Received October 27, 2017, accepted December 17, 2017, date of publication December 27, 2017,

date of current version February 28, 2018.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2787699

An Adaptive-Gain Sliding Mode Observer for

Sensorless Control of Permanent Magnet
Linear Synchronous Motors
CHUNYU YANG , (Member, IEEE), TINGTING MA, ZHIYUAN CHE , AND LINNA ZHOU
School of Information and Control Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221000, China
Corresponding author: Chunyu Yang (chunyuyang@cumt.edu.cn)

ABSTRACT In this paper, a novel adaptive-gain sliding mode observer (SMO) is designed for sensor-
less control of permanent magnet linear synchronous motors (PMLSMs). By the proposed adaptive-gain
algorithm, the gain can dynamically adapt to a changing operation condition of the PMLSMs and reach an
appropriate value in finite time. Stability of the SMO is proved by using Lyapunov stability theory. Compared
with the traditional SMO, the adaptive-gain SMO can improve the control precision, especially when the
operation condition is not invariant. Simulation results are given to show the advantages of the proposed
method.

INDEX TERMS Adaptive-gain algorithm, PMLSM, sensorless control, sliding mode observer.

I. INTRODUCTION Kalman filtering (EKF) methods [19], etc. These observers

Due to the high controllability and high responsiveness, per-
manent magnet linear synchronous motors (PMLSMs) are
widely used in machine tools, photolithography machines,
assembly equipments, etc [1], [2]. However, the high perfor-
mance linear motor drive systems require mechanical sensors
to measure the position of the motors in real time, which not
only increases the system cost, but also reduces the relia-
bility [3]–[5]. Sensorless control methods using algorithms
to estimate the position and speed can solve the problem
well [6]–[10]. Therefore, researchers have paid close atten-
tion to this problem and proposed several methods to achieve
high performance sensorless control [11]–[17].
The existing approaches for sensorless control of PMLSMs
can be roughly classified in two categories: high-frequency
injection methods and observer based methods [18]–[24].
The high-frequency injection technology superposes high-
frequency signals with the fundamental excitation by inject-
ing a high frequency voltage or current to a salient pole
motor. Because of the inherent or artificial asymmetry of the
motor, the excited high frequency response has rotor posi-
tion and speed information. By using the detected high fre-
quency response, the motor position estimation at low speed
even at standstill can be obtained [23]–[26]. Observer based
methods include Luenberger observer methods [16], back-
electromotive force (back-EMF) SMO methods [17], model
reference adaptive observer methods [18], the extended
depending on the mathematical models of motors are suit-
able for medium and high speed applications. Among them,
sliding mode observers(SMOs) suffer little from variation
of motor parameters [27], [28] and have become promis-
ing alternatives due to the high observation accuracy and
robustness. In [20], by introducing the fuzzy control into
the SMO, the balance between the smooth chattering and
the steady state error can be found, which can improve the
robustness and control precision. In [29], the position esti-
mation method adopts a SMO to estimate EMF and then
use the PI regulator to regulate the estimation error to zero.
Some researchers attempt to fuse the adaptive algorithm with
SMO to cope with system environment’s changes. In [21],
a sliding mode adaptive-flux observer, which comprises a
linear state observer and a constant-gain sliding mode com-
ponent, is proposed for PMLSMs. When the speed reference
changes, the flux changes accordingly, by which the speed
can be estimated. But two observers are required, which need
more parameters to design. In addition, its adaptive regulation
effect is not obvious when load changes. All of the above
mentioned SMOs have a constant gain. It is shown that the
gain has a great influence on SMO [30], [31]. The gain should
be large enough to ensure the stability of the observer, but the
chattering and estimation error are obviously increased if it
is too large. Thus a proper gain value should be chosen to
get high precision observation value. For a PMLSM running

2169-3536
2017 IEEE. Translations and content mining are permitted for academic research only.
VOLUME 6, 2018 Personal use is also permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. 3469
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

in real time, the internal parameters of the system and the

external conditions are likely to change, which means that a
constant-gain SMO is not suitable.
To slove the above problem, this paper will propose an
adaptive-gain sliding mode observer for sensorless control
of PMLSMs. By introducing an adaptive algorithm, the slid-
ing mode adaptive-gain is updated dynamically according to
the real situation and reach an appropriate gain to satisfy
the requirements of precision and stability in finite time.
Therefore, the robustness of the PMLSMs control system is
greatly enhanced, and the control precision is improved by
the aforementioned observer. Simulation results are given to
show the advantages of the method.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2,
the mathematical model of PMLSMs is described briefly.
In Section 3, the traditional SMO is firstly reviewed and
the adaptive-gain SMO is introduced. The design procedure
of the proposed SMO scheme is explained in detail. The
adaptive-gain SMO’s stability is derived by Lyapunov sta-
bility theory. In Section 4, simulation results are provided
to verify the performance and robustness of the proposed
new SMO. Finally, the paper is concluded in Section 5.

II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF PMLSM

PMLSMs are considered as an structure’s evolution of
PMSMs. It can be regarded as a PMSM cut open and rolled
flat shown in Fig.1. The stator of PMSMs can be regarded
as the primary in PMLSMs, and the rotor take as secondary.
When the primary multiple-phase windings of the linear
motor is passed through the multiple-phase currents, an air-
FIGURE 1. Structural change of rotating motor to linear motor.
gap field is formed. The magnetic field lines for both types of (a) Structure diagram of rotating motor. (b) Schematic diagram of motor
motor as shown in Fig.2. According to the phase sequence of longitudinal cutting. (c) Structure diagram of linear motor.
the energization, magnetic induction intensity of the magnetic
field is moved along a linear direction, which is called a PMLSM, v is the mover’s speed, τ is the polar distance, and
traveling wave magnetic field. Obviously, the speed of the θ is the position signal (electricity angular).
traveling wave is the same as that of the rotating magnetic It is easy to see from the back EMF function in (1) that
field on the inner surface of the stator, which is called syn- the back-EMFs contain the position and speed informations
chronous line speed. If the primary is fixed, under the action of the motor. Therefore, by using the back EMF signal,
of the traveling wave magnetic field, the secondary will do the position signal can be obtained as
rectilinear motion. eα
θ = − arctan( ) (2)
Mathematical model of PMLSMs in the stationary refer- eβ
ence frame(α − β) is utilized as follows [20]
III. DESIGN OF SMO
di

Lα0 ( α ) = −Rs iα − eα + uα
 A. TRADITIONAL SMO
dt According to the sliding mode variable structure theory, in the



0 ( diβ ) = −R i − e + u stationary (α − β) reference frame, the traditional SMO


L s β β β

β


 dt based on the mathematical model of PMLSMs is shown as
vϕf π sin θ


eα = − (1) follows [6]
 τ
vϕf π cos θ
 
L 0 ( d îα ) = −R î + u − ksgn(σ )

 
 eβ = α s α α α
τ

 
 dt (3)
 dθ = v π


d î
Lβ0 ( β ) = −Rs îβ + uβ − ksgn(σβ )

 
τ

dt dt
where iα , iβ , uα , uβ and eα , eβ are the phase currents, phase The sliding surface Sα and Sβ are selected as
voltages, and back-EMFs in the stationary reference frame, (
respectively. Rs is the stator phase resistance, Lα0 and Lβ0 are Sα = îα − iα , σα = 0
(4)
the stator phase inductances, ϕf is the flux linkage of the Sβ = îβ − iβ , σβ = 0

3470 VOLUME 6, 2018

C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

output accuracy, while too small will destroy the SMO’s

stability. Therefore, under the uncertain disturbances,
an adaptive SMO’s gain K (t) is necessary to get smooth and
optimal estimates of the speed and position of PMLSMs.

B. ADAPTIVE-GAIN SMO
Motivated by [32], where adaptive sliding mode control prob-
lem was consided, we formulate the following adaptive-gains
algorithm:
• If |σ | 6 = 0, K (t) is the solution of
K̇ (t) = K̄1 |σ | (10)
with K (0) > 0 and K̄1 > 0. K̄1 is an adjustable parameter
for the adaptive law. A larger K̄1 can lead to a faster adaptive
regulation of K (t), but to greater fluctuation. σ denotes the
error between the estimated and the measured value.
• If |σ | = 0, K (t) is regarded
(
K (t) = K̄2 |η| + K̄3
(11)
 η̇ + η = sgn(σ )

with K̄2 = K (t ∗ ), where t ∗ is the largest time value such that

FIGURE 2. Magnetic field diagrams for rotating motors and linear motors. |σ (t ∗ ), t ∗ | = 0 and |σ (t ∗− ), t ∗− | 6 = 0, t ∗− is the time just
(a) Magnetic field diagram of rotating motor. (b) Magnetic field diagram
of linear motor.
before t ∗ . K̄3 > 0 and  > 0 are also adjustable parameters
of the adaptive law. η is the average of sgn(σ ) obtained by the
low pass filter (LPF).
where îα and îβ are the estimated current values. iα and iβ are Because the α and β phases have no coupling relation, it
measured values of the actual stator current. k is a constant can be designed independently. So, the α and β phases’ SMOs
observer gain, sgn(x) is the sign function, which is defined as are designed as follows
( 
1, x≥0 d îα
Lα0 (

sgn(x) = (5)  ) = −Rs îα + uα − Kα (t)sgn(σα )
−1, x < 0

dt



K̇α (t) = K̄1 |σα |, |σα | 6 = 0 (12)
From equations (1) and (3), the dynamic error of the currents
K (t) = K̄ |η | + K̄ , |σ | = 0

α 2 α 3 α

can be expressed as follow


 η̇α + ηα = sgn(σα )



dσ
Lα0 ( α ) = −Rs σα + eα − ksgn(σα )
 
dt (6) L 0 ( d îβ ) = −R î + u − K (t)sgn(σ )

s β β β β
 β dt
dσ
Lβ0 ( β ) = −Rs σβ + eβ − ksgn(σβ )


 
dt K̇β (t) = K̄1 |σβ |, |σβ | 6 = 0 (13)
Once the system reaches the sliding surface, we have Kβ (t) = K̄2 |ηβ | + K̄3 , |σβ | = 0



 η̇β + ηβ = sgn(σβ )
( 
S˙α = Sα = 0

(7)
S˙β = Sβ = 0 Kα (t) is the α phase adaptive gain; Kβ (t) is the β phase
So the back-EMFs can be estimated from equation (6) as adaptive gain. By equations (1), (12) and (13), the estimation
follow errors are governed by

dσ
Lα0 ( α ) = −Rs σα − Kα (t)sgn(σα ) + eα
(
êα ≈ ksgn(σα ) 
(8) dt (14)
êβ ≈ ksgn(σβ ) dσ
Lβ0 ( β ) = −Rs σβ − Kβ (t)sgn(σβ ) + eβ

Then according to (2), the motor speed and position signals dt
can be extracted by When the system reaches the sliding surface, the back-EMFs

ê can be expressed as
θ̂ = − arctan( α )
 (
êβ (9) êα ≈ Kα (t)sgn(σα )
v̂ = d θ̂ × τ

êβ ≈ Kβ (t)sgn(σβ )
(15)
dt π
It is known that the observer gain k has great influence on Since êα and êβ usually suffer from chattering due to the
the observer’s output [30], [31]. Too large gain can decrease SMO using the sign function as switching function, a LPF

VOLUME 6, 2018 3471

 C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

FIGURE 3. Structure of the new adaptive-gain SMO and position estimation module.

is necessary to make the output smooth before the back- there for all the subsequent time. At the start of the SMO,
EMF is estimated. But the introduced LPF may cause a time the current estimation error is larger than 0 and the gain
delay and thus a phase compensation is required for mover’s Kα (t) is increasing until the value large enough to make the
position estimation [17]. Therefore the speed and position can sliding mode start. Let t1 be the first time instant for the
be expressed as sliding mode starts. From t = t1 , Kα (t) will decrease with

êα respect to the current perturbations. The sliding mode will

 θ̂ = − arctan( ) + 1θ be destroyed and |σα | 6 = 0, when the varying perturbation

 ê β


τ exceeds the value K̄2 = Kα (t1 ). As a result, the gain will
v̂ = ddtθ̂ × = ω̂e × πτ

(16) increase according to the gain adaptation law until the sliding
π

 mode start again at the time instant t2 . In order to prove, when
1θ = arctan( ω̂e )



 |σα | 6 = 0, the adaptive algorithm can ensure that |σα | = 0
ωc in a finite time, it is necessary to introduce the following
where 1θ is the phase compensation angle caused by LPF lemmas.
and ωc is cut-off frequency of LPF [17]. Lemma 1 [32]: For system ẋ = f (x)+g(x)(−K (t)sgn(σ ))
The structure of the new adaptive-gain SMO and position and the sliding variable σ (x, t) dynamics
estimation module are shown in Fig. 3. Voltages measured ∂σ ∂σ
from stator terminal of PMLSMs combined with the esti- σ̇ = ẋ +
∂x ∂t
mated back-EMFs from the back-EMF observer are used to
estimate the stator currents (12) and (13). The current estima- ∂σ ∂σ ∂σ
tion error passing through the sign function’s operation (5) = + f (x) + g(x)(−K (t)sgn(σ )) (17)
and the computed adaptive gain Kα (t) or Kβ (t) are used to |∂t {z∂x } |∂x{z }
9(x,t) 0(x,t)
estimate back-EMFs (15). The estimates of back-EMFs are
filtered and compensated, and then be used to estimate the with the K (t) satisfying (10) and (11). If the function 9(x, t)
position by (16). The adaptive gain Kα (t) and Kβ (t) governed is bound, the function 0(x, t) is greater than 0 and bounded,
by (12) and (13) are automatically changed to maintain the then there is a positive constant K ∗ , such that
stability and accuracy of the SMO by the adaptive algorithm
when the external environment or internal parameters of the K (t) ≤ K ∗ , ∀t > 0 (18)
system are changing. Rewrite the equation (14) as follows
 dσ
α 1 1
C. STABILITY ANALYSIS 
 = 0 (−Rs σα ) + 0 [−Kα (t)sgn(σα )]
dt L Lα
| α {z } |{z}

In this part, the stability of the adaptive-gain SMO for sen-




sorless control of PMLSMs is analyzed. Because the α and β 9α 0α

dσβ 1 1 (19)
phases have no coupling relation, the analysis is focused on 
 = 0 (−Rs σβ ) + 0 [−Kβ (t)sgn(σβ )]
α phase without loss of generalization. Usually, the sliding dt Lβ Lβ




surface can be defined as function of the errors between the

 | {z } |{z}
9β 0β
actual current and the estimated current. During the sliding
mode, the estimation error of sliding mode observer will Lemma 2: For the SMO (12), (13) and the sliding vari-
be globally driven onto the sliding surface and maintain ables σα , σβ dynamics (19), there exists a positive constant

3472 VOLUME 6, 2018

C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

FIGURE 4. Block diagram of the whole sensorless control system.

K ∗ such that • Suppose that |σα | 6 = 0. In this case, Kα (t)-dynamics reads

as K̇α (t) = K̄1 |σα |. Define the following Lyapunov function,
∗
K ≥ max(Kα (t), Kβ (t)), ∀t > 0 (20)
1 2 1
V = σ + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )2 (21)
Proof: For the SMO (12), (13) and the sliding vari- 2 α 2γ
ables σα , σβ dynamics (19), it is easy to see that σα , σβ ,
eα , eβ are bounded and the Rs , Lα0 , Lβ0 are constant. Then the where K ∗ is a positive constant. Taking the derivative of (21)
functions 9α and 9β are bounded and the functions 0α , 0β along the trajectory of (19), we have (22), as shown at the
are greater than 0 and bounded. So by Lemma 1, there exists bottom of this page, where
a positive constant K ∗ such that (20) holds.  1 ∗ 1 K̄1
Motivated by Theorem 1 of [32], we can get the following 8α = ( K − 9M ), ϒα = − 0 |σα | + |σα |.
Lα0 Lα γ
lemma.
Lemma 3: For the SMO (12), (13) and the sliding variables From Lemma 2, there always exists K ∗ and γ such that
σα , σβ dynamics (19), when σα = 0 and σβ = 0, if Kα (t) Kα (t) < K ∗ , K ∗ > 9M Lα0 and γ < K̄1 Lα0 , which yields
and Kβ (t) are large enough with respect to the perturbations 8α > 0 and ϒα > 0. Then, one get √ (23), as shown at
√
effects, then adaptive-SMO (12),(13) with the sliding vari- the bottom of this page, with 0 = 2 min(8α , ϒα γ ).
ables σα , σβ dynamics (19) allows keeping trajectories of Therefore, finite time convergence of σα to the domain
SMO on the sliding surface σα = 0 and σβ = 0. |σα | = 0 is guaranteed from any initial condition
Theorem 1: For the SMO system (12), (13) and the sliding from |σα | 6 = 0.
variables σα , σβ dynamics (19), there exists a finite time • Suppose that |σα | = 0. In this case, the trajectories of
tF > 0 so that the sliding modes are established for all t ≥ tF , the SMO has reached |σα | = 0, which means that Kα (t) is
that is, |σ | = 0 for t ≥ tF . large enough with respect to the perturbation effects. Then
Proof: Because the α and β phases have no coupling by Lemma 3, the SMO with the gain adaptation algorithm
relation, the proof is focused on α phase without loss of allows SMO keeping on the sliding surface |σα | = 0. Then
generalization. The proof is based on Lyapunov approach the sliding mode is established for all time until the mode is
and shows that, when |σα | 6 = 0, the system (19) can destroyed. 
reach sliding mode surface, that is, |σα | = 0 in finite From the above proof, the SMO gain can be automatically
time. adjusted with an upper bound by the adaptive algorithm,

1 σα 1
V̇ = σα σ̇α + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )K̄1 |σα |) = 0 (−Rs σα + eα − K (t)sgn(σα ) + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )K̄1 |σα |
γ Lα γ
K (t) 1
≤ |σα |9M − 0 |σα | + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )K̄1 |σα |
Lα γ
K (t) 1 1 1
= 9M |σα | − 0 |σα | + 0 K ∗ |σα | − 0 K ∗ |σα | + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )K̄1 |σα |
Lα Lα Lα γ
1 1 K̄1
= (9M − 0 K ∗ )|σα | + (Kα (t) − K ∗ )(− 0 |σα | + |σα |)
Lα Lα γ
= −8α |σα | − (K ∗ − Kα (t))ϒα (22)
√ √
2|σα | 2γ |Kα (t) − K ∗ | √ |σα | |Kα (t) − K ∗ | √
− ϒα ≤ min(8α 2, ϒα 2γ )( √ +
p
V̇ ≤ −8α √ √ √ ) ≤ −0 V (23)
2 2γ 2 2γ

VOLUME 6, 2018 3473

 C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

which is large enough to ensure both the existence and sta- TABLE 1. Parameters of the PMLSM.
bility of the sliding modes. On the other hand, the gain is not
too big for overcoming the noise error and adapting to the
unknown disturbances [28]–[31].

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

In this section, the proposed scheme as Fig.4 is implemented
by the Matlab/Simulink programming environment for
verifying the validity of the new SMO and evaluating the per-
formance of PMLSMs sensorless control system. Since the
sturcture of PMLSMs is similar to that of PMSMs, the con-
trol strategies for PMSMs are also applicable to PMLSMs.
Similarly to PMSMs, the available modulation techniques in
PMLSMs control system are SVPWM, SPWM and so on, TABLE 2. Parameters of the observer.
and PMLSMs control strategies include FOC (field oriented
control), DTC (direct torque control) and so on. In this paper,
SVPWM and FOC are used. The proposed adaptive gain
sliding mode observer is also applicable if they are replaced
by SPWM and DTC.
The structural difference has a great influence on the con-
struction of the model. Since the length of mover in the travel-
ing direction of the linear electric machine is finite, a special In equation (24), θdi (i = a, b, c) are the angle between
discontinuity on the magnetic circuit occurs at both ends of the phase winding and the d axis; L1 is the inductance
the mover, which may cause a phenomenon called end effect. general matrix describing the inductance constant part of
The end effect occurs because the impedance of each phase the traditional model; L2 is the inductance saturated matrix
become nonuniform due to the pole asymmetry, which causes describing the saturation inductance variation with the
imbalance in the phase currents. In [34], the inductance calcu- current; L3 describes the difference between three-phase
lation method is proposed using nonlinear magnetic circuit, inductor, the three phase inductances are not exactly equal;
and the variation of inductance under the influence of end the variation of inductance with the magnetic pole position is
effect and saturation effect is analyzed. In [35], by measuring described by L4 called inductance fluctuation matrix.
the inductance of motor at different poles, it is proved that The following coordinate transformation is performed on
the inductance of the linear motor is not a constant, and the the equation (24)
inductance varies regularly under the influence of the end
effect and inductance saturation effect. So, in this study, Lαβ0 = C3s/2s Labc (25)
 
instead of assuming that the armature winding is infinite, the 1 1
dynamic inductance matrix is modeled to reflect the impact 1 − √2
−
√2 
caused by end effect. 2 3 3

C3s/2s =  0 (26)
 
3 − 
According to the analysis of thrust characteristics of 1 2 2 
1 1 
PMLSM, the inductance change of linear motor is influenced
by phase current i, position electric angle θ and three-phase 2 2 2
inductance difference ε. The influence of mutual inductance Combining equation (1),(24)-(26), an improved linear
in motor operation is far less than that of self inductance motor model with consideration of motor’s end effect can be
change. In order to simplify the model, assuming mutual obtained.
inductance is a constant, the PMLSM inductance matrix can The motor’s parameters are listed in Table 1. The
be expressed as (24), as shown at the bottom of this page. observer’s parameters are listed in Table 2, it has a great

     
L0 Mab Mac −Ki ia 0 0 0 0 0
Labc = Mbc L0 Mbc  +  0 −Ki ib 0  + 0 ε 1 0 
Mca Mcb L0 0 0 −Ki ic 0 0 ε2

Lk cos(ωt + θda )
 
0 0
+ 0 Lk cos(ωt + θdb ) 0 
0 0 Lk cos(ωt + θdc )
= L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 (24)

3474 VOLUME 6, 2018

C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

TABLE 3. Parameters of the controller.

relationship with the given reference speed of the system. The

observer’s parameter K (0) can be the same as the traditional
observer’s constant gain. The value of the K̄1 is related to the
adjustment time and precision, which can be determined by
simulation. K̄3 is the fine-tuning parameter of the SMO, and
it also can be determined by simulation. ε is the SMO time
constant. In Table 3, the controller’s parameters are listed,
which are designed by critical proportioning method and are
not typical. The proposed adaptive SMO, speed PI controller
and current controller are robust with respect to the param-
eters to some extend. Thus the performance of the control
system is acceptable when the parameter mismatch is small. FIGURE 5. Sensorless control using traditional constant-gain SMO at
2 m/s. (a) The actual position θ and its estimate θ̂ . (b) Estimation error
But large mismatch of parameters can lead to the increase of θ .
of steady-state time, overshoot and oscillation. In this case,
the adaptive SMO, speed PI controller and current controller
should be re-tuned.
To show the superiority of the new SMO over the tra-
ditional SMO, we present the following simulation results
considering the motor end effect. The first set of simulations
are carried out under the constant speed reference signal and
constant load signal to verify the influence of different gain
values on SMO.The second set of simulations are carried
out under the changing speed reference signal and constant
load signal to illustrate the new SMO’s effect when the speed
reference changes. Finally, simulations are carried out under
the constant speed reference signal and changing load signal
to verify the new SMO’s effect when the load changes.

A. SIMULATIONS WITH CONSTANT SPEED REFERENCE

SIGNAL AND CONSTANT LOAD SIGNAL
The linear motor has a wide speed range, including a few
microns per second to a few meters per second [19]–[21].
The algorithm presented in this paper is suitable for high-
speed operation of linear motor, so, in this set of simulations,
we consider a constant speed reference signal 2 m/s with a
constant load signal 10 N · m, which can show the character-
istics of linear motor in high speed operation.
By the traditional SMO, the actual and estimated position
are shown in Fig. 5(a) and the estimation error of the mover
position is shown in Fig. 5(b).
As to the new SMO, the actual and estimated position are
shown in Fig. 6(a) and the estimation error of the mover
position is shown in Fig. 6(b).
In Fig.6, it can be seen that the estimation error is initially
much greater than zero, and then decreases. It looks increase
slightly in the negative direction after 0.15 second, but it
maintain small enough. The reason is that regulation of adap-
tive sliding mode observer gain is dynamic. When the error
FIGURE 6. Sensorless control using adaptive-gain SMO at 2 m/s. (a) The
actual position θ and its estimate θ̂ . (b) Estimation error of θ .
decrease to zero, that regulation cannot stop immediately. The
error bound 0.01rad is obtained by simulation, and it is easy
to find that the adaptive-gain SMO can automatically adjust
the gain, the error produced by the new SMO is 10 times
smaller than that of traditional SMO.
B. SIMULATIONS WITH VARYING SPEED REFERENCE
SIGNAL AND CONSTANT LOAD SIGNAL
In this set of simulations, we consider an abrupt speed vari-
ation, that is, changing speed reference signal at 0.1 s from
2 m/s to 3 m/s with a constant load 10 N · m in order to show
the algorithms performance under the varying speed cases.

VOLUME 6, 2018 3475

 C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

FIGURE 7. Sensorless control using traditional constant-gain SMO at FIGURE 8. Sensorless control using adaptive-gain SMO at speed from
speed from 2 m/s to 3 m/s. (a) The actual position θ and its estimate θ̂ . 2 m/s to 3 m/s. (a) The actual position θ and its estimate θ̂ . (b) Estimation
(b) Estimation error of θ . (c) The actual speed and its estimate error of θ . (c) The actual speed and its estimate speed v and v̂ .
speed v and v̂ .

The actual and estimated position by the traditional SMO

are shown in Fig. 7(a). The estimation error of the mover
position is shown in Fig. 7(b). The desired and actual speed
are shown in Fig. 7(c).
By the new SMO, the actual and estimated position are
shown in Fig. 8(a). The estimation error of the mover position
is shown in Fig. 8(b). The desired and actual speed are shown
in Fig. 8(c).
This simulation shows that when the reference speed
changes abruptly, the traditional SMO algorithm leads to a
bigger error due to the lack of adaptability. In Fig.7, it is
shown that before the speed changes, the error is acceptable
and the error become higher after the speed changes. The
reason is that the given observer gain is not suitable when the
reference speed changes to 3m/s. Under the same conditions,
we can see that when the speed reference is changing, the new
SMO can adjust the gain value according to the new speed
reference to make the estimation error close to 0.01 rad and FIGURE 9. Sensorless control using traditional constant-gain SMO at
2 m/s with load from 10 N · m to 5 N · m. (a) The actual position θ and its
achieve higher control accuracy.
estimate θ̂. (b) Estimation error of θ .

C. SIMULATIONS WITH CONSTANT SPEED REFERENCE

SIGNAL AND VARYING LOAD SIGNAL variation, that is, load signal is reduced at 0.1 s from 10 N · m
In order to reflect the performance of the algorithm when load to 5 N · m with a constant speed reference 2 m/s to show that
changes, in this set of simulations, we consider an abrupt load the algorithm can adjust the response when the load changes.

3476 VOLUME 6, 2018

C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs
FIGURE 10. Sensorless control using adaptive-gain SMO at 2 m/s with
load from 10 N · m to 5 N · m. (a) The actual position θ and its estimate θ̂.
(b) Estimation error of θ .
Using the traditional SMO, the actual and estimated posi-
tion are shown in Fig. 9(a). The estimation error of the mover
position is shown in Fig. 9(b). Fig. 10 shows the results
by using the new SMO. The actual and estimated position
are shown in Fig. 10(a). The estimation error of the mover
position is shown in Fig. 10(b).
The estimated position signal is used in the control system
for coordinate transformation in Fig.4. As shown in Fig.9 and
10, a sudden change of load leads to an excessive estimation
error. Since the error become small enough in 0.01 second,
the excessive estimation error dose not affect the stability
of the system. In Fig.10(b), it can be seen that the error is
decreasing due to the adaptive gain, but it dose not approach
zero in 0.2s. The reason is that it will take a longer time for
the error to approach zero when the load change abruptly.
If the simulation time is extended, the error can approach
zero.
V. CONCLUSION
A traditional SMO with constant gain for sensorless con-
trol of PMLSMs is not suitable for the changing operation
conditions. To cope with this problem, this paper proposes
a new adaptive-gain sliding mode observer for sensorless
control system of PMLSMs. The given adaptive algorithm
can automatically adjust the gain to reach an appropriate
gain in finite time for adapting to the actual system situation.
Stability of the SMO has been proved by using Lyapunov
stability theory. Simulations results shown that the new SMO
leads to higher control precision than the traditional SMO
when the PMLSMs are subject to a speed mutation or a load
mutation. In our future work, we will explore the influence of
the initial conditions on the adaptive gain algorithm.
VOLUME 6, 2018
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (61374043, 61603392),
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universi-
ties (2017XKQY055).
REFERENCES
[1] I. I. Abdalla, T. Ibrahim, and N. B. M. Nor, ‘‘Development and optimization
of a moving-magnet tubular linear permanent magnet motor for use in a
reciprocating compressor of household refrigerators,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power
Energy Syst., vol. 77, pp. 263–270, May 2016.
[2] T. Hama and K. Sato, ‘‘High-speed and high-precision tracking control
of ultrahigh-acceleration moving-permanent-magnet linear synchronous
motor,’’ Precis. Eng., vol. 40, pp. 151–159, Apr. 2015.
[3] M. H. Holakooie, M. Ojaghi, and A. Taheri, ‘‘Full-order Luenberger
observer based on fuzzy-logic control for sensorless field-oriented control
of a single-sided linear induction motor,’’ ISA Trans., vol. 60, pp. 96–108,
Jan. 2016.
[4] C. L. Baratieri and H. Pinheiro, ‘‘New variable gain super-twisting
sliding mode observer for sensorless vector control of nonsinu-
soidal back-EMF PMSM,’’ Control Eng. Pract., vol. 52, pp. 59–69,
Jul. 2016.
[5] H.-M. Ryu, J.-I. Ha, and S.-K. Sul, ‘‘A new sensorless thrust control of
linear induction motor,’’ in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Conf., Rome, Italy,
Oct. 2000, pp. 1655–1661.
[6] L. Li, H. Zhu, M. Ma, and Q. Chen, ‘‘Proposal of the sensorless control
method of long primary segmented PMLSM applied in electromagnetic
catapult,’’ in Proc. Int. Symp. Electromagn. Launch Technol., May 2012,
pp. 1–6.
[7] B. Chappuis, S. Gavin, L. Rigazzi, and M. Carpita, ‘‘Speed control
of a multiphase active way linear motor based on back EMF esti-
mation,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 62, no. 12, pp. 7299–7308,
Dec. 2015.
[8] B. Satpati, C. Koley, and S. Datta, ‘‘Sensor-less predictive drying control of
pneumatic conveying batch dryers,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 3547–3568,
Mar. 2017.
[9] S.-C. Yang, S.-M. Yang, and J.-H. Hu, ‘‘Robust initial position estimation
of permanent magnet machine with low saliency ratio,’’ IEEE Access,
vol. 5, pp. 2685–2695, Feb. 2017.
[10] R. Leidhold and P. Mutschler, ‘‘Speed sensorless control of a long-stator
linear synchronous motor arranged in multiple segments,’’ IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 3246–3254, Dec. 2008.
[11] P. Liu, C.-Y. Hung, C.-S. Chiu, and K.-Y. Lian, ‘‘Sensorless linear
induction motor control using fuzzy observers for speed tracking,’’ in
Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom., Anchorage, AK, USA, May 2010,
pp. 5621–5626.
[12] A. Sadighi and W. J. Kim, ‘‘Sensorless control of a novel linear magne-
tostrictive motor,’’ in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo., Sep. 2009,
pp. 1726–1731.
[13] M. A. M. Cheema, J. Fletcher, M. F. Rahman, and D. Xiao, ‘‘Modified
direct thrust control of linear permanent magnet motors with sensorless
speed estimation,’’ in Proc. IEEE Conf. Ind. Electron. Soc., Oct. 2012,
pp. 1908–1914.
[14] A. Loukianov, J. Rivera, A. Y. Alanis, and J. J. Raygoza, ‘‘Super-twisting
sensorless control of linear induction motors,’’ in Proc. Int. Conf. Elect.
Eng. Comput. Sci., Shanghai, China, Aug. 2012, pp. 1–5.
[15] M. A. M. Cheema and J. E. Fletcher, ‘‘Sensorless vector control of linear
permanent magnet synchronous motor,’’ in Proc. ECCE Asia Downunder,
Jun. 2013, pp. 1098–1104.
[16] A. Accetta, M. Cirrincione, M. Pucci, and G. Vitale, ‘‘Neural sensorless
control of linear induction motors by a full-order Luenberger observer
considering the end-effects,’’ in Proc. Energy Convers. Congr. Expo.,
Nov. 2012, pp. 1864–1871.
[17] X. Qiwei, C. Shumei, Z. Qianfan, S. Liwei, and X. Li, ‘‘Sensorless control
research for linear induction motor based on sliding mode observer in
electromagnetic aircraft launch system,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Elec-
tromagn. Launch Technol., Jul. 2014, pp. 1–7.
[18] C. H. Ng, M. Rashed, P. Vas, and F. Stronach, ‘‘A novel MRAS current-
based sensorless vector controlled PMLSM drive for low speed operation,’’
in Proc. IEEE Int. Electr. Mach. Drives Conf., vol. 3. Madison, WI, USA,
Jun. 2003, pp. 1889–1894.
3477
 C. Yang et al.: Adaptive-Gain SMO for Sensorless Control of PMLSMs

[19] W. M. Yang, L. J. Pan, P. F. Zheng, and Y. Q. He, ‘‘Applications of extended CHUNYU YANG received the B.S. degree in
Kalman filter for position sensorless control of permanent magnet linear applied mathematics and the Ph.D. degree in
synchronous motor,’’ Adv. Mater. Res., vols. 834–836, pp. 1240–1245, control theory and control engineering from
Oct. 2013. Northeastern University, China in 2002 and
[20] H. C. Lu, J. Ti, L. L. Sun, and L. S. Wei, ‘‘A new sliding mode observer for 2009, respectively. He is currently an Associate
the sensorless control of a PMLSM,’’ Appl. Mech. Mater., vols. 494–495, Professor with the China University of Mining and
pp. 1401–1404, Feb. 2014. Technology, Xuzhou, China. His research interests
[21] M. A. M. Cheema, J. E. Fletcher, D. Xiao, and F. Rahman, ‘‘Sensorless
include descriptor systems and robust control.
control of linear permanent magnet synchronous motors using a combined
sliding mode adaptive observer,’’ in Proc. Energy Convers. Congr. Expo.,
Nov. 2014, pp. 4491–4498.
[22] H. Wang, M. A. Jun, and H. X. Liu, ‘‘Research of speed regulating system
based on intelligent SMO for PMLSM,’’ Electr. Drive, vol. 44, no. 6,
pp. 54–57, Jun. 2014.
[23] H. Wang, C. D. Wang, and D. Q. Zhang, ‘‘Study of extraction strategy of
high-frequency response current based on RLS algorithm,’’ Small Special TINGTING MA received the B.Eng. degree
Electr. Mach., vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 6–8, Feb. 2014. in electrical engineering and automation from
[24] Q. Tang, A. Shen, X. Luo, and J. Xu, ‘‘PMSM sensorless control by Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China,
injecting HF pulsating carrier signal into ABC frame,’’ IEEE Trans. Power in 2015. She is currently pursuing the M.Eng.
Electron., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 3767–3776, May 2017. degree with the School of Information and Con-
[25] G. Scarcella, G. Scelba, and A. Testa, ‘‘High performance sensor- trol Engineering, China University of Mining and
less controls based on HF excitation: A viable solution for future AC Technology, Xuzhou, China. Her current research
motor drives?’’ in Proc. IEEE Elect. Mach. Design, Control Diagnosis,
interest is the analysis and design of sensorless
Mar. 2015, pp. 178–187.
control system for permanent magnet synchronous
[26] J.-L. Chen, S.-K. Tseng, and T.-H. Liu, ‘‘Implementation of high-
performance sensorless interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor linear motor.
control systems using a high-frequency injection technique,’’ IET Electr.
Power Appl., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 533–544, Sep. 2012.
[27] M. T. Angulo and R. V. Carrillo-Serrano, ‘‘Estimating rotor parameters in
induction motors using high-order sliding mode algorithms,’’ IET Control
Theory Appl., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 573–578, Apr. 2014.
[28] S. Xepapas, A. Kaletsanos, F. Xepapas, and S. Manias, ‘‘Sliding-mode ZHIYUAN CHE received the B.Eng. degree from
observer for speed-sensorless induction motor drives,’’ IEE Proc.-Control the School of Automation and Electrical Engi-
Theory Appl., vol. 150, no. 6, pp. 611–617, Nov. 2003. neering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou,
[29] X. Wang and Q. Ge, ‘‘Speed sensorless control of a linear synchronous China, in 2015. He is currently pursuing the
motor using state observer on d-q reference frame,’’ in Proc. Int. Conf. M.Eng. degree with the School of Information and
Elect. Mach. Syst., Wuhan, China, Oct. 2008, pp. 1553–1557. Control Engineering, China University of Min-
[30] Z. Qiao, T. Shi, Y. Wang, Y. Yan, C. Xia, and X. He, ‘‘New sliding-mode ing and Technology, Xuzhou, China. His current
observer for position sensorless control of permanent-magnet synchronous research interests include sliding mode control.
motor,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 710–719, Feb. 2013.
[31] F. Plestan, Y. Shtessel, V. Brégeault, and A. Poznyak, ‘‘New methodolo-
gies for adaptive sliding mode control,’’ Int. J. Control, vol. 83, no. 9,
pp. 1907–1919, Jul. 2010.
[32] H. Lee and V. I. Utkin, ‘‘Chattering suppression methods in sliding
mode control systems,’’ Annu. Rev. Control, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 179–188,
Aug. 2007.
[33] X. Qiu, ‘‘Research on sliding mode control for linear permanent magnetism LINNA ZHOU received the B.S. degree from the
synchronous motors based on neural network optimization,’’ College Inf. Department of Water Conservancy Engineering,
Eng., Zhejiang Univ. Technol., Tech. Rep., 2005. North China institute of Water Conservancy and
[34] C. Liu, H. Wang, Z. Zhang, and X. Shen, ‘‘Research on thrust character- Hydroelectric Power, Zhengzhou, China, in 2001.
istics in permanent magnet linear synchronous motor based on analysis of She is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree with
nonlinear inductance,’’ Proc. CSEE, vol. 31, no. 30, pp. 69–76, 2011. Northeastern University, Shenyang, China. Her
[35] F. Cupertino, P. Giangrande, G. Pellegrino, and L. Salvatore, ‘‘End effects research interests include descriptor system, robust
in linear tubular motors and compensated position sensorless control based control, and fuzzy control.
on pulsating voltage injection,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 58, no. 2,
pp. 494–502, Feb. 2011.

3478 VOLUME 6, 2018