Finite element analysis of the induction motor

N. Bianchi L. Alberti June 1, 2006

Introduction

This example shows the computation of a threephase induction motor by means of nite element method. Two analyses are carried out: at rst the noload test, then the lockedrotor test are simulated. At noload, magnetostatic simulations are carried out varying the magnetizing current. In the lockedrotor test, the frequency is changed so as to compute the dependence of the rotor parameters on the operating frequency. From these two tests, the parameters of the equivalent circuit of the induction motor are obtained, from which the motor performance can be predicted. Among the others, the power and the torque produced, the stator current and the power factor as a function of the rotor slip. Let us refer to the circuit sketched in Fig. 1, where Rs Ls Rr Lr Lm () (H) () (H) (H) stator inductance, stator leakage inductance, rotor resistance referred to the stator, rotor leakage inductance, magnetizing inductance.

The parameters Ls and Rs have to be known from measurement or from analytical calculation.
Ls is E Rs im L m(im) L r (s) ir R r (s)

Figure 1: Equivalent circuit of the induction motor

Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Padova, bianchi@die.unipd.it

In this circuit, the magnetizing inductance Lm is considered to be a non linear function of the magnetizing current Im and the rotor parameters L2 and R2 are considered to be a nonlinear function of the rotor slip.

Denitions and preprocessing

The structure of the induction motor under analysis is shown in Fig. 2 which also highlights the materials of the various blocks. Particular care has to be given to the materials used in the simulations. In particular Copper The stator slot is lled by several wires. However, it is considered that the slot is completely lled by copper, considering an equivalent conductive bar. In this bar the total current of all the wires is assigned. In the magnetodynamic computation, this yields a non uniform distribution of the stator current within the slot, according to the operating frequency. In order to avoid this mistake, the conductivity of the copper can be equated to zero, yielding an innite penetration thickness. Iron The iron nonlinear characteristic (the BH curve) has to be used in the noload simulation. However the higher values of the curve are not always available, and they are interpolated during the nite element analysis. It is convenient to assign the high values of ux density B and magnetic eld H when they are not given, extending the curve with a slop close to the 0 . An example of BH curve is given in Table 1. At last, in the magnetodynamic simulations of the lockedrotor tests a linear characteristic for the iron can be adopted, so as to limit the research to the eect of the frequency on the rotor parameters. Aluminum The rotor bars are completely lled by Aluminum. Its main parameter is the conductivity, which determines the rotor resistance. It is convenient to set its value considering the operating temperature of the rotor, thus a reasonable value is Al =15 MS/m (corresponding to 120 K temperature rise). The resistive eect of the two external rings can be taken into account by means of a further reduction of the conductivity Al as Al,eq = Al 1 + kring (1)

where the factor kring is dened as kring = 2Qr Dring Sbar (2p)2 Lstk Sring (2)

B (T) 0 0.3 0.6 0.90 1.05 1.20 1.35 1.50

Table 1: Example of BH curve H B H B H (A/m) (T) (A/m) (T) (A/m) 0 1.58 2000 1.80 10000 200 1.64 3000 1.805 11000 400 1.68 4000 1.810 12000 1.72 5000 1.815 14000 600 700 1.74 6000 1.82 15000 1.76 7000 2.00 87000 800 900 1.78 8000 2.25 148000 1000 1.79 9000 2.50 215000

Figure 2: Materials in the simulation It is useful to group the various objects together, so as to facilitate the postprocessing of the solution. The convention adopted by the authors is described hereafter: Rotor All the parts of the rotor are xed to belong to the group numbered 10, as also shown in Fig. 3. Stator All the parts of the stator except for the slots are xed to belong to the group 1000, as shown in Fig. 4. Slots The stator slots are numbered in counterclockwise direction starting on the right-hand side. They are labelled Slot1, Slot2, ..., and numbered 1001, 1002, ..., as shown in Fig. 4. These labels allow to recognize each single slot for both the automatic assignment of the slot current and the computation of the corresponding ux linkage once the solution has been carried out.

Figure 3: All otor parts belong to group 10

Figure 4: Stator (group 1000) and numbers assigned to the stator slots

2.1

Slot matrix

An useful tool for processing the stator windings is the slot matrix. It is formed by m matrix vectors (where m is the number of phases) whose length is equal to the number Qs of stator slots. The element of these vectors describes how the dierent phases ll the stator slots, assuming a value ranging from +1 to 1. For instance, referring to the aphase and the j th slot, it is kaj = +1 the j th slot is completely lled by conductors of the aphase; kaj = 0 there are no conductors of the aphase within the j th slot; kaj = 1 the j th slot is completely lled by conductors of the aphase, but with negative polarity. An example of slot matrix is reported in Table 2. It refers to the 24slot stator shown in Fig. 4, and a singlelayer fullpitch winding.

slot no. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

ka 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

kb 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

Table 2: Example of slot matrix kc slot no. ka kb kc slot no. 0 9 0 0 1 17 0 10 0 0 1 18 0 11 0 0 1 19 0 12 0 0 1 20 0 13 0 1 0 21 0 14 0 1 0 22 0 15 0 1 0 23 0 16 0 1 0 24

ka 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

kb 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

kc 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

2.2

Automatic setting of slot currents

The conventions assumed above above allows an easy automatic analysis of the machine. The slot currents are set as follows. The variable Isim means the rms value of the current xed for the simulation. The example refers to LUA code for FEMM tool.
-- series conductors per slot nc = 82 -- slot number (simulated) Qs = 24 -- slot matrix ka= { 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -1, -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0} kb= {-1, -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0} kc= { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -1, -1, -1, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1} -- phase Ia_re Ib_re Ic_re currents (real and imaginary part) = sqrt(2) * Isim = sqrt(2) * (-Isim/2) = sqrt(2) * (-Isim/2)

Ia_im = 0 Ib_im = sqrt(2) * (-sqrt(3) * Isim/2) Ic_im = sqrt(2) * (sqrt(3) * Isim/2) for q = 1, Qs, 1 do Islot_re = nc * (Ia_re*ka[q] Islot_im = nc * (Ia_im*ka[q] modifycircprop("Islot" .. q, modifycircprop("Islot" .. q, end

+ + 1 2

Ib_re*kb[q] + Ic_re*kc[q]) Ib_im*kb[q] + Ic_im*kc[q]) , Islot_re) , Islot_im)

Noload test

The simulations are carried out at zero frequency, assuming to work in the rotor reference frame. This corresponds to a rotor slip s equal to zero. Thus a magnetostatic eld problem is solved. Stator currents are imposed and the nonlinear behavior of the magnetizing inductance is computed. A series of simulations are carried out varying the stator current. The nonlinear characteristic of the iron has to be used in the simulation. Fig. 5 shows the ux plot during the noload test.

Figure 5: Map of ux density under noload test

Noload test

Flux linkage (Vs) Inductance (H)

1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0

Flux linkage (Vs) Magnetizing inductance (H)

0.5 1 1.5 2 Stator current (A) 2.5 3

Figure 6: Flux linkage versus stator current Fig. 6 shows the phase ux linkage and the magnetizing inductance as a function of the stator current. The eect of the saturation is evident.

Noload test 500

Phasetophase voltage (V)

400

300

200

100

0 0

0.5

1 Stator current (A)

1.5

Figure 7: Voltage versus stator current

Noload test 2.5 0.5 * int A.J 2 Magnetic energy (J)

1.5 Wm = int H.dB 1

0.5

0 0

0.5

1.5 2 Stator current (A)

2.5

Figure 8: Energy and coenergy versus stator current

Noload test 1 0.9 Magnetizing inductance (H) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 Stator current (A) Lmag from Lmag from A.J L 2.5
mag

from W 3

Figure 9: Magnetizing inductance versus stator current Referring to the aphase, the magnetizing inductance is computed as a Lm = (3) Ia 7

where Ia is the current and a is the ux linkage. Fig. 7 shows the phasetophase noload voltage that can be computed from the noload test. In the same gure the measured voltage is shown using circles. An appreciable agreement between simulated and measured voltage is observed. The higher dierence is found in the saturation region. It is attributed to the dierence in the magnetic characteristic that is used in actual motor and in simulation. Fig. 8 shows the magnetic energy versus the stator current. It is worth noticing that dierent computation yield dierent results in the saturation region. The computation of the whole magnetic energy
B

Wm =

H dBdvol
vol 0

(4)

can not be used. Its value becomes lower and lower with the saturation and can not more used for the computation of the magnetizing inductance. On the contrary, the apparent energy WAJ = A Jdvol
vol

(5)

can be used to estimate the apparent magnetizing inductance of the machine. It can be also observed that WAJ = Wm + Wm where Wm is the magnetic coenergy
H

(6)

Wm =

B dHdvol
vol 0

(7)

A numerical comparison is given in Table 3. At low currents it is observed that Wm = Wm = 1 2 WAJ , while this is not hold at higher currents. As conrmation of this remark, Fig. 9 shows the magnetizing inductance computed using three dierent ways. Using the uxlinkage or the energy (5) yield a correct value of its apparent inductance: Lm = 2 WAJ 2 3 I 0 (8)

On the contrary, using the magnetic energy (4), the inductance obtained does not make sense.

Table 3: Magnetic Im Wm (A) (J) 0.20 0.056 0.38 0.201 0.56 0.411 0.74 0.605 0.92 0.743 1.1 0.843 1.28 0.920 1.46 0.986 1.64 1.044 1.82 1.100 2.00 1.154

energy Wm (J) 0.056 0.202 0.436 0.738 1.082 1.449 1.830 2.222 2.621 3.026 3.438

comparison WAJ (J) 0.112 0.405 0.848 1.344 1.826 2.293 2.752 3.209 3.666 4.127 4.593

Lockedrotor tests

These tests are carried out assuming a lockedrotor and imposing a xed current within the stator slots. A series of simulations is carried out at various frequencies so as to weigh up the dependence of the rotor parameters on the operating frequency. In these simulations the iron is assumed to be linear, so as to allow the superposition of the eect to be applied. The corresponding magnetizing inductance of the equivalent circuit of Fig. 1 is xed to its linear value. This assumption does not aect the computation since the main purpose of this test is to compute the rotor parameters. From each nite element analysis the following quantities are computed: f Is a b c T Pjr Wm Wm WAJ (Hz) (A) (Vs) (Vs) (Vs) (Nm) (W) (J) (J) (J) Frequency Current aphase ux linkage (real and imaginary part) bphase ux linkage (real and imaginary part) cphase ux linkage (real and imaginary part) Torque computed from Maxwell stress tensor Rotor Joule losses Magnetic energy Magnetic coenery Integral of A J

As an example, Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 show the ux plots during the locked rotor test at two dierent frequency: at 10 Hz and at 50 Hz, respectively. It is worth noticing the higher shielding eect of the rotor current at the higher frequency.

Figure 10: Map of ux density under locked rotor test (10 Hz)

Figure 11: Map of ux density under locked rotor test (50 Hz) Fig. 12 shows the magnetic energy computed in dierent ways. In this case, the motor works in linear conditions, so that the computation yield the same result. Fig. 13 shows the computed torque as a function of the working frequency. It is worth noticing that the torque computed here refers to a constant current source, xed in all the simulation, and then it has not to be confused with the torque obtained at xed voltage to plot the mechanical characteristic of the machine. The Maxwell stress tensor is computed along a line within the airgap of the motor. The torque is also proportional to the power transferred from the stator to the rotor. It is equal to the ratio between the rotor Joule losses 10

Locked rotor test 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0

Energy (J) and coenergy (J)

int H.dB int B.dH int A.J

10

20 30 Rotor frequency (Hz)

40

50

Figure 12: Energy versus frequency

Locked rotor test 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 0

from Maxwell tensor from rotor losses

Torque (Nm)

10

20 30 Rotor frequency (Hz)

40

50

Figure 13: Torque versus frequency

Rotor parameters 120 Resistance () Reactance () 100 80 60 40 20 0 0

0.2

0.4 slip

0.6

0.8

Figure 14: Rotor parameters obtained from locked rotor test Pjr and the synchronous speed, given by T = Pjr 2f /p 11 (9)

where f is the frequency adopted in the simulation and p is the pole pair. Then 2f /p is the synchronous speed of each simulation. Finally, Fig. 14 shows the rotor parameters that are obtained from the lockedrotor simulations corresponding to each operating frequency f . The equivalent parameters are computed as Req = Leq Pjr 3I 2

(10)

2 Wm = 3 I2

where I is the rms current used in the simulation.

L 2 (s) L eq (s)

R 2 (s) Lm

R eq (s)

Figure 15: Equivalent circuits corresponding to the lockedrotor simulation Referring to Fig. 15, from the equivalence of the two circuits, it results Lr = Lm Leq (Lm Leq ) (Req / )2 (Lm Leq )2 + (Req / )2

(11)

Lm + Lr Rr = Req Lm Leq At last, let us remark that the leakage inductance of the stator and the rotor can not be separated. The meaning of Lr is the total leakage inductance, of the twodimensional model, referred to the stator.

12

Induction motor performance

From the noload tests and the lockedrotor tests, the parameters of the equivalent circuit of the induction motor are obtained. In particular the magnetizing inductance (see Fig. 9) and the rotor parameters (see Fig. 14). The equivalent circuited is completed adding the elements that are not considered in the nite element analysis: the stator winding resistance and the end winding leakage inductance. Then, xing a value of the phase voltage, for instance V =230 V, the computation of the motor performance is carried out.
From equivalent circuit 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0

Mech and electric power (W)

0.2

0.4 slip

0.6

0.8

Figure 16: From equivalent circuit: input and output power versus slip
From equivalent circuit 6 5 Torque (Nm) Current (A) 4 3 2 1 0 0

Torque (Nm) Current (A)

0.2 0.4 slip 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 17: From equivalent circuit: torque versus slip Fig. 16 shows the electrical power (input power) and the mechanical power (output power) of the motor versus the rotor slip. A good agreement between the simulated power (solid line) and the measured power (triangles) is evident, even though the iron losses and the mechanical losses are not 13

From equivalent circuit 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 cos 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0 0.2 0.4 slip 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 18: From equivalent circuit: power factor versus slip

From equivalent circuit 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 Efficiency 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.4 slip 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 19: From equivalent circuit: eciency versus slip considered in the computation. As a consequence, this justies the lower values of the predicted mechanical power and of the predicted torque. Fig. 17 shows the torque produced by the motor and the stator current as a function of the rotor slip. Once again, the agreement between simulated values (solid line) and measurements (triangles and circles) is evident. Fig. 18 shows the power factor (cos ) versus the rotor slip. The measured values are reported using triangles. Finally, Fig. 19 shows the motor eciency (without considering iron and mechanical losses) versus the rotor slip.

14

A second example: a 3.7kW 2pole induction motor

This section reports the simulation of a 3.7kW 2pole induction motor, adopting the same procedures illustrated above. However, in this case, we take advantage of the symmetry of the machine and only a half of motor is studied. This is possible by imposing an odd periodicity (or an anti periodicity) along the two boundaries of the machine as illustrated in Fig. 20.

Figure 20: Antiperiodicity along the two boundaries

6.1

Noload test

The simulations of noload test are carried out at zero frequency. Fig. 21 shows the corresponding ux plot.

Figure 21: Map of ux density under noload test Fig. 22 shows the phase ux linkage and the magnetizing inductance as a function of the stator current. Fig. 23 shows the phasetophase no load voltage. In the same gure the measured voltage is shown using circles. Fig. 24 shows the magnetic energy versus the stator current. At last, Fig. 25 shows the magnetizing inductance computed from uxlinkage, energy (5) and the magnetic energy (4). As above the last computation does not make sense. 15

Noload test 1.4 Flux linkage (Vs) Inductance (H) 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0

Flux linkage (Vs) Magnetizing inductance (H)

10 15 Stator current (A)

20

25

Figure 22: Flux linkage versus stator current

Noload test 500

Phasetophase voltage (V)

400

300

200

100

0 0

10 Stator current (A)

15

20

Figure 23: Voltage versus stator current

Noload test 20 0.5 * int A.J

Magnetic energy (J)

15

10

Wm = int H.dB

0 0

10 15 Stator current (A)

20

25

Figure 24: Energy and coenergy versus stator current

16

Noload test 0.45 0.4 Magnetizing inductance (H) 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0 5 10 15 Stator current (A) 20 Lmag from Lmag from A.J Lmag from Wm 25

Figure 25: Magnetizing inductance versus stator current

6.2

Lockedrotor tests

As above these tests are carried out assuming a lockedrotor and imposing a xed current within the stator slots, but varying the operating frequency. The lamination iron is assumed to be linear. Fig. 26 shows the ux plots during the lockedrotor test at 50 Hz.

Figure 26: Map of ux density under locked rotor test (50 Hz)
Locked rotor test 0.7 0.6 Energy (J) and coenergy (J) 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0

int H.dB int B.dH int A.J

10

20 30 Rotor frequency (Hz)

40

50

Figure 27: Energy versus frequency

17

Locked rotor test 0.35 0.3 0.25 Torque (Nm) 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0

from Maxwell tensor from rotor losses

10

20 30 Rotor frequency (Hz)

40

50

Figure 28: Torque versus frequency

Rotor parameters 60 Resistance () Reactance () 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

0.2

0.4 slip

0.6

0.8

Figure 29: Rotor parameters obtained from locked rotor test Fig. 27 shows the magnetic energy computed in dierent ways. Fig. 28 shows the torque computed by means of the Maxwell stress tensor and the rotor Joule losses as a function of the working frequency, using a constant stator current. Finally, Fig. 29 shows the rotor parameters that are obtained from the lockedrotor simulations corresponding to each operating frequency f.

18

6.3

Induction motor performance

From the noload tests and the lockedrotor tests, the parameters of the equivalent circuit of the induction motor are obtained. This equivalent circuited is completed adding the stator winding resistance and the end winding leakage inductance. Then, the computation of the motor performance is carried out for any given stator voltage, i.e. V =230 V, .
From equivalent circuit 18000 16000 Mech and electric power (W) 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 0.2 0.4 slip 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 30: From equivalent circuit: input and output power versus slip
From equivalent circuit 50

Torque (Nm) Current (A)

40

30

20

10

Torque (Nm) Current (A)

0.2 0.4 slip 0.6 0.8 1

0 0

Figure 31: From equivalent circuit: torque versus slip Fig. 30 shows the electrical power (input power) and the mechanical power (output power) of the motor versus the rotor slip. The measured power is reported by means of triangles, highlighting a good prediction. Fig. 31 shows the torque produced by the motor and the stator current as a function of the rotor slip. The measured currents are reported by means of circles while the measured torque by means of triangles. Fig. 32 shows the power factor (cos ) versus the rotor slip. The measured values are reported using triangles. Finally, Fig. 33 shows the motor 19

From equivalent circuit 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0

cos

0.2

0.4 slip

0.6

0.8

Figure 32: From equivalent circuit: power factor versus slip

From equivalent circuit 1

0.8

Efficiency

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 0

0.2

0.4 slip

0.6

0.8

Figure 33: From equivalent circuit: eciency versus slip eciency (without considering iron and mechanical losses) versus the rotor slip.

20