Common 3-Phase AC Motor Types

I Asynchronous motors
I Induction motor with squirrel-cage rotor
I Wound-rotor induction motor
I Synchronous motors
I Synchronous motor with a field winding
I Surface-mounted permanent-magnet synchronous motor (SPMSM)
I Interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM)
I Reluctance synchronous motor (SyRM)
I Permanent-magnet-assisted SyRM (PM-SyRM)
I Same model and similar control can be used for these synchronous motors

3 / 39
Recap: Single-Phase Motor
Assumption: ideal sinusoidal winding distribution

ψa = La (ϑm )ia + Laf (ϑm )if = [L0 + L2 cos(2ϑm )]ia + M cos(ϑm )if

ia

La
L2
L0 ϑm

ϑm dψa
Laf
M dt

π 2π ϑm

4 / 39
3-Phase Synchronous Motor Model

Permanent-Magnet and Reluctance Synchronous Motors

Control of Synchronous Motors

5 / 39
3-Phase Synchronous Motor
Sinusoidal phase windings and constant field-winding current if will be assumed
b b

a ia a ia

b ib b ib
a a
c ic c ic

c c

Example of a 3-phase distributed winding Simplified representation

(Y or D connection) will be used in the following
6 / 39
Number of Pole Pairs

ϑM = ϑ m
ϑM = ϑm /2

2 poles (p = 1) 4 poles (p = 2)

Electrical angular speed ωm = p ωM and electrical angle ϑm = p ϑM

Note that the stator and the rotor should have the same number of poles. What happens if their pole numbers differ?
7 / 39
Space Vector Transformation
I Instantaneous 3-phase quantities can be transformed to the αβ components
 
    ia
iα 2 1 √ −1/2 −1/2√ ib 
=
iβ 3 0 3/2 − 3/2
ic

where currents are used as an example

I Equivalently, the complex space vector transformation can be used

2 
is = iα + jiβ = ia + ib ej2π/3 + ic ej4π/3
3
which gives the same components iα and iβ
I 3-phase motor can be modeled as an equivalent 2-phase motor
with no loss of information

8 / 39
Equivalent 2-Phase Motor
β
I Stator flux linkages
q d
       iα
ψα Lα Lαβ iα Lαf
= + i
ψβ Lβα Lβ iβ Lβf f ϑm
Lα = L0 + L2 cos(2ϑm ) dψα
dt α
Lβ = L0 − L2 cos(2ϑm )
Lαβ = Lβα = L2 sin(2ϑm )
Lαf = M cos(ϑm ) Lβf = M sin(ϑm )

I Induced voltages iβ

dψα dψβ dψβ

eα = eβ = dt
dt dt
Torque could be derived using the approach described in the previous lecture, but transforming the model to rotor coordinates allows us to use a
shortcut, as shown in the following slides.
9 / 39
Transformation to Rotor Coordinates

I αβ components can be transformed to the dq components

    
id cos(ϑm ) sin(ϑm ) iα
=
iq − sin(ϑm ) cos(ϑm ) iβ

I Equivalent to the transformation for complex space vectors

id + jiq = is = e−jϑm iss

= [cos(ϑm ) − j sin(ϑm )](iα + jiβ )
= cos(ϑm )iα + sin(ϑm )iβ + j[− sin(ϑm )iα + cos(ϑm )iβ ]

I Inverse transformation is obtained similarly

10 / 39
Model in Rotor Coordinates
q
I Stator flux linkages ωm ψq
β
       id
ψd Ld 0 id L
= + d iF
ψq 0 Lq iq 0
dψd
I Inductances are constant ed
dt d
Ld = L0 +L2 Lq = L0 −L2 ϑm

I Equivalent field-winding α
current iF = (M/Ld )if
dψq
I Induced voltages ωm ψd dt
dψd dψq iq
ed = − ωm ψq eq = + ωm ψd
dt dt eq

11 / 39
I Model can be expressed using space vectors ωm ψq
id Rs
I Stator flux linkage
iF
ud dψd
ψ s = Ld id + ψF + jLq iq Ld
dt

where ψF = Ld iF
I Stator voltage ωm ψd
iq Rs

dψ s dψq
us = Rs is + + jωm ψ s uq Lq
dt dt

Alternatively, space vectors could be represented using real-valued column vectors, e.g., is = id , iq T instead of is = id + jiq . Real-valued
 
vectors would allow expressing the flux linkage equation in a more convenient form.
12 / 39
Power Balance
dψ s
 
3 3 3 ωm
Re {us i∗s } = Rs |is |2 + Re i∗s + TM
2 2 2 dt p

I Electromagnetic torque

3p n o 3p
TM = Im is ψ ∗s = [ψF + (Ld − Lq )id ] iq
2 2

I Rate of change of the magnetic field energy

dψ s ∗
   
d 1 1
Re is = Ld i2d + Lq i2q
dt dt 2 2
I This model is valid also for other synchronous motors

13 / 39
Model in a Block Diagram Form Model in rotor coordinates

Rs
I Magnetic model is obtained from
the flux linkage equation us 1 ψs
Magnetic is
s model
ψd − ψF ψq
is = +j
Ld Lq ωm TM
j Torque
I If needed, magnetic saturation
could be modeled in a form
uss αβ us is dq iss
is = id (ψd , ψq ) + jiq (ψd , ψq ) dq Model αβ
in rotor
ωm TM
coordinates
I Mechanical subsystem closes the
loop from TM to ωm (not shown) 1 ϑm
s

This model could be implemented in Simulink in a similar manner as the induction motor model in Assignment 1.
14 / 39
3-Phase Synchronous Motor Model

Permanent-Magnet and Reluctance Synchronous Motors

Control of Synchronous Motors

15 / 39
PM synchronous motor Reluctance Interior PM
(with a damping cage)1 synchronous motor2 synchronous motor3

1
Merrill, “Permanent-magnet excited synchronous motors,” AIEE Trans., 1955.
2
Kostko, “Polyphase reaction synchronous motors,” J. AIEE, 1923.
3
Jahns, Kliman, and Neumann, “Interior permanent-magnet synchronous motors for adjustable-speed drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1986.
16 / 39
 q q q

d d d

Surface-mounted PM Reluctance Interior PM

synchronous motor synchronous motor synchronous motor
Ld = Lq , ψF = const Ld > Lq , ψF = 0 Lq > Ld , ψF = const

Permeability of PMs (µr ≈ 1.05) almost equals the permeability of air (µr ≈ 1)

17 / 39
Surface-Mounted PM Synchronous Motor (SPMSM)

is
I Either distributed or concentrated
3-phase stator winding
I Rare-earth magnets (NdFeB or SmCo)
mounted at the rotor surface
I High efficiency (or power density)
I Limited field-weakening range
I Expensive due to the magnets and
manufacturing process
I Typical motor type in servo drives What are the current components
id and iq in the figure?

18 / 39
Reluctance Synchronous Motor (SyRM)

I Distributed 3-phase stator winding

I Transversally laminated rotor
I Flux barriers are shaped to maximize Ld /Lq
I Rotor tries to find its way to the position that is
minimizes the magnetic field energy
I Cheaper than PM motors
I More efficient than induction motors
I Poor power factor (means a larger inverter)
I Magnetic saturation has to be taken
into account in control What is the electromagnetic
I Competitor to induction motors torque in the figure?

19 / 39
 Conceptual rotor Axially laminated

Transversally laminated

Figures: (left) Fukami, Momiyama, Shima, et al., “Steady-state analysis of a dual-winding reluctance generator with a multiple-barrier rotor,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Conv., 2008; (right) ABB.
20 / 39
 Chord-slope inductance Incremental inductance

I Magnetic model of a 6.7-kW motor shown as an example

I Can be measured at constant speed4 or identified at standstill5

4
Armando, Bojoi, Guglielmi, et al., “Experimental identification of the magnetic model of synchronous machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2013.
5
Hinkkanen, Pescetto, Mölsä, et al., “Sensorless self-commissioning of synchronous reluctance motors at standstill without rotor locking,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., 2017.
21 / 39
Interior PM Synchronous Motors (IPMSM)

I Reluctance synchronous motor can be

is
improved by placing either rare-earth or
ferrite magnets inside the flux barriers
I Magnets improve the power factor and
contribute to the torque
I Excellent field-weakening performance
I Minor risk of overvoltages due to the low
back-emf induced by the magnets
I If the reluctance torque dominates, these
motors are called PM-assisted reluctance What is the reluctance
synchronous motors (PM-SyRM)6 torque in the figure?

6
Guglielmi, Pastorelli, Pellegrino, et al., “Position-sensorless control of permanent-magnet-assisted synchronous reluctance motor,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., 2004.
22 / 39
25 / 39
3-Phase Synchronous Motor Model

Permanent-Magnet and Reluctance Synchronous Motors

Control of Synchronous Motors

26 / 39
Typical Vector Control System
MTPA, MTPV, and field-weakening algorithms
udc

TM,ref Reference is,ref

Current us,ref uss,ref
calculation e jϑm PWM
controller

is iss
−jϑm
e

ωm ϑm
d/dt M

I Fast current-control loop

I Rotor position ϑm is measured (or estimated)
I Current reference is,ref is calculated in rotor coordinates
I Control of PM and reluctance synchronous motors will be considered
27 / 39
Constant Torque Loci in the Current Plane

I Same torque can be produced with iq

different current components TM = 2TN

3p
TM = [ψF + (Ld − Lq )id ] iq TM = TN
2 TM = 0.5TN
I IPMSM (Lq /Ld = 1.7 and ψF = 0.7 p.u.)
is used as an example motor id
I How are the loci for Ld = Lq (SPMSM)
and for ψF = 0 (SyRM)?
I How to choose id and iq ?

Magnetic saturation will be omitted here, but it should be taken into account at least for SyRMs in practice.
28 / 39
Current and Voltage Limits

I Maximum current
q iq
is = i2d + i2q ≤ imax
ψs = 1 p.u. is = 1.5 p.u.
I Maximum flux linkage
is = 1 p.u.
ψs = 0.3 p.u.
q umax
ψs = ψd2 + ψq2 ≤
|ωm |
id
where

ψd = Ld id + ψF
ψq = Lq iq

29 / 39
Control Principle

I Goal is to produce the requested torque at minimum losses and

to maximize available torque for the given drive capacity (imax and umax )
I Speeds below the base speed
I Maximum torque per ampere (MTPA) locus minimizes the copper losses
I Higher speeds
I MTPA locus cannot be used due to the limited voltage
I To reach higher speeds, the flux linkage ψs has to be reduced by negative id
I Maximum torque per volt (MTPV) limit has to be taken into account

30 / 39
Maximum Torque per Ampere (MTPA)
q
I Current magnitude is = i2d + i2q
I Torque is expressed as
MTPA iq
3p
q
TM = [ψF + (Ld − Lq )id ] i2s − i2d TM = 0.5TN
2
I Maximum torque at ∂TM /∂id = 0 TM = TN
is = 1 p.u.
ψF
i2d + id − i2q = 0 id
Ld − Lq

I Special cases

id = 0 for Ld = Lq (SPMSM)
|id | = |iq | for ψF = 0 (SyRM)

31 / 39
Maximum Torque per Volt (MTPV)

I Flux magnitude
q
ψs = (ψF + Ld id )2 + (Lq iq )2
I MTPV condition can be derived similarly as the MTPA condition

Lq
(ψF + Ld id )2 + ψf (ψF + Ld id ) − (Lq iq )2 = 0
Ld − Lq

I Special cases

id = −ψF /Ld for Ld = Lq (SPMSM)

|ψd | = |ψq | for ψF = 0 (SyRM)

32 / 39
Feasible Operating Area8

MTPA iq
Constant
MTPV torque loci
(dotted)
Constant
voltage
ellipses id
(dashed)
Current
limit

8
Morimoto, Takeda, Hirasa, et al., “Expansion of operating limits for permanent magnet motor by current vector control considering inverter
capacity,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 1990.
33 / 39
Example: Acceleration Loci for i max = 1 p.u. and i max = 1.5 p.u.

iq (p.u.) TM /TN

1.5
1.5

1
1

0.5 0.5

0
−1.5 −1 −0.5 0 id (p.u.) 0 1 2 ωm (p.u.)

34 / 39
TM /TN pM /pN
us (p.u.)
pM (is = 1.5 p.u.)
1.5 1.5 pM (is = 1 p.u.)

us
1 1

0.5 0.5

0 0
0 1 2 ωm (p.u.) 0 1 2 ωm (p.u.)

Mechanical power pM = TM ωm /p

35 / 39
Example: Time-Domain Waveforms
4

ωm (p.u.)
2

0
1.5 2

TM /TN
B 1

0
1.5

ψs (p.u.)
1 1
iq (p.u.)

0.5
0
1.5 BB C

is (p.u.)
D
1
0.5 C E
0.5
0 A
1.5

id , iq (p.u.)
id
D
iq
0

0 E A
−1.5
−1.5 −1 −0.5 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
id (p.u.) t (s)
36 / 39
Feedforward Reference Calculation Method9,10
udc √ us,max ψs,mtpa
1/ 3
ψs,ref ψs,ref
min(·) id,ref
ωm T M,ref
|·| |·| is,ref
ψs,max
iq,ref
TM,max
TM,ref T M,ref
|·| min(·)

sign(·) sign(·)

I Control lookup tables numerically solved from the magnetic model

I Other control structures and control variables are possible

9
Meyer and Böcker, “Optimum control for interior permanent magnet synchronous motors (IPMSM) in constant torque and flux weakening range,” in
Proc. EPE-PEMC, 2006.
10
Awan, Song, Saarakkala, et al., “Optimal torque control of saturated synchronous motors: Plug-and-play method,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2018.
37 / 39
Experimental Results: 6.7-kW SyRM
I Rated values: 3175 r/min; 105.8 Hz; 370 V; 15.5 A
I Sampling and switching frequency 5 kHz
I Current-control bandwidth 500 Hz
I Flux linkages used as state variables in the current controller11

11
Awan, Saarakkala, and Hinkkanen, “Flux-linkage-based current control of saturated synchronous motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2019.
38 / 39
I Acceleration to 2 p.u. (212 Hz)
I Control takes the magnetic
saturation into account
I Saturation affects significantly the
optimal current components

39 / 39