See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/224460086

Rotor Flux-Barrier Design for Torque Ripple Reduction in Synchronous

Reluctance and PM-Assisted Synchronous Reluctance Motors

Article  in  IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications · July 2009

DOI: 10.1109/TIA.2009.2018960 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS
237 2,129

4 authors, including:

N. Bianchi Silverio Bolognani

University of Padova University of Padova
251 PUBLICATIONS   7,133 CITATIONS    284 PUBLICATIONS   8,677 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Electric mobility on the water View project

AC machine drives for Renewable energy systems View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Silverio Bolognani on 06 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 45, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2009 921

Rotor Flux-Barrier Design for Torque Ripple

Reduction in Synchronous Reluctance and
PM-Assisted Synchronous Reluctance Motors
Nicola Bianchi, Member, IEEE, Silverio Bolognani, Member, IEEE, Diego Bon, and
Michele Dai Pré, Student Member, IEEE

Abstract—The torque produced by a synchronous reluctance

machine (including the permanent-magnet-assisted machine) is
studied analytically, with the aim of pointing out the effect of the
position of the flux barriers on the torque ripple. It is verified that
the position of the flux-barrier ends highly influences the torque
waveform. With the aim of reducing torque harmonic contents,
a new strategy is proposed based on the choice of couples of flux
barriers of different shapes. The flux-barrier geometry is chosen
so as to obtain a compensation between the torque harmonics
produced by each couple. Experimental results on two prototypes
confirm the analytical prediction.
Index Terms—Low torque ripple, permanent-magnet
(PM)-assisted synchronous reluctance machine, synchronous
reluctance machine. Fig. 1. Sketch of (a) a synchronous reluctance motor with three flux barriers
per pole and (b) a synchronous PM-assisted reluctance motor with two flux
barriers per pole.
I. I NTRODUCTION
harmonics of electrical loading and the rotor anisotropy causes
T HE SYNCHRONOUS reluctance machine with transver-
sally laminated rotor, shown in Fig. 1(a), is a good com-
petitor in applications requiring high dynamic, high torque
a torque ripple that is intolerable in most of applications.
In [5], it has been shown that the rotor skewing (commonly
adopted in PM machines [6], [7]) is not enough to smooth the
density, and fault-tolerant capability. A permanent magnet (PM)
torque. In any case, only step skewing is possible when PMs
can be inserted in each rotor flux barrier with the aim of
are used: the rotor is split into two or more parts, each of them
saturating the iron bridges and increasing the power factor
is skewed with respect to the others.
[1], which is generally low in this machine. The resulting
In [5], it has been shown that a reduction of the torque ripple
configuration is called PM-assisted synchronous reluctance
can be achieved by means of a suitable choice of the number of
machine. Fig. 1(b) shows a sketch of such a machine with
flux barriers with respect to the number of stator slots. In this
two flux barriers per pole. The added PM is minimum to
case, the flux-barrier ends are uniformly distributed along the
maintain the intrinsic fault-tolerant capability of the reluctance
air gap (similarly to the stator slot distribution).
machine. As a consequence, the back EMF and the short-
Alternatively, in [8] and then in [9], the flux barriers are
circuit current are low [2], as well as the corresponding braking
shifted from their symmetrical position. In this way, a sort
torque [3].
of compensation of the torque harmonics is achieved. This
A common drawback of synchronous reluctance machines is
technique is similar to that proposed in [10] for cogging torque
their high torque ripple [4]. The interaction between the spatial
reduction in surface-mounted PM motors.
This paper presents a novelty strategy to compensate the
torque harmonics of the synchronous reluctance motor. It is
Paper IPCSD-08-084, presented at the 2006 Industry Applications Society based on the following two-step design procedure.
Annual Meeting, Tampa, FL, October 8–12, and approved for publication in
the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS by the Electric Ma- 1) At first, a set of flux-barrier geometries is identified so as
chines Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society. Manuscript sub- to cancel a torque harmonic of given order.
mitted for review November 1, 2006 and released for publication November 7,
2008. Current version published May 20, 2009. This paper was supported
2) Then, couples of flux barriers belonging to this set are
in part by the Electric Drive Laboratory, Department of Electrical Engi- combined together so as the remaining torque harmonics
neering, University of Padova, and in part by the Ministero dell’Istruzione, of one flux-barrier geometry compensate those of the
dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR) under Research Project PRIN 2003.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
other geometry.
Padova, 35131 Padova, Italy (e-mail: nicola.bianchi@unipd.it). The term “to cancel” is adopted when a harmonic of given
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. order is zero according to the geometry configuration of the
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2009.2018960 rotor flux barriers. Conversely, the term “to compensate” is
0093-9994/$25.00 © 2009 IEEE
922 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 45, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2009

adopted when any technique (as step-skewing or pole shifting)

is used to decrement the effect of one or more harmonics. In
this case, the torque harmonics of given order are not zero in
each configuration, but their sum is zero.
This second step can be achieved in the following two ways:
either 1) by forming the rotor with laminations of two different
kinds or 2) by adopting two different flux-barrier geometries in
the same lamination.
The first is called “Romeo and Juliet” (R and J) configura-
tion, since the rotor is formed by two different and inseparable
kinds of lamination. The second is called “Machaon” configu-
ration, which is the name of a butterfly with two large and two
small wings, since the resulting flux barriers will be large and
small alternatively under the adjacent poles.
An accurate analytical model of the torque production of the
motor is first presented. After a validation by means of a finite Fig. 2. Reference frames of a synchronous reluctance motor. If the PM is
inset to assist the motor, it is placed with magnetization axis along the negative
element (FE) analysis, the model is adopted to determine the q-axis.
more profitable flux-barrier geometry. Promising results have
been reached analytically and by simulations. Experimental
tests on two rotor prototypes are presented in the following,
confirming the predictions.

II. I NVESTIGATION OF THE T ORQUE H ARMONICS

For a given winding arrangement, the electrical loading
(defined as the current linear density along the stator inner
diameter corresponding to the stator currents) can be expressed
as the Fourier series expansion, as

Ks (ϑs ) = K̂ν sin (νpϑs − pϑm − αie ) (1)
ν Fig. 3. Main magnetic quantities in stator and rotor.

where ν is the harmonic order, K̂ν is the peak of electric

loading harmonic of νth order, p is the number of pole pairs, ϑs computed as
is the coordinate angle in stator reference frame (mechanical 
degrees), ϑm is the rotor position (mechanical degrees), and D
Us (ϑr ) = Ks (ϑr ) dϑr (3)
αie is the angle of current vector (electrical degrees) [11]. 2
Superscript e is used to highlight when an angle is expressed
in electrical degrees, so as pϑm = ϑem . It is worth noticing that, that results in
during steady-state operations, the rotor position is linked to the
rotor speed by the relationship pϑm = ωt, where it is assumed  K̂ν D
Us (ϑr ) = − cos [νpϑr + (ν − 1)pϑm − αie ] . (4)
that ϑm = 0 at t = 0. ν 2p
ν
The symbol ν can be positive or negative (it has to be consid-
ered with sign). Adopting a standard three-phase winding, with Because of the small air gap, let us suppose that the air-
an integer number of slot per pole per phase, only harmonics of gap flux density has only radial component. In the adopted
odd order, not multiple of three, exist. Thus, ν can be expressed coordinate reference system, positive direction is from rotor to
as ν = 6k + 1 with k = 0, ±1, ±2, . . . [12]. stator. Thus, it is
Only the main harmonic (ν = p) is synchronous with the
rotor, while the other harmonics move asynchronously. −Us (ϑr ) + Ur (ϑr )
The electrical loading in (1) is expressed in the stator Bg (ϑr ) = μ0 (5)
g
reference frame. Since pϑs = p(ϑr + ϑm ), as shown in Fig. 2,
the electrical loading can be expressed in the rotor reference
where g is the air-gap thickness, and Ur (ϑr ) is the magnetic
frame as
potential of the rotor, as shown in Fig. 3. This is considered to
 be constant in each rotor magnetic “island” and zero elsewhere.
Ks (ϑr ) = K̂ν sin [νpϑr + (ν − 1)pϑm − αie ] . (2)
ν
Rotor island is that region of rotor iron magnetically insulated
and bordered by flux barriers and air gap (iron bridges are
The stator magnetic potential Us (ϑr ) along the stator bore not considered since they are saturated). The difference of
periphery (see Fig. 3), in the rotor reference frame, can be magnetic potential between the two edges of each flux barrier
BIANCHI et al.: ROTOR FLUX-BARRIER DESIGN FOR TORQUE RIPPLE REDUCTION IN MOTORS 923

is computed as the product of the magnetic flux φb crossing the

flux barrier
π

2p +ϑb
D
φb = Bg (ϑr )Lstk dϑr (6)
2
2p −ϑb
π

by the magnetic reluctance of the flux barrier itself

tb
Rb = (7)
μ0 Lstk lb
where D and Lstk are the bore diameter and the stack length,
respectively, and tb and lb are the thickness and the length of the
flux barrier, respectively (see Fig. 3). Therefore, the resulting
Ur (ϑr ) is a function of the electrical loading and the flux-
barrier geometry.
When the rotor is formed by several flux barriers per pole, the
computation becomes recursive. For each jth flux barrier, the
magnetic flux φbj and the magnetic potential Urj are computed Fig. 4. Torque behavior of a four-pole reluctance motor with assigned flux-
as described earlier, according to the geometry (i.e., tb , lb , and barrier angles ϑb1 and ϑb2 : comparison between analytical and FE results.
ϑb ) of each flux barrier.
where ρν1 and ρν2 are dimensionless parameters depending on
The torque is obtained by integrating the Lorentz’s force den-
rotor geometry only, i.e., on the following:
sity −Bg (ϑr )Ks (ϑr ) along the air-gap surface and multiplying
1) the air-gap thickness;
the result by the radius D/2, yielding
2) the lengths tb and lb of both flux barriers;
2π 3) the angles ϑb1 and ϑb2 of the flux-barrier ends.
D DLstk
τm =− Bg (ϑr )Ks (ϑr ) dϑr . (8) The motor torque expressed in (9) results in
2 2
0  K̂ν
τm = kτ cos λν
Since Us (ϑr ) is due to Ks (ϑr ), as expressed in (3), the ν2
interaction between these two quantities does not yield any ⎡ ν

 K̂ξ
overall torque. Thus, after some manipulations, the torque can × ⎣ρν1 sin λξ sin(ξpϑb1 )
be rewritten as ξ
ξ
⎤
2π  K̂ξ
μ0 D2 Lstk
τm = Ur (ϑr )Ks (ϑr ) dϑr . (9) + ρν2 × sin λξ [sin(ξpϑb2 ) − sin(ξpϑb1 )] ⎦
g 4 ξ
0 ξ
(13)
Since Ur (ϑr ) is a function of Ks (ϑr ), as discussed above,
it can be inferred that the motor torque exhibits an average where λν and λξ are given by (10) and
term, due to the fundamental harmonic of the electrical loading,
together with oscillating terms, due to the interaction between D3 Lstk 1
kτ = μ0 . (14)
the harmonics of the electrical loading of different orders. This g p2
will be clarified in the next section. Observing from (10) that λν and λξ depend on the harmonic
order (ν and ξ, respectively) and on the rotor position ϑm , it
III. R OTOR W ITH T WO F LUX B ARRIERS PER P OLE can be verified that the torque (13) is given by the sum of an
Let us consider the case of a rotor with two flux barriers average component (according to ν = ξ = 1) and other oscillat-
per pole, spanning angles 2ϑb1 and 2ϑb2 , as shown in Fig. 2. ing components (for any combination of ν and ξ different from
Letting the previous case). These latter components can be reduced by
means of a suitable design of the flux-barrier ends (i.e., of the
νπ
λν = + (ν − 1)pϑm − αie (10) angles ϑb1 and ϑb2 ).
2
the values of Ur (ϑr ) of the two rotor magnetic “islands” A. FE Comparison
become
With the aim of validating the analytical computation, a FE
 K̂ν analysis is carried out, referring to the same geometry. The
Ur1 = −D ρν1 cos(λν ) (11) curve of the torque versus rotor position predicted analytically
ν
(νp)2
is compared with the same curve computed by means of FE
 K̂ν
Ur2 = − D ρν2 cos(λν ) (12) method [13]. Two comparisons between the analytical and FE
ν
(νp)2 results are reported in Figs. 4 and 5.
924 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 45, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2009

Fig. 6. Design map of torque harmonic of 6th order.

Fig. 5. Torque behavior of a four-pole reluctance motor with assigned flux-

barrier angles ϑb1 and ϑb2 : comparison between analytical and FE results.

At first, the good agreement between analytical and FE

results should be noted. This confirms the accuracy of the
analytical model. On the basis of this result, the analytical
method will be used in the following to predict the torque
harmonic contents and to select the more suited flux-barrier
geometries.

B. Simulation of Torque Ripple Reduction

Some considerations on the torque ripple could be done. In
Fig. 4, the torque harmonic of 12th order is evident. Fig. 5
shows that an appropriate choice of the angles θb1 and θb2
allows one to cancel this torque harmonic of 12th order. Among
the remaining torque harmonics, the higher harmonics are of
6th and 36th orders. Fig. 7. Design map of torque harmonic of 12th order.

IV. C ONTOUR M APS OF THE T ORQUE H ARMONICS

From the analysis of the torque harmonics presented earlier,
it is possible to draw the amplitude of the various torque
harmonics according to the angles ϑb1 and ϑb2 of the flux-
barrier ends.
Referring to a four-pole 24-slot stator with one-slot chorded
winding, some maps are shown in Figs. 6–8. They display
the maximum amplitude of the torque harmonics of orders 6,
12, and 24, respectively, in the (ϑb1 , ϑb2 ) plane, in mechanical
degrees. The top left side of the maps is not to be taken into
account, since the values of ϑb2 < ϑb1 + 6◦ have not been
considered, being one flux barrier too close to the other.
The contour maps offer valid help to the rotor design. They
allow one to identify those combinations of flux-barrier angles
suited to cancel (or to minimize) some torque harmonics. For
instance, Fig. 6 shows that the torque harmonic of 6th order dis- Fig. 8. Design map of torque harmonic of 24th order.
appears when ϑb1 ≈ 17◦ and ϑb2 ≈ 36◦ are chosen. Similarly,
Figs. 7 and 8 show which combinations of ϑb1 and ϑb2 allow the Although the maps presented earlier are valid help to the
torque harmonics of 12th and 24th orders to be cancelled. The design the rotor geometry, it is not possible to cancel torque
number of combinations increases when the harmonic order harmonic of more than one order. Then, a further strategy has
increases, as can be inferred from comparing Figs. 6–8. to be adopted.
BIANCHI et al.: ROTOR FLUX-BARRIER DESIGN FOR TORQUE RIPPLE REDUCTION IN MOTORS
Fig. 9. R- and J-type laminations of the “R and J” rotor.
V. R OTOR W ITH D IFFERENT L AMINATIONS :
T HE “R AND J” R OTOR
The first proposed strategy consists in assembling the ro-
tor using different laminations. Two different laminations are
enough for an adequate reduction of torque ripple. The geome-
tries of the flux barriers of both laminations are chosen with
the aim of canceling the torque harmonic of one order and to
compensate those of other orders. In this way, a smooth total
torque is obtained.
This rotor is called “R and J” rotor. It is formed by two parts,
where one adopts lamination of the first kind and the second
part adopts lamination of the other kind. Of course, the two
parts are inseparable.
According with the adopted stator winding, the flux-barrier
angles are as follows.
1) R-type module. ϑb1 = 14.8◦ , and ϑb2 = 27.4◦ .
2) J-type module. ϑb1 = 22.2◦ , and ϑb2 = 40.2◦ .
The two rotor laminations exhibit the torque harmonics of
12th order out of phase of almost 180◦ . The simulated torque
ripple at nominal load has been computed to be equal to 5.45%
(peak-to-peak torque ripple).
The selected laminations are shown in Fig. 9. They will be
adopted for the first rotor prototype (see Section VII).
VI. R OTOR W ITH D IFFERENT F LUX B ARRIERS
PER P OLE : T HE “M ACHAON ” R OTOR
An alternative strategy lies in designing a single lamina-
tion in which the flux barriers present a different geometry
under various poles. The aim is, again, to cancel the torque
harmonic of one order and to compensate those of other
orders.
Let us refer to a four-pole motor. Among the various com-
binations, a couple of poles is designed with small (or R-type)
flux barriers, while the other couple of poles is designed with
large (or J-type) flux barriers.
This configuration can be looked upon as an evolution of the
“R and J” configuration, as shown in Fig. 10: The new rotor
lamination adopts the optimized flux barriers of the two-part
rotor. A couple of poles is designed with R-type flux barriers,
while the other couple of poles is designed with J-type flux
barriers. In order to avoid an unbalanced rotor, the poles of
equal shapes are symmetrical to the shaft axis.
This latter configuration overcomes the drawback of the
“R and J” configuration whose realization requires two different
rotor laminations. Although the use of two laminations yields
925
Fig. 10. Evolution from “R and J” rotor to “Machaon” rotor.
a higher number of degrees of freedom in the torque ripple
reduction, the additional manufacturing costs could represent
an impediment to its realization.
Since the final rotor presents two poles with large flux
barriers and two poles with short flux barriers, this second
solution is called “Machaon” configuration, which is the name
of a butterfly with two large wings and two small wings.
The final lamination is shown in the lower part of Fig. 10.
Whereas the flux-barrier angles have been not modified, the
thickness of the flux barriers has been slightly optimized in
order to improve the iron paths. The simulated peak-to-peak
torque ripple at nominal load has been computed to be lower
than 5%. This lamination shown in Fig. 10 has been adopted
for the second rotor prototype (see Section VII).
VII. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
Three motor prototypes have been manufactured. The same
three-phase stator has been used for the three motors. It is
a standard four-pole 24-slot induction motor stator, with a
double-layer one-slot chorded winding.
A. “R and J” Rotor
The “R and J” rotor is formed by the laminations of two
different types, each of them has two flux barriers per pole.
The rotor laminations have been chemically eroded. They are
shown in Fig. 11. In the center of the flux barrier, small PMs
(the assisting PMs) have been added so as to saturate the iron
bridge and to increase the power factor. Then, both laminations
show a hole of the same size to hold the PM. The PM flux is
quite low, to limit the short-circuit current and braking torque
in case of fault.
The rotor has been step skewed. At first, two stacks formed
by both laminations are packed. Then, one stack is skewed with
respect to the other.
926
Fig. 11. Photos of the “R and J” laminations. (a) R-type. (b) J-type.
Fig. 12. Photos of the “Machaon” lamination. (a) Actual waveform.
(b) Average and fundamental waveforms.
Fig. 13. Air-gap flux density distribution.
B. “Machaon” Rotor
The “Machaon” rotor is formed by laminations that are
chemically eroded, shown in Fig. 12. Small PMs have been
again added in the center of the flux barrier. The PM width
and thickness are the same of those used in the “R and J”
rotor. Fig. 13 shows the air-gap flux density distribu-
tion and the average value, together with the fundamental
waveform.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 45, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2009
Fig. 14. Insertion of the assisting PMs in the flux barriers of the “Machaon”
rotor.
Fig. 14 shows a step of the rotor assembling: The PM is going
to be inserted into the rotor flux barrier. Finally, the rotor has
been split into two parts that have been step skewed.
C. IPM Rotor
In order to compare the performance of the “R and J” and
“Machaon” motors with the classical interior PM (IPM) motor,
a further rotor has been designed and built. For the sake of
comparison, the IPM rotor has two flux barriers per pole as
well. It is labeled IPM2B and is shown in Fig. 1(b). The flux-
barrier ends are uniformly distributed along the air gap, i.e.,
they are the same under each pole. Their position was obtained
by means of an optimization procedure so as to minimize the
torque ripple.
In addition, a two-step skewing has been adopted to cancel a
higher order torque harmonic.
D. Motor Tests
Fig. 15 shows the measured torque behaviors of the IPM2B,
“R and J,” and “Machaon” motors, referred to the nominal cur-
rent Iˆ = 2.64 A (peak value). The same scale of 0.1 N · m/div
is used, so that one can easily observe the effective reduction
of the torque ripple achieved by the proposed solutions. The
torque ripple of the “R and J” and “Machaon” motors is
about one third of the torque ripple of the classical IPM2B
motor.
Fig. 16 shows the measured torque behaviors referred to a
current of Iˆ = 5.30 A (peak value). As mentioned earlier, both
innovative motor configurations exhibit a lower torque ripple.
In this case, the torque ripple becomes almost a half of that of
the IPM2B motor.
Table I reports a numerical comparison between average
torque (Tavg ) and torque ripple (ΔT ), at various currents. It
is worth noticing that the proposed solutions yield always an
appreciable reduction of the torque ripple. A reduction of the
average torque of about 8% is not negligible in the “R and J”
motor. On the contrary, the average torque appears slightly
higher in the “Machaon” motor.
BIANCHI et al.: ROTOR FLUX-BARRIER DESIGN FOR TORQUE RIPPLE REDUCTION IN MOTORS
Fig. 15. Measured torque comparison (current amplitude Iˆ = 2.64 A).
(a) IPM2B motor. (b) “R and J” motor. (c) “Machaon” motor.
Fig. 16. Measured torque comparison (current amplitude Iˆ = 5.30 A).
(a) IPM2B motor. (b) “R and J” motor. (c) “Machaon” motor.
The reason of the average torque decrease can be imputed
to the higher saturation of the central rotor path of the J-type
lamination (see Fig. 9) and to the leakage flux among the rotor
islands of two different laminations.
927
TABLE I
TORQUE COMPARISON AT DIFFERENT CURRENTS AMONG IPM2B,
R AND J, AND “MACHAON” MOTORS
TABLE II
TORQUE HARMONIC COMPARISON
E. Torque Harmonics
Table II shows the torque harmonics computed from the
torque behaviors of Fig. 15 (Iˆ = 2.64 A). In the same table,
the measured torque harmonics are compared with the torque
harmonics predicted by means of simulations. The good agree-
ment between the measures and the predictions highlights again
the effectiveness of the models used in the study.
From Table II, it is interesting to observe that higher torque
harmonics are achieved, corresponding to the slot harmonics
(i.e., of 12th and 24th orders). In addition, Table II shows
that the main reduction of the torque ripple is achieved in
the torque harmonic of 12th order: It decreases from 5.36%
in IPM2B motor to 1.35% in “R and J” motor and to 1.61%
in “Machaon” motor. Other significative reductions are of the
torque harmonics of 24th and 36th orders.
VIII. C ONCLUSION
An analytical model has been developed to study the depen-
dence of the torque harmonics on the rotor geometry. It is the
key tool in selecting the combinations of flux-barrier shapes,
yielding a significative torque harmonic reduction.
An effective torque ripple reduction is achieved by designing
flux barriers of different geometries, both adopting different
laminations forming the same rotor and a single lamination with
flux barriers of different geometries.
The results can be applied to synchronous reluctance
machines, as well as to PM-assisted reluctance machines
(as realized by the authors).
Two motor prototypes have been manufactured and tested.
The experimental results come up to the theoretical expecta-
tions: adopting the proposed solutions yields a sensible reduc-
tion of the torque ripple. At nominal current, the torque ripple
becomes about one-third of that exhibited by the classical rotor
design.
928 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 45, NO. 3, MAY/JUNE 2009
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Dr. G. Terruzzi of Saimag
S.p.a., Pogliano Milanese, Italy, for supplying the PMs;
Eng. G. Perletti of Volonterio and C. S.p.A., Milan, Italy, for
supplying the stator laminations; M. Trova and M. Bellomi of
Magnetic S.p.a., Montebello Vicentino, Italy, for assembling
the motor prototype; and M. Castiello for the help during the
motor tests.
R EFERENCES
[1] A. Fratta, A. Vagati, and F. Villata, “Permanent magnet assisted synchro-
nous reluctance drive for constant-power application: Drive power limit,”
in Proc. Intell. Motion Eur. Conf. (PCIM), Nürnberg, Germany, Apr. 1992,
pp. 196–203.
[2] N. Bianchi, M. Dai Pré, and S. Bolognani, “Design of a fault-tolerant IPM
motor for electric power steering,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 55,
no. 4, pp. 1102–1111, Jul. 2006.
[3] B. A. Welchko, T. M. Jahns, W. L. Soong, and J. M. Nagashima, “IPM
synchronous machine drive response to symmetrical and asymmetrical
short circuit faults,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 291–
298, Jun. 2003.
[4] A. Fratta, G. P. Troglia, A. Vagati, and F. Villata, “Evaluation of torque
ripple in high performance synchronous reluctance machines,” in Conf.
Rec. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, Toronto, ON, Canada, Oct. 1993, vol. I,
pp. 163–170.
[5] A. Vagati, M. Pastorelli, G. Franceschini, and S. C. Petrache, “Design
of low-torque-ripple synchronous reluctance motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 758–765, Jul./Aug. 1998.
[6] T. M. Jahns and W. L. Soong, “Pulsating torque minimization techniques
for permanent magnet ac motor drives—A review,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 321–330, Apr. 1996.
[7] S. Y. Jung and H. K. Jung, “Reduction of force ripples in permanent
magnet linear synchronous motor,” in Proc. ICEM, Brugges, Belgium,
Aug. 2002. CD-ROM.
[8] N. Bianchi and S. Bolognani, “Reducing torque ripple in PM synchronous
motors by pole-shifting,” in Proc. ICEM, Helsinki, Finland, Aug. 2000,
pp. 1222–1226.
[9] M. Sanada, K. Hiramoto, S. Morimoto, and Y. Takeda, “Torque ripple
improvement for synchronous reluctance motor using asymmetric flux
barrier arrangement,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. Soc. Annu. Meeting,
Oct. 12–16, 2003, pp. 250–255.
[10] T. Li and G. Slemon, “Reduction of cogging torque in permanent magnet
motors,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 2901–2903, Nov. 1988.
[11] N. Bianchi, “Analysis of the IPM motor—Part I. Analytical approach in
design, analysis, and control of interior PM synchronous machines,” in
Conf. Rec. IEEE IAS Annu. Meeting, N. Bianchi and T. M. Jahns, Eds.
Seattle, WA, Oct. 3, 2005, pp. 3.1–3.33. IEEE IAS Tutorial Course Notes,
CLEUP (info@cleup.it).
[12] M. Liwschitz-Garik and C. C. Whipple, Electric Machinery, vol. II.
New York: Van Nostrand, 1960.
[13] N. Bianchi, Electrical Machine Analysis Using Finite Elements,
ser. Power Electronics and Applications Series. Boca Raton, FL: CRC
Press, 2005.
View publication stats
Nicola Bianchi (M’98) received the Laurea and
Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the Uni-
versity of Padova, Padova, Italy, in 1991 and 1995,
respectively.
Since 1998, he has been with the Department
of Electrical Engineering, University of Padova, as
a Senior Research Assistant in the Electric Drives
Laboratory. His interest is in the field of the electro-
mechanical design of brushless, synchronous, and
induction motors with particular interest in drive
applications. He is the author or coauthor of several
technical papers and two books.
Silverio Bolognani (M’98) received the Laurea de-
gree in electrical engineering from the University of
Padova, Padova, Italy, in 1976.
In 1976, he joined the Department of Electrical
Engineering, University of Padova, where he is cur-
rently a Full Professor of electrical drives and is en-
gaged in research on advanced control techniques for
motor drives and on the design of ac electrical motors
for variable-speed applications. He is the author of
more than 100 papers on electrical machines and
drives.
Prof. Bolognani is the President of the IEEE Industry Applications
Society–Industrial Electronics Society–Power Electronics Society North Italy
Joint Chapter.
Diego Bon was born in Vicenza, Italy, in 1977. He
received the Laurea degree in electrical engineering
from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Uni-
versity of Padova, Padova, Italy, in 2002, where he is
currently working toward the Ph.D. degree.
He is involved in the design of low-cost electric
drives for the rural community.
Michele Dai Pré (S’06) was born in Verona, Italy,
in 1979. He received the Laurea degree in electrical
engineering from the University of Padova, Padova,
Italy, in 2004, where he is currently working toward
the Ph.D. degree in the Department of Electrical
Engineering and is involved in the design of innov-
ative electrical motors for automotive and aerospace
applications, with special attention to fault-tolerant
configurations.
In 2004, he received a bursary scheme at the Lab-
oratory of Electric Drives, Department of Electrical
Engineering, University of Padova.