IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO.
2, FEBRUARY 2015
Charging Method for the Secondary Battery in
Dual-Inverter Drive Systems for Electric Vehicles
Jinseok Hong, Student Member, IEEE, Heekwang Lee, Student Member, IEEE, and Kwanghee Nam, Member, IEEE
Abstract—A dual-inverter with an open-end winding motor con-
figuration is an attractive method to supply a higher voltage to a
motor for electric vehicle (EV) applications. A topology utilizing
two isolated dc sources is considered to reap the advantages of re-
liability and high voltage. Although this design may require two
battery chargers, in this study, the use of only one charger to a
main battery was considered. The central issue is to charge the
secondary battery from the main battery via the motor, whether
it is at a standstill or running. The inverter voltage margin re-
maining after motor torque production determines the charging
capacity. The unity-power-factor operation is shown to be useful
to maximize the charging power. Simulations and experiments are
presented that show the validity of the proposed scheme.
Index Terms—Battery charging, dual-inverter, electric vehicle
(EV), interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM),
open-end winding machine, unity-power-Factor (UPF).
I. INTRODUCTION
HE propulsion motors for electric vehicles (EVs) are char-
T acterized by high power densities and wide operating
ranges. The two issues are not separate because the high-speed
capability is necessary to increase the power density [1]. How-
ever, high-speed operation requires a high dc link voltage, as the
back electromotive force (EMF) grows linearly with the speed.
However, a high voltage is not favorable for a battery because
the cell balancing pays a penalty for battery efficiency. To ac-
commodate a high voltage, some vehicles, such as the Toyota
Prius, are utilizing a boost converter in the inverter dc link.
The Z-source inverter [2] provides another means to increase
the inverter output voltage without using a separate boosting
stage. The Z-source inverter, however, requires two bulky ca-
pacitors and inductors, and the boosting ratio is limited by the
output voltage and shoot-through zero state.
A dual-inverter with an open-end winding motor configu-
ration is one method to supply a higher voltage to the ma-
chine [3]–[9]. Typically, two inverters are connected to both
terminals of an open-end winding motor. Though it requires
six additional switches, the increased voltage output leads to
Manuscript received November 5, 2013; revised February 12, 2014;
accepted March 7, 2014. Date of publication March 17, 2014; date of current
version October 7, 2014. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor
S. Williamson.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Pohang
University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Korea (e-mail: jinsuk00@
postech.ac.kr; draco@postech.ac.kr; kwnam@postech.ac.kr).
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/TPEL.2014.2312194
0885-8993 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
909
high efficiency in a high-speed region. In [10]–[15], an mo-
tor control scheme for a dual-inverter with a floating capacitor
bridge has been developed. However, this scheme provides only
a reactive voltage component from the secondary inverter to
the motor. Welchko [16] suggested unity power factor control,
voltage quadrature control, and an optimum inverter utilization
control for a dual-inverter with two isolated dc sources. Rossi
et al. [17], [18] proposed a series hybrid power trains based on an
open-winding machine drive. An open-end winding permanent-
magnet (PM) generator was coupled to an internal combustion
engine (ICE), and the generated power was split into two iso-
lated dc buses through individual rectifiers.
Two popular topologies for the dual-inverter drive system are
shown in Fig. 1 with the corresponding voltage vector hexagons.
In Fig. 1(a), two dc links are connected to a single voltage source.
However, two separate voltage sources are utilized in Fig. 1(b).
Note in the case of a single voltage source that a substantial
amount of a triplen harmonic current is caused by a triplen
harmonic voltage. For this reason, many research efforts in the
field of open-winding motor drives have been spent on pulse
width modulation (PWM) techniques to suppress the triplen
harmonic current [19]–[26]. Nevertheless, a triplen harmonic
current does not occur, even in the presence of a triplen harmonic
voltage if the voltage sources are separated as shown in Fig. 1(b).
The triplen harmonic current is nothing but a common mode
(zero sequence) current in the motor, which is normally harmful,
causing additional copper loss and core saturation. Fig. 1(c)
shows the PWM hexagons constituted by the two sets of inverter
switch configurations. The switch configurations corresponding
to points G, I, K, M, P, and R produce common mode voltages
in Fig. 1(a). Because they cannot be used, the feasible region is
reduced to a small hexagon, HJLNQS, with solid lines.
Two insulated dc supplies inherently eliminate the common-
mode voltage and current [27]–[29], thereby no limitation is
imposed on PWM switching, i.e., all of the space-vector com-
binations can be utilized, and the PWM region is represented
by the dotted hexagon, GIKMPR. Furthermore, this topology
offers a highly reliable solution. In fact, in case of a fault in
one inverter, its output terminals can be short-circuited, and the
system can operate using a healthy inverter as a standard three-
phase two-level inverter [30]. However, the main drawback is
that this topology needs two isolated dc power sources and may
require two sets of battery chargers if it is applied to an electric
vehicle (EV) or a hybrid EV.
In this study, we focus on the EV application of a dual source
inverter and consider using one charger for the dual source in-
verters. In this proposed scheme, only Battery 1 is charged by an
external charger. Battery 2 is charged via Inverters 1 and 2 from
910
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1. Configuration of dual-inverter system (a) single voltage source, (b) isolated dual voltage source, and (c) corresponding voltage vector hexagon.
Battery 1. The charging algorithms differ based on the motor
operation status: at standstill, running under a base speed, and
running over a base speed in the field-weakening region. This
paper is organized as follows. In Section II, the open-end wind-
ing interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM)
model is developed, and the power flow of the dual-inverter sys-
tem is discussed. In Section III, the proposed battery charging
methods and algorithms are illustrated at various running con-
ditions. Finally, the proposed charging algorithms are verified
through simulation and experiments in Sections IV and V.
II. OPEN-END WINDING MOTOR MODEL WITH TWO
SEPARATE INVERTERS
EV propulsion motors are required to run at a high speed be-
cause most EVs use fixed reduction gears. At the same time, the
zero-speed torque should be sufficiently high to start the vehicle
on a slope. A high-torque machine, having a high back EMF
constant, requires a large dc link voltage as the speed increases.
However, the battery voltage cannot be easily increased owing
to the efficiency issue in the series cell connection.
To make a high-voltage battery pack, battery cells are usu-
ally connected in parallel and in series. Overcharging, as well
as overdischarging, causes lithium-ion batteries an irreversible
damage. In a serially connected battery stack, the discharging, as
well as the charging, process has to be stopped immediately as
soon as one of the terminal cell voltages fall below the discharge
voltage limit or exceeds the charging voltage limit [31]. As the
voltage level increases, the complexity of a battery management
system (BMS) increases correspondingly, and the battery sys-
tem efficiency decreases because the voltage balancing normally
fits each cell voltage to a minimum level by burning away the
excess voltages of the other cells.
The dual-inverter topology offers a method of increasing the
voltage to the motor, as was indicated in [3], [27], [28], and [29].
Throughout the paper, we consider the dual-inverter system with
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015
(c)
a separate dc voltage source, as shown in Fig. 1(b). Because it
carries two isolated batteries, we may need two separate chargers
or may need to charge the batteries individually. Using two
chargers is an obvious drawback in EVs from the perspectives
of cost, convenience, and weight management. We assume that
only one battery (Battery 1) is charged from the grid at a station
or at home. Table I compares the advantages of charge methods.
Obviously, additional cost and weight should be paid to the
two charger system. The charging efficiency of the two charger
system would be better because it does not include the motor
in the charging path. Thus, the iron and copper losses of the
motor can be avoided. Note that users may get bothered more
by the two charger method, since it requires two connections
each charging time.
Further, we may regard Battery 1 to have a larger energy
capacity than Battery 2, and consider Battery 2 as an auxiliary
battery. In this study, we consider charging methods of Battery
2 from the precharged battery (Battery 1) when the motor is at
a standstill or running.
A. Dynamic Model of Dual-Inverter System
In the dual-inverter system, two inverters are connected at
both ends of the stator windings. It follows from Fig. 1(b) that
the voltage equations for a dual-inverter system are expressed
as
d
vaa  = Rs ias + λaa  (1)
dt
d
vbb  = Rs ibs + λbb  (2)
dt
d
vcc  = Rs ics + λcc  (3)
dt
where vaa  , vbb  , and vcc  are the motor phase voltages;
λaa  , λbb  , and λcc  are the flux linkages of the a-, b-, and
c-phase stator windings, respectively; and Rs is the stator
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 911

TABLE I
ADVANTAGE/DISADVANTAGE OF ONE CHARGER METHOD AGAINST TWO CHARGER METHOD

resistance. Note that resulted from the current polarity. Therefore, the motor power
is equal to
vaa  = vao − va  o  + voo  (4)
3 3
vbb  = vbo − vb  o  + voo  (5) Pm ot = [(vd1 −vd2 )id +(vq 1 − vq 2 )iq ] = (vdm id + vq m iq ).
2 2
(12)
vcc  = vco − vc  o  + voo  (6)
where vao , vbo , and vco are the pole voltages of Inverter 1, III. BATTERY CHARGING METHODS FOR
va  o  , vb  o  , and vc  o  are the pole voltages of Inverter 2, and DUAL-INVERTER SYSTEM
voo  is the voltage difference between the dc link center taps of Battery 2 is an auxiliary battery that can be used as an assistant
Inverters 1 and 2. Thus, adding up (1), (2), and (3), we have voltage source when a high voltage is necessary for a motor
(vao + vbo + vco ) − (va  o  + vb  o  + vc  o  ) + 3voo  operation. In the low-speed range, Battery 1 acts as the main
power source, and Battery 2 is shut down by setting a 0 or 7
d
= Rs (ias + ibs + ics ) + (λaa  + λbb  + λcc  ). (7) vector at Inverter 2. At a high speed, Inverter 2 contributes to
dt increasing the supply voltage to the motor in series with Inverter
Assume that the terminal voltages of Inverters 1 and 2 are 1. Hence, the use of Battery 2 is not continuous but intermittent.
symmetrical such that vao + vbo + vco = 0, and va  o  + vb  o  + Whenever the voltage level is low, it needs to be charged for
vc  o  = 0. Then, it follows that ias + ibs + ics = 0 and λaa  + later operation. First, we consider a method of charging Battery
λbb  + λcc  = 0 owing to the impedance symmetry of the motor. 2 when the motor is under 1) the stationary state, 2) low-speed
Thus, it follows that voo  = 0, i.e., o and o are virtually equipo- operation, and 3) high-speed operation.
tential. It is assumed here that the motor is an IPMSM. In the
synchronous reference frame, we have A. Charging Method at Standstill
did At a standstill, only the d-axis current is utilized for charging
vdm  vd1 − vd2 = Rs id + Ld − ωe Lq iq (8)
dt while letting the q-axis current be regulated to zero. Because
diq no torque is produced with the d-axis current, the rotor remains
vq m  vq 1 − vq 2 = Rs iq + Lq + ωe Ld id + ωe ψm (9) fixed at a point. Note that, on the other hand, the positive d-axis
dt
current may saturate the motor core, leading to a decrease in
where vdm , vq m , id , iq , Ld , and Lq are the d- and q-axis
inductance. However, a small decrease in inductance is not a
voltages, currents, and inductances of the motor, respectively;
problem in the charging mode. Furthermore, a positive d-axis
vd1 , vq 1 , vd2 , and vq 2 are the d- and q-axis voltages of Inverters
current does not cause a PM demagnetization.
1 and 2, respectively; ωe is the electrical angular frequency; ψm
Because iq = 0 and ωe = 0, it follows from (8) and (9) that
is the rotor linkage flux.
Based on (8) and (9), we obtain an equivalent circuit for the did
vsm = (vdm , vq m ) = (vd1 − vd2 , 0) = (Rs id + Ld , 0).
dual-inverter system as shown in Fig. 2. Note that the volt- dt
age sources representing Inverters 1 and 2 appear in a series (13)
connection. Fig. 3 shows a corresponding equivalent circuit and a vector
The power delivered to the motor from each inverter can be diagram.
written as Note that the maximum inverter terminal voltage that Inverter
2 can generate is vd2 = √13 Vbat2 because the dc link voltage is
3
PI n v 1 = (vd1 id + vq 1 iq ) (10) equal to the battery voltage. Then, it follows from the power
2
relation between Inverter 2 and Battery 2 that
3
PI n v 2 = − (vd2 id + vq 2 iq ) (11) 3 3 Vbat2
2 Vbat2 Ibat2 = vd2 id = √ id . (14)
2 2 3
where the subscripts Inv1 and Inv2 represent Inverters 1 and
2, respectively. It should be noted that the minus sign in (11) Therefore, we have id = √2 Ibat2 .
3
912 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of dual-inverter system in a synchronous reference frame: (a) d-axis and (b) q-axis.

Fig. 3. (a) Equivalent circuit and (b) vector diagram for standstill operation of dual-inverter system.

Fig. 4. Control block diagram for standstill charging.

In general, the maximum charging current is determined by a

BMS, which monitors the battery state of charge, temperature,
and other variables. For fast charging, Battery 2 is charged in
c
a constant-current mode, and we denote by Ibat2 the allowed
charging current of Battery 2. Then, the d-axis current command
should be chosen as
2 c
i∗d = √ Ibat2 . (15)
3
Utilizing a proportional-integral (PI) controller to the system
(13), we obtain
  Fig. 5. Motor voltage vector with the voltage limit and a pair of v s1 and v s2
Ki
vd1 = vd2 + Kp + (i∗d − id ) for unity power factor operation at a low speed.
s
 
Vbat2 Ki
= √ + Kp + (i∗d − id ) (16) given torque. If there remains a voltage margin for Inverter 1, it
3 s will be used for charging Battery 2.
where Kp and Ki are the proportional and integral gains, In the steady state, the voltage equation for the motor is
respectively. written as
Fig. 4 shows the control scheme for the standstill charging. A vd1 = −ωe Lq iq + vd2 (17)
PI controller is constructed for Inverter 1 with the current com-
√
mands, (15) and i∗q = 0. For Inverter 2, we set vd2 = Vbat2 / 3 vq 1 = ωe Ld id + ωe ψm + vq 2 . (18)
and vq 2 = 0.
The voltage vector, vsm = (−ωe Lq iq , ωe Ld id + ωe ψm ) for the
motor is depicted with a voltage limit curve in Fig. 5. Because
B. Charging Method in Low-Speed Operation
the motor is not operating at high speed, vsm does not hit the
There are numerous ways of charging Battery 2 while the voltage limit, thereby we have numerous choices for Inverter 2
motor is running below a base speed. It is assumed here that voltages vs2 . Several pairs of vs1 and vs2 are drawn in Fig. 5.
the primary task is to produce a desired shaft torque. Hence, It is necessary to consider which vs2 is the most appropriate for
the main job of Inverter 1 is to generate the motor current for a charging Battery 2. This needs to be determined based on the
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 913

Fig. 6. Control block diagram for charging method under low-speed operation.

charging power. Note from (11), (17), and (18) that the charging
power delivered via Inverter 2 is
3 3
PI n v 2 = (vd2 id + vq 2 iq ) = [(vd1 + ωe Lq iq )id
2 2
+ (vq 1 − ωe Ld id − ωe ψm )iq ].

The power maximization problem is formulated as follows:

  2
Vbat1
max PI n v 2 subject to 2
vd1 + vq21 − ≤ 0.
(v d 2 ,v q 2 ) 3
Hence, we set the Lagrangian with a coefficient of λ

L(vd1 , vq 1 , λ) = [(vd1 +ωe Lq iq )id +(vq 1 − ωe Ld id − ωe ψm )iq ]

 2

Vbat1
+ λ vd1 + vq 1 −
2 2
3
The necessary conditions are Fig. 7. Change in operation points to charge Battery 2 in the field-weakening
region (a) vectors at “B,” (b) vectors at “A,” and (c) operation point change for
∂L a voltage margin.
= id + 2λvd1 = 0 (19)
∂vd1
∂L The charging current of Battery 2, Ibat2 , is calculated as
= iq + 2λvq 1 = 0 (20)
∂vq 1
PI n v 1 − Pm ot
∂L V2 Ibat2 =
2
= vd1 + vq21 − bat1 = 0. (21) Vbat2
∂λ 3
3 Vs1 Is + ωe Lq iq id − (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )iq
Solving (19), (20), and (21), we obtain = (24)
2 Vbat2
Vbat1 
vs1 = (vd1 , vq 1 ) = √ (id , iq ) (22) where Vs1 = vs1  = vd1 2 + v 2 . Note from (24) that the
q1
3Is
 charging current depends on the motor speed ωe , as well as the
where Is = i2d + i2q . This shows that the PI n v 2 -maximizing currents id and iq . Therefore, there is a chance that Ibat2 in (24)
c
solution is obtained when the Inverter 1 voltage vector is in is higher than the maximum charging current Ibat2 requested by
c
parallel with the current, i.e., the maximum power delivery to Battery 2 when the motor speed is low. If Ibat2 > Ibat2 , then it
c
Battery 2 is realized when the power factor of Inverter 1 is unity. is necessary to replace Ibat2 by Ibat2 in (24). In such a case, the
Correspondingly, the Inverter 2 voltage is obtained as maximum Vs1 is calculated as
 2
− ωe Lq iq id + (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )iq
c
Vbat1 Vbat1 3 Vbat2 Ibat2
vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) = √ id + ωe Lq iq , √ iq Vs1,lim it ≡ .
3Is 3Is Is
 (25)
Fig. 6 shows the whole control scheme under the base speed,
− ωe Ld id − ωe ψm . (23)
and the corresponding algorithm is summarized as follows:
914 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015

Fig. 8. Available battery charging current and power depending on the motor output power in high-speed operation: (a) 5000 r/min, and (b) 9000 r/min.

TABLE II current minimizing point that yields torque, T ∗ . It follows from

MOTOR PARAMETERS
Fig. 7(b) that

Vbat1
ωe (Lq iq A )2 + (ψm + Ld idA )2 = √ . (27)
3

However, one may choose a point “B” on the same constant-

torque line on the left-hand side of “A.” The best point is a tan-
gential intersection. It should be noted that |vsm | corresponding
TABLE III
VEHICLE PARAMETERS to (idB , iq B ) is less than V√
bat1
3
, i.e.,

Vbat1
|vsm (idB , iq B )| = ωe (Lq iq B )2 + (ψm + Ld idB )2 < √ .
3
(28)
In other words, a voltage margin V√ bat1
3
− |vsm (idB , iq B )| > 0
is secured by changing the operation point from “A” to “B,”
and can be used for charging Battery 2. Fig. 7(a) and (b) shows
1) Choose (i∗d , i∗q ) for a given torque, Te∗ , from the maximum the voltage vectors for (idA , iq A ) and (idB , iq B ) in the voltage
torque per ampere lookup table. plane (vd , vq ). It should be noted that the voltage limits appear
2) Determine the voltage vector for the motor, vsm = as circles in the voltage plane. The voltage margin obtained by
(−ωe Lq iq , ωe ψm + ωe Ld id ). changing the operation points is depicted in Fig. 7(a) and (c).
3) Determine vs1 = VIss1 (id , iq ) for Inverter 1, where Similarly to the previous case (Section III-B), the voltage of
  Inverter 1, vs1 for (idB , iq B ), can be set in parallel with a current
Vbat1
Vs1 = min Vs1,lim it , √ . vector IsB so as to achieve a unity power factor at Inverter 1,
3
i.e.,
4) Determine vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) for Inverter 2 such that Vbat1
  vs1 = √ (idB , iq B ) (29)
id iq 3IsB
(vd2 , vq 2 ) = Vs1 +ωe Lq iq , Vs1 −ωe Ld id −ωe ψm . 
Is Is
(26) where IsB = i2dB + i2q B . Then, the voltage of Inverter 2 is
obtained as
C. Charging Method in the Field-Weakening Region 
Vbat1 idB Vbat1 iq B
vs2 = vs1 − vsm = √ + ωe Lq iq B , √
In the field-weakening region, the motor terminal voltage is 3 IsB 3 IsB
limited by the maximum available voltage from the inverter. 
However, even in the field-weakening region, some voltage − ωe Ld idB − ω e ψm (30)
margin, though not sufficient, can be attained by increasing
the d-axis current in the negative direction. In such a case, the and used as a charging source voltage for Battery 2.
current vector increases so that the motor copper loss increases In a very high-speed region, the operation point is found
somewhat. uniquely at the tangential point. More specifically, the maximum
Consider a specific example shown in Fig. 7(c). Note that CA torque is determined at a tangential intersection with a voltage
is a voltage curve limited by V√bat1
3
, and “A”= (idA , iq A ) is an limit in a vicinity of (id , iq ) = (ψm /Ld , 0). The locus of those
intersection point with a constant-torque line. Then, “A” is the points is often called the “maximum torque per flux” (MTPF)
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 915

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9. Simulation results for charging with the motor at a standstill (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and v q 2 (c) three-phase current of the motor,
ia s , ib s , and ic s (d) V b a t 2 and Ibca t 2 .

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 10. Simulation results for charging in low-speed motor operation (300 r/min): (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (c) A-phase current of the
motor, ia s ; A-phase voltage of Inverters 1 and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (d) V b a t 2 and Ibca t 2 .

[33] or “maximum torque per voltage” (MTPV) [34]. In those Minimize(ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )2 + (ωe Lq iq )2
cases, charging Battery 2 is not possible.
The charging algorithm in the field-weakening region is sum- ∗ ∗
4 (ψm iq + (Ld − Lq )id iq ) = T , where T is a
subject to 3P
marized as follows: given torque. The Lagrangian for this problem is defined as
1) find, if any, in the current plane, a tangential intersection
(idB , iq B ) between a torque curve and a voltage limit
L(id , iq , λ) = (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )2 + (ωe Lq iq )2
ellipse;  
2) determine the motor voltage corresponding to (idB , iq B ); 3P
+λ (ψm iq + (Ld − Lq )id iq ) − T ∗ .
3) determine vs1 for Inverter 1 as (29); 4
4) determine vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) for Inverter 2 as (30).
1) Finding an Operating Point “B” in the Field-Weakening Then, the necessary conditions for minimization are ∂∂iLd =
Region: The operating point to maximize the voltage margin
0, ∂∂ iLq = 0, ∂∂Lλ = 0. Solving the necessary conditions simul-
[“B” in Fig. 7(c)] is found at a tangential intersection between
the torque and voltage limit curves. This can be formulated as a taneously for id , we obtain a fourth-order polynomial
constraint minimization problem:
i4d + Ai3d + Bi2d + Cid + D = 0 (31)
916 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015

(a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 11. Simulation results for Battery 2 charging in ECE-15 urban driving cycle (a) ECE-15 driving cycle, (b) Battery 2 charging current, and (c) a frequency
map of charging current versus vehicle speeds.

Fig. 12. Experimental setup (a) open-end winding IPMSM, (b) two inverters, and (c) battery pack.

2 2
A = ψm
+ 3ψ m 3ψ m 3ψ m Table II is used. Fig. 8 shows the available charging current
where Ld (L d −L q ) , B= (L d −L q )L d + (L d −L q ) 2 ,
3
3ψ m ψm3 4
ψm
and power for Battery 2 and the motor current versus the motor
C = (L d −L q ) 2 L d + (L d −L q ) 3 , and D = (L d −L q ) 3 L d − output power at 5000 and 9000 r/min. It is obvious that there is
16L 2q T ∗2 no power available for charging the battery if the motor power
9P 2 (L d −L q ) 2 L 2d
.
Then, the meaningful solution for the operating point is ob- reaches its maximum of 100 kW. However, a fairly high charging
tained as follows [32]: rate is feasible even in high-speed operation, as far as the motor

is not operating at the maximum power. For example, Battery 2
√  can be charged at 34 kW if the motor is running at 60 kW and
− α1 + 2ξ1 − − 3α1 + 2ξ1 − √α2β+2ξ 1
A1 1 1 5000 r/min.
idB = − +
4 2
(32) IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
4T ∗ 1 Simulations were performed using Ansoft Simplorer with the
iq B = · (33) motor parameters for an EV shown in Table II. Fig. 9 shows
3P ψm + (Ld − Lq )idα
simulation results with the proposed charging control scheme
2 3
where α = − 3A8 + B, β = A8 − A2B + C, γ = − 256 3
A4 + at a standstill. The command value for battery charging current
2
2 3
was set to 100 A, and the corresponding charging power was
16 A B − 4 AC + D, η = − α12 − γ, κ = − 108 + α3γ − β8 ,
1 2 1 α

3 36 kW. According to (15), the d-axis current√ command was

μ = − κ2 ± κ4 + η27 , and
2
calculated as 115.5 A, where vd2 = Vbat2 / 3 = 207.8 V, and
⎧ 5 √ η vq 2 = 0. Fig. 9(a) and (b) shows the controlled currents and
⎪
⎨ − α + 3μ − √ if μ = 0 terminal voltages of Inverters 1 and 2. Fig. 9(c) and (d) shows
6 3 3μ
ξ= the motor phase current and the voltage and current of Battery
⎩ − 5 α + √3μ − √3κ
⎪
if μ = 0. 2, respectively.
6 Fig. 10 shows a case when a motor running at 300 r/min
To show the charging capacity during high-speed operation produces 80 Nm of shaft torque. Before t = 0.1 s, charging was
of the motor, an example motor with the parameters listed in not activated. Inverter 1 was dedicated to only operating the
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 917

Fig. 13. Experimental results for charging operation at a standstill: (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and v q 2 ;
(d) three-phase current of the motor, ia s , ib s , and ic s .

Fig. 14. Experimental results for charging operation in the low-speed region (300 r/min): (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ;
(c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltage of Inverters 1
and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (e) the output torque.

motor, and Inverter 2 was locked at zero voltage (zero or seven
vector in the switch status). The charging started at t = 0.1
s as shown in Fig. 10(d), by applying a voltage command of
(vd2 , vq 2 ) = (−72, 178) V to Inverter 2. Fig. 10(a) shows that
the motor currents did not change to maintain a constant-torque
production, even during charging. However, voltage levels of
Inverter 1 increased to accommodate the terminal voltage of
Inverter 2, as shown in Fig. 10(c). Note that the charging rate
was 32.4 kW and a unity power factor operation of Inverter 1
was achieved during the charging.
Fig. 11 shows a scenario of maximum charging effort during
in an ECE-15 urban driving cycle (UDC). The previous same
918 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015

Fig. 15. Experimental results for charging operation in the low-speed region (2000 r/min): (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ;
(c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltages of Inverters 1
and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (e) the magnified view of Region A; (f) the magnified view of Region B; (g) the output torque.

TABLE IV energy recovery during deceleration was not considered. Note

SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
that the average charging current was 106 A, and a charging
current frequency map versus speed is shown in Fig. 11(c).

motor parameters were used, and the vehicle parameters are
listed in III. In this simulation, the maximum charging current
was set to 200 A. Note that the battery was charged to the full
extent during stops, and that charging action was maintained
while the vehicle was running, though the proportion decreased
as the speed increased. In this simulation, the regeneration
V. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Fig. 12 shows the experimental environments with a specially
manufactured test motor having open ends, two inverters, and
battery packs. The motor specifications are the same as those
(see Table II) used in the simulation. The dc link voltage of
Inverter 1 was fixed at 360 V dc. A battery pack was constructed
with 16 Calcium MF 12 V batteries (lead-acid) by connecting
them serially as shown in Fig. 12 (c). The maximum charging
current was set to 100 A.
Fig. 13 shows the experimental results of charging perfor-
mance when the motor was at a standstill. Note that the charging
current was regulated at 100 A. Initially, the battery voltage was
200 V but soon jumped to 300 V as soon as charging started.
Note that the phase currents were dc at standstill.
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 919

Fig. 16. Experimental results for charging operation in the field-weakening region (5000 r/min): (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ;
(c) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltages of
Inverters 1 and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 ; (e) the magnified view of Region A; (f) the magnified view of Region B; (g) the output torque.

Fig. 14 shows the charging performance when the motor was
running at 300 r/min. Note from Fig. 14 (d) that the phase voltage
va1 increased from 27.2 to 197.5 V in order to supply charging
current to Battery 2. Note, however, that the magnitudes of the
motor current and torque remained fixed. Additionally, note that
82% of the voltage of Inverter 1 was used for charging at this
low-speed operation.
Fig. 15 shows a similar experimental result, but the speed was
increased to 2000 r/min with an 80-Nm load torque (17 kW).
Note from Fig. 15 (d) that the phase voltage va1 was increased
from 117.5 to 207 V, the maximum phase voltage available
from the 360-V dc link. With the unity power factor option,
the charging current reached 60 A, which was the maximum
effort. At this time, 43% of the voltage of Inverter 1 was used
for charging. Fig. 15 (e) and (f) shows the magnified views
of the terminal voltages and currents of Inverter 1 and 2 along
with current before and after battery charging, respectively. Note
from the a-phase current ias and voltage va1 that the unity power
factor of Inverter 1 was achieved after the charging started.
Fig. 15(g) is a shaft torque plot drawn from the controller area
network (CAN) data and shows that the torque was undisturbed
even after charging started.
Fig. 16 shows an experimental result, but the speed was as
high as 5000 r/min. Before charging, Inverter 1 was already uti-
lizing its maximum voltage, as shown in Fig. 16(d). As explained
in Section III-C, the operation point moved to increase the d-axis
current from −60 to −145.7 A, as shown in Fig. 16(a). Thereby,
a new voltage margin was developed [observe that Vs1 changed
from 207 to 133.3 V in Fig. 16(d)]. As the charging started, Vs1
increased to 207 V again, providing Inverter 2 with a voltage
[see vd2 , vq 2 in Fig. 16(b)]. The charging current was 75 A, as
shown in Fig. 16(c). Fig. 16(e) and (f) shows magnified views
of the inverter terminal voltages along with the current before
and after battery charging, respectively. It should be noted that
a negative consequence
 of this operation was a current increase
from Is = i2d + i2q = 77 to 150 A.
920
Table IV provides the summary of the key working process
for experiments.
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS
A battery charging method was proposed for a dual-inverter
drive system with an open-end winding IPMSM. Throughout
the paper, a secondary battery charging method was considered.
The charging scheme covered the whole speed range of the
motor: at a standstill, in the low-speed region, and in the field-
weakening region. At a standstill, only the d-axis current was
used for charging in order to not produce a torque. In the field-
weakening region, the operating point was moved along the
constant-torque line to a tangential intersection with a voltage
limit curve to gain a potential to charge the battery. Furthermore,
it was shown that the unity power factor operation of Inverter
1 yielded the maximum power to Battery 2. Evidence from the
simulation and experiments was provided that demonstrated the
effectiveness of the proposed charging scheme.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Rajashekara, “Present status and future trends in electric vehicle propul-
sion technologies,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 1,
no. 1, pp. 3–10, Mar. 2013.
[2] F. Z. Peng, “Z-source inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 2,
pp. 504–510, Mar./Apr. 2003.
[3] H. Stemmler and P. Guggenbach, “Configurations of high-power voltage
source inverter drives,” in Proc.Fifth Eur. Conf. Power Electron. Appl.,
1993, vol. 5, pp. 7–14.
[4] H. Stemmler, “High-power industrial drives,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 82, no. 8,
pp. 1266–1286, 1994.
[5] T. Kawabata, E. C. Ejiogu, Y. Kawabata, and K. Nishiyama, “New open-
winding configurations for high power inverters,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp.
Ind. Electron., 1997, vol. 2, pp. 457–462.
[6] Y. Kawabata, M. Nasu, T. Nomoto, E. C. Ejiogu, and T. Kawabata, “High
efficiency and low acoustic noise drive system using open-winding AC
motor and two space-vector-modulated inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 783–789, Aug. 2002.
[7] K. A. Corzine, S. D. Sudhoff, and C. A. Whitcomb, “Performance charac-
teristics of a cascaded two-level converter,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 433–439, Sep. 1999.
[8] B. A. Welchko and J. M. Nagashima, “The influence of topology selection
on the design of EV/HEV propulsion systems,” IEEE Power Electron.
Lett., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 36–40, Jun. 2003.
[9] M. S. Kwak and S. K. Sul, “Flux weakening control of an open winding
machine with isolated dual inverters,” in Proc. Ind. Appl. Conf., 2007,
pp. 251–255.
[10] J. Kim, J. Jung, and K. Nam, “Dual-inverter control strategy for high-speed
operation of EV induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51,
no. 2, pp. 312–320, Apr. 2004.
[11] J. Ewanchuk, J. Salmon, and C. Chapelsky, “A method for supply voltage
boosting in an open-ended induction machine using a dual inverter system
with a floating capacitor bridge,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28,
no. 3, pp. 1348–1356, Mar. 2013.
[12] J. S. Park and K. Nam, “Dual inverter strategy for high speed operation
of HEV permanent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl.
Conf., Oct. 2006, no. 1, pp. 488–494.
[13] D. Pan, F. Liang, Y. Wang, and T. A. Lipo, “Extention of the operating
region of an IPM motor utilizing series compensation,” in Proc. IEEE
Energy Convers. Congr. Expo., Sep. 2012, pp. 823–830.
[14] Y. Lee and J. I. Ha, “Power enhancement of dual inverter for open-end per-
manent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron.
Conf. Expo., Mar. 2013, pp. 1545–1551.
[15] Y. Lee and J. I. Ha, “Six step phase modulation of dual inverter for openend
permanent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. Energy Convers. Congr.
Expo., Sep. 2013, pp. 3874–3879.
[16] B. A. Welchko, “A double-ended inverter system for the combined propul-
sion and energy management functions in hybrid vehicles with energy
storage,” in Proc. IEEE 31st Annu. Conf. Ind. Electron. Soc., Raleigh,
NC, USA, Nov. 6–10, 2005, pp. 1401–1406.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 30, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2015
[17] C. Rossi, G. Grandi, and P. Corbelli, “Series hybrid powertrain based on
the dual two-level inverter,” in Proc. Optim. Electr. Electron. Equipment
OPTIM, Brasov, Romania, 2008, pp. 277–286.
[18] C. Rossi, G. Grandi, P. Corbelli, and D. Casadei, “Generation system for
series hybrid powertrain based on dual two-level inverter,” in Proc. Eur.
Power Electron. Appl. Conf., Barcelona, Spain, 2009.
[19] V. T. Somasekhar, K. Gopakumar, A. Pittet, and V. T. Ranganathan, “PWM
inverter switching strategy for a dual two-level inverter FED open-end
winding induction motor drive with a switched neutral,” IEE Proc., Electr.
Power Appl., 2002, vol. 149, pp. 152–160
[20] V. T. Somasekhar, M. R. Baiju, and K. Gopakumar, “Dual two level in-
verter scheme for an open-end winding induction motor drive with a single
dc power supply and improved dc bus utilization,” Proc. Inst. Electr. Eng.
Electr. Power Appl., vol. 151, no. 2, pp. 230–238, Mar. 2004.
[21] E. G. Shivakumar, K. Gopakumar, S. K. Sinha, A. Pittet, and V. T. Ran-
ganathan, “Space vector PWM control of dual inverter FED open-end
winding induction motor drive,” Proc. IEEE 16th Ann. Appl. Power Elec-
tron. Conf. Expo., 2000, pp. 394–404
[22] V. Oleschuk, F. Profumo, G. Griva, R. Bojoi, and A. M. Stankovic,
“Analysis and comparison of basic schemes of synchronized PWM for
dual inverter-FED drives,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electr., 2006,
pp. 2455–2461.
[23] J. Kalaiselvi and S. Srinivas, “Hybrid PWMs for shaft voltage reduction
in a dual inverter FED induction motor drive,” in Proc. Conf. IEEE Ind.
Technol., Feb. 2013, pp. 539–544.
[24] G. Grandi and D. Ostojic, “Dual inverter space vector modulation with
power balancing capability,” in Proc. IEEE Reg. Conf. EUROCON, St.
Petersburg, Russia, May 18–23, 2009, pp. 721–728.
[25] M. R. Baiju, K. K. Mohapatra, R. S. Kanchan, and K. Gopakumar, “A
dual two-level inverter scheme with common mode voltage elimination
for an induction motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 794–805, May 2004.
[26] V. T. Somasekhar, S. Srinivas, and K. K. Kumar, “Effect of zero-vector
placement in a dual-inverter FED open-end winding induction-motor drive
with a decoupled space-vector PWM strategy,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 2497–2505, Jun. 2008.
[27] D. Casadei, G. Grandi, A. Lega, C. Rossi, and L. Zarri, “Switching tech-
nique for dual-two level inverter supplied by two separate sources,” in
Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Elec. Conf., Anaheim, CA, USA, 2007, pp. 1522–
1528.
[28] D. Casadei, G. Grandi, A. Lega, and C. Rossi, “Multilevel operation and
input power balancing for a dual two-level inverter with insulated dc
sources,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1815–1824, Nov.
2008.
[29] C. Rossi, D. Casadei, G. Grandi, and A. Lega, “Multilevel operation
and input power balancing for a dual two-level inverter with insulated dc
sources,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1815–1824, Nov./Dec.
2008.
[30] Y. Wang, D. Pan, T. A. Lipo, and D. Pan, “Open-winding power conversion
systems FED by half-controlled converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 2427–2436, May 2013.
[31] M. Einhorn, W. Roessler, and J. Fleig, “Improved performance of serially
connected li-ion batteries with active cell balancing in electric vehicles,”
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 2448–2457, Jul. 2011.
[32] D. Zwillinger, CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae. Boca
Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 1996.
[33] K. H. Nam, AC Motor Control and Electric Vehicle Applications. Boca
Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2010.
[34] S. Morimoto, Y. Takeda, T. Hirasa, and K. Taniguchi, “Expansion of
operation limits for permanent magnet motor by current vector control
considering inverter capacity,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 30, pp. 866–
871, Sep./Oct. 1990.
Jinseok Hong (S’08) was born in Incheon, Korea, in
1982. He received the B.S. degree in electrical en-
gineering and mechanical engineering from Hongik
University, Seoul, Korea, in 2007, and the M.S. de-
gree in electrical engineering in 2009 from Pohang
University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Ko-
rea, where he is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree.
His research interests include design, analysis, and
control of power electronic systems, ac motor drive,
and electric vehicle.
HONG et al.: CHARGING METHOD FOR THE SECONDARY BATTERY IN DUAL-INVERTER DRIVE SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLES 921

Heekwang Lee (S’14) was born in Seoul, Korea, in Kwanghee Nam (S’83–M’86) was born in Seoul,
1988. He received the B.S. degree in electronic en- Korea, in 1956. He received the B.S. degree in chem-
gineering from Chungnam National University, Dea- ical technology and the M.S. degree in control and in-
jeon, Korea, in 2012. He is currently working toward strumentation engineering from Seoul National Uni-
the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at the Po- versity, Seoul, Korea, in 1980 and 1982, respectively,
hang University of Science and Technology, Pohang, and the M.S. degree in mathematics and the Ph.D.
Korea. degree in electrical engineering from the University
His research interests include the design, analysis, of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA, in 1986.
and control of power electronic systems, ac motor From 1998 to 2000, he was the Director of the In-
drive, and electric vehicle. formation Research Laboratories and the Dean of the
Graduate School of Information Technology, Pohang
University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang, Korea, where he
is currently a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering. His current
research interests include ac motor control, power converters, motor design,
and electric vehicle. Now, he is director of POSTECH E-Car Research Center,
developing electric power train. He is the author of a book, “AC Motor Control
and Electrical Vehicle Applications,” published by CRC Press.
Prof. Nam received the IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS
Best Paper Award in 2000.