2018 5th International Conference on Electric Vehicular Technology (ICEVT)
October 30-31, 2018, Surakarta, Indonesia
A Study of a Three Phase Induction Motor
Performances Controlled by Indirect Vector and
Predictive Torque Control
Ahmad Antares Adam
School of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Bandung Institute of Technology
Bandung, Indonesia
ahmad.antares@yahoo.co.id
Agus Purwadi
School of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Bandung Institute of Technology
Bandung, Indonesia
agusp@konversi.ee.itb.ac.id
Abstract— This paper compares two methods of a three
phase induction motor speed control supplied by a two-level
three-phase inverter, those are indirect vector control (IVC) and
predictive torque control (PTC). The simulation results of both
methods show that when given torque and certain reference
speeds, either by using IVC or PTC the motor will provide
torque response and speed according to the reference given.
Both of these methods can also follow the reversal of motor
rotation according to the reference speed dictated. In addition,
the value of the effective stator current using both methods is
the same. The steady state torque of PTC is achieved faster than
IVC.
Keywords— control, induction motor, indirect vector, torque
predictive, compare
I. INTRODUCTION
The speed control methods applied to induction motors
generally consist of scalar and vector control. The application
of scalar control is relatively easier in controlling but it has a
bad dynamic response due to coupling effect between the flux
and torque motor as a function of voltage or current and
frequency [1]. However, using the vector control (VC)
technique the two components of the stator current can be
controlled independently and the flux and torque production
are decoupled, similarly to the DC motor. In a DC machine
the field flux is perpendicular to the armature flux, hence
these two fluxes produce no interaction with each other. By
controlling the field currents it can therefore control the flux
of the machine, and the torque can be controlled
independently of flux by controlling the armature current.
In the late 1970s, the Model Predictive Control (MPC)
was developed in the petrochemical industry to solve
optimization problems. MPC uses a mathematical model of
process and minimization of objective function to obtain
optimal control signal [2]. The main idea of MPC is to choose
action control by repeatedly to solve an optimal control
problem online. It aims to minimize a performance criterion
along an upcoming horizon, which may be the subject of
constraints on manipulated inputs and outputs, in which
future characteristics are computed based on a plant model
[3]. When the MPC is applied to an electric motor as a plant
978-1-5386-9164-9/18/$31.00 ©2018 IEEE
Yanuarsyah Haroen
School of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Bandung Institute of Technology
Bandung, Indonesia
yanuarsyah@stei.itb.ac.id
Arief Syaichu Rohman
School of Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Bandung Institute of Technology
Bandung, Indonesia
arief@stei.itb.ac.id
for controlling torque, the model is called predictive torque
control (PTC) [4]. Since PTC uses online optimization, a cost
function associated with the torque and flux errors is
determined and the voltage vector to minimize the function is
selected as the best voltage vector. PTC is a control structure
that has many advantages, such as it does not require a
rotating transformation like field oriented control (FOC)
because it is done in the stator frame and does not require a
modulator and PI current controller [4]. In addition PTC has
a very flexible structure because it is possible to add
constraints and other objective functions [5]. But the
disadvantage of this system is it requires more calculations
than other control strategies [2].
In this paper, speed control characteristics of an induction
motor supplied by a two level three legs inverter using
indirect vector control (IVC) and predictive torque control
(PTC) method are compared. These characteristics are
obtained from simulation result using Matlab / Simulink in
the form of motor torque, speed and stator current.
II. VECTOR CONTROL
In vector control, an induction motor is controlled like a
separately excited DC motor. In a DC motor the field flux ∅
and armature flux ∅ , are respectively established by field
current and armature component of current , which are
orthogonal in space. Thus, when torque is controlled by ,
the field flux is not affected, hence giving fast torque
response. Similarly, in induction motor vector control, the
synchronous reference frame currents and are
analogous to and , respectively, and is oriented
towards the direction of rotor flux ∅ . Therefore, when torque
is controlled by , the rotor flux is not affected thus giving
fast DC motor-like torque response [6].
The basic principle of VC can be explained with the help
of Fig. 1, where the machine model is represented in a
synchronously rotating reference frame. The inverter is
removed from the picture, assuming the current gain is one.
This inverter generates the currents , , and as dictated
by the command current ∗ , ∗ ,, and ∗ , from the controller.
Machine phase currents , , and are converted into
204

components of and by 3 to 2 phase transformations.
This current is then converted to a reference frame rotated by
the unit vector components cos and sin before being
applied to the machine model. The controller makes
two stages of reversal transformation so that the control
current ∗ and ∗ correspond to the motor currents and
[7]. The unit vector ensures the correct alignment of
current with the flux vector ∅ and perpendicular to it
[6].
Fig. 1 Vector control implementation
Fig. 2 shows the block diagram of an indirect vector
control (IVC) method. In this method, the rotor flux angle,
thus the unit vectors cos and sin are indirectly obtained
by summation of the rotor speed and slip frequency [6]. Using
PI controller, the speed error is converted into a torque
producing current component of the stator current. This
current component is then used to regulate the torque along
with the slip speed. The control equation which PI controller
is given by [8]:
∗
∆ ∆ (1)
The flux establishing current component is obtained from
the stator flux linkage reference value, given by equation (2)
∗
∅ (2)
The torque required for the given flux level is
∅ (3)
Fig. 2 Indirect vector control block diagram [6]
From the torque producing current component and slip gain,
the slip speed
205
∗
(4)
∗ ∅
Hence
(5)
∅
The slip speed and the feedback rotor speed is integrated
together to obtain the stator reference flux linkage space
vector position
(6)
The flux reference is kept constant at its rated value up to the
rated speed.
III. PREDICTIVE TORQUE CONTROL
In PTC, the outer speed controller is the same as the VC,
but the inner loops are replaced by a one-step finite set-model
predictive control (FS-MPC) of stator flux and
electromagnetic torque [9]. The PTC diagram of the
induction motor is shown in Fig. 3 [2]. The reference torque
is generated by an outer loop for speed control by using a PI
controller, and the reference stator flux is set constant at its
nominal value if the field weakening operation is not
performed [4]. The diagram consists of blocks for estimation,
prediction, and cost function. The estimation block calculates
the present value of the variables that cannot be measured,
such as the stator flux ∅ and the rotor flux ∅ . After that, the
prediction block calculates the future value of the control
variables at k+1, in this case the stator flux ∅ (k+1) and the
electromagnetic torque (k+1). This prediction is
calculated for every possible movement provided by the
inverter topology. If a two level three-leg inverter is used,
then eight switching states and seven different voltage vectors
may be generated. Then, the cost function minimization block
selects the optimum switching state that minimizes the
corresponding cost function. The cost function contains
control laws to obtain appropriate torque and flux regulation
[5].
Fig. 3 PTC block diagram [18]
The process carried out in each block from the diagram above
is explained as follows
A. Stator and Rotor Flux Estimation
Stator flux is calculated based on the stator voltage
equation:
∅
(7)
Stator flux is estimated by Euler formula:
∅ ∅ 1 (8)
Since
∅ C. Cost Function Minimization
∅ Cost function is the linear quantity of error torque and flux to
get the best voltage vector [4]. The cost function is evaluated
Hence for each prediction and that results in the lowest value
selected for the inverter ignition pulse. Cost function is
∅ ∅ expressed as:
∗
| 1 | ∅∗ ∅ 1 (14)
Thus, by using Euler formula, the rotor flux estimation is
obtained by: is the weighting factor of the stator flux, whose value
∅ ∅ (9) illustrates the relative importance of torque control over flux
control. If the same weight is given for torque and flux, these
factors will correspond to the ratio between the nominal
B. Torque and Flux Prediction
torque and stator flux |∅ |.
Stator flux prediction is given by
(15)
∅ 1 ∅ (10) |∅ |

IV. SIMULATION RESULT

The induction motor used in this simulation is 2.2 kW,
The torque prediction depends on the flux and stator current, 380 volt, 50 Hz, 4 poles with parameters Rs = 2,81 Ohm ; Rr
it can be derived from: = 2,41 Ohm, Ls = 0,171 H, Lr = 0,171 H, Lm = 0,161 H dan J
1 = 0,05 Kg.m2, 1435 rpm [10]. Simulations of both IVC and

∅ PTC methods use Matlab/Simulink with nominal reference
1 flux of 0.71 Weber, nominal reference torque 14 N.m and a

∅ reference speed of 150 rad/s or 150 x (60/2π) = 1433 rpm.
For tracking reference speeds, a PI controller is used. The PI
controller receives an error signal and calculates the torque
2 reference for the controller. There are two tuning parameters
1 1
∅ ∅ in this PI controller, namely the proportional amplifier
2
= ∅ ∅ and the integral amplifier. In these both simulations =
3.016 and = 0.141 with sampling time ( ) for PI 0.0004
= ∅ ∅ second.
= ∅ ∅
A. IVC Simulation Result
2 ∅ 2 ∅ Fig. 4 shows the torque reference and the torque actual
2 2
of the motor using indirect vector control.
Thus the electromagnetic torque can be expressed as:

∅ (11)

Torque prediction is

1 ∅ 1 1 12)

And the stator current prediction is

1 1 ∅ (13)

Where:

;
Fig. 4 The induction motor torque using IVC

It is shown that when the motor is given reference torque of
14 N.m, its actual torque can follow the reference torque
precisely. When the direction of reference torque is reversed
at t = 1.5 seconds, the actual torque can well follow the
reference torque. Fig. 5 shows the motor motor steady state
1 torque is achieved at t = 0.013 sec.

206
 Fig. 5 Transient to steady state motor torque response
Fig. 8 The induction motor stator current using IVC

Fig. 6 shows the motor actual speed when given the

reference speed of 150 rad/second or 1433 rpm by using IVC. Fig. 9 shows the steady state value of motor stator currents.
The motor actual speed can follow the given reference speed.
Reversal of motor rotation with reference speed 1433 rpm is
also done to the motor at t = 1.5 seconds. The motor also can
follow well the direction of rotation reversed.

Fig. 9 The steady state value of motor stator

currents using VC

The effective value of steady state steady current is 2.12

√

amperes.
B. PTC Simulation Result
Fig. 10 shows the torque reference and the torque actual of
the motor using PTC.
Fig. 6 The induction motor speed using IVC

Fig. 7 shows the motor steady state speed is achieved at

t = 0.54 sec.

Fig. 10 The induction motor torque using PTC

Fig. 7 Transient state to steady state of motor speed response
It is shown that when the motor is given reference torque of
Fig. 8 shows the motor stator current response. 14 N.m, its actual torque can follow the reference torque
precisely. When the direction of reference torque is reversed

207
at t = 1.5 seconds, the actual torque can well follow the
reference torque. Fig 11 shows the motor steady state torque
is achieved at t = 0.006 sec.

Fig. 11 Transient to steady state motor torque response

Fig. 12 shows the motor actual speed when given

reference speed of 1433 rpm by using PTC. The motor actual Fig. 14 The induction motor stator currents using PTC
speed can follow the given reference speed. Reversal of
motor rotation with reference speed of 1433 rpm is done to Fig. 15 shows the steady state value of motor stator currents.
the motor at t = 1.5 seconds and the motor can follow it well.

Fig. 15 The steady state value of motor stator currents using PTC

The effective value of steady state steady current is 2.12

√
Fig. 12 The induction motor speed using PTC amperes.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Fig. 13 shows the motor steady state speed is achieved at t =
0.54 sec. After analyzing the Simulation results, we can conclude
some points, i.e.:
1. Motor will give torque and speed response equal to the
reference value either by IVC or PTC.
2. Motor can follow well the reversal of the rotation given to
it for IVC or PTC.
3. An equal effective value of steady state stator current is
obtained using either IVC or PTC.
4. The steady state of motor torque is obtained faster when
using PTC than IVC.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is partially supported by PUI-National
Fig. 13 Transient to steady state motor speed response
Center for Sustainable Transportation Technology (NCSTT)
ITB under SHERA-USAID program.
The motor stator currents using PTC is shown by Fig. 14.

208
 REFERENCES
[1] S. V. Hule, Bindu R., and D. Vincent, “Sensorless vector control
of three phase induction motor,” in 2014 International Conference
on Advances in Communication and Computing Technologies
(ICACACT 2014), 2014, pp. 1–6.
[2] J. (Professor) Rodríguez and P. C. Estay, Predictive control of
power converters and electrical drives. IEEE/Wiley, 2012.
[3] E. F. Camacho and C. (Carlos) Bordons, Model predictive control.
Springer, 2007.
[4] Y. Zhang and H. Yang, “Model Predictive Torque Control of
Induction Motor Drives With Optimal Duty Cycle Control,” IEEE
Trans. Power Electron., vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 6593–6603, Dec. 2014.
[5] P. Cortes, J. Rodriguez, R. Vargas, and U. Ammann, “Cost
Function-Based Predictive Control for Power Converters,” in
IECON 2006 - 32nd Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial
Electronics, 2006, pp. 2268–2273.
[6] B. K. Bose, Modern power electronics and AC drives. Prentice
209
Hall, 2002.
[7] L. K. Jisha and A. A. Powly Thomas, “A comparative study on
scalar and vector control of Induction motor drives,” in 2013
International conference on Circuits, Controls and
Communications (CCUBE), 2013, pp. 1–5.
[8] R. Arulmozhiyal, K. Baskaran, and R. Manikandan, “An
intelligent speed controller for indirect vector controlled induction
motor drive,” in 2010 IEEE International Conference on
Computational Intelligence and Computing Research, 2010, pp.
1–5.
[9] J. Rodriguez, R. M. Kennel, J. R. Espinoza, M. Trincado, C. A.
Silva, and C. A. Rojas, “High-Performance Control Strategies for
Electrical Drives: An Experimental Assessment,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 812–820, Feb. 2012.
[10] Y. Haroen and P. A. Dahono, “ANALISIS MOTOR TAK
SEREMPAK TIGA.FASA DENGAN METODA PARK
KOMPLEK,” Proc. ITB, vol. 22, no. 1/2/3, pp. 1–27, 1989.