Abstract
This paper proposes a new robustification strategy of a primary H‘ controller based on a systematic selection of adequate fractional weights. Its robust
performance (RP) margin is well enhanced with respect to unstructured multiplicative uncertainties presented in linear feedback systems. The pro
posed robustification strategy provides a robustified H‘ controller when following proposed hierarchical control is well respected. First, the primary
H‘ controller is synthesized from solving a weightedmixed sensitivity H‘ problem using initial integer weights. Thus, an initial RP margin is obtained.
Second, an automatic selection of adjustable fractional weights is performed by the particle swarm optimization algorithm, in which some proposed
tuning rules are accordingly well satisfied. Third, frequency response data of these weights are computed and then fitted by corresponding approxi
mated integer weights using a frequency identification technique. Finally, these weights reformulate a new weightedmixed sensitivity problem. The opti
mal solution to this problem updates the previous initial RP margin. These last three steps are repeated as the updated RP margin is diminished.
Otherwise, the proposed hierarchical control is achieved by selecting the best adjustable fractional weights, providing, therefore, the best approxi
mated integer weights and leading, therefore, to the robustified H‘ controller. In order to confirm the effectiveness of our proposed hierarchical con
trol, primary and robustified H‘ controllers are applied on a permanent magnet synchronous motor where its actual behavior is modeled by an
unstructured multiplicative uncertain model. The results obtained are compared in frequency domains using the singular value plots of their sensitivity
functions. Otherwise, the same results are compared in time domains using the PowersimÒ software.
Keywords
Control systems design, electrical machines, Hinf, robust control, selftuning, stability, uncertain systems
+ + +
( )
+ +  In addition, both previous sensitivity functions are associated
with the following identity (Goodwin et al., 1992)
Robustification of the primary H‘ Shafai, 2003). This may present a difficult task, especially
controller when the desired RP performance is needed by a higher mar
gin. This drawback can be avoided by selecting the adequate
Fractional integraldifferential operation adjustable integer weights, in which their poles and zeroes are
Used adjustable fractional weights in the synthesis step of the optimized by an adequate optimization tool.
robustified H‘ controller taking into account the presence of Unfortunately, the computational cost increases exponen
hard performances is the capital importance for the success of tially with the optimized parameter number, leading, therefore
the proposed control strategy. However, introducing these to numerical illconditioning. For this reason, the two adjusta
weights in robust control theory is totally new compared to ble fractional weights, called WSf ðs, xÞ and WTf ðs, xÞ, are pro
those based upon integer ones. Furthermore, the main contri posed with the lowest number of unknown parameters. The
bution of this paper is how to find adequate adjustable frac PSO algorithm optimized these parameters by selecting the
tional weights that reduce, as much as possible, the space best weights of them available in a fractional dimensional
search size of the PSO algorithm, leading, therefore, to the best space. This selection mechanism is oriented by some proposed
integer weights for RP enhancement. Notice that the fractional tuning rules that will be described later. For NP specifications,
order fundamental operator a Dmt , which is used in the proposed the adjustable fractional weight WSf ðs, xÞ is proposed by
adjustable fractional weights, is defined according to both !nS
Grûnwald–Letnikov (GL) and Riemann–Liouville (RL) defi psﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
+ vB
nS
MS
nitions (Oustaloop et al., 2000; Podlubny, 1999) as follows WSf ðs, xÞ = pﬃﬃﬃﬃ ð13Þ
s + vB nS eS
Tuning rules proposed for selecting the best frequencies. Also, they allow increasing as much as possible
adjustable fractional weights both fractionalorders nS and nT , providing thus the steepest
descent slopes. From equations (8), (15) and (16), looking for
The aim of the proposed tuning rules is to select good adjus the best adequate fractional weights requires us to solve the
table fractional weights that ensure the following schemes proposed constrained optimization problem that can be
(Lundström et al., 1991; Oloomi and Shafai, 2003; Ortega expressed by the following general form
and Rubio, 2004; Sedraoui et al., 2017).
n o
According to Figure 3, increasing the RP0 margin can be
RPð xÞ = min WSf ðs, xÞ Sd1 ðsÞ‘ + WTf ðs, xÞ Sc1 ðsÞ‘
established when either NP0 margin or RS0 margin is x
increased. This is done as follows: ð17Þ
2 d M 3 2 3 2 3
The general rule to increase the NP0 margin is to MS0 S0 MS MS0
6 nS0 7 6 nS 7 6 dnS nS0 7
enlarge, as much as possible, the fractionalorder nS0 6 7 6 7 6 0 7
6 vB0 7 6 vB 7 6 dv v 7
and/or the bandwidth vB0 . However, increasing these 6 7 6 7 6 B0 B0 7
6 deS0 eS0 7 6 eS 7 6 eS0 7
parameters more than necessary decreases the pre Subject to : 6 7 6
6 dMT0 :MT0 7 ł 6 MT 7 ł 6 MT
7 6 7 ð18Þ
7
ferred RS1 margin, violating thus the robust stability 6 7 6 7 6 0 7
6 nT0 7 6 nT 7 6 dn nT 7
condition. Conversely, to increase the RS0 margin 6 7 6 7 6 T0 0 7
4 dv vBT0 5 4v 5 4 v 5
requires enlarging, as much as possible, the desired BT0 BT BT0
deT0 eT0 eT eT0
fractionalorder nT . However, when nT is increased ﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ} ﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄ} ﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ}
more than necessary, there is a possibility to violate LB x UB
the desired NP1 condition (Lundström et al., 1991;
Oloomi and Shafai, 2003). So, the desired compromise
can be ensured by the PSO algorithm using the follow Frequency response of adjustable fractional weights
ing proposed constraints
In the proposed hierarchical control system, the proposed
8 adjustable fractional weights are used to increase the RP0
< nS0 ł nS ł dnSj nS0
>
margin provided by the primary H‘ controller. As we know
vB0 ł vB ł dvB vB0 ,
where 1\dH \2 ð15Þ
> already, the standard Hinflmi function cannot solve the
: n ł n ł d 0 n
T0 T n T0 T0 weightedmixed sensitivity based on these fractional weights.
Approximating these weights by the corresponding integer
The general rule to increase the RS0 margin is to polynomials is employed to avoid this drawback. It should be
diminish as much as possible MT0 , vBT0 , eS0 and eT0 . noted that the approximation step based on conventional
However, decreasing these parameters more than nec methods can sometimes be quite complicated. For instance,
essary decreases the desired NP1 margin and also vio these weights may consist of several transfer functions con
lates the NP1 condition. On the other hand, the NP0 nected in series. The main goal is to determine a rational
margin is increased when MS is mitigated as much as weight with lower integer order, whose frequency responses
possible. However, when MS is decreased more than must be fitted closely to those provided by the corresponding
necessary, there is a possibility to violate the desired fractional weight. This can be done by the MatlabÒ function
RS1 condition (Lundström et al., 1991; Oloomi and Fitfrd, which yields a rational polynomial ratio with a prese
Shafai, 2003). So, the desired compromise can be pro lected integer order (Aidoud et al., 2016; Zheng et al., 2016).
vided by the PSO algorithm using the following pro In general, the H‘ controller order depends heavily on this
posed constraints preselected order. So, obtaining a rational polynomial with
lower order is ensured after the following steps.
8
> dMS0 MS0 ł MS ł MS0
>
> Algorithm B
>
< deS eS0 ł eS ł eS0
0 Step B.1: Get the exact frequency responses of both
dvBT vBT0 ł vBT ł vBT0 , where 0\dH \1 ð16Þ
>
>
0 fractional weights WSf ðs, xÞ and WT ðs, xÞ
> dMT0 MT0 ł MT ł MT0
> Step B.2: Select appropriate integer orders mS1 and
:
deT0 eT0 ł eT ł eT0
mT1 for the desired approximated integer polynomials
WS1 ðsÞ and WT1 ðsÞ, respectively.
In general, satisfying all proposed rules can improve the Step B.3: Apply the MatlabÒ function Fitfrd for iden
robust stability and the nominal performances. However, the tifying the parameters of WS1 ðsÞ and WT1 ðsÞ.
selection of good fractional weights may sometimes not be Step B.4: Verify the stop criterion
achieved due to a saturation problem of certain constraints in (
WS ðv, xÞ WS ðvÞ ł DWS
their upper limit. The proposed robustification has this draw f 1 2
WT ðv, xÞ WT ðvÞ ł DWT . Stop algorithm if
back, especially the saturation of both parameters MS and f 1 2
MT . To avoid this drawback, their corresponding upper both desired precision DWS and DWT are reached.
bounds will be increased each time when they are saturated. Otherwise, set mS1 by mS1 + 1 and mT1 by mT1 + 1. Go
These allow translating, as much as possible, the bandwidth back to step B.3.
vBT in lowfrequencies, and the bandwidth vB to the high
6 Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control 00(0)
In general, the implementation step of a robust controller, ðx‘j Þj = 1, ..., np are randomly initialized within LB ł x‘j
given with highorder leads often to high cost, the difficult ł UB where ‘ = 0 and x‘j = ðn‘Sj , v‘ ‘ ‘
Bj , nTj , MSj ,
‘ ‘ T
commissioning, poor reliability, and potential problems in vBTj , MTj Þ .
maintenance. Hence, how to obtain a loworder controller is Step C.1: For each particle x‘j , determine:
an important and interesting task of all practicing control P Step C.1.1 The adjustable fractional weights
engineers. This is achieved by reducing as much as possible fWSfj ðs, x‘j Þ, WTfj ðs, x‘j Þg
the two orders of WS1 ðsÞ and WT1 ðsÞ. This reduction leads P Step C.1.2 The frequency responses
unfortunately to a poor fit of its corresponding fractional fWSfj ðv, x‘j Þ, WTfj ðv, x‘j Þg where vmin ł v ł vmax
weights WSf ðs, x Þ and WTf ðs, x Þ. On the other hand, it is pos P Step C.1.3 The approximated integer weights
sible to find a compromise between these previous require fWS‘1 ðsÞ, WT‘1 ðsÞg using algorithm B.
j j
ments. This can be done by imposing reasonable P Step C.1.4 The state space representations of the
approximation accuracies DWS and DWT , initializing both updated H‘ controller fK0‘j ðsÞg using algorithm A.
integer orders mS1 and mT1 by 1 and increasing gradually these P Step C.1.5 The new direct and complementary sensi
last until achieving good approximation accuracy. tivity functions fSd‘j ðsÞ, Sc‘j ðsÞg.
As mentioned before, the main goal of this paper is to P Step C.1.6 The objective function RPðx‘j Þ
increase the RP0 margin, as much as possible, in the whole P Step C.1.7 The solutions xbest, j
‘
and xbest, ‘
swarm using the
frequency range. This can be ensured by applying both PSO following equations:
algorithm and frequency identification technique. The pro
posed robustification algorithm is summarized by the follow
ing steps. 8 n
o
>
>
best, ‘
= min RP xij , 0 ł i ł ‘
< xj i
xj
n
o ð19Þ
Algorithm C >
> x best, ‘
= min RP x‘j , 8j
: swarm
Initialization step: the two lower and upper bounds LB x‘
j
particle x‘h must be chosen again randomly within Table 1. Meaning and values of diverse PMSM components.
LB ł x‘j ł UB and go back to step C1.1.
Parameters Significations Unitsvalues
Step C.2: Check the termination criterion. If it is satis Ud Stator voltage in d axis V
fied, the proposed algorithm terminates by providing: Uq Stator voltage in q axis V
 Two adequate fractional weights WS ðs, x Þ, WT ðs, x Þ
f f id Stator current in d axis A
 Two best approximated integer weights fWS1 ðsÞ, WT1 ðsÞg iq Stator current in q axis A
 The best robustified H‘ controller K1 ðsÞ. Ld Stator inductance in d axis 8:5 103 H
Otherwise, go to step C.3. Lq Stator inductance in q axis 8:5 103 H
Step C.3: Update both position and velocity of all par fd Stator flux in d axis V:s
fq Stator flux in q axis V:s
ticles using the following equations (Eberhart and
ff Flux linkage 0:175V:s
Kennedy, 1995; Maruta et al., 2009) Rs Stator resistance 0:2O
vr Rotor speed r:p:m
np Poles pair number 4poles
(
Om Mechanical speed r:p:m
best, ‘
v‘j + 1 =c0 v‘j + c1 r1,
‘
j xj x‘j +c2 r2,
‘ best, ‘ ‘
j xswarm xj J Moment of inertia 0:089kg:m2
x‘j + 1 = x‘j + v‘j + 1 fc Viscous damping 0:005N:m:s
Cem Electromagnetic torque N:m
ð20Þ Ct Load torque N:m
= +

+ ∞
= +
 
/ /
−
+ + 1 3 + 1
∙ .
− ∙ + 2 − ∙ +
Figure 5. Block diagram used for computing the nominal plant GN (s).
Accordingly, from equations (21) and (24), the linear 6:325 106 ðs + 45:74Þ
GN ðsÞ =
PMSM model is determined by the following simplified equa ðs + 49:87Þðs + 0:054Þ s2 + 992:2 s + 5:116 105
tion system
ð27Þ
8
diq
>
< Uq = Rs iq + Lq dt + ff np Vm According to equation (27), it is easy to observe that the
3 ð25Þ
Cem = 2 :np :ff :iq parameters of GN (s) depend heavily on the parameters of the
>
: J dV
dt + fc Vm = Cem Ct
m PIDq current controller as well as on the nominal PMSM
model. According to previous works done on identifying
In synthesis step of the H‘ controller, the load torque Ct is parameters of the PMSM system actual behavior, four para
set by zero in equation (25). Afterward, the transfer function meters such as Ld ,Lq ,Rs and J have uncertainty of 620%,
of the nominal plant GN (s) is computed by the MatlabÒ func yielding, respectively,
the following lower and upper
tion Linmod using the following block diagram (Bouiadjra bounds: Ld , Lq 2 6:8 103 , 10:2 3
10 , Rs 2 ½0:16, 0:24,
et al., 2017). and J 2 712 104 , 1068 104 .
According to Figure 5, the PIDq current controller should In general, the controller parameters are determined through
minimize the discrepancy between the measured quadrature only the nominal values of the PMSM model. Furthermore,
current iq and its corresponding reference current iqref . This the controller synthesis step based FOC strategy provides gen
last presents later the control signal provided by the controller erally a poor robustness. This is due to various undesirable
to be synthesized. The tuning of the PIDq controller para effects caused by the neglected dynamics, the uncertainties of
meters is performed by the MatlabÒ function Rltool, provid the model parameters, the quadrature current sensor noise and
ing, thus, the following transfer function (Bouiadjra et al., the mechanical speed sensor noise. For these reasons, the outer
2017) loop of the FOC strategy must contain a robust controller that
provides very high robustness margins against these effects.
4557ðs + 45:74Þ In this paper, the design controller is performed using the
PIDq ðsÞ = ð26Þ H‘ synthesis methodbased LMIs. Accordingly, all neglected
sðs + 1019Þ
dynamics and imprecisely model parameters are considered in
The transfer function of the nominal plant GN (s) is accord the design of the integer weighting function WT0 ðsÞ, which
ingly given by (Bouiadjra et al., 2017) requires the following steps. First, the magnitude frequency
Guessoum et al. 9
responses of the relative error between both nominal and per Design of robustified H‘ controller
turbed PMSM models are computed for different variations
Simulation results confirm later that the initial RP0 condition
of Ld ,Lq ,Rs and J varying within its lower and upper bounds.
cannot be satisfied by the primary H‘ controller when the pre
Then, the stable transfer function W‘ ðsÞ is determined by cre
vious fixed integer weights are used. To avoid this drawback,
ating some data points, entered by pressing the left button of
the search space of the design parameter x is given by
the mouse, where the magnitude created by these points
should limit all frequency responses of the relative errors 2 3 2 3 2 3
1:15 MS 2:50
(more details are available in Gu et al. (2014)). Next, the 6 1:00 7 6 nS 7 6 3:00 7
6 7 6 7 6 7
obtained data points are fitted, providing therefore the trans 6 25:00 7 6 vB 7 6 35:00 7
6 6 7 6 7 6 4 7
fer function of W‘ ðsÞ. Finally, the parameters of WT0 ðsÞ can 6 10 7 6 eS 7 6 10 7
6 7 6 7 6 7 ð31Þ
be chosen in which the robustness condition given by equa 6 1:20 7 ł 6 MT 7 ł 6 2:00 7
6 7 6 7 6 7
tion (6) is well satisfied. 6 1:00 7 6 nT 7 6 3:00 7
6 7 6 7 6 7
The parameters of the integer weighting function WS0 ðsÞ 4 200 5 4 v 5 4 400 5
BT
are chosen with the respect of the bandwidth vB0 and other 106 eT 104
desired closed loop specification such as, the steady tracking ﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ} ﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄ} ﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ{zﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄﬄ}
LB x UB
error, rise time, and so forth. From both previous integer
weight, the generalized plant P0 ðsÞ is computed and the initial Then, our aim is to find x 2 R , which minimizes the
8
weightedmixed sensitivity problem is accordingly formulated. objective function given by equation (20) while satisfying the
bounded constraints given by equation (21). To determine the
desired adjustable fractional weights WSf ðv, xÞ and WTf ðv, xÞ
Design of the primary H‘ controller the PSO algorithm is applied with the following tuning
parameters:
The initial weightedmixed sensitivity problem is formulated
using both following initial fixed integer weights WS0 (s) and Maximum number of iterations: ‘max = 20
WT0 (s) (Bouiadjra et al., 2017) Swarm size: np = 20
c c
8 Inertia factor: c0 = c0max 0max‘max 0min ‘, where
>
> nS0 = 1 c0max = 0:9, c0min = 0:4 and ‘ = 1, . . . , ‘max
s <
1:2 + 25 vB0 = 25 Cognitive learning rate: c1 = 1:8
WS0 ðsÞ = , where ð28Þ
s + 25 104 >
>
:
MS0 = 1:2 Social learning rate c2 = 1:8
eS0 = 1:75 103
8 The initialization step of the proposed algorithm C (i.e.
>
> nT0 = 1 ‘ = 0) provides the following 20 particles
s 1 <
400 + 1:25 vBT0 = 400 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
WT0 ðsÞ = 104 , where ð29Þ
> MT0 = 1:25 n0S1 nS2 nS20
400 s + 1 >
: Bv C Bv C B v0 C
eT0 = 1:66 104 0
B B1 C
0
B B2 C B B20 C
B n0 C B 0 C B n0 C
0 B T1 C 0 B nT2 C 0 B C
x1 = B 0 C, x2 = B 0 C, . . . . . . , xnp = B T020 C,
Afterward, the MatlabÒ function Hinflmi is used to solve B MS1 C B MS2 C B MS20 C
B 0 C B 0 C B 0 C
the previous problem, providing, thus, the H‘ performance @ vBT1 A @ vBT2 A @ vBT20 A
level g opt = 0:9216, and the following state space representa MT10 0
MT2 MT020
tion of the primary H‘ controller K0 ðsÞ that is given by order
six.
2 3
119:14 15:27 4638:9 11886 1:2038 105 4:6427 105
6 1775:4 3:795 105 9:72 105 9:8482 106
9553:3 3:7981 107 7
6 7
6 7
6 15:569 211:96
116:22 464:26 4291:7 18991 7
A0 = 6
6
7
7
6 0:61284
4:0358 5:948 417:1 8516:3 2450:6 7
6 7
4 0:95047 855:66
21:309 6203:4 1:5671 105 68799 5
7:5889
7:0595 2316:3 3801:1 1:2289 105 1:4153 105
2 3 2 3T ð30Þ
5:2409 104 39:652
6 1:5057 104 7 6 2:9869 7
6 7 6 7
6 2 7 6 7
6 4:703 10 7 6 1365:4 7
B0 = 6
6
7, and C0 = 6
7 6
7
7
6 2:2262 7 6 3791:3 7
6 7 6 7
4 39:289 5 4 38472 5
57:504 1:4838 105
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
MS01 nS1 vB1 eS1
B . C B . C B . C B . C
1:15 ł @ .. A ł 2:5, 1 ł @ .. A ł 3, 25 ł @ .. A ł 35, 10 ł @ .. C
B C B C B C 6 B
A ł 10 ,
4
B S20 MS20 C
=@ q ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
ﬃ A
n0 This algorithm is achieved by providing 40 statestate rep
s + v0B20 20 eS20
S
0
resentation of the corresponding approximated integer
0 1n0T
s p1 ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 1 WS1 ðsÞ WS2 ðsÞ WS20 ðsÞ
0 + 0 weights, defined by , , ..., .
0 BvBT1 n
T1 MT0 C WT1 ðsÞ WT2 ðsÞ WT20 ðsÞ
WTf1 s, x1 = = B @ n0T pﬃﬃﬃﬃ ﬃ 1 C , ...,
A
1 e0T These integer weights are used to formulate 20 weightedmixed
v0
1
s + 1 sensitivity problems, which are solved using algorithm A.
BT1
0 1n0T Moreover, in Step C.1.4, the 20 integer H‘ controllers,
+ n0 p s1 ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 20
which are: K001 ðsÞ, K002 ðsÞ, ., K0020 ðsÞ, are provided where each
0 Bv0
T20BT MT C
0
WTf20 s, x20 = = B 20 C
20
@ n0T pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ A one allows to compute both corresponding sensitivity and
e0T
20
0
20
s + 1 complementary sensitivity functions.
v BT20
Now,
Step C.1.6 provides the 20 peaks, called also
RP x0j , using the following formula
In Step C.1.2, the frequency response data (FRD) of each j = 1, ..., 20
B v BT1 T1 MT C
0
desired adjustable fractional weights are given by xbest, 20
WTf1 vr , x01 = = B @ n0T pﬃﬃﬃﬃ ﬃ 1 C , . . . , WTf vr , x0
A 20
swarm
1 e0T 20 where algorithm A is terminated by providing the adequate
v0
1
j vr + 1 fractional weights, the corresponding approximated integer
BT1
0 1n0T weights and the robustified H‘ controller.
jvr
v0
+ n0
p
1 ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 20
Due to the probabilistic nature of PSO algorithm, it is run
B BT T20
0
MT C
= =B C
20
@ n0T pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ A
20
, 30 times with different initial populations of x 2 ½LB UB .
0 eT
20 20
j vr + 1 Consequently, the obtained solution, at ‘max = 20, leads to
v0
BT20
the following adjustable fractional weights
Guessoum et al. 11
Figure 6. Bode plots of WSf ðv, x Þ and WS1 ðvÞ (left side). Bode plots of WTf ðv, x Þ and WT1 ðvÞ (right side).
!1:229
psﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
+ 28:1386
1:229 Now, the singular values of these weights are compared
2:251
WSf ðs, x Þ = pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ , with those given by the direct and complementary sensitivity
1:9 104
1:229
s + 28:1386
8 functions. This comparison allows examining both NP1 and
> nS = 1:229 RS1 conditions. Consequently, Figure 7 presents the maximal
>
>
< v = 28:1386 ð32Þ singular values of both direct sensitivity functions Sd0 ðsÞ and
B
where Sd1 ðsÞ. They are compared, at low frequencies, to those pro
>
> MS = 2:251
>
: vided by the inverse of weighting functions WS0 ðsÞ and WS1 ðsÞ.
eS = 1:9 104
This comparison is illustrated on the left side. In addition,
Figure 7 also presents the maximal singular values of both
8 complementary sensitivity functions Sc0 ðsÞ and Sc1 ðsÞ. They
!2:3784 >
> nT = 2:3784 are compared, at high frequencies, to those provided by the
s 1 ﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ <
296 + 2:37841:88
p
vBT = 296
WTf ðs, x Þ = pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
2:3784 , where inverse of the weighting functions WT0 ðsÞ and WT1 ðsÞ. This
2:9 3 10 5
s+1 >
> M T = 1:88
296 : comparison is illustrated on the left side
eT = 2:9 105
According to Figure 7 (left side), it can be seen that a bet
ð33Þ ter NP margin is given when the maximum singular values of
direct sensitivity function are small as much as possible at low
Where their corresponding integer weights, provided by
algorithm B, are given by
34482ðs + 7637Þðs + 2170Þðs + 562:9Þðs + 3:024Þ s2 + 406:3:s + 4271 104
WT1 ðsÞ = ð35Þ
s + 1:167 104 ðs + 3561Þðs + 936:3Þðs + 3:025Þ s2 + 5:1 3 104 :s + 66370 104
Figure 7. Maximal singular value plots of Sd0 ðvÞ, Sd1 ðvÞ, WS1
0
ðvÞ and WS1
1
ðvÞ (left side), and Maximal singular value plots of Sc0 ðvÞ, Sc1 ðvÞ,
WT1
0
ðv Þ and WT
1
1
ðv Þ (right side).
values of complementary sensitivity function are small as much these controllers are connected with the linear PMSM model,
as possible at high frequencies. Consequently, the proposed presented by the transfer function given by equation (27).
robustified H‘ controller also ensures the better RS margin com They are also connected with the actual PMSM block where
pared with the one provided by the primary H‘ controller. several unmodeled nonlinearities are considered. This block
Furthermore, for frequencies above v = 4220 radians/seconds is available in the PowersimÒ Toolbox. The corresponding
the curve of smax ½Sc1 ðvÞ is below 60dB. This means that the feedback control system is established by connecting some
effect of the neglected nonlinear dynamic is attenuated more digital power electronics using the sampling time Ts = 20
than 1000 times at plant output. As results, the best tradeoff microseconds. Figure 9 shows the block diagram of the actual
NP=RS robustness is ensured by the robustified H‘ controller, PMSM system and its linear model with the primary or robus
involving, therefore, the best RP margin (see Figure 8). tified H‘ controllers.
Next, the Simulink blocks, based upon the Powersim soft According to Figure 9, three exogenous inputs are used.
ware, are used to compare the time responses provided by The first one presents the setpoint reference Vrmref (radians/sec
both primary and robustified H‘ controllers. Accordingly, onds), which is assumed by
Guessoum et al. 13
Figure 9. Block diagram of the actual PMSM system and its linear model with the primary or robustified H‘ controllers.
8
>
> 50 : 0 ł t\0:5 thresholds that are not applicable in real application, that is,
>
> 25 : 0:5 ł t\1
>
> its supplied quadrature current changes, especially in transi
>
>
< 0 : 1 ł t\1:2 entstate, within the range 430 ł iq ł 770A.
Vrmref (t) = 25 : 1:2 ł t\1:7 ð36Þ Now, the reference input (to be tracked) as well as the load
>
>
> 50 : 1:7 ł t\2:2
> torque input (to be attenuated) are considered in the presence
>
>
>
> 40 : 2:2 ł t\2:7 of the parametric uncertainties that affect the PMSM model.
:
30 : 2:7 ł t\4 Indeed, the 20 random variations given within the lower and
upper bounds of the four parameters Ld ,Lq ,Rs and J are taken
Where Vrmref = p
30 Vmref , yields also into accounts to build the perturbed plants of the PMSM sys
8 tem. These last are controlled by both primary and robusti
>
> 477:46 : 0 ł t\0:5 fied H‘ controllers where each feedback control system is
>
> 238:73 : 0:5 ł t\1
>
> excited by two exogenous inputs. The first input is the refer
>
>
< 0 : 1 ł t\1:2 ence mechanical speed. It is assumed as a unitstep function
Vmref = 238:73 : 1:2 ł t\1:7 ð37Þ
>
> with a gain equal to Vmref = 477:46 applied during the time
>
> 477:46 : 1:7 ł t\2:2
>
> range t 2 ½0, 3 s. The second input is the load torque. It is
>
> 381:79 : 2:2 ł t\2:7
: assumed as a unitstep function with a gain equal to
286:48 : 2:7 ł t\4
Ct = 15N m apply at the starttime t = 0:5 s. Figure 12
In addition, for practical consideration, a first order lead shows the mechanical speeds obtained by both primary and
lag filter given by F ðsÞ = 0:01s1 + 1 is a priory included to make robustified H‘ controllers.
this reference close to the actual mechanical speed of the According to Figure 12, it is easy to confirm that the
PMSM system. The second input presents the load torque. It robustified H‘ controller always retains the best tracking and
is assumed as a unitstep function with a gain equal to attenuation dynamics, regardless of the parametric change of
Ct = 15N m apply at the starttime t = 3 s. Figure 10 shows the PMSM model in their lower and upper bounds.
both mechanical speeds given by primary and robustified H‘
controllers and Figure 11 shows their provided quadrature Conclusion
currents.
According to Figures 10 and 11, it is easy to see that the In this paper we have proposed the new hierarchical allowing
same good tracking dynamic of the reference input is well the robustification of the primary H‘ controller to enhance
ensured by both previous controllers. However, the best their NP, RS and RP margins. These goals were reached by
attenuation dynamic of the load torque input is only ensured an automatic selection of two adjustable weights, in which
by the robustified H‘ controller in steadystate. It also pro some proposed tuning rules should be respected. The pro
vides the reasonable quadrature current, which is limited by posed hierarchy uses the PSO algorithm to find good adjusta
the range 125 ł iq ł 270A. For the primary H‘ controller ble fractional weights. Then, it uses the frequency
case, the supplied control signal reaches certain high current identification approach to fit the frequency responses of these
14 Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control 00(0)
Figure 10. Mechanical speeds given for the nominal plant: Robustified HNcontroller (solid line). Primary HNcontroller (dashed line).
Figure 11. Quadrature currents provided by both primary and robustified H‘ controllers.
weights, providing, therefore, good approximated integer the proposed new control strategy was validated on the
weights that update the weightedmixed sensitivity problem. PMSM system where its dynamic behavior is modeled by the
Finally, it applies the standard H‘ synthesis controller unstructured multiplicative uncertainty. The obtained simula
method to update the RP margin. These steps were repeated tion results show the evident improvement of the robustified
until achieving the robustified H‘ controller. The validity of H‘ controller, in which two significant gains were derived.
Guessoum et al. 15
Kanade SP and Mathew AT (2013) 2 DOF Hinfinity loop shaping achievable bandwidth of a nanopositioner. IFACPapers OnLine
robust control for rocket attitude stabilization. International Jour 50(1): 14539–14544.
nal of Aerospace Sciences 2(3): 71–91. Sarath SN (2011) Automatic weight selection algorithm for designing
Kim YH and Lewis FL (1999) Neural network output feedback con Hinfinity controller for active magnetic bearing. Interna
trol of robot manipulators. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and tional Journal of Engineering Science and Technology 3(1):
Automation 15(2): 301–309. 122–138.
Levine WS (1996) The Control Handbook. Edition CRC Press. Sedraoui M, Amieur T, Bachir Bouiadjra R and Sahnoune M (2017).
Li S and Liu Z (2009) Adaptive speed control for permanentmagnet Robustified fractionalorder controller based on adjustable frac
synchronous motor system with variations of load inertia. IEEE tional weights for a doubly fed induction generator. Transactions
Transactions on Industrial Electronics 56(8): 3050–3059. of the Institute of Measurement and Control 39(5): 660–674.
Lian KY, Chiu CS, Chiang TS and Liu P (2001) Secure communica Singiresu SR (2009) Engineering Optimization: Theory and Practice,
tions of chaotic systems with robust performance via fuzzy 4th edn. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
observerbased design. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 9(1): Skogestad S, Morari M and Doyle JC (1988) Robust control of ill
212–220. conditioned plants: High purity distillation. IEEE Transactions on
Lundström P, Skogestad S and Wang ZQ (1991) Performance weight Automatic Control 33(12): 1092–1105.
selection for Hinfinity and mcontrol methods. Transactions of the Tandon B and Narayan S (2014) Fixed structure robust H‘ loop shap
Institute of Measurement and Control 13(5): 241–252. ing control of feedback linearised CSTR using PSO. International
Maruta I, Hyoung T and Sugie T (2009) Fixedstructure H‘ control Journal of Modelling, Identification and Control 22(1): 33–40.
ler: A metaheuristic approachusing simple constrained particle Wang H, Li S, Lan Q, et al. (2017) Continuous terminal sliding mode
swarm optimization. Automatica 45(2): 553–559. control with extended state observer for PMSM speed regulation
Nair SS (2011) Automatic weight selection algorithm for designing h system. Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control
infinity controller for active magnetic bearing. International Jour 39(8): 1195–1204.
nal of Engineering Science and Technology 3(1): 122–138. Wei X and Verhaegen M (2011) Robust fault detection observer
Oloomi H and Shafai B (2003) Weight selection in mixed sensitivity design for linear uncertain systems. International Journal of Con
robust control for improving the sinusoidal tracking performance. trol 84: 197–215.
In: 42nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 1, Maui, HI, Xu WJ (2012) Permanent magnet synchronous motor with linear
USA, 9–12 December 2003, pp. 300–305 USA: IEEE.. quadraticspeed controller. Energy Procedia 14: 364–369.
Ortega MG and Rubio FR (2004) Systematic design of weighting Yi Y, Sun X, Li X and Fan X (2016) Disturbance observer based
matrices for the HN mixed sensitivity problem. Journal of Process composite speed controller design for PMSM system with mis
Control 14(1): 89–98. matched disturbances. Transactions of the Institute of Measure
Oustaloup A, Levron F, Mathieu B and Nanot FM (2000) Fre ment and Control 38(6): 742–750.
quencyband complex noninteger differentiator: Characterization Zames G (1981) Feedback and optimal sensitivity: model reference
and synthesis. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Fun transformations, multiplicative seminorm, and approximate
damental Theory and Applications 47(1): 25–39. inverse. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 26(2): 301–320.
Özbay H., Smith MC and Tannenbaum A (1993) Mixedsensitivity Zhan L and Zhou K (2014) Synchronous disturbance attenuation in
optimization for a class of unstable infinitedimensional systems. a power magnetically levitated spindle based on parameter
Linear Algebra and its Applications 178(1993): 43–83. scheduled H‘ control. Transactions of the Institute of Measure
Podlubny I (1999) Fractional order systems and PIL Dm controllers. ment and Control 37: 1–16.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 44(1): 208–214. Zheng X, Ali H, Wu X, et al. (2016) Frequency response measure
RanjbarSahraei B, Shabaninia F, Nemati A and Stan SD (2012) A
ments based reduced order identification for dcdc converter. In:
novel robust decentralized adaptive fuzzy control for swarm for
International Conference on Intelligent Systems Engineering
mation of multiagent systems. IEEE Transactions on Industrial
(ICISE), Islamabad, Pakistan, 15–17 January 2016, pp. 78–82.
Electronics 59(8): 3124–3134.
Pakistan: IEEE.
SanMillan A, FeliuBatlle V and Aphale SS (2017) Application of a
fractional order integral resonant control to increase the