A High-Efficiency PM-Assisted Synchronous Reluctance Motor Drive

Tzu-shien Chuang
Department of electrical engineering Ming Chi University of Technology New Taipei City, Taiwan Email:thchuang@mail.mcut.edu.tw AbstractA three-phase 6/4-pole PM-assisted synchronous reluctance motor (PMA-SynRM) drive is presented in this paper. To make the motor drive suitable for energy-saving airconditioners or other industrial applications, a PMA-SynRM current vector drive based on unity-power factor control scheme was implemented to achieve high performance with high efficiency, high torque, low acoustic noise, and quick speed response. Experimental results show that when a three-phase, 400-W, 6/4-pole, PMA-SynRM is operated from 100 rpm to 3000 rpm, the drive systems efficiency can reach 86~88%; its error in steady-state speed can also be kept below 0.3 %, its maximal acoustic noise at 70 dB , its maximal shaft torque at 3 N-m , and its speed response quick. It is very suitable for a highperformance automation applications with energy-saving. I. INTRODUCTION In an era of rising energy prices, energy-saving technologies have become increasingly popular. With motors accounting for a significant portion of energy consumption by both the defense and civilian industries, they are often the most critical component of a systems design. Although certain appliances have opted for the more efficient permanent magnet synchronous motor (PMSM), its high manufacturing cost discourages mass production. On the other hand, a switched reluctance motor (SRM) exhibits simplicity, sturdiness, and high-temperature tolerance in addition to a high efficiency at low manufacturing cost [1]. Nonetheless, an SRM has higher acoustic noise and torque ripple relative to conventional AC machines [2-8]. Previous research has shown that radial attraction forces between stator and rotor are the main source of the acoustic noise in SRM drives [2-3]. Because these types of motors magnetic characteristics are highly non-linear and difficult to control, some works used asymmetric converter to excite each phase to counter these problems [4-7]. Hybrid excitations were adopted to reduce vibration and acoustic noise in [8], but a traditional C-dump inverter was employed. Switching controls on vibration and acoustic noise reductions were reported in [9], but asymmetric converter was still used. A 3phase full bridge inverter was used to increase the drive performance in [10-11], but acoustic noise reduction was not reported. On the other hand, bipolar switched reluctance machines and torque-sharing functions are introduced in [1213], but the studies did not explain their reported noise reduction and efficiency enhancement. Sensorless SRM drives were reported in [14-15], but mutual coupling flux for torque enhancement was not introduced. In [16], short flux path and mutual coupling flux effect was presented but a study of acoustic noise reduction was also not reported. Direct torque control for SRM was studied in [17], but only simulation results were reported. In [18-19], acoustic noise reduction was presented but an effectively high-performance control scheme was still not reported. So far, it seems impossible for a SRM to simultaneously meet the requirements for efficiency and quiet performance for many applications. Therefore, to achieve a wide constant-power and a high-power-factor operational range in SRM drive system, a large saliency ratio and a low-noise feature are necessary. Adding a suitable quantity of permanent magnets to a SRMs rotor core has been reported as one way of improving a synchronous motors performance [20-23]; this improved SRM is called a permanent magnet-assisted synchronous motor (PMA-SynRM) in this paper. Figure 1 illustrates the winding connection of a 6/4 pole SRM with three-phase excitation. The phase windings are wound in the reverse direction to the opposite side pole and Y-connected. The current going through each phase winding is also shown in Figure 1. The cross-section of a proposed 6/4 pole 3-phase PMA-SynRM and the flux vector generated by each phase-current are shown in Figure 2. Obviously, the two motors have the same stator as well as the concentrated winding configuration so that their stator manufacturing cost, the copper volume, and the copper losses can be effectively reduced. According to paper [18] and [19], the noise can be significantly reduced for a 6/4 SRM if the phase winding is connected by the Y-typed configuration. However, the SRMs efficiency below the base speed is still low. The conventional IPMs have drawbacks such as large d-axis current at high speed during flux-weakening region and the uncontrolled generator mode of operation [21]. To overcome these problems and to achieve a wide constant-power and a high-power-factor operation, a large saliency ratio is necessary. Adding the proper quantity of permanent magnets into the rotor core, as shown in Figure 3, is a feasible way to

978-1-4673-4355-8/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE

3180

improve operating performance of the SRM but the amount of permanent magnets used is small in comparison with the conventional IPM. In the proposed PMA-SynRM, there are four poles in the rotor, each inserted with three layers of RuFe-B rare earth permanent magnets to provide permanent magnet as well as reluctance torques, as shown in Figure 3. In addition, to reduce costs and to improve the motor drives performance, three-phase full-bridge inverter and the currentphase-control with unity-power-factor can be employed to improve the efficiency and electromagnetic torque of the drive system.

v d i od L d 0 i od R a v od ) Vs = = R a + (1 + + p 0 L i v i v R q oq c oq q oq

(1)

where ,
v od Es = = v oq 0 - Lq iod 0 + Ld 0 ioq m

(2)

iod = id - icd , ioq = iq - icq , i oa = i od + i oq

(3)

icd =

Lq ioq
Rc

, i = (m + Ld iod ) cq Rc

(4)

The motor torque is given by

Fig.1. The stator and the rotor structure of a Y-connected 6/4 pole SRM.

T=

3 Pn o i oa = Pn [m + ( Ld Lq ) iod ] ioq 2

(5)

where stands for the cross product operation. The copper losses Wc and the iron losses Wi are shown as
Lq ioq 2 (m + Ld iod ) 2 2 = Ra [ iod ] + [ioq + ] Wc = Ra I s R Rc c

(6)

2 2 Wi = Rc (icd + icq )=

2 (m + Ld iod ) 2 + ( Lq ioq ) 2
Rc

(7)

Fig.2. Y-connected stator and rotor structure of a three-phase 6/4 pole PMASynRM.

The electrical losses Wloss can be expressed as

Wloss = Wc + Wi

(8)

Fig. 3. the rotor structure of a three-phase 6/4 pole PMA-SynRM.

(a)

(b)

II. ELECTROMAGNETIC TORQUE MODEL OF A 3-PHASE 6/4 POLE PMA-SYNRM According to paper [24], the d- and q-axis equivalent circuits in the d-q coordinate which rotate synchronous with an electrical angular velocity , are shown in Figure 4a and Figure 4b, respectively. With reference to Fig. 4a and Fig. 4b, the voltage equations of PMA-SynRM are expressed as

Fig.4. Equivalent circuits of a PMA-SynRM (a) equivalent circuit of d-axis (b) equivalent circuit of q-axis.

where,

Vs

Armature voltage vector

2 ) Armature current vector ( I s = I s = (i 2 + iq ) d

Is

3181

Es

Back EMF vector induced by stator flux vector Number of pole pairs Total inter linkage magnetic flux vector Stator flux vector

Pn

function of torque T, current iod and speed from (6),(7), and (8). It is given by:

Wloss (T, iod , ) = Wc (T, iod , ) + Wi (T, iod , )

(12)

s
Ra
Rc

m Permanent magnet flux vector ( m = m )

Armature winding resistance Iron losses resistance d- and q-axis inductance

From (12), it can be seen that the electrical losses depend on the direct-axis current iod only for a given torque T and rotor speed . So, the electrical loss minimization condition at steady state for given torque T and speed condition is obtained as follow:
Wloss T , = 0 iod

(13)

Ld , Lq

id , iq d- and q-axis components of armature current icd , icq d- and q-axis components of iron losses current
If iron losses can be neglected, (5) becomes
T= 3 3 Pn s I s = Pn [m + ( Ld Lq ) id ] iq 2 2

* When the optimal direct-axis current iod is found, the electrical losses can be minimized by the control of the direct-axis current. Thus, the motor efficiency can reach maximum and it is given by:

Pout Pout 100% = 100% Pin Pout + Wm + Wloss

(14)

(9)

where Pout , Pin , and Wm are the output power, input power, and the mechanical loss, respectively. Unfortunately, in the case of Ld Lq , it is very difficult to solve (13) and it seems impossible to obtain the closed form solution of iod , other more effective control strategies must be studied. Assuming the equivalent resistor and iron losses in a 3phase 6/4 pole PMA-SynRM are negligible, the space vectors described by Figure 4 and equation (1) are shown in Figure 5. However, Ld and Lq from equation (1) will vary with different loading and operating speeds, especially at magnetic saturation. So, the active flux vector D [26-28] can be defined as follows:

If the amplitude of armature current vector I s and the current phase shown in Figure 5 are used, the torque from (9) can be expressed as
3 2 T = Pn[m I s cos + 0.5( Lq Ld ) I s sin 2 ] 2

(10)

The first term of (10) is magnet torque and the second term is called reluctance torque which is due to the salient pole stator structure. The optimum current phase m , at which the maximum motor torque is reached for a given armature current, can be derived by the derivative of T with respect to in (10)[25].
+ 2 + 8( L L ) 2 I 2 m m d q s m = sin 4( Lq Ld ) I s
1

D = m + [(Ld Lq ) i d + j 0]

(15)

Thus, by (15), the electromagnetic torque from (9) becomes: (11)

T = 3 3 Pn D i q = Pn D I s 2 2

(16)

From (11), it is known that m can be found if the parameters Ld , Lq and m are given exactly. However, it is very difficult to obtain the accurate parameters because of magnet saturation, inductance variation, unknown iron loss and stray loss. When iron losses are considered, from (5), it can be seen that i oq can be expressed as a function of torque T, current

On the other hand, given i , i , L d , Lq ,and the q d fundamental stator-flux space vector s , D can be synthesized according to reference [26] as follows:

D = s LqIs = (Vs rsIs ) / e LqIs

(17)

iod . Therefore, the electrical losses can be expressed as a

Substituting (17) into (16), the electromagnetic torque T can be derived as:

3182

T=

3 3 Pn ( s Lq I s ) I s = Pn (V m I m sin ) / e 2 2

(18)

where is the torque angle between s and Is, Vm and e are the amplitude and the angular frequency of the stator voltage vector Vs in an D-Q synchronous reference frame, respectively.

To maximize the efficiency given in (20), each power loss captured by (21)-(23) must be minimized. To satisfy this loss-minimization condition, suitable values of ID and Vm can be obtained by differentiating the sum of PCu, PFe, and Pstr with respect to ID and Vm, and then equating the resulting equation to zero as follows:

I D = 0 , I Q = I m , V = V ( ) m m

and = 2 (24)

By substitution (24) into (18), the following equations are obtained:

T =
Fig.5. Space vectors in rotor reference frame.

3Pn (Vm I m / e ) 2

and Tr = 0

for = 2

(25)

III. CURRENT VECTOR CONTROL OF A 3-PHASE 6/4-POLE PMASYNRM According to the energy conservation law, the input power Pi is given by:
Pi = 3 3 (vq iq + vd id ) = (VD I D + VQ I Q ) 2 2

where Tr denotes the reactive torque of the 6/4 pole PMASynRM. From equations (24) and (25), it can be seen that the electromagnetic torque angle is 2 , the field energy is fully used so that I s is in phase with Vs . Since the reactive power and reactive torque are minimized, the real power is fully outputted to the load. In this case, the electromagnetic torque is maximized and the motors efficiency is effectively improved because PCu , PFe ,and Pstr are minimized. Moreover, the electromagnetic acoustic noise can be effectively reduced because if the reactive torque is zero there exists much less radial force between the stator and the rotor. Therefore, the controlled drive system can be designed as shown in Figure 6.

(19)

Where VD and VQ are the D- and Q-axis voltages in an D-Q synchronous reference frame, respectively. Similarly, ID and IQ are the D- and Q-axis currents in an D-Q synchronous reference frame, respectively. Thus, the efficiency of the 3-phase 6/4 pole PMA-SynRM drive system can be defined as follows:
P o = 1 P ls = 1 ( P Cu + P Fe + P str ) P P P i i i

(20)

Where Po is the output power, Pls the total power loss, PCu the copper losses , PFe the iron losses , and Pstr the stray losses of the proposed motor drive system, respectively. According to the papers [29]-[31], they can be described as:
2 2 2 PCu = rs I m = rs ( I D + IQ )

(21)

2 2 2 PFe = c Fe e sm = c Fe e Vm

(22)

Fig 6. The control block diagram of a three-phase 6/4 pole PMA-SynRM drive system.

2 2 2 2 2 Pstr = c str e I s = cstr e (I D + IQ )

(23)

IV. THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS When a 400-W 6/4-pole PMA-SynRM was run at 2000 rpm for 5 minutes under steady state operation, the proposed PMA-SynRM drive based on PLL-CPA and the torque model from (24)-(25) were as given by Figure 7 and 8. From these

Where cFe is the iron loss coefficient, = 1.5~1.6, and cstr is the stray loss coefficient.

3183

figures, one can observe that the proposed PMA-SynRM drive yielded stable three-phase current waveforms and maximal noise level of 70 dB. Since the drive system was already operated in an environment with 65 dB of noise, a noise level of 70 dB is generally acceptable for many industrial applications. When the drive system ran from 350 to 2000 rpm, the measured U-phase back-EMF,U-phase current, speed reponse, and shaft torque were obtained as in Figure 9. From this figure, it can be observed that the drive system had a fast speed response. Finally, when a conventional PMSM and the proposed PMA-SynRM drive systems were operated from 100 up to 3000 rpm, their efficiencies were recorded as in Figure 10 and Figure 11. The figures compare the efficiencies of the PMSM and PMASynRM using the conventional vector control and the proposed current-phase control with unity-power factor, respectively. PMA-SynRM can be seen to exhibit better efficiency than PMSM. Moreover, the drive systems efficiency can reach 86~88% from 1000 to 3000 rpm; its error in steady-state speed can also be kept below 0.3 %, its maximal acoustic noise at 70 dB , its maximal shaft torque at 3 N-m , and its speed response quick. It is very suitable for a high-performance automation applications with energysaving.

Fig. 10.. Efficiency comparison of PMA-SynRM and PMSM

Fig. 11. Efficiency comparison of PMA-SynRM and PMSM using the UPC.

V. CONCLUSION A three-phase, 400-W, 6/4-pole, PMA-SynRM was operated from 100 rpm to 3000 rpm, the drive systems efficiency can reach 86~88%; its error in steady-state speed can also be kept below 0.3 %, its maximal acoustic noise at 72 dB , its maximal shaft torque at 3 N-m , and its speed response quick. It is very suitable for a high-performance automation applications with energy-saving. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research were supported by Hhungfu Electrical Co Ltd and the National Science Council of the Republic of China under grant NSC 101-2221-E-131-038-. REFERENCES
[1] Fig. 8. Acoustic spectrum of PMA-SynRM running at 2000 rpm using the proposed drive [2] R. Krishnan, Switched Reluctance Motors Drives, CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2001. D. E. Cameron, J. H. Lang, and S. D. Umans, The origin and reduction of acoustic noise in doubly-salient variable-reluctance motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 28, no.6 pp.1250-1255, Nov./Dec. 1992. R. S. Colby, F. M. Mottier, and T.J. .E. Miller, Vibration modes and acoustic noise in a four-phase switched reluctance motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.32, no.6, pp. 1357-1364, Nov./Dec. 1996. C.Y. Wu and C. Pollock, Analysis and reduction of vibration and acoustic noise in the switched reluctance drive, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.31,no.1, pp.91-98, Jan./Feb. 1995. C. Pollock and C.Y. Wu, Acoustic noise cancellation techniques for switched reluctance drives, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.33, no.1, pp.477-484,Mar./Apr. 1997. P. Pillay and W. Cai, An investigation into vibration in switched reluctance motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,vol.35, no.3, pp. 589-596, May/Jun. 1999.

Fig. 7. Phase back-EMF and phase current waveform of a PMA-SynRM running at 2000 rpm using the proposed drive

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6] Fig. 9.. U-phase back-EMF, U-phase current, speed response and shaft torque when motor was running from 350 to 2000 rpm using the proposed drive

3184

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

Ha, K.H., Kim, Y.K., Lee, G.H., and Hong, J.P., Vibration reduction of switched reluctance motor by experimental transfer function and response surface methodology, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.40, no.2, pp. 577-580, 2004. Ahn, J.W., Park, S.J., and Lee, D.H., Hybrid excitation of SRM for reduction of vibration and acoustic noise, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol.51, no.2, pp.374-380, Apr. 2004. J. Y. Chai, Y.W. Lin and C.M. Liaw, Comparative study of switching controls in vibration and acoustic noise reductions for switched reluctance motor, IEE proc.-Electr. Power Appl., vol.153, no.3, May 2006. K. Ha,c.Lee,j. Kim, R. K., Design and development of low-cost and high-efficiency variable-speed drive system with switched reluctance motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.43,no.3, pp.703-713, May/Jun. 2007. Z. Grbo, S. Vukosavic, Cost-optimized switched reluctance motor drive with bipolar currents, Electrical engineering, vol. 89, no.3, pp.183-191, Jan. 2007. C.S. Edrington, M. K., and B.Fahimi, Bipolar switched reluctance machines: A novel solution for automotive applications, IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol.54, no.3, pp.795-808, May 2005. X. D. Xue, K.W.E. Cheng, and S.L Ho.: Optimization and evaluation of torque-sharing functions for torque ripple minimization in switched reluctance motor drives, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.24, no.9, pp. 2076-2090,2009. B.Fahimi, A. E., and R. B. Sepe, Jr., Four-quadrant position sensorless control in SRM drives over the entire speed range, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.20, No. 1, pp.154 -163, Jan. 2005. T. S. Chuang, J.W. Liang, A stator flux oriented current vector control of a sensorless 6/4 SRM for reduction of acoustic noise and vibration, Energy conversion and management, vol.49, no.11, pp.3075-3079, 2008. Debiprasad Panda and V.Ramanarayanan, Mutual coupling and its effect on steady-state performance and position estimation of even and odd number phase switched reluctance motor drive, IEEE Trans. Mag. vol.43, no.8, pp. 3445-3456, Aug. 2007. A. D. Cheok, and Y. Fukuda, A New Torque and Flux Control Method for Switched Reluctance Motor Drives, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.17, no. 4, pp.543-577, Jul. 2002. J.-W. Ahn, S.-G. Oh, J.-W. Moon, and Y.-M. Hwang A three-phase switched reluctance motor with two-phase excitation, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.35, no.5, pp. 10671075, 1999.

[19] T. S. Chuang, Acoustic noise reduction of a 6/4 SRM drive based on third harmonic real power cancellation and mutual coupling flux enhancement, Energy conversion and management, vol.51, no.3, pp.546-556, 2010. [20] S. Morimoto, M. Sanada and Y. Takeda, Performance of PM assisted synchronous reluctance motor for high efficiency and wide constant power operation, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.37, no.5, pp.12341240, 2001. [21] P. Niazi, H. A.Toliyat, D.-H. Cheong and J.-C. Kim, A low-cost and efficient permanent magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor drive, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,vol.43, no.2, pp. 542550, 2007. [22] P.Guglielmi, M. Pastorelli, G. Pellegrino and A.Vagati, Position sensorless control of permanent-magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol.40,no.2, pp. 615 622,2004. [23] H.W. De Kock and M.J.Kamper, Dynamic control of the permanent magnet-assisted reluctance synchronous machine, IET. Electr. Power Appl., vol.1,no.2, pp.153-160,2007. [24] S. Vaez and M.A. Rahman, An on-line loss minimization controller for interior permanent magnet motor drives, IEEE Transaction on Energy coversion, vol.14, no. 4, pp.1435-1440, 1999. [25] P. Niazi, H. A.Toliyat, Online parameter estimation of permanentmagnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,vol.43,no.2, pp. 609615, 2007 [26] I. Boldea, M. C. Paicu, and G.-D.Andreescu, Active flux concept for motion sensorless unified AC drives, IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol.23,no.5, pp. 26122618, 2008. [27] M.C.Paicu, I.Boldea, G.-D.Andreescu, F. Blaabjerg, Very low speed performance of active flux based sensorless control: interior permanent magnet synchronous motor vector control versus direct torque and flux control, IET Electr. Power Appl.,vol.3, no.6, pp. 551561, 2009. [28] I. Boldea, M.C. Paicu, G.-D. Andreescu, F. Blaabjerg, Active Flux DTFC-SVM sensorless control of IPMSM, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol.24, no.2, pp. 314322, 2009. [29] C. Mademlis, I. K., and N. Margaris, Optimal efficiency control strategy for interior permanent magnet synchronous motor drives, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol.19, no.4, pp. 715723,2004. [30] V. B. Hosinger, Performance of polyphase permanent magnet machines, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-99, pp. 1510 1518,July/Aug. 1980. [31] S. A. Nasar, Handbook of Electric Machines. New York: McGrawHill, 1987.

3185