The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparative Study of Predictive and Resonant Controllers in Fault-Tolerant Five-Phase Induction Motor Drives
Abstract
One of the most attractive features of multiphase machines is the fault-tolerant capability due to the higher number of phases. Different postfault control strategies based on hysteresis, proportional integral (PI)-resonant, and predictive techniques have been recently proposed. They all proved their capabilities to withstand fault situations and to preserve the fundamental component of the air-gap field, while achieving minimum losses, maximum torque per ampere, and reducing torque vibrations. Nonetheless, due to their recent introduction, no thorough study has yet appeared comparing the performance of these controllers. In this paper, two open-phase fault-tolerant control schemes are experimentally compared in a real five-phase induction machine. The controllers being compared are based on PI-resonant and predictive control techniques, respectively. The experiments include pre- and postfault situations. Obtained results show that both control methods offer nearly the same performance. When compared, predictive control provides faster control response and superior performance at low-speed operation but is found to be less resilient to fault detection delays and to have higher current ripple. Regarding the controller implementation, it is shown that the transition from prefault to postfault operation involves modeling the nonlinear effects observed when an open-phase fault occurs for the predictive controller and proper retuning of the PI trackers for the PI-resonant controller, to ensure postfault operation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Recent Advances in the Design, Modeling, and Control of Multiphase Machines—Part II
Duran, M. J., & Barrero, F. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · doi:10.1109/tie.2015.2448211 · Cited by 658
Self-citationA Unified Analysis of the Fault Tolerance Capability in Six-Phase Induction Motor Drives
Munim, W. N. W. A., Duran, M. J., Che, H. S., Bermudez, M., Gonzalez-Prieto, I., & Rahim, N. A. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics · doi:10.1109/tpel.2016.2632118 · Cited by 292
Self-citationLuo, Y., & Liu, C. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · doi:10.1109/tvt.2018.2883665 · Cited by 84
Bhuiyan, E. A., Akhand, M. M. A., Das, S. K., Ali, M. F., Tasneem, Z., Islam, M. R., Saha, D. K., Badal, F. R., Ahamed, M. H., & Moyeen, S. I. (2020) · International Journal of Automation and Computing · doi:10.1007/s11633-020-1250-3 · Cited by 68
Trabelsi, M., Semail, E., & Nguyen, N. K. (2018) · IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics · doi:10.1109/jestpe.2017.2719634 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Guzman, H., Duran, M. J., Barrero, F., Zarri, L., Bogado, B., Gonzalez Prieto, I., & Arahal, M. R.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 606-617
- ISSN
- 0278-0046 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-9948
- OpenAlex
- W2049732871
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative Study of Predictive and Resonant Controllers in Fault-Tolerant Five-Phase Induction Motor Drives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tie.2015.2418732
- The paper
- Guzman, H., Duran, M. J., Barrero, F., Zarri, L., Bogado, B., Gonzalez Prieto, I., & Arahal, M. R. (2016). Comparative Study of Predictive and Resonant Controllers in Fault-Tolerant Five-Phase Induction Motor Drives. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics. https://doi.org/10.1109/tie.2015.2418732
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.