Averaging over a cycle, the power transfer is
4IA2a2L2 (cos 8fiL-i eqns. 14 and 15, so that
•* v
Vo){
As determined in Section 7.1, the power transfer involving
the Ez field is '
321 A2L3 f 1 - cos Sj8L - (8j8L/2) sin 8pL
(15)
Discussion on
Introduction of general theory of electrical machines
into university courses
Prof. M. G. Say: Modern ideas of electrical machines
are (in terms of the racing stable) by Kron out of Park.
Kron's work is better known, but Park, whose classic paper
appeared in the General Electric Review of 1926, when he
was about 25 years old, was the originator—which shows
what really splendid ideas come from the young.
I am wholeheartedly in favour of the author's method, so
lucidly set out in paper 4487 S, for a university second-year
course, except for the rather heavy weather made of
the transformations. While some academics will object to
treating the particular after the general, instead of showing
the general to be a logical outcome of the particular, there is
sound sense in the exposition in Sections 2 and 4.1, respec-
tively. Generalisation should not, however, be overadvertised.
In the last few lines of Section 2 the author states that Fig. 7
applies to all electrical machines under all conditions. It does
not, for the exposition is particular to rotating machines, in
which at least one of the elements is cylindrical.
My views on realised, workable, generalised machines
have changed almost as often as the political allegiances of
the Vicar of Bray. At present, I feel that there is a place in
the teaching laboratory for such a machine, but not for its
wholesale and almost exclusive use as exemplified in the
author's laboratory. Generalisation is a concept: as soon as
realisation is attempted something is lost; rather as one finds
if one tries to produce those ideal voltage and current sources
that appear in network theory. To realise a concept we have
to make sacrifices.
Here the sacrifices are: first, we see too little of the machine
itself; secondly, the equipment fails to show the electromag-
netic torque developed; and thirdly, the important trans-
formations are not very readily demonstrable. The unifying
principles could be better shown with simpler elements,
stripped down to essentials and fed with d.c. and very-low-
frequency a.c, as well as with normal-frequency, supplies, to
show, in principle, the necessary air-gap conditions common
to all machines within the field concerned. This could then
be followed up by appropriate steady-state and transient
tests on real machines with normal parameters.
Mr. J. G. Henderson: The value of a new method of
teaching can be judged by the extent to which it can embrace
the principal concepts of the conventional approach whilst
also offering some further advantages, such as a saving in
time or a wider view of the subject. The generalised circuit
theory of electrical machines has the merit that it can deal
Paper 4487 S by ELLISON, A. J. [see 111, (7), p. 1359]
Read before the Science & General and Power Divisions, 2nd November
1964 and the Rugby Sub-Centre at Rugby, 17th March 1965
1802
The terms in brackets are approximately unity in both
8L
(16)
For the experimental guide this ratio is 176; so we conclude
that the error in neglecting the power used in deflecting the
beam is negligible.
with both the steady-state and transient performance of
linearised electrical machines. It also provides a logical basis
for the simulation of machines by computer and is therefore
a vital topic for system analysis. It should be included in any
modern course in electrical engineering at university level.
There are, however, two aspects of machine theory: the
electromagnetic aspects related to the physical structure of
machines, and the analytical aspect related to machine
performance. It is the latter which is covered by the generalised
theory. The author has quite rightly stressed the importance
of the former, but one wonders how much time can be devoted
to this in his syllabus. Does he have sufficient time to deal
with m.m.f. distribution in terms of space harmonics and
winding factors? This is an important topic for both con-
ventional and generalised analysis, being used in the latter
case to establish the nature of the inductance parameters of
the circuit model of a machine.
Another important topic is the combined voltage/m.m.f.
diagram for a synchronous machine. How would the author
introduce this? Would he derive it from the circuit equations
of the synchronous machine, or would he revert to his initial
introductory work on m.m.f.s and physical structure? I pose
these questions because our treatment of electrical machinery
must cover both the mundane and the more esoteric needs
of our students. It would appear to me that, whilst presenting
a linear theory of electrical machines on the one hand, we
must also still include some reference to those utilitarian
diagrams that are of value for assessing steady-state per-
formance.
Referring to the 3-phase/2-phase transformation, I prefer
to introduce this for the case of a 2-phase winding stationary
with respect to the 3-phase winding, with a and a phases
aligned and having a turns ratio N2plt = A / l l / 3p/r
^n
equating m.m.f.s, having defined /0 = (My/3)(ia + h + *c)>
this leads to the simple orthogonal matrix, A:
1 1
1
~2 ~2
_p
"V3
4 -4
1 I l
'0 V2 V2 V2
PROC. IEE, Vol. 112, No. 9, SEPTEMBER 1965
for which A, = A~l. Voltages and currents then transform
by the same law, and one need remember only one trans-
formation matrix rather than the four matrixes of Section 4.1.
This choice of turns ratio can easily be justified by con-
sidering the requirement for power invariance between
balanced 2-phase and 3-phase systems, coupled with the
desire to transform voltages and currents in the same way.
This leads to V2ph = ^ / ( - ) V3ph and I2ph =
In order to maintain the same total polyphase m.m.f., and
to produce voltages A / - times as large from the same value
of gap flux, we need N2ph = ^N2ph.
I think this is a transformation worth exploiting, for the
only rotating-axis transformation then needed is the ctfijdq
transformation of Section 4.2.
Dr. A. G. J. MacFarlane: I would like to make a few
brief remarks about the complementary part of the course
outlined in the paper. 'Generalised machines' is taught at
Queen Mary College as part of a course called 'Power and
Control'. The machine theory takes about two thirds of the
course, and I teach the remaining third. This remaining third
is essentially an introduction to a generalised network theory.
This part of the course, concerned with generalised circuit
theory, is based on defining a system as an assembly of
components, and defining each component in terms of a
pair of measurements carried out with respect to a pair of
points in space. System variables are then classified as
'spatial-intensive' or 'through' variables, and 'spatial-exten-
sive' or 'across' variables. These are essentially generalisations
of the current and voltage variables of electrical network
analysis. In this way, one can devise a generalised network
theory which includes the analysis of electrical, mechanical,
thermal and fluid systems. One can then incorporate the
results of the generalised machine theory in a unified network
theory of the type advocated by Henderson, and this gives one
immediate access to an analogue-computer representation for
a machine. The course finishes with a very brief introduction
to the concepts of information, signals and feedback.
Dr. B. Adkins {communicated): The author makes the
important claim that the students are inspired into enthusiasm
by the novel approach. It is a continual dilemma in teaching
that the fundamental matters on which the action of any
device depends do not excite interest as readily as a more
superficial study of special conditions. How far can the
generalised machine be used to overcome this difficulty ?
The primary purpose of the general theory is for predicting
the performance of practical machines. Consequently, the
assumptions on which the theory is based, and the errors
occasioned by them, are important matters. I often suspect
that the so-called 'circuit theory of electrical machines' tends
to give too little attention to the imperfections. These arise
from such things as harmonics, losses and saturation, which
cannot be included in the theory. Nevertheless, application
of the theory to practical problems gives quite remarkably
accurate results in many instances. The reason for this happy
situation is that the skill of the designer, developed after
much travail over many years, is directed toward the elimina-
tion of just these factors. A machine designed from the theory
without any knowledge of design techniques would probably
not obey the theory at all.
A generalised machine, intended to operate in many
different ways, cannot be a good machine for all the alter-
natives, and is liable to be a bad one for most of them.
We have tested a generalised machine (not the author's) in
various ways. As an induction motor it has excessive load loss,
PROC. IEE, Vol. 112, No. 9, SEPTEMBER 1965
80 S31
and the torque/speed curve has a dip which would make the
motor unusable. As a shunt commutator motor with short-
circuited 2-phase brushgear, which, according to the cross-
field theory, ought to be equivalent to an induction motor,
there was a very large change of current and power factor on
switching over the rotor connections. Does an unduly imper-
fect machine fail to bring out the fundamental action, or
is it beneficial in emphasising the importance of the errors
caused by the basic assumptions? Any such benefit would
depend on how far the student attained a full understanding of
what was involved.
Prof. P. L. Alger {UnitedStates): We have 160 students
in our senior electrical engineering class at Rensselaer Poly-
technic Institute; so we would need 40 machines to follow the
author's programme. This does not seem practical. Our point
of view is that we should rather teach students how to use
machines than how to make them, so that our courses deal
with the terminal characteristics, and say very little about the
windings.
When I first started to teach I made up my own concise
version of the generalised machine theory, and tried to
present it to my students in the simplest possible way. After
a while, the boys appointed a delegate to tell me very politely
that they were not listening—they wanted to know about
particular machines and not about generalised theory. Also,
they were more interested in doing things for themselves than
they were in listening.
I asked one of my best students to tell me how to make a
course in machines interesting. He said, 'It is obvious: throw
all the books in the wastebasket and write a good book'. It
appears that a good book must start from the point the
student has reached in his previous courses, and this point
is quite different from what it used to be for students of years
ago. Therefore, there may be good reason for the spate of
new books on machines that are coming out. One book*
explains at length the transfer of energy between electrical,
magnetic, and mechanical systems, as in a solenoid, before
going into machine theory.
If a student is interested, he will do an astonishing amount
of work. If he is not, he will do little work, and that little
will be of small avail. I am spending all my time nowadays
on devising projects that will give the students scope for
original work, so that they will have fun in the laboratory. If
they have fun, they will learn something.
Mr. R. A. French: We have installed six of the smaller
sets in our college laboratory, but we have not been using
them along the author's lines, nor are we using only
generalised machines in the laboratory course. We are making
no attempt to demonstrate, for instance, the characteristics
of an induction motor using this machine, since its charac-
teristics are not similar to those of an industrial machine.
Students are introduced to the generalised machine in their
second year, when half the laboratory course is spent on them.
We demonstrate the common principles involved in electrical
machinery, such as m.m.f., induced voltages, effects of different
winding connections, commutators and slip rings. They are
given the task of wiring the terminal panels, using plugs (not
connections) to obtain their d.c, single-phase, 2-phase and
3-phase m.m.f.s, making use of the search coils to display
them on an oscilloscope. This fits in very well in a 3 h period,
and keeps the students extremely busy and active mentally;
it also consolidates the work that is being done in a parallel
lecture course, since the whole class can be on the same
laboratory investigation, timed to come after the relevant
lectures.
I think there is a lot of enthusiasm amongst the lads
taking this course. They have said that, for the first time, the
* MESSERLE, H. K.: 'Dynamic circuit theory' (Pergamon Press 1965)
1803
 laboratory course has come alive and they really have some- Thus, if the voltage in coil A (the reference coil) is
thing interesting to do. We do not give long elaborate
laboratory sheets, but a very short instruction sheet of a few vA = Mcos 0 — — /Msin 0 -
lines telling them what they have to investigate. A 'conference' dt dt
is held after the laboratory period, at which each group
presents verbally to the class the work they have done and axis of coil
the conclusions they have drawn.
Mr. J. F. Perrin: I received my training well over
50 years ago at the Finsbury Technical College, and I would
like first to ask why the circle diagram is now obsolete. It
direct axis
may cause a smile, but in my day that was one of the 'must'
experiments in the electrical laboratory, just as was the
indicator diagram in the mechanical laboratory. Silvanus
Thompson used to teach that, if one had a circle diagram of
an induction motor, one could predict everything about it.
Secondly, why does the author think the separation of core Fig. A
losses in a transformer is obsolete? This was a fairly frequent
examination question in the past. and for coil B it is
Who, in these days, wants to convert 2-phase to 3-phase
or vice versa? I thought 2-phase was as dead as the dodo. vB = M cos (0 + <f>) j - /M sin (0 + 0) j
Just after the First World War there was quite a considerable
amount of 2-phase supply still in existence, and for 3-phase the voltage between the quadrature-axis brushes is
machinery it was quite essential to convert. One big factory
which originally had a 2-phase supply, which was changed to
3-phase, installed a Scott-connected transformer rather than
change all the machinery.
Mr. A Draper (at Rugby): I am not sure that it is J.TM. I —

advisable to introduce first-year students to the subject in TT dt

the way the author suggests. It is rather similar to teaching
swimming in a pool with no shallow end. On the other hand,
since much of the work of the unified machine theory is an
extension of generalised circuit theory, it is surely unnecessary
to delay any mention of machines until the necessary ground-
work of mathematics and circuit theory has been completed.
There is much to recommend the traditional approach to the
d.c. machine, transformer and induction motor in the first
year concurrently with an introduction to matrix methods and
and elementary treatment of network theory and transients.
This lays the foundation for unified theory in the later part
of the course.
The particular advantage to be gained by the use of the
generalised machine in the laboratory lies in having a machine
in which the axis currents in the rotor, id and iq, are real and
measurable. Students have difficulty in accepting transformed
or fictitious currents.
As an alternative treatment to Section 4.2 of the paper, the
values of the commutator voltages of the generalised machine
can more simply be derived in the following manner:
Considering the mutual inductance between a stator and
rotor coil (Fig. A), for sinusoidal flux distribution
M(0) = M cos 0
and the voltage generated in the rotor coil
d<f> _ d(M cos 6)i
dt dt
= M cos 0 — — iM sin 0 —
dt dt
which is seen to have two components, a transformer voltage
and a rotational voltage.
A commutator winding consists of a number of such coils
(Fig. B), and the voltage picked off between brushes is equal
to the sum of the instantaneous voltages in the coils between
them. In other words, it can be obtained by finding the
average voltage in these coils and multiplying by g the
number of coils.
1804
and between the direct-axis brushes is
*=(Tt/2-6)
VsR = g~
t-n/2-6)
2g di
= —M—
IT dt
The first of these is rotational voltage only and the second
transformer voltage only.
It is relatively easy to appreciate that current in a com-
mutator winding produces an m.m.f. pattern fixed relative
axis coil B
•''axis coil A
direct axis
Fig. B
to the brush axes and consequently a commutator winding
and brushgear can be replaced by pseudostationary coils in
which the above voltages are generated.
Mr. D. D. Stephen (at Rugby): The phase transforma-
tion shown in Fig. 4 of the paper and identified by the matrix
equation is restricted in that the possible turns ratio depends
on the actual machine winding. The result of this is that the
student may not appreciate the generality of the transforma-
tion. I have found that students seem to appreciate the more
general approach of first resolving an unbalanced system of
PROC. IEE, Vol. 112, No. 9, SEPTEMBER 1965
currents in the 3-phase system into the well known sym-
metrical components i0, iu i2, and then converting to a 2-phase
system which can have any convenient turns ratio. The result
of this operation is that the id and iq current system is shown
to depend only on /, and i2 and is completely independent of
t0, which can, in fact, be ignored in this form of analysis. I
regret that the author has used the symbols /« and ip in
associated with J'O, since these have been used for many
years to represent an alternative system of symmetrical
components and could easily lead to confusion.
Mr. A. J. Ellison (in reply): I would first like to point
out the inadvertent omission of a factor of 2/3 which should
have appeared before the matrix on the right-hand side of
the second equation from the bottom of page 1362.
In reply to Prof. Say, I have found that the physical
approach to transformations usually leads to an understand-
ing whereas the brief mathematical approach does not. I
agree that Fig. 7 applies only to almost all electric machines.
With suitably equipped generalised machines the funda-
mentals of electromechanical energy conversion can be
studied, together with their application to different types of
machine and other devices, in the short time available. The
many other machines in the laboratory are seen and informally
discussed, and some are studied by power students in the
third year. However, the best place to see real machines is
surely in industry, during practical training. The major aim
of a university course is to achieve an understanding of
principles.
Regarding sacrifices, firstly, I feel that the new course
shows more of the machine itself: many courses using real
machines study only their terminal characteristics. Secondly,
it is physically impossible, because of inertia, to measure
electromagnetic torque directly except in the steady state.
The torquemeter is at the mechanical terminals, which is
not the case with a dynamometer-load machine. Thirdly, the
transformations are readily verified using the generalised
machine and the methods are described in the paper. I feel
that the course provides in a practicable way what Prof.
Say feels desirable, and the particular generalised machine
used was carefully designed and has almost the same para-
meters as real machines.
I agree with Mr. Henderson on the importance of harmonics
of m.m.f. distribution and winding factors: they are studied
both theoretically and practically in the course (see Table 1).
Regarding the combined voltage/m.m.f. diagram for a
synchronous machine, I always keep terminal voltage, which
is a time-varying quantity, quite separate from m.m.f., which
is a space-varying quantity. However, a 2-axis phasor diagram
for a balanced polyphase synchronous machine can also be
regarded as a vector diagram giving the voltage and current
spatial distributions and the steady rotational voltages and
currents of the 2-axis representation. These matters are of
fundamental importance and are fully covered in Reference A.
Reference B, to be published, will cover the laboratory work.
I agree that our courses must include commonly used steady-
state performance diagrams.
Regarding the 3-phase/2-phase transformations, I prefer,
as a theoretical basis, the cutting of end connections and
reconnection to make one winding from another, the current-
and voltage-distribution patterns remaining unaltered. When
this is understood, it follows simply that the number of turns
of one of the windings can be altered to give identical voltage
and current transformations. The invariance of power also
follows—and can scarcely be otherwise if the physical basis
is kept in mind. The common practice of deriving in a semi-
physical way a transformation for currents and then taking,
PROC. IEE, Vol. 112, No. 9, SEPTEMBER 1965
without any physical basis, the same transformation for
voltages, has little justification. It does not lead to power
invariance (without the use of a per-unit system), and does
not appear pedagogically sound so far as introductory courses
are concerned.
The general theory is of growing importance because of
the need to analyse machines in systems. Dr. MacFarlane's
treatment of general-system dynamics is of great valuefor this.
The assumptions on which the theory is based, and its
approximations when applied to practical machines, have the
crucial importance pointed out by Dr. Adkins and must be
part of a course. The circuit theory of electric machines is
often lacking in these respects. One of the reasons for the
faults of some generalised machines, referred to by Dr.
Adkins, is their small size. A generalised machine with gross
imperfections uncharacteristic of real machines is, in my
view, unsuitable for use by students, who have sufficient
difficulties anyhow. The machine described in the paper has
an air-gap length which is a mechanical minimum and gives
a characteristic performance as an induction machine. As a
synchronous machine it has a short-circuit ratio of about 0 • 4,
which is characteristic of a turboalternator. When given the
test described by Dr. Adkins, there was no appreciable
change in primary current or power factor.
I am grateful for Prof. Alger's interesting contribution;
but I do not follow his arithmetic. At Queen Mary College,
four machines are required for 36 students at 3 per group and
3 half-days per experiment. My philosophy is based on the
view that an engineer cannot use machines intelligently
unless he understands the principles of their operation, and
this is what the new course tries to achieve.
In view of the performance of Mr. French's generalised
machines, it is not surprising that he finds it necessary to
use other machines in his laboratory course. Although there
is scope for some initiative in the experiments of the second-
year course described in the paper, I use initiative experiments
only in the third-year course.-
In reply to Mr. Perrin, the traditional circle diagram of the
induction machine is obsolete because the first step in its
construction is inadmissible. In this step, the magnetising
branch of the equivalent circuit is transferred to the terminals.
Designers of modern highly rated induction machines use
the correct equivalent circuit for predicting their performance.
Core loss is calculated using steelmakers' curves of peak-
flux-density/total-loss. There is rarely any point in trying to
separate eddy-current and hysteresis components, and, again,
this is usually done only by making inadmissible assumptions
about the variation of hysteresis loss with peak flux density.
Mr. Draper has provided a useful simple derivation of the
rotational and transformer voltages of the generalised
machine. I am not in favour of introducing machines in
first-year university courses in electrical engineering. But it
is important to cover thoroughly such fundamental matters
as Faraday's law and self and mutual inductance, including
the transformer. Machines, and other electromechanical
energy transducers, can be included in the second year.
In reply to Mr. Stephen, symmetrical components are not
introduced until the third year and cannot therefore be used
in the second-year course described in the paper. There is
no confusion with another system as no other system is used
in the course, a and j8 are also widely used as 2-phase suffixes.
References
A ELLISON, A. j . : 'Electromechanical energy conversion' (Harrap, 1965)
B ELLISON, A. J. : 'Generalized electric machines' (Harrap, 1966)
1805