716 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 45, NO.

2, FEBRUARY 2009

Comparison of Models for Estimating Magnetic Core Losses in Electrical

Machines Using the Finite-Element Method
Emad Dlala
Department of Electrical Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, 3000 Helsinki, FI-02015 TKK, Finland

This paper focuses on the modeling and prediction of core losses in nonoriented magnetic materials of electrical machines. The aim
is to investigate the accuracy, efficiency, and stability of certain models, including the commonly used and the advanced ones, and to
discuss their advantages and disadvantages when they are implemented in the finite-element method (FEM). It is shown in the paper that
the traditional technique based on the loss separation theory can efficiently produce reasonable results in specific operation conditions
but can, on the other hand, over- or underestimate the core losses in other circumstances. The advanced model based on solving the
one-dimensional (1-D) Maxwell equations can give accurate results for the prediction of core losses in a lamination strip, but its accuracy,
stability, and computational burden are put under scrutiny when it is applied to the prediction of core losses in an electrical machine. A
third technique, referred to as the hybrid model, which captures the advantages of the traditional and advanced techniques and merges
them into one, has been found to be the best compromise. The principal aim of the hybrid model is to avoid the numerical procedure of
the 1-D Maxwell equations while maintaining relatively accurate predictions with a reasonable computational burden. A comparative
investigation has been conducted for the three core-loss models that have been incorporated into the 2-D FEM analysis of a 37-kW
induction motor on which experiments were carried out for comparisons.
Index TermsCore loss, dynamic hysteresis, eddy currents, excess loss, finite-element method (FEM), harmonics, rotating electrical
machines, soft magnetic materials, time-stepping.

I. INTRODUCTION
HE characteristics of magnetic materials are important
T to the performance and efficiency of electrical devices.
Nonoriented materials are utilized in electrical machine cores
to direct and maximize the magnetic field that acts as a medium
in the energy conversion process. This utilization results in pro-
ducing large torque or large machine output per unit machine
volume. The magnetic field variation inside the magnetic mate-
rials causes energy loss dissipations in electrical machines, the
so-called iron losses or the core losses. The core losses are con-
ceptually separated into three loss components, known as the
hysteresis, classical eddy-current, and excess losses [2].
The magnetic flux patterns appearing in an electrical machine
are complicated and, therefore, they hinder the development of
adequate methods for the prediction of core losses. In the ma-
jority of cases, the complexity has been grossly reduced to the
use of simplistic techniques that are based upon postprocessing
the magnetic field solution and separating the core losses ac-
cordingly [1], [3][5]. These techniques are widely believed to
provide reasonable results, but their limitations and imperfec-
tions in generally obtaining accurate results are commonly ac-
knowledged [6][9].
Achieving high accuracy while the core losses are incorpo-
rated into the field solution requires the application of magne-
todynamic models that can track the magnetization behavior in
the magnetic materials under sinusoidal or distorted, unidirec-
tional, or rotating flux conditions [10][12]. Following this path
will not only guarantee the accuracy of the modeled core losses
Manuscript received August 26, 2008; revised October 14, 2008. Current
version published February 11, 2009. Corresponding author: E. Dlala (e-mail:
emad.dlala@tkk.fi).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TMAG.2008.2009878
0018-9464/$25.00 2009 IEEE
but also will ensure the accuracy of the modeled overall perfor-
mance of the electrical device. The latter feature seems to be
unimportant when dealing with an electrical steel sheet alone
where one is mainly interested in the core loss. In electrical ma-
chine applications, however, the shape of the loops determine
the shape of the current waveforms, and hence, they are impor-
tant for the evaluation of the machine characteristics and other
electromagnetic losses.
Consequently, the accurate analysis of the core losses in elec-
trical machines requires in-depth treatment of the magnetic field
and the ferromagnetic materials. The coupling of the magnetic
field solution obtained by the finite-element method (FEM) with
the hysteresis models needs therefore to be performed rigor-
ously [13]. The eddy currents in the laminations must be mod-
eled either, for example, by generalizing the hysteresis models
or by reformulating the magnetic field equations [14], the excess
loss being included through the dynamization of the hysteresis
models.
Although taking the magnetodynamic effects into account is
important for the analysis of electrical machines, incorporating
the nonlinear models, including hysteresis, excess, and classical
eddy-current models, into FEM is indeed very complicated and
can easily lead to divergence for the numerical analysis; partic-
ularly, when complex structures such as electrical machines are
applied. Therefore, one may have to compromise the accuracy
for the sake of stability because these goals may conflict. For ex-
ample, a highly accurate method for predicting core losses may
not be stable for certain problems. Tradeoffs between accuracy,
robustness, and speed are central issues in numerical analysis,
and here they receive careful consideration.
In this paper, three different techniques for the prediction of
core losses in electrical machines will be investigated. The prin-
cipal purpose of the work is to evaluate the performances of
the core-loss models when implemented in the FEM analysis
of electrical machines and discuss the advantages and disadvan-
tages of each technique, where they fail and where they prevail.
DLALA: COMPARISON OF MODELS FOR ESTIMATING MAGNETIC CORE LOSSES
The developed methods are applied in a two-dimensional (2-D)
in-house FEM code, specialized for the design and analysis of
electrical machines. The FEM simulations and the analysis of
core losses are conducted on a 37-kW induction motor, and the
numerical results are validated experimentally.
II. TECHNIQUES FOR MODELING MAGNETIC MATERIALS AND
CORE LOSSES
The history of the methods employed for the prediction of
core losses goes back to the famous formula introduced by
Steinmetz in the early twentieth century [15]. Today, several
approaches are followed and, in this section, the most important
and common ones are discussed and analyzed.
A. Traditional Technique
Traditionally, the core losses in electrical machines are calcu-
lated by postprocessing the magnetic field solution using empir-
ical equations or statistical laws [2], [3], [16], which have been
reinforced on several occasions [17][19]. Fiorillo and Novikov
made a generalization to the statistical loss theory of Bertotti
[2] in order to account for arbitrary (nonsinusoidal) flux den-
sity waveforms [20]. The total power loss, , per unit volume
dissipated in a ferromagnetic strip lamination, having thickness
and conductivity and periodically magnetized with funda-
mental frequency , can then be given as the sum of the hys-
teresis, , classical eddy-current, , and excess, , losses
(1)
where is the amplitude of the th harmonic of the flux den-
sity waveforms obtained by the time-stepping FEM solution and
is the total number of harmonics considered. If the field is
assumed to be 2-D, independent of the coordinate parallel to the
shaft of the machine ( -direction), then represents the am-
plitude of the flux density as . The clas-
sical eddy-current term is derived from Maxwell equations
assuming a uniform flux distribution in the -direction; hence,
. The coefficients and can be identified
experimentally from Epstein frame, core ring, or single-sheet
tester measurements. The flux density is obtained by the 2-D
FEM using a single-valued magnetization curve in which the
magnetic flux density and the magnetic field strength are
assumed to be collinear. Thus, the nonlinear relation is handled
as follows.
1) Compute the components of the flux density and
at each time step from the 2-D FEM solution.
2) Compute the magnitude of the flux density as
and the magnitude of the mag-
netic field strength from the single-valued relation as
(2)
717
3) Compute the components of the field strength as
(3)
The traditional approach (1), although widely considered
to be grossly simplistic, is the most popular technique applied
nowadays in research and commercial software of FEM pack-
ages. The impetus for the popularity of the postprocessing
methods is attributed mainly to the following reasons: 1) the
magnetic field is not required to be solved using hysteresis
models, and hence, only a lossless single-valued magnetization
curve, which permits the stability and efficiency of the iterative
procedure involved, is sufficient; 2) the identification problem
of the core-loss model is simple, leading to the determination
only of three parameters; and 3) the accuracy of the calculated
total core losses integrated over the volume of the machine
is quite satisfactory in specific regimes of frequencies and
voltages.
However, the drawbacks of using the postprocessing methods
outweigh the advantages and they are numerous too: 1) the sta-
tistical loss theory [2] and its various extensions [19] are suit-
able only for low-frequency applications, because their deriva-
tion is based on neglecting the skin effect [1]; 2) the effects of
minor loops, which are important especially in the teeth cores
and rotor surfaces, are not modeled properly by the postpro-
cessing methods; and 3) the incorporation of core losses into the
field solution is hindered by the use of a lossless single-valued
magnetization model so that the effects of core losses on the ma-
chine characteristics cannot be examined.
B. Advanced Technique
The aforementioned shortcomings of the postprocessing
methods have led researchers in the area to the use of advanced
methods that are able to model the core losses more adequately.
For example, the study of certain phenomena such as hysteresis
torque [13], [21] can be achieved only if appropriate mod-
eling of the vector hysteresis relation (hysteresis loop shapes
including minor loops under alternating or rotating flux) is per-
formed. Furthermore, cooling system designers, who nowadays
require the distribution of the losses in the electrical machine
for thermal analysis, cannot rely heavily on oversimplified
approaches. More importantly, if one pursues a proper way
for reducing core losses, even the very small details must be
adequately taken into account, or otherwise, the desired results
would not be achieved.
However, the eddy-current loss generated in the conducting
steel creates a difficult problem to deal with [14]. Electrical ma-
chine cores are usually made of laminated materials in order to
minimize the eddy-current loss induced. The eddy-current loss
in the lamination intrinsically creates a 3-D magnetodynamic
problem enforced by Maxwell equations
(4)
718
The 3-D analysis is not commonly considered because of its
high computation time, especially if hysteresis models are used.
Therefore, if the edge effects are neglected, then (4) can be re-
duced to the solution of two 1-D coupled penetration equations
[14]
(5)
Although these may appear as separate equations, they are
strongly coupled through the vectorial hysteretic relationship
between and , and also through the boundary conditions
[22].
When dealing with 2-D FEM problems, such as electrical ma-
chines, the 1-D magnetodynamic model (5), which represents
the solution of two 1-D coupled penetration equations, has to
be coupled with the 2-D FEM formulations. Despite its reason-
able accuracy, the resulting 1-D-2-D advanced model increases
the computation time and is easily vulnerable to convergence
problems since it involves two iterative solutions of two cou-
pled nonlinear problems [23].
The inclusion of the hysteretic behavior in the eddy-current
problem is vital, not only for obtaining accurate results but also
for validating the numerical model by experiments. The rota-
tional core loss calls upon a vectorial hysteretic relationship that
must, to a certain extent, satisfy the material hysteretic behavior.
Modeling vector hysteresis is not the main focus of this paper
and thus will not be dealt with thoroughly. Nevertheless, the
Mayergoyz vector hysteresis model [24] will be applied to com-
plete the analysis of the core losses. The model idea is based on
projecting the input data (magnetic field strength) in all feasible
directions, say , while using a scalar model that keeps its his-
tory in each direction. The vector Mayergoyz model has been
rather successful, except for its rotational loss property, which
will not be discussed here [25]. On the other hand, when the
model is used to deal with eddy currents, the vector model com-
plicates the iterative procedure and increases the computation
time remarkably [25]; the 1-D model of the lamination, which
involves an iterative time-stepping procedure, has to be applied
in every direction, creating penetration equations to be solved
..
.
..
. another method (10), which has retained all the main advan-
(6)
These penetration equations are strongly coupled through the
vector hysteresis model.
C. Hybrid Technique
A technique that has been recently proposed in [26] but has
not yet been tested in the FEM analysis of electrical machines
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2009
will be discussed in more detail here. The technique, referred
to here as the hybrid technique, captures the advantages of the
two aforementioned techniques and merges them into one: 1)
the simplicity and stability of the postprocessing formula (tra-
ditional technique) and 2) the accuracy and generality of the
1-D magnetodynamic model with the hysteresis and eddy-cur-
rent effects taken into account (advanced technique.) The prin-
cipal aim of the hybrid technique is to omit the numerical proce-
dure of the nonlinear penetration equations (1-D model) by de-
termining, using simple concepts, three magnetic field strength
components: a hysteresis component, , excess component,
, and classical eddy-current component, , which are re-
sponsible for generating and calculating the core losses.
The Fiorillo-Novikov method [20] can be expressed in a rela-
tively different way to calculate the power loss per unit volume
over a time period of the fundamental frequency as
(7)
where . Equation (7) can be also applied to cal-
culate the total energy loss as
(8)
and since , (8) becomes
(9)
By comparing (9) with (8), the total applied field is determined
as
(10)
where the directional parameter is
controlled by the magnetic flux density, whether it is increasing
or decreasing.
The equivalence of the loss separation (9) and the field
strength separation (10) has been also shown in [1] and [27].
In this manner, the core losses are calculated by integrating
the loop areas that are created by the contributions of the mag-
netic field strength of each loss component. This systematic
procedure has transformed the postprocessing method (7) into
tages of the postprocessing method and added several others
to them. In addition to its ability to incorporate the losses into
the field solution, (10) can be verified experimentally by using
the instantaneous values of the and waveforms (loop
shapes) and the integral of the core loss (loop area), unlike the
postprocessing method (7), which only uses the integral of the
core loss.
The first term of (10) is calculated by applying any suitable
static hysteresis model; the second term represents the excess
DLALA: COMPARISON OF MODELS FOR ESTIMATING MAGNETIC CORE LOSSES 719

field through the time delay of the magnetic flux density be- where is the number of directions along and is a pa-
hind the magnetic field strength; the third term is the classical rameter needed for the identification. The projections of are
eddy-current field, which is analytically derived from Maxwell calculated as
equations assuming a uniform flux distribution over the sheet
where no dependency on the magnetization law is con-
sidered [1]. This particular assumption, which was originally (15)
made in order to avoid the numerical solution of the Maxwell
equations, directly implies that (10) can produce accurate re- where and . The
sults only if the skin effect is negligible. The flux density av-
polar angle specifies the direction of and the scalar function
erage is assumed to be independent of and, as a result, the
is served by (11).
classical eddy-current loss becomes independent of the material
The total power losses per unit volume are computed using
relation . To improve the predictions of (10), the classical
the Poynting vector theorem as
eddy-current field is forced to be implicitly dependent on the
magnetization law through the use of a scaling function

(16)
(11)
Furthermore, separating the alternating power loss from the total
power loss can be achieved as [29]
Experiments [26] show that the scaling function can be ap-
proximated by a second-order polynomial as
(17)

where is the angle lag between and . The rotational loss

(12)
component can be then computed as

where is a predefined saturation value of the magnetic flux

(18)
density. The scaling function can be further revised in order to
improve the accuracy of minor loops by letting the coefficient
be linearly dependent on the reversals of the flux densities which goes to zero under purely unidirectional (alternating)
field excitations.
(13)

The reversals of the flux density are tracked in time and III. FINITE-ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ELECTRICAL MACHINES
whenever changes sign, a new reversal occurs. The co-
efficients , , and can be estimated by fitting the The magnetic material models developed in Section II are es-
calculated dynamic loops to the experimental ones [26]. The sentially useless if they cannot be applied to the prediction of
value of can be assigned to be the same as . An optimal the behavior of magnetic materials in electrical devices. The ac-
choice of the coefficients in must ensure that the eddy-current curate solution of the magnetic field in a complicated geometry
field is nonlinearly dependent on , analogous to the real- such as a rotating electrical machine requires rigorous numerical
istic case endured by (5). treatment. The spatial discretization of the geometry is needed
Since the hybrid technique will be used for the prediction and here it is accomplished by the use of the 2-D FEM cou-
of core losses in rotating electrical machines, a vector hys- pled with the circuit equations of the supply circuit and the end
teresis model is developed to account for the rotational losses, windings [30]. In Section II, it was assumed that the flux density
including the hysteresis, classical eddy-current, and excess components, and , were known; they are not in reality and
rotational losses. The Mayergoyz model of vector hysteresis hence they need to be calculated by FEM at each time step .
can be applied in its inverted version to calculate the magnetic Then, the magnetic field strength components, and , are
field strength [13]. In this way, the magnetic flux density determined by the material model and entered back to the 2-D
is projected over several directions specified by an angle FEM.
to calculate the magnetic field strength using a scalar dynamic The coupling between the FEM and the material model is in-
model such as (11). The magnetic field strength is the vectorial tricate and receives considerable attention in the article. How-
sum of each contribution ever, the 2-D FEM will not be elaborated on as a whole. More
emphasis will be placed on the part concerning the magnetic
(14) laminated materials. Nevertheless, the complete overall system
of equations will be briefly presented.
720 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2009

A. FEM Approach
The constitutive nonlinear relation can be expressed by the
fixed-point method as follows:

(19)

where is a magnetization-like quantity and is the fixed-

point coefficient. Applying the fixed-point method (19) with
Maxwell equations results in the following formulation

(20)

where is the magnetic vector potential and is the electric

current density.
If a 2-D FEM approach is performed, applying the Galerkin
weighted-residual method over the entire solution region
(cross-section of the machine) and respecting the boundary
conditions, the following system of differential equations of
(free nodes) unknowns results from (20)

(21)

where is the assembly (coefficient) matrix and

is a matrix associated with the eddy currents considered
in the 2-D FEM analysis. The matrix is associated
with the source where is the number of phases. The column
is associated with the fixed-point formulation and
calculated as

(22)

In the core regions, there is no source applied and hence the
electric current density . In the regions of the filamentary
windings where the eddy-current problem is not considered in
the field solution, the conductivity is assigned to zero, hence
:
Fig. 1. Flowchart illustrating the fixed-point iterative procedure carried out to
deal with the nonlinearity in the laminated steel of the machine model at each
time-step n. At each iterate k , the nonlinear lamination model is used and the
iteration is checked against convergence. The lamination model is represented
by either the single-valued curve, the advanced model, or the hybrid model.

from the first iterative solution of the current time-step

It should be noted that in the 2-D FEM analysis, the laminated
steel is considered to be nonconductive as the eddy currents are
modeled by the magnetodynamic (advanced and hybrid) models
described in Section II.
In the linear (air and copper) regions, is assigned to be
equal to , hence . In the nonlinear (core) regions,
is optimally calculated at each time-step, , using the locally
convergent method [28]
(23)
where is a constant that is conveniently chosen to ensure fast
convergence so that the iteration is strictly attractive in some
interval containing , which is the initial value that is known
.
B. Iterative Procedure
The flux density components, and , calculated from
the solution of the system of (21) are used as the input of the
lamination model. The lamination model shown in Fig. 1 may
be represented by one of the three models discussed earlier: the
single-valued model (2), the advanced model (5), and the hybrid
model (11).
As the lamination model is nonlinear, the 2-D FEM model
will be nonlinear too. Therefore, the system of (21) is solved
iteratively, as outlined in the flowchart of Fig. 1.
In the case where the advanced model is applied, the flux
density components, and , calculated by FEM will be re-
sponsible for setting the boundary conditions of the magnetody-
namic model, leading to the coupling of two nonlinear models
DLALA: COMPARISON OF MODELS FOR ESTIMATING MAGNETIC CORE LOSSES
(1-D-2-D model.) Thus, in principle, two nested iteration loops
are needed. The first is the local iteration loop of the advanced
model and the second is the global iteration loop of the FEM
model. To circumvent this problem, the boundary conditions of
the advanced model may be kept fixed during iteration and thus
one will end up with two more efficient iteration procedures that
are not looped but rather made in series [23]. The other option
which appears to be more practical, and will be proven to be so,
is the use of the hybrid model, which has no requirement for an
iterative solution. In this way, using only one iteration loop is
needed, a simplification that is important for the efficiency of
the iterative procedure and for the stability of the time-stepping
scheme.
C. Overall System of Equations
Rotating electrical machines are constructed of two principal
parts: a stationary part, called the stator, and a rotating part,
called the rotor. Usually, the stator and the rotor are coupled
through the air-gap, and the FEM analysis must ensure that they
are all well modeled together. The motion of the rotor is mod-
eled by changing the mesh in the air-gap. The circuit equations
of the stator and the rotor must be coupled with the 2-D FEM
solution [30].
The complete overall system of equations of the rotating elec-
trical machine is solved iteratively using the fixed-point method
and discretized in time using the Crank-Nicholson time-step-
ping scheme as
(24)
where the solutions , , and are, respectively, the nodal
values of the magnetic vector potential, the voltages of the rotor
circuit, and the currents of the stator phases. The matrices ,
, , and are associated with the rotor and stator cir-
cuits and the end windings. The subscripts r and s refer to the
rotor and stator, respectively. The source represents the line
voltages over the stator windings where the matrix defines
the type of connection.
The system of (24) is sparse and here is efficiently solved
using a direct method of sparse matrices.
D. Power Balance and Core Losses
The power balance test is a suitable method for checking the
errors that might have been made in the numerical implemen-
tations of the models, but it cannot be, by any means, used to
check the accuracy of the models.
When the core losses are incorporated into the field solution,
their effect on the input power of the electrical machine must
appear. The power balance of the electrical machine is applied
to the average powers as follows:
(25)
721
Fig. 2. Predictions of the advanced model and the hybrid model of dynamic
hysteresis loops compared with the measurements obtained by applying average
flux densities of a 500-Hz fundamental frequency.
where is the average input power of the stator, is the av-
erage output power of the shaft, is the average resistive loss
power, and is the average core loss power. The methods for
the determination and description of the powers , and
can be found in [31]. The output power, , is computed
using the principle of virtual work [32]. The term re-
sponsible for storing and releasing the energy in the machine is
not apparent in (25) because the instantaneous powers are being
averaged over several periods of the supply frequency.
IV. RESULTS
Practically, it is more convenient to measure and deal with the
core losses in a steel lamination than in a rotating electrical ma-
chine. The complicated geometry of an electrical machine and
the interdependent phenomena occurring in it make the identifi-
cation of the loss models a difficult task to carry out. Therefore,
the steel laminations of the electrical machine to be studied are
usually provided by the manufacturer to verify the models. In
this paper, the three different techniques discussed above are ap-
plied in the prediction of core losses in a 400-V, 50-Hz, 4-pole,
37-kW squirrel-cage induction motor, which has been subjected
to a no-load experimental test made by a rigorous method (see
the Appendix). In general, the induction motor is regarded as
a suitable application to test the accuracy and stability of the
models. The induction motor represents a significantly difficult
problem for the time-stepping FEM analysis, mainly because of
the spacial high harmonics generated by the slotting of the stator
and the rotor (see a quarter of the cross-section of the motor in
Fig. 3). When the openings of the rotor slots are closed, as the
case in the studied motor, they can further complicate the itera-
tive procedure because the closed openings have to be saturated
in order for the machine to produce torque.
The core-loss models have been identified by experiments
made on a soft magnetic steel lamination of a thickness
mm and conductivity . The traditional tech-
nique of the postprocessing formula (1), which uses a single-
valued magnetization curve for the magnetic field solution, has
been identified using experimental data obtained by applying
722
Fig. 3. Distribution of the total core losses in a pole of the cross-section of the
studied 37-kW induction motor computed at 400 V by the 2-D FEM applying
the hybrid model. The core losses are quite evenly distributed in the stator while
densely concentrated at the rotor surface. Note that the copper losses in the slots
of the stator and rotor are not plotted; thus, they appear white in the graph.
unidirectional flux excitations at 50 Hz [9], [31]. On the other
hand, the advanced model (6) and the hybrid model (11) have
been identified using experimental data obtained by a vertical
yoke setup, applying unidirectional and rotational flux excita-
tions at various frequencies [25]. The scalar hysteresis function
needed for the two latter models was efficiently handled by the
history-independent static hysteresis model [25]. Fig. 2 shows
the predictions of the advanced model and the hybrid model
of dynamic hysteresis loops obtained by applying average flux
densities of a 500-Hz fundamental frequency. The results of the
two models correlate closely with the measured ones at both
lower and higher flux density levels. The values of the coeffi-
cients identified for the scaling function (12) of the hybrid model
were as follows:
, and . The number of direc-
tions used in the vector model was 8. More details on the
procedure for the identification of the models can be found in
[23], [26], and [25].
After identifying the core-loss models, the models were in-
tegrated into the time-stepping FEM analysis of electrical ma-
chines. The simulation of the 37-kW induction motor was con-
ducted to determine the core losses in the steady state. There-
fore, for saving substantial computation time, the transient of
the motor starting was bypassed by calculating the initial solu-
tion of the steady state using a time-harmonic FEM [30]. Then,
the time-stepping FEM analysis was run over several periods of
the supply frequency, ensuring that the steady state was reached
(see Table I for the simulation conditions that have been fixed
for all cases.)
Fig. 4 shows the computed no-load core losses compared with
the experimental ones. The FEM applying the traditional post-
processing technique (1) gave relatively accurate results at lower
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2009
TABLE I
SIMULATION INPUT DATA AND PROBLEM SIZE OF THE INDUCTION MOTOR
Fig. 4. No-load core losses of the induction motor as a function of the supply
voltage predicted by the 2-D FEM applying the traditional model, the advanced
model, the hybrid model, and compared with experimental data.
voltage levels (lower flux densities) but showed remarkable dis-
crepancies at higher voltage levels (high flux densities.) The rea-
sons behind the discrepancies in the case of the postprocessing
formula can be attributed to three possible factors: the inade-
quacy in calculating the effects of minor loops (resulted from the
harmonics), the neglecting of the skin effect, and the inability
of estimating the rotational losses properly. On the other hand,
the results of the FEM applying the advanced model (6) and the
FEM applying the hybrid model (11) gave relatively accurate re-
sults over the whole range of supply voltages. The hybrid model,
however, showed a better correlation with the measurements.
The advanced model slightly overestimated the measurements
because it kept its boundary conditions constant during the iter-
ation of the 2-D FEM. More importantly, the advanced model
needs a smaller time-step in order for the model to deal better
with the distortions of the flux densities and the strong coupling
between the 2-D FEM and the 1-D magnetodynamic model, a
requirement that does not apply to the hybrid model (see the flux
density waveforms in Figs. 5 and 6).
The results of the power balance conducted at 400 V are
shown in Table II. The relative error is calculated from the
computed powers as
The highest error, 3.4%, which is not that significant, appears
in the calculations of the FEM applying the advanced model.
It should be also noted that the influence of the core losses is
apparent in the input power in the case of the advanced model
and the hybrid model while not in the case of the postprocessing
DLALA: COMPARISON OF MODELS FOR ESTIMATING MAGNETIC CORE LOSSES
Fig. 5. Dynamic hysteresis loops and waveforms of flux density and field
strength at a point in a tooth tip in the stator calculated by the 2-D FEM
applying the advanced model. The high harmonic content in the waveforms
can cause problems to the iterative procedure of the advanced model.
Fig. 6. Dynamic hysteresis loops and waveforms of flux density and field
strength at a point in the surface of a rotor tooth calculated by the 2-D FEM
applying the advanced model. The high harmonic content in the waveforms
is quite severe at the rotor surface and is the main problem to the iterative
procedure of the advanced model.
model, because the latter did not incorporate the core losses into
the magnetic field solution.
The distribution of the total core losses in the cross-section of
the studied induction motor in the case of the 2-D FEM applying
the hybrid model is shown in Fig. 3. The core losses are quite
evenly distributed in the stator while densely concentrated in
the rotor surface. The computed total core losses as a function
of the supply voltage separated into hysteresis, classical, and
excess losses by the presented models are shown in Figs. 79. It
can be seen that the advanced model and the hybrid model gave
once again correlated distributions of the losses over the whole
range of voltages, a notable result that confirms the adequacy
of the hybrid model in modeling core losses. The traditional
723
TABLE II
POWER BALANCE AND ELECTROMAGNETIC POWER LOSSES OF THE INDUCTION
MOTOR COMPUTED AT 400 V BY THE FEM MODELS
Fig. 7. No-load core losses of the induction motor as a function of the supply
voltage separated into hysteresis, classical, and excess losses by the traditional
model.
postprocessing technique, however, produced larger hysteresis
losses and smaller classical eddy-current losses over the other
models. It is perceived that these differences are associated with
the inability of the postprocessing technique in taking the effects
of minor loops, rotational losses, and the skin effect properly
into account. The alternating and rotational losses have been
separated by the hybrid model as shown in Fig. 10.
Finally, the core-loss models are compared in terms of speed
and computation time. Table III shows comparative results of
the average number of iterates per time-step, the average CPU-
time spent on a time-step, and the CPU-time spent on a period
of simulation. The traditional technique and the hybrid tech-
nique had a similar convergence speed, whereas the latter spent
more computation time on modeling hysteresis as the former
only uses a single-valued magnetization curve. The advanced
model, however, was noticeably slow both in terms of the con-
vergence speed and the computation time it entails. The problem
that significantly affected the speed of the advanced mode was
the nonlinear eddy-current problem.
V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
This article has discussed the applicability, accuracy, and ef-
ficiency of three different core-loss models that have been im-
plemented in the FEM analysis of core losses in electrical ma-
chines. These models may be classified under two main cate-
gories: postprocessing techniques and techniques that incorpo-
rate the losses into the magnetic field solution. The first cate-
gory, referred to in this paper as the traditional technique, deter-
724
Fig. 8. No-load core losses of the induction motor as a function of the supply
voltage separated into hysteresis, classical, and excess losses by the advanced
model.
Fig. 9. No-load core losses of the induction motor as a function of the supply
voltage separated into hysteresis, classical, and excess losses by the hybrid
model.
mines the core losses by postprocessing the magnetic field so-
lution obtained by the FEM analysis. The second, referred to as
the advanced technique, determines the core losses by modeling
the magnetization curves and hence the ensuing core losses.
The proposed hybrid model, which goes under the second cat-
egory, performs the same task as the advanced modelmod-
eling the loop shapesbut in a much simpler manner. By using
the hybrid model, it has been shown that modeling the magne-
todynamic vector hysteresis behavior is feasible, even in com-
plicated cases such as induction machines, making the idea of
using the concept of modeling the dynamic loop shapes fruitful
in producing accurate estimates of the core losses. The hys-
teresis, classical eddy-current, and excess losses, known as the
magnetodynamic effects, are determined accordingly.
The methods that are commonly used for computing core
losses in electrical machines are based upon simple techniques
that exploit the field solution as a posteriori, using statistical
laws or empirical equations. Despite their imperfections and
inaccuracies, the common tendency to use such techniques is
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. 45, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2009
Fig. 10. No-load core losses of the induction motor as a function of the supply
voltage separated into alternating and rotational losses by the hybrid model.
TABLE III
RESULTS OF THE COMPUTATION TIME
mainly attributed to their simplicity and stability, which are a
crucial factor for the success and popularity of the core-loss
model. An accurate model that is not robust may be applied
only to certain problems or may be useful only for academic
studies in which these problems are often solved manually. For
instance, the eddy current in the laminations of the rotor, in par-
ticular, can easily lead to significant problems in the time-step-
ping scheme and the iterative procedure involved. The proposed
hybrid model was found to be relatively accurate and consis-
tently stable and efficient.
The solution of the eddy-current problem has proven to be
difficult, requiring careful treatment, especially in electrical ma-
chines where the problem becomes more complicated because
of the strong coupling between the 2-D magnetic field solu-
tion and the eddy-current field solution. The idea of tackling the
problem by using a simplified (hybrid) model, which is more
stable and efficient, has considerably alleviated the overall iter-
ative procedure. The hybrid model is not only efficient from a
computational viewpoint but also stable and adequate for mod-
eling the eddy currents in a rotating electrical machine, where
the flux is usually highly distorted.
APPENDIX
The core losses of the induction motor was measured at no
load with various voltage levels. The core losses were segre-
gated from the electromagnetic losses and mechanical losses
using a rigorous method referred to as the synchronous test. The
method of the measurement was based on the same principle
DLALA: COMPARISON OF MODELS FOR ESTIMATING MAGNETIC CORE LOSSES
used in determining the hysteresis torque as described in detail
in [21], [31]. Near the synchronous speed, the torque compo-
nents associated with the harmonics and friction are approxi-
mately constant. The jump of power, which is associated with
the hysteresis torque, is determined by operating the machine
at small slips in motoring and generating modes; then, the cor-
responding powers are extrapolated to the synchronous speed.
The average loss power obtained from these two modes corre-
sponds to the core losses and resistive losses.
The advantage of the synchronous method is that the running
of the motor is maintained close to the synchronous speed,
ensuring that no friction or windage mechanical losses are
apparent in the measurements. Furthermore, the method sup-
presses the negative torque caused by the harmonics. The core
losses are then separated from the total electromagnetic losses
by subtracting the resistive loss of the stator. The result of the
subtraction is believed to be associated with the core losses.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author would like to thank Prof. Antero Arkkio and
Dr. Anouar Belahcen from the Department of Electrical Engi-
neering, Helsinki University of Technology, for their constant
help and useful discussions.
REFERENCES
[1] G. Bertotti, Hysteresis in Magnetism. New York: Academic, 1998.
[2] G. Bertotti, General properties of power losses in soft ferromagnetic
materials, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 24, pp. 621630, Jan. 1988.
[3] M. Amar and R. Kaczmarek, A general formula for prediction of iron
losses under nonsinusoidal voltage waveform, IEEE Trans. Magn.,
vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 25042509, Sep. 1995.
[4] D. Binesti and J. P. Ducreux, Core losses and efficiency of electrical
motors using new magnetic materials, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 32, no.
5, pp. 48874889, Sep. 1996.
[5] D. M. Ionel, M. Popescu, S. J. Dellinger, T. J. E. Miller, R. J. Heideman,
and M. I. McGilp, On the variation with flux and frequency of the core
loss coefficients in electrical machines, IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat.,
vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 658667, Jun. 2006.
[6] O. Bottauscio, A. Canova, M. Chiampi, and M. Repetto, Iron losses
in electrical machines: Influence of different material models, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 805808, Mar. 2002.
[7] S. E. Zirka, Y. I. Moroz, P. Marketos, and A. J. Moses, Viscosity-
based magnetodynamic model of soft magnetic materials, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 21212132, Sep. 2006.
[8] S. E. Zirka, Y. I. Moroz, P. Marketos, and A. J. Moses, Comparison
of engineering methods of loss prediction in thin ferromagnetic lami-
nations, J. Magn. Magn. Mater., vol. 320, no. 20, pp. 25042508, Oct.
2008.
[9] A. Belahcen and A. Arkkio, Comprehensive dynamic loss model of
electrical steel applied to FE simulation of electrical machines, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 886889, Jun. 2008.
[10] L. R. Dupre, O. Bottauscio, M. Chiampi, J. Melkebeek, and M.
Repetto, Modeling electromagnetic phenomena in soft magnetic
materials under unidirectional time periodic flux excitations, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 35, pp. 41714184, Sep. 1999.
[11] O. Bottauscio and M. Chiampi, Laminated core modeling under ro-
tational excitations including eddy currents and hysteresis, J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 89, pp. 67286730, Sep. 2001.
[12] J. Saitz, Magnetic field analysis of induction motors combining
Preisach hysteresis modeling and finite element techniques, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 36933697, Sep. 2001.
725
[13] E. Dlala, J. Saitz, and A. Arkkio, Inverted and forward Preisach
models for numerical analysis of electromagnetic field problems,
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 19631973, Aug. 2006.
[14] O. Bottauscio, M. Chiampi, and D. Chiarabaglio, Advanced model
of laminated magnetic cores for two-dimensional field analysis, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 36, pp. 561573, May 2000.
[15] C. P. Steinmetz, On the law of hysteresis, Proc. IEEE, vol. 72, no. 2,
pp. 197221, Feb. 1984.
[16] H. Jordan, Ferromagnetic constants for weak fields, Elek. Nachr.
Tech., pp. 729, 1924.
[17] K. Atallah, Z. Q. Zhu, and D. Howe, An improved method for pre-
dicting iron losses in brushless permanent magnet dc drives, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 29972999, Sep. 1992.
[18] D. M. Ionel, M. Popescu, M. I. McGilp, T. J. E. Miller, S. J. Dellinger,
and R. J. Heideman, Computation of core losses in electrical ma-
chines using improved models for laminated steel, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Applicat., vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 15541564, Nov./Dec. 2007.
[19] E. Barbisio, F. Fiorillo, and C. Ragusa, Predicting loss in magnetic
steels under arbitrary induction waveform and with minor hysteresis
loops, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 18101819, Jul. 2004.
[20] F. Fiorillo and A. Novikov, An improved approach to power losses in
magnetic laminations under nonsinusoidal induction waveform, IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 29042910, Sep. 1990.
[21] E. Dlala and A. Arkkio, Measurement and analysis of hysteresis
torque in a high-speed induction machine, Elect. Power Applicat.,
IET, vol. 1, pp. 737742, Sep. 2007.
[22] R. Del Vecchio, The calculation of eddy current losses associated with
rotating magnetic fields in thin laminations, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol.
18, no. 6, pp. 17071709, Nov. 1982.
[23] E. Dlala, A. Belahcen, and A. Arkkio, Efficient magnetodynamic
lamination model for two-dimensional field simulation of rotating
electrical machines, J. Magn. Magn. Mater., vol. 320, no. 20, pp.
10061010, Oct. 2008.
[24] I. D. Mayergoyz, Mathematical models of hysteresis, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 603608, Sep. 1986.
[25] E. Dlala, Magnetodynamic Vector Hysteresis Models for Steel Lam-
inations of Rotating Electrical Machines Doctoral Thesis, No. 111,
TKK Dissertations Helsinki Univ. Technol., , 2008 [Online]. Available:
http://lib.tkk.fi/Diss/2008/isbn9789512292776/
[26] E. Dlala, A simplified iron loss model for laminated magnetic cores,
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 44, no. 11, pp. 31693172, Nov. 2008.
[27] S. E. Zirka, Y. I. Moroz, P. Marketos, A. J. Moses, D. C. Jiles, and
T. Matsuo, Generalization of the classical method for calculating dy-
namic hysteresis loops in grain oriented electrical steels, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 21132126, Sep. 2008.
[28] E. Dlala and A. Arkkio, Analysis of the convergence of the fixed-point
method used for solving nonlinear rotational magnetic field problem,
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 473478, Apr. 2008.
[29] K. Atallah and D. Howe, Calculation of the rotational power loss
in electrical steel laminations from measured H and B, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 35473549, Nov. 1993.
[30] A. Arkkio, Analysis of Induction Motors Based on the Numerical So-
lution of the Magnetic Field and Circuit Equations, Doctoral thesis,
Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, Electrical Engineering Series, no. 59,
Sep. 1987.
[31] J. Saitz, Magnetic Field Analysis of Electric Machines Taking Ferro-
magnetic Hysteresis Into Account, Doctoral thesis, Acta Polytechnica
Scandinavica, no. 37, 2001.
[32] J. L. Coulomb, A methodology for the determination of global electro-
mechanical quantities from a finite element analysis and its application
to the evaluation of magnetic forces, torques and stiffness, IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 25142519, Nov. 1983.
Emad Dlala was born in Libya in 1976. He received the B.Sc. degree in elec-
trical power engineering from Seventh of April University, Sabrata, Libya, in
1999 and the M.Sc. and D.Sc. degrees (with distinction) in electromechanical
energy conversion from Helsinki University of Technology (TKK), Helsinki,
Finland, in 2005 and 2008, respectively.
He is currently a Senior Researcher with the Department of Electrical Engi-
neering, Helsinki University of Technology. His research interests include nu-
merical analysis of electrical machines as well as measurement and modeling
of magnetic materials.