International Journal of Applied Electromagnetics and Mechanics 1 (2019) s1–s9 s1

DOI 10.3233/JAE-191115
IOS Press

Average-torque-maximization and
cogging-torque-minimization of
permanent-magnet-assisted synchronous
reluctance motor using topology optimization

on
Reiya Suzukia,∗ , Yoshifumi Okamotoa and Shinji Wakaob

rsi
a
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Hosei University, Koganei, Tokyo, Japan
b ve
Department of Electrical Engineering and Bioscience, Waseda University, Shinjuku, Tokyo, Japan
of
Abstract. Although rare earth materials are actively utilized in permanent magnets for a wide variety of applications including
electric vehicles and trains, the cost of these materials is on the rise. Therefore, the synchronous reluctance motor (SynRM)
o

which does not require permanent magnets is remarkable from the perspective of high efficiency and low cost. However, the
pr

torque characteristic of the SynRM is much lower than that of the interior permanent magnet synchronous reluctance motor
(IPMSM). Then, a permanent magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor (PMASynRM) which bonded magnet was attached
to the rotor structure of SynRM has been proposed. The manufacturing cost of the PMASynRM is lower than that of the IPMSM
d

because a bounded magnet is utilized former. In this work, the structure of the PMASynRM has been drastically changed by
cte

topology optimization to average torque maximization and cogging torque minimization.

Keywords: Average torque, cogging torque, Heaviside function, permanent magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor,
rre

topology optimization
co

1. Introduction
un

The interior permanent magnet synchronous reluctance motor (IPMSM) using a neodymium magnet
made from rare earth materials is currently used in electric vehicles, trains and other applications.
However, because the cost of rare earth material is continuously increasing, the synchronous reluctance
motor (SynRM), which does not require a permanent magnet, is of great interest from the perspective
of high efficiency. Specifically, the efficiency of SynRM has been improved beyond the induction motor
[1]. However, the torque characteristic of SynRMs is much lower than that of the IPMSM. To improve
the torque characteristic, the permanent magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor (PMASynRM), in
which a bonded magnet [2,3] is attached to the rotor structure of the SynRM, is proposed in [4].

* Corresponding author: Reiya Suzuki, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Hosei University, Koganei,
Tokyo 184-8584, Japan. E-mail: reiya.suzuki.6n@stu.hosei.ac.jp.

1383-5416/19/$35.00 © 2019 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved
s2 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization

Fig. 1. Topology modelling based on Heaviside function.

In conventional SynRM and PMASynRM research, the rotor structure design has been attempted
such as raise the torque [5] and torque ripple reduction structure [6]. However, topology optimization
of PMASynRM has not been reported to date. In this investigation, the aim is to design the rotor structure
of the PMASynRM to improve its torque characteristic using topology optimization. Because topology

on
optimization has a high flexibility of design, the rotor structure is drastically changed.
In this report, topology optimization based on the Heaviside function aimed at average torque maxi-

rsi
mization and cogging torque minimization was applied to the rotor structure of PMASynRM. Suppression
of motor noise and vibration is expected with a reduction in the cogging torque. Coefficients are provided
ve
for each objective functions, the optimization which increasing the coefficient for the cogging torque
minimization is investigated. In the optimized structure, the torque average and cogging torque are
of
improved.
o
pr

2. Method of topology optimization

d

2.1. Finite element method

cte

The governing equation is formulated in magnetostatic field, which can be written as follows:
rre

𝜕 𝜕𝐴 𝜕 𝜕𝐴
𝜈 + 𝜈 + 𝐽0 (𝑡) = 0, (1)
𝜕𝑥 ( 𝜕𝑥 ) 𝜕𝑦 ( 𝜕𝑦 )
co

where A is a magnetic vector potential of the z-axis direction, J 0 (t) is the magnetizing current density at
time t, 𝜈 is the magnetic resistivity. Equation (1) is changed to the weak form Gi by using the Galerkin
un

method as follows:
𝜕𝑁𝑖 𝜕𝐴 𝜕𝑁𝑖 𝜕𝐴
𝐺𝑖 = ( 𝜈 )+ 𝜈 𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦 − 𝑁 𝐽 (𝑡) = 0, (2)
∬ 𝑆
{ 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 ( 𝜕𝑦 )} ∬ 𝑖 0
where N i is the shape function. The linear equation is defined as follows:
𝐾𝑨 = 𝑭 , (3)
where K is the stiffness matrix, F is the right side vector.

2.2. Heaviside function

Figure 1 shows the topology optimization based on the Heaviside function. When the smoothed Heav-
iside function H (𝜓) [7] is applied to the approximated characteristic function, the reluctivity 𝜈(B2 , 𝜓)
 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization s3

in the design domain is formulated as follows:

𝜈(𝑩 2 , 𝜓) = {1 − 𝐻(𝜓)}𝜈0 + 𝐻(𝜓)𝜈𝑒 (𝑩 2 ), (4)
where 𝜈 0 is the reluctivity in air, 𝜈 e (B2 ) is the nonlinear magnetic reluctivity which is a function of the
magnetic flux density B. 𝜓 are the design variables, and H(𝜓) determines distribution of the material
density in the design domain. The area H(𝜓) = 0 represents the air region, the H(𝜓) = 1 represents the
magnetic body. H(𝜓) is formulated as follows:
3 𝜓 5 5 𝜓 3 15 𝜓 1
𝐻(𝜓) = − ( ) + + (−ℎ ≤ 𝜓 ≤ ℎ), (5)
16 ( ℎ ) 8 ℎ 16 ℎ 2
where h is the transition width between H (−h) = 0 and H (h) = 1.

2.3. Adjoint variable method

on
Sensitivity analysis based on the adjoint variable method (AVM) [8] allows for the calculation of the
sensitivity for all design variables. In finite element analysis considering magnetic nonlinearity, the update

rsi
formula of the Newton-Raphson (NR) method is defined as follows:
𝜕𝐾
(𝐾𝑛−1 + 𝜕𝑨 |𝑛−1 𝑨𝑛−1 ) 𝛿𝑨𝑛−1 = −(𝐾𝑛−1 𝑨𝑛−1 − 𝑭 ).
ve (6)
of
The converged solution An is obtained from the iteration of the NR method (n −1)-th iteration. The
extended objective function is defined as follows:
o
pr

𝑊 = 𝑊 + 𝝀𝑇 (𝐾𝑛 𝑨𝑛 − 𝑭 ), (7)
where W is the objective function, and 𝝀 is the adjoint variables. When Eq. (7) is differentiated by 𝜓 and
d

transformed, the adjoint equation is obtained as follows:

cte

𝜕𝐾 𝑇 𝜕𝑊 𝑇
(𝐾𝑛 + 𝜕𝑨 |𝑛 𝑨𝑛 ) 𝝀 = − 𝜕𝑨 |𝑛 . (8)
rre

The objective function W is the average torque maximization as follows:

co

𝑊 = −𝑡𝑎 . (9)
un

𝜕W∕𝜕A is defined as follows:

𝑝 𝑁
𝜕𝑊 1 𝜕𝒕𝑙
=− , (10)
𝜕𝑨 ∑
𝑛 𝑙 𝜕𝑨

where t l is the torque obtained by the nodal force method [9] at the rotor position l, and N p is the total
motor position. 𝜕t l ∕𝜕A is defined as follows:
𝜕𝒕𝑙 𝜕𝒇
= 𝒓𝑖 × 𝑖 , (11)
𝜕𝑨 ∑ ( 𝜕𝑨 )𝑧
𝑖

where f i is the nodal force of node number i as follows:

𝒇𝑖 = − 𝑇 grad𝑁𝑖 𝑑𝑆, (12)

∫Γ
𝑓
s4 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization

where T is the Maxwell stress tensor as follows:

1
𝑇 = 𝜈0 (𝑩𝑩 𝑇 − 𝑩 2 𝐼 ) . (13)
2
By solving the adjoint equation of (8), the adjoint variable 𝝀 is derived, and the sensitivity is obtained
as follows:
𝜕𝑊 𝜕𝐾 𝜕𝑭
= 𝝀𝑇 𝑨𝑛 − . (14)
𝜕𝜓 ( |
𝜕𝜓 𝑛 𝜕𝜓 )

2.4. Sequential linear programming with fixed move-limit

The optimization problem is defined as follows:

on
min. 𝑔0 (𝝍)
s. t. 𝑔𝑖 (𝝍) ≤ 𝑔𝑖0 , (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑚), (15)

rsi
− ℎ ≤ 𝜓𝑗 ≤ ℎ, (𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛)
ve
where 𝑔0 (𝜓), gi (𝜓) and 𝑔𝑖0 are the objective function to minimize, the i-th constraint condition, and the
upper bound of the constraint condition. The expanded function on the k-th iteration of the topology
of
optimization in sequential linear programming with relaxed move limit (R-SLP) [10] is obtained as
follows:
o

𝑛
pr

(𝑘) 𝜕𝑔𝑖 (𝑘)

𝐺𝑖 (𝝍) = 𝑔𝑖 (𝝍 (𝑘) ) − (𝜓𝑗 − 𝜓𝑗 ) , (16)
∑ { 𝜕𝜓𝑗 | }
𝑗=1 𝝍 (𝑘)
d
cte

where 𝜕gi ∕𝜕𝜓 j is evaluated by the AVM. The sub-problem is generated at 𝜓 (k) :
(𝑘)
min. 𝐺0 (𝝍)
rre

(𝑘)
s. t. 𝐺𝑖 (𝝍) ≤ 𝑔𝑖0 , (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , 𝑚), (17)
co

(𝑘) (𝑘)
𝛼𝑗 ≤ 𝜓𝑗 ≤ 𝛽𝑗 , (𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛)
un

(𝑘) (𝑘)
where 𝛼𝑗 and 𝛽𝑗 are the variation constraints. To solve this problem, the Lagrange function can be
defined as follows:
𝑛𝑐
(𝑘) (𝑘)
𝐿(𝝍, 𝝀) = 𝐺0 (𝝍) + 𝜆𝑖 (𝐺𝑖 (𝝍) − 𝑓𝑖0 ). (18)
∑
𝑖=1

In the R-SLP, the move limit 𝜁 is introduced to prevent over-modification, and it is defined as the step
size of the design variable update. This limit is reduced only when the objective function vibrates, and the
move limit at 𝜁 (k) the k-th iteration steps decelerates as follows:
(𝑘) (𝑘−1) (𝑘−1) (𝑘−2)
𝜉 (𝑘−1) (𝜓𝑗 − 𝜓𝑗 )(𝜓𝑗 − 𝜓𝑗 )≥0
𝜉 (𝑘) = (𝑘−1) (𝑘) (𝑘−1) (𝑘−1) (𝑘−2) (19)
{𝜏𝜉 (𝜓𝑗 − 𝜓𝑗 )(𝜓𝑗 − 𝜓𝑗 ) < 0,

where 𝜏 is a constant less than 1.0.

 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization s5

Fig. 2. PMASynRM model.

on
3. Optimization model

rsi
Figure 2(a) shows the reference model of PMASynRM. The magnetic material for the rotor and stator
core is T50A1300, and the material for the rotor shaft is S45C. Figure 2(b) shows the optimization model,
ve
in which the rotor area except the region of the magnet and rotor bridge are set to the design domain 𝛺d .
To facilitate manufacturing, the mirror symmetry condition of the design variable is applied, and half of
of
the domain for 1 pitch is set to the design domain. The type of permanent magnet is bounded magnet (Br
= 0.67 T). The design variables are the values for the material density in the design domain. PMASynRM
o
pr

is operated using a three-phase current as iu (t), iv (t) and iw (t) as follows:

𝑖𝑢 (𝑡) = 𝐼𝑚 sin(𝜔𝑡 + 𝛽), (20)
d

𝑖𝑣 (𝑡) = 𝐼𝑚 sin(𝜔𝑡 − 2𝜋/3 + 𝛽), (21)

cte

𝑖𝑤 (𝑡) = 𝐼𝑚 sin(𝜔𝑡 − 4𝜋/3 + 𝛽), (22)

rre

where I m is the amplitude of the input current (3 Arms × 35 turns), and 𝛽 is the current phase angle (30°).
The design goal is average torque maximization and cogging torque minimization under the area Si (𝜓)
co

of the magnetic body generated in the design domain, which is less than S0 . The optimization problem is
formulated as follows:
un

min. 𝑊 = 𝑘1 𝑊𝑎 + 𝑘2 𝑊𝑐
s.t. 𝑆𝑖 (𝜓) = 𝐻(𝜓)𝑑𝑆 ≤ 𝑆0 , (23)
∫Ω𝑑

where k 1 , k 2 are constants. The objective function W a , W c are defined:

𝑊𝑎 = −𝑡𝑎 , (24)
𝑊𝑐 = 𝑡2𝑐𝑙 , (25)
∑
𝑙

where t a is the average torque and t cl is the cogging torque of the rotor position l for the optimized structure.
Table 1 lists the optimization parameter. The convergence criterion 𝜀opt is defined as follows:

𝜀opt = |𝑊 (𝑘) − 𝑊 (𝑘−1) |. (26)

s6 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization

Table 1
Optimization parameter

Rotating speed [rpm] h [mm] 𝜓 (0) Np 𝜁 𝜏 𝜀opt

1,500 0.2 0 30 h∕10 0.99 1.0 × 10−5

on
rsi
ve
Fig. 3. Sensitivity analysis result of node ID:350.
of
4. Optimization result
o

In this section, average torque maximization and cogging torque minimization of PMASynRM is
pr

investigated.
Figure 3 shows the result of sensitivity analysis at node ID:350. In the case of Δ𝜓 = 10−3 , the relative
d

error between AVM and FDM became 0.45%. From the above, only the discretization error is included
cte

in the design sensitivity. Therefore, the accuracy deterioration of AVM does not affect the convergence
result.
rre

Figure 4 shows the optimized structure. With the increase in k 2 , many gray-scales remained at the edge
of the rotor. The optimized structure Fig. 4(d) is similar to Fig. (e). Because the case of k 1 = 1, k 2 = 0
co

and k 1 = 1, k 2 = 1 is no gray-scale, a satisfactory rotor structure was obtained. From the convergence
characteristics of the objective function, vibration is suppressed by decelerating the move limit. It is
un

necessary to reduce the initial 𝜁 because oscillations of the objective function are strongly generated
in the region less than the 50-th step optimization iteration.
Figure 5 shows the results for the torque characteristics. The torque characteristic for the case of k 1
= 1, k 2 = 100 is similar to that of k 1 = 1, k 2 = 100, h∕4. Figure 6 shows the results of the cogging torque
characteristics. When k 2 is larger than k 1 , the cogging torque can be reduced significantly. Table 2 presents
the average torque and torque ripple t r of each structure. In the case of k 1 = 1, k 2 = 1, the average torque is
higher, and the cogging torque is lowered than the reference model. Although the cogging torque is lower
by increasing k 2 , the average torque does not exceed that of the reference model. The elapsed time in each
optimization case became less than half a day. The source code is written in C language.
 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization s7

on
rsi
ve
Fig. 4. Optimized structure.
o of
pr
d
cte
rre
co
un

Fig. 5. Convergence characteristics of the objective function.

5. Conclusions

The average torque and the cogging torque of the PMASynRM were improved by topology optimization.
When the coefficient of the cogging torque minimization is larger than the coefficient of the average torque
maximization, the cogging torque can be reduced significantly. However, the average torque is lower than
that of the reference model. Even though the transition width of the Heaviside function was reduced, many
gray-scales remained. When the coefficients were the same, a higher average torque and lower cogging
torque was obtained for the rotor structure.
s8 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization

Fig. 6. Torque characteristics.

on
rsi
ve
o of
pr
d
cte

Fig. 7. Cogging torque characteristics.

rre

Table 2
co

Optimization result
un

Reference k 1 = 1, k 1 = 1, k 1 = 1, k 1 = 1, k 1 = 1,

model k 2 = 0 k 2 = 1 k 2 = 10 k 2 = 100 k 2 = 100, h∕4

t a [N ⋅ m] 1.72 1.76 1.79 1.68 1.48 1.49

t r × 10−1 4.62 3.39 4.96 2.34 3.62 3.53
Wc 5.96 × 10−1 1.04 1.29 × 10−3 9.15 × 10−5 6.21 × 10−5 6.55 × 10−5
Elapsed time [h] 6.6 7.3 7.4 5.9 5.9

CPU:Intel Core i7-6850K 3.6 GHz & 128 GB.

References
[1] K. Takeuchi, M. Mathushita and Y. Hashiba, High-efficiency reluctance motor, Toshiba Review 70(5) (2015), 20–23, (in
Japanese).
[2] C. Kaidou, T. Ishibashi and Y. Higashimura, Advance and diversification of rotating electrical machines III. Progress in
applied materials, T. IEE Japan 115-D(7) (1995), 835–837, (in Japanese).
 R. Suzuki et al. / Average-torque-maximization and cogging-torque-minimization s9

[3] S. Kitamura, Y. Ishihara, T. Todaka and Y. Inoue, Magnetic field analysis of polar anisotropic plastic magnet and application
for DC brushless motor, T. IEE Japan 117-D(8) (1997), 1001–1007, (in Japanese).
[4] H. Nishiura, S. Morimoto, M. Sanada and Y. Inoue, Structure and characteristics of interior permanent magnet synchronous
motor with bonded rare-earth magnets, IEEJ Transactions on Industry Application 134(10) (2014), 863–869, (in Japanese).
[5] T. Saitou, S. Morimoto, M. Sanada and Y. Inoue, A study on the rotor design of high-torque synchronous reluctance motor
for vehicle propulsion, The Annual Meeting record IEE Japan (5-040) (2014), 71–72, (in Japanese).
[6] M. Obata, S. Morimoto, M. Sanada and Y. Inoue, Rotor structure of ferrite magnet assisted synchronous reluctance motor
for torque ripple reduction, IEEJ Transactions on Industry application 134(10) (2014), 876–883, (in Japanese).
[7] M.-Y. Wang, X. Wang and D. Guo, A level set method for structure topology optimization, Comput Methods, Appl. Mech.
Engrg. 192 (2003), 227–246.
[8] I.-H. Park, B.-T. Lee and S.-Y. Hahn, Design sensitivity analysis for nonlinear magnetostatic problems using finite element
method, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28(2) (1992), 1533–1536.
[9] A. Kameari, Local force calculation in 3D FEM with edge elements, Int. J. Applied Electromagnetics in Materials 3 (1993),
231–240.
[10] H. Masuda, Y. Kanda, Y. Okamoto, K. Hirono, R. Hoshino and S. Wakao, Topology optimization of induction heating
model using sequential linear programming based on move limit with adaptive relaxation, Open Phys. 15 (2017).

on
rsi
ve
o of
pr
d
cte
rre
co
un