6286 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO.

8, AUGUST 2017

A Novel Flux Estimator Based on Multiple

Second-Order Generalized Integrators and
Frequency-Locked Loop for Induction Motor Drives
Rende Zhao, Member, IEEE, Zhen Xin, Student Member, IEEE, Poh Chiang Loh, and Frede Blaabjerg, Fellow, IEEE

AbstractAccurate flux estimation is essential for the imple-

mentation of a high-performance ac motor drive. However, it still
faces some problems, which can better be projected by analyzing
performances of existing flux estimators, implemented with either a
pure integrator or a low-pass filter (LPF). To solve the problems, an
alternative flux estimator, implemented with a single second-order
generalized integrator (SOGI) and a frequency-locked loop (FLL),
is discussed for induction motor drives. The SOGI block included
in this algorithm works for integrating the back-electromotive
force, which unlike the pure integrator and LPF, does not expe-
rience saturation and significant dc offsets caused by different
initial conditions. The single-SOGI-FLL estimator does not need
additional magnitude and phase compensation, while its perfor-
mance may deteriorate at low speed, caused by the inverse propor-
tional relationship between its estimated flux and the frequency. A
multi-SOGI-FLL flux estimator is, thus, proposed for uncompro-
mised attenuation of dc and harmonic errors even under low-speed
condition. Excellent flux estimation can, hence, be offered over
the full-speed range, as proven through theoretical studies and
experiments.
Index TermsFlux estimation, frequency-locked loop (FLL),
induction motor (IM) drives, second-order generalized integrator
(SOGI). Fig. 1. Summary of (a) problems experienced by pure integrator and (b) ideal
condition expected from approximated integrator.
I. INTRODUCTION
LUX estimation is a vital task in high-performance ac
F motor drives, which can be accomplished in different ways.
One of the most widely used methods is based on voltage model,
integrator [1], [2], which is usually introduced by the inevitable
dc biases found in sensors and analog-to-digital (A/D) con-
verters. The drift, when integrated, will cause the integrator to
which is implemented by integrating the back-electromotive saturate, no matter how small it is. The second is caused by the
force (back EMF). This approach is generally attractive, since start point or initial condition of integration, which, if not prop-
it does not need an explicit speed sensor. However, it is well erly timed, may lead to a dc offset at the output of the integrator.
known that a pure integrator suffers from three main prob- This offset, however, does not actually exist, even though it has
lems, which to avoid confusion is pictorially summarized in been created mathematically. The third, related to harmonics,
Fig. 1(a). The first is related to dc drift detected at the input of the will cause the estimated flux to become distorted, which again
should be avoided [3].
Manuscript received June 26, 2016; revised September 11, 2016; accepted A pure integrator is, therefore, not recommended, which is
October 6, 2016. Date of publication October 24, 2016; date of current version
March 24, 2017. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Sci- usually replaced by a low-pass filter (LPF), in practice [4] and
ence Foundation of China under Grant 51677193, in part by Shandong Provin- [5]. Although the added LPF can solve the first two mentioned
cial Natural Science Foundation under Grant 14CX02203A. Recommended for problems, it unintentionally introduces magnitude and phase er-
publication by Associate Editor V. Staudt.
R. Zhao is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, China University of rors to the estimated flux when the motor runs close to or lower
Petroleum Huadong, Qingdao 266555, China (e-mail: zhaorende@upc.edu.cn). than the filter cutoff frequency [5]. Many techniques have, there-
Z. Xin and F. Blaabjerg are with the Department of Energy Technology, fore, emerged for removing these magnitude and phase errors
Aalborg University, Aalborg 9220, Denmark (e-mail: zxi@et.aau.dk; fbl@et.
aau.dk). caused by the LPF, which can be divided into two classes, de-
P. C. Loh is with the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong pending on whether their cutoff frequencies are programmable
(e-mail: epcloh@gmail.com). or not.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Undeniably, the estimation of flux using a fixed cutoff fre-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2016.2620428 quency for the LPF is easy to implement. However, practically,
0885-8993 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
ZHAO et al.: NOVEL FLUX ESTIMATOR BASED ON MULTIPLE SOGI AND FLL FOR INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 6287

it is difficult to select a single cutoff frequency for the full-speed

range, yet maintaining the best tradeoff among magnitude and
phase errors, nullification of dc drift and dynamic response [4].
In [5] and [6], a programmable first-order LPF with magni-
tude and phase compensation has, thus, been proposed for flux
estimation. Cutoff frequency of this LPF and its parameters
for magnitude and phase compensation are, however, found to
depend on the synchronous angular frequency, which must be
estimated. Accuracy of the frequency estimation is, thus, crit-
ically important, before the programmable LPF technique can
produce the correct flux. To ensure that a phase-locked loop [5]
or a function of back EMF and flux [6] has commonly been
included for estimating the synchronous angular frequency.
The programmable LPF technique has subsequently been
extended in [7] to develop the programmable cascaded LPF
technique, comprising n identical first-order LPFs with angular
compensation. The technique has since been modified in [8] to
include a three-stage cascaded LPF and a high-pass filter, and in
[9] to include a five-stage cascaded LPF and a high-pass filter.
Both techniques are programmable, and rely on the estimated
synchronous angular frequency, which in both cases are calcu-
lated by differentiating the position angle of the motor. The dif-
ferentiation may, however, introduce additional problems, like
amplified noise interference commonly associated with a dif-
ferentiator. Moreover, although both techniques contribute to
harmonic attenuation, the amount of erroneous harmonic flux Fig. 2. Control scheme of IM based on (a) field-oriented vector control and
estimated is still not close to zero. Existing flux estimators using (b) direct-torque control [10].
pure integrator, LPF, and programmable cascaded LPFs have,
therefore, not yet holistically addressed, all problems indicated tor current. The equations convey that estimation of s , s ,
in Fig. 1(a). More detailed demonstration of these shortcom- and the corresponding components in r involves the same
ings will be outlined in subsequent sections, before presenting integration. It is, therefore, only necessary to discuss the esti-
a multi-second-order generalized integrator (SOGI) frequency- mation of one of them, which if s is considered, leads to the
locked loop (FLL) flux estimator that can solve all problems in following equation:
 
Fig. 1(a) without demanding for magnitude and phase compen-
s = (us Rs is )dt = es dt. (3)
sation. Effectiveness of this estimator has been demonstrated in
theory, before proving it experimentally.
A. Practical Back-EMF Signal
II. INTEGRATION PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH From (3), it is clear that the back-EMF es contains two
FLUX ESTIMATION components, the stator voltage us and the voltage Rs is across
Fig. 2 shows the conventional flux-oriented vector control the stator resistor. Rs is depends on the current measured by the
and direct-torque control systems of the induction motor (IM). current sensor. So the biases in sensors, operational amplifiers,
In the stationary reference frame, estimation of the stator and and A/D converters lead to the dc drift in the current [1], [2].
rotor fluxes, based on the voltage model, can be given by Harmonics caused by nonlinearities found in the inverter and
  motor, such as dead time and motor cogging effect [2] can be
measured by current sensors.
s = (us Rs is )dt = es dt (1)
In practice, the stator voltages (line neutral) are obtained
  using the measured dc-link voltage Udc and the duty cycle of
Lr
r = (us Rs is )dt Ls is the inverter switches (Da , Db , Dc ) [5]
Lm
  Udc
Lr usa = (2Da Db Dc ) (4)
= es dt Ls is (2) 3
Lm Udc
usb = (2Db Da Dc ). (5)
where Rs is the stator resistance. Ls is the stator inductance, 3
Lr is the rotor inductance, Lm is the magnetizing inductance, The stator voltages in the stationary reference frame are
= (Ls Lr L2m )/L2m is the leakage flux coefficient, es = us = usa (6)
es + jes is the back EMF of the stator, s = s + js
is the stator flux, r = r + jr is the rotor flux, us = 1
us = (usa + 2usb ). (7)
us + jus is the stator voltage, and is = is + jis is the sta- 3
6288 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO. 8, AUGUST 2017

In fact, when there is no overmodulation, the stator voltages
obtained from (4)(7) are the outputs of the current controllers.
The dc drift or harmonics in the measured current will generate
the dc or harmonic components in the outputs of the current con-
troller. Thus, a practical back-EMF signal will, in fact, always
contain the dc drift and harmonic components, in addition to the
desired fundamental component. It is, therefore, more precise
to express the back-EMF es signal as follows, rather than with
only a fundamental sinusoid:
 decreases, since there are now more dead time error pulses in
es = A0 + A1 sin(1 t + 01 ) + Ah sin(h t + 0h ) (8)
where A0 is the dc drift, A1 sin(1 t + 01 ) is the fundamental
component, and Ah sin(h t + 0h ) is the hth harmonic com-
ponent. Applying Laplace transform to es then results in
Es (s) = L [es ]
A0 1 cos01 + ssin01
= + A1
s s2 + 12
 h cos0h + ssin0h
+ Ah . (9)
s2 + h2
B. Flux Estimation Using Pure Integrator
If the flux estimation is realized with a pure integrator, the
Laplace transform of (3) results in
Es (s)
s I (s) = (10)
s
where s I (s) is the Laplace transform of s I . Equation (9)
can next be inserted into (10), before inverse Laplace transform
is applied to s I (s) to get s I expressed in (11) in the time
domain
1 s+c
s I =L [s I (s)]
A1 cos01  Ah cos0h
= A0 t + + timated by the LPF whose cutoff frequency c is usually
1 h
A1  
+ sin 1 t + 01
1 2
 Ah  
+ sin h t + 0h . (11)
h 2
As seen, integration of the dc drift A0 in (8) results in a flux
component that increases linearly with time. It will eventually
cause a practical integrator to saturate regardless of how small
the dc drift is. New dc-offset terms have also been observed in
(11), which in Fig. 1(a) are detected at the output of the integra-
tor, caused by different initial conditions of integration. Their
values will change at different starting points of integration, and
when summed, form the mathematically created dc flux that
does not exist in practice. This erroneous dc flux will cause the
flux circular trajectory to become eccentric, and may, hence, af-
fect the inverter control. It is also very difficult to nullify, since
according to (8), each fundamental or harmonic voltage sinu-
soid at the input of the integrator has its own initial phase, and,
hence, its own dc offset at the output, as seen from (11).
In addition, each voltage sinusoid at the input in (8) has its
own corresponding flux sinusoid at the output in (11) whose
magnitude is always the voltage magnitude divided by its angu-
lar frequency. Erroneous flux at high frequency or motor speed
will, therefore, have a much attenuated impact on the estimated
flux, and can, hence, be ignored. However, at low speed, the
angular frequency h in the denominator is small and the volt-
age magnitude Ah may become very large. This expectation
can be reasoned by noting that fundamental frequency and volt-
age magnitude of the motor decrease with a decrease in speed.
Magnitudes of the harmonics, however, rise when the speed
a fundamental period. It is, therefore, important not to ignore
erroneous flux caused by harmonics in the low-speed range. Re-
gardless of that the phase of each flux sinusoid will always lag
its accompanied voltage sinusoid by 90, if a pure integrator is
used.
It is, hence, clear that at the output of the pure integrator
in (11), only the fundamental sinusoid should be retained as
the estimated flux. The remaining four terms are caused by
imperfections from sensors and other hardware, and, hence,
not related to the actual flux in the motor. In other words, the
unwanted four terms in (11) will always be there, unless the pure
integrator is replaced by an appropriate approximated integrator,
like in Fig. 1(b). No doubt, approximation will usually lead to
errors, but it does work well here in terms of blocking input
imperfections, as demonstrated in the next section.
C. Flux Estimation Using LPF as Approximated Integrator
A common substitute for integration is the first-order LPF,
which when used for flux estimation, causes (10) to change
into
Es (s)
s F (s) = (12)
where s F (s) is the Laplace transform of flux s F es-
set much lower than 1 . Inserting (9) into (12) and apply-
ing inverse Laplace transform yield s F in (13), where
1 = tan1 (c /1 ) and h = tan1 (c /h ) are the phase
errors of the estimated fundamental and harmonic fluxes
A0 A0 c t
s F = L1 [s F (s)] = e
c c
A1 cos(01 + 1 ) c t  Ah cos(0h + h )
+  e + 
12 + c2 h2 + c2
A1  
e c t +  2 sin 1 t + 01 + 1
1 + c2 2
 A  
+  h sin h t + 0h + h .
h2 + c2 2
(13)
Comparing (13) with (11), it is obvious that the first linear
time-dependent term in (11) has been replaced by the first dc
and second exponentially decaying offsets in (13). Saturation
of the estimated flux will, therefore, not happen, even though
it will still be unnecessarily shifted up by the dc offset in the
steady state. Fortunately, this dc offset is inversely proportional
ZHAO et al.: NOVEL FLUX ESTIMATOR BASED ON MULTIPLE SOGI AND FLL FOR INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 6289

Fig. 4. Single-SOGI flux estimator.

Fig. 3. Structure of SOGI.
input v, while its magnitude is that of the input divided by
to c , and can, hence, be reduced by choosing a larger c , so its frequency, if v is a sinusoid. Output i v  is, therefore, the
long as it is still smaller than 1 . Regardless of that complete integration of v.
removal of the dc offset at the output of the LPF is not possible,
even though the third and fourth dc-offset terms in (13), caused B. Single-SOGI Flux Estimator
by initial conditions of integration, will exponentially decay to As inferred by i v  in Fig. 3, a flux estimator can be obtained
zero in the steady state. Also not removed is the harmonic term by using a single SOGI for performing the approximated inte-
whose magnitude and phase remain almost the same as those gration. The estimator is drawn in Fig. 4 with the appropriate
estimated by the pure integrator in (11), if c is much smaller voltage and flux variables marked in the figure. Mathematically,
than h . a transfer function for the estimated flux s S (s) in the Laplace
Moreover, it should be noted that although the LPF has pre- domain can also be written as
vented integrator saturation, it unintentionally introduces mag- k  Es (s)
nitude and phase errors to the estimated fundamental flux or the s S (s) = 2 = S(s)Es (s) (14)
s +k  s + 2
fifth term in (13). The values of these errors depend on how
far c can be set below 1 , and, if nonnegligible, may require s S (s) k 
S(s) = = 2 (15)
explicit magnitude and phase compensation. Es (s) s +k  s + 2
A0 k 
= L1 [s S (s)] = + f0 (t)e 2 k t
1
s S 
III. PROPOSED FLUX ESTIMATOR

 
+ f1 (t)e 2 k t fh (t)e 2 k t
1 1
To reemphasize, the approximated integrator chosen in +
Fig. 1(b) must block all unpreventable imperfections at its in-
put, so that its output comprises only the fundamental estimated A1 k  1
+
flux. This objective cannot be met by the pure integrator in (7) 1 2
( 2 12 ) + (k  1 )2
and the low-pass filter (LPF) in (9). An improved flux estimator
 
is, thus, proposed in this section based on multiple SOGIs with sin 1 t + 01 + 1
a frequency-locked loop (FLL). Different developmental stages 2
of the proposed estimator are now described, after introducing  Ah k  h
the basic principle of the second-order generalized integrator +
h 2
(SOGI). ( 2 h2 ) + (k  h )2
 
sin h t + 0h + h . (16)
A. Second-Order Generalized Integrator 2
SOGI has been widely used for extracting a sinusoid in-phase
Inserting (9) to (14) and taking its inverse Laplace transform
and another in-quadrature with the grid voltage [11][14]. The
yield flux s S in (16) in the time domain, where f0 (t), f1 (t),
obtained sinusoids can be used for computing magnitude and
and fh (t) are the transient offsets, related to the initial dc and
phase of the grid voltage and to form tracking references for
fundamental and harmonic conditions of integration. Their de-
control purposes. SOGI is, therefore, a helpful tool, whose basic
tailed expressions are provided in the Appendix. Regardless of
principle can be inferred from its traditional structure, shown in
that these offsets will decay exponentially to zero in the steady
Fig. 3. In the figure, k is the damping factor, while  is the
state, as indicated by the second to fourth terms in (16). Also
tuning frequency set to the motor frequency (or grid frequency,
noted in (16) are 1 and h for representing fundamental and
if the grid voltage is fed to the input v).
harmonic phase errors, caused by the SOGI integration. Their
The output v will then be the observation of v with their error
expressions are given as
notated as v = v v  . Another popular sinusoid extracted is
2 
notated as q v  , where the letter q is for indicating that this 1 12
1 = tan (17)
output is in quadrature with v. The two output sinusoids can k  1
then be used for computing magnitude and phase of the input v.
2 
Before q v  , there may also be a third sinusoid for extraction, 1 h2
h = tan . (18)
notated as i v  in Fig. 3. The phase of i v  is 90 lagging behind k  h
6290 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO. 8, AUGUST 2017

In steady state, if the fundamental frequency is precisely ob-

served or  = 1 , (16) becomes

A0 k A1  
s S = + sin 1 t + 01
1 1 2
 1 Ah  
+ sin h t + 0h + h .
(1h 2 ) 2 h 2
k2 h2 + 1
(19)

Comparing (19) with (11) and (13), a few observations can be

drawn. First, the single-SOGI flux estimator does not experience
saturation, caused by the dc drift at its input. There is, however,
still a dc offset flux, which is inversely proportional to 1 , even
though dc offsets caused by initial conditions of integration
have decayed to zero in the steady state. Moreover, there are no
magnitude and phase errors in the estimated fundamental flux,
as long as 1 is observed precisely. Thus, the magnitude and
phase compensation algorithm can be avoided, which certainly
is an advantage when compared with the LPF.
Nevertheless, harmonic fluxes are still detected in (19)
with the single-SOGI integrator. Magnitude of the hth har- Fig. 5. Bode plots of flux estimator implemented with either single SOGI or
monic flux in (19) is, however, noted to be inversely pro- pure integrator.

portional to (1 h2 )2 /(k 2 h2 ) + 1, where k is usually

to 2, h = 6n 1 (n 1 is an integer), and, hence,
set
(1 h2 )2 /(k 2 h2 ) + 1 h/k  1. In contrast, magnitude of
the same hth harmonic flux generated by a pure integrator is
inversely proportional to h (approximately the same relation-
ship with an LPF). Harmonic fluxes generated by the single-
SOGI estimator are, thus, significantly attenuated, even though
not completely eliminated. To illustrate, Bode diagrams of the
pure integrator and single-SOGI estimator with  =1 = 1 Hz,
10 Hz, and 50 Hz are shown in Fig. 5, where at , the single- Fig. 6. Single-SOGI-FLL flux estimator.
SOGI estimator and pure integrator are found to have the same
magnitude and phase. However, at a smaller , attenuation of
To next demonstrate how the FLL in Fig. 6 works, its control
the dc offset or the first term in (19) is observed to be less effec-
signal is first identified as f , which works for collecting the
tive. In addition, at all , the single-SOGI estimator is noted to
information of frequency observation error [12]. Expression for
have a faster roll off, and, hence, a better harmonic attenuation
f can, in fact, be derived from Fig. 6 as
than the pure integrator.

f = e s S = (20)
C. Single-SOGI-FLL Flux Estimator

As seen from Fig. 4, the single-SOGI flux estimator works
only if accurate  =1 can be ensured. In case where  is
unknown, a scheme for estimating 1 accurately is necessary.
For that [12] and [14] are referred to, where an FLL has been de-
veloped for estimating the grid frequency. This FLL can now be
modified for estimating the fundamental frequency of the motor
back EMF. Inclusion of the FLL to the single-SOGI flux estima-
tor then results in Fig. 6, where unlike the traditional FLL, the
integrated flux s S has been used for frequency observation,
instead of the in-quadrature back-EMF component. The gain
used for normalization on the left of the FLL in Fig. 6 must,
hence, change to k 2 /(e2 2 2
s 1 + s S ). If the approximate
fundamental frequency f f is known, it can be used to shorten
the start-up time of FLL.
where  is the differentiation of  , and is the gain of FLL.
The gain varies with k, and the magnitude and frequency of
the input signal es . When is positive, the FLL will proceed to
shift the SOGI resonant frequency  , until it matches the input
frequency 1 . Its precise expression can also be written as (21),
in order to get a normalized gain of for the FLL
k 2
= . (21)
e2
s 1 + 2 s
2
S
It should, however, be noted from Fig. 6 and (20) that any dc
and harmonic components in s S will influence the signal f ,
which in turn will cause frequency and flux estimation errors,
especially at low motor speed. DC and harmonic components
in the estimated flux must, hence, be further attenuated, in order
ZHAO et al.: NOVEL FLUX ESTIMATOR BASED ON MULTIPLE SOGI AND FLL FOR INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES
Fig. 7. Illustration of (a) multi-SOGI-FLL flux estimator and (b) each of its
inner SOGI block.
to ensure the accuracy of the estimated frequency and flux. This
requirement, however, cannot be met by only a single SOGI in
the estimator, as seen from (19).
D. Multi-SOGI-FLL Flux Estimator
One way to improve the single-SOGI-FLL estimator in Fig. 6
is to add more SOGIs with their resonant frequencies set to
prominent harmonic frequencies. The resulting estimator is re-
ferred to as the multi-SOGI-FLL flux estimator. Its block dia-
gram is shown in Fig. 7(a) with details of each SOGIh (h 0
is an integer, excluding 1) shown in Fig. 7(b). For h = 0 or
dc, it should additionally be noted that Fig. 7(b) degenerates to
only a single integrator along the forward path, since the output
of the second integrator along the feedback path will always be
nullified by the h2 -gain block. Furthermore, the block diagram
in Fig. 7(a) has been organized into three parts with the first two
for fundamental flux estimation and FLL realization. The third
is for dc and harmonic attenuation in the estimated flux, which
6291
Fig. 8. Bode diagram of (26) showing fundamental passing, and dc and har-
monic attenuation.
As visible, Bh (s) is a resonant term with an infinite gain at
the resonant frequency h  . Its input e at h  must, hence, be
zero in the steady state, in order for a suitable finite output es h
at h  to be produced. From Fig. 7(a), input e can further be
expressed as e = es es h es 1 with only a single hth
harmonic considered for simplicity. To get e = 0 at h  , es h
must, hence, equal to es at h  . In other words, the SOGIh
block with transfer function in (22) is capable of filtering out the
hth harmonic back EMF as its output es h . The same applies
to the SOGI block in the fundamental flux estimator, which
means es 1 contains only the fundamental back EMF. As for
their gains, notated as kh in Fig. 7(b), they may affect dynamics
of each SOGIh and its interaction with adjacent blocks. They
should, therefore, be identical, except k0 , in order to have the
same bandwidth for all SOGI blocks [14], [15]. Mathematically,
it means kh = k for h 1, and the following expression for
relating k0 and k according to [15]:
k03 + 3kk02 + (3k 2 + 9)k0 + k 3 4.5k = 0 (23)
where k is set to 2 to get an optimal tradeoff among settle
time, overshooting, and interaction with adjacent harmonics.
Then, the real roots of (23) is k0 = 0.1668.
From Fig. 7(a), the second transfer function between system
error and input back EMF can next be derived as
e (s) 1
N (s) = =
Es (s) 1 + B0 (s) + B1 (s) +
1
if not enforced and as mentioned at the end of Section III-C,
may cause the FLL to function improperly.
To next demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed estima-
tor, relevant transfer functions can be derived, beginning with
the function for relating the estimated back EMF and system
error in Fig. 7(b)
=  (24)
1+ h=0,1, Bh (s)
where Bh (s) with h 0 is obtained from (22). Multiplying
(22) and (24) also results in (25) for relating each extracted hth
back-EMF harmonic and the input back EMF

E  s h (s) kh  s E  s h (s) B (s)

Bh (s) = = 2 . (22) Mh (s) = =  h . (25)
e (s) s + h2 2 Es (s) 1 + h=0,1, Bh (s)
6292 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO. 8, AUGUST 2017

TABLE I
EXPERIMENTAL PARAMETERS OF IM

Rated power [kW] 11 Rated speed [r/min] 1480

Rated voltage [V] 380 Rated current [A] 24.8

Stator resistance [] 0.308 Rotor resistance [] 0.365
Stator inductance [mH] 98.5 Pole pairs 2
Mutual inductance [mH] 95

TABLE II
EXPERIMENTAL PARAMETERS OF PMSG

Rated power [kW] 15 Rated speed [r/min] 150

Rated voltage [V] 260 Rated current [A] 24

d-axis inductance [mH] 6.5 Pole pairs 10
q-axis inductance [mH] 13.5 Stator resistance [] 0.362
Fig. 9. Experimental setup for testing different flux estimators.

Similarly, transfer function between the extracted and input

back EMF can be determined as
Es 1 (s) 1 + B1 (s)
A(s) = =  . (26)
Es (s) 1 + h=0,1, Bh (s)
Substituting s = jh  for all h 0 to (26) then leads to the
observation that all magnitude gains for dc and harmonics are
zero, while gain for the fundamental is unity. Function A(s) in
(26) is, thus, both a notch filter for blocking dc and harmonics,
and a bandpass filter for passing only the fundamental back
EMF. This expectation can also be seen from Fig. 8, where
Bode diagrams of (26) are plotted for a fundamental frequency
of 1 Hz or  = 2 rad/s, for example. Included in the figure
are only SOGI blocks for extracting the fundamental, dc, fifth,
and seventh harmonics, which for the latter three exhibit notch
characteristics. In contrast, unity magnitude response with zero
Fig. 10. Control scheme of IM with voltage-model flux estimator included.
phase shift is noted at the fundamental frequency, which as
earlier anticipated is a bandpass response. TABLE III
Finally, from Fig. 7(a), the transfer function between s 1 S GAINS USED IN THE MULTI-SOGI-FLL ESTIMATOR
and the extracted fundamental es 1 can be written as
Gain of SOGI 0 k 0 0.1668 Gain of SOGI h (h 1) k h 2
s 1 S (s) k 
S1 (s) = = 2 . (27)
Es 1 (s) s +k  s + 2 Gain of FLL () 30

This transfer function is the same as (15) for the single-

SOGI estimator, except es in (15) has been replaced by its
extracted fundamental es 1 in (27). The time-domain estimated
flux in (28) produced by the multi-SOGI-FLL estimator will,
thus, have the same form as (19) for the single-SOGI estimator,
but without the dc and harmonic terms in the steady state. The
intended outcome of blocking unpreventable input distortions,
including dc drift, dc offsets by different initial conditions and
harmonics, from affecting the estimated flux has, hence, been
fulfilled by the multi-SOGI-FLL estimator
 driving the inverter has also been set to 19.2 kHz with a dead
A1 
s 1 S = sin 1 t + 01 . (28)
1 2
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The proposed flux estimator has been tested with the ex-
perimental setup shown in Fig. 9. It comprises an 11-kW IM
and an equally rated permanent magnet synchronous generator
(PMSG). Both machines are mechanically coupled together
through a 7.22:1 gearbox to produce the desired load
torque. Other rated parameters of the machines are given in
Tables I and II, respectively. Additionally, an incremental en-
coder has been used for measuring the speed of the IM whose
control scheme has been shown in Fig. 10 and implemented
with a Texas Instruments TMS320F2812 Digital Signal Pro-
cessor (DSP). Switching frequency generated by the DSP for
time of 1.5 s. The gains used in the multi-SOGI-FLL estimator
are listed in Table III.
With the setup, the steady state and dynamic experiments
have been performed with results first shown in Fig. 11. From
Fig. 11(a), it can be seen that the 3-D flux trajectory produced
by a pure integrator at the speed of 1200 r/min is vertically ec-
centric, due to the linear time-dependent term obtained through
ZHAO et al.: NOVEL FLUX ESTIMATOR BASED ON MULTIPLE SOGI AND FLL FOR INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 6293

Fig. 11. Experimental 3-D flux trajectories of estimator implemented with (a) pure integrator, (b) LPF, and (c) multiple SOGI-FLL.

Fig. 12. Experimental back EMFs, fluxes, and frequencies estimated by Fig. 13. Experimental back EMFs, fluxes, and frequencies estimated by
(a) single- and (b) multi-SOGI-FLL estimators at 50 r/min. (a) single- and (b) multi-SOGI-FLL estimators at 500 r/min.

integrating the dc drift in the input back EMF. This problem

has promptly been solved by the LPF and the proposed multi-
SOGI-FLL flux estimator whose flux trajectories are shown in
Fig. 11(b) and (c), respectively. It can be seen that less noises are
with the proposed multi-SOGI-FLL estimator, since its high-
frequency attenuation has been significantly improved. Next,
the -axis back-EMF es , the estimated frequency  , and the
-axis flux s S from the single-SOGI-FLL and multi-SOGI-
FLL estimators are plotted in Figs. 12 to 14 for three different
speeds. In all figures, es and s S are in phase, since the axis
orientation assumed for both variables is the -axis lagging be-
hind the -axis by 90. The back-EMF es , therefore, lags es
by 90. This, together with the inherent 90-lag feature of the
flux, causes es and s S to be in phase, as observed in all
figures.
The results in Fig. 12, however, show that at a low motor
speed of 50 r/min, back-EMF es is heavily distorted, which its
spectrum in Fig. 15(a) shows that the largest harmonic is about
9.5% of the fundamental amplitude. This distortion, when fed
through the single-SOGI-FLL estimator, causes the estimated Fig. 14. Experimental back EMFs, fluxes, and frequencies estimated by
flux spectrum of s S in Fig. 15(b) to become distorted. The (a) single- and (b) multi-SOGI-FLL estimators at 1200 r/min.
6294 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO. 8, AUGUST 2017

Fig. 15. Frequency spectrums of (a) back EMF, (b) estimated flux from single-SOGI-FLL estimator, and (c) estimated flux estimated from multi-SOGI-FLL
estimator at 50 r/min.

Fig. 16. Frequency spectrums of (a) back EMF, (b) estimated flux from single-SOGI-FLL estimator, and (c) estimated flux estimated from multi-SOGI-FLL
estimator at 500 r/min.

Fig. 17. Frequency spectrums of (a) back EMF, (b) estimated flux from single-SOGI-FLL estimator, and (c) estimated flux estimated from multi-SOGI-FLL
estimator at 1200 r/min.

estimated flux spectrum generated by the multi-SOGI-FLL es-

timator with the same distorted input back EMF is, on the other
hand, harmonic free with only the intended fundamental compo-
nent observed in Fig. 15(c). A consequently smoother frequency
 can, thus, be estimated by the multi-SOGI-FLL estimator in
Fig. 12(b), unlike the more oscillatory single-SOGI-FLL esti-
mation shown in Fig. 12(a).
The motor speed has subsequently been raised to a midvalue
of 500 r/min with its obtained results shown in Fig. 13. Quality
of the back-EMF es has obviously been improved, but still with
some harmonics smaller 3.5% of the fundamental observed in
its spectrum in Fig. 16(a). These smaller harmonics, however,
do not influence estimated fluxes from both single- and multi-
SOGI-FLL estimators whose spectrums with only fundamental
components observed are shown in Fig. 16(b) and (c). They
also do not fluctuate frequencies estimated by both estimators
in Fig. 13(a) and (b). The motor speed has finally been raised
again to a high value of 1200 r/min. Its accompanied waveforms
are shown in Fig. 14 , which undeniably has a nearly undistorted
back EMF whose spectrum, shown inFig. 17(a), only has har- Fig. 18. Experimental dynamic performance of multi-SOGI-FLL estimator
monics smaller than 1.6% of the fundamental. Estimated fluxes during speed change.
ZHAO et al.: NOVEL FLUX ESTIMATOR BASED ON MULTIPLE SOGI AND FLL FOR INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES


A0 k 2 sinh 12 t  k 2 4 A0 kcosh 12 t  k 2 4
f0 (t) =
 k2 4 
 
 k  ( 2 + h2 )sin0h + h (k 2 2 2 2 + 2h2 )cos0h sinh 12 t 2 (k 2 4)
fh (t) = Ah k 2 (k 2 4)
 (k 2 4) ( 2 h2 ) + (k  h )2
  
cosh 12 t 2 (k 2 4) cos(01 + 1 )
+ A1 k  . (A-2)
2
( 2 h2 ) + (k  h )2
and frequencies from both estimators are, thus, smooth too, as
seen from their spectrums in Fig. 17(b) and (c), and waveforms
in Fig. 14(a) and (b).
Together, the above experimental results have proven that
the proposed multi-SOGI-FLL estimator outputs accurate flux
and frequency over a wide speed range including at low
speed. Its steady-state performance is, therefore, better than the
single-SOGI-FLL estimator, because of its more SOGI blocks
involved. The added SOGI blocks will, however, not affect its
dynamics in Fig. 18, where a motor speed change from 500 to
1200 r/min has been intentionally triggered. As observed, the
estimated frequency has changed correctly, in proportion with
the speed. The phase of the estimated flux has also been seen
to track to its new steady state relatively fast, demonstrating
the uncompromised dynamic response of the multi-SOGI-FLL
estimator.
V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a novel multi-SOGI-FLL flux estimator has been
proposed to output precise motor flux over a wide speed range.
To demonstrate its effectiveness, detailed theoretical analyses
have been formulated for comparing it with other estimators,
implemented with a pure integrator, a LPF, or a single SOGI with
FLL. The comparison shows that single-SOGI-FLL estimator
can easily avoid problems caused by different initial conditions
and saturation caused by integrating dc drift. It also does not
require fundamental magnitude and phase compensation. Its
performance is, therefore, significantly improved, as compared
to estimators implemented with either a pure integrator or LPF.
The single-SOGI-FLL estimator, however, lacks accuracy at
low speed caused by its nonnegligible dc and harmonic flux
components. This deficiency has promptly been solved by the
proposed multi-SOGI-FLL estimator whose improved high- and
low-speed performances have both been verified in experiments.
APPENDIX
Substituting 1 for h in (A-2), f1 (t) can be obtained. Eq. (A-1)
and (A-2) as shown at the top of the page.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Holtz and J. Quan, Drift- and parameter-compensated flux estimator
for persistent zero-stator-frequency operation of sensorless-controlled in-
duction motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 10522003,
Jul./Aug. 2003.
6295
(A-1)
  
 
2
[2] K. Cho and J. Seok, Pure-integration-based flux acquisition with drift
and residual error compensation at a low stator frequency, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 12761285, Jul./Aug. 2009.
[3] G. Wang et al., Enhanced position observer using second-order gener-
alized integrator for sensorless interior permanent magnet synchronous
motor drives, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 486495,
Jun. 2014.
[4] J. Hu and B. Wu, New integration algorithms for estimating motor flux
over a wide speed range, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 13, no. 5,
pp. 969977, Sep. 1998.
[5] M. Comanescu and L. Xu, An improved flux observer based on PLL
frequency estimation for sensorless vector control of induction motor,
IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 5156, Feb. 2006.
[6] M. Shin, D. Hyun, S. Cho, and S. Choe, An improved stator flux estima-
tion for speed sensorless stator flux orientation control of induction mo-
tors, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 312318, Mar. 2000.
[7] B. K. Bose and N. R. Patel, A programmable cascaded low-pass filter-
based flux synthesis for a stator flux-oriented vector-controlled induction
motor drive, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 140143,
Feb. 1997.
[8] Y. Wang and Z. Deng, Improved stator flux estimation method for direct
torque linear control of parallel hybrid excitation switched-flux generator,
IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 747756, Sep. 2012.
[9] Y. Wang and Z. Deng, An integration algorithm for stator flux estimat-
ion of a direct-torque-controlled electrical excitation switched-flux gene-
rator, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 411420,
Sep. 2012.
[10] D. Casadei, F. Profumo, G. Serra, and A. Tani, FOC and DTC: Two
viable schemes for induction motors torque control, IEEE Trans. Power
Electron., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 779787, Sep. 2002.
[11] M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg, A new single-phase PLL
structure based on second order generalized integrator, in Proc. IEEE
Power Electron. Spec. Conf., Jun. 2006, pp. 16
[12] P. Rodriguez, R. Teodorescu, I. Candela, A. V. Timbus, and F. Blaab-
jerg, New positive-sequence voltage detector for grid synchronization
of power converters under faulty grid conditions, in Proc. IEEE Power
Electron. Spec. Conf., 2006, pp. 17.
[13] P. Rodriguez, A. Luna, M. Ciobotaru, R. Teodorescu, and F. Blaabjerg,
Advanced grid synchronization system for power converters under un-
balanced and distorted operating conditions, in Proc. 32nd Conf. IEEE
Ind. Electron. Soc., Paris, France, Nov. 610, 2006, pp. 51735178.
[14] P. Rodrguez, A. Luna, I. Candela, R. Mujal, R. Teodorescu, and F.
Blaabjerg, Multiresonant frequency-locked loop for grid synchroniza-
tion of power converters under distorted grid conditions, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 127138, Jan. 2011.
[15] M. Karimi-Ghartemani, S. A. Khajehoddin, P. K. Jain, A. Bakhshai, and
M. Mojiri, Addressing DC component in PLL and notch filter algo-
rithms, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 7886, Jan. 2012.
Rende Zhao (M15) was born in Shandong Province,
China. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in elec-
trical engineering from Shandong University, Jinan,
China, in 1999 and 2002, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree from the College of Electrical Engineering,
Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China, in 2005.
Since 2006, he has been with China University of
Petroleum (Eastern China), Qingdao, China. His re-
search interests include renewable energy generation
and motor control.
6296
Zhen Xin (S15) was born in Shandong Province,
China. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from
the College of Information and Control Engineer-
ing, China University of Petroleum (Eastern China),
Qingdao, China, in 2011 and 2014, respectively. He
is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in the
Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg Univer-
sity, Aalborg, Denmark.
His research interests include power quality, mod-
eling and control of power converters for renewable
energy systems, motor drives, and Rogowski current
sensor.
Poh Chiang Loh received his B.Eng. (Hons.) and
M.Eng. degrees in electrical engineering from the
National University of Singapore, Singapore, in
1998 and 2000, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree
in electrical engineering from Monash University,
Melbourne, Vic., Australia, in 2002.
From 2013 to 2015, he was a Professor with Aal-
borg University, Aalborg, Denmark. Since 2015, he
has been a tenured Full Professor with the Chinese
University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong. His
research interests include power converters and their
grid applications.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 32, NO. 8, AUGUST 2017
Frede Blaabjerg (S86M88SM97F03)
worked toward the Ph.D. degree with Aalborg
University, Aalborg, Denmark, from 1988 to 1992.
He was with ABB-Scandia, Randers, Denmark,
from 1987 to 1988. He is currently with Aalborg
University, where he became an Assistant Professor
in 1992, an Associate Professor in 1996, and a
Full Professor of power electronics and drives
in 1998. His current research interests include
power electronics and its applications, such as in
wind turbines, photovoltaic systems, reliability,
harmonics, and adjustable speed drives.
Dr. Blaabjerg received 15 IEEE Prize Paper Awards, the IEEE PELS
Distinguished Service Award in 2009, the EPE-PEMC Council Award in 2010,
the IEEE William E. Newell Power Electronics Award in 2014, and the Villum
Kann Rasmussen Research Award in 2014. He was an Editor-in-Chief of the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS from 2006 to 2012. He has
been a Distinguished Lecturer for the IEEE Power Electronics Society from
2005 to 2007 and for the IEEE Industry Applications Society from 2010 to
2011. He was nominated in 2014 by Thomson Reuters to be between the most
250 cited researchers in engineering in the world.