Open Phys.

2017; 15:984–991

Research Article Open Access

Aimeng Wang* and Jiayu Guo

A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal

design of IPM machines for electric vehicle
https://doi.org/10.1515/phys-2017-0122 mizes each single structure parameter, not only compli-
Received November 9, 2017; accepted November 22, 2017 cated and time consuming but it also produces a poor op-
timization result. With the development of optimal design
Abstract: A novel hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA) is pro-
for motor and computer techniques, some quick optimiza-
posed to optimize the rotor structure of an IPM machine
tion, which combines optimization algorithms with com-
which is used in EV application. The finite element (FE)
puter software, has successively appeared.
simulation results of the HGA design is compared with the
The Taguchi method [2–7] is a robust local optimiza-
genetic algorithm (GA) design and those before optimized.
tion algorithm. It can analyze the best combination of each
It is shown that the performance of the IPMSM is effec-
structure parameter using a minimum number of “experi-
tively improved by employing the GA and HGA, especially
ments” by implementing an orthogonal experiment array
by HGA. Moreover, higher flux-weakening capability and
to perform a multi-objective optimization for the motor.
less magnet usage are also obtained. Therefore, the valid-
But its defect in common with other local optimization al-
ity of HGA method in IPMSM optimization design is veri-
gorithms is that its optimization result depends on the se-
fied.
lection of the initial point, which means it only searches
Keywords: Genetic algorithm (GA); Taguchi method; hy- the adjacent range of the initial point and its global search-
brid genetic algorithm (HGA); IPMSM; optimal design ing capability is poor.
On the other hand, the genetic algorithm (GA) [8–10]
PACS: 88.85.Hj
is an intelligent stochastic search algorithm, which has ro-
bust global searching ability. This could fill the gap of the
Taguchi method in the optimal design of motors. But the
1 Introduction poor local search capability of GA makes it easily trapped
in a local extremum at the later evolution stages.
With the wide application of interior permanent mag-
net synchronous machines (IPMSM) in electric vehicles,
the performance of IPMSM, such as high efficiency, high
torque, low torque ripple, high flux-weakening capability
and less magnet mass, to meet the requirements of elec-
tric vehicles, is important [1, 2, 8]. Therefore, the optimal
design of IPMSM should be conducted to obtain better per-
formance.
The traditional method of structure optimization for
motors is optimizing each parameter one by one. How-
ever, the mutual restriction between structure parame-
ters and their complex coupling with electromagnetic per-
Figure 1: Machine structure and rotor parameters of the initial de-
formance, makes the method, which independently opti-
sign

This paper proposes a hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA),

*Corresponding Author: Aimeng Wang: North China Electric
Power University, School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
Baoding, China, E-mail: aimeng_068@163.com
Jiayu Guo: North China Electric Power University, School of
Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Baoding, China, E-mail:
kaka1599515@outlook.com
which is a combination of GA and the Taguchi method. The
HGA not only can overcome the defect of the poor global
searching capability for the Taguchi method, but can also
cover the poor local searching ability of GA. The HGA will
be used to optimize the rotor structure parameters of an

Open Access. © 2017 Aimeng Wang and Jiayu Guo, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License. Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
 A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal design of IPM machines for electric vehicle |
IPMSM for an electric vehicle application considering max-
imum torque and efficiency, minimum torque ripple and
iron loss as the optimization objective. The optimization
results of the HGA design are compared with the initial and
GA design results.
2 Model of the IPMSM
The initial design of the IPMSM is a 15-slot, 8-pole, 1.5-kW,
1000-r/min machine with V-shaped barriers in the rotor as
shown in Figure 1(a). The rotor inside radius Rri is fixed
at 22.5 mm and the other structure parameters of the rotor
shown in Figure 1(b) are optimized by the HGA. The IPMSM
design with V-shaped rotor barriers is widely used in elec-
tric vehicles because of its wide flux-weakening capabil-
ity [1].
Consider the average torque T avg , efficiency η, torque
ripple coefficient K mb and core loss P Fe as the optimization
objectives. For the first two, a larger value is better; and for
the last two, a smaller value is better.
The torque ripple coefficient K mb is the quantity which
measures the degree of torque ripple for a machine, and it
is defined as follows:
Tmax − Tmin
K mb = × 100%
2T avg
where T max and T min is the maximum and minimum in-
stantaneous torque under steady state, respectively.
The calculation formula of efficiency η is shown as:
Pout
η= × 100%
P out + P loss
T avg · ω
= × 100%
T avg · ω + P cu + P Fe
where ω is the rated angular speed and P cu is the copper
loss.
The implementation process for the HGA is: first, per-
form adequate global searching for the initial design of
the IPMSM using the GA optimal scheme; then, take ad-
vantage of the local searching capability of the Taguchi
method by taking the GA optimized design and optimizing
it further by the Taguchi method.
3 Global searching by GA
Finite element (FE) software is used to analyze the
performance of the designs as part of the optimization
process. The GA optometric of the software is applied to
985
conduct GA optimization for the IPMSM. The optimiza-
tion considered nine structural parameters of the rotor
shown in Figure 1, these are: outer radius of rotor barriers
Rb, minimum distance between side magnets Dm , mag-
netic bridge length Hrib, bottom width of rotor barriers
O1 , depth of rotor yokeO2 , width of magnetic bridge be-
tween two adjacent poles Rib, thickness of magnet Th,
width of magnet Wid and rotor outside radius Rro . The
range of the variables above is shown in Table 1.
3.1 The Establishment of the Objective
Function and its Standardization
In the GA optimization, the objective optimization is real-
ized using a defined cost function, and the minimum point
of the cost function corresponds to the optimum point. For
a multi-objective optimization, a weight coefficient is as-
signed to each objective according to its degree of impor-
tance, wi (the objective function with larger wi is more im-
portant). The sum of the products of each objective value
and their weighting degree wi to calculate the total cost
function. The constraint formula of the objective functions
is shown as (3), and total cost function formula shown
as (4).
g i (x)condition i G i (3)
(1)
where gi (x) is the i-th objective function expression;
conditioni is the corresponding conditional operator “<”,
“=” and “>”; and Gi is the given goal value of the i th ob-
jective function.
N
Cost =
∑︁
w i ε2i (4)
i=1
where N is the number of objective functions; ϵ i is the
(2)
residual target and its value reflects the degree that the
simulated response values of the objective function devi-
ate from the given goal value range. As shown in Figure 2,
if the response value is within the goal value range, then
ϵ i = 0, if not, ϵ i is the difference of the response value and
the goal value.
In this paper, four objectives of the machine are used
for optimization, that is the average torque T avg , torque
ripple coefficient K mb , iron loss P Fe and efficiency η. Due
to the significant difference between these four objective
function values, they are standardized to a goal value be-
tween 1 and 10.
For instance, the optimization goal value of the av-
erage torque T avg is 16 Nm and the value range is 12 Nm
~ 16 Nm, thus its objective function g 1 is defined as:
g1 = 1 + (T avg − 16) × 9/(−4) (5)
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
986 | Aimeng Wang and Jiayu Guo

Table 1: Value range of optimization variables

Value range Value range

Variable Variable
(mm) (mm)
Rb [47.25 47.85] Rib [4.8 6]
Dm [4 8] Th [3 5]
Hrib [2 4] Wid [7 10]
O1 [2 4] Rro [48.45 48.65]
O2 [8 12]

Figure 2: Diagram of the objective function residual for different

conditioni

It can be seen from formula (5) that the value of g 1 is 1

when the average torque T avg is 16 Nm, and g 1 is 10 when
the average torque T avg is 12 Nm.
Similarly, the optimization goal value of the torque
ripple coefficient K mb is 1.6% and value range is
1.6%~2.2%, and its objective function g 2 is defined in for-
mula (6); set the optimization goal value of the iron loss
P Fe to 28 W and value range is 28 W ~ 35 W, defined its ob- Figure 3: Torque and iron loss of the initial and GA designs
jective function g 3 as formula (7); set the optimization goal
value of efficiency η to 96% and value range is 90%~96%,
defined its objective function g 4 as formula (8). 3.2 Simulation results of GA design

g2 = 1 + (K mb − 1.6) × 9/0.6
g3 = 1 + (P Fe − 28) × 9/7
g4 = 1 + (η − 96) × 9/(−6)
In this optimal design, the conditioni of the formula is
“<”, thus the corresponding constraint formula of the four
objective functions is shown as:
g i (x) < G i i = 1, 2, 3, 4
Then, set the importance degree of each optimization
objective. The importance degree of all four objective func-
tions is set to 1 in this paper. Combining Figure 2(a) with
the total cost function formula (4) gives the total cost func-
tion of the average torque T avg , torque ripple coefficient
K mb , iron loss P Fe and efficiency η as follows:
4
2
∑︁
Cost = (g i − G i )
i=1
(6) After the optimization variables and objective function are
defined, the values of the five major parameters of GA op-
timization are set: population size popsize = 20, selection
(7) pressure Sp = 10, crossover probability Pc = 0.75, mutation
probability Pm = 0.01 and iteration termination generation
(8) N = 500, with the other parameters chosen as their default
values. The GA optimization results are shown in Table 2
and Figure 3. They indicate that the average torque T avg
and efficiency η of the GA design are increased by 6.7%
and 5.5%, respectively, compared with the initial design,
the torque ripple coefficient K mb and iron loss P Fe is respec-
(9)
tively reduced by 47.6% and 4.9%, as well. In addition, the
PM mass of the GA design is reduced from 337.5 g to 306.5
g and reduced 9.2% compared with the initial design.
(10)

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
 A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal design of IPM machines for electric vehicle | 987

Table 2: Results comparison of the initial and GA design

Initial design GA design Initial design GA design

Rb (mm) 47.6 47.715 Wid (mm) 7.5 8.85
Dm (mm) 6 5.51 Hrib (mm) 3 3.32
Rro (mm) 48.6 48.545 T avg (N.m) 13.8 14.7
O1 (mm) 3 3.01 K mb (%) 3.56 1.87
O2 (mm) 11 10.96 P Fe (W) 33.5 31.9
Rib (mm) 5.7 5 η (%) 91.0 96.0
Th (mm) 5 3.85 mPM (g) 337.5 306.5

4.2 Finite element simulation

4 Local searching by taguchi
method
The performance of the IPMSM is significantly improved
by GA optimization. However, local searching by the
Taguchi method can effectively overcome the defect of GA,
which is easily trapped in a local extremum during the
later evolution stages. The conducted Taguchi optimiza-
tion for GA scheme can further optimize the performance
of the machine.
In the applied Taguchi method for optimizing the
structure parameters of the machine, an orthogonal array
should be established according to the number of opti-
mization variables and their levels. In the orthogonal ar-
ray, the value taken by each parameter at each experiment
is imported into optometric of the FE software and ana-
lyzed to calculate the performance of the machine.
4.1 Established orthogonal experiment
array
Starting from the GA optimal design, take six structure pa-
rameters of the rotor: the minimum distance between side
magnets Dm , magnetic bridge length Hrib, depth of rotor
yoke O2 , width of magnetic bridge between two adjacent
poles Rib, thickness of magnet Th and width of magnet
Wid shown in Figure 1 and use them as optimization fac-
tors for the Taguchi optimization design, because these
six parameters have greater effect on the performance of
IPMSM. The values of the other parameters are maintained
at the same value as the GA optimal design. These 6 opti-
mization parameters are represented as A, B, C, D, E and
F, respectively. Every optimization factor can take 5 levels
and its values are shown in Table 3. The orthogonal array
L25 (56 ), which is established according to the number of
optimization variables and its levels, is shown in Table 4.
FE simulation is conducted according to the value of each
level taken by each optimization factor for each experi-
ment in Table 4 and used to obtain the result for the av-
erage torque T avg , torque ripple coefficient K mb , iron loss
P Fe and efficiency η. The calculated results for each exper-
iment are shown in Table 4.
4.3 Analysis of mean
After the results for each experiment of the orthogonal ar-
ray have been calculated, the analysis of mean and vari-
ance for experimental results should be conducted to an-
alyze the effects and the relative importance of each opti-
mization factor on the average torque T avg , torque ripple
coefficient K mb , iron loss P Fe and efficiency η, to obtain
the factor combination with the most optimized for each
performance.
The overall mean of each experiment result for each
performance is calculated in accordance with Equation
(11) and the results are shown in Table 4.
n
1 ∑︁
m= mi (11)
n
i=1
Then the mean of one performance for each optimiza-
tion factor under each level was calculated. For example,
the mean of average torque for factor A under level 1 is cal-
culated as:
1 (︀ )︀
m T avg (A1 ) = T avg1 + T avg2 + T avg3 + T avg4 + T avg5
5
(12)
where T avg1 ~T avg5 is the average torque of the 1st up to 5th
experiments for factor A under level 1.
Similarly, the mean of average torque T avg , torque
ripple coefficient K mb , iron loss P Fe and efficiency η for
the other 5 factors under each level can be calculated
respectively, and the calculation results are shown in

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
988 | Aimeng Wang and Jiayu Guo

Table 3: Optimal factors and its value levels

Factor Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

A:Dm (mm) 5.26 5.385 5.51 5.635 5.76
B:Hrib (mm) 3.22 3.27 3.32 3.37 3.42
C:O2 (mm) 10.66 10.81 10.96 11.11 11.26
D:Rib (mm) 4.9 4.95 5 5.05 5.1
E:Th (mm) 3.7 3.775 3.85 3.925 4
F :Wid (mm) 8.6 8.725 8.85 8.975 9.1

Table 4: Experiment orthogonal array and FE simulation result

Experiment Orthogonal array Tavg Kmb (%) PFe (W) η (%)

number A B C D E F (N·m)
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14.31 1.75 31.49 81.77
2 1 2 2 2 2 2 14.53 1.76 31.55 83.07
3 1 3 3 3 3 3 14.73 1.82 31.63 84.30
4 1 4 4 4 4 4 14.94 1.96 31.69 85.49
5 1 5 5 5 5 5 15.14 1.98 31.77 86.63
6 2 1 2 3 4 5 15.08 2.15 31.81 86.26
7 2 2 3 4 5 1 14.57 2.15 31.47 83.65
8 2 3 4 5 1 2 14.47 1.72 31.53 82.65
9 2 4 5 1 2 3 14.59 1.79 31.54 83.45
10 2 5 1 2 3 4 14.81 1.67 31.76 84.58
11 3 1 3 5 2 4 14.84 1.97 31.74 84.83
12 3 2 4 1 3 5 15.01 1.79 31.75 85.86
13 3 3 5 2 4 1 14.50 1.89 31.43 83.19
14 3 4 1 3 5 2 14.69 2.04 31.64 84.17
15 3 5 2 4 1 3 14.54 1.69 31.66 82.90
16 4 1 4 2 5 3 14.87 2.29 31.61 85.33
17 4 2 5 3 1 4 14.74 1.85 31.65 84.21
18 4 3 1 4 2 5 14.94 1.82 31.86 85.20
19 4 4 2 5 3 1 14.44 1.87 31.54 82.58
20 4 5 3 1 4 2 14.59 1.69 31.58 83.57
21 5 1 5 4 3 2 14.62 1.93 31.51 83.80
22 5 2 1 5 4 3 14.80 2.10 31.74 84.67
23 5 3 2 1 5 4 14.98 2.13 31.77 85.75
24 5 4 3 2 1 5 14.81 1.89 31.80 84.45
25 5 5 4 3 2 1 14.34 1.70 31.50 81.94
m 14.72 1.896 31.64 84.17

Table 5. It can be seen from Table 5, that the combina-
tion of the levels taken by each factor to make the av-
erage torque T avg largest, the torque ripple coefficient
K mb smallest, the iron loss P Fe smallest and the effi-
ciency η highest, respectively, is A(1)B(1)C(4)D(5)E(5)F(5),
A(1)B(5)C(1)D(1)E(1)F(2), A(2)B(1)C(5)D(1)E(1)F(1) and
A(1)B(1)C(4)D(5)E(5)F(5). Obviously, the level combina-
tion of each factor that makes each performance optimal,
respectively, is different. Thus the analysis of the variance
was conducted to analyze the relative importance of the
effects of each optimization variable on each performance
to get the optimal result.
4.4 Analysis of variance and determined
optimization scheme
By analyzing the variance of the experimental results, the
relative importance of the effects of each optimization vari-

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
 A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal design of IPM machines for electric vehicle | 989

Table 5: Performance for each factors at each levels

Factor Level Tavg (N·m) Kmb(%) PFe(W) η(%)

1 14.729 1.855 31.626 84.254
2 14.702 1.895 31.622 84.120
A 3 14.718 1.874 31.644 84.191
4 14.716 1.906 31.647 84.177
5 14.710 1.950 31.661 84.123
1 14.745 2.018 31.630 84.399
2 14.729 1.930 31.631 84.292
B 3 14.724 1.878 31.644 84.219
4 14.693 1.909 31.642 84.029
5 14.684 1.745 31.653 83.925
1 14.711 1.875 31.701 84.080
2 14.711 1.921 31.665 84.112
C 3 14.710 1.904 31.641 84.161
4 14.727 1.892 31.616 84.257
5 14.716 1.888 31.578 84.255
1 14.696 1.827 31.625 84.082
2 14.703 1.902 31.629 84.124
D 3 14.718 1.912 31.644 84.178
4 14.720 1.911 31.640 84.208
5 14.738 1.928 31.663 84.272
1 14.575 1.779 31.625 83.195
2 14.647 1.807 31.636 83.700
E 3 14.722 1.816 31.638 84.224
4 14.782 1.960 31.649 84.638
5 14.850 2.117 31.653 85.109
1 14.432 1.872 31.486 82.626
2 14.581 1.827 31.562 83.452
F 3 14.706 1.939 31.635 84.133
4 14.861 1.915 31.722 84.974
5 14.995 1.926 31.797 85.680

Table 6: Variance of performance for each factors at 5 levels

S T avg S K mb S P Fe Sη
Factor
Value(10−3 ) Ratio(%) Value(10−3 ) Ratio(%) Value(10−3 ) Ratio(%) Value(10−1 ) Ratio(%)
A 0.08 0.14 1.03 5.03 0.21 0.47 0.02 0.12
B 7.83 13.7 0.07 0.34 29.91 67.35 0.4 2.4
C 0.04 0.07 0.24 1.17 1.76 3.96 0.05 0.3
D 0.21 0.37 1.26 6.15 0.17 0.38 0.04 0.24
E 9.37 16.4 16.21 79.15 0.1 0.23 4.55 27.23
F 39.61 69.32 1.67 8.16 12.26 27.61 11.65 69.71
Total 57.14 100 20.48 100 44.41 100 16.71 100

Table 7: Value taken by each factors for final optimal scheme

Factor A:Dm B:Hrib C:O2 D:Rib E:Th F :Wid

Value (mm) 5.26 3.22 11.26 4.9 3.7 9.1

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
990 | Aimeng Wang and Jiayu Guo

able on each performance can be obtained. The calcula- Table 8: The results comparison
tion formula of variance is shown as:
Initial GA HGA
Q
1 ∑︁ (︀ )︀2 Rb (mm) 47.6 47.715 47.715
SA = m A(i) − m (13)
Q Dm (mm) 6 5.51 5.26
i=1
Rro (mm) 48.6 48.545 48.545
where SA is the variance of one performance under factor O1 (mm) 3 3.01 3.01
A; Q is the level number of each factor and Q = 5; mA (i) is O2 (mm) 11 10.96 11.26
the mean of one performance for factor A at level 1 in Ta- Rib (mm) 5.7 5 4.9
ble 5; m is the overall mean of one performance in Table 4. Th (mm) 5 3.85 3.7
Thus the variance of the average torque T avg , torque ripple Wid (mm) 7.5 8.85 9.1
coefficient K mb , iron loss P Fe and efficiency η under other Hrib (mm) 3 3.32 3.22
factors can also be calculated from equation (13). The cal- T avg (N.m) 13.8 14.7(↑ 6.7%) 14.9 (↑ 7.6%)
culation results are shown in Table ??. K mb (%) 3.56 1.87(↓ 47.6%) 1.85(↓ 48%)
It can be seen from Table 6 that the change of fac- P Fe (W) 33.5 31.9(↓ 4.9%) 31.6 (↓ 5.5%)
tor A, D and E has the largest effects on the torque rip- η (%) 91.0 96.0 (↑ 5.5%) 97.0 (↑ 6.57%)
ple coefficient K mb , the change of factor B and C has the mPM (g) 337.5 306.5(↓ 9.2%) 303.0(↓ 10.2%)
largest effects on iron loss P Fe , and the change of factor
F has largest effects on the average torque T avg and effi-
ciency η. Therefore, the levels selected for factors A, D and which is easily trapped in a local extremum at the later
E are to make the torque ripple coefficient K mb smallest, evolution stage.
the levels selected for factors B and C are to make the iron
loss P Fe smallest, and the level selected for factor F is to
make the average torque T avg and efficiency η largest. The
final optimal scheme for the factor level combination is
A(1)B(1)C(5)D(1)E(1)F(5) and the corresponding values are
shown in Table 7.

4.5 Results comparison

The FE model was built and the simulations were con-

ducted according to the value taken by each optimization
variable for the final optimal scheme shown in Table 7. Ta-
ble 8 listed the results comparisons of the initial, GA and
HGA designs, and Figure 4 shows the torque and iron loss
comparisons.
It can be observed that the average torque T avg and
efficiency η of the HGA design is increased by 7.6% and
6.57% respectively compared with the initial design, and
the torque ripple coefficient K mb and iron loss P Fe is re-
duced by 48% and 5.5% respectively as well. In addition,
the PM mass of theHGA design changed from 337.5 g to
303 g and is reduced by 10.2% compared with the ini-
tial design. Each performance of the HGA design has real-
ized further optimization compared to the GA design. The
degree of performance improvements of the HGA design
compared to the GA design is smaller than the GA design Figure 4: Calculated instantaneous torque and iron loss compar-
isons for the initial, GA and HGA optimised designs
compared to the initial design. This shows that the GA op-
timal design is already close to the optimum solution, and
that the Taguchi method overcomes the defect of the GA,

Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM
 A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for optimal design of IPM machines for electric vehicle | 991
Figure 5: Torque versus speed (field-weakening) comparison for
initial, GA and HGA optimized designs
Figure 5 is the torque-speed characteristic comparison
for the initial, GA and HGA optimised designs. It indicates
that the speed range has widened to 0 to 7000 rpm from
0 to 4000 rpm and that the flux-weakening capability has
improved for both the GA and HGA designs, especially for
the HGA design.
5 Conclusion
A hybrid genetic algorithm (HGA), which combined a ge-
netic algorithm (GA) with the Taguchi method, is proposed
to optimize the rotor structure of an IPMSM for an electric
vehicle application, to maximize the torque and efficiency,
and minimise the torque ripple and iron loss. The follow-
ing conclusions can be drawn:
1. The proposed HGA not only could overcame the de-
fect of poor global searching capability of the Taguchi
method, but also could cover the poor local searching
ability for the GA. The Taguchi method is conducted to
further optimize the GA optimized design.
2. Not only the performance such as torque, efficiency,
torque ripple and iron loss have improved by using
the GA and HGA, but also the amount PM material is
reduced 9.2% and 10.2%, respectively, which reduces
the motor manufacturing cost. In addition, the flux-
weakening capacity of the IPMSM, which is important
for electric vehicle applications, is also improved by
optimisation by GA and HGA, especially by the pro-
posed HGA.
Acknowledgement: This study was supported by the Bei-
jing Natural Science Foundation (3172037) and the Natural
Science Foundation of Hebei Province (E2017502025).
References
[1] Wang A., Jia Y., Soong W., Comparison of Five Topologies for an
Interior Permanent-Magnet Machine for a Hybrid Electric Vehi-
cle, IEEE Trans. Magn., 2011, 47, 10, 3606-3609.
[2] Xia C., Guo L., Zhang Z., et al., Optimal Designing of Permanent
Magnet Cavity to Reduce Iron Loss of Interior Permanent Mag-
net Machine, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 51, no. 12, article. 8115409,
Dec. 2015.
[3] Sung-II K., Ji-Young L., Young-Kyoun K., et al., Optimization for
reduction of torque ripple in interior permanent magnet motor
by using the Taguchi method, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 41, no. 5,
pp. 1796-1799, May. 2005.
[4] Hwang C., Li P., Liu C., Optimal Design of a Permanent Magnet
Linear Synchronous Motor with Low Cogging Force, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 1039-1042, Feb. 2012.
[5] Hwang C., Li P., Frazier C.Chuang, et al., Optimization for Re-
duction of Torque Ripple in an Axial Flux Permanent Mag-
net Machine, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol.45, no.3, pp. 1760-1763,
Mar.2009.
[6] Ki-Chan Kim, Ju Lee, Hee Jun Kim, et al., Multiobjective Optimal
Design for Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol.45, no.3, pp. 1780-1783, Mar.2009.
[7] Shi T., Qiao Z., Xia C., et al., Modeling, Analyzing, and Parameter
Design of the Magnetic Field of a Segmented Halbach Cylinder,
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1890-1898, May. 2012.
[8] Hwang C., Lyu L., Liu C., et al., Optimal Design of an SPM Mo-
tor Using Genetic Algorithms and Taguchi Method, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 4325-4328, Nov. 2008.
[9] Mahmoudi A., Kahourzade S., Abd Rahim N., et al., Design and
prototyping of an optimised axial-flux permanent-magnet syn-
chronous machine, IET Electric Power Applications., vol. 7, no. 7,
pp. 338-349, 2013.
[10] Lee D., Lee S., Kim J.-W., et al., Intelligent Memetic Algorithm
Using GA and Guided MADS for the Optimal Design of Interior
PM SynchronousMachine, IEEE Trans.Magn., vol. 47, no. 5, pp.
1230-1233, May. 2011.
Unauthenticated
Download Date | 2/12/20 5:35 PM