OPTIMIZED PERMANENT MAGNET MOTOR CONTROL FOR ELECTRIC

SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS USING LV ASDs

Copyright Material IEEE
Paper No. PCIC-2019-53

Richard Paes Tim Rowan Semyon Royak Jingbo Liu

Senior Member, IEEE, IAS Member, IEEE, IAS Senior Member, IEEE, IAS Senior Member, IEEE, IAS
Rockwell Automation Rockwell Automation Rockwell Automation Rockwell Automation
6223 2nd St SE 6400 W. Enterprise Drive 1 Allen Bradley Dr. 1 Allen Bradley Dr
Calgary, AB, Canada Mequon,Wl 53092 Mayfield Heights, OH 44124 Mayfield Heights, OH 44124
T2H 1J5 USA USA USA
rhpaes@ra.rockwell.com t m rowa n@ ra.rockwe 11.co m s roya k@ ra.rockwe 11.co m jliu 2@ra.rockwell.com

Abstract - Advancements in motor technology are leading to demonstrate the impact of efficiency on operating costs alone.
the increased use of permanent magnet motors (PM motors) in The evaluation was done on the basis of $0.07/kWhr cost of
a variety of applications. One of these applications is electric electricity with the machines operating at 3500 hours per year.
submersible pumps because this technology brings several In the case of higher electrical rates or longer operating timelines
benefits over conventional induction motors. When permanent (> 3500 hours per year), the energy savings will be more
magnet motors are combined with adjustable speed drives, there pronounced.
are further benefits, particularly when the drive utilizes sensor­ TABLE 1
less flux oriented control of these synchronous machines rather ESTIMATED ANNUAL ENERGY COST SAVINGS
than the typical volts per hertz control. This paper will go into STANDARD VS PREMIUM EFFICIENCY INDUCTION MOTORS
detail on this new technology and the benefits which are realized Motor Efficiency (%) Annual
with its use. Motor Rating Standard High Energy Cost
Index Terms — energy savings, flux vector control, permanent (HP) Efficiency Efficiency Savings
magnet motor (PMM), adjustable speed drive, electrical 50 88.0 95 $765.19
submersible pump motor, ESP 100 91 95.5 $946.40
250 93.4 96.2 $1423.90
I. INTRODUCTION 400 93.3 96.2 $2362.14

Current economic conditions along with an increased focus on
the environment have led to additional emphasis on energy
efficiency during selection and design. Energy is often the
largest component in the overall cost of ownership outweighing
the initial capital cost of the motor itself as well as the cost of
production for any end user. Reducing the energy required is an
obvious target for those who are looking to remain competitive
with the challenging economic circumstances today. There are
a number of considerations when minimizing energy costs
ranging from initial motor selection to peak energy demand (utility
strategy) as well as the use of adjustable speed drives (ASDs).
Using ASDs has become commonplace and may be justified
simply on the basis of energy savings alone. In this paper, we
will be focusing on the type of motor and the type of drive control
utilized as being key factors in additional energy savings.
II. MOTORS
It is recognized that motors, in general, represent perhaps the
largest opportunity worldwide to reduce energy consumption.
For this reason, motor efficiency has been a primary focus for
government agencies, utilities and other energy regulators. End
users are further motivated with a variety of incentives (usually in
the form of rebates) or penalties and taxes such as those
currently being imposed related to carbon emissions and
greenhouse gasses. Table 1 shows typical energy usage
differences and associated savings when standard and high
efficiency induction motors are compared over time in order to
III. PERMANENT MAGNET MOTORS
Permanent magnet motors (PMM) are relatively new to
industry. This motor design brings additional benefits beyond the
standard induction motor which has been the prevalent design
for decades. In fact, induction motors displaced DC motors years
ago due to their simpler design and reduced maintenance,
especially when used in conjunction with ASDs. The PM motor
may do the same to the induction motor certainly for some
specific applications.
To begin with, the PM motor is a synchronous motor. Unlike
the typical brush or brushless type synchronous machine, this
motor design utilizes rare earth permanent magnets rather than
an electrical approach to produce the field poles at the rotor.
The PM synchronous motor has a three-phase stator similar to
that of a standard synchronous or induction motor, however,
the rotor has permanent magnets installed on the rotor as
shown in Fig. 1.
The construction of the PM motor gives this machine a few
interesting and unique characteristics as compared to ac
induction, synchronous and dc machines [ 1][2j.
Characteristics which are unique to this motor are as follows:
• PMMs do not have an amortisseur or start winding to
address across the line starting. This means that PM are
typically applied with an ASD as the controller ramps up the
frequency at the stator from zero to rated frequency so the
motor is never out of step.

978-1-7281-2305-9/19/$31.00 O 2019 IEEE CFP19PCI-PRT

- 495 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
• Field excitation cannot be varied so the power factor will
remain relatively fixed as compared to alternatives.
• The field poles are established using rare earth magnets
eliminating the losses associated with inducing a counter
electro EMF in the squirrel cage winding in the case of an
ac induction motor and the dc exciter; and, there are other
associated losses when exciting the dc field of the more
conventional ac synchronous machine.
S tator
Fig. 1 Permanent Magnet Motor Overview
These characteristics lead to a very efficient machine when
compared to either the conventional ac synchronous or even
the high efficiency induction machine as shown below in Fig. 2.
M otor Efficiency vs Speed - V T application
100
2 95
í 90
5
£ 85
UJ
s 80
5 75
70
900 1125 1350 1575
Speed (rpmj
----- PMAC Motor Nema Premium Induction Motor
Fig. 2 Efficiency Comparison of PM and Induction Motor (IM)
(3HP)
This leads to a number of advantages for the PM motor:
• More efficient than the equivalent induction machine.
• Motors will tend to run cooler with lower losses.
• Higher power density allows for size reduction. This is
particularly beneficial to the electric submersible pump
Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
(ESP) application since it simplifies deployment and
retrieval.
• Higher pole counts can be achieved. Lower speed
applications are easier to achieve while avoiding the use of
gear boxes. Higher motor poles allow the creation of more
torque with less speed and constant power, therefore, it is
possible to avoid a gear box.
• Fixed power factor / no-field excitation is an advantage for
this motor type. When using PM motors with appropriate
control, it is possible to save 50% energy (or more, because
this approach keeps power factor at near unity).
Additional items to discuss when looking at PM technology.
• PM motors are relatively new technology so reliability
numbers are still being established since there is not the
same historical database to draw from as that for induction
motors. The expectation is that the reliability should be
similar to and possibly better than induction machines.
• Self-excitation when there is an overhauling load connected
to the PM motor would leave a voltage at the output of the
drive even when the ASD has been shut down. This is both
an application and safety consideration.
• The availability of spares and how quickly they could be
obtained in the event of a failure.
• It is possible for a magnet(s) to lose their magnetic flux if
abused or overheated. This must be considered for certain
applications such as marine propulsion, hoisting, etc. where
this is more critical.
IV. ADJUSTABLE SPEED DRIVE CONTROL
Just as there are several distinct types of motor construction
options ranging from induction to permanent magnet, there are
also several types of drive control options available to end users
as well. The most basic control available today is Volts per Hertz
(V/Hz). A slightly more advanced control is Enhanced Volts per
Hz, followed by Field Oriented Control (FOC) which is often
referred to as simply Vector Control. There are distinct benefits
as the drive control becomes more advanced, which we will
cover briefly in this next section.
A. Induction Motor Control
V/Hz control provides basic speed control for many low
dynamic response induction motor applications such as fans and
pumps. The drive is given a user frequency reference and
1800 delivers a user programmed voltage to the motor that is a
function of the frequency. The main drawbacks to this control
are that it can be difficult to deliver high starting torque and
achieve acceptable speed control below 10% of rated motor
speed.
Enhanced V/Hz control utilizes knowledge of the motor stator
resistance, which is measured by the drive to automatically boost
the output voltage at low frequencies as a function of the amount
of load. This allows the drive to deliver high starting torque and
achieve improved speed control down to 1 -2% of rated motor
speed on an induction motor.
FOC, as shown in Fig. 3, does not directly control the speed of
the motor with a frequency reference as V/Hz control does.
Rather the speed is controlled indirectly using a speed feedback
signal and adjusting the torque applied to the motor to regulate
- 496 -
 the motor speed to the user speed reference. The control utilizes
knowledge of the motor resistances, inductances and speed to
allow independent control of the motor flux and torque. The
speed feedback signal can be supplied from a feedback device
connected to the motor (closed loop) or from a speed estimate
calculated by the drive (open loop). FOC control enables several
performance benefits:
• Direct control of motor torque in addition to speed
control of the motor. Torque accuracy can be as good
as +1-2% of the motor rated torque.
• Smooth motor operation at rated torque down to and
including zero speed when run with a speed feedback
device.
• High bandwidth speed and position control possible
with a speed feedback device.
All three of the described methods of control as applied to an
induction motor can also support an economizing option that will
reduce the voltage applied to the motor under light load
conditions, resulting in reduced motor losses and net energy
savings.
have any magnetic saliency because the inductances of both the
d and q axis are equal. Optimal efficiency is easily achieved
using FO vector control because the torque production is entirely
from magnetic torque. See Fig. 3.
IPM motors have the magnets imbedded in the rotor. This
topology results in different magnetic paths dependent on the
rotor position because some of the paths go through a magnet
and others don’t. These motors have magnetic saliency because
the inductances of both the d and q axis are unequal. Achieving
optimal efficiency is more difficult with these motors because
there are two mechanisms of torque production in this design.
One is the same magnetic torque as in SPM motors. The second
torque mechanism is the reluctance torque which arises from this
saliency of the rotor. The torque per amp ratio maximization
involves balancing these two torque contributions in addition to
the FOC.
FOC applied to PM motors also enables the same
performance benefits previously described when applied to
induction motors.

6. Permanent Magnet Motor Control

Many of the items discussed above for induction motors also

apply to PM motor application, however, there are differences
specific to PM applications.
V/Hz control can also provide basic speed control for a limited
number of PM motor applications but typically will not be able to
deliver the high motor efficiencies previously shown. The only
way to achieve this optimization at any speed and load is to
minimize the current by manual adjustment of the programmed
voltage at each individual operating point. This effectively
maximizes the torque per ampere ratio. For example, if the
voltage adjustment is made at a rated load operating point, when
the load is light, the motor will draw much higher current than
required to support that load. In the extreme case of no load, the
Fig. 3 Structure of General Field-Oriented Control
motor may draw as much as 50% rated current while virtually
zero current is required in an optimized condition.
V. SENSOR-LESS FOC VECTOR CONTROL
Enhanced V/Hz control will have similar problems and may
also be incapable of providing acceptable starting torque or fast
FOC is a valuable ASD control technology which provides
acceleration times as it can provide on an induction motor. This
significant performance benefits. The stator currents of an ac
is because an induction motor rotor has natural damping and is
motor are transformed into two orthogonal components, d- and
designed for across the line starts, while the typical PM motor
q- axis, which are not dependent on time. In general, FOC
rotor has no damping and is not designed for across the line
improves motor drive performance by decoupling flux and torque
starts. PMMs are specifically designed for operation with ASDs.
components such that they can be controlled independently.
The induction motor also is naturally stable at any speed around
Motor drive systems with FOC have shown improved efficiency
its synchronous speed, while the PM motor can be unstable
and smoother operation.
when it is not at its synchronous speed.
Fig. 4 illustrates a general structure of a commonly used
Field Oriented Control applied to a PM motor automatically
position sensor-less control scheme over the full speed range [3].
achieves the high efficiencies the motor is naturally capable of
High frequency harmonic components are inserted or injected
by applying the optimal voltage at each operating point to
into the phase currents at zero and low speed that takes
minimize the current. Closed loop FOC on PM motors requires
advantage of the anisotropic properties of the machines. Back-
a motor feedback device that delivers both a speed and position
electromotive force (EMF) methods are generally utilized for
signal to the control, while in open loop FOC control the drive
machines operating within the medium and high speed ranges.
calculates an estimate of both speed and position.
In Electric Submersible Pumps (ESP) for oil pump
There are two types of PM motors, Surface PM (SPM) and
applications, there has been an emerging trend of using PM
Interior PM (IPM) motors [2], SPM motors have the magnets
motors. Even though sensor-less FOC has been commonly
mounted on the surface of the rotor. This topology results in
used for conventional PM motor drives, it is not a feasible control
every flux path, independent of rotor position, being the same
because they all go through a magnet. These motors do not

- 497 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
strategy, especially for starting and lower speed operation, for
particular applications such as oil pump applications.
For instance, a typical low voltage adjustable speed drive
system configuration for an IM ESP application is shown in Fig.
4 [4]-[8], The system consists of:
1. A low voltage drive - in this case a voltage source
inverter (VSI) - pulse width modulated (PWM)
2. A sine wave filter to mitigate the effect of the reflected
wave due to the use of a PWM drive and long cable
3. An output transformer to increase low voltage drive
output voltage to the levels of medium voltage to allow
for cable voltage drop plus motor requirement
4. Long cable which is typically 1000 meters or more
5. A MV induction motor electric submersible pump
without a position sensor
For such LV ESP drives, the installation of a position sensor
attached to the motor shaft is not even practical.
Fig. 4 A Typical LV ESP Motor Drive Configuration
Unfortunately, conventional sensor-less FOC is not feasible for
lower speed operation for a drive system with an output filter and
transformer due to the presence of the transformer. On the other
hand, the most commonly used open loop method such as V/FIz
control does not work well for PM motor drives [9][10],
Fig. 5 Starting Control: Open Loop Current Regulated Control for Motor Drive with an Output Sinewave Filter, a Transformer, and
Long Cable
- 498
Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Uncontrolled drive/motor currents could have large variations
even with the same voltage command. Furthermore, huge drive
currents could also be generated if the transformer saturates
without much real power being delivered to the motor.
In [2], a new open loop current regulated control scheme is
proposed for a motor drive with an output filter and a transformer,
as shown in Fig. 5. The current-frequency curve determines a Õ-
axis current reference iB* based on the frequency reference f*.
During starting, the current reference ramps up from zero to a
starting frequency where the current reference remains at a
constant value at frequencies above the starting frequency.
Therefore, the motor has sufficient starting torque capability with
controlled drive/motor current through the proper design of the
current and frequency references.
One item to note is that with PM motor technology, while
energy savings are realized with the conventional PM motor
based on velocity/position open loop control, the additional
benefits being discussed are realized to a greater degree with
the full implementation of FOC vector control for a motor drive
system with long output cables and transformers [ 11][ 12].
To begin with, using the proper control algorithm based upon
FOC vector control, for example, the method that will be
presented in following section VI, allows the PM motor to operate
at a power factor close to unity regardless of the load level. The
second benefit of using FOC vector control is that it is dynamic
and adjusts according to the speed and load level unlike V/Hz
control which is optimized for a specific operating speed point
only. A further benefit is the fact that the control is more effective
in utilizing reluctance torque which is addressed in more detail in
section VI.
Fig. 6 shows a control diagram utilizing an equivalent EMF
position observer [13] when the motor runs at medium to high
speed. The stationary reference frame current and signals are
inputs to the position estimator. The current regulator outputs a
voltage reference in the synchronous reference frame which is
transformed back into the stationary reference frame. A
reference frame transformation generates the d- and q-axis
current feedback signals (id and iq) for use by the current
regulators.
Fig. 7 explains the operational modes for a LV PM motor drive
system with output transformer and long cable. At start (t0) is
-
 r

Fig. 6 Medium and High Speed: Sensorless FOC for Motor Drive using Equivalent EMF Observer with an Output Sinewave Filter, a
Transformer, and Long Cable

open loop as shown in Fig. 5, the current and frequency both

Tmot —2 " Pn ' IA/ ' 'Em 0Jq A/) 1A/ ' A/] (1)
ramp up until the frequency reference reaches a certain low
value detected by an open velocity (t-i), closed current loop Where:
control scheme as shown in Fig. 6 . The frequency reference pn - Motor pole pairs
stays at the low value for a set duration of time (L to t2) to ensure 'Vm - Flux of permanent magnet
the synchronization of motion. Next, the frequency and current l q, Lq - Current and inductance for q-axis
continue to ramp up until the current reaches the maximum Id> Ld - Current and inductance for d-axis
allowable current (t2 to t3). After this, the frequency reference lq ' - Torque produced by flux
ramps up while the current reference remains at the maximum (Lq - Ad) - Id' lq - Reluctance torque
allowed current during motor starting (t3 to ti). Finally, when the
motor speed is higher, the motor is controlled by a sensor-less The torque equation can be written in per unit form as follows:
closed-loop FOC that utilizes an estimated rotor position based
T= v (l-ff-/d) (2)

Where:

hh At ’ h ^ . K = \ ~

1st = stator current

vm
l Ch = 77 - Characteristic current that totally demagnetized the
magnet.
To further explain this last point, if the Id current equals or
exceeds the value shown for the calculated ICh characteristic
current as calculated above, the permanent magnet flux will go
to zero and will never be restored.
Optimum torque control delivers maximum torque per amps by
utilizing reluctance torque properly. According to the torque
equation it is necessary to apply the right ratio between Id and Iq
current components to achieve the optimum result [14],
Optimum values of these variables can be calculated
according to the following equations:
Top Vertical Axis, Frequency (Flz)
Bottom Vertical Axis, Current (A)
Florizontal Axis, Time
Add to, t-i, t2, t3, t 4
Âopt = {l+HJl + 8 ' A 2 - / s2t - l ] } -

O)
VI. RELUCTANCE TORQUE UTILIZATION METHOD
1
The torque equation for a PM motor can be written using a well- Id .o p t ~ _ 4^~K‘ [ J l + 8 - K 2 - I 2s t - l ] (4 )
known relationship as follows:
(5 )
J r“ - 16■K2 U/1 + 8 K
Iq.opt st 1\

- 499 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 The above equations can be solved only numerically with the
help of per unit tables.
lv vsi PWM
The algorithm simplified structure for the optimum torque
control is shown on Fig. 8, where “Table 1st” represents the
equation (1), “Table / / represents the equation (2), and “Table Iq
” represents the equation (3).

a a a
i i i
0 0 0

Voltage
Scaling

Fig. 9 LV PM Motor Drive System - ESP Deep Well

Fig. 8 Optimum Torque Control Simplified Block Diagram Operation

This application has become relatively commonplace with

VII. APPLICATIONS
PM motors are used in a wide variety of applications ranging
from very tiny mW machines to larger units used for ship
propulsion. Positioning is also benefit so PM motors are often
used in machine tools, servo drives, and electric vehicles.
Another application for which PM technology is particularly
well suited is the ESP. Review of the benefits of PM machines
are higher power density which leads to a more compact design
facilitating deployment and retrieval of ESP units in the field.
Lower losses result in a cooler running motor which, in turn, can
only serve to improve motor life which is desirable since the
above deployment and retrieval costs are a major consideration
often times being higher in cost than the ESPs themselves.
Thermal cycling of the motor contributes to seal failures which is
one of the leading failures seen on these assemblies.
Fig. 9 shows an overview of the electrical approach to a deep
well PM ESP application. Please note the differences between
this figure and Fig. 4 earlier. The drive in the case of the PMM
FOC control has additional sensing which is taken into the drive
control. This sensing brings in information needed to implement
the more advanced control.
Using a low voltage drive is the most economical approach for
relatively small ESPs even when the additional equipment such
as sine wave filter, step up transformer are considered. The
amount of voltage drop which occurs over the long output cables
as shown in this example requires that the 480 or 600 volt drive
output voltage needs to be stepped up to a higher voltage to
minimize current and the associated voltage drop which will
occur across the output cables.
induction motor technology. ESP vendors are introducing more
versions of PM machines every day and there is a major
opportunity for field retrofits, particularly when original units
must be replaced.
VIII. RESULTS
The results obtained to date and presented here are from a
combination of in lab tests and field measurements gathered
as the opportunities have presented themselves.
Initial testing began in February 2015 in Bogota Columbia.
This testing involved operating a PM ESP on the vector control
as described at various speed and torque levels. The testing
involved the verification that speed, voltage and current
waveforms were stable at various levels and during transitions
between these levels. Included in the tests was the validation
that operation was stable and the waveforms remained clean
and close to sinusoidal. Start-up was based on V/Hz control
between 5Hz and 15Hz. At 15 Hz, the algorithm was
automatically switched to sensor-less FOC.
The conclusion was that the control concept based on voltage
source inverter with sensor-less FOC of a synchronous
permanent magnet was successful.
Later in May 2015, additional tests were performed which
included a comparison of the operation of a PM ESP on V/Hz
control which was later compared to the results when operating
under the new control approach at the same speed on the
same well. One item to consider was that the initial VSI-PWM
ASD topology, while similar, was not from the same
manufacturer. The results are shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON - PM MOTOR ON V/Hz
AND FOC VECTOR CONTROL
- SAMPLE TAKEN AT 10% LOAD AND RATED SPEED
ASD Control Volts / Hz FOC Vector
Motor frequency 60 60
Motor current 9.5 A 4.0 A
Motor voltage 2116 V 1820 V
Pressure (pu) 1.0 1.1

- 500 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Only this single test point was possible at the time since the
equipment was being used in production and the 60 hertz
operating speed was mandated by operations. As this was only
a single sample, it cannot be considered as conclusive. The
large difference in result is attributed to the low load level where
the effect of the new control will be the most pronounced. Low
load levels were typical for this site. It is expected that with
increased load, this differential will remain substantial but be
lower than these numbers. Further comparative testing of V/Hz
and vector control at various load and speed production levels
is planned when the opportunity arises.
Tables 3 & 4 as well as Figs. 11 & 12 are information taken
at a subsequent test performed with a standard filter and 2 khlz
drive carrier frequency in 2016 in Tulsa on a 240 hp test motor.
The tables represent test results for significant drive values and
demonstrate independent power factor from torque level. The
waveforms remained very sinusoidal when operating at 150 Flz
as seen in Fig. 10 at 40% load and Fig. 11 at 100% load.

TABLE 3 Fig. 10 ASD Measured Output 150 Flz, 40 % Load

TEST RESULTS AT 40% LOAD
(Top V, Bottom mA)
TEST MOTOR: 240 HP V(L-L)=2424V, l=57A, T=350FT/LB
Output Transformer Motor
Speed Torque
Amp kW kVA PF Eff Hz
(rpm) (ftlbs)

23.0 44.2 45.2 0.98 0.775 60 1801 133.8

23.1 57.4 58.2 0.986 0.760 80 2397 128.0

22.9 69.0 70.2 0.980 0.790 100 2998 128.0

22.9 81.8 83.6 0.982 0.782 120 3598 125.2

25.3 109.4 112.6 0.972 0.809 150 4502 138.4

TABLE 4
TEST RESULTS AT 100% LOAD
TEST MOTOR: 240 HP V(L-L)=2424V, l=57A, T=350FT/LB
Output Transformer Motor
Speed Torque Fig. 11 ASD Measured Output 150 Flz 100% Load
Amp kW kVA PF Eff Hz
(rpm) (ftlbs)
(Top V, Bottom, mA)
56.1 118.4 120.4 0.986 0.748 60 1796 347.0
Additional results were gathered more recently at a site in
South America. The end user changed over a number of wells
55.8 148.4 150.4 0.988 0.790 80 2409 342.8 from IM ESPs to PM ESPs. Table 5 shows the production
levels for the wells which were changed over and subsequently
56.4 177.8 180.4 0.986 0.809 100 3005 337.1 monitored for energy usage. The wells were broken down into
14 cases (Cases 5 to 18) based on their respective production
rates. It can be seen that each of these cases had significantly
55.9 203.6 206.6 0.984 0.817 120 3584 327.0
different flow rates ranging from 3,500 to 10,000 barrels of fluid
per day (BFPD). Results from these case studies are graphed
49.4 212.6 217.4 0.977 0.837 150 4519 277.3 in Fig. 12. In this graph, green results are the power consumed
by the PM motor ESPs with optimized vector control while the
red is the power used by the IM ESPs operating with volts per
hertz control.

- 501 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE 5 are several options related to drive control for both PM and IM
SOUTH AMERICAN CASE STUDIES which will impact overall efficiency.
Case Production Rate (BFPD) Number of wells There are many benefits which are realized when a PM motor
Number studied (IM/PM) is utilized even with the most basic control option - volts per hertz
5 3000 < BFPD < 3500 15 control. PM motors are more compact in design, have higher
6 3500 < BFPD < 4000 15 efficiencies and run cooler than the equivalent induction
7 4000 < BFPD < 4500 15 machine. When the drive operates with FOC vector control
8 4500 < BFPD < 5000 13 utilizing the algorithms discussed in the paper, additional energy
9 5000 < BFPD < 5500 17 savings are realized making these savings even more
10 5500 < BFPD < 6000 10 substantial. Energy reductions of 20 to 50% without any
11 6000 < BFPD < 6500 13 compromise in motor performance have been demonstrated
12 6500 < BFPD < 7000 13 consistently. The relative cost of a PM drive system is similar to
13 7000 < BFPD < 7500 13 that of a conventional IM system. The ASD requires a new main
control board plus additional sensing to implement the change.
14 7500 < BFPD < 8000 15
This means that the cost to convert an IM ESP to a PM ESP from
15 8000 < BFPD < 8500 11
the drive perspective is not prohibitive.
16 8500 < BFPD < 9000 14
Energy savings improve the bottom line for production,
17 9000 < BFPD < 9500 6
however, there may be additional opportunities for government
18 9500 < BFPD < 10000 2 credits (carbon tax, etc.) and R & D incentives that may further
justify the investment in this state of the art control.
ANALYSIS -KVA/BARREL X. REFERENCES

l [1] M. Melfi, S. Evon, R. McElveen, “Induction versus

0.8 permanent magnet motors”, IEEE Industry Applications
m 0.6 Magazine ( Volume: 15, Issue: 6 , November-December
2009)
“ 0.4
^ 0.2 [2] Frances Richards, “Motors for efficiency: Permanent-
magnet, reluctance, and induction motors compared",
* 0 http://www.machinedesign.com, Apr 09, 2013
CD 00 CD o T—I CM m *f LD CD 00
tH T—1 T—1 tH T—1 T—1 tH T—1 T—1
LU
CO
LU
CO
LU
CO
LU
CO LU LU LU LU LU LU LU LU LU
[3] J. Liu, T. Matsuo, T. A. Nondahl, P. B. Schmidt, T. Rowan
< < < < < CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO and Robert J. De Lange, “Implementation and
o U U U < < < < < < < < <
O O O O O O U O u Performance of Position Sensorless PMSM Control in
Industrial Drives", in Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS 2005 Annu.
I AVE. KVA/BRL (PMM ESPs) ■ AVE. KVA/BRL (IM ESPs) Meeting, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2014, pp. 1-8.
[4] J. Liu; J. Dai; T. Nondahl, S. Royak; P. Schmidt; E. Al-
nabi; “Design and Implementation of Position Sensorless
Fig. 12 Relative Energy Usage per Barrel of Oil Starting Control in Industrial Drives with Output Filter and
Transformer for Oil/Pump Applications", in Conf. Rec.
What is readily apparent from the results is that the PM motor 2017 IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and
ESPs in all cases used less energy than their IM counterparts Exposition (APEC), Tampa, FL USA, March 2017, pp.
with the range being from a 20 to 50% reduction in energy 578-584.
consumption. In total, there were nearly 180 units monitored [5] J. Liu, T. Nondahl, P. Schmidt, and S. Royak, “Position
during the testing with all units demonstrating consistent energy sensorless open loop control for motor drives with output
filter and transformer," U.S. Patent 9054621, June 9, 2015.
savings in this range.
[6] J. Liu, T. A. Nondahl, P. B. Schmidt, S. Royak, “Method
It is estimated that optimizing torque/amps using vector
and apparatus for stability control of open loop motor drive
control will realize additional energy savings in the order of an operation", US patent 9,054,611, Jun 9, 2015
additional 10-30% over standard V/Hz control particularly in the
[7] J. Liu, T. A. Nondahl, P. B. Schmidt, S. Royak, T. Rowan,
case of an IPM motor due to the improvement in reluctance “Generalized stability control for open loop operation of
torque utilization. Further testing in this direction is being motor drive”, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
planned but not available at the time of writing this paper. This vol. 53, pp 2517-2525, May-June 2017
savings does not consider power factor improvement or any [8] I. Boldea, A. Moldovan, V. Schramel-Coroban, G.-D.
associated reduction in penalties for power factor which would Andreescu, and L.Tutelea, “A class of fast dynamics V/f
also contribute to the overall cost benefit to the application. sensorless AC general drives with PM-RSM as a case
study,” in Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Optim. Elect. Electron.
IX. CONCLUSIONS Equip., Bras^ov, Rorrfania, May 2010, pp. 453-459.
[9] M. Kiuchi, T. Ohnishi, H. Flagiwara, and Y. Yasuda, “V/f
Energy savings are a primary focus in industry at this time. control of permanent magnet synchronous motors suitable
for home appliances by DC link peak current control
There are a number of strategies which can be adopted to method," in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Power Electron. Conf.,
improve the energy scenario for most end users. The most Jun. 2010, pp. 567-573.
common strategies which are considered are the use of high [10] Y. Xiang, “Method and apparatus for instability
efficiency motors and the addition of ASDs, both of which are compensation ofV/FIz pulse width modulation inverter-fed
beneficial. In the case of ASDs, one should be aware that there

- 502 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 induction motor drives,” U.S. Patent 5 959 431, Sep. 28,
1999.
[11] J. Liu, T. Nondahl, P. Schmidt, S. Royak and M. Harbaugh,
“Rotor Position Estimation for Synchronous Machines
Based on Equivalent EMF”, IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, vol. 47, pp 1310-1318 , May-June 2011
[12] S.Koonlaboon and S. Sangwongwanich, “Sensorless
Control of Interior Permanet-Magnet Synchronous Motors
Based on A Fictitious Permant -Magnet Flux Model”, in
Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS 2005 Annu. Meeting, Flong Kong,
2005, vol. 1, pp. 311-318.
[13] I. Boldea, M.C. Paicu and G-D. Andreas, "Active Flue
Concept for Motion Sensorless Unified AC drives", IEEE
Trans, on Power Electronics, vol. 23, No. 5, pp 2612-2618,
Sept. 2008.
[14] Semyon Royak, Mark Flarbaugh, Jingbo Liu, Peter
Schmidt, Tom Nondahl, Robert Breitzmann “System and
Method for Universal Adaptive Torque Control of
Permanent Magnet Motor". US patent #7,609,014 issued
10/27/2009.
XI. VITAE
Richard Paes (M’81) received his degree in
electrical/electronic engineering technology from Conestoga
College, in Kitchener, Ontario Canada in 1981. Since
graduation, he has been employed with Rockwell Automation.
FI is primary roles include the application of various motor starting
methods, including medium voltage drives for medium voltage
induction and synchronous motors. Fie is a Senior member of
IEEE, past Chair of the PCIC Transportation Subcommittee,
current Vice-Chair of the PCIC Marine Subcommittee, Chair of
the IEEE 1566 Large Drive Standard, past committee chair for
the 2001 & 2007 PCIC conferences in Toronto and Calgary as
well as future committee chair of 2017 PCIC in Calgary, past
chair of the 2007 Calgary and 2008 Edmonton IEEE IAS Mega
Projects workshops. Mr. Paes is a P.L. (Eng.) in the province of
Alberta, Certified Engineering Technologist in the Province of
Ontario.
Timothy M. Rowan (M'87) was born in Milwaukee, Wl, USA,
in 1958. He received the B.S. degree from Marquette
- 503
Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
University, Milwaukee, in 1980, and the M.S and Ph.D. degrees
from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wl, in 1982 and
1985, respectively, all in electrical engineering.
He is currently a Senior Principal Engineer with Rockwell
Automation, Milwaukee, where he works on the development
of low-voltage standard drive products.
Semyon Royak, Ph.D. was born in 1944 in Novosibirsk,
Russia. He received his BS and MS degrees in 1966 and Ph.D.
degree in 1974 from Novosibirsk Electrotechnical University
Russia. Semyon began his career as an Assistant Professor with
Novosibirsk Electrotechnical University in 1967 and became an
Associate Professor in 1976. He joined Reliance Electric as a
Development Engineer in 1990 and Rockwell Automation in
1995. Recently he was promoted in an Engineering Fellow
position. Working in the field of AC and DC motor control and
power conversion he has most recently been involved in the
research and development of the control design of IPM and SPM
sensor and sensorless drives for traction and underground oil
pump applications, and the control for active front rectifier under
unbalanced voltage source condition. He has received a number
of invention awards from Rockwell Automation.
Dr. Royak is a Senior Member of IEEE with a 49 Russian and 31
USA patents in the field of AC and DC motor control and an
Engineering Fellow of Rockwell Automation.
Jingbo Liu (S’99-M ’05-SM’10) received the B.Eng. and
M.Eng. degrees from Huazhong University of Science and
Technology, Wuhan, China, in 1997 and 2000, respectively, and
Ph.D. degree from The Ohio State University, Columbus, in
2005, all in electrical engineering. She joined the Advanced
Technology Milwaukee Labs., Rockwell Automation, in
2005. She is currently a Principal engineer at Rockwell
Automation, Milwaukee, Wl. Her research interests include
control of AC motor drives & power converters. Dr. Liu is a
Senior Member of IEEE. She holds 21 U.S. patents
-
 APPENDIX A

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

LEGEND FOR IMAGES:

Symbol Extended Description

T re f T o rq u e R e fere n ce
Is t.re f S ta to r c u rre n t r e fe re n c e

is* ô - a x is c u r r e n t r e f e r e n c e
f* fre q u e n c y re fe re n c e
Id d - a x is c u r r e n t
q - a x is c u r r e n t
b
to T i m e z e r o / s ta r t
Lq q - a x is i n d u c t a n c e

I 'd d - a x is i n d u c t a n c e

P e r m a n e n t m a g n e t f lu x
lI q ■¥T m T o r q u e p r o d u c e d b y f lu x
CL q I 'd ) ‘ I d ' Iq R e lu c t a n c e to r q u e
T M o t o r e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c to r q u e
1 m ot

Vn M o t o r p o l e p a ir s

id d - a x is c u r r e n t p e r u n i t

I ch C h a r a c t e r i s t i c c u r r e n t t h a t t o ta l ly d e m a g n e t i z e d th e m a g n e t
1st S ta to r c u rre n t
K Ratio Id/lq
f ovt O p t i m u m t o r q u e p e r u n it

T T o rq u e p e r u n it
q - a x is c u r r e n t p e r u n i t

I d .o p t O p t i m u m d - a x is c u r r e n t p e r u n i t

I q .o p t O p t i m u m q - a x is c u r r e n t p e r u n i t
COr S p e e d (r/se c ) re fe re n c e

cor S p e e d r e f e r e n c e p e r u n it
/\

o, R o t o r a n g le p e r u n it

ia A lp h a -a x is c u rre n t

b B e ta - a x i s c u r r e n t

^ s t.r e f
Stator reference current per unit
I d.com d - a x is c u r r e n t c o m m a n d
I q.com q - a x is c u r r e n t c o m m a n d
V d .c o m d - a x is v o l ta g e c o m m a n d
V
v a .co m q - a x is v o l ta g e c o m m a n d

- 504 -

Authorized licensed use limited to: Andhra University College of Engineering. Downloaded on April 14,2022 at 13:25:23 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.