A Novel Control Strategy of Linear Induction Motor
Drives Based on Dynamic Maximum Force
Production
Haidong Yu
John Deere
YuHaidong@JohnDeere.com
Abstract—Linear induction motor (LIM) drives have been
investigated vastly for the past several decades. Attractive
features, such as simple structure and easy maintenance, have
made this family of machines utilized broadly in military,
transportation, and aerospace, to name a few. Up to nowadays,
vector control is a dominant control strategy for LIM based on
the assumption that this family of machines portray inherent
similarities with their rotary counterparts. However, due to
existence of end effects and magnetic asymmetry effects,
conventional vector control can not provide its expected
functionality for LIM. Therefore, a novel control strategy,
dynamic maximum force control, is invented and presented in
this paper. Compared with conventional vector control, the
excitation frequencies are calculated through field reconstruction
(FR) in the proposed control method. In addition, the amplitude
of phase current is regulated indirectly through controlling the
square of current amplitude. As a result, at any instant,
maximum force production is guaranteed. The dynamic
maximum force control has been validated by simulation study.
Keywords-linear induction motor drives; field reconstruction;
maximum force;
I. INTRODUCTION
Linear induction motor (LIM) drives have been investigated
vastly for the past several decades due to their attractive
features, such as simple structure and easy maintenance.
Recently, vector control is a dominant control strategy for LIM
based on the assumption that this family of machines portray
inherent similarities with their rotary counterparts. In a
conventional rotor indirect field oriented control, both d-axis
current and q-axis current are regulated such that the excitation
frequency ω e can be calculated analytically based on the
following equation:
∗ End Effect
P i qs
ωe = ωr + (1)
2 τ ⋅ ids∗
The resulted phase current amplitude and electromagnetic
torque are expressed as follows:
I s = iqs2 + ids2 (2)
Te = kt ids iqs (3)
978-1-4244-2601-0/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
Babak Fahimi
University of Texas at Arlington
fahimi@uta.edu
Where P is number of poles, τ is secondary time constant,
∗
i is q-axis current reference, ids∗ is d-axis current reference,
qs
and kt is the torque constant. However, due to existence of
end effects [1] and magnetic asymmetry effects [2],
conventional field oriented control can not provide its expected
functionality for LIM. Figure 1 represents the end effects in
LIM. Therefore, equations (1) and (3) have been modified to
accommodate the end effects [3]. Nevertheless, the above
modifications did not solve the problems of magnetic
asymmetry effects. In addition, the complexity has been
increased significantly. It can be observed from (1) to (3) that
both current amplitude and excitation frequency have to be
regulated to produce desired electromagnetic torque. In
addition, excitation frequency calculation is coupled with speed
control due to second term on the right hand side of equation
(1). In order to guarantee superior transient performance, [4]
has proposed maximum force/ampere control. In this method,
excitation frequency calculation is separated from speed
control using field reconstruction method [4]. The field
reconstruction method is a powerful tool, which allows effcient
computation of extensive field-based motor drive applications.
In addition, the linear speed is regulated using hysteresis
control. Both simulation studies and experimental results have
verified the fast transient performance and steady state speed
control effect. Meanwhile, the steady state ohmic loss of
maximum force/ampere control is a little higher. To solve the
challenges mentioned in indirect field oriented control and
maximum force/ampere control is the major motivation to
develop the dynamic maximum force control. Machine under
investigation is a single sided, three phase, 4 pole LIM. Figure
2 illustrates the cross sectional view of LIM. Detailed
information is given in Appendix A.
Figure 1. End effect of LIM
98
 Primary

Aluminum (Grey) Back Iron (Blue)

Figure 2. Cross sectional view of the healthy LIM under investigation

II. DYNAMIC MAXIMUM FORCE CONTROL

Figure 3 represents a generalized torque speed curve of
induction motors. The operation modes of LIM have similar
behaviors, which include two regions: A) Constant thrust ( Ft ) Figure 3. Torque speed curve of induction motors
0.4 m/sec
region. B) Constant power ( Pe ) region. During this operation
mode, field weakening should be applied. Figure 4 represents 10
the thrust variation with excitation frequency when linear speed
is 0.4 m/sec. One can notice that at any linear speed there exists 5
a unique pair of excitation frequencies that can produce
maximum thrust. These frequencies are characterized as Thrust (N)
0
optimum excitation frequencies. Based on this observation, [1]
has utilized field reconstruction (FR) method to offline
calculate the optimum excitation frequencies. Therefore, at any -5
linear speed maximum force production or acceleration is
guaranteed. Figure 5 and 6 illustrate the normal flux density -10
variations at the same position from FRM and experiment
testbed. The output of the flux meter to oscilloscope is voltage -100 -50 0 50 100
Excitation Frequency (Hz)
signal. The amplitude of this voltage signal is 1.06 V, which is
corresponding to about 0.05 T. One can notice the results from Figure 4. Thrust variation with excitation frequency when linear speed is 0.4
figure 5 and 6 match well. m/sec

It has been observed in [1] that both thrust and normal force 0.06
are proportional to square of phase current amplitude.
Therefore, below base speed thrust can be expressed as: 0.04

Ft = c i
Normal Flux Density (T)

2
f s (4)
0.02

Where c f is force constant. In addition, the mechanical 0

equation of the LIM system is governed by:
-0.02
•
Ft − Fl = M v + Bv (5)
-0.04

Where Fl is the load force, M is the total mass of the LIM -0.06
0 50 100 150 200
• Time (msec)
system, B is the viscous friction coefficient, v is the
acceleration speed, and v is linear speed. Equation (4) can be Figure 5. Normal flux density in the middle of airgap at standstill using FR
further transformed as:

Ft = c f ε (6)

As a result, one can regulate linear speed by controlling ε

(square of phase current amplitude) using a PI controller.

99
 ⎧1 if ε >0
⎪
Sgn(ε ) = ⎨ 0 if ε = 0 (7)
⎪− 1 if ε < 0
⎩
⎧ f _ in(motoring ) if Sgn(ε ) = 1
⎪
f _ outk = ⎨ f _ out k −1 if Sgn(ε ) = 0 (8)
⎪ f _ in( generating ) Sgn(ε ) = −1
⎩ if

Where k represents the current instant index, and k − 1

represents the previous instant index. Finally, three phase
balanced currents are regulated using hysteresis control.

Figure 6. Normal flux density in the middle of airgap at standstill from testbed
The complete functionality of dynamic maximum force
control is illustrated in figure 7. As can be seen, linear speed is
regulated by a PI controller. Due to the current limit (4 A of
amplitude) of LIM, a saturation block is added to the system.
Due to the non-linearity of the saturation block, the design of
PI controller has to be very careful. The output of saturation
block is ε . Therefore, instantaneous value of phase current
amplitude can be calculated through ε . Using interpolation,
relationship between linear speed and optimum excitation
frequency is characterized into two lookup tables in the block
diagram. The block ‘frequency selector’ selects appropriate
excitation frequency based on operation mode using ‘Sign’
function. The functionalities of ‘Sign’ function and ‘frequency
selector’ are expressed as follows:
III. SIMULATION RESULTS
For motor drive applications, the bandwidth of current
controller is typically around 1 kHz. Therefore, the PI
controller in the dynamic maximum force control is designed
such that the bandwidth is about 100 Hz, and damping factor is
1. Figure 8-10 depict performance of step linear speed response.
Figure 8 represents the linear speed response. It is notable that
the speed controller has satisfactory transient performance with
0% overshoot during acceleration and deceleration. In addition,
the steady state speed regulation of linear speed is very good.
Figure 9 illustrates the reference of excitation frequency. As
can be seen, depending on the linear speed, the excitation
frequency varies correspondingly. According to [1], negative
frequency in the figure means regenerative braking mode.

v∗ + ε ε
−
v Sgn(ε )

Figure 7. Block diagram of dynamic maximum force control

100
 0.6 0.4
Vr Vr
0.5 Vm 0.3 Vm

0.2
Linear Speed (m/sec)

Linear Speed (m/sec)

0.4
0.1
0.3
0
0.2
-0.1
0.1
-0.2

0 -0.3

-0.1 -0.4
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Figure 8. Step response of linear speed Figure 11. Linear speed response of sinusoidal reference

30 30

20 20
Excitation Frequency (Hz)

Excitation Frequency (Hz)

10 10

0 0

-10 -10

-20 -20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Figure 9. Excitation frequency Figure 12. Excitation frequency of sinusoidal linear speed reference
5 4
Reference Reference
Prediction 3 Prediction

2
Phase Current (A)

Phase Current (A)

0 0

-1

-2

-3

-5 -4
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Time (sec) Time (sec)
Figure 10. Phase current regulation Figure 13. Phase current response of sinusoidal linear speed reference
Figure 10 shows the reference of phase current and
prediction using current hysteresis control. One can observe IV. CONCLUSION
the current control functions properly. In addition, the ohmic The challenges and issues of conventional indirect field
loss in the steady state is minimized. oriented control for linear induction motor drives have been
Figure 11-13 depict another set of results corresponding addressed. A novel control strategy, dynamic maximum
to sinusoidal linear speed reference. The frequency of the force control has been invented and introduced based the
reference is 2 Hz. It is notable from figure 11 that there are field reconstruction technique. The control performance has
amplitude deviation and phase shift between reference and been verified by simulation results. Compared to the
response. This is because the linear PI controller is only valid maximum force/ampere control, the transient control effect
for DC reference. In addition, the control effect is dominant of linear speed is satisfactory. The steady state ohmic loss is
by the pole of mechanical plant. Figure 12 and 13 illustrate reduced significantly.
the prediction of excitation frequency and phase current.

101
 REFERENCES
[1] H. Yu, R. Jayabalan, M. Krishnamurthy, and B. Fahimi, “Analysis of
High Speed Characteristics for Linear Induction Machines,” VPPC
2006, Windsor, England, UK, 2006.
[2] H. Yu, B. Fahimi, “An investigation on asymmetry effects in linear
induction machines”, APEC 2007, Anaheim, California, 2007.
[3] J. Duncan, “Linear Induction Motor-Equivalent Circuit Model,” Proc.
Inst. Elec. Eng., pt. B, vol. 130, no. 1, 1983.
[4] Haidong Yu, “High Grade Control of Linear Induction Motor
Drives,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Arlington,
supervising professor: Dr. Babak Fahimi.
APPENDIX A
No. Parameter Description

Type Linear Induction

1. Machine
Power supply 240V, 3 phase AC
2.
Winding Configuration wye
3.
Poles 4
4.
Slots per pole per phase 1
5.
Air Gap (mm) 2.5
6.
Primary Dimensions in x, y, 250 x 72 x 100
7. and z Directions (mm)
Reaction Plate 1524 x 3 x 100
8. Dimensions in x, y, and z
Directions (mm)
Back iron Dimensions in x, 1524 x 6 x 100
y, and z Directions (mm)
9.

10. Material of Primary

Lamination M19

11. Material of Reaction Aluminum: 3.8e7

Plate Siemens/meter

12. Material of Back Iron CR10: Cold rolled 1010 steel

Table 1. Detailed information of LIM

102