See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/224579971

Identification of Lamination Stack Properties: Application to High-Speed

Induction Motors

Article  in  IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · February 2010

DOI: 10.1109/TIE.2009.2029522 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS
18 6,429

5 authors, including:

Guillaume Mogenier Régis Dufour

15 PUBLICATIONS   134 CITATIONS   
Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon
176 PUBLICATIONS   1,358 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Lionel Durantay
General, Electric
42 PUBLICATIONS   211 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Comportement Dynamique de Structures Localement Non Linéaires. Cas des Suspensions View project

Mode Shape Tracking & Centrifugal Effect in Tie Rods View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lionel Durantay on 12 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010 1

1 Identification of Lamination Stack Properties:

2 Application to High-Speed Induction Motors
3 Guillaume Mogenier, Régis Dufour, Guy Ferraris-Besso, Lionel Durantay, and Nicolas Barras

4 Abstract—In order to predict the lateral rotordynamics of a

5 high-speed induction motor, an optimization procedure is used
6 for identifying the dynamic behavior of the magnetic core made
7 of a lamination stack, tie rods, and short-circuit rods. Modal
8 parameters predicted by a finite-element model based on beam
9 elements and measured on induction motors are included in modal
10 error functions contained in a functional. The minimization of this
11 functional by using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm permits
12 extracting the equivalent constitutive properties of the lamination
13 stack for several rotors of different sizes. Finally, the size effect on
14 the constitutive properties identified is discussed.
15 Index Terms—Finite-element (FE) methods, parameter
16 identification, squirrel-cage motors, vibrations. Fig. 1. Diagram of a squirrel-cage induction motor.

17 I. I NTRODUCTION
18
19 T HIS PAPER focuses on the squirrel-cage induction motor
known as the Moteur Grande Vitesse (MGV) in the 3
20 to 30 MW range from 6000 to 18 000 r/min, used for critical
21 applications, particularly motocompressors, in the oil and gas
22 industry. This paper continues from an International Confer-
23 ence on Electronic Materials 2008 conference paper dealing
24 with other experiments performed on several MGVs to evaluate
25 a possible relation between identified parameters and rotor
26 sizes, i.e., magnetic core length Lfer (Fig. 1) and diameter Dfer
27 (Fig. 2). As shown in Fig. 1, an MGV is mainly composed of
Fig. 2. Cross section of the magnetic core of a squirrel-cage induction motor.
28 two steel shaft ends and full-depth laminations held together
29 by steel tie rods. The squirrel cage consists of copper short-
30 circuit rods distributed at the periphery of the core (Fig. 2) and compact and efficient than widely used solid rotors with shrink 38
31 linked to two bronze alloy rings placed at both ends of the fitted laminations. It also prevents problems such as electrical 39
32 stack. The stack and the rings are tightened by the tie rods, loss, heat dissipation, and loss of adhesion between the compo- 40
33 also distributed at the periphery of the core and screwed into nents although it is difficult to predict its dynamic behavior. The 41
34 the shaft ends. This configuration is proposed as full-depth problem of modeling the magnetic core and the stacks of full- 42
35 laminations considerably reduce the eddy-current circulation depth laminations has been given little attention in scientific 43
36 along the longitudinal axis in the core of the magnetic part and papers. References [1] and [2] suggested homogenized bending 44
37 thus eliminate flux saturation. Consequently, the MGV is more rigidity for the entire magnetic core cross section by adding the 45
bending rigidity of each cross section component. McClurg [3] 46
deals with a stiff shaft design for a squirrel-cage rotor, but 47
Manuscript received February 27, 2009; revised July 27, 2009.
the bending rigidity of the magnetic core is not described. 48
G. Mogenier, R. Dufour, and G. Ferraris-Besso are with the Centre However, many authors have attempted to predict the dynamic 49
National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut National des Sciences Ap- behavior of induction machine rotors with a laminated core 50
pliquées de Lyon, Laboratoire de Mécanique des Contacts et des Structures,
Unite Mixte de Recherche 5259, Université de Lyon, 69621 Villeurbanne, mounted on a solid shaft, i.e., laminations around central 51
France (e-mail: guillaume.mogenier@insa-lyon.fr; regis.dufour@insa-lyon.fr; hole. The stiffening effects of the laminated core are not easy 52
guy.ferraris@insa-lyon.fr). to assess and often require identification via modal testing. 53
L. Durantay and N. Barras are with the Department of Research
and Development, Converteam SAS, Rotating Machines Division, 54250 Ede et al. [4] assess the influence of leading design parameters, 54
Champigneulles, France (e-mail: lionel.durantay@converteam.com; nicolas. such as stack length, on the natural frequencies of a high-speed 55
barras@converteam.com). permanent magnet brushless machine by using a 3-D finite- 56
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. element (FE) model. Garvey et al. [5] present the advantages 57
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2009.2029522 of a branched model for a laminated rotor. The laminations 58

0278-0046/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE

 2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

59 are considered as several annular ring subsets linked together

60 by elastic connections. Moreover, the subsets are elastically
61 connected to the shaft. Chen et al. [6] consider an equiva-
62 lent Young modulus for the stack and use a branched beam
63 model for the magnetic core. The authors of many papers
64 have dealt with a coefficient known as stacking factor that
65 modifies the value of the mass of the lamination stack. In
66 addition, its weak Young modulus is due to resin or var-
67 nish layers on the interfaces between consecutive laminations.
68 Garvey et al. [5] consider the lamination stack as an orthotropic
69 material whose elastic strain–stress relation takes into account
70 the lamination material and the mean flexibilities (shear and
71 compressive) of the lamination interfaces. Kim and Kim [7] Fig. 3. Short-circuit rod in bending—kinematic assumption.
72 show that the lamination pressure has considerable influence on
73 the lateral natural frequencies of a rotor. An equivalent diameter II. FE M ODEL 117
74 and lumped masses are considered for modeling the entire
The predicted modal data emanate from the eigenvalue equa- 118
75 magnetic core.
tion of the undamped FE model based on the structural dynamic 119
76 In identification procedures, an optimization algorithm is
theory, described in [14], for each mode k = 1, . . . , m 120
77 used so that the optimization parameters of an FE model make
78 predicted data tend toward target values, i.e., measured data.  
K −ω
k2 M ϕk = 0, with K = KS + KP (1)
79 Such algorithms can use modal data for updating and then
80 identifying the FE model parameters. Modal error functions are
where ω k , ϕk are the kth angular frequency and associated 121
81 defined to quantify the difference between predicted and mea-
mode shape, respectively. KS is the structural stiffness matrix, 122
82 sured natural frequencies and mode shapes. Lee and Kam [8]
KP is the stress stiffening matrix if a possible axial prestressing 123
83 use a common modal error function based on natural frequen-
force acts on the beam FE [18]. M is the mass matrix due to 124
84 cies in order to identify the properties of laminated composite
the translation and rotatory inertia, the latter being classically 125
85 plates. Cugnoni [9] proposes two original modal error functions
neglected for slender structures. Shear strain and rotatory inertia 126
86 based on the diagonal and extra-diagonal terms of the modal
are taken into account in the Timoshenko in-plane beam FE 127
87 assurance criterion matrix. Feng et al. [10] use a more classical
containing 2 DOF per node: one translation and one rotation. 128
88 modal error function, based on the difference between the
Thus, a shear correction factor dependent on the shape of the 129
89 components of predicted and measured mode shapes, to iden-
cross section is used as in [19]. 130
90 tify the material parameters of concrete dams. These functions
Free–free boundary conditions are taken into account by 131
91 are combined in a functional whose minimization requires its
adding low-stiffness springs (10 N/m) at each boundary node. 132
92 derivatives, with respect to the optimization parameters, that
Disks and landing rings are considered as lumped masses. 133
93 depend on eigenelement derivatives. Eigenvalue derivatives are
To identify the stiffness parameters of the lamination stack, 134
94 obtained from the relation given by [11] whereas eigenvector
specific assumptions must be considered to model the tie and 135
95 derivatives can be computed by using approximate or exact
the short-circuit rods. The latter can be modeled as beams of 136
96 methods [12]. Min et al. [13] compare different algorithms
diameter DCC (Fig. 2) whose neutral axes coincide with the 137
97 designed to achieve this.
neutral axis of the magnetic core. These rods are fastened at 138
98 In this paper, an FE model of an induction rotor is presented middle of the magnetic core by screws and their ends can slide 139
99 with particular attention given to modeling the magnetic core.
in the short-circuit rings, as shown in Fig. 3. Thus, each FE of 140
100 It is based on the structural dynamics theory described in
the discretized magnetic core is connected to two consecutive 141
101 [14] and therefore uses beam FE in order to limit the degrees
nodes its elementary matrices being the sum of those of the 142
102 of freedom (DOF). Under certain assumptions, tie and short-
short-circuit rods and the lamination stack. Furthermore, the 143
103 circuit rods can also be modeled with beam FE. Even if a
tie rods are modeled as a one FE equivalent hollow cylinder 144
104 beam-based model is used, the constitutive properties of the TI
clamped at nodes A0 and B0 (see Fig. 2). Let DOut and 145
105 stack are defined such that the shear and the Young moduli TI
DIn be its outer and inner diameters, respectively, and simply 146
106 are independent in order to take into account its orthotropic
calculated by considering surface STI and second moment of 147
107 properties [5]. The lateral dynamic behavior of the stack is
area ITI of the tie rods 148
108 then identified by performing experimental modal analyses
109 on several rotors of different sizes. The identification strategy   12   12
8ITI 2STI 8ITI 2STI
110 presented in [15] consists in minimizing the difference be-
TI
DOut = + , TI
DIn = − .
STI π STI π
111 tween the measured and the predicted modal data provided by
(2)
112 the FE model, by using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm
113 [16], [17]. Identification results are discussed to evaluate a The screwing torque ensures the stress stiffening in the tie 149
114 possible relation between the equivalent constitutive properties rods and the prestressing in the lamination stack. The stress 150
115 of the lamination stack and the magnetic core length and stiffening effect is taken into account by the KP matrix (1) 151
116 diameter. only for the hollow cylinder. The measurement is performed 152
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 3

153 on the assembled structure; therefore, the identified parameters requires that all the extra-diagonal terms of the MAC matrix 194
154 implicitly take into account the prestressing which is of the vanish. Thus, a third modal error function can be defined [9] 195
155 same magnitude for each rotor presented in Section III. Since

m
  i  
156 the short-circuit rings, the lamination stack and the shaft ends FkϕED (xi ) = j , ϕk − MAC(ϕj , ϕk ) .
MAC ϕ
157 connected to each ring are drilled at their periphery for the j=1,j=k
158 short-circuit rods and tie rods, (2) is also used to model the (7)
159 cross section of these elements.
A fourth modal error function can be defined by estimating 196
the difference between two sets of mode shapes by simply cal- 197
160 III. O PTIMIZATION S TRATEGY culating the sum of the absolute values of differences between 198
161 The equivalent constitutive properties of the lamination stack the modal vector components. However, it is essential that the 199
162 are denoted x ∈ Rn so that {x}p=1,...,n . The optimization pair of measured and predicted mode shapes are normalized 200
163 parameters, stemming from the following doublet:
equally and signed so that the larger component is equal to unity 201
  i 
r  

1  ϕ (ϕk )j 
{E, G} (3) ϕEC i
Fk (x ) =  
k j
  −  (8)

r j=1  max ϕ ik l max ((ϕk )l ) 
l l
164 where E and G are the Young and the shear moduli, re-
165 spectively, and they are also independent for modeling the where j stands for the jth vector component whereas r is the 202
166 anisotropy of the lamination stack, as described in [5]. The number of vector components. The identification method is then 203
167 optimization parameter number is therefore equal to two, i.e., reduced to the minimization of a global error functional f (xi ) 204
168 (n = 2). The identification strategy consists in minimizing the with respect to optimization parameters vector xi including n 205
169 difference between the predicted and measured modal data. parameters. The global error functional can be expressed as a 206
function of the previous four modal error functions 207

170 A. Modal Error Functions 1 

q

Tot i 2
f (xi ) = F Tot (xi ) 2 = 1 Fk (x ) , q =4 × m
171 An optimization algorithm is used so that the optimization 2 2
k=1
172 parameters of an FE model make the predicted data tend toward (9)
173 target values, i.e., measured data. Let xi be the vector of
174 optimization parameters x at iteration i. Let us assume that all
with 208

175 the variables of the FE model depend on xi . Let ωki and ωk be F Tot (xi ) = [αω F ω , αϕD F ϕD , αϕHD F ϕHD , αϕEc F ϕEc ]T .
176 the predicted and measured natural frequencies, respectively.
(10)
177 Let ϕ ik and ϕk be their associated mode shapes projected on
178 the same spatial basis. The first modal error function is based Weight coefficients α (10) permit controlling the order of 209
179 on the difference between measured natural frequencies ωk and each function as they are very different from each other. Thus, 210
180 predicted natural frequencies ωki for each mode shape k (k = a weighting coefficient linked to a modal error function is 211
181 1, 2, . . . , m) [8] defined as the inverse of the mean value of this modal error 212
function components calculated at the first iteration, i.e., i = 0. 213
ki
ω
Fkω (xi ) = − 1. (4) We propose defining each weight coefficient α (10) as follows: 214
ωk
α = 1/F (x0 ). (11)
182 When performing modal tests, the MAC method is that
183 most commonly used for estimating the correlation of mea- To avoid numerical conditioning problems (a 1012 ratio 215
184 sured mode shapes. It provides a matrix Mjl = MAC(ϕ j , ϕl ) between the Young modulus and the Poisson ratio), particularly 216
185 of scalar products between two sets of mode shapes ϕl (l = for the Jacobian matrix J(xi ) (12), the xi are defined relative 217
j (j = 1, 2, . . . , m), denoted as follows:
186 1, 2, . . . , m) and ϕ to reference values such as the initial values of optimization 218
parameters x0 . This functional is minimized by using the 219
j · ϕl )2
(ϕ
j , ϕl ) =
MAC(ϕ . (5) Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm, which is generally acknowl- 220
j · ϕ
(ϕ j )(ϕl · ϕl ) edged as being very robust and highly efficient in a wide range 221
of problems 222
187 Usually, two mode shapes ϕl and ϕ j are considered identical  0
188 if Mjl is higher than 0.9, close together if Mjl > 0.7 or 0.8  x , λ0 given 
 
 di = −(Hi + λi I)−1 ∇f ,  ∇f = J(xi )T F i
i T Tot
189 depending on measurement accuracy. For each pair of measured  i+1  (12)
x Hi ≈ J(x ) J(x )
190 and predicted modes k = 1, 2, . . . , m, let a second modal error = xi + ρi di
191 function be defined as follows:
where I and Hi are, respectively, the identity and the ap- 223
 i 
FkϕD (xi ) = 1 − MAC ϕ k , ϕk . (6) proximate Hessian matrices of size [n × n]. If λi → +∞, the 224
method tends toward the steepest descent method, whereas 225
192 On the strength of the orthogonality property of the mode if λi → 0, the method tends toward to the Gauss–Newton 226
193 shapes, a perfect correlation between two sets of mode shapes method. Updating damping parameter λi is done by calculating 227
 4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

228 a “gain factor,” i.e., the ratio of the f (xi ) decrease over the TABLE I
S IZE AND I NERTIAL C HARACTERISTICS OF THE T ESTED ROTORS
229 F Tot decrease, as vector F Tot is expanded by a Taylor series.
230 Descent step ρi can be obtained by a “Line Search” algorithm.
231 The method proposed by [16] is used here by setting ρi = 1 and
232 frequently updating λi . This results in smoother performance
233 and faster convergence than that achieved by Marquardt’s up-
234 dating strategy.

235 B. Eigenderivatives
By substituting (20) and (15), ck can be obtained by 259
236 The Jacobian matrix J(xi ) (of size [q × n]) of the total error
237 vector F Tot implicitly depends on eigenelements λk and ϕ k ck = Qk − ϕ
k M Vk . (21)
238 defined in (1), λk being equal to the square of the kth angular
This method is costly in terms of computation time because 260
239 frequency ωk . Assuming that the eigenvectors are normalized
it requires knowing all the eigenvectors of the system. Thus, by 261
240 with respect to the mass matrix M
substituting (20) in (14), [12] proposes removing the singularity 262
T
ϕ k = 1,
k Mϕ k = 1, . . . , m. (13) of Ak by cancelling a component of Vk , (14) becomes invertible 263
and part of the solution Vk is obtained. The complete solution 264
241 Taking partial derivatives of (1) and (13) with respect to is then given by (20) and (21). This method requires as many 265
242 an optimization parameter xp yields the following governing inversions of matrix Ak of size [m × m] as eigenvector deriva- 266
243 equations for eigenvector derivatives [11]: tives needed. However, MGV rotors are considered as medium 267
k
∂ϕ systems and the inversion of such matrices is not costly in terms 268
Ak = Pk (14) of CPU time. 269
∂xp
k
∂ϕ 1 T ∂M
T
ϕkM = Qk 
with Qk = − ϕ k
ϕ (15) IV. I NDUSTRIAL A PPLICATIONS 270
∂xp 2 k ∂xp
Experimental modal analyses were conducted on five MGV 271
244 where
  rotors denoted as Rotor#1 through Rotor#5 whose total lengths 272
∂K ∂λk ∂M and weights are presented in Table I. Rotor#1 is the rotor 273
Ak = (K − λk M ), Pk = − − M − λk ϕk .
∂xp ∂xp ∂xp presented in [15]. Length Lfer and diameter Dfer (Figs. 1 and 274
(16) 2) of the core vary from rotor to rotor, as shown in Table I. The 275
rotors were hung from a crane via a flexible sling and a swivel 276
245 By premultiplying (14) by ϕ T
k and substituting (1) and (13), hoist ring to achieve free–free boundary conditions at best. 277
246 the eigenvalue derivative with respect to xp is obtained from the
The hanging rotors were radially excited along a meridian line 278
247 relationship
  with an impulse force hammer (KISTLER Type 9726A20000 279
∂λk ∂K ∂M of mass 0.5 kg), with the transmitted force being measured 280
=ϕ T
k − λ k k .
ϕ (17)
∂xp ∂xp ∂xp by a load cell. A steel impact tip was used to observe a large 281
frequency spectrum. Meridian lines were discretized in fine 282
248 The partial derivatives of global mass and stiffness matrices experimental meshes to establish accurate mode shapes. Sets 283
249 with respect to xp are easily obtained by differentiating elemen- of 62, 81, 73, 68, and 89 measurement points were defined 284
250 tary mass and stiffness matrices (1). Concerning the eigenvector
for Rotor#1 through #5, respectively. The successive acceler- 285
251 derivatives, the problem is that (14) is not invertible since the
ances obtained with a dynamic analyzer permit evaluating the 286
252 Ak matrix is of rank (m − 1). The complete modal method
measured natural frequencies. The mode shapes are plotted by 287
253 assumes that the kth eigenvector derivative with respect to xp
exploring the imaginary part of the accelerances. 288
254 can be expressed as follows:
Identification procedures were performed by updating the 289
k
∂ϕ  m
FE models of each rotor, as described in Sections II and III. 290
= j .
cj ϕ (18) A minimum of four modes were retained to ensure sufficient 291
∂xp j=1
measured modal data to preserve the dynamics of the rotors 292
T
Substituting (18) and (14) and premultiplying by ϕ studied. Poisson ratio was fixed at 0.28, as in [6]. Thus, for 293
255 k gives
each rotor, the optimization problem contains two unknowns 294
T
ϕ j · Pk {E, G}, the Young and shear moduli, respectively. Five sets of 295
cj = , j = k. (19)
λj − λk constitutive properties have been identified and are presented 296
in Table II. The normalized values are reported and defined as 297
256 Equation (19) shows that the eigenvector derivative has a
follows: 298
257 unique expression (Linear combination) in terms of all the
258 system’s eigenvectors, excluding the kth one E G Lfer Dfer
E∗ = , G∗ = , L∗ = , D∗ = (22)
Ē Ḡ L̄fer D̄fer
k
∂ϕ  m
= j + ck ϕ
cj ϕ k ≡ Vk + ck ϕ
k . (20) where Ē and Ḡ are the mean values of the identified Young 299
∂xp j=1
j=k and shear moduli, respectively. Consequently, L̄fer and D̄fer are 300
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 5

TABLE II
I DENTIFIED D IMENSIONLESS E QUIVALENT C ONSTITUTIVE P ROPERTIES

Fig. 5. Evolution of the normalized identified Young modulus weighted by

L∗2 versus the D∗2 L∗ parameter.

TABLE III
F IRST F OUR P REDICTED AND M EASURED NATURAL F REQUENCIES

Fig. 4. Evolution of the β parameter versus the σ the parameter.

301 the mean values of the magnetic core lengths and diameters in
302 order to obtain dimensionless variables.
303 To evaluate a correlation between the identified constitutive
304 properties and the rotor sizes, the first step is achieved by using
305 coefficient a (23) which characterized the shear effect in the
306 FE model, as defined in [18]. It can be seen as the ratio of the
307 bending and the shearing rigidities and tends to a low value for
308 slender structures and to a high value for monolithic structures.
309 Let β and σ be the numerator and the denominator, respectively,
310 of coefficient a. They are defined as follows:

12EI E ∗ D∗2 β
a= 2
∼ ∗ ∗2
= (23)
GSr L G L σ
311 where L, Sr , I are the characteristic length, reduced area, and
312 second moment of inertia of the magnetic core, respectively.
313 Fig. 4 shows the evolution of parameter β versus parameter σ.
314 This representation shows that the identified bending rigidity of
315 the magnetic core increases with the associated identified shear
316 rigidity. Moreover, the identified bending rigidity seems to be
317 very sensitive to low values of the identified shear rigidity while mode shapes are shown in Figs. 6–10. The relative errors 332
318 it tends to increase slowly for high values of the identified shear between the predicted and measured frequencies vary from 333
319 rigidity. 0.2% to 10% with a mean value equal to 3.1%. Figs. 6–10 334
320 The second step is carried out by plotting the normalized show a good correlation between the predicted and measured 335
321 identified Young modulus E ∗ weighted by L∗2 as a function of mode shapes. Therefore, the identification method presented 336
322 D ∗2 L∗ , a classical parameter used in electromagnetic design. is more accurate than classical identification methods when 337
323 Fig. 5 shows that E ∗ /L∗2 decreases quasi-linearly with the considering restrictive assumptions on the mechanical behavior 338
324 D ∗2 L∗ parameter. This behavior probably signifies an exponen- of a lamination stack mode of isotropic material. It shows that 339
325 tial decrease, since the normalized identified Young modulus the FE model presented here is an efficient means of prediction 340
326 E ∗ cannot be negative for a high value of D ∗2 L∗ . This means the dynamics of this kind of real assembled structure. 341
327 that for a given parameter D ∗2 L∗ , a Young modulus can be
328 found for the lamination stack. Therefore, a shear modulus can
V. C ONCLUSION 342
329 be associated, by using the curve shown in Fig. 4.
330 The first four predicted and measured natural frequencies The proposed optimization procedure was tested on several 343
331 are given in Table III while the predicted and measured lateral industrial induction motors with complex designs. An FE model 344
 6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

Fig. 9. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
Fig. 6. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral mode shapes of the Rotor#4.
mode shapes of the Rotor#1.

Fig. 10. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
Fig. 7. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral mode shapes of the Rotor#5.
mode shapes of the Rotor#2.
shown that the identified equivalent constitutive properties of 348
the lamination stack, i.e., its stiffness, depend on the rotor sizes. 349
This procedure is very useful for formulating an FE model 350
mainly based on beam elements containing few DOF, which is 351
a great advantage for rotordynamics prediction, i.e., unbalanced 352
and transient responses. The reliability of such a procedure 353
will allow predicting the dynamic behavior of an MGV under 354
development, operating at 6000 r/min in the 30-MW range. This 355
will permit the manufacturer to increase the reliability of this 356
range of products. 357

ACKNOWLEDGMENT 358

The authors would like to thank Converteam for its support 359
and permission to publish this paper. 360

Fig. 8. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
mode shapes of the Rotor#3. R EFERENCES 361
[1] R. Belmans, W. Heylen, A. Vandenput, and W. Geysen, “Influence of 362
rotor-bar stiffness on the critical speed of an induction motor with an 363
345 was presented taking into account that MGV are assemblies aluminium squirrel cage,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 131, pt. B, no. 5, 364
pp. 203–208, Sep. 1984. 365
346 made of different components including in particular a mag- [2] S. Chang and D. Lee, “Robust design of a composite air spindle,” Polym. 366
347 netic core. The prestressed tie rods were also modeled. It was Compos., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 361–371, 2002. 367
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 7

368 [3] J. McClurg, “Advantages of stiff shaft design on high speed, high horse- Régis Dufour received the Ph.D. degree from the 427
369 power squirrel cage induction motors and generators,” in Proc. 34th APCI Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 428
370 Conf., 1987, pp. 259–263. (INSA Lyon), Villeurbanne, France, in 1984. 429
371 [4] J. Ede, D. Howe, and Z. Zhu, “Rotor resonances of high-speed permanent- He is a Professor of mechanical engineering 430
372 magnet brushless machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 38, no. 6, at the University of Lyon, Centre National de la 431
373 pp. 1542–1548, Nov./Dec. 2002. Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), INSA Lyon. He is 432
374 [5] S. Garvey, J. Penny, M. Friswell, and A. Lees, “The stiffening effect of the Deputy Director of the Laboratoire de Mécanique 433
375 laminated rotor cores on flexible-rotor electrical machines,” in Proc. 8th des Contacts et des Structures, Unite Mixte de 434
376 Int. Conf. Vibrations Rotating Machinery, 2004, pp. 193–202. Recherche, Centre National de la Recherche Scien- 435
377 [6] Y. Chen, Y. Cheng, J. Liao, and C. Chiou, “Development of a finite tifique 5259, comprised of 160 members, in which 436
378 element solution module for the analysis of the dynamic behavior and he manages the research group Dynamics and Con- 437
379 balancing effects of an induction motor system,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., trol of Structures (40 members). His expertise concerns dynamic analysis of 438
380 vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 483–492, May 2008. mechanical systems and structures: theory and experimentation. Nonlinear 439
381 [7] Y.-C. Kim and K.-W. Kim, “Influence of lamination pressure upon the dynamics–rotordynamics–vibration isolation are his specific interests. 440
382 stiffness of laminated rotor,” JSME Int. J., Ser. C, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 426– Dr. Dufour is an Editor-in-Chief of Mécanique & Industries (EDP 441
383 431, 2006. Sciences), Associate Editor of Shock and Vibration (IOS Press), and a member 442
384 [8] C. Lee and T. Kam, “Identification of mechanical properties of elastically of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Vibration and Control (Sage Publica- 443
385 restrained laminated composite plates using vibration data,” J. Sound Vib., tions). He belongs to the Technical Committee of the International Federation 444
386 vol. 295, no. 3–5, pp. 999–1016, 2006. for the Promotion of Mechanism and Machine Science Rotordynamics. 445
AQ1 387 [9] J. Cugnoni, “Identification par recalage modal et fréquentiel des propriétés
388 constitutives de coques en matériaux composites,” Ecole Polytechnique
389 Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2005.
390 [10] X. Feng, J. Zhou, and Y. Fan, “Identifying sub-regional material param- Guy Ferraris-Besso was born in Annecy, France, in 446
391 eters of concrete dams using modal data,” Acta Mech. Solida Sinica, 1943. He received the Ph.D. degree (3rd cycle) from 447 AQ3
392 vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 88–94, 2003. the University of Lyon, Lyon, France, in 1982. 448
393 [11] I. Ojalvo, “Efficient computation of mode-shape derivatives for large He joined the Institut National des Sciences 449
394 dynamic systems,” AIAA J., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1386–1390, 1987. Appliquées de Lyon (INSA Lyon), Villeurbanne, 450
395 [12] R. Nelson, “Simplified calculation of eigenvector derivatives,” AIAA J., France, in 1973. In 1983, he became a Research 451
396 vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1201–1205, 1976. Engineer with the Centre National de la Recherche 452
397 [13] Y. Min, L. Zhong-Sheng, and W. Da-Jun, “Comparison of several approx- Scientifique, and was detached to INSA Lyon. 453
398 imate modal methods for computing mode shape derivatives,” Comput. Since 1994, he has been a Professor at INSA Lyon. 454
399 Struct., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 381–393, 1997. His research interests are mechanics–computer 455
400 [14] J.-S. Przemieniecki, Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis. New York: science–engineering vibrations, and rotating 456
401 Dover, 1985. machinery dynamics. 457
402 [15] G. Mogenier, R. Dufour, G. Ferraris Besso, L. Durantay, and
403 N. Barras, “Optimization procedure for identifying constitutive properties
404 of high speed induction motor,” in Proc. ICEM, Vilamoura, Portugal,
405 2008, pp. 1–6. Lionel Durantay was born in Nancy, France, in 458
406 [16] H. Nielsen, “Damping parameter in Marquardt’s method,” Tech. Univ. 1965. He received the M.Sc. degree in mechanical 459
407 Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, Tech. Rep. IMM-REP-1999-05, 1999. engineering from the Ecole Nationale Supérieure 460
408 [17] S. Villwock and M. Pacas, “Application of the Welch-method for the iden- d’Electricité et de Mécanique, Nancy, in 1989, and 461
409 tification of two- and three-mass-systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., the Ph.D. degree in mechanics from the Institut Na- 462
410 vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 457–466, Jan. 2008. tional Polytechnique de Lorraine, Nancy, in 1994. 463
411 [18] M. Lalanne and G. Ferraris, Rotordynamics Prediction in Engineering., He is currently the R&D Director of the Rotat- 464
412 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1998. ing Machines activities for Converteam SEMEA, 465 AQ4
413 [19] G. Cowper, “The shear coefficient in Timoshenko’s beam theory,” J. Appl. Champigneulles, France. 466
414 Mech., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 335–340, 1966.

415 Guillaume Mogenier was born in Bourg en Bresse,

416 France, in 1981. He received the M.Sc. degree in me-
417 chanical engineering from the University of Lyon 1, Nicolas Barras was born in Versailles, France, in 467
1982. He received the M.Sc. degree in mechanical 468
418 Lyon, France, in 2005. He is currently working
engineering from the Institut National des Sciences 469
419 toward the Ph.D. degree in rotordynamics of high-
Appliquées de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France, in 2005. 470
420 speed induction motors at the Institut National
421 des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon (INSA Lyon), He is currently with Converteam SEMEA, 471
Champigneulles, France, as Lead Engineer for high- 472
422 Villeurbanne, France.
speed induction motors. 473
AQ2 423 He is currently with the Laboratoire de Mécanique
424 des Contacts et des Structures (Unite Mixte de
425 Recherche, Centre National de la Recherche Scien-
426 tifique 5259), INSA Lyon.
 AUTHOR QUERIES

AUTHOR PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUERIES

AQ1 = Please provide type of reference and additional information in Reference [9].
AQ2 = “Contact and Structural Mechanics Laboratory” was changed to “Laboratoire de Mécanique des
Contacts et des Structures.” Please check if correct.
AQ3 = Please check if the rephrased educational background is correct.
AQ4 = Please provide the expanded form of the acronym “SEMEA.”

END OF ALL QUERIES

 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010 1

1 Identification of Lamination Stack Properties:

2 Application to High-Speed Induction Motors
3 Guillaume Mogenier, Régis Dufour, Guy Ferraris-Besso, Lionel Durantay, and Nicolas Barras

4 Abstract—In order to predict the lateral rotordynamics of a

5 high-speed induction motor, an optimization procedure is used
6 for identifying the dynamic behavior of the magnetic core made
7 of a lamination stack, tie rods, and short-circuit rods. Modal
8 parameters predicted by a finite-element model based on beam
9 elements and measured on induction motors are included in modal
10 error functions contained in a functional. The minimization of this
11 functional by using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm permits
12 extracting the equivalent constitutive properties of the lamination
13 stack for several rotors of different sizes. Finally, the size effect on
14 the constitutive properties identified is discussed.
15 Index Terms—Finite-element (FE) methods, parameter
16 identification, squirrel-cage motors, vibrations. Fig. 1. Diagram of a squirrel-cage induction motor.

17 I. I NTRODUCTION
18
19 T HIS PAPER focuses on the squirrel-cage induction motor
known as the Moteur Grande Vitesse (MGV) in the 3
20 to 30 MW range from 6000 to 18 000 r/min, used for critical
21 applications, particularly motocompressors, in the oil and gas
22 industry. This paper continues from an International Confer-
23 ence on Electronic Materials 2008 conference paper dealing
24 with other experiments performed on several MGVs to evaluate
25 a possible relation between identified parameters and rotor
26 sizes, i.e., magnetic core length Lfer (Fig. 1) and diameter Dfer
27 (Fig. 2). As shown in Fig. 1, an MGV is mainly composed of
Fig. 2. Cross section of the magnetic core of a squirrel-cage induction motor.
28 two steel shaft ends and full-depth laminations held together
29 by steel tie rods. The squirrel cage consists of copper short-
30 circuit rods distributed at the periphery of the core (Fig. 2) and compact and efficient than widely used solid rotors with shrink 38
31 linked to two bronze alloy rings placed at both ends of the fitted laminations. It also prevents problems such as electrical 39
32 stack. The stack and the rings are tightened by the tie rods, loss, heat dissipation, and loss of adhesion between the compo- 40
33 also distributed at the periphery of the core and screwed into nents although it is difficult to predict its dynamic behavior. The 41
34 the shaft ends. This configuration is proposed as full-depth problem of modeling the magnetic core and the stacks of full- 42
35 laminations considerably reduce the eddy-current circulation depth laminations has been given little attention in scientific 43
36 along the longitudinal axis in the core of the magnetic part and papers. References [1] and [2] suggested homogenized bending 44
37 thus eliminate flux saturation. Consequently, the MGV is more rigidity for the entire magnetic core cross section by adding the 45
bending rigidity of each cross section component. McClurg [3] 46
deals with a stiff shaft design for a squirrel-cage rotor, but 47
Manuscript received February 27, 2009; revised July 27, 2009.
the bending rigidity of the magnetic core is not described. 48
G. Mogenier, R. Dufour, and G. Ferraris-Besso are with the Centre However, many authors have attempted to predict the dynamic 49
National de la Recherche Scientifique, Institut National des Sciences Ap- behavior of induction machine rotors with a laminated core 50
pliquées de Lyon, Laboratoire de Mécanique des Contacts et des Structures,
Unite Mixte de Recherche 5259, Université de Lyon, 69621 Villeurbanne, mounted on a solid shaft, i.e., laminations around central 51
France (e-mail: guillaume.mogenier@insa-lyon.fr; regis.dufour@insa-lyon.fr; hole. The stiffening effects of the laminated core are not easy 52
guy.ferraris@insa-lyon.fr). to assess and often require identification via modal testing. 53
L. Durantay and N. Barras are with the Department of Research
and Development, Converteam SAS, Rotating Machines Division, 54250 Ede et al. [4] assess the influence of leading design parameters, 54
Champigneulles, France (e-mail: lionel.durantay@converteam.com; nicolas. such as stack length, on the natural frequencies of a high-speed 55
barras@converteam.com). permanent magnet brushless machine by using a 3-D finite- 56
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. element (FE) model. Garvey et al. [5] present the advantages 57
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2009.2029522 of a branched model for a laminated rotor. The laminations 58

0278-0046/$26.00 © 2010 IEEE

 2 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

59 are considered as several annular ring subsets linked together

60 by elastic connections. Moreover, the subsets are elastically
61 connected to the shaft. Chen et al. [6] consider an equiva-
62 lent Young modulus for the stack and use a branched beam
63 model for the magnetic core. The authors of many papers
64 have dealt with a coefficient known as stacking factor that
65 modifies the value of the mass of the lamination stack. In
66 addition, its weak Young modulus is due to resin or var-
67 nish layers on the interfaces between consecutive laminations.
68 Garvey et al. [5] consider the lamination stack as an orthotropic
69 material whose elastic strain–stress relation takes into account
70 the lamination material and the mean flexibilities (shear and
71 compressive) of the lamination interfaces. Kim and Kim [7] Fig. 3. Short-circuit rod in bending—kinematic assumption.
72 show that the lamination pressure has considerable influence on
73 the lateral natural frequencies of a rotor. An equivalent diameter II. FE M ODEL 117
74 and lumped masses are considered for modeling the entire
The predicted modal data emanate from the eigenvalue equa- 118
75 magnetic core.
tion of the undamped FE model based on the structural dynamic 119
76 In identification procedures, an optimization algorithm is
theory, described in [14], for each mode k = 1, . . . , m 120
77 used so that the optimization parameters of an FE model make
78 predicted data tend toward target values, i.e., measured data.  
K −ω
k2 M ϕk = 0, with K = KS + KP (1)
79 Such algorithms can use modal data for updating and then
80 identifying the FE model parameters. Modal error functions are
where ω k , ϕk are the kth angular frequency and associated 121
81 defined to quantify the difference between predicted and mea-
mode shape, respectively. KS is the structural stiffness matrix, 122
82 sured natural frequencies and mode shapes. Lee and Kam [8]
KP is the stress stiffening matrix if a possible axial prestressing 123
83 use a common modal error function based on natural frequen-
force acts on the beam FE [18]. M is the mass matrix due to 124
84 cies in order to identify the properties of laminated composite
the translation and rotatory inertia, the latter being classically 125
85 plates. Cugnoni [9] proposes two original modal error functions
neglected for slender structures. Shear strain and rotatory inertia 126
86 based on the diagonal and extra-diagonal terms of the modal
are taken into account in the Timoshenko in-plane beam FE 127
87 assurance criterion matrix. Feng et al. [10] use a more classical
containing 2 DOF per node: one translation and one rotation. 128
88 modal error function, based on the difference between the
Thus, a shear correction factor dependent on the shape of the 129
89 components of predicted and measured mode shapes, to iden-
cross section is used as in [19]. 130
90 tify the material parameters of concrete dams. These functions
Free–free boundary conditions are taken into account by 131
91 are combined in a functional whose minimization requires its
adding low-stiffness springs (10 N/m) at each boundary node. 132
92 derivatives, with respect to the optimization parameters, that
Disks and landing rings are considered as lumped masses. 133
93 depend on eigenelement derivatives. Eigenvalue derivatives are
To identify the stiffness parameters of the lamination stack, 134
94 obtained from the relation given by [11] whereas eigenvector
specific assumptions must be considered to model the tie and 135
95 derivatives can be computed by using approximate or exact
the short-circuit rods. The latter can be modeled as beams of 136
96 methods [12]. Min et al. [13] compare different algorithms
diameter DCC (Fig. 2) whose neutral axes coincide with the 137
97 designed to achieve this.
neutral axis of the magnetic core. These rods are fastened at 138
98 In this paper, an FE model of an induction rotor is presented middle of the magnetic core by screws and their ends can slide 139
99 with particular attention given to modeling the magnetic core.
in the short-circuit rings, as shown in Fig. 3. Thus, each FE of 140
100 It is based on the structural dynamics theory described in
the discretized magnetic core is connected to two consecutive 141
101 [14] and therefore uses beam FE in order to limit the degrees
nodes its elementary matrices being the sum of those of the 142
102 of freedom (DOF). Under certain assumptions, tie and short-
short-circuit rods and the lamination stack. Furthermore, the 143
103 circuit rods can also be modeled with beam FE. Even if a
tie rods are modeled as a one FE equivalent hollow cylinder 144
104 beam-based model is used, the constitutive properties of the TI
clamped at nodes A0 and B0 (see Fig. 2). Let DOut and 145
105 stack are defined such that the shear and the Young moduli TI
DIn be its outer and inner diameters, respectively, and simply 146
106 are independent in order to take into account its orthotropic
calculated by considering surface STI and second moment of 147
107 properties [5]. The lateral dynamic behavior of the stack is
area ITI of the tie rods 148
108 then identified by performing experimental modal analyses
109 on several rotors of different sizes. The identification strategy   12   12
8ITI 2STI 8ITI 2STI
110 presented in [15] consists in minimizing the difference be-
TI
DOut = + , TI
DIn = − .
STI π STI π
111 tween the measured and the predicted modal data provided by
(2)
112 the FE model, by using the Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm
113 [16], [17]. Identification results are discussed to evaluate a The screwing torque ensures the stress stiffening in the tie 149
114 possible relation between the equivalent constitutive properties rods and the prestressing in the lamination stack. The stress 150
115 of the lamination stack and the magnetic core length and stiffening effect is taken into account by the KP matrix (1) 151
116 diameter. only for the hollow cylinder. The measurement is performed 152
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 3

153 on the assembled structure; therefore, the identified parameters requires that all the extra-diagonal terms of the MAC matrix 194
154 implicitly take into account the prestressing which is of the vanish. Thus, a third modal error function can be defined [9] 195
155 same magnitude for each rotor presented in Section III. Since

m
  i  
156 the short-circuit rings, the lamination stack and the shaft ends FkϕED (xi ) = j , ϕk − MAC(ϕj , ϕk ) .
MAC ϕ
157 connected to each ring are drilled at their periphery for the j=1,j=k
158 short-circuit rods and tie rods, (2) is also used to model the (7)
159 cross section of these elements.
A fourth modal error function can be defined by estimating 196
the difference between two sets of mode shapes by simply cal- 197
160 III. O PTIMIZATION S TRATEGY culating the sum of the absolute values of differences between 198
161 The equivalent constitutive properties of the lamination stack the modal vector components. However, it is essential that the 199
162 are denoted x ∈ Rn so that {x}p=1,...,n . The optimization pair of measured and predicted mode shapes are normalized 200
163 parameters, stemming from the following doublet:
equally and signed so that the larger component is equal to unity 201
  i 
r  

1  ϕ (ϕk )j 
{E, G} (3) ϕEC i
Fk (x ) =  
k j
  −  (8)

r j=1  max ϕ ik l max ((ϕk )l ) 
l l
164 where E and G are the Young and the shear moduli, re-
165 spectively, and they are also independent for modeling the where j stands for the jth vector component whereas r is the 202
166 anisotropy of the lamination stack, as described in [5]. The number of vector components. The identification method is then 203
167 optimization parameter number is therefore equal to two, i.e., reduced to the minimization of a global error functional f (xi ) 204
168 (n = 2). The identification strategy consists in minimizing the with respect to optimization parameters vector xi including n 205
169 difference between the predicted and measured modal data. parameters. The global error functional can be expressed as a 206
function of the previous four modal error functions 207

170 A. Modal Error Functions 1 

q

Tot i 2
f (xi ) = F Tot (xi ) 2 = 1 Fk (x ) , q =4 × m
171 An optimization algorithm is used so that the optimization 2 2
k=1
172 parameters of an FE model make the predicted data tend toward (9)
173 target values, i.e., measured data. Let xi be the vector of
174 optimization parameters x at iteration i. Let us assume that all
with 208

175 the variables of the FE model depend on xi . Let ωki and ωk be F Tot (xi ) = [αω F ω , αϕD F ϕD , αϕHD F ϕHD , αϕEc F ϕEc ]T .
176 the predicted and measured natural frequencies, respectively.
(10)
177 Let ϕ ik and ϕk be their associated mode shapes projected on
178 the same spatial basis. The first modal error function is based Weight coefficients α (10) permit controlling the order of 209
179 on the difference between measured natural frequencies ωk and each function as they are very different from each other. Thus, 210
180 predicted natural frequencies ωki for each mode shape k (k = a weighting coefficient linked to a modal error function is 211
181 1, 2, . . . , m) [8] defined as the inverse of the mean value of this modal error 212
function components calculated at the first iteration, i.e., i = 0. 213
ki
ω
Fkω (xi ) = − 1. (4) We propose defining each weight coefficient α (10) as follows: 214
ωk
α = 1/F (x0 ). (11)
182 When performing modal tests, the MAC method is that
183 most commonly used for estimating the correlation of mea- To avoid numerical conditioning problems (a 1012 ratio 215
184 sured mode shapes. It provides a matrix Mjl = MAC(ϕ j , ϕl ) between the Young modulus and the Poisson ratio), particularly 216
185 of scalar products between two sets of mode shapes ϕl (l = for the Jacobian matrix J(xi ) (12), the xi are defined relative 217
j (j = 1, 2, . . . , m), denoted as follows:
186 1, 2, . . . , m) and ϕ to reference values such as the initial values of optimization 218
parameters x0 . This functional is minimized by using the 219
j · ϕl )2
(ϕ
j , ϕl ) =
MAC(ϕ . (5) Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm, which is generally acknowl- 220
j · ϕ
(ϕ j )(ϕl · ϕl ) edged as being very robust and highly efficient in a wide range 221
of problems 222
187 Usually, two mode shapes ϕl and ϕ j are considered identical  0
188 if Mjl is higher than 0.9, close together if Mjl > 0.7 or 0.8  x , λ0 given 
 
 di = −(Hi + λi I)−1 ∇f ,  ∇f = J(xi )T F i
i T Tot
189 depending on measurement accuracy. For each pair of measured  i+1  (12)
x Hi ≈ J(x ) J(x )
190 and predicted modes k = 1, 2, . . . , m, let a second modal error = xi + ρi di
191 function be defined as follows:
where I and Hi are, respectively, the identity and the ap- 223
 i 
FkϕD (xi ) = 1 − MAC ϕ k , ϕk . (6) proximate Hessian matrices of size [n × n]. If λi → +∞, the 224
method tends toward the steepest descent method, whereas 225
192 On the strength of the orthogonality property of the mode if λi → 0, the method tends toward to the Gauss–Newton 226
193 shapes, a perfect correlation between two sets of mode shapes method. Updating damping parameter λi is done by calculating 227
 4 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

228 a “gain factor,” i.e., the ratio of the f (xi ) decrease over the TABLE I
S IZE AND I NERTIAL C HARACTERISTICS OF THE T ESTED ROTORS
229 F Tot decrease, as vector F Tot is expanded by a Taylor series.
230 Descent step ρi can be obtained by a “Line Search” algorithm.
231 The method proposed by [16] is used here by setting ρi = 1 and
232 frequently updating λi . This results in smoother performance
233 and faster convergence than that achieved by Marquardt’s up-
234 dating strategy.

235 B. Eigenderivatives
By substituting (20) and (15), ck can be obtained by 259
236 The Jacobian matrix J(xi ) (of size [q × n]) of the total error
237 vector F Tot implicitly depends on eigenelements λk and ϕ k ck = Qk − ϕ
k M Vk . (21)
238 defined in (1), λk being equal to the square of the kth angular
This method is costly in terms of computation time because 260
239 frequency ωk . Assuming that the eigenvectors are normalized
it requires knowing all the eigenvectors of the system. Thus, by 261
240 with respect to the mass matrix M
substituting (20) in (14), [12] proposes removing the singularity 262
T
ϕ k = 1,
k Mϕ k = 1, . . . , m. (13) of Ak by cancelling a component of Vk , (14) becomes invertible 263
and part of the solution Vk is obtained. The complete solution 264
241 Taking partial derivatives of (1) and (13) with respect to is then given by (20) and (21). This method requires as many 265
242 an optimization parameter xp yields the following governing inversions of matrix Ak of size [m × m] as eigenvector deriva- 266
243 equations for eigenvector derivatives [11]: tives needed. However, MGV rotors are considered as medium 267
k
∂ϕ systems and the inversion of such matrices is not costly in terms 268
Ak = Pk (14) of CPU time. 269
∂xp
k
∂ϕ 1 T ∂M
T
ϕkM = Qk 
with Qk = − ϕ k
ϕ (15) IV. I NDUSTRIAL A PPLICATIONS 270
∂xp 2 k ∂xp
Experimental modal analyses were conducted on five MGV 271
244 where
  rotors denoted as Rotor#1 through Rotor#5 whose total lengths 272
∂K ∂λk ∂M and weights are presented in Table I. Rotor#1 is the rotor 273
Ak = (K − λk M ), Pk = − − M − λk ϕk .
∂xp ∂xp ∂xp presented in [15]. Length Lfer and diameter Dfer (Figs. 1 and 274
(16) 2) of the core vary from rotor to rotor, as shown in Table I. The 275
rotors were hung from a crane via a flexible sling and a swivel 276
245 By premultiplying (14) by ϕ T
k and substituting (1) and (13), hoist ring to achieve free–free boundary conditions at best. 277
246 the eigenvalue derivative with respect to xp is obtained from the
The hanging rotors were radially excited along a meridian line 278
247 relationship
  with an impulse force hammer (KISTLER Type 9726A20000 279
∂λk ∂K ∂M of mass 0.5 kg), with the transmitted force being measured 280
=ϕ T
k − λ k k .
ϕ (17)
∂xp ∂xp ∂xp by a load cell. A steel impact tip was used to observe a large 281
frequency spectrum. Meridian lines were discretized in fine 282
248 The partial derivatives of global mass and stiffness matrices experimental meshes to establish accurate mode shapes. Sets 283
249 with respect to xp are easily obtained by differentiating elemen- of 62, 81, 73, 68, and 89 measurement points were defined 284
250 tary mass and stiffness matrices (1). Concerning the eigenvector
for Rotor#1 through #5, respectively. The successive acceler- 285
251 derivatives, the problem is that (14) is not invertible since the
ances obtained with a dynamic analyzer permit evaluating the 286
252 Ak matrix is of rank (m − 1). The complete modal method
measured natural frequencies. The mode shapes are plotted by 287
253 assumes that the kth eigenvector derivative with respect to xp
exploring the imaginary part of the accelerances. 288
254 can be expressed as follows:
Identification procedures were performed by updating the 289
k
∂ϕ  m
FE models of each rotor, as described in Sections II and III. 290
= j .
cj ϕ (18) A minimum of four modes were retained to ensure sufficient 291
∂xp j=1
measured modal data to preserve the dynamics of the rotors 292
T
Substituting (18) and (14) and premultiplying by ϕ studied. Poisson ratio was fixed at 0.28, as in [6]. Thus, for 293
255 k gives
each rotor, the optimization problem contains two unknowns 294
T
ϕ j · Pk {E, G}, the Young and shear moduli, respectively. Five sets of 295
cj = , j = k. (19)
λj − λk constitutive properties have been identified and are presented 296
in Table II. The normalized values are reported and defined as 297
256 Equation (19) shows that the eigenvector derivative has a
follows: 298
257 unique expression (Linear combination) in terms of all the
258 system’s eigenvectors, excluding the kth one E G Lfer Dfer
E∗ = , G∗ = , L∗ = , D∗ = (22)
Ē Ḡ L̄fer D̄fer
k
∂ϕ  m
= j + ck ϕ
cj ϕ k ≡ Vk + ck ϕ
k . (20) where Ē and Ḡ are the mean values of the identified Young 299
∂xp j=1
j=k and shear moduli, respectively. Consequently, L̄fer and D̄fer are 300
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 5

TABLE II
I DENTIFIED D IMENSIONLESS E QUIVALENT C ONSTITUTIVE P ROPERTIES

Fig. 5. Evolution of the normalized identified Young modulus weighted by

L∗2 versus the D∗2 L∗ parameter.

TABLE III
F IRST F OUR P REDICTED AND M EASURED NATURAL F REQUENCIES

Fig. 4. Evolution of the β parameter versus the σ the parameter.

301 the mean values of the magnetic core lengths and diameters in
302 order to obtain dimensionless variables.
303 To evaluate a correlation between the identified constitutive
304 properties and the rotor sizes, the first step is achieved by using
305 coefficient a (23) which characterized the shear effect in the
306 FE model, as defined in [18]. It can be seen as the ratio of the
307 bending and the shearing rigidities and tends to a low value for
308 slender structures and to a high value for monolithic structures.
309 Let β and σ be the numerator and the denominator, respectively,
310 of coefficient a. They are defined as follows:

12EI E ∗ D∗2 β
a= 2
∼ ∗ ∗2
= (23)
GSr L G L σ
311 where L, Sr , I are the characteristic length, reduced area, and
312 second moment of inertia of the magnetic core, respectively.
313 Fig. 4 shows the evolution of parameter β versus parameter σ.
314 This representation shows that the identified bending rigidity of
315 the magnetic core increases with the associated identified shear
316 rigidity. Moreover, the identified bending rigidity seems to be
317 very sensitive to low values of the identified shear rigidity while mode shapes are shown in Figs. 6–10. The relative errors 332
318 it tends to increase slowly for high values of the identified shear between the predicted and measured frequencies vary from 333
319 rigidity. 0.2% to 10% with a mean value equal to 3.1%. Figs. 6–10 334
320 The second step is carried out by plotting the normalized show a good correlation between the predicted and measured 335
321 identified Young modulus E ∗ weighted by L∗2 as a function of mode shapes. Therefore, the identification method presented 336
322 D ∗2 L∗ , a classical parameter used in electromagnetic design. is more accurate than classical identification methods when 337
323 Fig. 5 shows that E ∗ /L∗2 decreases quasi-linearly with the considering restrictive assumptions on the mechanical behavior 338
324 D ∗2 L∗ parameter. This behavior probably signifies an exponen- of a lamination stack mode of isotropic material. It shows that 339
325 tial decrease, since the normalized identified Young modulus the FE model presented here is an efficient means of prediction 340
326 E ∗ cannot be negative for a high value of D ∗2 L∗ . This means the dynamics of this kind of real assembled structure. 341
327 that for a given parameter D ∗2 L∗ , a Young modulus can be
328 found for the lamination stack. Therefore, a shear modulus can
V. C ONCLUSION 342
329 be associated, by using the curve shown in Fig. 4.
330 The first four predicted and measured natural frequencies The proposed optimization procedure was tested on several 343
331 are given in Table III while the predicted and measured lateral industrial induction motors with complex designs. An FE model 344
 6 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 57, NO. 1, JANUARY 2010

Fig. 9. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
Fig. 6. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral mode shapes of the Rotor#4.
mode shapes of the Rotor#1.

Fig. 10. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
Fig. 7. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral mode shapes of the Rotor#5.
mode shapes of the Rotor#2.
shown that the identified equivalent constitutive properties of 348
the lamination stack, i.e., its stiffness, depend on the rotor sizes. 349
This procedure is very useful for formulating an FE model 350
mainly based on beam elements containing few DOF, which is 351
a great advantage for rotordynamics prediction, i.e., unbalanced 352
and transient responses. The reliability of such a procedure 353
will allow predicting the dynamic behavior of an MGV under 354
development, operating at 6000 r/min in the 30-MW range. This 355
will permit the manufacturer to increase the reliability of this 356
range of products. 357

ACKNOWLEDGMENT 358

The authors would like to thank Converteam for its support 359
and permission to publish this paper. 360

Fig. 8. First four (solid line) predicted and (dashed line) measured lateral
mode shapes of the Rotor#3. R EFERENCES 361
[1] R. Belmans, W. Heylen, A. Vandenput, and W. Geysen, “Influence of 362
rotor-bar stiffness on the critical speed of an induction motor with an 363
345 was presented taking into account that MGV are assemblies aluminium squirrel cage,” Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng., vol. 131, pt. B, no. 5, 364
pp. 203–208, Sep. 1984. 365
346 made of different components including in particular a mag- [2] S. Chang and D. Lee, “Robust design of a composite air spindle,” Polym. 366
347 netic core. The prestressed tie rods were also modeled. It was Compos., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 361–371, 2002. 367
 MOGENIER et al.: IDENTIFICATION OF LAMINATION STACK PROPERTIES 7

368 [3] J. McClurg, “Advantages of stiff shaft design on high speed, high horse- Régis Dufour received the Ph.D. degree from the 427
369 power squirrel cage induction motors and generators,” in Proc. 34th APCI Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon 428
370 Conf., 1987, pp. 259–263. (INSA Lyon), Villeurbanne, France, in 1984. 429
371 [4] J. Ede, D. Howe, and Z. Zhu, “Rotor resonances of high-speed permanent- He is a Professor of mechanical engineering 430
372 magnet brushless machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 38, no. 6, at the University of Lyon, Centre National de la 431
373 pp. 1542–1548, Nov./Dec. 2002. Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), INSA Lyon. He is 432
374 [5] S. Garvey, J. Penny, M. Friswell, and A. Lees, “The stiffening effect of the Deputy Director of the Laboratoire de Mécanique 433
375 laminated rotor cores on flexible-rotor electrical machines,” in Proc. 8th des Contacts et des Structures, Unite Mixte de 434
376 Int. Conf. Vibrations Rotating Machinery, 2004, pp. 193–202. Recherche, Centre National de la Recherche Scien- 435
377 [6] Y. Chen, Y. Cheng, J. Liao, and C. Chiou, “Development of a finite tifique 5259, comprised of 160 members, in which 436
378 element solution module for the analysis of the dynamic behavior and he manages the research group Dynamics and Con- 437
379 balancing effects of an induction motor system,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., trol of Structures (40 members). His expertise concerns dynamic analysis of 438
380 vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 483–492, May 2008. mechanical systems and structures: theory and experimentation. Nonlinear 439
381 [7] Y.-C. Kim and K.-W. Kim, “Influence of lamination pressure upon the dynamics–rotordynamics–vibration isolation are his specific interests. 440
382 stiffness of laminated rotor,” JSME Int. J., Ser. C, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 426– Dr. Dufour is an Editor-in-Chief of Mécanique & Industries (EDP 441
383 431, 2006. Sciences), Associate Editor of Shock and Vibration (IOS Press), and a member 442
384 [8] C. Lee and T. Kam, “Identification of mechanical properties of elastically of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Vibration and Control (Sage Publica- 443
385 restrained laminated composite plates using vibration data,” J. Sound Vib., tions). He belongs to the Technical Committee of the International Federation 444
386 vol. 295, no. 3–5, pp. 999–1016, 2006. for the Promotion of Mechanism and Machine Science Rotordynamics. 445
AQ1 387 [9] J. Cugnoni, “Identification par recalage modal et fréquentiel des propriétés
388 constitutives de coques en matériaux composites,” Ecole Polytechnique
389 Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2005.
390 [10] X. Feng, J. Zhou, and Y. Fan, “Identifying sub-regional material param- Guy Ferraris-Besso was born in Annecy, France, in 446
391 eters of concrete dams using modal data,” Acta Mech. Solida Sinica, 1943. He received the Ph.D. degree (3rd cycle) from 447 AQ3
392 vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 88–94, 2003. the University of Lyon, Lyon, France, in 1982. 448
393 [11] I. Ojalvo, “Efficient computation of mode-shape derivatives for large He joined the Institut National des Sciences 449
394 dynamic systems,” AIAA J., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1386–1390, 1987. Appliquées de Lyon (INSA Lyon), Villeurbanne, 450
395 [12] R. Nelson, “Simplified calculation of eigenvector derivatives,” AIAA J., France, in 1973. In 1983, he became a Research 451
396 vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1201–1205, 1976. Engineer with the Centre National de la Recherche 452
397 [13] Y. Min, L. Zhong-Sheng, and W. Da-Jun, “Comparison of several approx- Scientifique, and was detached to INSA Lyon. 453
398 imate modal methods for computing mode shape derivatives,” Comput. Since 1994, he has been a Professor at INSA Lyon. 454
399 Struct., vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 381–393, 1997. His research interests are mechanics–computer 455
400 [14] J.-S. Przemieniecki, Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis. New York: science–engineering vibrations, and rotating 456
401 Dover, 1985. machinery dynamics. 457
402 [15] G. Mogenier, R. Dufour, G. Ferraris Besso, L. Durantay, and
403 N. Barras, “Optimization procedure for identifying constitutive properties
404 of high speed induction motor,” in Proc. ICEM, Vilamoura, Portugal,
405 2008, pp. 1–6. Lionel Durantay was born in Nancy, France, in 458
406 [16] H. Nielsen, “Damping parameter in Marquardt’s method,” Tech. Univ. 1965. He received the M.Sc. degree in mechanical 459
407 Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, Tech. Rep. IMM-REP-1999-05, 1999. engineering from the Ecole Nationale Supérieure 460
408 [17] S. Villwock and M. Pacas, “Application of the Welch-method for the iden- d’Electricité et de Mécanique, Nancy, in 1989, and 461
409 tification of two- and three-mass-systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., the Ph.D. degree in mechanics from the Institut Na- 462
410 vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 457–466, Jan. 2008. tional Polytechnique de Lorraine, Nancy, in 1994. 463
411 [18] M. Lalanne and G. Ferraris, Rotordynamics Prediction in Engineering., He is currently the R&D Director of the Rotat- 464
412 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 1998. ing Machines activities for Converteam SEMEA, 465 AQ4
413 [19] G. Cowper, “The shear coefficient in Timoshenko’s beam theory,” J. Appl. Champigneulles, France. 466
414 Mech., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 335–340, 1966.

415 Guillaume Mogenier was born in Bourg en Bresse,

416 France, in 1981. He received the M.Sc. degree in me-
417 chanical engineering from the University of Lyon 1, Nicolas Barras was born in Versailles, France, in 467
1982. He received the M.Sc. degree in mechanical 468
418 Lyon, France, in 2005. He is currently working
engineering from the Institut National des Sciences 469
419 toward the Ph.D. degree in rotordynamics of high-
Appliquées de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France, in 2005. 470
420 speed induction motors at the Institut National
421 des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon (INSA Lyon), He is currently with Converteam SEMEA, 471
Champigneulles, France, as Lead Engineer for high- 472
422 Villeurbanne, France.
speed induction motors. 473
AQ2 423 He is currently with the Laboratoire de Mécanique
424 des Contacts et des Structures (Unite Mixte de
425 Recherche, Centre National de la Recherche Scien-
426 tifique 5259), INSA Lyon.
 AUTHOR QUERIES

AUTHOR PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUERIES

AQ1 = Please provide type of reference and additional information in Reference [9].
AQ2 = “Contact and Structural Mechanics Laboratory” was changed to “Laboratoire de Mécanique des
Contacts et des Structures.” Please check if correct.
AQ3 = Please check if the rephrased educational background is correct.
AQ4 = Please provide the expanded form of the acronym “SEMEA.”

END OF ALL QUERIES

View publication stats