Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors (PMSM) have growing adoption in consumer and industrial motor applications due to their higher reliability and smaller size compared to other motors. To achieve high efficiency and low vibration and acoustic noise, Field Oriented Control (FOC) schemes are increasingly being used in consumer and industrial PMSM control for fans, pumps, compressors, geared motors, and so forth.
For highly dynamic loading (e.g., motors for electric propulsion, compressors, etc.), a fast and accurate FOC control loop can be used to control motor currents and voltages to maintain maximum efficiency. On the other hand, existing FOC schemes often have complex transformations in the critical control loop, which can make them inaccurate and relatively slow.
To further improve efficiency at the lowest cost, increasingly more control functions (e.g., digital power conversion, digital Power Factor Correction (PFC), FOC control of multiple motors, etc.) are often handled by fewer microcontrollers. New microcontrollers also include increasingly more features and peripherals (e.g., Human Machine Interfaces, communications, etc.) in order to excel in the intensely fierce market competition. However, existing FOC control strategies can be complicated and processor-intensive, tending to overburden the microcontrollers and impeding microcontroller power from being allocated to complex system functions efficiently, and hindering the full usage of microcontroller potential and features.
Existing rotor position and speed estimators for sensorless FOC include a flux estimator, a PLL estimator, Sliding-Mode Observer (SMO), and so forth. All of these can be sensitive to motor stator resistance R, and the fluctuating stator resistance (mainly due to temperature changes) can cause unpredictable errors to the estimated rotor position and speed, causing the control to become unstable particularly at low motor speed. Furthermore, with imprecise position and speed information in sensorless FOC, the stator flux and rotor flux may not always be perpendicular to each other and consequently the energy efficiency may not be maximized all the time. Some techniques have been proposed to compensate the stator resistance variations, such as online stator resistance re-estimation/tracking/recalibration and stator resistance adaptation in sensorless PMSM drives, but they can be complex and consume more resources, including processor time.
The detailed description is set forth with reference to the accompanying figures. In the figures, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The use of the same reference numbers in different figures indicates similar or identical items.
For this discussion, the devices and systems illustrated in the figures are shown as having a multiplicity of components. Various implementations of devices and/or systems, as described herein, may include fewer components and remain within the scope of the disclosure. Alternately, other implementations of devices and/or systems may include additional components, or various combinations of the described components, and remain within the scope of the disclosure.
As an optimized technique, field oriented control (FOC) (i.e., vector control) is a method of variable speed control for three-phase alternate current (AC) electric motors, to improve power efficiency with fast control response over a full range of motor speeds.
Various implementations of structures, components, and techniques for providing optimized control of three-phase AC motors are discussed in this disclosure. Structures, components, and techniques are discussed with reference to example three-phase Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM) devices and control systems illustrated in the figures. However, this is not intended to be limiting, and is for ease of discussion and illustrative convenience. The techniques and devices discussed may be applied to many of various motor designs, control structures, and the like (e.g., single-phase and three-phase variable frequency drives, digital phase converters, three-phase and single-phase motors, induction motors, regenerative drives, etc.), and remain within the scope of the disclosure.
Implementations are explained in more detail below using a plurality of examples. Although various implementations and examples are discussed here and below, further implementations and examples may be possible by combining the features and elements of individual implementations and examples.
In an example, a FOC structure arrangement 100 transforms three phase signals into two rotor-fixed signals (e.g., in the d,q coordinate system) and vice versa with complex Cartesian reference frame transformations (e.g., Park Transform 110 and Inverse Park Transform 112) in a control loop which is desired to have a fast response. These reference frame transformations can be computation-intensive and can also introduce extra calculation errors, resulting in an undesirably slow current control loop and in poor response to dynamic motor loads. This can make it difficult to handle increasingly more composite system functions (e.g., digital power factor correction, multiple FOC motor controls, digital power conversion, etc.) with a single microcontroller.
Normally, as shown in
PI controllers 130, 120, and 122 are used for speed and current controls separately, to achieve controllable motor speed, torque and air gap flux. In general, the flux generating component Id is controlled to 0. It is also possible to control Id to negative values (i.e., flux-weakening control) to extend the operating speed range of the motor 102. The speed PI controller 130 output is the reference current for the torque generating component Iq. The PI controllers 120, 122 output the voltages Vd and Vq, that the motor 102 phases should have in the d-q reference frame, for the desired rotational speed of the motor 102. Vd and Vq are also nearly constants in steady state.
In various examples, Inverse Park Transform 112 is used to transform resultant voltages Vd and Vq to the stationary α-β reference frame as Vα and Vβ, which are sinusoidal signals in steady state. The amplitude and angle of the voltage vector (Vα, Vβ) is the reference voltage for the space vector modulation (SVM) modulator 124, which is used to control the PWM unit 118, to create 3-phase sinusoidal waveform outputs from the 3-phase 2-level voltage inverter 126, to drive the motor 102 phases.
In some cases, the Cartesian to Polar Transform 128 can be neglected if it is not desired for the microcontroller to perform the Cartesian to Polar Transform calculations. In that case, the voltages Vα and Vβ can be sent to the SVM modulator 124 directly. If desired, the ADC 116 value of the inverter 126 DC link voltage (VDC) (often a voltage divider is used) can also be obtained regularly for SVM 124 calculations. The above described control loops repeat themselves to realize required motor 102 control.
The rotor position φ and speed ω may be obtained from a rotor position sensor 104 (such as encoder, resolver, Hall sensors, etc.) for a sensored FOC arrangement 100, as shown in
A sensorless FOC structure arrangement 100, such as shown in
Some rotor position and speed estimators 202 for sensorless FOC arrangements 100 use accurate motor 102 parameter information, such as stator resistance R and stator inductance L, to estimate rotor position and/or speed, and hence are sensitive to R and L variations. However, motor stator resistance R can be highly dependent on temperature. For example, the resistance of copper and aluminum, the common motor winding materials, increases more than 15% if the temperature rises 40° C. from 20° C. (the resistivity temperature coefficients of copper and aluminum are about +0.39%/° C. at 20° C.). Such random resistance variations can introduce errors to the position and speed estimators 202 and can aggravate control performance, especially at low speeds.
Additionally, some sensorless FOC arrangements 100 can be very complex and often use three PI controllers, making it difficult and time-consuming to achieve smooth motor startup and to fine-tune for the best system performance with specified motors. With imprecise position and speed information in sensorless FOC, the stator flux and rotor flux may not always be perpendicular to each other and consequently the energy efficiency may not be maximized all the time.
The disclosed FOC control techniques and structures include optimized and faster control loops, and decreased CPU time utilization. Without Inverse Park Transform 112, the FOC arrangement 100 can optimize and speed-up the fast control loop, which will benefit the FOC motor control with highly dynamic loading (such as compressor, motor for electric propulsion). It also reduces CPU load and saves precious CPU time for other purposes (e.g., digital PFC, multiple FOC motor drive, HMI, communications) in sophisticated systems, hence the microcontroller's potential and features can be used sufficiently. Conversely, with optimized FOC users could select a microcontroller with less computation power and lower cost to accomplish FOC motor controls of the same quality.
In various implementations, one or more of the FOC arrangement 100 modules or components (e.g., PI controllers 120, 122, 130, transforms 110, 112, 114, 128, 1302, 1402, 1802, 1902, 2102, modulator 124, calculations 108, 115), as well other components, may be implemented in hardware, firmware, software, or the like, or in combinations thereof.
Furthermore, some of the disclosed techniques may be readily implemented in software using object or object-oriented software development environments that provide portable source code that can be used on a variety of computer or workstation platforms. Alternatively, the disclosed techniques and/or arrangements may be implemented partially or fully in hardware using standard logic circuits or VLSI design.
Moreover, the disclosed procedures may be readily implemented in software that can be stored on a computer-readable storage medium (such as a memory storage device), executed on programmed general-purpose computer with the cooperation of a controller and memory, a special purpose computer, a microprocessor, or the like. In these instances, the arrangements and procedures of the described implementations may be implemented as program embedded on personal computer such as an applet, JAVA® or CGI script, as a resource residing on a server or computer workstation, as a routine embedded in a dedicated communication arrangement or arrangement component, or the like. The arrangements may also be implemented by physically incorporating the arrangements and/or procedures into a software and/or hardware system, such as the hardware and software systems of a test/modeling device.
In various implementations, the FOC structure arrangement 100 may use the following coordinate systems for a 3-phase single pole-pair PMSM motor (additionally, the disclosure may be equally applicable to multi-pole-pair motors and other types of motors). A summary of the coordinate systems is given below, including explanations of the coordinate systems and their relationships.
Throughout this document it is assumed that the motor 102 rotates in the positive direction (i.e., in the counterclockwise direction), so the angles and angular speeds are positive numbers. The signs of the angles and angular speeds may be changed for a motor 102 that rotates in the negative direction (i.e., in the clockwise direction).
As shown in
As shown in
In a stationary α-β reference frame, {right arrow over (I)} has Cartesian coordinates Iα and Iβ, as shown in
Similarly, vector addition of 3-phase 120° separated stator phase voltages Vu, Vv, and Vw gives a rotating voltage space vector {right arrow over (V)}ref. Also, a rotating rotor permanent magnet generates a rotating rotor magnetic flux space vector {right arrow over (Ψ)}r.
The magnitudes and directions of the above-mentioned rotating space vectors can be represented by the radial coordinates and polar angles in polar coordinate systems, as shown in
where:
In the stationary polar coordinate system Ou, the rotating space vectors can be written in polar form of complex numbers as follows:
{right arrow over (I)}=|I|·ejγ (1)
{right arrow over (V)}ref=|Vref|·ejθ (2)
{right arrow over (Ψ)}S=L{right arrow over (I)}=L|I|·ejγ (3)
{right arrow over (Ψ)}r=|Ψr|·ejφ (4)
where:
e—Euler's number (i.e., the base of the natural logarithm); e≈2.718281828.
j—Imaginary unit; j=√{square root over (−1)}.
Referring to
Considering Equations (1) through (4), Equation (5) can be rewritten as the following Equation (6) in the stationary polar coordinate system Ou. All of the angles are illustrated in
where:
In Equation (6), except two unknown variables ωr and φ, all other items are either constants
motor 102 parameters (e.g., R, L and |Ψr|), measured and calculated values
or last control cycle calculation results, which are currently applying to motor phases (e.g., |Vref| and θ). Since a PMSM is a synchronous motor, the average electrical angular speed of the voltage space vector, the current space vector, and the rotor should be the same. So, for simplicity, the change in the angle of the voltage space vector over time can be written as:
where:
ω—Measured speed by a position sensor, or estimated speed by a position estimator, e.g., the PI controller of the PLL observer, and
ωref—User-defined reference speed of motor 102.
Recalling that all of the terms of equation (6) are depicted in
{right arrow over (Ψ)}r=∫0t({right arrow over (V)}ref−R{right arrow over (I)})dt−L{right arrow over (I)} (7.a)
Both sides of Equation (7.a) may be projected to stationary α-β axes to get the coordinates of rotor flux space vector:
Ψrα=∫0t(Vα−RIα)dt−LIα (7.b)
Ψrβ=∫0t(Vβ−RIβ)dt−LIβ (7.c)
In various implementations, Iα and Iβ are real-time measured and calculated current values. Additionally, Vα and Vβ are last control cycle calculation results and are applying to the motor 102 phases. In some examples, the integrations shown in Equations (7.b) and (7.c) can be simplified by replacing the integrations by low pass filters with a very low cut-off frequency. For sensorless FOC arrangements 100, the rotor position can be calculated by knowing the motor 102 parameters R and L. The flux position estimator is:
The rotor electrical speed is:
For some sensorless FOC arrangements 100, the estimated rotor position {circumflex over (φ)} can be obtained by an integrator 2302 (see
{circumflex over (φ)}=∫ωdt (8)
The angle of the SVM 124 (of
θ=∫ωrefdt (8.a)
The phasor diagrams of Equation (6) are shown in
Rearranging Equation (9) results in equation (10.a):
ε=|Vref|sin(γ−θ)+ωiL|I|=ωr|Ψr|sin(δ) (10.a)
which may be scaled as shown in equation (10.b):
where:
The sine function sin(δ), with δ in radians, can be represented by an infinite series as shown below:
ε=|Vref|sin(γ−θ)+ωL|I|≈ωr|Ψr|·δ (12.a)
and the scaled version:
It can be found from above, that in normal conditions:
1). The voltage difference ε will be 0 whenever the angle deviation δ is 0;
2). The voltage difference c is almost proportional to the current space vector angle deviation δ;
3). For the same non-zero angle deviation δ, the larger the BEMF magnitude |ωrΨr|, the larger the resulting voltage difference c magnitude. Hence, at higher motor speed, ε is more sensitive to non-zero δ.
Therefore, calculating the voltage difference ε=|Vref|sin(γ−θ)+ωL|I| can reveal whether the stator flux is perpendicular to the rotor flux as required for maximum energy efficiency. Additionally, the result can show how much angle deviation it is from the desired position, if it is not perpendicular.
In sensorless FOC arrangement 100 implementations, the voltage difference ε (or the scaled value
can be used as a feedback signal to estimate the rotor position {circumflex over (φ)} and speed Co. Further, the feedback signal can be used to control the magnitude |Vref| of the revolving voltage space vector {right arrow over (V)}f. As in examples shown in
Referring to
where:
Note that the thresholds εTh_L and εTh_H are closely related to BEMF magnitude |ωrΨr|, and thus, the rotor speed ωr. Usually the higher the motor 102 speed, the larger the threshold values for a specified motor 102.
PI controllers (e.g., 120, 122, and 130) as shown in
where:
A digital implementation of the PI controller 120, 122, 130, 2306, and 2804 in a microcontroller can be expressed in the form:
I[k]=Kie[k]+I[k−1] (14)
U[k]=Kpe[k]+I[k] (15)
Both I[k] and U[k] in Equations (14) and (15) have minimum and maximum limits to avoid the unwanted windup situation (anti-windup).
The low pass filter (LPF) 2304 in the PLL observer 2202 (See
where:
The connection of a 3-phase 2-level voltage source inverter 126 and a motor 102 are shown in
Different motor 102 phase current sensing techniques can be used. In
If desired, an amplifier 134, which can be external amplifier, on-chip ADC gain of the microcontroller, or similar, is used to amplify the resistor 132 voltage drop which is proportional to the current of motor 102 phase or DC link. Note that a Hall sensor, a current transformer, or other current sensors can replace the shunt resistor 132 for motor 102 phase current sensing.
Compared to triple-shunt and dual-shunt current sensing, single-shunt current sensing has the following important advantages:
Space Vector Modulation (SVM) is used to control the PWM for the inverter 126 switching devices in
Referring to
Equations (17) and (18) may be solved to yield:
where:
In various implementations, the sine/cosine functions in Equations (19) and (20) can be calculated with different methods, (e.g. use a look-up table for sine function from 0 to 60° in microcontroller memory, etc.) or be calculated by a microcontroller, and so forth.
There are many SVM 124 schemes (e.g., symmetrical or asymmetrical 7-segment schemes, symmetrical or asymmetrical 5-segment scheme, and 3-segment scheme) that result in different quality and computational requirements. An SVM 124 scheme can be selected based on microcontroller features and application requirements, for example. In an implementation, a SVM 124 can be used for a sensorless FOC arrangement 100 with either triple-shunt or dual-shunt current sensing.
In an example, during V/f open-loop startup, the SVM 124 reference vector magnitude and angle are:
|Vref|=Offset+K·ωref (22)
θ=∫ωrefdt (23)
where:
Offset—A offset value for |Vref| at zero speed.
K—V/f constant.
The herein discussed sensorless FOC control techniques are well suited for some microcontrollers that have hardware coprocessors. For example, the coprocessor can compute trigonometric, linear, hyperbolic and related functions to offload the processor-intensive tasks from CPU and thus accelerate system performance. The table below gives examples of computations that could be used in the proposed control techniques.
1). To solve the Cartesian to Polar Transform of current, set X = Iα/ K, Y = Iβ/K, and Z = 0. 2). Specially, set Z = −θ to calculate Cartesian to Polar Transform of current and angle subtract (γ − θ) with one single calculation.
|I| = {square root over (Iα2 + Iβ2)}
Angle addition/subtraction: θ = Θ + {circumflex over (φ)} γ − θ
T2 = KSVMsin(θrel) · TS
As shown in
In an example, the addition of angles can be computed precisely and instantly (e.g., angle addition operations can be done within one, or a few system clocks with most microcontrollers). This is illustrated in the table below, which shows the angle addition techniques used for the FOC arrangements 100 of
φ—Rotor position/angle n = 0, ±1, ±2, ±3, or . . . * Magnitude maintains, i.e., |Vref| = {square root over (Vα2 + Vβ2)} = {square root over (Vd2 + Vq2)}
Accordingly, in an implementation, the Inverse Park Transform 112 is bypassed in a FOC arrangement 100, as shown in
and φ is the rotor position/angle. In one example, the magnitude of the voltage space vector |Vref| is calculated with Vd and Vq, as shown in the table above. This represents a manipulation of the voltage space vector in a polar coordinate system, as also shown.
For example, as shown in
In various implementations, calculations executed for the various modules of the FOC arrangement 100 may be performed on a computing device (e.g., microprocessor, microcontroller, CPU, etc.), they may be accessed via a look-up table, or a combination of both. For example, the look-up table may be stored in a local or remote memory device, or the like, and may be accessed by a computing device.
In an alternate implementation, as shown in
For example, the mathematical expressions from the Park Transform 110 and the Clark Transform 114 may be combined in matrix form to yield:
These can be simplified to form the uvw to d-q Transform 1402 as shown below:
where: K1 is a scaling factor;
which can be neglected (i.e., make K1=1). In an example, the scaling factor
can be combined with other scaling factors of the FOC control strategy (e.g., current sensing and amplification, analog-to-digital conversion, etc.). In an implementation, a look-up table is used for sine functions, for example, to optimize control loop speed.
In another alternate implementation, as shown in
In an implementation, this alternate FOC control strategy has improved fast control loop efficiency compared to the FOC arrangement of
As shown in
In various implementations, the control strategies use polar coordinates instead of Cartesian coordinates to represent motor space vectors, so that the complex Cartesian reference frame transformations (e.g., Park Transform 110 and Inverse Park Transform 112 with sine and cosine functions, which are used in FOC arrangements 100 of
In an example, the subtraction and addition of angles can be computed precisely and instantly (addition or subtraction operations can be done within one, or a few system clocks with many microcontrollers). This is illustrated in the table below, which shows the angle subtraction and addition techniques used for the FOC arrangements 100 of
φ—Rotor position/angle m = 0, ±1, ±2, ±3, or . . . * Magnitude maintains, i.e., |I| = {square root over (Id2 + Iq2)} = {square root over (Iα2 + Iβ2)}
φ—Rotor position/angle n = 0, ±1, ±2, ±3, or . . . ** Magnitude maintains, i.e., |Vref| = {square root over (Vα2 + Vβ2)} = {square root over (Vd2 + Vq2)}
Accordingly, in an implementation, the Park Transform 110 and Inverse Park Transform 112 are bypassed in a FOC arrangement 100, as shown in
and φ is the rotor position/angle, and the angles Φ and φ are added to produce θ, where
and φ is the rotor position/angle. In one example, the magnitude of the voltage space vector |Vref| is calculated with Vd and Vq, as shown in the table above. This represents a manipulation of the voltage space vector in a polar coordinate system, as also shown.
For example, in steady state, the magnitudes of the PMSM motor space vectors (i.e., current space vector, stator and rotor magnetic flux space vectors, and voltage space vector) are constants, while their directions are stationary in the rotating polar coordinate system which is fixed to the rotor. So it is possible to use PID controllers to control the stator flux magnitude and direction to achieve constant speed and controlled torque for quiet motor operation, and also control the stator flux to be perpendicular to the rotor flux for maximum energy efficiency. With polar coordinate systems the reference frame transformations for motor control can be done by subtraction or addition of angles, so computation-friendly motor control with fast control loop are achieved.
In various implementations, as shown in
An addition of angles θ=Φ+φ accomplishes the transformation from the rotating coordinate system to the stationary coordinate system, in place of Inverse Park Transform 112 of FOC arrangements of
The speed PI controller 130 output is the reference for the magnitude PI controller 120. As described above, the rotor position (at 106) and speed calculation (at 108), speed PI control 130 are the slow control loop of the FOC arrangement 100. In some sensorless implementations, as shown in
Without Park Transform 110 and Inverse Park Transform 112 which are used with the FOC arrangements of
To provide the highest performance for both sensored and sensorless control strategies as shown in
In various implementations, several varieties of stator flux magnitude and direction control strategies may be implemented.
where: K1 is a scaling factor;
which can be neglected (i.e., make K1=1). In an example, the scaling factor
can be combined with other scaling factors of the FOC control strategy (e.g., current sensing and amplification, analog-to-digital conversion, etc.).
In an implementation, varieties of alternate control strategies are combined to form the FOC arrangement 100 shown in
In various implementations, both sensored and sensorless FOC arrangements 100 can use (Γ−π/2) as feedback for the direction PI controllers 122. Additionally, FOC arrangements 100 can control (Γ−π/2) to 0, as shown in
Referring to
In an implementation, as shown in
Depending on different system requirements, the final control strategies can be any combinations of the new control strategies as shown in
In an implementation, the sensorless FOC structure arrangement 100 of
In various implementations, as shown in
constantly, which forces the stator flux to be perpendicular to the rotor flux, maximizing energy efficiency of the motor 102. Further, this will also drive the estimated rotor position {circumflex over (φ)} and estimated speed {circumflex over (ω)} to be very close to their real quantities φ and ωr, respectively.
In one implementation, for example as shown in
In various implementations, as shown in
The alternate PLL observer 2202 of
Vi=Vαcos(γ)+Vβsin(γ) (31)
Vp=−Vαsin(γ)+Vβcos(γ) (32)
where:
Note the following Polar to Cartesian Transform 1302 of the voltage space vector:
Vα=|Vref|cos(θ) (33)
Vβ=|Vref|sin(θ) (34)
Combine Equations (32), (33) and (34) to get:
Vp=|Vref|sin(θ−γ) (35)
With Equation (35), the feedback signal to the PI controller 2306 shown in
ε=ωL|I|−Vp=|Vref|sin(γ−θ)+ωL|I| (36)
The table below summarizes the mathematical transformations used by the sensorless FOC arrangement 100 with alternate PLL observer as shown in
Note 1:
Another alternative PLL observer is shown in
Most existing position and speed estimators for sensorless FOC controllers are based on back electro-motive force (BEMF), and do not work well at zero or low motor speed. So an open-loop motor startup (e.g., V/f control) is used for these sensorless FOC controllers. A typical 2-step motor startup mechanism is V/f open-loop→FOC closed-loop:
V/f open-loop control can have poor energy efficiency; and generally the higher the motor speed, the greater power it consumes. A typical 2-step motor startup mechanism normally transitions from V/f open-loop to FOC closed-loop at relatively high motor speed, causing a high startup power (or current). Furthermore, it can be problematic to fine-tune the estimator to achieve smooth transition from open-loop startup to closed-loop FOC operation for all working conditions.
Maximum Efficiency Tracking (MET) is a sensorless control technique (as shown with the example MET control strategies 2800 of
In an implementation, a MET control technique includes changing the angle θ of the SVM 124 reference vector {right arrow over (V)}f at constant speed, as set by a user-defined reference speed
and concurrently controlling the magnitude |Vref| to force ε=|Vref|sin (γ−θ)+ωrefL|I|≈0 for the MET arrangement 2800 of
for the MET arrangement 2800 of
In various implementations, the MET control technique for a FOC structure arrangement 100 achieves a 3-step motor 102 startup: V/f open-loop→MET closed-loop→FOC closed-loop. This 3-step motor 102 startup sequence provides smooth and low-power startup for sensorless FOC arrangements 100.
In various implementations, MET arrangements 2800 use a Cartesian to Polar Transform 128 to get magnitude and angle information of the current space vector, instead of a voltage space vector, as in FOC arrangements. In an implementation, MET arrangements 2800 use a V/f open-loop motor startup 2806 (SW12808 is in position 1) and then transition (e.g., switch) to closed-loop maximum efficiency tracking (SW12808 is in position 2) after reaching a predetermined motor 102 speed. During maximum efficiency tracking, the SVM 124 reference vector angle θ changes at constant speed as set by the reference speed ωref. In an implementation, the reference vector magnitude |Vref| is controlled by a hysteresis controller 2802 to force
For example, this forces the motor 102 stator flux to be perpendicular to the rotor flux, maximizing the energy efficiency of the motor 102.
In an implementation, as shown in
If
it is an urgent condition and the magnitude |Vref| is increased. Note that in some examples, an optional LPF can be applied to both |Vref|sin(γ−θ) and ωref|I|, for implementations as shown in
The table below compares the building blocks and mathematical transformations used in the FOC arrangement 100 of
In various implementations, a MET arrangement 2800 includes a smooth transition from V/f open-loop startup to MET closed-loop, even at relatively low motor speed. For example, MET technique can be integrated to sensorless FOC arrangements 100 to apply a 3-step motor startup, which is V/f open-loop→MET closed-loop→FOC closed-loop:
for smooth transition from MET to FOC closed-loop control.
If desired, FOC closed-loop control can transition to MET closed-loop control at any time to fully use the advantages of MET technique, and users can decide when to transition back to FOC closed-loop again.
MET has at least the following advantages, and in some implementations, may have other advantages as well. Without calculation-intensive rotor position 202 and speed estimator 108, no transformations to/from rotor-fixed d-q coordinate system (110, 112), and with one PI controller 2804, MET is easy to fine-tune for applied motors 102, and the CPU time for MET is also much less. In examples, MET can reduce CPU load and save precious CPU time for other purposes (e.g., digital PFC, multiple PMSM motor drive, HMI, communications, safety checking, etc.) in sophisticated systems, hence the potential and features of the microcontroller can be fully used. Conversely, using a MET control technique, users can select a microcontroller with less computation power and lower cost to accomplish motor 102 controls.
Since it is possible to transition from V/f open-loop to energy-efficient MET closed-loop at much lower motor speed, the typical high startup power of existing 2-step motor startup mechanism can be avoided. Because MET has already made the stator flux perpendicular to the rotor flux smoothly, the PI controllers of FOC won't over-react, struggling to make them perpendicular from non-perpendicular conditions that caused by V/f open-loop control. Thus smooth startup transitions in sensorless FOC can be easily achieved. In various implementations, additional or alternative components may be used to accomplish the disclosed techniques and arrangements.
Referring to
where: K|I| is a scaling factor of the current space vector magnitude; K|I|=√{square root over (3)}.
In an implementation, the scaling factor K|I|=√{square root over (3)} can be neglected (i.e., make K|I|=1). Alternatively, the scaling of √{square root over (3)} can be combined with other scaling computations (e.g., current sensing and amplification, analog-to-digital conversion, etc.).
Referring to
Vi=Vαcos(γ)+Vβsin(γ) (39)
Vp=−Vαsin(γ)+Vβcos(γ) (40)
where:
In an implementation, the Polar to Cartesian Transform 1302 of the voltage space vector shown in
Vα=|Vref|cos(θ) (41)
Vβ=|Vref|sin(θ) (42)
Equations (40), (41) and (42) may be combined to yield:
Vp=|Vref|sin(θ−γ) (43)
Using equation (43), the voltage difference E shown in
ε=ωrefL[I]−Vp=|Vref|sin(γ−θ)+ωrefL|I| (44)
Although the implementations of the disclosure have been described in language specific to structural features and/or methodological acts, it is to be understood that the implementations are not necessarily limited to the specific features or acts described. Rather, the specific features and acts are disclosed as representative forms of implementing example devices and techniques.
This application is a non-provisional application of provisional application 61/822,422, which was filed on May 12, 2013. The entire contents of the indicated provisional application are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5854547 | Nakazawa | Dec 1998 | A |
6166514 | Ando et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
7339333 | Chen et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
7514896 | Imura et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
9263979 | Zhang et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
20050088135 | Sato | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20080191656 | Satake | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20140253000 | Gebregergis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140265951 | Gebregergis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140265953 | Collier-Hallman | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140265961 | Gebregergis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140265962 | Gebregergis | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140266295 | Erlenbeck | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140320308 | Lewis | Oct 2014 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
102008045622 | Apr 2010 | DE |
H0114394 | Jun 1989 | JP |
H06351264 | Dec 1994 | JP |
2006129698 | May 2006 | JP |
2012120409 | Jun 2012 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160359442 A1 | Dec 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61822422 | May 2013 | US | |
61822425 | May 2013 | US |