The output torque of a permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM) (either a surface permanent magnet (SPM) or an interior permanent magnet (IPM) motor) may be determined by a voltage command and a phase advance angle. A specific output torque of the PMSM is determined by first selecting a specific quadrature axis (also referred to as the q-axis) reference current and a direct axis (also referred to as the d-axis) reference current, and then determining the voltage command and the phase advance angle based on the selected quadrature axis reference current and the direct axis reference current.
Electric Power Steering (EPS) systems use an electric motor (e.g., PMSM) to provide steering assist. When using a PMSM, Field Oriented Control (FOC) is utilized, which allows an alternating current (AC) poly-phase (e.g., three-phase) motor voltage and current signals to be transformed into a synchronously rotating reference frame, commonly referred to as the d-axis/q-axis reference frame, where the motor voltages and currents become direct current (DC) quantities. The FOC torque control technique is implemented either using feedforward methods of control or a closed-loop current feedback control, or some combination of them.
Application of closed-loop current control of PMSM to EPS systems has unique and demanding requirements outside of the control system's capability to track the desired assist torque command (i.e., motor torque command). Many of these requirements are associated with a balance of the torque response behavior, motor input disturbance characteristics, current measurement noise transmission characteristics, and robustness to the accuracy of the estimated electric motor parameter estimates. Consistency of performance throughout the operating range of the control system is desired, including operation throughout the motor velocity range and operation near the supply voltage limit. Unlike high voltage power applications utilizing PMSMs, the supply voltage available for the control system from a vehicle is not unlimited, and the motor used in these applications is typically sized as efficiently as possible to deliver steady state power requirements. This requires the current control to operate in a stable and predictable manner as the transient voltage available to the control system becomes smaller near the peak power point of PMSM operation. Therefore, the control system should be configured to operate as desired while requiring relatively small motor voltage command transients.
In one embodiment of the invention, a system for controlling an electric motor that generates an output current from an input voltage command that includes a sum of a first voltage command and a second voltage command is provided. The system comprises a first module configured to receive the output current from the motor as a feedback, determine a first set of gain factors to generate the first voltage command based on the feedback such that the input voltage command causes the motor to generate the output current with reduced influence of variations of a set of operating parameters of the motor. The system further comprises a second module configured to receive a difference between the feedback and a commanded current and determine a second set of gain factors to generate the second voltage command based on the difference such that the input voltage command causes the motor to generate the output current as a first, second or higher order response.
In another embodiment of the invention, a method of controlling an electric motor that generates an output current from an input voltage command that includes a sum of a first voltage command and a second voltage command is provided. The method receives the output current from the motor as a feedback. The method determines a first set of gain factors to generate the first voltage command based on the feedback such that the input voltage command causes the motor to generate the output current with reduced influence of variations of a set of operating parameters of the motor. The method determines a difference between the feedback and a desired current. The method determines a second set of gain factors to generate the second voltage command based on the difference such that the input voltage command causes the motor to generate the output current as a first, second or higher order response.
These and other advantages and features will become more apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the drawings.
The subject matter which is regarded as the invention is particularly pointed out and distinctly claimed in the claims at the conclusion of the specification. The foregoing and other features, and advantages of the invention are apparent from the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in which:
Referring now to the Figures, where the invention will be described with reference to specific embodiments, without limiting same,
Referring now to
In some embodiments, an encoder 36 (shown in
Va=Vm sin(θe+δ) (Equation 1)
Vb=Vm sin(θe+δ+120°) (Equation 2)
Vc=Vm sin(θe+δ+240°) (Equation 3)
where θe in the equations 1-3 is the electrical position of the rotor that is converted from the mechanical angle or position θ of the rotor. The motor 20 rotates in a clockwise as well as a counterclockwise direction, and may also produce torque in both the clockwise and counterclockwise direction during operation.
The motor 20 is a plant that is being controlled by the control module 30. That is, the motor 20 receives a voltage command VR and generates torque (i.e., draws or outputs the current IP, which is the actual motor current as described above by reference to
In some embodiments, the control module 30 is a feedback controller having closed-loops. That is, the output current of the motor 20 is fed back to the control module 30 and the control module 30 uses the feedback to regulate the output of the motor 20. As the output current IP is fed back to the control module 30, a disturbance current Idist and a noise current Inoise are added to IP and what comes back to the control module 30 is a feedback current IM, which is the output of a current sensor (not shown). That is, IM is the current measured and fed back to the control module 30, and is equal to the sum of IP, Idist and Inoise.
The modification module 320 takes as input from the motor 20 the measured feedback current IM. Based on the measured feedback current IM, the modification module 320 decouples the d-axis component Id of the output current IP from the variations of the q-axis current component Iq. That is, the modification module 320 eliminates the influence of the variations of the q-axis current Iq on the d-axis component of the output current. The modification module 320 also decouples the q-axis component Iq of the output current IP from the variations of d-axis current Id similarly. The modification module 320 achieves such decoupling by generating a modification voltage VH using a matrix H as will be described further below. The voltage command VM, which includes the modification voltage VH, causes the motor 30 to draw each component of the current IP without being affected by the variations of the other current component.
In addition, the modification module 320 of some embodiments makes the closed-loop system more robust to the stator resistance variations of the motor 20 as well as the measurement inaccuracies of the resistances. The modification voltage VH is combined by the adder 314 with a voltage command VC coming from the compensation modules 306 and 310 to produce a voltage command VR that causes the motor 30 to draw current in a stable manner that is not affected by the resistance of the motor 20 or any inaccurate estimation of the resistance. The addition module 316 combines the voltage command VR and a disturbance voltage Vdist to produce the voltage command VM supplied to the motor 20.
The compensation modules 306 and 310 make up a matrix-valued (or, multi-dimensional) proportional-integral (PI) controller that compensates for a difference IE between a commanded current IR and the measured current IM to control the motor 20. The compensation module 306 produces a proportional voltage command VP from a difference current IE (determined by the subtraction module 304). The compensation module 306 along with the integration module 308 produces an integral voltage command VI. The addition module 312 combines the voltage commands VP and VI to produce a voltage command VC. The proportional voltage command VP and the integral voltage command VI are determined in such a way that the combined voltage command VC, when applied to the motor 20, causes the overall current to current transfer function to be of a specific, desired order. It is to be noted that each of IR, IM, IE, VP, VI, and VC has a d-axis component and a q-axis component. Also, IR, IM, IE, VP, VI, and VC represent vectors and not scalar values.
The compensation module 306 is a proportional controller and the compensation module 310 is an integral controller. The proportional compensation module CP aids in configuring the frequency response of the closed-loop system when the first order type response is desired, in addition to providing beneficial tradeoffs between the motor input disturbance transfer function behavior and the current measurement noise transfer function behavior. When a higher order transfer function (e.g., a third order) is desired, a different configuration than the PI controller is utilized. More details about configuring the closed-loop system to have a frequency response of a specific, desired order will be described further below by reference to
The BEMF compensation module 302 is configured to compensate for dynamics (e.g., variations) of BEMF voltage that are slower than the dynamics of the currents of the motor 20. Specifically, the BEMF compensation module 302 takes as input the rotor mechanical velocity ωm and outputs voltage VF that compensates for the dynamics of the BEMF voltage.
As used herein, the term “module” or “sub-module” refers to an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), an electronic circuit, a processor (shared, dedicated, or group) and memory that executes one or more software or firmware programs, a combinational logic circuit, and/or other suitable components that provide the described functionality. When implemented in software, a module or a sub-module can be embodied in memory as a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium readable by a processing circuit and storing instructions for execution by the processing circuit for performing a method. Moreover, the modules and sub-modules shown in
In some embodiments, the control module 30 is configured to generate a voltage command VR using a motor control model for line-to-neutral voltage equations:
where Vd and Vq are the d-axis and q-axis motor voltages (in Volts), respectively; Id and Iq are the d-axis and q-axis motor currents (in Amperes), respectively; Ld and Lq are the d-axis and q-axis motor inductances (in Henries), respectively; R is the motor circuit (i.e., the motor and controller) resistance (in Ohms), Ke is the motor BEMF coefficient (in Volts/rad/s); ωm is the mechanical motor velocity in (in rad/s); Np is the number of poles of the motor 20; and Te is the electromagnetic motor torque (in Nm).
It is to be noted that equation 6 for computing the electromagnetic motor torque Te is nonlinear and that equation 6 represents a sum of the torque developed by leveraging the magnetic field from the permanent magnets and the reluctance torque generated by the rotor saliency (i.e., a difference between Lq and Ld) and desired values for Id and Iq. A reference model design for optimizing selection of the reference currents Id and Iq to use for PMSM control is described in U.S. Patent Application, entitled “Generation of a Current Reference to Control a Brushless Motor,” filed Nov. 26, 2013, with an 14/090,484,” which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
The parameters in equations 4-6 vary significantly during normal operation of the motor 20—potentially over 100% variation in R, and 5-20% variation in inductances Ld and Lq and 15-20% in Ke. R varies with the build and the temperature of the motor 20. Ld and Lq vary due to saturation (i.e., as a function of Id and Iq) and Ke varies due to saturation (as a function of Iq) and with the temperature.
In the equations 4 and 5,
is me electrical motor velocity ωe of the motor 20. The electrical motor velocity is assumed to be a slowly varying parameter. In addition, due to relatively slow flux dynamics, the quasi-static back-EMF (BEMF) term Keωm (i.e., the disturbance from the motor) may be considered a constant. This disturbance from 402 is compensated by a compensation module 302 in the feedforward path. That is, the addition module 404 combines the voltage command VM, which includes this compensation from the compensation module 302, with the disturbance from 402. These two assumptions allow linearization of equations 4 and 5 for a fixed velocity of the motor 20. From
Vd=Ldİd+RId+ωeLqIq (Equation 7)
Vql=Vq−Keωm=Lqİq+RIq−ωeLdId (Equation 8)
Further, equations 7 and 8 can be compactly written using s-domain representation as follows:
where U is the matrix
Pi(s) is the matrix
and X is the matrix
For the simplicity of illustration and description, Vql is illustrated and described as Vq hereinafter. In equation 10, the output current matrix X of the motor 20 is translated into the input voltage matrix U via the complex frequency transfer matrix Pi(s). This complex frequency transfer matrix Pi(s) is the inverse of the true transfer matrix P(s). This Pi(s) is shown to be included in the motor 20 in
The actual plant transfer matrix P(s), which converts the input voltage to the output current may be written as:
Using the transfer matrix H, shown as
in
Peff=(Pi(s)−H)−1 (Equation 13)
That is, Peff(s) may be defined as the inverse of Pi(s)−H. Then, the effective inverse transfer matrix Pieff(s) is Pi(s)−H, which can be written in a matrix form:
By implementing the matrix H, the modification module 320 may decouple the coupling terms in equations 7 and 8 (or the corresponding elements in the matrix Pi(s) or P(s)). By configuring H to have appropriate elements (i.e., gain factors), the modification module 320 allows for changes in Vg to control Iq without affecting Id, and allows for changes in Vd to control Id without affecting Iq. Specifically, the off-diagonal elements of H are selected to cancel the off-diagonal elements of Pi(s), which correspond to the coupling terms of the equations 7 and 8. The off-diagonal elements of H may be expressed as follows:
KHdq={tilde over (ω)}e{tilde over (L)}q (Equation 15)
KHqd=−ωe{tilde over (L)}d (Equation 16)
where {tilde over (ω)}e is an estimated electrical motor velocity of the motor 20; {tilde over (L)}q is an estimated q-axis inductance of the motor 20; and {tilde over (L)}d is an estimated d-axis inductance of the motor 20.
The modification module 320 may also desensitize the motor 20 from the variations of motor operation parameters (i.e., reduces influence of the variations), especially from the variations in the motor resistance, so that the current that the motor 20 draws is also desensitized from the variations. As can be appreciated, the diagonal elements R−KHdd and R−KHqq of the Pieff(s) should be greater than zero (i.e., a positive resistance value) in order to maintain the motor's stability in the presence of variations in resistance. In some embodiments, the diagonal elements of the matrix H, namely KHdd and KHqq, are configured to have negative values so as to ensure the diagonal elements R−KHdd and R−KHqq of the Pieff(s) are positive. The diagonal elements of H may be expressed as follows:
KHdd=−Rd (Equation 17)
KHqq=−Rq (Equation 18)
where Rd and Rq are resistance values (in Ohms). Rd and Rq values are selected and specifically configured to balance the control system sensitivity to motor parameter variations (specifically, the variations in resistance, which typically swings as large as 100% over temperature), voltage disturbance rejection transfer function properties, and current measurement noise sensitivity properties, and robustness to imperfect decoupling of the two current loops. Moreover, because of the Rd and Rq, the effective time-constant of the motor 20 gets shortened or reduced (i.e., a faster response time results). Accordingly, the matrix H may be written as:
It is to be noted that these elements of the matrix H are scheduled in terms of motor parameters, which are nonlinear and continuously changing with the motor's operating conditions (e.g., temperature, saturation, etc.)
With these elements in the matrix H and with the assumption that {tilde over (ω)}e, {tilde over (L)}d and {tilde over (L)}q are accurate estimations, the effective motor transfer matrix Peff may, in this embodiment, be defined as:
As shown in the effective motor transfer matrix Peff, the motor 20 is decoupled in both the d-axis and q-axis and a configurable effective resistance element is available to further adjust the dynamic response of the motor 20.
With the modification module 320 decoupling the coupled elements of the transfer matrix P(s) of the motor 20 and desensitizing the motor 20 from the resistance variation, the proportional compensation module 306 and the integral compensation module 310 may be configured and optimized to cause the closed-loop system to produce specific transfer function behavior. In some embodiments, the compensation modules implement matrices CP and CI, respectively, in which coupling elements are omitted. That is, only diagonal elements of the matrices CP and CI are used and the off-diagonal elements (i.e., the coupling elements) of the matrices CP and CI are set to zero. When the target transfer function response of the closed-loop system is a first order response, the overall block diagram of the configuration of the control module 30 is shown in
To achieve an overall current to current transfer function behavior, which mimics a first order transfer function in both the d-axis and q-axis control loops (i.e., the loop-forming feedback signal path of the compensation module 306 or 310 and the motor 20 includes d-axis control loop and q-axis control loop), the elements (i.e., gain factors) of the matrices CP and CI are selected as follows:
KPdd=ωd{tilde over (L)}d (Equation 23)
KIdd=ωd({tilde over (R)}+Rd) (Equation 24)
KPqq=ωq{tilde over (L)}q (Equation 25)
KIqq=ωq({tilde over (R)}+Rq) (Equation 26)
where that ωd and ωg in the equations 21-24 represent the desired closed-loop cutoff frequencies in the d-axis and q-axis control loops; {tilde over (R)}, {tilde over (L)}d and {tilde over (L)}q represent the estimated resistance, the estimated d-axis inductance, and the estimated q-axis inductance, respectively; and Rd and Rq represent the additional “effective” resistances in the d-axis and q-axis control loops, which are also the values of the diagonal elements of the matrix H. The overall block diagram for the configuration with these elements of the matrices CP and CI is shown in
In some embodiments, the compensation modules 306 and 310 are configured to cause the closed-loop system to produce a frequency response of a second order. Specifically, the compensation modules 306 and 310 may be configured to implement an active damping decoupling control (ADDC) configuration. In such configuration, the elements in the matrices CP and CI are selected to avoid pole-zero cancellation in the open loop transfer matrix, resulting in a second order closed-loop transfer matrix, with the capability of actively controlling the damping in the motor 20. To have a frequency response of a second order, all elements in the matrix CP for the proportional compensation module 306 are set to zero. In addition, the off-diagonal elements of the matrix CI for the integral compensation module 310 are set to zero. The resulting forward path compensation module (i.e., the compensation module 310) implements CI as:
The overall block diagram for the ADDC configuration is shown in
Then, the closed-loop transfer matrix can be written as:
From the transfer matrix T, it can be seen that in this configuration, both of the closed-loop transfer functions are of second order. As can be appreciated, the damping of a second order system can be controlled independently of its natural frequency (and thus, its bandwidth). In order to achieve natural frequencies of ωd, ωq and damping ratios of ζd, ζq in the d-axis and q-axis control loops respectively, the tunable parameters may be selected as:
KHdd=−Rd=−2ωdζd{tilde over (L)}d+{tilde over (R)} (Equation 31)
KHqq=−Rq=−2ωqζq{tilde over (L)}q+{tilde over (R)} (Equation 32)
KIdd=ωd2{tilde over (L)}d (Equation 33)
KIqq=ωq2{tilde over (L)}q (Equation 34)
The overall block diagram for the ADDC configuration with the above forward path controller gains is shown in
As one skilled in the art of second order transfer functions would recognize, as the damping ratio changes from zero to unity to greater than unity, the behavior of the system (e.g., the motor 20) changes from underdamped to critically damped and to overdamped, respectively. It should be noted that an overdamped second order system may be tuned to behave as a first order system within the desired system bandwidth without the need to perform pole-zero cancellations. In order to do so, the pole locations of the system should be considered. In order to mimic a first order behavior with a certain desired bandwidth, it is to be ensured that the faster pole is sufficiently far away from the slower pole, while the slower pole location corresponds to the desired closed-loop cutoff frequency for an effective first order system. Thus, a sufficiently high damping ratio is selected first, and the corresponding value of the natural frequency is obtained by placing the slower pole at the desired closed-loop bandwidth. Consequently, the faster pole moves far away enough from the slower pole, and the closed-loop transfer function behaves effectively as a first order system dominated by the slower pole. In such a way, the configuration shown in
The ADDC configuration shown in
In some embodiments, the compensation modules 306 and 310 can be configured to implement a third or higher order transfer function responses of the motor 20 as shown in
It is to be noted that with this selection of the elements for the matrix C(s), each of the d-axis and q-axis loops have n (KIdd, Rd, αd3, . . . , αdn in the d-axis loop and KIqq, Rq, αq3, . . . , αqn in the q-axis loop) unknowns, where n is an integer greater than or equal to three. With the assumption of accurate parameter estimation, the open loop transfer function can be written as:
Thus, the closed-loop transfer matrix becomes:
In some embodiments, in order to cause the closed-loop system to mimic a third or higher order system of a specific type, a closed-loop transfer matrix of the form below may be obtained:
where ωd and ωq are d-axis and q-axis closed-loop bandwidths, respectively. A third or higher order system can, in general, have n different pole locations. In some embodiments, the pole locations may be set to n different places. This closed-loop transfer matrix is obtained by comparing the characteristic polynomials (i.e., denominators of transfer functions) from equations 37 and 38 for T in both of the d-axis and the q-axis loops and solving for the 2n unknowns in terms of R, Ld, Lq, Rd, Rq, ωd, and ωq. For example, a third order closed-loop transfer function requirement in each of the d-axis loop and the q-axis loop is considered. The block diagram for this case is shown in
Comparing the characteristic polynomials in equations 36 and 37 for a third order transfer function for the d-axis loop results in the following:
Equations 39-41 can be solved for KIdd, αd3 and Rd in terms of R, L and ωd in order to obtain the desired closed-loop polynomial.
In some embodiments, the compensation modules 306 and 310 may be configured in such a way that the d-axis control loop and the q-axis control loop have different closed-loop transfer function orders.
At block 1210, the control module 30 decouples the d-axis component of the output current from the influence of the q-axis component of the output current and decouples the q-axis component of the output current from the influence of the d-axis component of the output current. In some embodiments, the control module 30 achieves such decoupling of current components by applying the voltage commands generated based on the matrices CP, CI and H as described above.
At block 1220, the control module 30 desensitizes the operation of the motor 20 from the variations of a set of operating parameters of the motor 20. More specifically, the control module 30 determines a first set of gain factors to generate a first voltage command based on the feedback current received from the motor 20, in order to cause the motor 20 to generate the output current with reduced influence of variations of a set of operating parameters of the motor. In some cases, the variations of the set of operating parameters are due to inaccurate estimation of the operating parameters. In some embodiments, the set of operating parameters includes the resistance of the motor 20. The control module 30 also causes a reduction in the response time for the motor 20 to respond to the input voltage command as the control module 30 desensitizes the motor operation. In some embodiments, the control module 30 determines the first set of gain factors in order to tune a damping ratio and natural frequency of the closed-loop system. In these embodiments, at least one of the first set of gain factors is a function of natural frequency of the closed-loop system.
At block 1230, the control module 30 determines a second set of gain factors to generate the second voltage command based on a difference between the feedback and a desired current, in order to cause the closed-loop system to generate the output current as a first, second or higher order response. The output current includes a d-axis component and a q-axis component. The control module 30 is configured to determine the second set of gain factors such that the input voltage command causes the motor to generate the d-axis component of the output current and the q-axis component of the output current as different order responses. At least one of the second set of gain factors is a function of resistance of the motor. At least one of the second set of gain factors is a function of inductance of the motor. At least one of the second set of gain factors is set to zero. The first and second voltage commands are combined into the input voltage command supplied to the motor 20.
While the invention has been described in detail in connection with only a limited number of embodiments, it should be readily understood that the invention is not limited to such disclosed embodiments. Rather, the invention can be modified to incorporate any number of variations, alterations, substitutions or equivalent arrangements not heretofore described, but which are commensurate with the spirit and scope of the invention. Additionally, while various embodiments of the invention have been described, it is to be understood that aspects of the invention may include only some of the described embodiments. Accordingly, the invention is not to be seen as limited by the foregoing description.
This patent application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/015,784, filed Jun. 23, 2014. U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/015,784 is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4713596 | Bose | Dec 1987 | A |
4733149 | Culberson | Mar 1988 | A |
4920306 | Mard | Apr 1990 | A |
5196778 | Hayashida | Mar 1993 | A |
5223775 | Mongeau | Jun 1993 | A |
5410234 | Shibata et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5652495 | Narazaki et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5927430 | Mukai et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5962999 | Nakamura et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6002234 | Ohm et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6021251 | Hammer et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6104148 | Kumar et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6152254 | Phillips | Nov 2000 | A |
6161068 | Kurishige et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6222334 | Tamagawa et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6288515 | Hiti et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6370459 | Phillips | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6465975 | Naidu | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6499559 | Mc Cann et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6605912 | Bharadwaj et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6700342 | Hampo et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6900607 | Kleinau et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
7034493 | Yoshimoto et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7071649 | Kleinau et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7145310 | Ihm et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7199549 | Kleinau et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7207412 | Uryu | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7394214 | Endo et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7548035 | Endo et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7576506 | Kleinau et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7952308 | Schulz et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8633766 | Khlat et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8896244 | Kleinau | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8952637 | Suzuki | Feb 2015 | B2 |
20020175649 | Reutlinger | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030076065 | Shafer et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030146041 | Kanda | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20040095089 | Collier-Hallman | May 2004 | A1 |
20040195993 | Yoshimoto et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050073280 | Yoshinaga et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060000209 | Tsuda et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060100766 | Schwarz et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20060122751 | Oyama et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060145639 | Song et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070043490 | Yokota et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070046126 | Sagoo et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070103105 | Endo et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070132446 | Kleinau et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070177314 | Weng et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070278032 | Sakaguchi et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080067960 | Maeda et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080167779 | Suzuki | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080191656 | Satake et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080265808 | Sparey et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090026994 | Namuduri et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090027000 | Gallegos-Lopez et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090069979 | Yamashita et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090114470 | Shimizu et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090115362 | Saha et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090189555 | Chen | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090224710 | Mir | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090234538 | Ta et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20090267555 | Schulz et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100140003 | Saha et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100231148 | Tobari et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110018281 | Tan et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110127934 | Suzuki | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110153162 | Kezobo et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110169432 | Dean | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110175556 | Tobari et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110204833 | Santo et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110231066 | Ohno | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110297475 | Taniguchi et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110309781 | Tomigashi | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120112549 | Perisic et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120221208 | Kojo et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120313701 | Khlat et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130013154 | Aoki | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130154524 | Kleinau | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130187579 | Rozman et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130261896 | Gebregergis et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130285591 | Suzuki | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140191699 | Dixon | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140239860 | Kleinau | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140265961 | Gebregergis et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140265962 | Gebregergis et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140285129 | Maeda | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140375239 | Kim et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150069941 | Iwaji et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150155811 | Merienne | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150194919 | Merienne et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150222210 | Kleinau et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20160056745 | Ootake et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1675099 | Sep 2005 | CN |
1741368 | Mar 2006 | CN |
101218146 | Jul 2008 | CN |
101399516 | Apr 2009 | CN |
101456429 | Jun 2009 | CN |
101615791 | Dec 2009 | CN |
101981804 | Feb 2011 | CN |
102570476 | Jul 2012 | CN |
102582679 | Jul 2012 | CN |
102751936 | Oct 2012 | CN |
1378419 | Jan 2004 | EP |
1768252 | Jan 2006 | EP |
1720242 | Aug 2006 | EP |
1720242 | Nov 2006 | EP |
1914878 | Apr 2008 | EP |
2003010 | Dec 2008 | EP |
2293428 | Oct 2009 | EP |
2000108916 | Apr 2000 | JP |
2001247049 | Sep 2001 | JP |
2003170850 | Jun 2003 | JP |
2007137272 | Jun 2007 | JP |
2008143200 | Jun 2008 | JP |
2012224258 | Nov 2012 | JP |
2014006329 | Jan 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Application No. 201210599015.5 dated Oct. 23, 2014; 29 pages. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 201310104183.7 dated Jan. 6, 2015. |
F. Briz, M.W. Degner and R.D. Lorenz; “Analysis and Design of Current Regulators Using Complex Vectors”, IEEE Industry Applications Society; Annual Meeting; New Orleans, Louisiana; Oct. 5-9, 1997; pp. 1504-1511. |
European Search Report for EP App. No. 12196930.7, mailed from the European Patent Office dated Mar. 22, 2013. |
Lennart Harnefors and Hans-Peter Nee; “Model-Based Current Control of AC Machines Using the Internal Model Control Method”; IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications; vol. 34, No. 1; Jan./Feb. 1998; pp. 133-141. |
Kirtley, James; 6.061 Introduction to Electric Power Systems; Spring 2011; Massachussetts Institute of Technology. |
English translation of office action issued in related CN Application No. 201400942309, dated Jan. 18, 2016, 14 pages. |
European Search Report from related Application No. 15171189: dated Jan. 4, 2016; 9 pages. |
Extended European search report for related European application No. 16153434.2, dated: Jul. 6, 2016, 8 pages. |
Office Action dated Jan. 18, 2016. |
Office Action dated Dec. 8, 2015. |
Office Action issued in related CN Application No. 201400942309, dated Jan. 18, 2016, 34 pages. |
Office Action dated Jul. 7, 2016. |
EP Search Report for related EP Application No. EP12196930.7; dated Mar. 22, 2013; 7 pages. |
Chinese Office Action for Chinese Patent Application No. 2014100892259, dated Jan. 13, 2017. |
EP SR dated May 12, 2017. |
Final OA dated Aug. 16, 2016. |
Jeong et al., “Fault Detection and Fault-Tolerant Control of Interior Permanent-Magnet Motor Drive System for Electric Vehicle”, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 41, No. 1, Jan./Feb. 2005, pp. 46-51. |
NFOA, dated Feb. 17, 2016. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Mar. 7, 2017. |
Non-Final Office Action, dated Jan. 27, 2017. |
Office Action dated Dec. 9, 2016. |
Office Action dated Aug. 16, 2016. |
European Patent Search; International Application No. EP14158556; International Filing Date: Jan. 8, 2017; dated Jul. 31, 2017; 9 pages. |
European Patent Search; International Application No. EP14158559; International Filing Date: Jan. 8, 2017; dated Aug. 1, 2017; 7 pages. |
Madani, et al; “Reduction of Torque Pulsations by Inductance Harmonics Identification of a Permanent-Magent Synchronous Machine”; IEEE Conference New York; Sep. 28, 1995; 6 pages. |
Li Yituo et al., PMSM current harmonics suppression based on feedforward compensation, Journal of Tsinghua University (Science and Technology), Mar. 2012, vol. 52, No. 3, Beijing, China, English Abstract, 1 page. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150372623 A1 | Dec 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62015784 | Jun 2014 | US |