s2 ⎛ Ls ⎞ (19) model (20). Comparing (20) with (1), it can be shown that:
> + ⎜ ⎟
Rs 2 2 ⎜L ⎟
⎝ s ⎠ ⎡ 0 Lqω⎤
K= 1 ⎢ (21)
Thus, the reduced system (slow subsystem) is Gv ⎣− Ld ω 0 ⎥⎦
exponentially stable if conditions (17) are verified. Then, we
can conclude that the overall system is stable at L~s = R~s = 0 In the following, we propose to identify the parameters of a
because both fast and slow subsystems are exponentially decoupled control PMSM.
stable at this point. B. On-line Identification Algorithm
Fig. 2 illustrates the closed-loop system trajectories in
Fig. 4 illustrates the identification method using the
normalized Rˆ s − Lˆ s plane. As it can be seen, all of the feedback decoupling control. The feedback decoupling matrix
trajectories converge to L~s = R~s = 0 ( Lˆ s L s = 1, Rˆ s R s = 1 ) K and the decoupled model (20) contain the estimated
thanks to the choice of Kd and Kq satisfying (8). But, the parameters:
convergence of the parameters is coupled as expected. In order ⎡ 0 L̂q ω⎤ (22)
K= 1 ⎢
to overcome this drawback, we propose another method based Gv ⎢− L̂d ω 0 ⎥⎥
on decoupling control in the next section. ⎣ ⎦
⎡ − R̂s ⎤
0 ⎡ide ⎤ ⎡ L̂1d 0 ⎤ ⎡ Gv udr ⎤
d ⎡ide ⎤ =⎢ L̂d ⎥ +⎢ ⎥ (23)
III. MODEL-REFERENCE ON-LINE IDENTIFICATION USING dt ⎢iqe ⎥ ⎢ 0 − R̂s ⎥ ⎢iqe ⎥ ⎢ 0 1 ⎥ ⎢Gv uqr −Ψ f ω⎥
DECOUPLING CONTROL ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L̂q ⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎣ L̂q ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
A. Decoupling Control of PMSMs where ed and eq in (20) are replaced by their values (ed = 0 and
To improve the current dynamics, and to simplify the eq = Ψf ω). The main idea is to correct the estimated
current controllers design, a decoupling block is often added to parameters using the current estimation error. To do this, we
the system. It eliminates interactions between (d-) direct and in propose the same estimator as given in (3) (the case of Ld≠Lq
quadrature (q-) currents control. The decoupled system should will be discussed later in this section). In the next paragraph,
have the following diagonal form: we give some results on the nonlinear stability analysis.

4
 ~ ~ ]t and z=[i i i i s s ]t and:
with x=[ Ls Rs d q de qe d q
+
Model (24)
ie
⎡ K d id − K d ide ⎤ (28b)
~
a( x,z )= ⎢ ⎥
− e/Gv
Estimator
i + ⎣ K qiq − K qiqe ⎦
− The fast system model is expressed as follow:
~
⎡ i d ⎤ ⎡ − Ls 0 ⎤ ⎡ id ⎤
Rs + K p Ki
K − L
ω 0 0
⎢ i ⎥ ⎢ L~ ⎥⎢ ⎥
Ls Ls
Rs + K pe Ki
−
⎢ q ⎥ ⎢ Ls ω − Ls
0 0 0 i
Ls ⎥ ⎢ q ⎥
iref + ur + vr v + i ⎢ K ~ ⎥ ⎢i ⎥
C VSI Machine
d ⎢i de ⎥ ⎢ − L +pL~ 0 −
R s + Rs
~ 0
Ki
~ 0 ⎥ de
− − ⎢ ⎥= s s L s + Ls Ls + Ls ⎢ ⎥
e
dt ⎢i qe ⎥ ⎢ 0 −
Kp
0 −
~
R s + Rs
0
K i ⎥ i qe
⎢ ⎥
⎢sd ⎥ ⎢ L s + Ls ⎥
~ ~ ~
L s + Ls L s + Ls
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ −1 0 0 0 0 0 ⎢s d ⎥
⎥
Fig. 4. On-line identification based on feedback decoupling control.
⎣⎢ s q ⎦⎥ ⎢⎣ 0 −1 0 0 0
⎥
0 ⎦ ⎣⎢ s q ⎦⎥
C. Local Stability Analysis ⎡ Kp
i d ref ⎤
Taking into account that the feedback matrix K given in ⎢ K p Ls Ψf ⎥
⎢ Ls i q ref − Ls ω ⎥
(18) may fail to decouple the control of the machine (because ⎢ Kp ⎥ (28c)
of the estimation error on the parameters), we can write a new ~ i
+ ⎢ K Ls + Ls d ref ⎥
model for the machine: ⎢ p~ i −
Ψf
ω⎥
⎢ Ls + Ls q ref Ls + L~s ⎥
⎡id ⎤ ⎡id ⎤ ~ ⎡0 −1⎤ ⎡id ⎤ ⎡ Gvudr ⎤ ⎢ i d ref ⎥
Ls d ⎢ ⎥ =−Rs ⎢ ⎥ − Lsω ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥+⎢ ⎥ (24) ⎢ ⎥
dt iq ⎣1 0 ⎦ ⎣iq ⎦ ⎣Gvuqr −Ψ f ω⎦ i q ref
⎣ ⎦ ⎣iq ⎦ ⎣ ⎦
From the hypothesis (5), the estimator equations (3) and the Then, the boundary layer system (fast subsystem) is the
models (23) and (24), we can obtain the following: following:
d L~ = −ωK d iq L~ d
w = Ar (x ) w (29)
dt s R̂s
s
dτ
dR~ K qiq ~ (25) where τ is the fast time scale, and:
= R
dt s R̂s s w= z−z
Then, the linearized model around the origin ( L~s = R
~
s =0 ) is: where: z = − Ar−1 ( x )b( x )
For this system, the origin w=0 is exponentially stable for the
d L~ = −ωK d iq L~
dt s Rs s same reasons given for the system (12).
The reduced system (slow subsystem) is modeled by
dR~ K qiq ~ (26)
=
dt s Rs s
R x = a( x , z ) = f (x ) , which gives the following:

where iq and ω are supposed constant different from zero for a d ~ ω iqref ~
Ls = f 2 ( x ) = − K d ~ Ls
given operating point. From this model, the local stability dt Rs + Rs (30)
conditions may be concluded easily: d ~ i qref ~
ωK d iq >0 Rs = f1 (x ) = K q ~ Rs
(27) dt Rs + Rs
K q iq <0
In order to have a torque different from zero, we suppose that
It must be noted that the choice of the estimator gains iqref≠0. To study the convergence of the estimated parameters,
proposed by (9) satisfy the local condition stability (27). It we propose the following Lyapunov function candidate:
means that with Kd and Kq given in (9), the estimation errors
~ ~
Ls and Rs vanish if they are enough close to the origin (local V (x ) = f t (x ) f (x ) (31)
stability). In the next paragraph, the global stability of the Then, we have V ( x ) = f t ( x )F (x ) f ( x ) , with
overall system will be studied as the same manner described in
section II. F (x ) = ( x ) + As ( x ) , where As(x) denotes the Jacobian matrix
Ast
D. Global Stability Analysis of the reduced system (Krasovkii’s method [1]):
The analysis given in this paragraph is based on the same ⎡ ω i q ref ω i q ref ~⎤
⎢− K d Kd Ls ⎥
approach presented in the previous section. We make the same
hypothesis and we obtain a two time scale system: As ( x ) =
∂f (x ) ⎢
=
Rs + Rs
~
(Rs + Rs
~
) 2
⎥ (32)
∂x ⎢ i q ref ⎥
0 Kq Rs ⎥
⎧ x = a( x , z )
⎨ (28a)
⎢
⎣ (Rs + Rs
~
) 2
⎦
⎩εz = Ar ( x )z + b( x )

5
The desired equilibrium point ( L~s = R~s = 0 ) is stable if F(x) is Note- For the case of Ld≠Lq, we propose the following
negative definite for any x belonging to the domain Λ in the parameter estimator:
vicinity of the origin. From (32), it can be easily shown that t
~ (36a)
the convergence conditions are the following: L̂d (t ) = L̂d (t 0 ) − ∫ K Ld iq (σ) dσ
t0
ω K d iqref > 0 (33a) t
~ (36b)
(33b) L̂q (t ) = L̂q (t 0 ) − ∫ K Lq id (σ ) dσ
K q i qref < 0 t0
~ ~ 2 t
Rs − τ s2 ωK d ⎛ Ls ⎞ ~ (36c)
> ⎜ ⎟ (33c) R̂s (t ) = R̂s (t 0 ) − ∫ K Rs iq (σ ) dσ
Rs 4 Kq ⎜L ⎟
⎝ s ⎠ t0

The first two conditions are almost the same as in (27). The where KLd, KLq and KRs are the estimator gains. The equations
last one defines a bound on the stability domain of the origin. (36b) and (36c) are the same as in (3). Thus, Lq and Rs are
In addition, the slow subsystem (30) is exponentially stable estimated as before if idref=0 and iqref≠0. But the estimation of
at the origin because: Ld requires that idref≠0. In practice, it is not a constraint,
- V ( x ) < λV ( x ) where λ<0 is the biggest eigenvalue of F(x), because in the case of Ld≠Lq, the optimal value for idref is not
- there are two positive real numbers k1 and k2 such that: zero. In this case, idref may take a pulse signal form whose
frequency is much more than mechanical natural frequency in
< f (x ) < k 2 x
2 2 2
k1 x (34) such a manner to not excite the angular speed. In addition, its
The first criterion is easy to verify. For the second, we have to mean value must be equal to its optimal value. In this case, the
take into account (4) and the fact that ω≠0 and iqref≠0. Then, k1 estimator (36) converges if:
and k2 may be given as follow: ωK Ld id <0
ωK Lq iq >0 (37)
2
i qref ⎛ ω 2 K d2 ⎞
k1 = K q2 ⋅ Min⎜1, ⎟ K Rs iq <0
R̂ s2max ⎜ K q2 ⎟ (35)
⎝ ⎠
i 2
⎛ ω Kd ⎞
2 2
IV. PARAMETER ESTIMATION BASED ON KALMAN FILTER
K q2 ⋅ Max⎜1, ⎟
qref
k2 =
R̂ 2 ⎜ K2 ⎟
s min ⎝ q ⎠ Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) has found wide application
Knowing that the fast subsystem (29) as well as the slow in drive control and parameter identification. It is often applied
subsystem (30) are exponentially stable in a domain Λ in the to obtain the angular speed from noisy mechanical
vicinity of the origin, the desired equilibrium point measurements, or to estimate the rotor position in a
( L~s = R~s = 0 ) is exponentially stable while the convergence mechanical sensorless control application or to identify the
machine parameters. Here, we are interested by this latter
conditions (33) are satisfied. application for a non-salient pole PMSM (Ls=Ld=Lq).
The system trajectories are shown on Fig. 5. Comparing to In this section, an EKF is applied to on-line PMSM
Fig. 2, it can be concluded that they converge to the origin parameter identification. We make the same assumptions as in
more easily thanks to the decoupling control. Indeed, previous sections on time scale separation of different
contrarily to (14), there is not any significant interaction in variables. So, the angular speed is supposed very slowly
(30) between R ~ and ~ . This is an important advantage
s Ls variable when the machine parameters and currents represent
making more stable the parameter estimation and more robust respectively slow and fast variables. This leads us to the
the overall system. following model in the EKF algorithm:

⎡i d ⎤ ⎡ − a ⋅ i d + b ⋅ Gv u dr ⎤
⎢i ⎥ ⎢− a ⋅ i + b ⋅ (G u − Ψ ω )⎥
d ⎢ q⎥ ⎢ q v qr f ⎥
=
⎢
dt a ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣b⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦
⎡id ⎤
⎢ ⎥
⎡1 0 0 0 ⎤ ⎢ i q ⎥ (38)
y=⎢ ⎥
⎣0 1 0 0 ⎦ ⎢ a ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣b⎦
where a = Rs Ls and b = 1 Ls . It should be noted that udr and
uqr come from current controllers when the feedback
decoupling control (see III.A) is used. If the machine control is
Fig. 5. ”Feedback” decoupled system trajectories with the estimator (3). not decoupled, the following model can be used:

6
 ⎡i d ⎤ ⎡ − a ⋅ id + ω ⋅ i q + b ⋅ v d ⎤ It should be noted that even if the EKF gives satisfactory
⎢i ⎥ ⎢− a ⋅ i − ω ⋅ i + b ⋅ (v − Ψ ω )⎥ results, but it is computationally expensive with respect to the
d ⎢ q⎥ ⎢ q d q f ⎥ (39)
= other two methods. Indeed, the execution time of the EKF in
dt ⎢ a ⎥ ⎢ 0 ⎥ our bench is about 12 μs, when that of the second method with
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥
⎣b⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ the decoupling control is less than 4 μs.
with the same output vector y given in (38).
Now, the only things needed for completing the EKF
realization are its initial covariance matrix (P0) and its
weighting matrices (Q and R). Using a trial-and-error
procedure, these matrices are chosen as follow:
P0 = diag ( 0.1, 0.1, 100, 100 )
Q = diag ( 1, 1, 500, 500 ) (40)
R = diag ( 1, 1)
This on-line identification algorithm is compared to those
proposed in previous sections by simulation and a) Lˆ s (0) = Ls 5 and Rˆ s (0 ) = Rs 5 .
experimentation. Test results are presented in the next section.

V. TEST RESULTS
A. Simulation results
Fig. 6 illustrates 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 rpm. The estimator
gains Kd0 and Kq0 are respectively fixed to 0.05 and 20. At t=0,
the estimated parameters are forced to erroneous values (over-
or under-estimation). All combinations are tested and in each
case, all three methods converge. But, it can be seen that the
first method (without decoupling) is less efficient than the two b) Lˆ s (0) = Ls 5 and Rˆ s (0 ) = 5Rs .
others. On the other hand, the EKF is sometimes better and
sometimes worse than the second method (with decoupling). It
should be noted that for all the tests, the parameter estimation
might be faster than that presented, but the assumption on time
separation would not be respected. The actual drive
parameters are given in Table I.
B. Experimental Results
To validate the proposed methods, they are implemented
on a dSPACE digital control card. The same tests as in the
simulation are performed. The estimated parameters,
illustrated in Fig. 7, behave almost at the same manner as in
Fig. 6 and converge rapidly to the actual values. The c) Lˆ s (0) = 5Ls and Rˆ s (0 ) = 5Rs .
experimental bench is shown on Fig. 8.
TABLE I
EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS
DC source voltage 200 V
no. of poles 8
Rated current 12 A
Rated speed 3000 rpm
Stator resistance 1.5 Ω
Stator inductance 5.4 mH
24×10 kg.m .s
-3 2 -1
Friction coefficient
3.2×10 kg.m
-3 2
Inertia coefficient d) Lˆ s (0) = 5Ls and Rˆ s (0 ) = Rs 5 .
Sampling frequency 10 kHz Fig. 6. Estimated parameters (simulation): 1st method (green), 2nd method
Switching frequency 10 kHz (red), EKF (blue).

7
 a) Lˆ s (0) = Ls 5 and Rˆ s (0 ) = Rs 5 .

Fig. 8. Experimental bench.

VI. CONCLUSION
Three on-line identification methods for PMSM
parameters are studied and compared in this paper. The
stability of the augmented system is analyzed. This study gives
the stability conditions and the domain of attraction for the
studied methods. It is shown that the method using the
decoupling control has the best characteristics: the
b) Lˆ s (0) = Ls 5 and Rˆ s (0 ) = 5Rs .
convergence of the machine parameters is decoupled and the
domain of attraction is the largest. The simulation and
experimental results illustrate the validity of the analytical
study. For further works, the authors plan to use the proposed
model reference on-line identification method for detecting the
drive faults.

REFERENCES
[1] Leonhard, W.; Control of electrical drives, Springer-Verlag, 1996.
[2] Li Liu; Cartes, D.A.; "On-line identification and robust fault diagnosis for
nonlinear PMSM drives," Proceedings of American Control Conference,
vol. 3, pp. 2023-2027, June 2005.
[3] Bolognani, S.; Zigliotto, M.; "Parameter Sensitivity of the Kalman Filter
c) Lˆ s (0) = 5Ls and Rˆ s (0 ) = 5Rs . Applied to a Sensorless Synchronous Motor Drive," EPE'95, vol. 3, pp.
375-380, Sevilla, 1995.
[4] Bolognani, S.; Zigliotto, M.; Unterkofler, K.; "On-line parameter
commissioning in sensorless PMSM drives,", IEEE International
Symposium on Industrial Electronics, ISIE'97, Vol. 2, pp. 480-484, 1997.
[5] Nahid Mobarakeh, B.; Meibody-Tabar, F.; Sargos, F.M.; "On-line
Identification of PMSM Electrical Parameters Based on Decoupling
Control," IAS'01, Chicago, Oct. 2001.
[6] Rahman, M.A.; Hoque, M.A.; "On-line adaptive artificial neural network
based vector control of permanent magnet synchronous motors," IEEE
Trans. on Energy Conversion, Vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 311–318, Dec. 1998.
[7] Arab Khaburi, D.; Meibody-Tabar, F.; Sargos, F.M.; "On-line
identification of electrical time constants of synchronous machines,"
PEMC'98, vol.3, pp. 184-188, Prague, Sept. 1998.
[8] Khalil,H.;Nonlinear Systems, Prentice-Hall, 1996.

d) Lˆ s (0) = 5Ls and Rˆ s (0 ) = Rs 5 .

Fig. 7. Estimated parameters (experimentation): 1st method (green),
2nd method (red), EKF (blue).