International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

COMPARING OF SWITCHING FREQUENCY ON VECTOR
CONTROLLED ASYNCHRONOUS MOTOR
Yılmaz Korkmaz1, Fatih Korkmaz2, Ismail Topaloglu2, Hayati Mamur2
1

Faculty of Technology, Department of Electrical-Electronic Engineering,
Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey
2
Faculty of Engineering, Department of Electrical-Electronic Engineering,
Çankırı Karatekin University, Çankırı, Turkey

ABSTRACT
Nowadays, asynchronous motors have wide range use in many industrial applications. Field oriented
control (FOC) and direct torque control (DTC) are commonly used methods in high performance vector
control for asynchronous motors. Therefore, it is very important to identify clearly advantages and
disadvantages of both systems in the selection of appropriate control methods for many industrial
applications. This paper aims to present a new and different perspective regarding the comparison of the
switching behaviours on the FOC and the DTC drivers. For this purpose, the experimental studies have
been carried out to compare the inverter switching frequencies and torque responses of the asynchronous
motor in the FOC and the DTC systems under different working conditions. The dSPACE 1103 controller
board was programmed with Matlab/Simulink software. As expected, the experimental studies showed that
the FOC controlled motors has a lessened torque ripple. On the other hand, the FOC controlled motor
switching frequency has about 65-75% more than the DTC controlled under both loaded and unloaded
working conditions.

KEYWORDS
Asynchronous motor; vector control; motor drives; switching frequency

1. INTRODUCTION
For many years, asynchronous motors have wide range use in industrial applications due to its
simple and robust structure and low costs when compared with dc motors. Furthermore, we have
better high performance control options now due to development of power electronics in the last
few decades. There are two noted control methods in high performance control of asynchronous
motors named as: FOC and DTC.
Blaschke proposed the FOC in the 1970s. The FOC was unique and only option that we had on
asynchronous motors high performance control until 1980s that the DTC was introduced by
Takahashi. Since that day, there have been continual discussions and questions about that: Which
one has the best performance on asynchronous motors vector control? [1-3].
The main idea of vector control methods is the control of motor flux and torque components
separately like DC motors. The main difference between two methods is that the FOC controls by
a rotor or stator field orientation, while the DTC controls by a stator field observation [4]. So, the
structural differences in the both control methods are that the FOC uses park transformation, more
machine parameters, and current regulators, while the DTC uses Clarke transformation, less
DOI :10.5121/ijscai.2014.3402

19

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

machine parameters, and any current regulators. Thus, comparative studies between the two
methods show that the DTC is simplicity, a fast dynamic response, and robust against to
parameter changes. Despite all these advantages, the DTC also has some handicaps: the most
important of them being high torque and current ripples. Evidently, all users have to take into
account all these advantages and disadvantages when deciding on which method they will use on
designed system [5]. There are some comparative studies regarding both comparison of both the
methods, which address the motors speed and torque behaviours. Thanks to this research, it is
now known that despite a high torque ripple, the DTC has a fast dynamic response [6-7].
In this paper, a new and different perspective has been presented regarding the comparison of the
FOC and the DTC drivers. The voltage source inverter switching frequencies has been compared
on both the FOC and the DTC systems. There is no doubt about the importance of switching
frequency on power electronic systems because its directly affects switching losses and it means
also affects indirectly the efficiency of the drivers. Experimental studies have been carried out to
compare switching frequencies and the dSpace 1103 controller board has been programmed with
Matlab/Simulink.

2. FOC AND DTC METHODS
The FOC is mostly used to control the speed of the motor, not control of the moment, due to its
low level sensitivity [8].
In the FOC, the parameters of the motor have to be turned in a d-q reference frame, which
consider turns in a synchronous speed (park transformation). Thus, the position of the rotor flux
has to be well determined for the success of transformation. In the determining the process of the
rotor flux position two basic approaches are used.
Using of flux sensors is the first approach to determine the rotor flux position while to measure
the rotor position with an incremental encoder and calculate the angle between the axis of the
rotor and the flux, is the second one. Eq. 1 and Eq. 2, describes the calculation of the stator
current d-q components.

i qs* =

i ds* =

2 2  Te*  Lr
 
3 p  λ*r  Lm

λ*r
Lm





(1)

(2)

iqs* and ids* are the stator current d-q components reference values, λ*r is the rotor flux reference
value, and Lm is the mutual inductance, Lr is rotor inductance and p is motor pole pairs value
in these equations. The stator three phase currents obtained by using the transformation matrix
which is given in Eq. 3.

20

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

i

i
i


*
a
*
b
*
c



cos θ
 
2π
  
 = cosθ − 3
  

cosθ + 2π
3
 

sin θ
2π


 sin θ −
3


2
π


 sin θ +
3












1 i q* 
 
1 i d* 

  i 0 
1


(3)

In Eq. 3., θ indicates the rotor angular position, and can be obtained from the integration of the
sum of the rotor angular speed ( ω r ) and the sleep angular speed ( ω sl ) as given in Eq. 4.

θ = ∫ (ω r + ω sl ).dt

(4)

and the sleep angular speed is obtained from Eq. 5.

ω sl =

Lm Rr *
iqs
Lr λ*r

(5)

The FOC control block diagram is created by using Eq.1- Eq.5 and is shown in Fig. 1[9].

Fig. 1. Simulink block diagram of the FOC controller

The DTC algorithm controls the stator flux and the torque with using measured currents and
voltages.
Instantaneous values of the flux and the torque can be obtained by using the transformation of the
measured currents and the voltages of the motor. The stator flux is calculated as given in Eq.5-7
in a stationary reference frame [10].

λα = ∫ (Vα − R s iα )dt

(6)

λ β = ∫ (V β − R s i β )dt

(7)

21

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

λ = λα2 + λ 2β

(8)

Where, λα - λ β stator flux, iα - i β stator current, Vα - Vα stator voltage α − β components,

R s stator resistance. Motor torque can be calculated as given in Eq.9.

Te =

3
p (λα iβ − λβ iα )
2

(9)

Where, p is the motor pole pairs. The stator flux vector region is an important parameter for the
DTC, and it can be calculated as given in Eq.10.

 λβ 

 λα 

θ λ = tan −1 

(10)

The torque and flux errors are obtained by comparing the reference and observed values and than
the errors are converted to control signals by hysteresis comparators. The switching table is used
to obtain the optimum switching inverter states, and it determines the states by using the
hysteresis comparators outputs and the flux region data[11]. The schematic view of the
experimental setup is given in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Schematic view of the experimental setup

3. EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES
Experimental tests have been carried out in order to compare the switching frequency between the
DTC and the FOC systems, and the dSpace 1103 DSP (Digital Signal Processor) board has been
programmed in the Matlab-Simulink Real-Time-Workshop environment for tests.
A new block has been created to compare the switching frequency on both systems. The inverter
switching frequency has been obtained by the addition of the arms switching frequencies, and
22

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

then dividing the total by three. However, especially in the DTC, the switching frequency has a
wide range, so the average switching frequency has been calculated with a different sampling
time (100 ms) in the frequency measurement block to obtain healthy comparable results.
The results of the experimental tests obtained in this study are for the asynchronous motor of 4
kW and the parameters of the motor, and the experiments are as given below. The motor model is
implemented for the DTC and the FOC methods on the Matlab/Simulink. Different load ranges
have been applied to the asynchronous motor to compare the switching frequencies. The DTC and
the FOC systems have been tested at under no load and loaded (10 N.m.) conditions. The
parameters of the three-phase asynchronous motor, in the SI units: P=4 kW, U=380 V, I=8.2 A,
cosφ=0.85, 1425 rpm, f=50 Hz, Rs =7.2 Ω.

Fig. 3. Torque responses of unloaded DTC controlled motor

Fig. 4. Torque responses of unloaded FOC controlled motor

23

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

Fig. 5. Switching frequencies of unloaded DTC controlled motor

Fig. 6. Switching frequencies of unloaded FOC controlled motor

In the first group of the tests, the motor has been operated as unloaded working conditions. The
motor speed has been set up to 1500 rpm for all experimental tests. The moment and switching
frequency data, which has been calculated within the Simulink blocks, have been obtained by
using the digital-analogue converters of the dSPACE 1103 controller board. The torque response
curves of the motor for the both systems have been given in Figure 3 and Figure 4 for unloaded
working conditions. As expected, it can be clearly seen that the DTC has much torque ripples
when compared FOC.
Figure 5 and Figure 6 show change on the switching frequencies of the motor for both systems.
The switching frequency of the DTC controlled motor has nearly 900 Hz, while the FOC
controlled motor has 1400 Hz. Therefore, it can be stated that the FOC controlled motor
switching frequency has 65% more than the DTC controlled one.
In the second part of tests, the motor has been operated under loaded (10Nm) conditions and
torque and the switching frequency curves of these tests have been given in following figures.

24

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

Fig. 7. Torque responses of loaded DTC controlled motor

Fig. 8. Torque responses of loaded FOC controlled motor

The torque response curves of the motor for the both systems have been given in Figure 7 and
Figure 8 for loaded working conditions. By analyzing the torque responses of the motor, it can
still be stated that the DTC has much torque ripple. Figure 9 and Figure 10 show change on the
switching frequencies of the motor for both systems. The switching frequency of the DTC
controlled motor has approximately 800 Hz, while the FOC controlled motor has 1300 Hz.
Consequently, the FOC controlled motor switching frequency nearly %75 more than DTC
controlled under loaded conditions.
After all the experimental studies, it can be seen that the switching frequency behaviour of the
inverter has close ratio in loaded and unloaded operating conditions, so this shows that the change
of the switching frequency on both systems is independent of the motor load situation. In
addition, it can be accepted that the change in the switching frequency is also independent of the
motor size due to the independency of the load situations.

25

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

Fig. 9. Switching frequencies of loaded DTC controlled motor

Fig. 10. Switching frequencies of loaded FOC controlled motor

4. CONCLUSIONS
Choose of the motor driver can be very important to operate the designed system efficiently when
designing an application which includes electric motors. Addition, many times, it can be difficult
to decide any optimum control method for obtaining high performance regarding to asynchronous
motor drivers. In fact, for the high performance asynchronous motor drivers, we have only two
options: FOC and DTC. This paper deals with to give fair comparison between two vector control
methods for asynchronous motor drives. For this purpose, experimental tests have been realized
to compare of the motor performances on different working conditions. The experimental test
shows that the DTC method is preferable if the fast dynamic performance has primary importance
whereas the FOC method might be a better option when high torque quality is demanded. In
addition, the inverter switching frequencies have been investigated in the FOC and DTC methods
to give a new criterion for the selection of optimum control strategy for asynchronous motor high
performance control. The experimental studies have carried out to compare the switching
frequencies in both methods under different load conditions. As a result, the FOC controlled
motor switching frequency was almost 70% more than the DTC controlled one under loaded and
unloaded working conditions and choosing of the DTC scheme will also provide high energy
efficiency driver if the dynamic performance of the motor has primary importance.
26

International Journal on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications (IJSCAI), Vol.3, No. 3/4, November 2014

REFERENCES
[1]

V. Bleizgys, A. Baskys and T. Lipinskis, “Induction motor voltage amplitude control technique based
on the motor efficiency observation”, Electronics and Electrical Engineering – Kaunas: Technologija,
2011. – No. 3(109) – P. 89–92.
[2] Blaschke, F., “The Principle of Field Orientation Applied to The New Transvector Closed-Loop
Control System for Rotating Field Machines”, Siemens-Rev.,1972. – Vol. 39 – P. 217–220.
[3] Takahashi, I., Naguchi, T. A., “New Quick-Response and High-Efficiency Control Strategy of an
Induction Motor”, IEEE Transactions on Industry Application,1986. IA-22(5) –P. 820–827.
[4] Liu-Jun; Wang Wan-li, Wang Yang. “Research on FOC and DTC switching control of asynchronous
motor based on parameter estimation”, Automation and Logistics ICAL 2008. IEEE International
Conference, 2008. – P. 1754–1758.
[5] Farasat, M.; Rostami, N.; Feyzi, M. R., “Speed sensorless hybrid field oriented and direct torque
control of induction motor drive for wide speed range applications”, Power Electronic & Drive
Systems & Technologies Conference (PEDSTC), 2010. – P. 243–248.
[6] Casadei, D.; Profumo, F.; Serra, G.; Tani, A., “FOC and DTC: two viable schemes for induction
motors torque control”, Power Electronics, IEEE Transactions, 2002. –Vol.17– No.5 – P. 779–787.
[7] Wolbank, T.A.; Moucka, A.; Machl, J.L., “A comparative study of field-oriented and direct-torque
control of induction motors reference to shaft-sensorless control at low and zero-speed”, Intelligent
Control, 2002. Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Symposium. – P. 391–396.
[8] T. V. Mumcu, I. Aliskan, K. Gulez, G. Tuna, “Reducing Moment and Current Fluctuations of
Induction Motor System of Electrical Vehicles by using Adaptive Field Oriented Control”,
Electronics and Electrical Engineering – Kaunas: Technologija, 2013. – Vol. 19 – No.2 – P. 21–24.
[9] Krishnan, R. Electric Motor Drives // Prentice Hall, P.450 2001.
[10] Fatih Korkmaz, M.Faruk Çakır, İsmail Topaloğlu, Rıza Gürbüz, “Artificial Neural Network Based
DTC Driver for PMSM”, International Journal of Instrumentation and Control Systems (IJICS) Vol.3,
No.1,pp. 1-7 Jan. 2013
[11] Yılmaz Korkmaz, Ismail Topaloglu, Hayati Mamur, Fatih Korkmaz, “An Investigation on Switching
Behaviours of Vector Controlled Induction Motors” Third International Conference on Advanced
Information Technologies & Applications (ICAITA-2014) November 7~8, Dubai, UAE, Conference
Proceedings, Vol. 4, Num. 11, P. 13-19, November, 2014

27

