Sensorless Control of Induction Motors based on
High-Gain Speed Estimation and On-Line Stator
Resistance Adaptation
Marcello Montanari, Andrea Tilli
CASY - Center for Research on Complex Automated Systems “G. Evangelisti”,
Department of Electronics, Computer and System Sciences (DEIS), University of Bologna,
Viale Pepoli 3/2, 40123 Bologna, ITALY
E-mail:{mmontanari, atilli}@deis.unibo.it
Abstract— Stator resistance adaptation is a crucial issue
in sensorless control of induction motor, particularly at low
speed. In this paper, an improved indirect field oriented
controller based on high gain speed estimation, which was
previously proposed by the authors, is deeply revised in or-
der to add a stator resistance adaptation mechanism. Sim-
plicity and easy-to-tune structure of the non-adaptive ver-
sion of the controller is preserved, while its robustness is sig-
nificantly improved thanks to stator resistance estimation.
Experimental results are provided to show the effectiveness
of the proposed method.
I. Introduction
Speed sensorless induction motor (IM) drives are becom-
ing wide spread solutions thanks to cost reduction and in-
creased reliability with respect to high performance sen-
sorized IM drives. Many solutions have been presented
in the literature; owing to space limitation, an extensive
overview is omitted here, see [1], [2]. Sensorless control
techniques can be classified into two main areas: solutions
based on the fundamental IM model and standard control
signals and methods exploiting IM non-ideality and/or sig-
nal injection for speed estimation. The former represents
an interesting approach, since it does not require ad hoc
IMs or extra hardware components. Nevertheless, this ap-
proach is critical when the excitation frequency is close to
zero (dc-excitation), due to reduction of back-emf signal for
speed estimation and high sensitivity to model parameters
and measurement errors [3].
The most critical parameter affecting performances at
low speed is stator resistance [4], which varies depending
on temperature and hence is required to be estimated on-
line. Various techniques for sensorless control with stator
resistance estimation have been presented [5], [6], [7], [8].
In this paper a speed sensorless controller with a novel
on-line stator resistance adaptation is presented. The pro-
posed solution is based on the sensorless control algorithm
reported by the authors in [9], which has the following
properties: (a) an improved Indirect Field Oriented (IFO)
Control [10] is exploited to obtain decomposition into feed-
back interconnected electromechanical and electromagnetic
dynamics without flux estimation; (b) speed estimation is
performed with a high-gain adaptation mechanism based
1-4244-0136-4/06/$20.00 '2006 IEEE 1263
on the back-emf signal perturbing the q-axis current track-
ing error. In [9] it has been shown that, under assumption
of known stator resistance, local asymptotic tracking of
smooth speed and flux reference trajectories along with
asymptotic field orientation are obtained with unknown
load torque, if the speed observer is designed sufficiently
fast and if persistency of excitation is guaranteed, namely
avoiding dc excitation.
Similarly to other methods, using the solution proposed in
[9] it results that relevant uncertainties in stator resistance
value introduce speed estimation error, leading to uncor-
rect speed tracking and, in some cases, to instability.
The main purpose of this paper is to revise the solution
of [9] to add an adaptation mechanism which avoids the
above-mentioned phenomenon, preserving the basic prop-
erties of the original solution. Analyzing the effects of a
wrong stator resistance value on the algorithm of [9], it
can be noted that a steady-state error arises in the current
component devoted to flux control (d-component), while
the stability property is lost only for very large stator re-
sistance error. Consequently, the main idea is to make ex-
plicit the quasi-steady state d-axis current tracking error
model to design a stator resistance adaptation mechanism.
A suitable and simple on-off supervisor has been added to
disable the stator resistance estimation mechanism in par-
ticular working conditions where it is not useful.
Main advantage of the proposed method is that the
physically-based structure of [9] is preserved leading to a
tuning procedure similar to standard electrical drives with
cascaded control loops.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section II the IM
model is presented and the control problem is formulated,
in Section III the sensorless controller of [9] is deeply re-
vised in order to add a suitably-designed stator resistance
estimator, in Section IV experimental results are presented
in order to show the achievable performance. Finally, in
Section V conclusions are given.
II. Induction motor model and control problem
statement
The equivalent two-phase model of the symmetrical IM,
under assumptions of linear magnetic circuits and balanced
operating conditions, is expressed in an arbitrary rotating is eω = ω̂ − ω ∗ , the (normalized) load torque estimation
reference frame (d-q) [11] as error is T̃L = TJL − T̂L . The estimated stator resistance is

 denoted as r̂s , while its estimation error is r̃s = rs − r̂s .
i̇d = − rσs + αLm β id + ω0 iq + αβψd + βpωψq + σ1 ud The slip frequency is defined as ω2 = ω0 − pω.


i̇q = − rσs + αLm β iq − ω0 id + αβψq − βpωψd + σ1 uq
III. Controller Design
ψ̇d = −αψd + (ω0 − pω)ψq + αLm id
In this section, the speed and flux controller combined
ψ̇q = −αψq − (ω0 − pω)ψd + αLm iq with the high-gain speed observer are presented and their
ω̇ = µ(ψd iq − ψq id ) − TL
J (1) main features are enlightened. Then, analysis under as-
sumption of unknown stator resistance and design of the
T T T
where i = (id , iq ) , Ψ = (ψd , ψq ) , u = (ud , uq ) denote stator resistance adaptation law are reported.
stator current, rotor flux and stator voltage vectors (sub-
scripts d and q stand for vector components in the (d-q) A. Speed/flux controller and speed observer
reference frame), ω is the rotor speed, TL is the load torque The speed sensorless controller is designed as follows:
and ω0 = ε̇0 , ε0 are the angular speed and position of the
reference frame (d-q) with respect to a fixed stator refer- Current controller


 
ence frame (a-b), where the physical variables are defined. ud = σ r̂σs + αLm β id − ω0 iq − αβψ ∗ + i̇∗d − kid ĩd
Transformed variables in (1) are given by

 
uq = σ r̂σs + αLm β iq + ω0 id + βpψ ∗ ω̂ + i̇∗q − kiq ĩq
 
xdq = e−Jε0 xab Jε0 cos ε0 − sin ε0 (3)
with e = (2)
xab = eJε0 xdq sin ε0 cos ε0 Flux controller
i
where xyz stands for any two-dimensional vector of IM ω0 = pω̂ + αLm ψq∗ + ψν0∗
model.   (4)
i∗d = αL1m αψ ∗ + ψ̇ ∗
Positive constants related to the electrical and me-
chanical
 parameters
 of the IM are defined as σ = with
L2m  
Ls 1 − Ls Lr , β = σLr , µ = 32 LLmr Jp , α = Lrrr , where J is
Lm
1 i
ν0 = β pω̂ + αLm ψq∗ ĩd + γ1 pω̂ ĩd
the total rotor inertia, rs , rr , Ls , Lr are stator/rotor resis-
tances and inductances respectively, Lm is the magnetizing Speed controller
 
inductance, p is the number of pole pairs. No mechanical
i∗q = µψ1 ∗ ω̇ ∗ + T̂L − kω eω
friction is supposed. (5)
In the framework of indirect field orientation [11], [10] ˙
T̂L = −kωi eω
specifications for speed-sensorless controlled electric drives
require to control speed ω and rotor flux amplitude |ψ| = Speed observer

ψd2 + ψq2 and to obtain field orientation, i.e. ψq = 0, ω̂ = ω ∗ + eω , ėω = − βpψ
kio
∗ ĩq (6)
by designing the control inputs given by the stator voltage where the stator resistance estimate r̂s will be specified in
T
vector (ud , uq ) and the synchronous speed ω0 , on the basis the following. Constant tuning gains are the proportional
T
of measured variables (id , iq ) . Defining speed and flux current gains kid > αLm β, kiq > 0, the proportional and
reference trajectories ω and ψ ∗ and introducing speed and
∗
integral speed gains kω , kωi > 0, the observer gain kio > 0
flux tracking errors ω̃ = ω −ω ∗ , ψ̃d = ψd −ψ ∗ , ψ̃q = ψq , the and the tuning gain γ1 selected as γ1 = kid −αL mβ
, accord-
α
proposed controller guarantees local asymptotic speed and ing to [9].
flux amplitude tracking and asymptotic field orientation, From (1) and (3)-(6) the tracking and estimation error
i.e. limt→∞ ω̃ = 0, limt→∞ ψ̃d = 0, limt→∞ ψ̃q = 0, with dynamics is
all signals bounded, under the following assumptions:
A.1. Stator currents are available from measurements. ĩ˙ d = −kid ĩd + αβ ψ̃d + βpω ψ̃q − r̃σs id
A.2. Motor parameters are constant and known, apart
˙
from the stator resistance rs which is positive, unknown, ψ̃d = −αψ̃d + ω2 ψ̃q + αLm ĩd (7)
constant and bounded. ˙
ψ̃q = −αψ̃q − ω2 ψ̃d + pψ ∗ (ω̃ − eω ) − ν0
A.3. Load torque TL is unknown, bounded and constant.
A.4. Speed and flux reference trajectories ω ∗ , ψ ∗ are
smooth functions with known and bounded first and second ω̃˙ = −kω eω − T̃L + µψ ∗ ĩq + µ(ψ̃d iq − ψ̃q id )
(8)
time derivatives, and ψ ∗ (t) > 0, ∀t. T̃˙L = kωi eω
The following notation is introduced. Reference signals for
the d- and q-axis currents are denoted with i∗d , i∗q , estimated
speed and (normalized) load torque are ω̂, T̂L , tracking ĩ˙ q = −kiq ĩq + αβ ψ̃q − βpω ψ̃d + βpψ ∗ (eω − ω̃) − r̃s
σ iq
errors are defined as ĩd = id −i∗d , ĩq = iq −i∗q , ψ̃d = ψd −ψ ∗ , ėω = − βpψ
kio
∗ ĩq .

ψ̃q = ψq , ω̃ = ω − ω ∗ , the estimated speed tracking error (9)

1264

From controller equations and error dynamics, it can be
noted that main features of the controller are:
• the controller shows a cascaded structure with inner cur-
rent control loops (3) and outer flux (4) and speed (5) con-
trol loops;
• the current loops are composed by proportional con-
troller and feed-forward actions based on model inversion;
• vector flux control is based on the improved IFOC struc-
ture, with additional stabilizing term ν0 and no flux esti-
mation required to obtain field orientation;
• speed controller is composed by feed-forward terms and
a PI controller based on the estimated speed;
• speed estimation (6) is based on the back-emf signal in
the iq current dynamics. In fact, according to the q-axis
current controller (3) and assuming, as preliminary step,
r̃s = ψ̃d = ψ̃q = 0, the back-emf signal βpωψd is compen-
sated by βpω̂ψ ∗ exploiting only estimated and reference sig-
nals. Hence, uncorrect speed estimation leads to non-null
q-axis current tracking error in (9), which can be exploited
through the integral term (6) in the speed observer. By the
way, in the following analysis the flux and stator resistance
estimation errors will be considered.
Error dynamics can be decomposed into three feedback
interconnected subsystems: electromagnetic (7), mechani-
cal (8) and estimation dynamics (9). In particular, select-
k2
ing kω , kωi such that kωi = 2ω the isolated mechanical dy-
namics (8) can be rendered exponentially stable. Similarly,
k2
selecting kiq , kio such that kio = 2iq the isolated estimation
dynamics (9) can be made exponentially stable, too. In
addition, as underlined in [9], defining = kkiq ω
and impos-
ing it sufficiently small, time-scale separation between the
estimation subsystem (fast) and the speed and flux track-
ing error dynamics (slow) can be achieved. Hence, under
this particular choice of gains, the estimation error dynam-
ics (9) can be approximated by its quasi-steady state given
by
¯ĩ = 0
q
  (10)
1
ēω = ω̃ − βpψ ∗ αβ ψ̃q − βpω ψ̃d − r̃σs i∗q .
This result is similar to [9] with the additional r̃s -dependent
term, hence it follows that the estimated speed is affected
by flux tracking errors and stator resistance estimation
error. Perturbation due to flux error is compensated by
proper design of ν0 and γ1 , in order to impose asymptotic
stability of the electromagnetic subsystem (7), while stator
resistance mismatching will be compensated by a proper
adaptation law.
Thanks to time-scale separation between control and es-
timation dynamics, the flux-speed error dynamics can be
approximated by its quasi-steady state version, obtained
substituting (10) into (7)-(8). It is expressed as
ĩ˙ d = −kid ĩd + αβ ψ̃d + βpω ψ̃q − r̃σs id
˙ 
ψ̃d = −αψ̃d + ω̄2 ψ̃q + αLm ĩd
 ∗ 
˙ ¯ + αLm iq∗ ĩd + γ1 pω̂
ψ̃q = −ω̄0 ψ̃d − β1 r̃σs i∗q − β1 pω̂ ψ
¯ ĩd
(11)
1265
 
r̃s ∗
ω̃˙ = −kω ω̃ − T̃L + kω
βψ ∗ αβ ψ̃q − βω ψ̃d − σ iq +
+ µ(ψ̃d i∗q − ψ̃q id ) (12)
 
T̃˙L = kωi ω̃ − βψ
kωi
∗ αβ ψ̃q − βω ψ̃d − r̃s ∗
σ iq
¯ are evaluated with the quasi-steady state
where ω̄0 , ω̄2 , ω̂
value of eω given in (10). Error dynamics (11), (12) is
composed by the linearly-cascaded-interconnected flux and
speed subsystems. Under assumption of r̃s = 0, in [9] it has
been shown that the origin of the overall error dynamics
is locally exponentially stable if a persistency of excitation
condition is satisfied.
B. Stator resistance adaptation
In order to preserve the stability properties of the solu-
tion presented in [9], the rs adaptation mechanism is de-
signed to be slower than error dynamics (11), (12). In
particular, it is based on the steady-state of that dynam-
ics. This is admissible only if the stability of (11), (12)
is preserved even when r̃s perturbation is present. This is
conceivable according to robustness of exponentially sta-
ble systems with respect to bounded disturbances and if r̃s
remains small thanks to a suitably-designed on-line adap-
tation.
Under steady-state operating conditions, i.e. with con-
stant ω ∗ , ψ ∗ , TL , solving (11), (12) with time derivatives
equal to zero, the dependence on the stator resistance esti-
mation error r̃s of the steady-state d-axis current tracking
error ĩd and the speed tracking error ω̃ can be analytically
determined. The analytical dependence of ĩd on r̃s is the
following
(t)
ĩd = − ndrr(t) r̃s
nr (t) = αi∗q + (ω0 − pω̂)id + (pω̂ − pω)id
   (13)
i∗
dr (t) = σ kid ω0 + α pω̂ + αLm ψq∗ +
+(kid − αLm β)(pω̂ − pω)) .
In Fig. 1 these relations are represented graphically for the
IM used in the testing bench considered in Section IV. It
follows that, at constant r̃s , the effect on ω̃ and ĩd depends
on the IM operating condition, i.e. on reference speed and
load torque. Major sensitivity is present at low speed and
in regenerating mode, when instability may arise.
From (13) and Fig. 1 it follows that ĩd is proportional to r̃s
with larger gain at higher torques, i.e. with high |i∗q | and
|ω2 | = |ω0 − pω|, and at lower excitation frequency |ω0 |.
Based on (13), the following stator resistance adaptation
law is designed:
 
r̂˙s = −fs ηs n̂r (t)sign(dˆr (t))ĩd
n̂r (t) = αi∗q + (ω0 − pω̂)id (14)
 
i∗
dˆr (t) = σ kid ω0 + α pω̂ + αLm ψq∗
where ηs is a positive constant tuning gain and fs (·) is the
 10
Speed error [rad/s]
5 95%r
0 tee that the rate of convergence of r̂s is slower than the
−5
−10
−150 −100 −50
d−axis current error [A]
0.1
0.05
0
−0.05
−0.1
−150 −100 −50
Reference speed [rad/s]
Fig. 1. Dependence of ω̃ and ĩd on r̃s at steady-state, for different
values of ω ∗ , with TL = 7 Nm and ψ ∗ = 0.86 Wb for r̂s = 90%rs
and r̂s = 95%rs . For ω0 close to zero, errors are not shown since
equilibrium point is unstable.
following saturation function with dead-zone:
 before. The adaptation gain ηs is selected following this

0 if |y| ≤ fdz
fs (y) = min(y − fdz , fM )
if y > fdz


max(y + fdz , −fM ) if y < −fdz
and fdz , fM are the dead-zone amplitude and the satura-
tion limit respectively. The adaptation law (14) can be eas-
ily derived adopting the Lyapunov-like function V = 12 r̃s2
applying standard Lyapunov design arguments. Note that
the adopted V takes into account the r̃s state only, since
the steady-state behavior of (11), (12) is considered accord-
ing to the hypothesis of slow stator resistance adaptation.
From (13), (14) the time derivative of V is
 
V̇ = −r̃s fs ηs n̂r sign(dˆr ) ndrr r̃s (15)
which is negative semidefinite if sign(n̂r ) = sign(nr ) and
sign(dˆr ) = sign(dr ). It is worth noting that nr , dr in (13)
are replaced by their estimations since they are not com-
pletely known. In particular, terms dependent on speed
estimation error (pω̂ − pω) have been neglected. By the
way, according to V̇ , this solution is effective only when
n̂r , dˆr are sufficiently close to their real values. Noting
that n̂r and dˆr are approximatively proportional to i∗q and
ω0 respectively, the adaptation law (14) is enabled only
if these values are large enough, i.e. when the following
condition is satisfied:
(|i∗q | ≥ i∗qM ) and (|ω0 | ≥ ω0M )
where i∗qM , ω0Mare positive constant thresholds, otherwise
r̂s is not updated.
The saturation/dead-zone function fs has been added for
the following reasons. The dead-zone is useful to increase
robustness with respect to measurement noise, stator volt-
age distortion and other model uncertainties. It prevents
the r̂s updating with small values of ĩd and i∗q , when sensi-
90%rs
tivity to r̃s of the proposed sensorless solution is actually
s negligible. Differently, the saturation is added to guaran-
speed-flux dynamics.
It is worth noting that to guarantee the time scale sepa-
rations and to track the stator resistance thermal variation,
0 50 100 150
a slow convergence rate is required. On the other hand, the
on-line estimation must be sufficiently fast to track the sta-
90%rs tor resistance variation occurred when the adaptation law
95%rs is disabled. Hence, a suitable trade-off in designing ηs and
fM is required.
Guidelines in selecting parameters are the following. The
dead-zone amplitude fdz is basically related to current mea-
surement noise. The saturation limit fM is set to impose
0 50 100 150 a sufficiently small variation of the stator resistance along
a time interval comparable to the rotor time constant in
every working condition, hence the following rule can be
given: fαM < 5%rsN . Thresholds i∗qM , ω0M are selected in
order to guarantee that whenever the adaptation law is en-
abled, for a conceivable maximum speed estimation error
it holds |nr − n̂r | < 12 |n̂r | and |dr − dˆr | < 12 |dˆr |; in this
way, nr , n̂r and dr , dˆr have the same sign as underlined
rule derived from (13), (14): ηs < ασ(α+k id )ω0M
, in order
4α2 i∗2
qM AX
to obtain a r̃s dynamics slower than the flux dynamics in
typical working conditions.
IV. Experimental results
The proposed speed sensorless algorithm has been tested
using a 1.1 kW induction motor, whose data are reported
in Table I. The experimental set-up is equipped with a
rapid prototyping station including:
• a 50 A/380 V three phase inverter operated with a sym-
metrical PWM technique with 10kHz switching frequency,
dead-times set to 1.5 µs and compensated in the current
control loop;
• a custom floating-point digital signal processor (DSP)
board, based on TMS320C32 and installed on a PC used
as operator interface. The DSP board performs data ac-
quisition (two stator currents, dc-link voltage and rotor
speed, by means of a 512 ppr incremental encoder and
only for monitoring purposes), implements the control al-
gorithm and generates the PWM signals for the inverter
actuation. The discrete-time version of the control algo-
rithm (3)–(6), (14), obtained using the Euler method, and
the On/Off adaptation supervisor according to (16) have
been implemented with 200 µs sampling time;
• the 1.1kW induction motor;
• a vector controlled permanent magnet synchronous mo-
(16)
tor used to provide load torque and load inertia.
Controller and estimation parameters have been set accord-
ing to tuning rules given in Section III as follows: current
gains are kid = 350, kiq = 500, speed controller gains are
kω = 120, kωi = 7200, observer gain is kio = 125000, tun-
ing gain is set to γ1 = 25.9. With the selected gains the
speed control and speed estimation dynamics show a time
1266
 Rated power 1.1 kW Rated speed 1410 rev/min a) Speed reference and load torque profile b) Est. stator resistance
Rated torque 7.0 Nm Rated frequency 50 Hz 20 12
11.5
15
Pole pairs 2 Rated voltage 220 V 11

rad/s, Nm
10
10.5
Rated current 2.8 A Excitation current 1.4 A

Ω
5
10
0 9.5
Rs = 10.3 Ω Rr = 5.2 Ω Lm = 0.434 H −5 9

Ls = 0.4704 H Lr = 0.4704 H J = 0.0034 Kgm2 −10

0 0.5 1
8.5
0 0.5 1

c) Speed ref., speed and est. speed d) Excitation freq.

TABLE I 30 60
25 50
Induction motor data 20 40

rad/s

rad/s
15 30
10 20
5 10
0
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
constant of τω = 17 ms and τo = 4 ms respectively, with e) d−axis current reference f) q−axis current reference
imposed time scale separation expressed by = ττωo = 0.25. 4
3
4
3
2 2
Gains kid and γ1 are selected considering the trade-off be- 1 1
0 0

A
tween bandwidth increase of the d-current loop and sensi- −1 −1
−2 −2
tivity to noise superimposed on ĩd . Stator resistance adap- −3 −3

tation gain has been set as ηs = 8 Ω/A2 , while other param-

−4 −4
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1

eters have been set as follows: fdz = 0.1 Ω/s, fM = 4 Ω/s, 0.3
g) d−axis current error
0.3
h) q−axis current error

i∗qM = 1 A, ω0M = 5 rad/s. 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1
Experimental tests under low speed and regenerating 0 0

A
mode, which represent the most critical operating condi- −0.1 −0.1
−0.2 −0.2
tions of sensorless controlled IMs, have been performed to −0.3 −0.3
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
study the performance of the proposed controller. time (s) time (s)

The aim of the first test is to show that at low speed

Fig. 2. Experimental results with ω ∗ = 15 rad/s and stepwise load
with regenerating load, i.e. at low excitation frequency,
the sensorless controller with detuned r̂s and no adapta-
tion fails to properly work. It is worth noting that this
behavior is not peculiar of the proposed solution only, but
reveals common robustness issues of sensorless controllers
at low excitation frequency. During this test as well as in
the following ones, the flux reference is maintained constant
at its rated value ψ ∗ = 0.86 Wb. In Fig. 2 experimental
results are shown. In this test, a step-wise regenerating
torque TL = −7 Nm, with constant r̂s = 9.5 Ω. a) Speed refer-
ence ω ∗ (solid) and load torque TL (dashed). b) Stator resistance
r̂s (constant since the adaptation is not activated in this test).
c) Speed reference ω ∗ (dashed), speed ω (solid), estimated speed
ω̂ (marked). d) Excitation frequency ω0 ; e) d-axis current refer-
ence i∗d ; f) q-axis current reference i∗q ; g) d-axis current tracking
error ĩd ; h) q-axis current tracking error ĩq .
a) Speed reference and load torque profile b) Est. stator resistance
20 12

rated torque TL = −7 Nm is applied to the IM with con- 15 11.5

11
rad/s, Nm

10
stant speed reference equal to ω ∗ = 15 rad/s. The stator 10.5
Ω

5
10
0
resistance adaptation law is removed and the estimated sta- −5
9.5
9
tor resistance is maintained constant at r̂s = 9.5 Ω (about −10
0 0.5 1
8.5
0 0.5 1
92% rated value). The estimated speed tracking error con- c) Speed ref., speed and est. speed d) Excitation freq.
30 60
verges to zero after the transient at t = 0.2 s, nevertheless 25 50
the speed tracking error diverges, even leading to instabil- 20 40
rad/s

rad/s

15 30
ity if this condition persists. This is due to the uncorrect 10 20
value of r̂s , as enlightened also by the non-null d-axis cur- 5 10
0
rent tracking error when load torque is applied, which is in 0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
e) d−axis current reference f) q−axis current reference
accordance with (13). 4 4
3 3
In the second test, whose results are reported in Fig. 3, 2 2
1 1
the IM is controlled under the same operating conditions of 0 0
A

−1 −1
the first test, with the stator resistance adaptation starting −2 −2
−3 −3
with initial value r̂s (0) = 9.0 Ω. According to enabling −4
0 0.5 1
−4
0 0.5 1
condition (16), the stator resistance is adapted after load
torque is applied, i.e. for t ∈ [0.2, 1.2] s, when i∗q ∼
g) d−axis current error h) q−axis current error
= −2.8 A. 0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
From Fig. 3 it follows that r̂s is adapted to the rated value 0.1 0.1
0 0
A

in about 0.4 s, the speed and d-axis current tracking errors −0.1 −0.1
TL
converge to zero and the q-axis current is close to µJψ ∗, −0.2 −0.2
−0.3 −0.3
enlightening correct flux orientation. 0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
time (s) time (s)
In order to analyze the behavior of the stator resistance
estimation also during fast variable load torque, a square Fig. 3. Experimental results with ω ∗ = 15 rad/s and stepwise load
wave load torque with amplitude TL = ±7 Nm and period torque TL = −7 Nm (the same condition of Fig. 2) with rs adap-
tation law activated.
equal to 0.3 s is applied. In Figs. 4 and 5 it is shown that

1267
 a) Speed ref., speed and load torque profile b) q−axis current (real and ref.) a) Speed ref., speed and load torque profile b) Est. stator resistance
30 4 30 12
25 3 20 11.5
20 2
rad/s, Nm

11

rad/s, Nm
15 1 10
10.5
10 0

Ω
0
5 −1 10
−10 9.5
0 −2
−5 −3 −20 9
−10 −4 −30 8.5
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8

c) Est. stator resistance d) d−axis current error c) d− and q−axis current d) Excitation freq.
11.5 0.3 4 75
11 0.2 3
50
2
10.5 0.1 25
1

rad/s
Ω

10 0

A
0 0

A
9.5 −0.1 −1 −25
−2
9 −0.2 −50
−3
8.5 −0.3 −4 −75
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8
time (s) time (s) time (s) time (s)

Fig. 4. Experimental results with ω ∗ = 15 rad/s and stepwise load
torque TL = −7 Nm, with rs adaptation law. a) Speed reference
ω ∗ (marked), speed ω (solid), load torque TL (dashed); b) q-axis
current iq (solid) and reference i∗q (marked); c) Estimated stator
resistance r̂s ; d) d-axis current tracking error ĩd .
Fig. 6. Experimental results during speed transient from 20 rad/s
to −20 rad/s with 7 Nm rated torque. a) Speed reference ω ∗
(marked), speed ω (solid), load torque TL (dashed); b) estimated
stator resistance r̂s ; c) d-axis current id (marked) and q-axis
current iq (solid); d) excitation frequency ω0 .

a) Speed ref., speed and load torque profile b) q−axis current (real and ref.)
30
25
4
3
back-emf signal, represents a faster dynamics with respect
20 2
to the speed-flux tracking one, while the stator resistance
rad/s, Nm

15 1
10 0
A

5 −1 estimation is based on a quasi-steady state error model.

0 −2
−5 −3 With respect to common approaches, which are based on
−10 −4
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1 a flux observer combined with speed and stator resistance
11.5
c) Est. stator resistance
0.3
d) d−axis current error adaptation laws for state estimation, the proposed solu-
11 0.2 tion presents a simpler implementation and allows for a
10.5 0.1
clear and ordinary tuning procedure. The experimental
Ω

10 0
A

9.5 −0.1 results show the suitability of the controller in low-speed

9 −0.2
8.5 −0.3
0 0.5 1 0
time (s)
Fig. 5. Experimental results with ω ∗ = 15 rad/s and stepwise load
torque TL = 7 Nm, with rs adaptation law.
the r̂s is monotonically adapted during load torque applica-
tion. When the stator resistance is almost exactly adapted,
estimation remains almost constant despite of noise and
transient dynamics and the speed response to load torque
step is characterized by null steady-state error, 40 ms set-
tling time and 12 rad/s maximum tracking error.
In Fig. 6 results relative to a (slow) speed reference
ramp from 20 rad/s to −20 rad/s with maximum accel-
eration equal to −20 rad/s2 and 7 Nm constant torque are
shown. During tests, the motor is in regenerating mode
from t = 2.0 s to t = 6.0 s; the IM passes through the dc
excitation condition (ω0 = 0) at t = 2.4 s and t = 5.5 s,
when ω ∼ = −9 rad/s. This test shows the capability of the
proposed controller to guarantee speed tracking of slowly
varying speed reference with excitation frequency close to
zero. Note that when ω ∗ = −20 rad/s, iq is slightly lower
than the case of ω ∗ = 20 rad/s owing to the effect of the
viscous friction.
V. Conclusions
In this paper a speed sensorless controller for induction
motors, based on a high gain speed observer and a stator
resistance estimator, has been presented and experimen-
tally tested. The solution is based on time scale separa-
tion approach: the speed estimation, which exploits the
and regenerating mode. Further studies will be devoted to
0.5 1
time (s) develop a solution which is adaptive with respect to rotor
resistance.
References
[1] K. Rajashekara, A. Kawamura, and K. Matsuse. Sensorless con-
trol of AC motor drives. IEEE Press, New York, 1996.
[2] J. Holtz. Sensorless control of induction machines - with or with-
out signal injection? IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electron-
ics, 53(1):7–30, Feb. 2006.
[3] K.D. Hurst, T.G. Habetler, G. Griva, and F. Profumo. Zero-
speed tacholess im torque control: simply a matter of stator
voltage integration. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applica-
tions, 34(4):790–795, July-Aug. 1998.
[4] J. Holtz. Sensorless control of induction motor drives. Proceed-
ings of the IEEE, 90(8):1359–1394, Aug. 2002.
[5] G. Guidi and H. Umida. A novel stator resistance esti-
mation method for speed-sensorless induction motor drives.
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, 36(6):1619–1627,
Nov./Dec. 2000.
[6] M. Tsuji, S. Chen, K. Izumi, and E. Yamada. A sensorless
vector control system for induction motors using q-axis flux with
stator resistance identification. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, 48(1):185–194, Feb. 2001.
[7] J. Holtz and J. Quan. Drift- and parameter-compensated
flux estimator for persistent zero-stator-frequency operation of
sensorless-controlled induction motors. IEEE Transactions on
Industry Applications, 39(4):1052–1060, Jul./Aug. 2003.
[8] G. Edelbaher, K. Jezernik, and E. Urlep. Low-speed sensorless
control of induction machine. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
Electronics, 53(1):120–128, Feb. 2006.
[9] S. Peresada, M. Montanari, A. Tilli, and S. Kovbasa. Sensor-
less indirect field-oriented control of induction motors, based on
high gain speed estimation. In Proceedings of the 28th IEEE
Conference on Industrial Electronics, Sevilla (Spain), 2002.
[10] S. Peresada and A. Tonielli. High-performance robust speed-flux
tracking controller for induction motor. International Journal
of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing, 14:177–200, 2000.
[11] W. Leonhard. Control of Electrical Drives. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 3rd edition, 2001.

1268