## 4 Simulation and Experimental Verification
### Experimental Verification  
In order to further verify the accuracy of the theoretical calculation results, this paper designs a synchronous reluctance motor control system. In the laboratory environment, the synchronous reluctance motor is controlled by vector control and the control effects of the EI-BELBIC, BELBIC and PI are compared. Verify the superiority of the EI-BELBIC controller proposed in this paper.  
The control circuit in the system uses DSP28335 as the main control chip. The speed of the SynRM is sampled by the photoelectric encoder on the motor shaft and fed back to the main control chip. The parameters of the experimental motor are shown in Table 3.  
Figure 21: Comparison diagram of magnetic saturation parameter under different working conditions.  
Figure 20: Comparison diagram of current curves under different working conditions: (**a**) Current of d-axis; (**b**) Current of q-axis.  
As shown in Figure 22, the experimental waveforms of the SynRM range from 0 to 1350 rpm under different controllers. The experimental diagram includes speed waveform, current waveform, and torque waveform. At this time, the motor runs at a load of 2 Nm, a reference speed of 1350 rpm, and a starting current within the allowable range of the motor. The three-phase current is 2 A during stable operation. Figure 22a is the SynRM start waveform diagram under the EI-BELBIC. Compared with the existing BELBIC (Figure 22b) and PI controller (Figure 22c), the SynRM based on the improved brain emotion controller has smaller current fluctuation, better speed tracking, smaller oscillation amplitude, faster response speed, and smaller overshoot.  
Figure 22: The startup waveforms of the SynRM under different controllers: (**a**) EI-BELBIC controller; (**b**) BELBIC controller; (**c**) PI controller.  
Figure 23 shows the waveform when the SynRM speed changes. The SynRM is operated under non-rated parameters, and the SynRM driver is tested at different speeds at constant torque. Figure 23 shows the SynRM's test of speed change under load torque of 2 Nm. As shown in Figure 21a, when the speed changes, EI-BELBIC control effect is better, faster speed tracking, torque ripple is small, no overshoot, no oscillation. Compared with BELBIC (Figure 23b) and PI controller (Figure 23c), the current waveform is more stable and the fluctuation is smaller. The torque ripple is smaller and more stable.  
The disturbance of the motor by the change of load torque is shown in Figure 24. Load torque of the SynRM is changed from 0.5 Nm to 10 Nm. Before the load is applied, the  
Figure 23: SynRM waveform when speed changes: (**a**) EI-BELBIC controller; (**b**) BELBIC controller; (**c**) PI controller.  
speed is set to 675 rpm. When the load is suddenly applied, the speed change under the control of EI-BELBIC in Figure 24a is very small, and there is no instantaneous oscillation after the three-phase current reaches a new steady-state value. However, in Figure 24b, the torque under the control of the BELBIC fluctuates and the current waveform fluctuates. In Figure 24c, the torque ripple under the PI controller is relatively large and the current waveform clutter is greater. In contrast, it can be seen that the EI-BELBIC can change the stator current faster when the SynRM load changes, such that the stator current reaches a new steady-state value and runs more smoothly.  
Figure 24: SynRM surge load waveform: (**a**) EI-BELBIC controller; (**b**) BELBIC controller; (**c**) PI controller.