Diffc,-rm. enefyctLe dc9criptioms for HVI2NTI J. P.

Diffcrcn: cncrgctic dc.criptioiis for clcctroinccliankd systenis

8y8tcnW 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

Different energetic descriptions for electromechanical systems

A. Bouscayroll, R. Schoenfeld, G. Dauphin-Tanguy G.-H. Geitner2

X. Guillaud A. Pennamen', J. P. Hautier1

'L2EP Lille, USTL, 59655, Villeneuve d'Acsq cedex France

E-Mail: Alain.Bouscayrol(duniv-lillel.fr,
URL: http://www.univ-lillel.fr/l2ep/

Institute of Electrical Power Engeering, TU Dresden, Germany

E-Mail: geitner@eti.et.tu-dresden.de,
URL: http:/fwww.eti.et.tu-dresden.de/ae/ae e.htm
3LAGIS Lille, Ecole Centrale de Lilie, 59651 Villeneuve d'Ascq Cedex
E-Mail: Genevieve.Dauphin-Tanguy(ec-lille.fr,
URL: htp:/Iwww-lagis.univ-lillel fr/

Keywords
Modelling, Multi-machine system, traction application, Education tool, System engineering

Abstract
In this paper the fraction system of an automatic subway is described using several graphical tools:
transfer functions, bond-graph, causal ordering graph, power flow diagram and energetic macroscopic
representation. The aim of the paper is to highlight the interest of each tool for the analysis ad the
control of such a system.

I. Introduction
A lot of modellings are available for describing electromechanical systems, from the physical
relationships to state space models, the classical transfer function schemes or generalised impedance
theory [1]. More recently, new graphical tools have been used to suggest other views of these systems.
The bond graph methodology proposed by [2] and developed by [3] is used for modelling dynamic
systems in many different physical areas, and more particularly electromechanical ones as in [4]. The
Causal Ordering Graph has been developed 10 years ago to built control of electrical systems using
inversion rules [5]. Power flow diagram has been more recently developed for control purpose of
electromechanical systems [6]. Energetic macroscopic representation has been developed in 2000 to
analyse and control systems with several electrical machines [7-8]. The aim of this paper is to
highlight the advantages of each of these modelling tools. The same fraction system is thus modelled
using these graphical descriptions.

II. The studied traction system

The fraction system of automatic subway [9] is taken as example (Fig. 1). The supply rail delivers a
an

DC voltage to an embedded filter. The DC voltage is then distributed to 3 choppers. Two of them
supply the field windings of two DC machines. The armature windings of both machines are
connected in series and are supplied by the last chopper. Each machine is associated with a bogie. The
car of the subway is moved by two bogies.

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5
P.1
1>q1
Diffc,-rm. enefyctLe dc9criptioms for HVI2NTI J. P.
Dfffcrcn: cncrgctic dc.criptioiis for clcctroinccliankd systenis
8y8tcnW 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

Tnachj<,i
t\3

VDC

7J2eyillr
T
tcb-
t < ( L
3
o

Fig. 1: Power- stractwve of the sabway traction system

The supply rail delivers a constant DC voltage V.c The filter is composed of an inductor LJ with an
internal resistance R1; nd a capacitor Cj. The capacitor voltage uf1p and the inductor current ijF,>e,. are
state variables, which depend on the DC voltage and the chopper current i01'P:

[f dd
I Cf .ftelU
l = 'f'lter 'chop (1)

L fitetc + Rri rier=VDC -

The filter voltage is distributed to all choppers through a parallel connection. All supply voltages are
thus identical and the current , is the sum of currents produced by the three choppers:
JIcl = U2= 113 = u fl/(r 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(2)
tchop = ihop + tchop2 + 'chop3
The chopper no. i can be modelled using a switching vector S±c;ropw0-fshqpfla SCbp(02fT amd a
modulation fumction m0hph0), which links voltages and currents. This modulation function is a
combination of switching functions which indicate the state of power switches K jo.iWJA (s cboi'jcW/ = I

for Kcb,pffqj and O for Khop closed) [5]: (Ifik

I(hoO = mchrPttfilter with m = 2- Schop3)2 and i e

{1J,2,3 (3)

'chop0f) mchop(i)lload
The DC machine no. k has two windings. The armature winding leads to the armature current farm(k)
from the chopper voltage and the armature e.m.f ew+(A):

Larm(k) tarrnm(k) + Rtr-/n(k)Iarm(k) =

tfchop(i) -Carn(k) With k {I,2}

with L.,7) and Rt.mp inductance and resistance of the armature winding machine no. kc.
the
The field winding leads to the field current 'i)(k) in the same way, but the field e.mf eyk/dr7, has a zero-
value if the machine is well designed:

Lrfeld(k)l dt ficled(k)9 R fildfeld(k)ii

dt(5 r) (5)wf)eQ cdf

with Lg0,1,(k and Rjfiu(L) the inductance and resistance of the field winding.
Both machines have their armature windings connected in series:
I tarnnl arm2 = iarm(
(6)
Ceann - e( rm] + eanti2

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5
P.2
i,.2
Diffc,-rm. enefyctLe dc9criptioms for HVI2NTI J. P.
Diffcrcn: cncrgctic dc.criptioiis for clcctroinccliankd systenis
1-JAUTIERJ. P.
8y8tcms

The modelling of both windings connected in series is not obvious (see III and V). For some of the
presented tools, a concatenation rule from EMR can be used to solve this modelling problem. An
equivalent armature winding is thus defined with &rn-R.lm+Ra,.n2 Larn - La1Rn +Larrnz [9]:

d iarm + Rarmlar m= ichFop? (7)

Latrm -
Carn

The electromechanical conversion no. k gives the machine torque T.c.mA) from field ad armature
currents, and armature e.m.f. from the bogie rotation speed

TniachJ wachjwld(k) arin(k) Ewith kmacj the torque coefficient

(8)
ean(k) =kCmchifictt(k)Qobg( -)
In this study a simple mechanical transmission is considered. It leads to the subway velocity 1b from
the bogie speed and the bogie fraction force Fb0',ak, from the machine torque:

Qbog(k) = inbogvs,d) with mbogthe bogie ratio, (9)

Fbog(A) bogTmach(k)
Both fraction forces are coupled through the chassis to give the total traction force F]%:

{Froi
=E&grl =(10)
E&:
t FlocrI +F Mocr2
=

The fundamental dynamics relationship yields the subway velocity as state variable from the traction
and resistive forces:

M dv (1 1)

with M the mass of the subway. The subway environment produces a resistive force to the motion F,-09
which depends on the velocity square and of the slope ct.

F
,,s = a + bv±sub + Mgsin a
2 (12)

A classical description with transfer functions is given (Fig. 2) with the assumptions of continuous and
linear relationships for each component. Of course these assumptions are not validated for power
converters, magnetic saturation and the contact law between the wheel and the rail.

O~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~r
<S

Fig. 2: Tranrsfrrfimetion? deescription of/lie subway traction syXstem

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'roxkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5,
P.3
i,.3
Dfffcrcn: encfyc&
cncrgctic dc9crip6oas
Diffc,-rm. for systems HVI2NTI J. P.
dc.criptioiis for dc trornedianied 8)8tcnw 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

III. Description using Bond-Graph

The bond graph (BG) modelling tool [3], based on energy and information flow, uses a unifonn
notation for all types of physical system. Power exchanges are represented with half arrows ("bonds")
bringing a pair of conjugated variables called effort and flow whose product is the instantaneous
power exchanged between elements or subsystems. Three "passive" elements represent energy
dissipation (R) and energy storage (I, C) phenomena, two "active" elements (Se, Sf) model power
supply, and four power conservative "junction" elements (0, 1, TF, GY) constitute the structure of the
model. Causality infornation is shown up on each half arrow by means of the causal stoke drawn
perpendicularly to the bond. Fig. 3 shows the BG model of the subway traction system.

inJhqj MT l AIGY i TF

R: 1c- /2$ R:R R:R m1

L (nc-°S 1:t4 L /lsrv
Sc AITF Iho2 1 Al I
FE/c zod
load

z/@{r'i {r>er > s(9 t( v 1)* X

t<I'7~. C:
7'W(ho R
:Riw2 &
4 I:Lo2 O
f"kqw -*MTF I l CGY TE

&wkJI 1-q z

I: 41W
t
Fig. 3: Bond-Graph description of the subiway traction system

The MTF-elements are associated with the modulated function mc.r<, of the choppers, the MGY-
elements represent the electromechanical conversion and the TF-elements the coupling between
rotational and taslational mechanical domains.
When assigning the causality, it appeas that a derivative causality has to be assigned to one of the two
armature winding inductances connected in series (here on ILLar2 as represented by a dashed line
causal stroke) showing up the dependency between the corresponding state variables. The
consequence will be the derivation of a state space model under implicit from which needs the use an

of a specific solver for simulation. To avoid this problem, the concatenation of the two armature
windings can be done proposed in section I and shown Fig. 4.
as

Uchop2
I1
_
7--l
Z aF!

earrCarr2
I :La,mrni+Laru
Fig. 4: Concatenation of the cannaure windings

It is one of the advantages of the BG model to point out graphically the causality problems, which will
appear in the mathematical equation derivation or simulation phase.
Structural analysis (controllability, observability, invertibility...), simplification in modelling, control
law designing and diagnosis procedures can be directly performed on the BG [10] by means of
graphical causal manipulations and symbolic calculus.

12K
P.4
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5 i,.4
Diffc,-rm. encfyc& dc9crip6oas for HVI2NTI J. P.
Diffcrcn: cncrgctic dcecriptioiis for dc trornedianied systems
8)8tcnw 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

IV. Description using Causal Ordering Graph

The Causal Ordering Graph (COG) [5-11] is a graphical tool based on the integral causality as the
only allowable physical causality [12-13]. Two kinds of relationships are defined. A causal processor
is associated with each energy storage object and represented by an elliptic drawing with orientated an

arrow: the output (effect) is integral consequence of the input (cause). A bi-directional arrow is
an

associated with a dissipative object and all sort of instantaneous relationships. Inputs and outputs of
processors are kinetic (flow in BG) or potential (effort in BG) variables. The COG of the studied
system is presented in Fig. 5. Such a graph highlights causality chains between variables of connected
elements: the adjustment chain from the chopper orders SCrop(i) to the train velocity vt. As COG of an

element is only focused on its inputs and output, its enables a more synthetic description than classical
transfer function (see Fig. 2). Moreover GOC allows uniform representation of different subsystems
(electrical, mechanical, linear, non-linear, continuous, discrete...).

*lie

icbop2Fv
*~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~m -8L ,4 E

mchop reA

\. 14) (13) .

Uc 9op.S_ ref li e/d2 ref

Fig. 5: COG description of the subway traction system

The control of a system is considered as an inversion of its adjustment function of the power, because
it has to provide the inputs of the system &bohp( from its reference output v<,,,,.& This control
methodology is extended to each processor. The direct inversion of an integral causal processor
mustn't be obtained by means of a derivative operation (in the COG methodology) but through a
controller from the eror between the output on its reference (often PI controller or controller with a
specific fimction). For example the voltage reference 1cspibr& is obtained from ijirthrough a
current controller to invert (5):
(chop(i) CLICi( ref- '/eld(i)mes] with CfXrnerXreI controller ofX (13)

On the other hand, bidirecfional relationships can be directly inverted. For example mnhpqk_rej reference
is obtained from the voltage reference Ucrepand the filter voltage by a direct inversion of (3):

-n.ll ret. f
-_

1tchop_2ref
Ufil1er_umes
(14)

The COG inversion of these both relationships are presented in the lower part of Fig. 5. These rules
can be applied all along the adjustment chain to define the choppers orders &,pa from the subway
velocity reference v,, This specific description leads to automatic deduction of the system control
and defines cascaded control loops. Such as a global control is also provided by the EMR tool (section

V), the global control COG of the subway traction system is not presented in this section.

ElK
Its
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rcedcn ISBN :90-75815-08-5 I" f
ISBN
Diffcrcn: enefyc&
cncrgctic dc9crip6oas
Diffc,-rm. for clo=mcch,,uiicd systenis HVI2NTI J. P.
dc.criptioiis for electromechanical ayatcmn HAUTIERJ. P.

V. Description using Power Flow Diagram

The Power Flow Diagram (PHD) [6] was developed to study the flow of power and the energy
efficiency [14] in electromechanical systems. Unlike Power-Oriented Graphs (POG) [15] which
represent remodeled transfer function descriptions with assignment of the applied blocks to one of
an

the groups "elaboration" or "connection" PFD defines its own symbolism including source/drain,
storage/loss and converter/transformer elements of power. comparison with transfer function
descriptions PFD does not destroy the physical structure and does not sunimanse consumer and
storage effects by definition of time constants. PFD offers the advantage of a detailed graphical
description of the energy distribution associated with classical visible representation of the sum of
power signals as well as use of block symbols. Control inputs for some elements like energy
transformer or converter enable the consideration of non-linearities. Thereby underlies as an essential
fundamental idea the formulation of storage element equations using integral operations as known
from BG and COG. In comparison to BG fields or vectors are not defined. Subsystems are possible in
principle. The Power Flow Diagram description of the studied traction system is given in Fig. 6. This
presentation points out energy storages and consumers.

L,ltt.alt~~~~ 7a

;rt1 T, zFsi

~ ~ 2 o&?

Fig. 6: Power Flo-w description ofthe subiway traction system

The tnsmission of similar values (e.g. capacitor voltage) respectively the computation of different
values (e.g. chopper currents) is clearly expressed. Energy domains are marked by different geometric
transformer symbols (electric: rectangular, mechanic: triangular). Fig. 7 demonstrates this by a detail
variation of the suggested example. Two motors in series operation can be compared with two motors
in parallel operation. Because of the non-linearity of the wheel-rail-force transmission it is important

to study the stability of the total electromechanical system. Furthermore this non-linearity causes the
necessity of a possibility to control the two motors by independent choppers.

I t sy2 (SS 6arm

Fig. 7: Simiplified PFDfor a detail variation

(comparison ofparal/e/ and seria/ connzectionr of the motors - wilhout feld stipply and losses)

P.6
hUE
DEl 2005 - L)i--;c11i
-I2'rc.xkn ISBN 90-75815-08-5
ISBN :90-758t5-08-5, i,.6
Diffc,-rm. encfyc& dc9crip6oas for HVI2NTI J. P.
Dfffcrcn: cncrgctic dc.criptioiis for dc trornedianied systems
8)8tcnw 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

VI. Description using Energetic Macroscopic Representation

The Energetic Macroscopic Representation (EMR) is a graphical tool based on the action-reaction
principle [7-8]. Specific pictograms are associated to each power component depending on their power
finction: energy accumulation (rectangle with oblique bar), conversion without energy accumulation
(square for electrical conversion, circle for electromechanical conversion, triangle for mechanical
conversion), interleaved forms for energy distribution. The EMR of the studied system is given m the
upper part of Fig. 8 (with modelling relationship numbers in brackets). Notice that the concatenation
rule (7) as been used to solve the senres connection problem [9]. This description points out the
coupling devices, which distribute energy. It has been shown that these components are key of energy
management in such systems [16].
clhoppers (3) series coiuection (6) bogies (9)
pva1el connec4ion ~windings (§Q> <inacUnzes(%8) chassis (10, 11
cfilter-(1)-> Uchc~oPf I enviAL/
rail / >
F,bPogI
ip

VDC ~F tor

ES MS

ichop
chop2

1 i'[A~~Ulft? tk%p3 IC&I

EMCS

mI-.

r ~ ~~~
_____________

-~~~~~~~~~ kR21e7
Tdo,0
; R2T{712_ef

Uch/op2 Zrt crrrf f2 tre st_

iarnl kRI

co nl/rolle r- cnJ...f4 tog?_ ef

U&rnpi _rf t/h/d/_S

Fig. 8: EMR descrzipion of he subway tract ion syste and deduced Mafvimu
m contro! struc uree
A Maximum Control Structure (MCS) can be deduced from EMR using inversion rules from COG.
Controllers are thus required to invert accumulation elements. Moreover, inversions of coupling
devices require criterion coefficients. For example, the bogies force references FEoygiref and Fbogz ref are
deduced from the total force reference Ftorg by inversion of (9) using a repartition coefficient kRI:
an

F tf=kR.tot tf k
[
(15)
(I-kRI )F(o(_rc

Such a control structure leads to a maximum of control operations and measurements. The MCS of the
studied system (lower part of Fig. 8) owns 4 controllers, 8 measurements and 4 criterion coefficients.
In a second step simplifications and estimations of non-measured variables can be made. The actual
control of this system can be found with this methodology [9] and other original controls are deduced
with other simplifications and specific criterion coefficients in order to improve performances [17].

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5
PH
P.7X
Dfffcrcn: encfyc&
cncrgctic dc9crip6oas
Diffc,-rm. for systems HVI2NTI J. P.
dc.criptioiis for dc trornedianied 8)8tcnw 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

VI. Discussion
VI.1 Common properties of th e presented tools
Even though their own graphic rules and vocabulary, these descriptions have a lot of common points
because they have been developed in a cybernetic approach, which considers a whole system being
composed of interdependent subsystems. On the contrary of the classical reductionism methodology,
the system study must not be decomposed in separated studies of each component. The series
connection of armatures windings (6) is a good illustration: independent studies of two machines using
integral causality can not be made as underlined by BG analysis or EMR concatenation nule.
All these descriptions are based on energetic considerations (Table 1). In BG the power flows are
explicitly highlighted by bonds. Two kinds of variables are found: flow (BG, PFD) or kinetic (COG,
EMR) variables and effort (BG, PFD) or potential (COG, EMR) variables. The power exchanged by
connected elements is the product of a flow/kinetic variable by effort/potential variable.
an

Key elements are energy storage elements, which generally induce state variables. In BG and PFD,
kinetic or potential storage are differentiated (e. g. element I or C in BG). In COG and EMR, there is
no difference between energy storge, but these elements are at the origin of the whole of the
causalities of the system. Moreover in COG and EMR, they induce controllers using inversion rules.

All these representations enable a uniform description of system composed of multidisciplinary

subsystems as presented by the subway traction application. BG is well known for description of
complex and non-uniform systems. The other tools have been developed more recently and are
focused on electrical engineering systems, but extensions to others domains can be easily made.

VI.2. Specificities of each graphical toot

The specificities of each tool are discussed in this paragraph according to the traction subsystem
example. But other properties can be found in other studies.
Bond Graph In comparison with other tools, BG describes the system with the exact number of
subsystems. For example, both armature windings are represented using the derivative causality. The
connection problem of subsystems is thus highlighted and can be solved by different ways in a second
step. With the other tools the concatenation rule has been used in the first step and a fictive equivalent
winding is implicitly defined. The BG model represents the physical structure of the actual process.
Power Flow Diagram PFG organises signal flows between connected subsystems with implicit
power flow. In comparison with COG and EMR (other signal flow descriptions), it points out
dissipative elements, which are energy consumers. An efficiency study is thus immediate using PHD.
Moreover, relationships between signal variables are more explicit because the signs of their addition
are put on the diagram. This property can be useful in reverse operation.

Causal Ordering Graph Because COG uses only two kinds of processors and integral causality, a
systematic control can be deduced from the modelling graph. COG is thus a dedicated graphical tool
for control purpose. It indicates where measurements have to be made and controllers to be located.
Cascaded loop controls are found by using inversion rules. As COG is focused on inputs, outputs and
internal causality of processors, other properties as dissipative components are not pointed out.
Energede Macroscopic Represeadtion EMR focuses the modelling on coupling devices, which
distribute energy. Association rules have been defined for element connection; these rules can lead to
global fictive equivalent element. By an extension of COG inversion rules, EMR highlights the
necessity for introducing energy distribution criteria in control stuctures. Because it leads to
macroscopic description of the whole system, other properties of the system are not pointed out.

ItS
12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-7581508-5 n>s
 cncrgctic dc9criptioms
Diffc,-rm. for HVI2NTI J. P.
Dfffcrcn: enefyctLe systenis
dc.criptioiis for clcctroinccliankd 8y8tcnW 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

Table Graphical di/jerencefor energy connection

BG COG PFD I EMR
I >1 =-2 -= n r 1 U2 = 1 U
Parallel connection example of (2)
,= 0 tchop = ichopI + ichop2 + ichoops

Ufilter ttllc 2hpl tP1c 1cop

cl'choP IOWr ±1,oIchop3

iehop3 U-3~ ~ ~ 1LWJ3 chp
tchop2 tcbop

L 5chop3 tchop3

Series connection tl example of (6) { = 1a72 arm

rrrn Ilk 110 1e _

ear e07?1 ±

li1alf anrowi for powier flow effort/potelitial or flux/k-iletic vFariables)

arrow for signalu 1flw (i.e.
stroke for variable, catisality explicit variable causality
explicit power flow imnplicit power flow (product of effortpotential vadable with flux/1-hetic variable}
explicit v&diable relations(l) imnplioit variable relations explicit vmaiable relations |imnplioit variable relations
imnplicit energy distribution (2) explicit energy distribuLtion
same variable several timies (32 same variable appears once (explicit signal distributiol) same variable several times
explicit connection difference | no difference between conunon floNv/kinetic or effort/potential contnection

(1) BO and PFD explicitly indicate the relationships between variables of connected elemelts.
(2) For BG junction can incticate energy distribution or just several components connected to the samne point
(3) For BO and EMR the same variable can appears several times at differ-ent locations.

VI.3 co-operation of th e presented tools

Another way to consider these graphical tools could be to use them in co-operation. For example, BG
of the traction system could be firstly used to point out connection problems and to analyze control
properties (controllability, observalibity...). In a second step, PFD could be used to achieve an energy
efficiency study of the whole system. In third step, EMR can lead to a global control structure with
energy criteria. Finally, COG could be used to define specific control of local part as the wheel contact
law. Of course each tool can achieve several of the suggested steps. In function of the dedicated
application two or three tools could be used.
As it can be seen in Table 1, it seems easy to describe the same system with one or the other graphical
representation. It would be interesting to analyse sub-systems with different tools, in accordance with
the aims of this modelling: control, analysis and understanding of power flows, structure details,
complexity. A global study using several tools could be thus possible.

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75815-08-5
P.9
1'.9
Dfffcrcn: encfyc&
cncrgctic dc9crip.Oas
Diffc,-rm. for systmB HVI2NTI J. P.
dc.criptions for electromechanical 8y8tcms 1-JAUTIERJ. P.

Conclusion
The same traction system is modelled using different description tools. They are all based on energetic
considerations in a systemic philosophy. They just suggest different graphical descriptions of the same
modelling relationships, in order to graphically point out one or several characteristics of the system.
For these reasons, they give another global view of system in comparison with classical tools as

transfer futnctions or state space models. It seems important to set oneself the aims of the chosen
modelling and one promising track is maybe the "multi-tools description".

References
[1] S. E. Gay, J.Y. Routex, M. Ehsani, "Study of Hybrid Electric Vehicle Drive Train Dynamics Using
Gymtor-Based Equivalent Circuit Modeling", 2002 SAE World Congress, Detroit (MI) March 4-7, 2002,
SAE #2002-01-1083.
[2] H. Paynter, Analysis and design of en-gineer-in-g systems, MIT Press, 1961.
[3] D. Kanopp, Ri Rosenberg, Systemn dynamics a unified approach., J. Wiley & sons, 1975
:

[4] G. Gandanegara, B. Sareni. X. Roboam, G. Dauplhin-Tanguy. "Bond graph multi-time scale analysis of a
railway tmetion system", EPE, 200I, Graz, August 2001.
[5] X. Gitlaud, P. Degobert, J. P. Hauier, "Modeling, contol and causality: the Causal Ordering Graph',
16th JVACS World Congress, CD-ROM, Lausanne (Switzerland), Augst 2000.
[6] Ri Sell6lhfeld, G. fl. Geitner, "Power flow and information flow in motion control systems", EPEI-PEMC,
Riga, September 2004.
[7] A. Bouscayrol, B. Davat, B. de Formel, B. Frangois, J. P. Hautier, F. Meibody-Tabar, M. Pietrzak-David,
MsMultimachiie Multiconveder Systemn: application for electromechanical drives", European Phzysics
Journal App/ied Physics, vol 10 no. 2. pp. 131-147, May 2000.
-

[8] A. Bouscayrol, Ph. Delarue, "Weighted control of drives with series connected DC machines', IEEE-
IEMDC'O3, Madison (USA), June 2003, vol. 1, pp. 159-165.
[9] J. C. Mercieca, J. N. Verhille, A. Bouscayrol, "Energetic Macroscopic Represenitation of a subway traction
system for a simulation model', IEEE-ISIE'04, Ajaccio, May 2004, pp. 1519-1524.
[10] G. Dauphin-Tanguy, A, Rahmani, C. Sueur "Bond gaph aided desigi of controlled systeans", Journal
Simiu/tation Practice and Theory, Elsevier Pub, L. Dekker Ed, vol. 7, no. 5-6, 1999.
[It] Jean-Paul Hautier, Pierre-Jean Barre, "The Causal Orderilng Graph, A tool for system modelling and
control law synthesis', Stdiies in infornwtics an7d control, December 2004, vol. 13, no. 4 pp.265-283.
[12] I. Iwasaki, H. A. Simon, "Causality and model abstraction'" Artifieial Intel/igence, Elsevier, vol. 67, pp.
143-194, 1994.
[13] Z. Rubin, S. Mununs, J. Moskowva, "The development of vehicular powertrain system mnodeling
metlhodologies: philosophy and iinplementation", Sjstem Automotive Engineering, paper 971089. 1997.
[14] "GuideLilne VDIIVDE 3547 Assessment of quality of miotion systems and controlled sequences of
miotion,' 'IDpub/lshers, 2003.
[15] Ri Zanasi, "Power-Orienited Graphs for Modeling Electrical Machines", MELECOM'96. Bai (Italy), May
1996, pp. 1211-1214.
[16] A. Bouscayrol, B, Davat, B. de Fomel, B. Frxnyois, J. P. Hautier, F. Meibody-Tabar, E. Monmasson, M,
Pietlzak-David, fl. Razik, E. Semail, M. F. Beikhoris, 'Control Structures for Multi-nachine MuLti-
converter Systeans wNith upstream coupling", Mathcnwrics and Coniputers in Sinmulation, vol. 63, no. 3-5,
pp. 261-270. November 2003. (conmon paper of GE 44 St Nazaire, GREEN Nalcy, L2EP Litle, LEEI
Toulouse and LESiR-SATIE Cachan, according to the MMS project of the GDR-ME2MS).
[17] J, N. Verhille, A. Bouscayrot, P. J. Ba-e, J. C. Mercieca, J. P. Hautier, E. Semail, "Torque tracking
stmtegy for anti-slip control in railway traction systems with coimon supplies', JEEE-JAS'04, Seattle
(USA), October 2004, vol. 4. pp. 273 8-2745.

10

12K
DEl 2005 -- L)i--;c11i
I2'rc.xkn ISBN :90-75,St-08-5,
itic
11.10