Maximising the saliency ratio of the synchronous
reluctance motor
D.A. Staton
T.J.E. Miller
S.E.Wood
Indexing terms: Saliency ratio, Synchronous reluctance motor
Abstract: Recent interest in the synchronous
reluctance motor has increased in the context of
possible applications in field oriented AC drives.
The absence of rotor slip losses, and the apparent
simplicity of the control, suggest the possibility of
performance and cost advantages over the induc-
tion motor. With field oriented control, and con-
tinuous shaft-position feedback, the synchronous
reluctance motor does not need a starting cage
and can be designed for maximum saliency ratio
( L J L , ratio). This ratio is by far the most import-
ant parameter for achieving high power factor,
torque/ampere, and constant-power speed range.
This paper analyses the various known forms of
the synchronous reluctance motor, to determine
the maximum achievable saliency ratio and iden-
tify the parameters on which it depends. The main
originality is the analysis of the effect of the
number of flux guides/barriers. It is shown that a
minimum number is required for the performance
to surpass that of the induction motor. The
analysis also reveals the optimum ratio of flux
guide/flux barrier thicknesses and the effects of the
tooth/slot geometry and stator saturation. Test
results are included from three motors ranging
from 50 W at 2000 rpm to 7.5 kW at 1500 rpm,
covering both axially laminated and transversely
laminated types.
1 Introduction
1 .I A revival of interest in the synchronous
reluctance motor
This paper explores the performance limits of the syn-
chronous reluctance motor when operated from a current
controlled PWM inverter (i.e. with field oriented
control), and focuses on the saliency ratio (Ld/Lq)as the
key design parameter. Line start synchronous reluctance
motors have been used for many years, but their design is
compromised by the need for a cage winding for starting
and stable operation. The vector controlled motor needs
no starting cage, and its electromagnetic design can be
optimised for maximum saliency ratio.
0IEE, 1993
Paper 9344B (Pl), received 1st September 1992
D.A. Staton and T.J.E. Miller are with the Department of Electronics
and Electrical Engineering, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 SLT,
United Kingdom
S.E. Wood is at 3 Bowling Green Court, Stainland, Halifax, West York-
shire HX4 9QQ, United Kingdom
IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, NO. 4, J U L Y 1993
The synchronous reluctance motor is seen as a pos-
sible replacement for vector controlled induction
motors, or at least as an extension to a range of induc-
tion motors, in which the controller could be simplified
by taking advantage of the absence of slip. While the
induction motor is gaining in popularity for adjustable
speed drives, it has inherent limitations (e.g. limited
torque at low speed and complex control algorithms). At
low speed, the losses in the synchronous reluctance
motor might be low enough to relieve the need for an
external fan. For certain applications (e.g. high tem-
perature applications) the absence of magnets may be an
advantage.
Recent work has established the feasibility of field
oriented control, with a certain flexibility in control char-
acteristics [19, 203 covering a wide speed range. Imple-
mentation in a PWM inverter has been shown to be
relatively straightforward.
The synchronous reluctance motor shares many of the
advantages claimed for switched reluctance motors [2],
but it uses a standard AC induction motor stator and a
standard PWM inverter circuit. Like the induction
motor, it is robust and brushless, and since it operates
with a rotating magnetic field it is inherently smooth and
quiet in operation. Its inertia is lower than that of the
equivalent induction motor.
1.2 Development history
Almost all of the important performance parameters of
the synchronous reluctance motor depend on the syn-
chronous inductance ratio or saliency ratio, 5 = L,/L,.
The main classes of rotor design aimed at maximising 5
are shown in Fig. 1. In all cases, the objective is to
achieve a high Ld by providing, essentially, flux guides for
d-axis flux; and a low L, by providing flux barriers to
q-axis flux. Since attention is restricted to inverter fed
machines with field oriented control and shaft position
feedback, it is assumed that a high saliency ratio can be
pursued without concern for the stability problems that
may arise in line start motors [SI.
Several of the key papers published in the 1960s and
1970s, on line start reluctance motors, provide reviews of
early work and discuss the geometry needed to achieve a
high saliency ratio [7, 9, 101. Some early workers recog-
nised the ultimate potential of the reluctance motor, but
This work was supported by the UK Science and
Engineering Research Council, the SPEED Con-
sortium, Brook Crompton Parkinson (Small
Industrial Motors Division), and Lucas Advanced
Engineering Research Centre.
249
could not achieve it in practice because they did not have
field oriented controllers [ l l , 121.
A brief discussion of alternative rotor geometries is
helpful. It is convenient to distinguish between salient
pole designs, Figs. la, b, single barrier designs, Fig. IC, d
and multiple barrier designs, Figs. le,$ The so-called seg-
Fig. 1 Main classes of synchronous reluctance rotor design
mental rotor design [lo] is of the multiple barrier type,
but with a small number of barriers (typically 2-3).
The rotor in Fig. l a is obtained by removal of material
from a conventional induction motor rotor, either by a
milling operation after casting the cage, or by punching
before casting the cage. Rotors of this type (synchronous
induction motors) have simple construction, but the
saliency ratio is too small to give competitive per-
formance.
Fig. l b shows the salient pole construction, like a con-
ventional salient pole synchronous motor with the wind-
ings removed. This geometry was used by Lee [3] in a
low-speed sealed rotor motor, but he used a hermetic can
around the rotor, increasing the airgap and decreasing
the d-axis inductance. More recently, Chiba and Fukao
[4] described a two-pole rotor, of similar type, using
amorphous iron laminations in a high speed application.
They reported an unsaturated inductance ratio of about
3, decreasing to about 2.5 under load. Hassan and
Osheiba [5] considered several variants of this geometry,
but reported no value of saliency ratio higher than 3.8.
The development of more specialised rotors seems to
have followed two distinct routes. As early as 1923,
Kostko [6] analysed a rotor of the form of Fig. le
embodying several features of both the main schools of
later development, including the use of multiple flux bar-
riers, segmental geometry, and a q-axis channel. Kostko
points out the essential limitation of the salient pole
design, namely, that if the interpolar cutout is widened to
decrease the q-axis inductance, the pole arc is thereby
narrowed, producing an unwanted reduction in L d . He
concludes, in effect, that the multiple barrier or seg-
mented arrangement is the natural way to make a
synchronous reluctance motor because it involves no sac-
rifice of pole arc in the d-axis. He calculates the unsatu-
rated saliency ratio for a rotor with four segments, and
250
quotes a calculated value of 25.6, concluding that the
maximum torque is 80% of that of an average induction
motor (1923 vintage!) of the same size. Kostko also rec-
ognised that the effect of slot leakage flux (which adds to
both Ld and Lq) could be decreased by having a large
number of thin barriers, and states that even with only
four segments the saliency ratio is several times as great
as with the salient pole design.
Subsequent workers, generally aware of Kostkos
work, developed the geometry along two main lines: the
segmental geometry [103 and the axially laminated
geometry. In line start motors, the segmental rotor
reached a high state of development in the work of Law-
renson [lo]. (See also Honsinger [13, 141.) The highest
value quoted for 5 is that of Fong [7], who reported a
value of 10.7 at no load and 5.3 under load. Lawrenson
[lo] and Honsinger [13, 141 reported saturated values
only slightly lower than Fongs, all of the reported
motors being in the range 1-10 hp. The power factors of
these motors were generally in the range 0.55-0.7, but it
is difficult to make a meaningful summary of the effi-
ciencies because of the variety of sizes and designs. All
these workers recognised the improvements in per-
formance with increasing size, but very little has been
published on larger motors.
The literature consistently shows that, in its line start
form, the axially laminated rotor produces a saliency
ratio no higher than that of the segmental type. For
example, Cruickshank er al. reported a value of 5.2 for a
2.25 hp four pole motor. Rao [16] reported a full load
value of 6.8, but his motor was larger than the others
discussed here. His 15 hp, four-pole line start motor
achieved a power factor of 0.8 and an efficiency of 86% at
full load.
When the starting cage is removed, higher values of 5
are encountered. For example, Fratta er al. [17] report a
saturated value of 9.2 in a 20 kW motor. Lip0 [18]
quotes performance figures for a six-pole motor which
imply a saliency ratio of about 7.
The cageless rotor in Fig. Id is distantly related to the
segmental rotor. It is derived from the so-called interior
magnet PM synchronous motor [lZ, 151 by removing the
I E E P R O C E E D I N G S - B , Vol. 140, N O . 4, JULY 1993
magnets. The highest value o f t reported for this design is
4.7 in a 6 kW motor [ l ] . A figure of 4 was also achieved
in a very small (50 W) motor [12].
What is surprising about all the reported saliency
ratios is how far they fall short of Kostko's prediction of
25, even for cageless designs. In the following Sections,
this theoretical figure is redeveloped from a slightly dif-
ferent (but equally simple) basis, and it will be shown by
finite element analysis why it cannot be achieved in prac-
tice with a fully loaded motor.
general, the performance is improved as t is increased. In
this paper, attention is focused on power factor: the effect
of 5 on the other parameters is discussed in References 19
and 20.
2.2 Power factor
The synchronous reluctance motor is intended to operate
with sinewave currents, and therefore the fundamental (or
'displacement') power factor cos 4 is used. It is related to
the saliency ratio 5 by the equation

2 Basictheory

2.I Torque per ampere

cos 4 = (5 - 1)
sin 2y
+
2(tan y 5' cot y)
in which y is the phase angle between the current and the
1
The electromagnetic torque is the classical reluctance d-axis (Fig. 2). The inverter rating is closely related to the
torque of the conventional synchronous machine, eqn. 1 , power factor and to the fundamental kVA requirement of
where I d and I, are components of the RMS phase the motor. Eqn. 2 assumes zero phase resistance (RPH).
current I,, resolved along the d- and q-axes of the While this simplification is valid for motors with integral
phasor diagram, Fig. 2 ; they correspond to the space horsepower and larger rating, it is not valid when the
resistance is comparable with X , , as is the case in smaller
q-axis motors. Neglecting R,,, the power factor has a
I,% I maximum value of
"PH 5-1
cos (#J =-
+ with tan y = ,,/(() (3)
IPH

Fig. 3 shows the variation in power factor with 5 for

y = 45", and with y = tan-',,/((). To achieve a power
factor greater than 0.8, 5 must exceed 9, and y will have a
value in excess of 71.6'. Even with ( = 9, a power factor
of only 0.625 is achievable when y = 45".

d-axis
Fig. 2 Synchronous reluctance motor phasor diagram

vector components of stator M M F along the d- and B 6.01 y=450

q-axes of the rotor. The torque is given by

T
rn
= rnplJI,(LJ- L,) = - p l g H sin 2y(Ld - L,) (1) L
B t
t; L.5
,

i3011
2
Here, rn is the number of phases, p is the number of pole
pairs, and Ld and L, are the direct and quadrature axis
synchronous inductances, respectively. Note that X d =
h f L d and X , = 2nfL,, where f is the frequency. The 1.5 t
convention adopted here, in which the d-axis is the high
inductance axis, is the same as that used in the literature 01 1
t I I I I I
on the line start reluctance motor'. For maximum torque 0 1 2
L d / L q x 1.0el
per ampere, the inductance difference (Ld - L,) should be
maximised within constraints set by manufacturability, Fig. 3 Variation in powerfactor with saliency ratio
and the current angle y made equal to 45". Saturation in
the d-axis causes the maximum torque per ampere to
occur at a value of y greater than 45", and this value 3 Theoretical limits t o t h e saliency ratio 5
increases with increasing phase current (Section 6). 3.1 Physical factors
The inductance difference (Ld - L,) takes no account For a four-pole motor with sinusoidally distributed wind-
of the voltage requirements of the motor. The saliency ings, if the rotor is removed, the rotating magnetic field
ratio ( 5 = L,,/L,) provides a more general guide to the has the form of Fig. 4a. By suitable choice of time origin,
overall performance, because the power factor, the speed the d-axis can be aligned with the reference axis of the
range at constant power, and several aspects of the flux, so that all the flux is d-axis flux, and the q-axis flux
dynamic response, are all directly related to 5 [19, 203. In is zero. The saliency implied by this flux pattern is infin-
ite. The ideal rotor is one which is infinitely permeable
In References 1 and 12, the opposite convention was used, with the
q-axis the high inductance axis, because the particular motors in those along the flux lines in Fig. 4a, and completely imperme-
papers were related to the interior magnet hybrid motor in which the able across them. This would require an hypothetical
magnet axis is the low inductance direct axis. anisotropic material whose permeability was not only
IEE PROCEEDINGS-E, Vol. 140, NO. 4, J U L Y 1993 251
directional, but which also followed a pattern corres-
ponding to the natural shape of the flux lines. The axially
laminated rotor approximates this arrangement. It has
q-axis / d-axis / 3.2 Simple estimate of maximum saliency ratio
/ ,
/ \\
Fig. 4 0 1 3 2 synchronous reluctance motor.flux plots
LIideal rotor (current sheet)
b ideal rotor (36 slots)
c single barrier rotor
d IO-layer rotor
e 24-layer rotor
J axially laminated rotor
laminations shaped to follow the d-axis flux, and flux
barriers which inhibit the q-axis flux.
The achievable saliency ratio is limited by two factors
that are immediately obvious:
(i) the q-axis permeance cannot be zero; and
(ii) the laminations are subject to saturation in the
d-axis.
A third limiting factor, less obvious, is that
(iii) if the laminations are too thick they can short
circuit the stator slot openings;
(as recognised by Kostko), effectively increasing the
stator slot leakage inductance which adds to both Ld and
L , . A fourth limiting factor is
(iv) end turn and other leakage inductances which add
a swamping term to both Ld and L, .
252
Two methods have been used to estimate the theoretical
limits to saliency: a simple calculation based on the ideal
flux paths, and a wide ranging study using finite element
analysis.
Assume that the laminations and flux barriers are every-
where very thin, and let t be the average ratio of flux
barrier thickness to the combined thickness of lamination
and flux barrier. Then 1/(1 - t ) is a measure of the flux
concentration that occurs in the laminations owing to the
loss of effective d-axis pole arc to the flux barriers. For a
peak airgap flux density of 0.8 T and a saturation density
of around 1.7 T, t must be limited to the order of 0.5.
Now the synchronous reactance xd is inversely pro-
portional to the airgap length g, and, by the methods of
Reference 2, it can be shown that X , is inversely pro-
portional to the sum of g and the combined thickness of
the flux barriers, which is of the order of t R , where R is
the rotor radius. Therefore the saliency ratio is given
approximately by
x (tR + 9) - t R
(=A=---
x, 9 9
+ , (4)
With t = 0.5 and R / g typically 120, this indicates a
maximum unsaturated saliency ratio of about 60, which
is even larger than Kostkos prediction of 25. This simple
theory explains the limitation due to the finite q-axis per-
meance (factor 1 above), but the limitations due to the
other two factors are more difficult to estimate, and
require finite element analysis in the context of the whole
design of the motor. Nevertheless, the unsaturated figure
of 60 represents a yardstick against which practical
designs can be evaluated.
3.3 Finite element analysis of maximum saliency ratio
Theoretical limits on L, and Ld can be defined using a
fictional motor model which approximates the proper-
ties of the ideal anisotropic material discussed in Section
3.1. The d-axis flux distribution is computed with a solid
rotor having a normal B/H characteristic. The q-axis flux
distribution is computed with the rotor removed alto-
gether. The ideals of infinite permability in the d-axis and
zero permeability in the q-axis are thus relaxed to what
might be achievable with real materials. A further ideal-
isation is to represent the stator winding as an infinitely
thin current sheet located on a smooth bore. This will
give a benchmark against which the effects of slotting can
be assessed. The q-axis and d-axis flux plots for the ideal
motor (in a D132 frame size) are shown in Fig. 4a, while
the saliency ratios at two levels of phase current are given
in the first row of Table 1. Saturation is minimal in this
ideal machine, even at the maximum current of 15 A, and
the saliency ratio of about 60 corresponds quite closely to
the simple estimate in Section 3.2.
Table 1 : D132 motor saliency ratios (y = 45)
Design Unsaturated Saturated
I,, 1 amp
= I,,= 15 amp
Ideal rotor + current sheet 61.70 57.56
Ideal rotor + 36 slot stator 30.76 20.53
Single barrier + 36 slots 1.72 4.66
3-layer + 36 slots 6.68 5.43
10-layer + 36 slots 10.09 8.16
24-layer + 36 slots 11.21 8.73
Axial lamination + 36 slots 11.63 8.69
Ideal rotor + 24 slot stator 26.53 17.50
24-laver + 24 slots 9.57 6.89
I E E PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N o . 4 , JULY 1993
 Table 2 : 0132 induction and synchronous reluctance motors with 6 kW rating
Parameter IM SI MU(1) MU(2) AX(1) AX(2)
Full load shaft power, kW 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Full load speed, rpm 1471 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
Full load torque, Nm 39.8 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2 38.2
kVA rating 10.03 11.71 10.18 8.00 10.17 7.94
Full load power factor 0.688 0.576 0.654 0.853 0.655 0.856
Full load efficiency 88.8 88.86 90.09 88.0 90.13 88.24
Apparent efficiency 61.09 51.18 58.92 75.06 59.04 75.53
Total loss, W 770 752 660 81 9 657 799
Stator M M F angle (J) 45 45 71 45 71
dlL LI 4.83 9.93 11.16 10.00 11.56
I M : induction motor
SI: single barrier motor
MU(1): multiple barrier motor (maximum torque per ampere)
MU(2) : multiple barrier motor (minimum kVA requirement)
AX(1): axially laminated motor (maximum torque per ampere)
AX(2) : axially laminated motor (minimum kVA requirement)

Fig. 4b shows q- and d-axis flux plots for the D132
stator with the ideal rotor, but with the slotting reinstat-
ed. As summarised in the second row of Table 1, slotting
reduces the unsaturated saliency ratio by a factor of 2
(with 1 A of phase current). It also causes the teeth and
the stator yoke to saturate at the maximum current
(15 A), and, for this current, the saliency ratio is only 20,
that is, only one-third of the ideal value with the
unslotted stator. It is evident that saturation in the stator
teeth and yoke have a significant effect.
In the next three Sections, the saliency ratio is investi-
gated for three types of rotor: the single barrier, Fig. Id,
the multiple barrier, Fig. le, and the axially laminated
rotor, Fig. lf
4 Single barrier r o t o r
The single barrier rotor is designed so that magnets can
be inserted in the barriers as a performance enhancing
option. This makes the topology identical to that of the
interior permanent magnet motor described by Jahns,
Kliman and Neumann [l5]. Several 50 W motors and
one D132 (nominally 7.5 kW) motor have been built and
tested. The 50 W motors used a 41 mm rotor diameter,
50 mm stack length, 0.15 mm airgap, and 16-slot stator.
The D132 motor used a 126 mm rotor diameter, 203 mm
stack length, 0.5 mm airgap, and 36-slot stator.
4.1 50 Wmoror
Only a brief summary is presented here, since a more
complete account has been published in Reference 12. At
full load, the highest saliency ratio that could be achieved
was only 4.0. This low value is due to the small number
of barriers and the presence of thin bridges which bypass
the flux barriers, effectively increasing L,. For the same
total losses, the motor achieved a slightly higher torque
than the induction motor in the same stator (with the
same airgap length). The torque capability was 28% less
than that of a switched reluctance motor having a similar
frame size and airgap length. (However, the switched
reluctance motor used in that test was considerably
noisier than the synchronous reluctance motor.)
4.2 0132 motor
The overall performance of the D132 single barrier motor
is compared with that of an induction motor having an
identical stator in Tables 2 and 3. The tables are for
6 kW and 11 kW ratings respectively. The induction
motor has an 11 kW rating when operated from a sinus-
oidal supply, but must be derated to 6 kW when supplied
from an inverter to provide variable speed (10: 1 speed
ratio) with constant torque. The single barrier prototype
motor has modest saliency ratio of only 4.7, so that, even
when y is chosen to minimise the kVA requirement, the
power factor is limited to approximately 0.65. This is far
less than that of the induction motor and results in an
unfavourably high kVA rating. Values of torque ripple
are not included in the table, although the measured
torque ripple of the single barrier motor is relatively large
(approximately 40%). This is due to the nonsinusoidal
variation in airgap permeance with rotor angle.
Fig. 4c shows d- and q-axis flux plots for the D132
single barrier motor. Finite element analysis was used to
maximise the saliency ratio of this design. To minimise
L,, the ribs are made radially thin such that they saturate
at low levels of current. To maximise L,, the radial depth

Table 3: D132 induction and synchronous reluctance motors with 11 kW rating

Parameter IM SI MU(1) MU(2) AX(1) AX(2)
Full load shaft power, kW 11 .O 11.0 11.0 11 .o 11.0 11 .o
Full load speed, rpm 1439 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500
Full load torque, Nm 73.0 70.03 70.03 70.03 70.03 70.03
kVA rating 14.38 22.68 19.24 14.44 19.32 14.36
Full load power factor 0.867 0.553 0.636 0.850 0.634 0.855
Full load efficiency 88.2 87.63 89.93 89.63 89.78 89.55
Apparent efficiency 76.47 48.46 57.20 76.19 56.92 76.57
Total loss, W 1473 1552 1232 1272 1253 1283
Stator M M F angle (y) 45 45 71 45 72
LdILo 3.97 7.33 10.86 7.18 11.19
I M : induction motor
SI : single barrier motor
MU(1): multiple barrier motor (maximum torque per ampere)
MU(2) : multiple barrier motor (minimum kVA requirement)
AX(1) : axially laminated motor (Maximum torque per ampere)
AX(2) : axially laminated motor (Minimum kVA requirement)

IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N O . 4, J U L Y 1993 253

of the pole pieces and the width of the web section are
made large enough to minimise rotor saturation.
Fig. 5a plots the variation in L, and L, with I , and I , ,
respectively, while Fig. 5b plots the variation in 5 with
I , = I , . Characteristics are shown for designs based on
ideal, single barrier, multiple barrier and axially lami-
nated rotors. The 5 characteristic is plotted for y = 45",
which gives maximum torque per ampere assuming linear
magnetics. The single barrier rotor shows a 10%-15%
reduction in L, compared to the ideal rotor, owing to
added saturation in the rotor pole piece and web sec-
tions. The unsaturated q-axis inductance is some 17.5
times that of the ideal rotor. This high value is partly due
to the rotor rib sections, which provide a path for q-axis
leakage flux. There is also a large amount of q-axis
leakage flux across the stator slot openings, which are
bridged by the rotor pole and web. At maximum current
the saturated q-axis inductance is only 3.8 times that of
the ideal rotor, because the rib sections are driven deeply
into saturation and their relative contribution to the
q-axis flux linkage is much smaller. Although L, is also
smaller, the saturated saliency ratio (4.66) is much larger
than in the unsaturated case (1.72). This is 'anomalous'
relative to all the other motors and is caused by the satu-
ration of the ribs. Nevertheless, the large value of L, in
the single barrier design still causes its saliency ratio to
be much smaller than that of the ideal rotor (Table 1).
All this shows that the D132 single barrier rotor falls
far short of full load performance that would compete
with that of the induction motor, so, if there is to be any
chance of a full load performance advantage, the multiple
barrier and axially laminated versions must be invest-
igated.
1.6-
5 M u l t i p l e barrier rotor
As stated in Section 3, to maximise d-axis flux linkage,
the flux guides should ideally have the same shape as the
flux paths shown in Fig. 4a, and, to minimise the q-axis
flux linkage, the flux barriers should be perpendicular to
the flux lines. These requirements lead to the multiple
barrier concept shown in Figs. 4d and e. The parameters
that have been studied are:
(i) the number of layers per pole (laminations
+ barriers) [ N , ]
(ii) the ratio of lamination thickness/barrier thickness
CRL,Bl
(iii) slot number and slot design.
5.1 Effects of varying N ,
Finite element analysis has been carried out in which N ,
has been varied between 3 and 26. R L , B was fixed at unity
throughout the analysis. Figs. 4d and 4e show q- and
d-axis flux plots for N , = 10 and N , = 24, respectively.
Designs based on both the standard 36-slot stator and an
airgap current sheet have been carried out to separate the
effects of stator slotting. The variation in saturated L,
and L, with N , is shown in Fig. 6.
Varying N , has little effect on L,. However, there is a
significant initial decrease in L, as N , is raised above 3,
levelling out to a constant value as N , increases above
10. This causes the saliency ratio to remain virtually con-
stant once N , becomes larger than 10. It attains a value
between 8 and 9 in the slotted design and between 13.5
and 14.5 in the current sheet design. Even though there
seems little benefit to the saliency ratio in increasing N ,
above 10, this may not be sufficient to eliminate torque
ripple. The flux guides of the IO-layer design are wide

a
N

- 1.2-
0 l',r n
X

I
E. 0 . 8 -
U
J

20.4-
-

i;-
6 0.4
2

*
0.4 0.8
I

1.2
I,, I q , amp x 1 Oel
16
" "
a

20
t
a 3.00
0 0.75 number of 2.2 5
0 layers x 1.0el
1.50 0
a

I
0.4
I
0.8
Id=Iq,
I
1.2
a m p x 1.0el
I

1.6
I
2.0
0 t
0
0.7 5 1.50 2.2 5
number of layers x 1.0el
3.00
b
b
Fig. 5 Variation in L , , L,, and LJL, with I , and I , ( D l 3 2frame)
Fig. 6 Variation in L, and L, with number of rotor layers ( D l 3 2
a L, and L,
b LdL, frame)
+ : ideal rotor a L, against N,
#: single barrier rotor 6 L, against N ,
x : 24-layer rotor x : airgap current sheet
0:axially laminated rotor 0:36-slot stator

254 IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N O .4, JULY 1993

enough to form a short circuit to q-axis flux in various
rotor positions. This can just be seen in the flux plot of
Fig. 4d. The variation in permeance with rotor angle is
therefore far from smooth, and may cause unacceptably
high torque ripple. It is only when N , attains a value of
around 24 that there is at least one barrier across every
slot opening for all rotor positions. The consequence of
such a large barrier number is an extremely intricate the
flimsy lamination, each flux guide being only 1.5 mm
wide.
5.2 Effects of varying R L i B
Finite element analysis has been used to study the effects
of varying RLiE.A value of N , = 24 was used throughout
the analysis. Fig. 7 plots the variation in L , , Ld, (Ld - L,)
-
1.2
1.0 -
0 -
0
0,
- of power factor, efficiency, and torque per unit volume.
40.8
x Q
5.4 Comparison with a standard induction motor
The above analysis suggests that to achieve an acceptable
saliency ratio with low torque ripple, N , should
approach 24, while a value of RLiEequal to unity should
be used. The calculated performance of a 24-layer, 36-slot
multiple barrier design is compared with that of the
single barrier design and a standard induction motor in
Tables 2 and 3, for 6 kW and 11 kW output ratings,
respectively. As discussed in Section 4.2, the induction
motor is derated from 11 kW to 6 kW when operated
from a variable-frequency supply (10 : 1 speed ratio) with
constant torque. All the motors have the same rotor
volume. Motor designs are presented for both maximum
torque per ampere (y = 45") and minimum kVA require-
ment (i.e. maximum apparent efficiency, y = 71").
When the multiple barrier motor is driven at
maximum torque per ampere, the resulting low power
factor gives rise to a large kVA requirement. However, if
7 is chosen to give maximum apparent efficiency, the
kVA requirement can be reduced significantly. The multi-
ple barrier motor appears to compare favourably with
the induction motor, at both 6 kW and 11 kW, in terms

- -
3
0,

6 Axially laminated design

9 0.6 -
U
-E -
Due to the difficulty of constructing the multiple barrier
0 rotor from a unitary lamination, recent efforts have been
5 0.4 - concentrated on the axially laminated structure. The
c
-
laminations have the topology shown in Fig. 45 This
topology was chosen because of the ease in which
0.2 - laminations can be formed into the required shape with
-
insulation sandwiched between laminations. Each pole
assembly is bolted to a square section shaft. To date, a
I I 1 I 50 W motor and a larger D63 (120 W) motor have been
0.L 0.8 12 1.6
R ( l / b ) x 1.0e0 built. In the near future it is intended to build a rotor to
fit the D132 frame described in Sections 3 and 4. Concen-
Fig. 7 Variation in L , , L,, (Ld ~ LJ, and L J L , with lamination to tration will be placed on the D63 and D132 designs in
barrier thickness ratio (RL,J
this paper, but a brief review of the saliency ratio of the
0 :L,
x : L, 50 W design is presented first.
+ : (L, ~ LJ
# : L,/L,
6.1 5 0 W design
The small 50 W rotor was primarily used to prove the
and 5 with RLiB.All parameters are normalised to their axially laminated construction. Eleven 0.5 mm thick
respective values achievable with RLiB= 1. As R,,E. is laminations per pole together with ten 0.5 mm pieces of
increased, the increase in electrical steel cross section interlamination insulation (slot liner material) were used
available for d-axis flux produces an increase in L,; but in the construction. The axially laminated construction
there is an associated reduction in barrier thickness, increases the full load saliency ratio from 4 (single barrier
which causes an increase in L,. The optimum R,,E value design) to 7. The axially laminated construction also
seems to be in the region of 1, but the optimum is not reduced the torque ripple compared to the single barrier
sharp. (For interest, and as a reference case, Appendix 9 design. However, the level of torque ripple in this motor
shows that, for a given value of steel permeability, the is still quite large (approximately 50%) because the low
optimum ratio is very nearly unity in a perfectly rec- stator slot and rotor lamination numbers give rise to
tangular laminated block.) nonsinusoidal airgap permeance functions.

5.3 Effect of varying the slot number and slot design
The effects of replacing the 36-slot stator with a 24-slot
stator in the D132 design have been analysed using finite
element analysis. Table 1 lists achievable saliency ratios
for the two stator designs. There is a sizeable reduction in
full load saliency ratio from 8.73 to 6.89 (- 21.1%) when
the 24-slot stator is used. The reduction in saliency ratio
is partly due to a small decrease in L,, but is mainly due
to a sizeable increase in L , . The increase in L, is mainly
due to the increased slot bridging effect as a result of the
reduced slot number. The choice of N , is closely related
to the size of the slot opening and the number of slots.
IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N O . 4 , J U L Y 1993
6.2 063-120 W design
An existing D63 (120 W) induction motor stator, and its
associated winding, were used in the design (56.4 mm
rotor diameter, 32 mm axial length, 0.3 mm airgap, and
24 slots), The rotor was constructed from 25 x 0.3 mm
thick layers of slot insulation material (flux barriers)
sandwiched between 26 x 0.3 mm thick grain oriented
laminations (flux guides). It was discovered that there is
little difference in designs based on oriented and non-
oriented materials, because stator saturation is predomi-
nant. It was not possible to construct a rotor having a
full 90" pole arc, owing to the requirement for clamping
255
the pole sections to the shaft. The prototype rotor has a
66" pole arc.
The theoretical limits on L, and L, have been calcu-
lated using the ideal motor model described in Section 3.
The variation in L,, L d , and 5 with I , and I , is shown in
Limiting Galues together with calculated and
taken into account, the maximum torque per ampere
occurs at values of y greater than 45". Fig. 10 plots the
variation in torque per ampere with y for I , , between 0.1
and 1.0 A (0.1 A increments). The value of y, at which the
peak torque per ampere occurs, is progressively displaced
r Y = 900

3.2 -

0
a 2.4 -
-
9
x
-
u1.6 -
A

D
0.8-
a-axis
~,~

X ~

U v

ob + 2'
1

4
Id. I,,
7

6
8

amp x 1.0e-1
8
f
10 i 1 I 1 1 1
a 2 4 6 8 10
I p h , arm x 1.0e-1
I Fig. 9 Variation in L J L , with I,, and y

-a -
9
1.6-
U
A -

20.8-

X X X X
I I I 1
2 4 6 8
I,. I,, a m p x 1 Oe-1
b
Fig. 8 Variation in L , , L , , and L$Lq with 1, and I , (D63frame)
a L,and L,
b LdlL,
+ : ideal rotor
0: axially laminated rotor (calculation)
x : axially laminated rotor (measurement)
measured prototype characterics are shown. The varia-
tion in L, with I , is accurately calculated. Over most of
the range of currents, the calculated value is only a few
percent less than that obtained for the ideal rotor,
showing that L, is ultimately limited by stator saturation.
The rotor fux density levels are small compared to those
in the stator. L,, however, is underestimated by approx-
imately 30%, probably owing to the neglect of end
winding inductance in the finite element calculation. End
effects are expected to be significant as the axial length is
only 32 mm compared to a 56.4 mm rotor diameter. The
calculated saliency ratio is less than 50% of that of the
ideal rotor because of the high value of L, .
The variation in 5 with I , , is shown in Fig. 86. This is
for the special case where I , = I , , which would give
maximum torque per ampere for a linear machine
(y = 45"). The saliency ratio is also a function of y. For a
fixed magnitude of I , , , as I , , is rotated towards the
q-axis (increasing y), there will be an associated reduction
in I d ( l d = I , , cos y) and reduced saturation. Fig. 9 plots
the variation in saliency ratio with both I,, and y (loo
increments of y), and it is clearly variable over a signifi-
cant range. The full load current is approximately 0.4 A.
For values of y between 50" and 80, the reduction in
saliency ratio is relatively little, and 5 is virtually constant
for y between 80" and 90".
From linear magnetic theory, the maximum torque per
ampere occurs at y = 45". However, when saturation is
256
1
10
c u r r e n t angle, deq. x 1.0el
Fig. 10 Variation in torquelampere with I,, and y (D63frame)
towards the q-axis as I , , is increased. This is because the
increase in (L, - L,) resulting from reduced saturation
more than offsets the reduction in the sin (2y) term in
eqn. 1 as y is increased above 45". The maximum torque
per ampere occurs at y = 45" on no load, at 50" on full
load ( I , , z 0.4 A), and up to 67" when I, approaches
1.O A, The characteristics become progressively closer as
I,, increases. This is due to increased d-axis saturation at
the higher currents, causing a reduction in (Ld - L,).
The calculated performance characteristics are com-
pared in Table 4 with those of an induction motor having
an identical stator. Characteristics are presented for
y = 45" and y = 62" (which gives minimum kVA
requirement), and separate columns show the calcu-
lations based on finite element and measured values of
the saliency ratio. The fixed loss of the motor was
assumed to be equal to that of the induction motor. This
simplification, while not being fully justifiable, has been
used as inadequate data and techniques are available for
calculating iron loss within the motor at present. Fig. 8
shows that the motor is not driven deeply into saturation
at full load, and this explains the relatively high saliency
ratio. The two-dimensional finite-element calculation is
9.09, and the measured value is 6.62; the difference is
largely due to end winding inductance. The effect of this
difference on the power factor is masked by the relatively
high resistance of the stator winding, but even so, both
IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, No. 4, J U L Y 1993
 Table 4 : D63 motor performance characteristics
~

Parameter SY(C1) SY(T1) SY(C2) SY(T2) IM

Full-load shaft power, W 120 120 120 120 120
Full load speed, rpm 1500 1500 1500 1500 1412
Full load torque, Nm 0.764 0.764 0.764 0.764 0.812
Full load current, amp 0.364 0.381 0.389 0.386 0.39
Supply voltage, volts 377.3 386.6 31 1.9 326.6 400
Full load current density 6.36 6.65 6.79 6.74 6.808
A/mm2
VA rating 237.8 254.8 21 0.1 21 8.4 270.2
Full load power factor 0.734 0.702 0.863 0.826 0.697
Full load efficiency 68.71 67.04 66.21 66.49 62.6
Apparent efficiency 50.43 47.06 57.14 54.92 37.94
Stator M M F angle 45 45 62 62
kNm/m3 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 10.11
Fixed loss [PFE + PFW], watt 8 8 8 8 8
Stator copper loss, watt 46.7 51 .O 53.2 52.5 54.0
Rotor copper loss, watt 8
Total loss, watt 54.7 59.0 61.2 60.5 70.0
Full load L,, H 2.318 2.266 2.43 2.589
Full load L,, H 0.268 0.391 0.268 0.391
Full load, L_,'L,, 8.65 5.80 9.09 6.62
~~

SY(C1) motor design using finite element predictions of L, and L, (maximum torque per
ampere)
SY(T1) motor design using measured values of L, and L, (Maximum torque per ampere)
SY(C2) motor design using finite-element predictions of L, and L, (minimum kVA
requirement)
SY(T2) motor design using measured values of L, and L, (minimum kVA requirement)
I M Induction motor calculated data

the efficiency and the power factor appear higher than
those of the induction motor.
Fig. 1l a shows static torque characteristics measured
over 30, and at six levels of I , , ranging from 0.2 to 0.45
amp (0.5 A increments), with y set at 45". Fig. I l b plots
the equivalent characteristic for y equal to 60". In both
cases, the torque characteristic is reasonably smooth
(peak-peak torque ripple less than 20%). At present, only
static measurements have been performed, due to the
lack of a suitable vector controller, this being under
1.2r I,h=O
development. The ripple pattern repeats itself after 30,
giving 12 peaks per revolution.
Fig. 12a compares the torque current characteristic as
calculated using finite element predictions of L, and L,
with the average of the static torque tests. Characteristics
for = 45" and y = 60" are shown. Fig. 12b shows the
equivalent characteristic in which measured values of L,
L5A

0.4
c I I I f I
1 2 3 4 5
I,,, amp x 1.0e-1
0
I 1 I I
0.75 1.50 2.25 3 oc 1.2,
rotor angle, mech deg x 1.Cel
a
c
1.2
e 0.8
X I

0
al
-
0

x
E 0.8

I I I I 1
0 1 2 3 4 5
I p h , amp x 1.0e-1
b
Fig. 12 063 axially laminated torque current characteristics
r o t o r angle, mech. deg. x l . @ e t a finite element magnetisation curves used in calculation
b h measured magnetisation curves used in calculation
x : calculation (y = 45')
Fig. 11 0 6 3 axially laminated static torque characteristics 0: static test average (7 = 45")
a y = 45' + . calculation ( y = 60")
b y=W # . static test average (y = 6 0 )

I E E PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N o . 4 , J U L Y 1993 257

and L , are used in the calculation of torque. Both sets of
calculated results give reasonable agreement with tests.
The main discrepancy is in the y = 60 curves, the calcu-
lated torque being between 0.06 and 0.1 Nm low over the
full range of current.
6.3 D 132 design
An axially laminated rotor has been designed to fit the
D132. It has 34 x 0.5 mm thick layers of insulation
material (flux barriers) sandwiched between 35 x 0.5 mm
thick LOSIL 500 laminations per pole. Fig. 4fshows a
typical flux plot. Finite element predictions of L,, L,,
and 5 are compared with the values for the ideal rotor,
single barrier rotor, and multiple barrier rotor in Fig. 5
and Table 1. There is virtually no difference between the
axially laminated design and the 24-layer multiple barrier
design. Thus there is little difference in predicted per-
formance characteristics for the two designs. Tables 2 and
3 include data relating to both designs. The arguments
presented in Section 5, highlighting the competitive per-
formance characteristic of the 24-layer design compared
to a comparable induction motor, are also valid for the
axially laminated design. There should also be a reduced
level of torque ripple because the increased barrier
number smooths out the variation in premeance with
rotor angle.
7 Discussion and conclusions
The comparison between the best motor (the axially
laminated version) and the induction motor hinges on the
capability of the induction motor and how it is inter-
preted. In the case of the D132 motors, if the induction
motor is classified as an 11 kW machine, even the axially
laminated motor only matches its performance : it does
not surpass it significantly in either power factor or efi-
ciency. However, the induction motor can be rated at
11 kW only at full speed when running from a sinewave
supply. When it is operated from an inverter over a 10 : 1
speed range, it is thermally limited to only 39.8 Nm over
the whole range, which is equivalent to only 6 kW at full
speed. This is a fairer basis for comparison, because the
motors described here are intended for inverter supplies.
At this torque level, the motor can be operated in any
one of a number of modes, the best being with 7 = 71. In
this condition, the motor shows a 21% lower kVA
requirement (based on calculated data) but with roughly
the same total loss at full speed, compared with the
induction motor still operating from a sinewave supply.
When end winding inductance is factored into this com-
parison, there is a 13% reduction in t,which appears to
give a modest 2.5% increase in kVA requirement.
One of the key questions in relation to the motor is
whether it can deliver more torque at low speed within
the same thermal rating. According to Table 2, if the
axially laminated motor is operated with 7 = 45, it can
produce 38.2 Nm with a total loss of 657 W, while the
induction motor produces 39.8 Nm with 770 W (i.e. 4.2%
more torque but 17%,more losses). The advantage of the
synchronous reluctance motor is therefore only of the
order of 10-15%; but, when combined with a reduction
in full load kVA requirement approaching 20%, the
overall performance would appear quite attractive.
The electromagnetic performance is not the only cri-
terion for comparison. The control strategy is arguably
simpler than that of the induction motor, while the rotor
losses are less. The inertia and rotor weight are also
slightly lower than those of the induction motor. (As-yet
258
unpublished results on the control characteristics show a
40% improvement in the time to reverse speed.)
It has been shown that the single barrier construction
is not capable of achieving a saliency ratio large enough
to make the motor competitive with the induction motor
in terms of power factor and kVA requirement [19, 201.
The single barrier motor also possesses a larger com-
ponent of torque ripple owing to the combination of
rotor saliency and stator slotting.
From analysis in which the rotor lamination number
( N L ) and the lamination to barrier thickness ratio (RLis)
have been varied in the multiple barrier design, it seems
that there is little benefit in using a value of N , greater
than 10. In practice, it is thought that N , should be at
least double this figure to avoid degradation and torque
ripple due to stator slotting. There also seems to be little
benefit in using a value of RLIBother than unity. By using
a value of N , = 24, a saliency ratio of around 9 can be
achieved, resulting in a power factor suficiently large to
make it competitive with the induction motor in terms of
kVA requirement. It is interesting to note that, when y is
chosen on the basis of minimum kVA requirement for a
given level of output torque, even though there is an
increase in the total phase ampere turn requirement,
there is also an increase in the saliency ratio over that
with y = 45. This is because I , , swings round towards
the q-axis, leading to an overall decrease in the magni-
tude of I , , and reduced rotor saturation.
The limitations on L , , L,, and saliency ratio have
been predicted by using an idealised model in which a
solid rotor and airgap are used in the d-axis, and a non-
magnetic rotor is used in the q-axis, corresponding to an
ideal anisotropic material. While multiple barriers
produce a significant improvement in saliency ratio over
the single barrier design, it is only 50% of that achievable
in the ideal rotor model. It is, however, not possible to
achieve the saliency ratio of the ideal rotor, as approx-
imately 50% of the rotor must be steel to maximise L,.
This will inevitably reduce the barrier length by some
500/0 compared to the nonmagnetic rotor, and lead to a
doubling of L, .
The multiple barrier single lamination rotor is con-
sidered impractical, and therefore attention has been con-
centrated on the axially laminated construction, which is
simpler to construct and has lower torque ripple. It has
been found that the use of grain oriented steel in the
rotor has little effect in improving the saliency ratio,
because L, is limited by stator saturation.
8 References
1 MILLER, T.J.E., STATON, D.A., and WOOD, S.E.: Optimisation
of the synchronous reluctance motor geometry. IEE Conference on
Electrical Machines and Drives, London, 1991, UK
2 MILLER, T.J.E.: Brushless permanent-magnet and reluctance
motor drives (Oxford University Press. 1989)
3 LEE, C.H.: Theory and design of a very-slow-speed reluctance
motor, AIEE Trans., 1960, pp. 1683- 1688
4 FUKAO, T., CHIBA, A., and MATSUI, M.: Test results on a super
high-speed amorphous-iron reluctance motor, IEEE Trans., 1989,
IA-25, ( l ) , pp. 119-125
5 HASSAN, S.A., OSHEIBA, A.M.F., and MOHAMADEIN, A.L.:
Performance of different types of reluctance motors: experimental
comparative study, Elect. Mach. Elerrromech., 1980, 5, pp. 225-236
6 KOSTKO, J.K. : Polyphase reaction synchronous motors, J . Am.
Inst. Elec. Eng., 1923,42, pp. 1162-1 168
7 FONG. W., and HTSUI, J.S.C.: New type of reluctance motor,
Pror. IEE, 1970, 117, (3), pp. 545-551
8 FINCH, J.W., and LAWRENSON, P.J.: Synchronous performance
of single-phase reluctance motors. Proc. IEE, 1978, 125, (12), pp.
1350-1 356
IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, N o . 4, JULY 1993
 9 CRUICKSHANK, A.J.O., ANDERSON, A.F., and MENZIES, in Fig. 13. With the dimensions shown, the reluctance
R.W.: Theory and performance of reluctance motors with axially along the q-axis is
laminated anisotropic rotors, Proc. IEE, 1971, 118, (7)
10 LAWRENSON, P.J., and GUPTA, S.K.: Developments in the per-
fomance and theory of segmental-rotor reluctance motors, Proc. Lt
IEE, 1967,114, (5), pp. 645-653 R, = -
11 XU, L., LIPO, T., and RAO, S.C.: Analysis of a new variable-speed Po D2
singly-salient reluctance motor utilizing only two transistor
switches, I E E E Trans. 1990,1A-26, (2), pp. 229-236 where t is the ratio of barrier thickness to the sum of
12 MILLER, T.J.E., HUTTON, A., COSSAR, C., and STATON, D.A.: barrier plus lamination thickness. The reluctance through
Design of a synchronous reluctance motor drive, IEEE Trans.,
1991, IA-27, (4), pp. 741-749
13 HONSINGER, V.B.: The inductances L, and L, of reluctance
machines, IEEE Trans., 1971, PAS-90, (l), pp. 298-304

-T
14 HONSINGER, V.B.: Steady-state performance of reluctance
machines, IEEE Trans., 1971, PAS-90,(l), pp. 305-317
15 JAHNS, T.M., KLIMAN, G.B., and NEUMANN, T.W.: Interior
magnet synchronous motors for adjustable-speed drives, IEEE

i
Trans., 1986, IA-22, pp. 738-747
16 RAO, S.C.: Dynamic performance of reluctance motors with mag-
netically anisotropic rotors, IEEE Trans., 1976, PAS%, (4), pp.
1369-1376
17 FRATTA, A., VAGATI, A., and VILLATA, F.: Control of a reluc-
tance synchronous motor for spindle applications. International /
d-axis
Power-Electronics Conference, Tokyo, 1990, pp. 708-71 5
18 XU, L., XU, X., LIPO, T.A., and NOVOTNY, D.W.: Vector barrier lamination
control of a synchronous reluctance motor including saturation and
iron loss. IEEE IAS Annual Meeting, Seattle, USA, 1990 Fig. 13 Optimum ratio of laminationlbarrier thickness
19 BETZ, R.E.: Theoretical aspects of the control of synchronous rel-
uctance machines. IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual
Meeting. Dearborn USA, 1991 the steel laminations is ignored. Similarly, the permeance
20 BETZ,R.E., and MILLER, T.J.E.: Aspects of the control of syn- along the d-axis is
chronous reluctance machines. European Power Electronics Con-
ference, EPE91, Florence Italy, 1991
P , = Pr PO Yl - t) (6)
9 Appendix: optimum thickness ratio of barriers
and flux guides where pr is the relative permeability of the steel, and the
permeance along the barriers is ignored. The maximum
(The following analysis was contributed by Dr. T.R. inductance ratio is achieved by maximising the ratio
Foord.) Consider a cube of laminated material as shown P, R , , which results in t = 0.5 and R,,, = l/t - 1 = 1.

IEE PROCEEDINGS-B, Vol. 140, NO. 4. J U L Y 1993 259