IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO.
6, DECEMBER 2005
Modeling, Simulation, and Control of Switched
Reluctance Motor Drives
Iqbal Husain, Senior Member, IEEE, and Syed A. Hossain, Member, IEEE
Abstract—This paper presents the modeling, simulation, and
control aspects of four-quadrant switched reluctance motor
(SRM) drives. The design of SRM drive systems must be focused
on application-based appropriate control and engineering solu-
tions needed to overcome the practical issues. A complex model
is described for the physical motor simulation to incorporate the
important dynamics of the SRM. A simpler, but quite accurate,
model is presented for the SRM controller. Various practical limi-
tations have been incorporated in the simulation model to make it
closer to the experimental setup. The SRM control parameters are
chosen based on torque-per-ampere maximization requirement.
Experimental results for a 1.0-kW SRM obtained on a digital
platform are presented along with useful guidelines for prototype
implementation.
Index Terms—Four-quadrant controls, switched reluctance
machines.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE INHERENT simplicity, ruggedness, and low cost of
a switched reluctance motor (SRM) makes it a viable
candidate for various general-purpose adjustable-speed and
servo-type applications. The SRM drives have the additional
attractive features of fault tolerance and the absence of magnets.
However, due to the doubly salient construction and the discrete
commutation from one phase to another, high-performance
torque control of this type of motor is a critical issue for
servo-type applications. A sophisticated control technique can
improve the operating performance for the entire motor drive
system.
The development of a servo-category drive system demands
a good computer-simulation model to reduce the expensive and
time-consuming experimental stage. The block diagram of an
SRM drive system is given in Fig. 1. The controller has two
parts: outer loop controller and inner loop controller. The outer
loop generates the reference torque or reference speed from
the position or speed error. The SRM drive system is in the
inner loop. Dynamic modeling and simulation play critical roles
in the inner loop controller design, drive system analysis, and
future development. The importance of appropriate modeling
Manuscript received September 24, 2003; revised May 6, 2005. Abstract
published on the Internet September 26, 2005. This work was supported in part
by a research award from Delphi.
I. Husain is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineer-
ing, University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-3904 USA (e-mail: ihusain@
uakron.edu).
S. A. Hossain was with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-3904 USA. He is now with
Globe Motors, Dayton, OH 45404-1249 USA.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2005.858710
0278-0046/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE
1625
is significant during both the computer-simulation and the real-
time implementation stages of the drive system.
The performance of an SRM drive system is enhanced
through optimization of a desired criterion, which set the appro-
priate control parameters of turn-on angle, turn-off angle, and
reference current [1]. The maximization of torque per ampere
by an SRM is considered in this paper. This optimization may
yield the use of a smaller motor for a given application or
a faster response time for a given motor. Electromechanical
actuators and traction-type loads require motor operation in
the position-controlled mode with fast response characteristics.
A four-quadrant drive is essential for such servo-type applica-
tions. In any operating quadrant, maximum torque per ampere is
the desirable quantity, either for fast forward or reverse motion
or for fast motion-direction reversal.
This paper demonstrates the development of an SRM drive
considering all the practical implementation issues. The issues
arising at the hardware and software development stages have
been addressed.
II. SRM M ODEL
The motor modeling lends itself to two distinctive ap-
proaches when considering the objective of modeling. A precise
model is presented for the physical motor simulation to incor-
porate the important dynamics of the SRM. A simple, but quite
accurate, model is presented for the SRM controller.
A. Physical Motor Model
In the computer-simulation stage, an accurate model of the
physical motor is necessary to depict the real scenario, where
the computation time is not at all critical. In the case of SRM,
the machine is always operated in the magnetically saturated
mode to maximize the energy transfer. The magnetic nonlin-
earities of an SRM can be taken into account by appropriate
modeling of the nonlinear flux–current–angle (λ−i−θ) charac-
teristics of the machine. The output electromagnetic torque of
the machine is described by the nonlinear torque–current–angle
(T −i−θ) data. The machine model may then be described by
λ = λ(i, θ) (1)
T = T (i, θ). (2)
A first approach consists of look-up tables, with the predicted
flux linked λ(i, θ) and the static torque T (i, θ) expressed as
functions of current level i and rotor position θ. The look-up
1626
Fig. 1. SRM drive system.
table is typically populated using data from static tests or results
from finite-element analysis (FEA).
An alternative approach consists of using a geometry-based
analytical model described in [2] and [3]. The model uses an
analytical solution for the flux linked and static torque produced
by one SRM phase. Separate analytical models for the flux
linked by a phase of the SRM when its stator and rotor poles do
and do not overlap are combined to provide a complete model
of a given motor phase. When the poles overlap, saturation
must be included, especially in the pole tips, whereas a linear
representation can be used in the unaligned position. The flux
linked by the SRM phase is determined from the sum of the
main flux and the fringing flux that is linked by the phase. The
analytical model could be used to populate the look-up tables
mentioned earlier, or to directly calculate the motor parameters.
The analytical model is preferably described in terms of
the machine geometry and material properties. The geometry-
based model allows extensive computer-simulation studies
during the drive design stage. The general form of a geometry-
based analytical expression for flux linkage used is
λ(i, θ) = Am (θ, ξ) + Af (θ, ξ)

of a machine. The controller model requires being fairly simple
− Bm (θ, ξ) Cm (ξ) + Dm (i, ξ) + Em (i2 , ξ)

SRM flux model [5] expressed as a function of phase current
− Bf (θ, ξ) Cf (ξ) + Df (i, ξ) + Ef (i2 , ξ) (3)
where A, B, C, D, and E are ξ- and θ-dependent constants. ξ
stands for geometry and magnetic properties and θ stands for
rotor position. Subscripts m and f are for main and fringing
components of the flux linkage.
The physical motor is simulated using either flux λ or current
i as the state variables. Rotor position and speed (ω) constitute
the state variables for the mechanical subsystem. The state-
space format that describes the SRM dynamics is
 −1 
∂λj ∂λj
λ̇j = vj − ij rj or i̇j = −ij rj − ω + vj
∂ij ∂θ
(for each jth phase)
θ̇ = ω
 
Nph
B 1
ω̇ = − ω +  Tj − TL 
J J j=1
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2005
vj is the applied phase voltage, rj is the phase resistance, B
is the viscous damping constant, TL is the load torque, and Tj
is the torque of each phase. The output variable i is obtained
from the machine (λ−i−θ) characteristics when flux is used
as the electrical state variable. If currents are used as the elec-
trical state variables, then (∂λj )/(∂θ) and (∂λj )/(∂ij ) need
to be calculated from the (λ−i−θ) characteristics. The elec-
tromagnetic torque is derived from the flux-linkage expression
of (3) using
 i 

∂ 
Tj (θ, i) = λ(i, θ)di .
∂θ
0
The magnetic and mechanical loss models must also be
incorporated in the physical motor, since the static (λ−i−θ)
characteristics does not include the losses.
B. Controller SRM Model
The analytical-model equations are too complex to be imple-
mented directly in the controller code for the real-time control
so that the computation cycle time is minimized. The following
and rotor position has been used in the implementation
λ = λu + (λa − λu ) · f (θ)


=Lu i + (ai + b − b2 − ci + di2 ) · f (θ) (7)
where a, b, c, and d are the machine-geometry- and iron-
magnetic-property-dependent terms, which are given in
Appendix I. The use of two different models for the controller
and physical motor in the computer-simulation stage represents
the real scenario.
 Equation (7) has been validated by comparing the model-
predicted result with the FEA result. The static plots of flux-
linkage (λ) and torque (T ) characteristics of an SRM obtained
(4) from the two models described above and the FEA method were
compared with each other to ensure that the prediction from the
(5) proposed models are satisfactory. The characteristic data from
the FEA method and static experiments are typically very close.
(6) Fig. 2 shows the λ−i−θ and T −i−θ characteristic plots for a
four-phase 8/6 SRM.
HUSAIN AND HOSSAIN: MODELING, SIMULATION, AND CONTROL OF SRM DRIVES
Fig. 2. Comparison of torque and flux characteristics between analytical model, controller model, and FEA.
III. SRM C ONTROLLER D ESIGN
The SRM drive controller parameters must be selected to
optimize the design objective. The choice of control parameters
to maximize the torque per ampere (T /A) is described in
this section. For a high-performance drive, the SRM drive
inner loop controller functions to deliver the reference torque
commanded by the outer control loop. At high speeds, the
available torque of SRM decreases due to back-electromotive
force (EMF) voltage and input dc voltage saturation. The max-
imization of T /A is achieved by a field-weakening technique,
which requires the advancement of turn-on and turn-off angles.
At low speeds, the current limit restricts the available torque
and a fixed set of turn-on and turn-off angles is sufficient for
successful magnetization and demagnetization. Depending on
the operating speed, the optimization problem can be divided
into two parts under constraints of current or voltage limits. The
transition from one constraint to the other is based on the motor
base speed.
A. Maximization With Current Constraint
At low speeds, the current constraint is active and the control-
output parameters are turn-on angle θon , turn-off angle θoff , and
reference current Iref . Therefore, the optimization problem can
be defined as
1627
An analytical solution of the necessary conditions is dif-
ficult due to the highly nonlinear characteristics of the SR
machine. Numerical or graphical optimization techniques can
be employed to accommodate models containing significant
nonlinearities [5]. Therefore, the reference current is generated
from the torque requirement using

h h2 − 4gT
f
(θ)
i=− + (8)
2g 2g
where g and h are machine-geometry-dependent terms ex-
plained in [4], and f
(θ) is a position-dependent term. Equation
(8) has been validated by comparing the model-predicted result
with the FEA result in Fig. 2. Defining the reference current
in terms of the reference torque, a univariate-search technique
has been used to determine the turn-on and turn-off angles [1].
The guiding logic behind univariate search is to change one
variable at a time so that the function is maximized in each of
the coordinate directions. The optimal-control parameters for
operating speed below base speed can be represented by the
following equations
Optimal turn-on angle = a1

 Optimal turn-off angle = a2
Tav qph Nr
max = max i(ψ, θ)dψ
θon ,θoff ,iref iref θon ,θoff ,iref 2πiref
where the constant a’s are determined through the optimization
program. The optimization results show little or no variation
where the performance index J(θon , θoff , Iref ) is Tav /Iref . The of the turn-on and turn-off angles with motor speed as long as
optimization problem can be solved by defining the following the speed is below the base speed. The torque is regulated by
necessary conditions: controlling the phase current according to (8).
dJ(θon , θoff , iref )
=0
dθon
B. Maximization With Voltage Constraint
dJ(θon , θoff , iref )
=0 The SRM operates in single-pulse mode above the base
dθoff
speed. Torque-per-ampere maximization under voltage con-
dJ(θon , θoff , iref ) straint yields a solution that is referred to as optimal field weak-
= 0.
diref ening. The control parameters are only the turn-on and turn-off
1628
Fig. 3. Energy versus speed with: (a) turn-off angle and (b) turn-on angle variations.
Fig. 4. Schematic representation of the controller.
angles, with the peak-current limit set to the rated value. The
problem can now be defined as
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2005
to negative and vice versa. The motor operates in all four
quadrants of its torque-speed characteristic. The flow diagram
of the controller is shown in Fig. 4. The controller switches the
motor between the motoring and braking regions according to
the control command. The appropriate and different turn-on and
turn-off angles are used depending on the operating quadrant.
The turn-on and turn-off angles determined in Section II are
used for first- and fourth-quadrant operation. These angles are
scheduled as a smooth function of speed, which maximizes
the average torque at all operating points. Operation in the
second and third quadrants is the mirror symmetry of that of the
fourth and first quadrants, as shown in Fig. 5. The relationships
between the firing angles are
2π

 θon,III = −
qph Nr
max Tav = max ∗ i(ψ, θ)dψ .
θon ,θoff θon ,θoff 2π
Using the univariate-search technique, the overall solution is
a function of speed ω given by
Optimal turn-on angle = a11 + a∗12 ω + a∗13 ω 2
Optimal turn-off angle = a21 + a∗22 ω + a∗23 ω 2
where the coefficient a’s are determined through the optimiza-
tion program. The influence of the turn-on angle and turn-off
angles on energy conversion per stroke in the motoring mode at
different speeds is shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b). The turn-on angle
is kept constant in Fig. 3(a), while the turn-off angle is kept con-
stant in Fig. 3(b). Observing the two figures, it is obvious that
the energy conversion is increasing by advancing the turn-on
and turn-off angles at high speed.
IV. F OUR -Q UADRANT C ONTROL S TRATEGIES
In many applications, the SRM operates in the torque-
controlled mode, with the command torque set by an outer loop
position controller. The SR drive controller in the inner loop
functions to maintain the desired command torque. Fast re-
sponse is critical for highly dynamic loads, where the command
torque and the motor speed may reverse quickly from positive
− θon,I
Nr
2π
θoff,III =− − θoff,I
Nr
θon,II = − θon,IV
θoff,II = − θoff,IV .
The four-quadrant drive may be required to operate either
in the position-controlled loop or in the speed-controlled loop.
In the controller, the operating quadrant is determined from
the sign of reference torque (or reference speed for speed-
controlled drive) and motor speed, as shown in Fig. 4.
V. S IMULATION OF SR D RIVE
The objective of the simulation model is to predict results
that would match the experimental results such that lengthy
experimental procedures can be eliminated during product de-
velopment. The disparity between results from the computer-
simulation stage and the hardware implementation can be
traced to two aspects, which are: 1) accuracy of the measured
variables and 2) the delay in signal processing. Some of this
disparity can be accounted for in the simulation by inserting
delays in the controller execution cycle according to the speed
of the processor used and the number of instructions of the
controller algorithm. The delays in acquiring measured data
HUSAIN AND HOSSAIN: MODELING, SIMULATION, AND CONTROL OF SRM DRIVES
Fig. 5. Operating points in different quadrants.
Fig. 6. Simulation block diagram of the SRM drive.
through the analog-to-digital (A/D) channels can also be ac-
counted for according to the A/D sampling and conversion
time required.
The SRM analytical model described in Section II, having
the significant nonlinear saturation characteristics, has been
used to represent the motor in the simulation setup. The
simulation block diagram of the SRM drive is shown in Fig. 6.
The simulation setup incorporated the practical nonidealities
such as controller delay time, position-sensor resolution, and
errors in current measurements. These measures provided
results that closely matched the experimental results.
A. Simulating the Execution-Time Delay
The input signals to the controller e(t) are approximately
constant within the execution-time interval, at a value equal
to those of the signals at the preceding sampling instant. A
1629
zeroth-order hold (ZOH) is introduced to incorporate this effect
into the simulation [5]. The ZOH implements a sample-and-
hold function operating at execution-time (Tex ) period rate.
Therefore, for a ZOH
ek (t) = e(kTex ), kTex ≤ t < (k + 1)Tex .
Fig. 7 shows a comparison of measured current and simu-
lated current when the motor was operated at 2000 r/min with
a load torque of 0.4 N·m. The simulation-current waveform
without any limitation and using 5 µs of simulation time step
and the same execution time step deviates significantly from the
measured current. However, the simulated current with consid-
eration of the practical limitations such as the A/D quantization
error and the delay due to execution loop frequency gives a
good estimation of the actual current.
1630
Fig. 7. Measured and simulated phase current at 2000 rpm and 0.4 N·m.
TABLE I
QUANTIZATION INTERVAL
B. Simulating the Quantization Effect
The output of the encoder used for rotor-position sensing is
quantized, which may lead to limit cycles in digital control sys-
tems. The quantization process involved in A/D conversion also
cause errors in the measurements [6]. The dc-link voltage and
phase currents are commonly digitized for the SRM controller.
Both the dc-link voltage and the phase current are unipolar.
Accordingly, the quantization errors of voltage and currents for
an n-bit A/D converter are given by
Vmax Imax
∆ν = ∆i = . which any particular program will be able to capture and utilize
2n − 1 2n − 1
The rotor position, dc-link voltage, and phase currents used
in the controller are to be quantized according to Table I in order
to incorporate the quantization effect in the simulation.
VI. R EAL -T IME I MPLEMENTATIONS
An experimental setup was established to test the optimal-
control algorithms of Section III and also to evaluate the
developed simulation tool. The prototype setup of the SR drive
is shown in Fig. 8. The test setup was designed for motion-
control applications, which can be operated in variable-speed-
controlled or position-controlled loop. The parameters of the
SRM are given in Appendix II.
A. Processor-Speed Metrics
The choice of the required processor depends on two im-
portant factors: the processor speed and the facility to allow
fast and efficient programming. The performance of the drive
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2005
system is directly related to controller execution time. The
execution time is given by
Execution time TE = Nins ∗ CPI ∗ Clock period
where Nins is the number of instructions executed in one
control cycle, and CPI is the average clock cycles required per
instruction.
The floating-point digital signal processor (DSP), pro-
grammed using C compiler, is advantageous in terms of ac-
curacy and ease of implementation compared to a fixed-point
DSP. The fixed-point processors require significant time for
scaling and shifting operations for complex computations. The
execution times required for a simple SRM drive controller
with fixed turn-on and turn-off angles and hysteresis current
control for a four-phase 8/6 SRM developed in TMS320C240
and TMS320C30 (clock speed = 40 MHz) were observed to
be about 40 and 35 µs, respectively. A more advanced SRM
controller implementation in TMS320C30 would typically take
between 80–100 µs.
B. Position-Sensor Resolution
The resolution of the position is effective only when every
position update information can be utilized in each controller
execution period. The time for each updated position informa-
tion when the motor is in steady state depends on the operating
speed of the machine. If the position feedback system sends NA
number of pulses for each mechanical revolution of the rotor,
then the time for one pulse is
60
Tp = s
N p · NA
where Np is the operating speed of the machine in revolutions
per minute. The condition for the position-sensor feedback
information to be utilized effectively is TE > TP . Alternatively,
a critical speed Ncr can be defined as the maximum speed at
each and every updated position pulse. The critical speed is
60
Critical speed, Ncr = rev/m.
T E · NA
C. Filtering Effects
In SRM drives with a discrete position sensor, the encoder
output is quantized, and the velocity is determined by differ-
entiating the quantized signal. The position is also obtained by
differentiation in some position-sensorless control algorithms.
The differentiation amplifies the high-frequency noise. More-
over, the A/D converters introduce measurement noise to the
signal. A digital recursive filter can be implemented to remove
noise from the speed signal as follows:
yk+1 = auk+1 + (1 − a)yk , 0<a<1 (9)
where u and y are the input and output of the filter, respectively.
The coefficient “a” determines the cutoff frequency of the
HUSAIN AND HOSSAIN: MODELING, SIMULATION, AND CONTROL OF SRM DRIVES 1631

Fig. 8. Hardware setup for the SRM drive system.

Fig. 9. Filtering effect on speed measurement.

filter. The coefficient “a” can be chosen through simulation Fig. 10. Measured four-quadrant closed-loop speed response.
by analyzing the effect of the inherent delay introduced by the
filter. Fig. 9 shows the motor speed derived from differentiation
of the encoder output and then smoothened by a digital filter.
The value of the coefficient a has been chosen to be 0.01.

VII. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS

In this section, experimental results are presented to show
the performance of the SRM drive system. Four A/D channels
having a sampling time of 4 µs are used to digitize the phase-
current information. One A/D channel having a sampling time
of 4 µs is also used to receive the bus-voltage information
for the controller. The phase voltages are reconstructed from
the bus voltage and gate signals. A 360-pulses-per-revolution
encoder is used to provide the rotor-position feedback infor-
mation. The current control is implemented through software
to avoid the necessity of any additional hardware. The current
hysteresis control inside the digital controller increases the
hysteresis band, which leads to higher torque ripple. It also
becomes difficult to maintain current within the band due
to processor computation cycle time. However, the inside-
hysteresis current control is a good choice for many cost-
effective actuator applications where the torque ripple is not an
important issue. A significantly smaller hysteresis band can be
designed when the hysteresis current regulator is built outside
the digital controller.
A. Speed-Controlled Loop
The SRM was first connected to an inertia load to verify
the variable-speed operation. The closed-loop response for a
toggling speed command from 1000 to −1000 rpm is shown
in Fig. 10. The motor was thus required to switch operation
Fig. 11. Measured phase voltage, current, and estimated flux at 500 rpm.
from forward motoring (first-quadrant operation) to reverse
motoring (third-quadrant operation) through regenerating mode
(fourth-quadrant operation), and also from reverse motoring to
forward motoring through regenerating mode (second-quadrant
operation). The current is regulated in the active phase by chop-
ping at the reference level commanded by the speed regulator.
Fig. 11 presents the measured phase voltage, phase current, and
estimated phase flux with inside-hysteresis current control.
In the speed-controlled mode, the current is regulated in the
active phase by chopping at the reference level commanded by
the speed regulator. Fig. 12(a) shows the measured phase cur-
rents during motor acceleration. Fig. 12(b) shows the measured
phase-A current along with the wrapped rotor position during
the deceleration mode. In the wrapped rotor position, 0◦ is the
aligned position and ±30◦ are the unaligned positions. The
figure also shows the correct positioning of the phase current
with respect to the rotor position in the regeneration mode. The
optimized turn-on and turn-off angles produce a small amount
1632 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2005

Fig. 12. Measured phase currents during: (a) acceleration and (b) deceleration.

Fig. 13. Hydraulic drive system.

of opposite polarity torque. The opposite polarity torque pro-

duced by the rising or decaying phase current may appear to be
Fig. 14. Measured and simulated closed-loop position-control response.
undesirable, since it will adversely affect the machine efficiency
and torque ripple. However, the small opposite polarity torque
helps to maximize the average torque in each phase cycle of
operation, which is required for fast actuation.

B. Position-Controlled Loop
In this test, the SRM was used to drive a linear actuator
coupled through a ballscrew arrangement. Any position change
of the motor is converted into force on the piston that has a
restoring spring, as shown in Fig. 13. The experimental results
of the closed-loop position-controlled system are shown in
Fig. 14. The rotor-position information is used to measure the
translational displacement of the piston.
Figs. 14 and 15 show the linear displacement and speed
responses, respectively, under load-torque disturbances. The
performance of the drive system is also compared with the
Fig. 15. Measured and simulated motor speed during closed-loop position-
simulation results to evaluate the prediction performance of control response.
the simulation tool. These figures represent four-quadrant
response of the SRM for the linear displacement control of the
actuator system. on response time. The response time (rise time) is considered
The optimized turn-on and turn-off angles obtained in as the time required for translational movement of 10%–90%
Section III are used in the inner loop of the SRM drive. Table II of the position command. The position-controlled drive system
shows the effect of the variations of turn-on and turn- off angles was operated in a test bench by varying the turn-on and turn-off
HUSAIN AND HOSSAIN: MODELING, SIMULATION, AND CONTROL OF SRM DRIVES 1633

TABLE II
RESPONSE-TIME COMPARISON

Fig. 17. Motor speed versus time with sudden command change.

VIII. C ONCLUSION
The importance of a good modeling and simulation tool
for digital implementation of an SRM motor drive system has
been emphasized in this paper. Modeling and simulation, incor-
porating the practical nonidealities as accurately as possible,
drastically reduces the time and cost associated with exten-
sive experimentation. Practical problems, such as measurement
Fig. 16. Comparison of normal and optimal-control strategies for position error, processor delay time, and quantization factors can be
control with sudden command change. easily incorporated in the simulation model. Once satisfied
with the performance obtained from simulation, one can start
a prototype system development on a test bench. The practical
angles one mechanical degree around the optimal angles. The
problems experienced on the test bench can be used to improve
test results prove that the optimal turn-on and turn-off angles
the simulation model. The iterative process in developing a very
give the fastest response.
useful simulation tool has been shown to be very effective in the
development of a servo-type four-quadrant switched reluctance
C. Response in Highly Dynamic Operation motor (SRM) drive system presented in this paper. The results
obtained from the final simulation model and the experiments
The linear-actuator load was used to evaluate the system are extremely close. Such a model could be reliably used for
response in a highly dynamic mode. Fig. 16 shows the lin- performance evaluation and future development.
ear position versus time for a ramp command. The position
command is reversed when a linear position of 0.2 mm is
reached in the forward direction. The target is to minimize the A PPENDIX I
subsequent overshoot and the reverse time. The figure shows The coefficients used in (7) and (8) are dependent on machine
the comparison of position overshoot (ξ) and reversal time geometry as follows:
(T ) for two different control strategies: one for optimal-control
strategy, as described in Section III-B, and the other is the
control strategy suggested by Kjaer et al. [7]. The latter control a = λm am − Lu b = λ m bm c = λ2m cm d = λ2m
strategy used a turn-off angle at lower speeds, then switched to
another turn-off angle at higher speeds. and
The a, b, and c reference points in Fig. 16 are for the optimal-
control response plot. In the figure, the position command  √ 
a d
changes to 0 at point a, which changes the motor operation from g= −
forward motoring to the forward braking region. The motor 2 2
operates in the forward braking region between points a and b.  
b c
The forward movement after the command change leads to h= − √
2 4 d
the overshoot of the system. From points b to c, the motor  
first operates in the reverse motoring mode and then in the 1
f (θ) = ∗ (1 − cos θ)
reverse braking mode. Fig. 17 shows the motor-speed dynamics 2
for optimal-control position response in Fig. 16. The optimally
f
(θ) = 0.5 ∗ Nr ∗ (sin θe ), θe < Nr (π − βr )
controlled four-quadrant operation of the SRM helps minimize
the overshoot and reversal time of the mechanical drive system. = 0.5 ∗ Nr ∗ tanh(π − θ), θe ≥ Nr (π − βr )
1634 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 52, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2005

where [4] I. Husain, A. Radun, and J. Nairus, “Unbalanced force calculation in

switched reluctance machines,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 330–
nser Np Rg 338, Jan. 2000.
λm = · µ0 · · lstk · stf . · βr [5] S. Hossain and I. Husain, “A geometry based simplified analytical model of
npar 2 g switched reluctance machines for real-time controller implementation,” in
Proc. IEEE Power Electronics Specialists Conf. (PESC), Cairns, Australia,
2g Jun. 2002, pp. 839–844.
am = 1 +
lp [6] T. Hartley, G. Beale, and S. Chicatelli, Digital Simulation of Dynamic
Systems: A Control Theory Approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
npar · Bsat Hall, 1994.
bm = · [lp + (µr + 1)g] [7] P. C. Kjaer, J. J. Gribble, and T. J. E. Miller, “High-grade control of
µNp switched reluctance machines,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Industry Applications,
2npar · Bsat San Diego, CA, Oct. 1996, pp. 92–100.
cm = · [lp − (µr − 1)g].
µNp
Here, Np is the number of turns per pole, nser is the number
of series paths, npar is the number of parallel paths, lstk is Iqbal Husain (S’89–M’89–SM’99) received the
the stack length, stf is the stacking factor, Rg is the radius to B.Sc. degree from the Bangladesh University of
rotor pole tips, g is the air-gap length, lp is the total length Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh, in
1987, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Texas
of rotor and stator poles, βr is the rotor-pole width, µ is the A&M University, College Station, in 1989 and 1993,
iron permeability, µr is the relative permeability, and Bsat is respectively, all in electrical engineering.
the saturation flux density. Previously, he was a Lecturer at Texas A&M Uni-
versity and a Consulting Engineer at Delco Chassis,
Dayton, OH. In 1996 and 1997, he was a Summer
Researcher at Wright Patterson AFB Laboratories.
A PPENDIX II He is currently a Professor at the Department of Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering, University of Akron, Akron, OH, engaged in
SRM Ratings and Parameters teaching and research. His research interests are in the areas of control and
Inverter dc bus voltage 30 V modeling of electrical drives, design of electric machines, and development of
Power 1000 W power conditioning circuits. He has worked extensively in the development of
switched reluctance motor drives including sensorless controllers.
Peak current 40 A Dr. Husain received the 1998 IEEE Industry Applications Society (IAS)
Number of stator poles 8; 22◦ pole arc Outstanding Young Member Award, the 2000 IEEE Third Millenium Medal,
Number of rotor poles 6; 22◦ pole arc and the 2004 College of Engineering Outstanding Researcher Award. He was
also the recipient of three IEEE IAS Committee Prize Paper Awards.
Stator winding resistance 0.179 Ω

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to Delphi for providing an experi-
mental hardware for this research.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. Hossain, I. Husain, H. Klode, B. Lequesne, and A. Omekanda, “Four
quadrant control of a switched reluctance motor for a highly dynamic
actuator load,” in Applied Power Electronics Conf. and Expo. (APEC),
Dallas, TX, Mar. 2002, pp. 41–47.
[2] A. Radun, “Analytically computing the flux linked by a switched reluctance
motor phase when the stator and rotor poles overlap,” IEEE Trans. Magn.,
vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1996–2003, Jul. 2000.
[3] ——, “Analytically calculation of switched reluctance motor’s unaligned
inductance,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 4473–4481, Nov. 1999.
Syed A. Hossain (S’01–M’02) received the B.Sc.
and M.Sc. degrees in electrical and electronic engi-
neering from Bangladesh University of Engineering
and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh, in 1994 and
1997, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Akron, Akron, OH, in 2002.
From 1994 to 1998, he was a Lecturer and then
an Assistant Professor at Bangladesh University
of Engineering and Technology. In Summer 2000
and 2001, he was at Delphi Research Laborato-
ries, Shelby Township, MI. He is currently a Senior
Project Engineer at Globe Motors, Dayton, OH, where he is engaged in the
design and development of controls for brushless motors. His technical interests
include the development of high-performance brushless motor servo drives for
automotive applications.