applied
sciences
Article
Flux-Barrier Design and Torque Performance Analysis of
Synchronous Reluctance Motor with Low Torque Ripple
Jing Liang 1 , Yan Dong 2, *, Hexu Sun 3 , Rongzhe Liu 1 and Guantong Zhu 1






Citation: Liang, J.; Dong, Y.; Sun, H.;
Liu, R.; Zhu, G. Flux-Barrier Design
and Torque Performance Analysis of
Synchronous Reluctance Motor with
Low Torque Ripple. Appl. Sci. 2022,
12, 3958. https://doi.org/10.3390/
app12083958
Academic Editors: Krzysztof Talaśka,
Szymon Wojciechowski and
Antoine Ferreira
Received: 18 February 2022
Accepted: 12 April 2022
Published: 14 April 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12083958
1 School of Artificial Intelligence, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin 300130, China;
201712501003@stu.hebut.edu.cn (J.L.); 202131404088@stu.hebut.edu.cn (R.L.);
202032803001@stu.hebut.edu.cn (G.Z.)
2 School of Electrical Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin 300130, China
3 School of Electrical Engineering, Hebei University of Science and Technology, Shijiazhuang 050018, China;
hxsun@hebut.edu.cn
* Correspondence: dongyan73@hebut.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-187-2219-9127
Abstract: In this paper, an improved rotor structure with cross-shaped flux-barriers was proposed to
improve the torque output capacity and reduce the torque ripple of the synchronous reluctance motor
(SynRM). Firstly, an improved rotor structure of synchronous reluctance motor with cross-shaped
flux-barriers, which can be described by two main parameters, is presented. Second, the improved
motor is qualitatively analyzed by using magnetic equivalent circuit (MEC), and then the effects of
the main parameters of the improved flux-barriers on the distribution of air-gap flux density, average
torque, and torque ripple were analyzed by using the finite element method. Based on the above
analysis, the rotor structure parameters of the proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers were obtained,
and the performance was compared with that of the initial motor. The results show that the proposed
rotor structure with cross-shaped flux-barriers can significantly reduce the torque ripple and increase
the average torque.
Keywords: synchronous reluctance motor; magnetic equivalent circuit; air-gap flux density; harmonic;
torque ripple
1. Introduction
In the face of security threats in the non-traditional climate change crisis, it has
become an international consensus to advance the climate governance process through
global cooperation. Improving industrial energy efficiency is one of the most effective
ways to combat climate change [1]. As far as the motor industry is concerned, the high-
efficiency motor has become the focus of attention. Permanent magnet synchronous motor
(PMSM) is widely studied and used for its high efficiency [2–4]. However, PMSM needs
permanent magnets affected by critical minerals such as rare earth and are a scarce resource
with relatively high cost. Therefore, to further reduce energy consumption, synchronous
reluctance motors with more straightforward structure and lower cost without permanent
magnets have attracted more and more scholars’ attention [5–9]. However, compared with
permanent magnet synchronous motor, the torque characteristics of SynRM need to be
improved, especially torque ripple.
One of the main reasons for the large torque ripple of the SynRM is the spatial harmonic
interaction of magnetic motive force caused by stator current and rotor geometry [10–12].
In terms of ontology design and optimization, previous studies have shown that the design
parameters of the SynRM have a significant influence on the torque ripple [13–16]. The
hotspot of scholars’ research mainly focuses on the shape and position of flux-barriers and
the combination form of rotor silicon steel sheet during stacking [17–19].
Nicola Bianchi suppressed the 10th and 20th harmonics to reduce the torque ripple
by changing the end angles or salient pole angles of the flux barriers [14]. Furthermore,
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 2 of 20

Nicola Bianchi studied the influence of the flux-barrier angles between the flux-barrier ends
and q-axis on torque ripple and proposed an analysis model, which can quickly select the
flux-barrier angles to design a SynRM with minimum torque ripple [20]. However, not
all MMF harmonics are considered to simplify the model. Reference [21] proposed that
the specific torque harmonics can be eliminated by different flux-barrier geometry, and the
corresponding torque harmonics of other geometry can be compensated by combining the
flux-barriers of different geometry. Two laminates with different flux-barrier end angles are
laminated to form a rotor. However, it makes the design more difficult because it needs
to optimize these two laminates separately. Therefore, another method is also proposed
to reduce the torque ripple in ref. [21], that is, two different flux-barrier-end angles are
used on the same stack. Reference [22] also proposed the method of using asymmetric flux-
barriers and a combination of different laminates to reduce the torque ripple. Nevertheless,
motors designed by this method are more challenging to manufacture.
Some scholars choose to use algorithms to optimize motor torque performance. Ref-
erences [19,23,24] introduces the automatic design process of SynRM multi flux berriers
rotors based on finite element analysis and multi-objective genetic optimization. The design
results show that the improved system can be implemented in a reasonable time, but not
all rotor design degrees of freedom are beneficial to the system performance. Reference [7]
trained nonlinear regression or alternative models for average torque and torque pulsation
by using Bayesian regularization back-propagation neural networks. Next, multi-objective
genetic algorithm is used to find the empirical Pareto frontier solution, and the analytic
ellipse constraint is used to encapsulate the optimal solution. However, due to the problem
of multi-variables and multi-constraints, swarm intelligence optimization algorithm is easy
to fall into local optimization or has the problem of slow convergence speed in the process
of motor optimization.
Literature [12] presents a step-shaped flux-barriers rotor structure to reduce the torque
ripple using the conformal mapping method and the magnetic equivalent circuit. It is
concluded that the resistance of the outer two layers of flux barrier does not change with
the change of the structural parameters for the rotor with four layers of flux barrier by
using conformal mapping method to calculate the reluctance of flux barrier. At the same
time, study two layers of trapezoidal flux-barriers structure parameters of its impact on
the air-gap flux density distribution and optimize it. However, this analytical method has
limitations and can only be applied to rotor structure analysis of circular arc flux-barriers
with conformal mapping.
In this article, an improved SynRM with a rotor structure with cross-shaped flux-
barriers is proposed to reduce torque ripple. The air-gap flux density distribution of the
proposed motor is analyzed by using the equivalent magnetic circuit method, and the
effects of two main parameters are used to describe the structure of the cross-shaped flux-
barriers on the air-gap magnetic density distribution, average torque and torque ripple
are analyzed. Based on the above research, the improved geometric configuration of
cross-shaped flux-barriers with small torque ripple is finally obtained.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the parameters of rotor
structure for the initial motor and the proposed motor are presented. Section 3 presents the
computation of the MEC of the proposed motor. Section 4 presents the influence of parame-
ters on air-gap flux density and torque performance. Section 5 provides the conclusions.

2. Rotor Structure for Initial Motor and Proposed Motor

2.1. Rotor Structure of the Initial Motor
Generally speaking, the size of the stator of the SynRM is the same as that of the
three-phase asynchronous motor with the same capacity. Therefore, the stator core and
winding of the motor in this paper refer to the three-phase asynchronous motor. The
difference between the two is only in the rotor structure. Considering the shortcomings
of the axially laminated rotors, such as weak mechanical strength, high manufacturing
process, and high cost, this paper chooses the laterally laminated rotors.

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958
winding of the motor in this paper refer to the three-phase asynchronous motor. The
difference between the two is only in the rotor structure. Considering the shortcomings
of the axially laminated rotors, such as weak mechanical strength, high manufacturing
process, and high cost, this paper chooses the laterally laminated rotors.
The rotor structure of the initial motor is derived from the magnetic field line dis-
tribution of a finite element simulation of a four-pole motor with a virtual solid3 rotor of 20

[25]. In addition, ABB has also produced synchronous reluctance motors with flu-
id-shaped flux-barriers for industrial applications.
Therotor
The equation of the
structure of magnetic
the initialfield
motor potential
is derivedlines in the
from the rotor in polar
magnetic fieldcoordinates
line distri-
bution
can beof a finite element
expressed as: simulation of a four-pole motor with a virtual solid rotor [25].
In addition, ABB has also produced synchronous reluctance motors with fluid-shaped
flux-barriers for industrial applications.d C + C 2 + 4 sin 2 ( pθ )
r(θ ,field
C ) = potential
⋅p (1)
2 sin ( pθ )
The equation of the magnetic lines in the rotor in polar coordinates can
2
be expressed as: v
where r and θ are the radius and u
q
polar angles
C2 +of4 sin
each2 point in the polar coordinate
u
d t p C + ( pθ )
system, d is the shaft diameter, r (θ, C ) =and· p is the number of pole pairs of the motor. C(1)is
2 2 sin( pθ )
used to represent one of the field potential lines. In other words, each magnetic field line
where r and θ to
corresponds area the radius
certain andofpolar
value C . angles of each point in the polar coordinate system,
d is theThe
shaft diameter, and p is the number
design method of initial rotor structure of pole pairs of the motor.
in literature [26,27]C are
is used to represent
referred and the
one of the field potential lines. In other words, each magnetic field
rotor structure of the referenced design motor with fluid-shaped flux-barriers is shown line corresponds to a
certain value of C.
in Figure 1. α i is the angle between the end of the adjacent two layers of the barriers,
The design method of initial rotor structure in literature [26,27] are referred and the
rotor β is theof
and structure angle between the
the referenced q-axismotor
design and the
withimaginary
fluid-shaped extraflux-barriers
point in theislast seg-
shown
ment. To determine the location of the end of the flux-barriers, it
in Figure 1. αi is the angle between the end of the adjacent two layers of the barriers, is assumed that the an-
gle β
and ofisthe
thevirtual
angle point
betweennearthetheq-axis
q-axisand β the
= αmimaginary
2 and soextra that the
pointangle between
in the the end
last segment.
To determine the location of the end of the flux-barriers,
( ) it is assumed
of the flux-barriers is constant that α = π  2p k + 1  , as shown in Figure 1, where ti
the virtual point near the q-axis β = αmm /2 and
that
so that the angle between the end of the
the angle of

and hi areisthe
flux-barriers thicknesses
constant that αof m the
= π/ flux-barriers
[2p(k + 1)],and the segments,
as shown in Figurerespectively.
1, where ti and hi are
the thicknesses of the flux-barriers and the segments, respectively.

Figure1.1.Rotor
Figure Rotorstructure
structureand
anddesign
designvariables
variablesofofthe
theinitial
initialmotor.
motor.

InInthis
thispaper,
paper,the thickness
the thicknessof segments andand
of segments flux-barriers are optimized
flux-barriers following
are optimized the
following
principle of sine
the principle of distribution of magnetic
sine distribution motive
of magnetic forceforce
motive [28] to determine
[28] the value
to determine of theof
the value
thickness of segments
the thickness and flux-barriers.
of segments and flux-barriers.
The
The parameters ofthe
parameters of theinitial
initialSynRM
SynRMareareprovided
providedininTable
Table1.1.The
Theslot
slottype
typeofofstator
stator
used
usedininthis
thispaper
paperisispiriform
piriformslot,
slot,and
andthe
thewinding
windingconnection
connectionadopts
adoptsdelta
deltaconnection.
connection.
Table 1. Parameters of the initial motor.

Parameter Symbol Value Parameter Symbol Value

Rated phase voltage Up 220 V Stack length L 155 mm
Rated phase current Ip 21.79 A Number of phases m 3
Rated speed ns 1500 rmp Number of slots per pole per phase q 3
Frequency f 50 Hz Number of pole pairs p 2
Air-gap length g 0.5 mm Number of parallel branches as 1
Outer stator diameter Ds 260 mm Number of strands bs 2
Inner stator diameter Dsi 170 mm Wingding layers bl 1
Outer rotor diameter Dr 169 mm Winding factor Kw 0.95
Inner rotor diameter d 60 mm Stacking factor Kfe 0.95
 Outer stator diameter Ds 260 mm Number of strands bs 2
Inner stator diameter Dsi 170 mm Wingding layers bl 1
Outer rotor diameter Dr 169 mm Winding factor Kw 0.95

Inner rotor diameter d 60 mm Stacking factor K fe 0.95

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 4 of 20

2.2. Rotor Structure of the Proposed Motor

In this
2.2. Rotor paper, of
Structure thethe
improved
Proposed rotor
Motorwith the cross-shaped flux-barriers structure of the
SynRM is proposed.
In this paper, the The newlyrotor
improved added structural
with parameters
the cross-shaped are mainlystructure
flux-barriers of lthe
hseg ,i and arci
,
SynRM
includingis proposed.
larci ,1 and lThearci ,2
newly added the
, to represent structural parameters
decreased thicknessare mainly
of three hseg,iofand
layers larci ,
barriers
including l arci,1 and l arci,2 , to represent the decreased thickness of three
closed to the shaft, as shown in Figure 2. They are designed to be within eighty percent oflayers of barriers
closed to the shaft,
the thickness of theasbarrier
shownlayer in Figure 2. They
in which are
they designed
are located.to
Atbethe
within
sameeighty percent
time, in order of
to
the thickness of the barrier layer in which they are located. At the same time, in order to
calculate the equivalent reluctance of flux-barrier, each layer of flux-barrier is divided
calculate the equivalent reluctance of flux-barrier, each layer of flux-barrier is divided into
into region I, II and III. It can be seen from Figure 2 that region I and region II exist
region I, II and III. It can be seen from Figure 2 that region I and region II exist symmetrically
symmetrically and have equal areas.
and have equal areas.

Figure2.2.Proposed
Figure Proposedrotor
rotorstructure
structureand
anddesign
designvariables.
variables.

Tobetter
To betterdescribe
describethethe rotor
rotor structure
structure andand optimize
optimize the flux-barriers
the flux-barriers structure
structure pro-
proposed
in the future,
posed two parameters
in the future, k arc and kk seg need
two parameters and to
k be
seg
defined,
need to separately:
be defined, separately:
arc

larci,1
larci ,1
k arc = (2)
karc l=
arci,1 + 2l arci,2 (2)
larci ,1 + 2larci ,2
2hseg,i
k seg = 2 hseg ,i (3)
k seg = hi (3)
hi
where hseg,i is the ith layer salient cross-shaped flux-barrier width, larci,1 (θ ) and larci,2 (θ )
are the lengths of the fluid-shaped flux-barrier after segmentation. k arc is defined as the
ratio of larci,1 to the total length of the curve, and k seg is defined as the ratio of hseg,i to the
thickness of the flux-barrier.

3. Computation of MEC of Proposed Motor

The MEC for the proposed motor is shown in Figure 3. The source of the magnetomo-
tive force and the air-gap reluctance is the same for both models because the stator is the
same. The difference between them lies only in the equivalent reluctance of flux-barriers
caused by different shapes in the rotor.

3.1. MMF Sources

The function of the overall air-gap MMF field with respect to time and angular position
is [13]:
F (t, θ ) = ∑ wn ( θ ) · in ( t ) (4)
n = a, b, c

where n is the phase that n = 0, 1, 2 represent the three phases of a, b, and c, respectively,
and θ is defined as the angular position measured along the circumference of the average
air-gap with the s-axis of phase a as zero reference. Furthermore, wn (θ ) and in (t) are the
 fined as the ratio of larci ,1 to the total length of the curve, and kseg is defined as the ratio
of hseg ,i to the thickness of the flux-barrier.

3. Computation of MEC of Proposed Motor

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 5 of 20
The MEC for the proposed motor is shown in Figure 3. The source of the magneto-
motive force and the air-gap reluctance is the same for both models because the stator is
the same. The difference between them lies only in the equivalent reluctance of
winding function of three phases and the current in three phase at instant t, and the specific
flux-barriers caused by different shapes in the rotor.
calculation equation can be referred to [13].

Figure3.3.MEC
Figure MECfor
foraaSynRM
SynRMwith
withcross-shaped
cross-shapedflux-barriers.
flux-barriers.

3.1. MMF
BasedSources
on the overall air-gap MMF calculated above, the MMF sources of each region
F1n and F
Then1 in Figure
function of 3the
canoverall
be calculated.
air-gap MMF field with respect to time and angular po-
sition is [13]:
3.2. Air-Gap Reluctances in the MEC
Since the width of the air-gap F (ist , considered
θ ) =  wnto (θ be
) ⋅ inuniform,
(t ) air-gap reluctances can (4)
n= a , b , c
be calculated: 
(1/µ0 ) g
where n is the phaseRthat=nR= 0,1, 2 represent

2(αk+1 + β) RL
n = phases
the three 1 of a, b, and c, respective-
g1n gn1 = g (5)
ly, and θ ( 1/µ 0 )
is defined as the angular position measured along the

αk+2−n RL n = 2, 3, . . . , k circumference of the
average air-gap with the s-axis of phase a as zero reference. Furthermore, wn (θ ) and
(1/µ0 ) g
in ( t ) are the winding function of three
R g22 = (6)
phases and the current in three phase at instant
2α1 RL
t , and the specific calculation equation can be referred to [13].
3.3. Cross-Shaped Flux-Barriers Reluctances
Based on the overall air-gap MMF calculated above, the MMF sources of each re-
To
gion F1ncalculate
and Fnthe inreluctance of the
Figure 3 can beimproved
calculated.cross-shaped flux-barriers in the MEC, it is
1
necessary to calculate the length of the curve in the flux-barriers. The calculation equation
of curve length is:
3.2. Air-Gap Reluctances in the MEC Z βq
Since the width of the air-gap r2 + (rto0 )2be
= considered
l (θ ) is dθ uniform, air-gap reluctances can
(7)
α
be calculated:
Then taking the derivative of r in (1) and substituting the obtained formula with
Equation (1) into (7), the calculation equation of curve length is obtained:
v √
2 c+ c2 +4 sin2 (2θ ) 4 cos2 (2θ )
u
Z β u h √ 8 sin(2θ )·cos
i (2θ ) √
+ 3 (2θ ) −
l (θ ) = d 2 2 2 2 sin sin(2θ )· c2 +4 sin2 (2θ ) dθ (8)
u
t c+ c +4 sin (2θ ) ·[c +4 sin(2θ )]
α

The proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers are divided into three parts to calculate
the magnetoresistance according to the structural characteristics of the rotor. Since the
proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers are symmetric for the q-axis, the reluctance between
the two ends of the separated barrier is equal. Rbi1 is the reluctance of the ith layer of the
proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers in region I and Rbi2 is the reluctance of the ith layer
of the proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers in region II and region III. The reluctances Rbi1
and Rbi2 are defined as, respectively,

hi + hseg,i
Rbi1 = (9)
µ0 larci,1 (θ ) L
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 6 of 20

hi
Rbi2 = (10)
µ0 larci,2 (θ ) L
where L is the stack length.

3.4. MEC Model

By analyzing the magnetic circuit shown in Figure 4a, the expressions of magnetomo-
tive force and magnetic resistance in the equivalent magnetic circuit shown in Figure 4c
can be obtained.
!
Feq2 (t, θr ) F15 (t, θr ) F51 (t, θr )
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Feq (t, θr ) = + + 7 of 21 · R eq4 , (11)
Req3 + Reqb2 R g15 R g51
  −1
Reqbi = R− 1 −1
bi1 + 2R−bi2 i = 1, 2, 3, (12)
 1

(R + Rhb 51 ) + Rg 12 + Rg 21 
−1
−1 −1
 i =1

−1 
g 11 i −1
R + R + R −1 + R −1 i =1
 −1g11 g12 g21
 −
b51 1

( Req1 hb 41 ) + Rg 13 −1 + R
g 31−1 



 + R −1  i = 2 i −1
 + R g13 −1, + R g31 −1

Reqi =  Req1 + Rb41 (13) i =2



−1

(=Req2+ R ) + Rg 14 + Rg 41−1


Reqi
 − 1
−1 −1 
i=3
 −1
, (13)
 

 eqb 3R eq2 + Reqb3  + R g14 −1 + R g41 −1 i =3
  −1

( Req3+ Reqb2 ) + Rg 15 + Rg51−1 
−1

− − −1
i=4

  1 1 

 Req3 + Reqb2  + R g15 −1 + R g51 −1


 i =4
where i represents the number of layers of the flux-barrier, and Re qbi is the equivalent
where i represents the number of layers of the flux-barrier, and Reqbi is the equivalent
magnetic resistance of Rbi 1 in parallel with two Rbi 2 . Rbi 2 is the equivalent reluctance
magnetic resistance of Rbi1 in parallel with two Rbi2 . Rbi2 is the equivalent reluctance
required for calculation.
required for calculation.

(a)

(b) (c)
Figure 4. (a) MEC for the proposed motor; (b) Simplified equivalent circuits of (a); (c) Final simpli-
Figure 4. (a) MEC for the proposed motor; (b) Simplified equivalent circuits of (a); (c) Final simplified
fied equivalent circuits of SynRM with proposed rotor structure MEC for a SynRM with
equivalent
cross-shaped circuits of SynRM with proposed rotor structure MEC for a SynRM with cross-shaped
flux-barriers.
flux-barriers.
By analyzing each magnetic circuit, the equivalent magnetic flux expression of
By analyzing
equivalent magnetic circuit caneach magnetic
be obtained. circuit,
Some the
of the equivalent
magnetic magnetic
flux and flux expression of equiva-
equivalent
magnetic flux
lentthrough
magneticeach flux-barrier
circuit can be canobtained.
be obtained by using
Some Equations
of the (14)–(19).
magnetic flux and equivalent magnetic
(t ,θ )
flux through eachF flux-barrier
Φ2 =
can be obtained by using Equations (14)–(19).
eq r
(14)
Req 4 + Reqb1
Feq (t, θr )
Φ2 = (14)
F11 ( t , θr ) Req4 + Reqb1
Φ b 51 ( t , θr ) = (15)
Rg 11 + Rb 51 + Rb 41 + Reqb 3 + Reqb 2 + Reqb1
 F13 ( t , θr ) F31 ( t , θr )
Φ eqb 3 ( t , θr ) = Φ 41 ( t , θr ) + + ,
Rg13 + Reqb 3 + Reqb 2 + Reqb1 Rg 31 + Reqb 3 + Reqb 2 + Reqb1

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958

F14 ( t , θr ) F41 ( t , θr ) 7 of 20
Φ eqb 2 ( t , θr ) = Φ eqb 3 ( t , θr ) + + ,
Rg 14 + Reqb 2 + Reqb1 Rg 41 + Reqb 2 + Reqb1
F11 (t, θr )
Φb51 (t, θr ) = (15)
R g11 + Rb51 + Rb41 + Reqb3 + Reqb2 + Reqb1
F15 ( t , θr ) F51 ( t , θr )
Φ eqb1 ( t , θFr 12
) =(t,Φθeqbr ) 2 (t ,θr ) + F21 (t, θr ). +
Φb41 (t, θr ) = Φb51 (t, θr ) + Rg15++RReqb+
R g12 + Rb41 + Reqb3 + Reqb2 + Reqb1 1 R Rg 51
+ + Reqb+
Reqb3 1 R eqb2 + R eqb1
, (16)
g21 b41

F13 (t, θr ) magnetic flux and (t, θr )

F31 equivalent
Φeqb3 (t, θr ) = Φ41 (t,When the equivalent
θr ) + + magnetic
, resistance
(17) ar
R + R eqb3 + R eqb2 + R eqb1 R + R eqb3 + R eqb2 + R
lated, the expression of three-layer magnetomotive force drop can be further obta
g13 g31 eqb1

F14 (t, θr ) F41 (t, θr )

R( tg14
, θ+) R=eqb2
Φ + R( teqb1 ) ⋅ RRg41 + Reqb2
Φeqb2 (t, θr ) = Φeqb3 (t, θΔr )F+ ,θ + i =+1,R2,eqb1
3 ,, (18)
eqbi r eqbi r eqbi

F15 (t, θr ) F (t, θr )

Φeqb1 (t, θr ) = Φeqb2 (t, θr ) + + 51
ΔFbi 1 ( t , θr ) ( )
. (19)
t , θ ⋅ Rg51 + Reqb1
R=g15Φ+ Reqb1
bi 1
R
r
i = 4, 5 .
bi 1
When the equivalent magnetic flux and equivalent magnetic resistance are calculated,
The expressions
the expression of magnetomotive
of three-layer magnetic fluxforce
in different regions
drop can be further are as follows:
obtained.

∆Feqbi (t, θr ) = Φeqbi (t, θr ) ·Δ

RFeqbi
Φbi 1 ( t , θr ) =
eqbi (t ,iθ=)1, 2, 3,i = 1, 2, 3
r
(20)
,
∆Fbi1 (t, θr ) = Φbi1 (t, θr ) · Rbi1Rbi 1 i = 4, 5. (21)
The expressions of magnetic flux in different regions are as follows:
ΔF ( t , θr )
Φ
Φbi1 (t, θr ) =bi2 (
∆F t , θ
eqbi
r
()t,=θr ) eqbi
Ribi= 1, 2, 3, i = 1, 2, 3 . (22)
Rbi1 2

∆Feqbi (t, θr )
Φbi2 (t, θr ) = i = 1, 2, 3. (23)
3.5. Air-Gap Flux Density Rbi2

The MMF
3.5. Air-Gap drops
Flux Density of the flux-barriers are independent of the path of the m
fieldThe
line through the barriers
MMF drops of the flux-barriers [21].
are Therefore,
independent the
of theair-gap flux
path of the density
magnetic at differe
field
tions
line can be
through the calculated
barriers [21]. according toair-gap
Therefore, the the following
flux density method proposed
at different locations in
canthis pap
be calculated according to the following method proposed in this paper, and
the partition diagram of air-gap between stator and rotor are shown in Figure 5. the partition
diagram of air-gap between stator and rotor are shown in Figure 5.

Figure
Figure Partition
5. 5. diagram
Partition of air-gap
diagram betweenbetween
of air-gap stator andstator
rotor. and rotor.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 8 of 20

1. When the magnetic field line passes through all flux-barriers and comes out of region
11, the flux density is expressed as,
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p − ∆Fb51 t, θ p − ∆Fb41 t, θ p − ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) , (24)





Bg t, θ p , θr =
g i =1

where, θr ≤ θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 ) p or θr + 2π − ( β + α6 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + 2π;
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p + ∆Fb51 t, θ p + ∆Fb41 t, θ p + ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) , (25)





Bg t, θ p , θr =
g i =1

where θr − ( β + α6 ) p + π ≤ θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 ) p + π;
2. When the magnetic field line only does not passes through the outermost magnetic
barriers, that is, through the first four layers of magnetic barrier, and comes out of
region 12 or region 21, the magnetic density is expressed as,
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p − ∆Fb41 t, θ p − ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) ,




Bg t, θ p , θr = (26)
g i =1

where, θr + ( β + α6 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 + α5 ) p or θr + 2π − ( β + α6 + α5 ) p ≤ θ p ≤
θr + 2π − ( β + α6 ) p;
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p + ∆Fb41 t, θ p + ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) ,




Bg t, θ p , θr = (27)
g i =1

where, θr − ( β + α6 + α5 ) p + π ≤ θ p ≤ θr − ( β + α6 ) p + π or θr + ( β + α6 ) p + π ≤
θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 + α5 ) p + π;
3. When the magnetic field line passes through the first three magnetic barriers, and
comes out of region 13 or region 31, the magnetic density is expressed as,
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p − ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (28)
g i =1

where, θr + ( β + α6 + α5 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 + α5 + α4 ) p or θr + 2π −
( β + α6 + α5 + α4 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + 2π − ( β + α6 + α5 ) p;
" #
n
µ0
F t, θ p + ∑ ∆Feqbi (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (29)
g i =1

where, θr − ( β + α6 + α5 + α4 ) p + π ≤ θ p ≤ θr − ( β + α6 + α5 ) p + π or θr +
( β + α6 + α5 ) p + π ≤ θ p ≤ θr + ( β + α6 + α5 + α4 ) p + π;
4. When the magnetic field line passes through the first and the second magnetic barriers,
and comes out of region 14 or region 41, the magnetic density is expressed as,
µ0 h i
F t, θ p − ∆Feqb2 (t, θr ) − ∆Feqb1 (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (30)
g

where, θr + ( β + α6 + α5 + α4 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + π/2 − (α1 + α2 ) p or θr + 3π/2 +

(α1 + α2 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + 3π/2 + (α1 + α2 + α3 ) p;
µ0 h i
F t, θ p + ∆Feqb2 (t, θr ) + ∆Feqb1 (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (31)
g

where, θr + π/2 + (α1 + α2 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + π/2 + (α1 + α2 + α3 ) p or θr + 3π/2 −

(α1 + α2 + α3 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + 3π/2 − (α1 + α2 ) p;
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 9 of 20

5. When the magnetic field line only passes through the innermost flux-barrier, and
comes out of region 15 or region 51, the magnetic density is expressed as,
µ0 h i
F t, θ p − ∆Feqb1 (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (32)
g

where, θr − π/2 − (α1 + α2 ) p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + π/2 − α1 p or θr + 3π/2 + α1 p ≤ θ p ≤

θr + 3π/2 + (α1 + α2 ) p;
µ0 h i
F t, θ p + ∆Feqb1 (t, θr ) ,



Bg t, θ p , θr = (33)
g

where, θr − π/2 + α1 p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + π/2 + (α1 + α2 ) p or θr + 3π/2 − (α1 + α2 ) p ≤

θ p ≤ θr + 3π/2 − α1 p;
6. When the magnetic field line does not pass through any flux-barrier and comes out of
region 22, the magnetic density is expressed as,

µ0

Bg t, θ p , θr = · F t, θ p , (34)
g

where, θr + π/2 − α1 p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + π/2 + α1 p or θr + 3π/2 − α1 p ≤ θ p ≤ θr + 3π/2

+ α1 p.
As can be seen from the above analysis, the distribution of air-gap flux density is
related to the MMF sources of each region, the air-gap reluctances, and the reluctances of
the proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers that appear in the MEC. If the partition remains
unchanged, it can be seen that the distribution of air-gap flux density is related to the
reluctances of the proposed cross-shaped flux-barriers, that is, to the structural parameters
of the cross-shaped flux-barriers.

3.6. Torque and Performance Evaluation Index

The electromagnetic torque T can be calculated by the total magnetic energy stored in
the motor without considering the magnetic saturation, and the calculation equation is,

∂Wm (t, θr )
T (t, θr ) = − , (35)
∂θr

where Wm is the total magnetic energy stored by the proposed rotor with cross-shaped
flux-barriers structure of SynRM.
The assumption is made that the magnetic permeability of the core is much greater
than that of the air, that is, the core does not store magnetic energy, the total magnetic
energy stored in the motor can be divided into two parts, one is the magnetic energy stored
in the magnetic barrier Wmb , the other is the magnetic energy stored in the air-gap Wmg .
Then the total magnetic energy Wm can be expressed by the following equation:

Wm (t, θr ) = Wmb (t, θr ) + Wmg (t, θr ). (36)

The magnetic energy stored in the magnetic barrier Wmb is expressed as,

h i
Wmb (t, θr ) = p Rb51 Φb51 (t, θr )2 + Rb41 Φb41 (t, θr )2 + Reqb3 Φeqb3 (t, θr )2 + Reqb2 Φeqb2 (t, θr )2 + Reqb1 Φ2 (t, θr )2 . (37)

The magnetic energy stored in the air-gap Wmg is expressed as,

Z 2π
L( Dr − g) g
Wmg (t, θr ) = Bg (t, θ, θr )2 dθ. (38)
4µ0 0
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 10 of 20

Through the above steps, the torque of the proposed SynRM with cross-shaped fluid-
berriers can be predicted. Next the torque ripple ∆T is defined as the ratio of the difference
between the maximum value of torque Tmax and the minimum value of torque Tmin to the
average value of torque Tavg :
Tmax − Tmin
∆T = . (39)
Tavg
The sensitivity [14] is also used in this paper as one of the indicators to evaluate the
performance of the motor. The method can be exploited when a discrete representation
of the research domain is available [29]. Firstly, a perturbation space of nv -dimensional
hypercube with design vector in the center is established to estimate the maximum rate
of change of torque pulsation, and the dimension of the parameter space is equal to the
number of parameters, which is two in this paper. The parameters of the geometry in
→
a generic solution are defined by the vector f = ( f 1 , f 2 , . . . , f n ), where f 1 = k arc and
f 2 = k seg , and both values range from 0 to 0.8 in this study. The distance between the vector
→0 →00
f and the vector f is calculated by the following equation:

→0 →00  " nv #1

2
= ∑ f i 0 − f i 00

2
d f , f . (40)
i =1

Sensitivity analysis of solutions in space requires the determination of a radius of

an hypersphere R, which must be adequately small to properly assess the sensitivity of
each solution, but also adequately large to find other solutions around each one [30]. The
number of solutions in this study is 65, and R is 0.2 after comprehensive consideration.
For the solution with the minimum torque ripple, the parameters of the geometry is
→  
defined by the vector fe = fe1 , fe2 , . . . , fen , and then the fluctuation of the torque ripple is
computed according to the variation of the geometry with respect to the optimal solution
→
fe, so as to evaluate the rate of change of the ripple with the deviation from the optimal
→ → →
solution fe. The distance of a generic solution f from the fe is:

→ → " nv  #1
2 2
d f , fe = ∑ f i − fei . (41)
i =1

Maximum and minimum torque ripple can be obtained by comparing all solutions in
→ →
the hypercube which is centered in the solution f . The sensitivity of torque ripple at f is
defined as:
∆Tmax − ∆Tmin
→
s f = → . (42)
∆T f

4. Analysis and Comparison of Air-Gap Flux Density and Torque Performance

4.1. Distribution of Air-Gap Flux Density
To further study the influence of cross-shaped flux-barriers on the distribution of
air-gap flux density, the air-gap between stator and rotor in one-eighth motor model was
divided more accurately from the original six regions to obtain 16 regions, as shown in
Figure 6, which were mainly divided according to the width of the flux-barriers end.
These 16 regions can be divided into three parts for research: one is the region A1–A6
corresponding to the segments, and the other is the region B1–B5 and C1–C5 corresponding
to the end of the flux-barriers.
 air-gapToflux density,
further thethe
study air-gap between
influence stator and rotor
of cross-shaped in one-eighth
flux-barriers on themotor model of
distribution
was divided
air-gap more
flux accurately
density, from the
the air-gap originalstator
between six regions to obtain
and rotor 16 regions,
in one-eighth as shown
motor model
in was
Figure 6, which were mainly divided according to the width of the flux-barriers
divided more accurately from the original six regions to obtain 16 regions, as shown end.
These 16 regions
in Figure canwere
6, which be divided
mainlyinto threeaccording
divided parts for to
research: oneofisthe
the width theflux-barriers
region A1–A6 end.
corresponding to the
These 16 regions cansegments,
be dividedand thethree
into other is the
parts for region B1–B5
research: and
one is theC1–C5
regioncorre-
A1–A6
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 11 of 20
sponding to the end
corresponding to of
thethe flux-barriers.
segments, and the other is the region B1–B5 and C1–C5 corre-
sponding to the end of the flux-barriers.

Figure 6. Detailed partition diagram of air-gap between stator and rotor of one-eighth motor.
Figure6.6.Detailed
Figure Detailedpartition
partitiondiagram
diagramofofair-gap
air-gapbetween
betweenstator
statorand
androtor
rotorofofone-eighth
one-eighthmotor.
motor.
The influence of the structural parameters of the cross-shaped flux-barriers on the
air-gapThe
fluxinfluence
The density isofof
influence thethestructural
studied by finiteparameters
structural element
parameters ofofthe
analysisthe cross-shaped
at rated currentflux-barriers
cross-shaped 21.79 A and on
flux-barriers onthe
rated the
air-gap
speed 1500
air-gap flux
flux density
rpm.density isisstudied
The finite studied by
elementbyfinite
finiteelement
results analysis
are shown
element atatrated
in Figures
analysis current
7–9.
rated Among
current 21.79 AAand
them,
21.79 andrated
the flux
rated
speed
speed1500
density of rpm.
each
1500 The
Thefinite
region
rpm. isfinite element
analyzed byresults
element resultsare
taking areshown
the value
shownat ininFigures
the 7–9.
7–9.Among
geometric
Figures Amongthem,
midpoint the
theflux
of each
them, re-
flux
density
densityof
gion. ofeach
each region
region is is analyzed
analyzed by by taking
takingthe
thevalue
valueatatthe thegeometric
geometricmidpoint
midpoint ofof each
each re-
region.
gion.

(a) (b) (c)

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

(d) Figure (e) (f)
Figure7.7.The
Theinfluence
influenceofofcross-shaped
cross-shapedflux-barriers
flux-barriersparameters
parametersononflux
fluxdensity
densityinineach
eachregion
regionofof
air-gap:
Figure(a)
7. region
The A1; (b) region
influence of A2; (c) region
cross-shaped A3; (d) region
flux-barriers A4; (e)on
parameters region
flux A5; (f) region
density in A6.
each region of
air-gap: (a) region A1; (b) region A2; (c) region A3; (d) region A4; (e) region A5; (f) region A6.
air-gap: (a) region A1; (b) region A2; (c) region A3; (d) region A4; (e) region A5; (f) region A6.
Figure 77 shows
Figure shows the
theinfluence
influenceof of
parameters of cross-shaped
parameters flux-barriers
of cross-shaped on theon
flux-barriers air-gap
the
flux density
air-gapFigure of region
flux density A1–A6
of region
7 shows which are
A1–A6 which
the influence mainly located
are mainly
of parameters in the
of located corresponding air
in the flux-barriers
cross-shaped corresponding gap at
onairthe
the end of
air-gap thedensity
flux segmentof of the rotor.
region A1–A6 It can be seen
which that when
are mainly the in
located parameter k seg remains
the corresponding air
unchanged, the value of flux density of region A1, A2 and A3 all remain unchanged first
and then decrease with the increase of k arc . When k arc is constant, the value of flux density
decreases with the increase of k arc for regions A1 and A2, while the value of flux density
increases first and then decreases with the increase of k arc for region A3. Furthermore,
the value of flux density decreases to the minimum when k seg = k arc = 0.8 for all three
regions. The variation trend of A5 and A6 are basically the same as each other when one
parameter of k seg and k arc remains unchanged. The value of flux density decreases first
and then increases with the change of the other parameter. The change of flux density
value in region A4 is different from the above regions while the cross-shaped flux-barrier
parameters change, which is approximately funnel-shaped, and the value of flux density
 k arc , while the value of flux density has little change with kseg when k arc is fixed.
When one parameter is fixed, the value of flux density increases first and then decreases
with the increase of the other parameter. kseg and k arc have slightly different effects on

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958
region B4 because it can be seen that when k arc is constant, the value of flux density
12 of 20
decreases with the increase of kseg . In contrast, the value of flux density increases with
the increase of k arc when kseg is small and remains unchanged when kseg is large. It
is the minimum when k seg = k arc = 0.4. The main reason is that the change of value k arc
can be seen from the observation of Figure 8e that cross-shaped flux-barrier parameters
and k seg changes the equivalent reluctance of the flux-barriers in MEC, which leads to the
exert a similar influence on the value of flux density on region B5 to region A5.
corresponding change of the value of flux-density of the air-gap at different positions.

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 21

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 8. The influence of cross-shaped flux-barriers parameters on flux density in each region of
air-gap: (a) region B1; (b) region B2; (c) region B3; (d) region B4; (e) region B5.

Figure 9 shows the influence of parameters of cross-shaped flux-barriers on the

air-gap flux density of region C1–C5 which are mainly located in the air gap corre-
sponding to the lower half of the end of the flux barriers. As can be seen from the figure,
the impact of kseg and k arc on regions C2 and C3 is consistent with that of regions B2
and B3 analyzed above, and the same tendency with the region C4 and C5 with that of
region B4. When one of the two variables kseg and k arc is fixed, and the other one in-
(d) (e)
creases, the value of flux density shows a changing trend of increasing first and then de-
creasing,
Figure 8. The influence of cross-shaped flux-barriers parameters on Figure
thus forming an umbrella-shaped trend as shown in 10c. in
flux density Moreover, theof
each region
flux density
air-gap: reaches
(a) region B1; its
(b)maximum value
region B2; (c) when
region k
B3; (d) seg = k
region arc = 0.4 .
B4; (e) region B5.

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e)
Figure 9. The influence of cross-shaped flux-barriers parameters on flux density in each region of
Figure 9. The influence of cross-shaped flux-barriers parameters on flux density in each region of
air-gap: (a) region C1; (b) region C2; (c) region C3; (d) region C4; (e) region C5.
air-gap: (a) region C1; (b) region C2; (c) region C3; (d) region C4; (e) region C5.

ItFigure
can be8 observed
shows the from the Figures
influence 7–9 that
of parameters of the magnetic flux-barriers
cross-shaped density valueonofthe
each re-
air-gap
gion
flux is affected
density of by the change
region of equivalent
B1–B5 which reluctance
are mainly locatedofinflux
thebarriers, and some of theto
air gap corresponding
changes
the upper arehalf
nonlinear.
of the end of the flux barriers. It can be seen from Figure 8b,c that the
cross-shaped flux-barrier parameters have the same influence on regions B2 and B3. That
4.2. Analysis of Torque Performance
The torque reflects the output capacity of the motor, and the torque ripple demon-
strates the stability of the output of the motor, which are two crucial indicators of electro-
magnetic performance. When the values of k arc and kseg are different, that is, the flux-
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 13 of 20

is, when k seg is fixed, the value of flux density increases with the increase of k arc , while the
value of flux density has little change with k seg when k arc is fixed. When one parameter is
fixed, the value of flux density increases first and then decreases with the increase of the
other parameter. k seg and k arc have slightly different effects on region B4 because it can
be seen that when k arc is constant, the value of flux density decreases with the increase of
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
k seg . In contrast, the value of flux density increases with the increase of k arc when k15segofis 21

small and remains unchanged when k seg is large. It can be seen from the observation of
Figure 8e that cross-shaped flux-barrier parameters exert a similar influence on the value of
flux
anddensity
k arc ononaverage
region B5 to region
torque A5.
and torque ripple can also be seen in Figure 10. It can be
Figure 9 shows the influence of parameters of cross-shaped flux-barriers on the air-gap
found that when k arc is fixed, the average torque first increases and then decreases with
flux density of region C1–C5 which are mainly located in the air gap corresponding to the
the increase
lower half of ofthekend
seg , while
of thethefluxtorque ripple
barriers. As shows
can be an opposite
seen from the trend. Furthermore,
figure, the impact av-
of
kerage
seg and k
torque on regions C2 and
arc is hardly changed when k C3 is consistent with that of regions B2 and B3 analyzed
remains constant, and kseg varies between
arc
above, and the same tendency with the region C4 and C5 with that of region B4. When
0.2 and
one of the 0.6. When
two the overall
variables k seg and trend
k arc of air-gap
is fixed, flux-density
and the other oneis closer to sinusoidal,
increases, the value the
of
torque ripple will be smaller. According to Equations (35)–(38),
flux density shows a changing trend of increasing first and then decreasing, thus the energy in the mag-
forming
netic
an circuit will also
umbrella-shaped trendchange
as shown correspondingly
in Figure 10c. when the magnetic
Moreover, barrierreaches
the flux density structure
its
changes, which is finally reflected
maximum value when k seg = k arc = 0.4. in the change of torque.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure10.
Figure 10.TheTheeffect
effect of kofseg kand
seg and
karcaverage
k arc on on average torque
torque and andripple:
torque torque(a)ripple: 0.2; k(b)
k arc = (a) = 0.2 (b)
arc k arc =; 0.4;

= =
k k arc
(c)
arc ; (c)(d)k k arc= =0.6
0.40.6; arc ; (d) k = 0.8 .
0.8.
arc

It can be observed from the Figures 7–9 that the magnetic density value of each region
Basedbyonthe
is affected thechange
aboveof
analysis, the reluctance
equivalent structural parameters of SynRM
of flux barriers, withofcross-shaped
and some the changes
flux-barriers
are nonlinear. rotor structure with relatively better torque performance can be obtained as
kseg = 0.4 and karc = 0.2 . At this point, the average torque of the motor is 85.26 Nm,
and the torque ripple is 11.79%.
In order to verify the effectiveness of the method, the same optimization was carried
out for motors with three layers and four layers flux-barrier structures, respectively, as
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 14 of 20

4.2. Analysis of Torque Performance

The torque reflects the output capacity of the motor, and the torque ripple demonstrates
the stability of the output of the motor, which are two crucial indicators of electromagnetic
performance. When the values of k arc and k seg are different, that is, the flux- barrier
structure changes, the torque value of the motor with the corresponding rotor structure can
be calculated according to the MEC of proposed motor established in Section 3.
The analytical torque is compared with the result of FEA simulation, as show in
Figure 10. The stator current are set with I0 = 21.79 A and T = 20 ms (the frequency is
50 Hz). It can be seen from the figure that the analytical torque is basically consistent with
the simulation results, which verifies the validity of the model and can be used for torque
prediction in the early stage of motor rotor structure design. The influence of k seg and k arc
on average torque and torque ripple can also be seen in Figure 10. It can be found that
when k arc is fixed, the average torque first increases and then decreases with the increase
of k seg , while the torque ripple shows an opposite trend. Furthermore, average torque is
hardly changed when k arc remains constant, and k seg varies between 0.2 and 0.6. When
the overall trend of air-gap flux-density is closer to sinusoidal, the torque ripple will be
smaller. According to Equations (35)–(38), the energy in the magnetic circuit will also
change correspondingly when the magnetic barrier structure changes, which is finally
reflected in the change of torque.
Based on the above analysis, the structural parameters of SynRM with cross-shaped
flux-barriers rotor structure with relatively better torque performance can be obtained as
k seg = 0.4 and k arc = 0.2. At this point, the average torque of the motor is 85.26 Nm, and
the torque ripple is 11.79%.
In order to verify the effectiveness of the method, the same optimization was carried
out for motors with three layers and four layers flux-barrier structures, respectively, as
shown in the Figure 11. It can be found that for a SynRM with three layers of flux barrier,
the torque can be increased from 75.2 Nm to 82.15 Nm by using the proposed method,
and the torque ripple is reduced by 27.69%. For a SynRM with four layers of flux barrier,
it is necessary to make a trade-off between the two performance indexes of torque and
torque ripple. However, no matter how to choose, the motor with better performance
than the initial motor can be obtained. Therefore, it can be proved that the proposed
method is not only suitable for the motor with five layers of flux barrier structure, but also
has universality.

4.3. Comparison of Air-Gap Flux Density and Torque Performance

The 3D view of the rotor of initial motor (left) and proposed motor (right) are showed
in Figure 12a. Figure 12b shows the comparison of torque waveform between the initial
motor and the proposed motor with the cross-shaped flux-barriers rotor. The torque ripple
decreases by 34.06%, and the average torque increases by 11.34% with the comparison of
the initial motor. Figure 12c highlights that the shaped of flux-barriers affects the intent
of torque harmonic the proposed rotor structure with cross-shaped flux-barriers with low
torque ripple has lower torque harmonics.
Figure 13 shows the contrast diagram of air-gap flux density distribution and harmonic
content of no-load motor at rated current. Figure 13a reflects the existence of stator slot
and rotor anisotropy, and it can be seen from Figure 13b that there are odd harmonics
in addition to the fundamental components. The third and its multiple harmonics are
primarily caused by magnetic saturation, and the 17th and 19th harmonics are primarily
related to stator slotting, and the 11th, 13th, 23rd, 25th and 29th harmonics are mainly
caused by rotor structure. As for the two motors in this paper, the harmonic components
vary with the shape of the flux barrier in the rotor. It can be seen from the Figure that the
amplitude of the fundamental wave of the air-gap flux density of the proposed SynRM
with cross-shaped flux-barriers rotor structure is higher than that of the initial SynRM,
and the majority contents of harmonics are reduced, which makes the air-gap flux density
distribution more sinusoidal and leads to reduced torque ripple.
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 21

ripple. However, no matter how to choose, the motor with better performance than the in-
itial motor can be obtained. Therefore, it can be proved that the proposed method is not
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 15 of 20
only suitable for the motor with five layers of flux barrier structure, but also has universal-
ity.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure
Figure 11.
11. The effectofof kkseg
Theeffect and kkarc
seg and onaverage
arc on averagetorque
torqueand
andtorque
torque ripple
ripple of
of motor
motor with
with different
different
number of
number of flux
flux barrier
barrier layers
layers (a)(a) average
average torque
torque of
of three-layer
three-layer flux-barriers;
flux-barriers; (b)
(b) average
average torque
torque of
of
four-layer
four-layer flux-barriers;
flux-barriers; (c)(c) torque
torque ripple
ripple ofof three-layer
three-layer flux
flux barriers;
barriers; (d)
(d) torque
torque ripple
ripple of
of four-layer
four-layer
flux-barriers.
flux-barriers.

Figure 14 is
4.3. Comparison of the flux line
Air-Gap Fluxdistribution
Density and of the initial
Torque motor and the proposed motor in
Performance
steady state. As can be seen that the trend of flux
The 3D view of the rotor of initial motor (left) and lines is basically the same
proposed motoras the shapeare
(right) of
flux barrier, and the flux lines are symmetrically distributed. Most
showed in Figure 12a. Figure 12b shows the comparison of torque waveform between of the flux lines of the
twoinitial
the motorsmotor
go along
andthe thesegment,
proposed and only with
motor a fewthe
of them pass through
cross-shaped the flux barrier,
flux-barriers that
rotor. The
is, to ensure the inductance of d-axis is maximum and the inductance of
torque ripple decreases by 34.06%, and the average torque increases by 11.34% with theq-axis is minimum.
Table 2 of
comparison show
the the output
initial motor.characteristics of initial model
Figure 12c highlights and
that the proposed
shaped motor. As can
of flux-barriers af-
be seen from the table, the performance of the proposed motor is better than that of the
fects the intent of torque harmonic the proposed rotor structure with cross-shaped
first motor, with lower core loss and stranded loss and higher efficiency. At the same time,
flux-barriers with low torque ripple has lower torque harmonics.
the sensitivity of the proposed motor is lower than that of the initial motor, which verifies
the feasibility of the proposed method.
Table 2. Output characteristics of initial motor and proposed motor.

Contents Initial Motor Proposed Motor Unit

d-axis inductance 108.2 112.1 mH
q-axis inductance 19.3 17.8 mH
Core loss 112.05 90.05 W
Stranded loss 692.47 670.58 W
Sensitivity 0.32 0.12 -
Efficiency 91.15 92.67 %
Power factor 0.69 0.72 -

Figure 15 shows the efficiency map of initial motor and proposed motor. The rated
speed is 1500 rpm. In order to ensure that the voltage is not higher than the rated voltage,
it is necessary to reduce the current or change the current angle thus reducing the torque
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 16 of 20

OR PEER REVIEW 17 of 21
when the speed exceeds 1500 rpm. In the constant torque region, the efficiency of both can
reach 88%, and in the constant power region can reach 94%.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure 12. ComparisonFigure
of the12.rotor structure
Comparison androtor
of the the structure
torque waveforms:
and the torque(a)waveforms:
3D view of(a)the rotorofofthe rotor
3D view
initial motor (left) andofproposed motor
initial motor (left) (right); (b) torque
and proposed waveforms
motor (right); at rated
(b) torque current
waveforms 21.79current
at rated A; (c) 21.79 A;
torque harmonic. (c) torque harmonic.

Figure 13 shows the contrast diagram of air-gap flux density distribution and har-
monic content of no-load motor at rated current. Figure 13a reflects the existence of sta-
tor slot and rotor anisotropy, and it can be seen from Figure 13b that there are odd har-
monics in addition to the fundamental components. The third and its multiple harmon-
ics are primarily caused by magnetic saturation, and the 17th and 19th harmonics are
 Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 21

l. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 21

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 17 of 20

(a)

(a)

(b)
Figure 13. Comparison of the radial flux density distributions: (a) flux density; (b) FFT of the flux den-
sity.

Figure 14 is the flux line distribution of the initial motor and the proposed motor in
steady state. As can be seen that the trend of flux lines is basically the same as the shape of
(b)
flux barrier, and the flux lines are symmetrically distributed. Most of the flux lines of the two
motors
Figure 13.Figure 13.goComparison
Comparison along theradial
of the segment,
flux
of the and onlydensity
density
radial flux a few ofdistributions:
them(a)
distributions: pass through
flux flux the
density;
(a) flux
(b) barrier,
FFT
density; thethat
(b)ofFFT flux
of is,den-
the to
flux
sity. ensure the inductance of d-axis is maximum and the inductance of q-axis is minimum.
density.

Figure 14 is the flux line distribution of the initial motor and the proposed motor in
steady state. As can be seen that the trend of flux lines is basically the same as the shape of
flux barrier, and the flux lines are symmetrically distributed. Most of the flux lines of the two
motors go along the segment, and only a few of them pass through the flux barrier, that is, to
ensure the inductance of d-axis is maximum and the inductance of q-axis is minimum.

(a) (b)

Figure 14. Flux line distribution: (a) initial motor; (b) proposed motor.

(a) (b)
 Power factor 0.69 0.72 -

Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958
Figure 15 shows the efficiency map of initial motor and proposed motor. The rated
speed is 1500 rpm. In order to ensure that the voltage is not higher than the rated volt-
age, it is necessary to reduce the current or change the current angle thus reducing the
torque when the speed exceeds 1500 rpm. In the constant torque region, the efficiency18 of
of 20
both can reach 88%, and in the constant power region can reach 94%.

(a) (b)
Figure 15.15.
Figure Efficiency map:
Efficiency (a)(a)
map: initial motor;
initial (b)(b)
motor; proposed motor.
proposed motor.

When
When considering
considering magnetic
magnetic structure
structuredesign,
design, mechanical
mechanical strength
strength is also a point
is also to to
a point
paypayattention
attention to.to.
Therefore,
Therefore,the the
rotor stress
rotor of motor
stress of motorrunning at 1.5
running at times ratedrated
1.5 times speed is
speed
analyzed. As canAs
is analyzed. becan
seenbefrom
seenFigure
from 16 the maximum
Figure stress point
16 the maximum of the
stress pointmotor
of theis located
motor is
at located
the end atof the flux
end barrier of the
of the flux first layer
barrier of the(near
firstthe shaft),
layer andthe
(near theshaft),
stress and
is 26.008 MPa, is
the stress
which
26.008is MPa,
far lower
whichthan thelower
is far required
thanpressure of 340
the required MPa forofthe
pressure 340silicon
MPa for steel
thesheet.
siliconFur-
steel
thermore, the deformation
sheet. Furthermore, the at this time is at
deformation only
this1.3651 × 10
time is −4 mm,
only × 10
which
1.3651 is −a4 minimal
mm, which valueis a
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
forminimal
the rotor. Thefor
value mechanical
the rotor. stability of the motor
The mechanical canofbe
stability theguaranteed
motor can be under 20
op-of 21
normal under
guaranteed
normal operation.
eration.
The main application field of the low-speed synchronous reluctance motor studied
in this paper is the textile industry and conveyor belt, so the performance requirements
are up to standard, and the design method proposed is feasible.

(a) (b)
Figure16.
Figure 16.Stress
Stressanalysis
analysisof
ofproposed
proposedmotor:
motor:(a)
(a)stress
stressdiagram;
diagram;(b)
(b)deformation
deformationdiagram.
diagram.

5. Conclusions
The main application field of the low-speed synchronous reluctance motor studied in
this paper is paper,
In this the textile
an industry
improvedand conveyor
rotor belt,
structure ofso the performance
synchronous requirements
reluctance are
motor with
up to standard,flux-barriers
cross-shaped and the design method proposed
is proposed to improve is feasible.
the torque performance of the motor.
A method for magnetic field analysis of synchronous reluctance motor with
5. Conclusionsflux-barriers rotor structure is proposed. The structure of cross-shaped flux
cross-shaped
In this
barrier paper,determined
is mainly an improved by rotor structure
two design of synchronous
parameters. reluctance
By designing motor with
the structure pa-
cross-shaped flux-barriers is proposed to improve the torque performance
rameters of the magnetic barrier reasonably and calculating the equivalent magnetic of the motor. re-
A
method
sistance for magnetic
of the proposedfieldcross
analysis of synchronous
magnetic barrier, thereluctance motorcircuit
rotor magnetic with was
cross-shaped
analyzed
flux-barriers
by MEC, and rotor
the structure
air-gap flux is proposed.
density and Thetorque
structure of cross-shaped
characteristics of theflux barrier is
cross-shaped
mainly determined
flux-barrier by two
distribution design
of the parameters.
improved By designing
synchronous the motor
reluctance structure
wereparameters
predicted,
of the magnetic barrier reasonably and calculating the equivalent magnetic
and the results are compared with the finite element analysis. The results show that the resistance of
the proposed cross magnetic barrier, the rotor magnetic circuit was
proposed rotor structure with cross-shaped flux-barriers can reduce the harmonic con- analyzed by MEC,
and
tent the
andair-gap
make the flux density
air-gap and torquemore
flux-density characteristics
sinusoidal,of thereducing
thus cross-shaped flux-barrier
the torque ripple.
distribution of the improved synchronous reluctance motor were
Compared with the initial model, the torque ripple can be reduced by 34.06% predicted, and theand
results
the
are compared with the finite element analysis. The results show that
average torque can be increased by 11.34% by designing the parameters of the crossed the proposed rotor
flux separator reasonably.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.L. and Y.D. and H.S.; methodology, J.L.; formal anal-
ysis, J.L.; investigation, J.L., R.L. and G.Z.; data curation, J.L. and R.L.; writing—original draft
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 19 of 20

structure with cross-shaped flux-barriers can reduce the harmonic content and make the
air-gap flux-density more sinusoidal, thus reducing the torque ripple. Compared with the
initial model, the torque ripple can be reduced by 34.06% and the average torque can be
increased by 11.34% by designing the parameters of the crossed flux separator reasonably.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.L. and Y.D. and H.S.; methodology, J.L.; formal analysis,
J.L.; investigation, J.L., R.L. and G.Z.; data curation, J.L. and R.L.; writing—original draft preparation,
J.L.; writing—review and editing, J.L. and Y.D.; supervision, Y.D. and H.S.; project administra-
tion, Y.D.; funding acquisition, Y.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant
number U20A201284.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are
not publicly available due to the requirement of the security but are available from the corresponding
author on reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Okamoto, Y.; Yamashita, Y. Design Optimization of Synchronous Reluctance Motor for Reducing Iron Loss and Improving Torque
Characteristics Using Topology Optimization Based on Level-set Method. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2020, 56, 1–4.
2. Kim, S.; You, Y. Optimization of a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor for e-Mobility Using Metamodels. Appl. Sci. 2022,
12, 1625. [CrossRef]
3. Liu, C.T.; Shih, P.C.; Cai, Z.H.; Yen, S.C.; Lin, S.Y. Rotor Conductor Arrangement Designs of High-Efficiency Direct-on-Line
Synchronous Reluctance Motors for Metal Industry Applications. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2020, 56, 4337–4344.
4. Islam, M.Z.; Choi, S.; Elbuluk, M.E.; Bonthu, S.S.R.; Arafat, A.; Baek, J. Design of External Rotor Ferrite-Assisted Synchronous
Reluctance Motor for High Power Density. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 3102. [CrossRef]
5. Murataliyev, M.; Degano, M.; Galea, M. A Novel Sizing Approach for Synchronous Reluctance Machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
2021, 68, 2083–2095. [CrossRef]
6. Giacomo, B.; Nicola, B.; Hanafy, M. A Nonlinear Analytical Model for the Rapid Prediction of the Torque of Synchronous
Reluctance Machines. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2018, 33, 1539–1546.
7. Mohammadi, M.H.; Rahman, T.; Silva, R.; Li, M.; Lowther, D.A. A Computationally Efficient Algorithm for Rotor Design
Optimization of Synchronous Reluctance Machines. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2016, 52, 1–4. [CrossRef]
8. Mirazimi, M.S.; Kiyoumarsi, A. Magnetic Field Analysis of SynRel and PMASynRel Machines with Hyperbolic Flux Barriers
Using Conformal Mapping. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2020, 6, 52–61. [CrossRef]
9. Kabir, M.A.; Husain, I. Application of a Multilayer AC Winding to Design Synchronous Reluctance Motors. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.
2018, 54, 5941–5953. [CrossRef]
10. Tawfiq, K.B.; Ibrahim, M.N.; EI-Kholy, E.E.; Sergeant, P. Performance Improvement of Synchronous Reluctance Machines—A
Review Research. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2021, 57, 1–11. [CrossRef]
11. Yu, H.; Yu, G.; Xu, Y.; Zou, J. Torque Performance Improvement for Slotted Limited-Angle Torque Motors by Combined SMA
Application and GA Optimization. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2021, 57, 1–5. [CrossRef]
12. Yan, D.; Xia, C.; Guo, L.; Wang, H.; Shi, T. Design and Analysis for Torque Ripple Reduction in Synchronous Reluctance Machine.
IEEE Trans. Magn. 2018, 54, 1–5.
13. Tessarolo, A. Modeling and Analysis of Synchronous Reluctance Machines with Circular Flux-barriers through Conformal
Mapping. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2015, 51, 1–11. [CrossRef]
14. Bianchi, N.; Degano, M.; Fornasiero, E. Sensitivity analysis of torque ripple reduction of Synchronous Reluctance and Interior PM
Motors. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2014, 51, 187–195. [CrossRef]
15. Ban, B.; Stipetic, S.; Jercic, T. Minimum Set of Rotor Parameters for Synchronous Reluctance Machine and Improved Optimization
Convergence via Forced Rotor Barrier Feasibility. Energies. 2021, 14, 2744. [CrossRef]
16. Vagati, A.; Pastorelli, M.; Franceschini, G.; Petrache, S.C. Design of low-torque-ripple synchronous reluctance motors. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 1998, 34, 758–765. [CrossRef]
17. Murataliyev, M.; Degano, M.; Nardo, M.D.; Bianchi, N.; Tessarolo, A.; Jara, W.; Galea, M.; Gerada, C. Homothetic Design in
Synchronous Reluctance Machines and Effects on Torque Ripple. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2021, 36, 2195–2205. [CrossRef]
18. Chen, Q.; Yan, Y.; Xu, G.; Xu, M.; Liu, G. Principle of Torque Ripple Reduction in Synchronous Reluctance Motors with Shifted
Asymmetrical Poles. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron. 2020, 8, 2611–2622. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 3958 20 of 20

19. Pellegrino, G.; Cupertino, F.; Gerada, C. Automatic Design of Synchronous Reluctance Motors Focusing on Barrier Shape
Optimization. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2015, 51, 1465–1474. [CrossRef]
20. Bacco, G.; Bianchi, N. Design Criteria of Flux-Barriers in Synchronous Reluctance Machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2019, 55,
2490–2498. [CrossRef]
21. Bianchi, N.; Bolognani, S.; Bon, D.; Pre, M.D. Torque Harmonic Compensation in a Synchronous Reluctance Motor. IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers. 2008, 23, 466–473. [CrossRef]
22. Wang, K.; Zhu, Z.; Ombachg, G.; Koch, M.; Zhang, S. Torque ripple reduction of synchronous reluctance machines: Using
asymmetric flux-barrier. Compel Int. J. Comput. Math. Eletr. Electron. Eng. 2015, 34, 18–31. [CrossRef]
23. Pellegrino, G.; Cupertino, F.; Gerada, C. Barriers shapes and minimum set of rotor parameters in the automated design of
synchronous reluctance machines. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Electric Machines Drives Conference(IEMDC),
Chicago, IL, USA, 12–15 May 2013; pp. 899–904.
24. Gamba, M.; Pellegrino, G.; Cupertino, F. Optimal number of rotor parameters for the automatic design of Synchronous Reluctance
machines. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Electrical Machines (ICEM), Berlin, Germany, 2–5 September
2014; pp. 1334–1340.
25. Bacco, G.; Bianchi, N. Choice of flux-barriers position in synchronous reluctance machines. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE
Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Cincinnati, OH, USA, 1–5 October 2017; pp. 1872–1879.
26. Bianchi, N. Synchronous Reluctance and PM Assisted Reluctance Motors. In The Rediscovery of Synchronous Reluctance and Ferrite
Permanent Magnet Motors—Tutorial Course Notes; Springer International Publishing AG: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 27–57.
27. Zhu, L.; Jiang, S.Z.; Zhu, Z.Q.; Chan, C.C. Analytical Methods for Minimizing Cogging Torque in Permanent-Magnet Machines.
IEEE Trans. Magn. 2009, 45, 2023–2031. [CrossRef]
28. Ferrari, S.; Pellegrino, G. FEAfix: FEA Refinement of Design Equations for Synchronous Reluctance Machines. IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl. 2020, 56, 256–266. [CrossRef]
29. Barba, P.D. Multiobjective Shape Design in Electricity and Magnetism; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 147–155.
30. Babetto, C.; Bacco, G.; Bianchi, N. Synchronous Reluctance Machine Optimization for High-Speed Applications. IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers. 2018, 33, 1266–1273. [CrossRef]