energies

Article
System Efficiency Improvement for Electric Vehicles
Adopting a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor
Direct Drive System
Chengming Zhang * ID
, Qingbo Guo ID
, Liyi Li, Mingyi Wang and Tiecheng Wang
Department of Electrical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology University, Room 205, Building 2C,
Science Park of Harbin Institute of Technology, Nangang District, Harbin 150001, China;
aza1aza2@163.com (Q.G.); liliyi1024@163.com (L.L.); 1050610803@163.com (M.W.);
wangtiecheng1024@126.com (T.W.)
* Correspondence: zhangchengming1024@163.com; Tel.: +86-0451-864-03771

Received: 18 October 2017; Accepted: 27 November 2017; Published: 1 December 2017

Abstract: To improve the endurance mileage of electric vehicles (EVs), it is important to decrease the
energy consumption of the Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM) drive system. This paper
proposes a novel loss optimization control strategy named system efficiency improvement control
which can optimize both inverter and motor losses. A nonlinear power converter loss model is built
to fit the nonlinear characteristics of power devices. This paper uses double Fourier integral analysis
to analytically calculate the fundamental and harmonic components of motor current by which the
fundamental motor loss and harmonic motor loss can be accurately analyzed. From these loss models,
a whole-frequency-domain system loss model is derived and presented. Based on the system loss
model, the system efficiency improvement control method applies the genetic algorithm to adjust the
motor current and PWM frequency together to optimize the inverter and motor losses by which the
system efficiency can be significantly improved without seriously influence on the system stability
over the whole operation range of EVs. The optimal effects of system efficiency is verified by the
experimental results in both Si-IGBT-based PMSM system and SiC-MOSFET-based system.

Keywords: permanent magnet synchronous motor; inverter loss; fundamental loss; harmonic
loss; double Fourier integral analysis; nonlinear loss model; system loss; efficiency optimization;
SiC-MOSFET; electric vehicle

1. Introduction
One of the major challenges currently faced in the transportation sector is how to decrease the
dependency on fossil fuels and thus reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. As electric vehicles (EVs)
have the advantage of eliminating the automobile exhaust and offer an ultimate solution for sustainable
personal mobility [1,2], EVs seem to be one of the best future alternatives for the automotive industry
and transportation [3]. However, the limited operational range of EVs is a major drawback which is
mostly affected by the battery management system and motor drive system. As the motor drive system
is the main power source of EVs, the efficiency of the drive system will directly influence their mileage
endurance. Compared with induction motors (IMs) and switched reluctance motors (SRMs) [4,5],
permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSMs) with their advantage of high power density and
high efficiency, can decrease the energy consumption and improve the operational mileage of EVs [6–8],
therefore, the PMSM direct drive system has been widely applied in EVs for transportation.
The optimization of the electromagnetic structure and control strategy of PMSMs has been widely
discussed in recent years. There are several PMSM control strategies, such as id = 0 control, maximum
torque per ampere (MTPA) control, maximum speed per voltage (MSPV) control, unity power factor

Energies 2017, 10, 2030; doi:10.3390/en10122030 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2017, 10, 2030 2 of 27

(UPF) control, loss model control (LMC) and etc. [9–24]. The id = 0 control is the most conventional
vector control method used in PMSM drive systems. In [9–11], the finite element method (FEM) is
used to calculate the motor loss, and the id = 0 control is used to drive the PMSM system to verify
the performance of a PMSM. By keeping the motor current in the d-axis at zero, the id = 0 control
can make the electromagnetic torque and q-axis motor current proportional, and will not damage
the magnetic properties of the permanent magnet. However, in [12], the id = 0 control method could
not minimize the stator current in the interior of a PMSM in which the d-axis magnetic inductance
is not equal to q-axis magnetic inductance, and could not achieve minimum copper loss in IPMSMs.
Compared with other control strategies, the MTPA control method can take advantage of the reluctance
torque of the motor, by which the stator current is decreased [13–16]. In [16], the improved MTPA
control takes the core saturation and cross coupling of the d- and q-axis magnetic flux into account, and
the motor performance was optimized with the consideration of the impact of various temperatures.
The MTPA control can obtain the minimum stator current and achieve the least copper loss below the
rated speed. Meanwhile, the MSPV control can optimize the stator voltage and obtain the optimal
stator iron below rated torque [17]. However, as the losses of a PMSM are comprised of copper loss
and iron loss, both the MTPA control method and MSPV control method only consider part of the
total motor loss, and ignore the coupling relationship between copper loss and iron loss. Therefore,
neither the MTPA control strategy nor the MSPV control strategy will achieve the maximum motor
efficiency in PMSMs [18]. The UPF control can keep the power factor of PMSMs to one and decrease
the energy consumption in the power transfer process [19–21]. In Ref. [21], a PMSM drive system with
small DC-link capacitor applied UPF control to stabilize the motor driving and decrease the energy
loss on the input side. As the UPF control does not take into consideration the power loss in PMSMs,
the motor efficiency will not always achieve the maximum value under UPF control. The LMC can
optimize both copper loss and iron loss by the PMSM loss model and improve the motor efficiency of
the PMSM system [22–24]. In Ref. [23], the motor iron loss is calculated by the iron loss resistance, and
both the iron loss and copper loss are optimized. The LMC enables the drivetrain to operate safely
at the maximum attainable performance limits. In Ref. [24], the Bertotti iron loss formula is used to
analyze the stator iron loss, and iron loss is verified by the FEM model. Based on the loss model,
the proposed control method fully considers the cross effect and iron loss, and can maximize the
efficiency of PMSMs. However, these recent optimized motor efficiency control strategies only focus
on the optimization of the motor loss, and neglect the coupling relationship between motor loss and
inverter loss. Therefore, as the inverter loss is an important part of system loss in the PMSM system
for transportation, these motor control strategies will not achieve the maximum system efficiency.
There are also many control strategies for three-phase half-bridge inverters in the PMSM drive
system [25]. Modern methods about three-phase inverters such as selected harmonic elimination pulse
width modulation (SHEPWM) [26], current harmonic distortion minimization PWM (CHMPWM) [27],
harmonic injection PWM (HIPWM) [28], space vector pulse width modulation (SVPWM) [29], etc.,
always focus on the modulation optimization to decrease the harmonic components of the output
voltage in the three-phase inverter. In Ref. [26], a method of smooth transition between different
SHEPWMs is proposed to adapt to the SPMSMs and IPMSMs, by which smooth transition of current
is guaranteed and the harmonic current is reduced. In Ref. [27], considering the saliency ratio and
load angle constraints, a new current harmonic evaluation index is proposed, and based on it, the
improved CHMPWM guarantees good performance of both current THD and the specific order
current harmonics. All these control strategies ignore the coupling relationship between motor loss
and inverter loss. As the inverter loss is an important part of the efficient performance in the PMSM
drive system, the efficiency optimization of the three-phase inverter will directly improve the power
loss of a PMSM system. Therefore, to acquire a higher system efficiency of a PMSM drive system,
The PWM control strategy must take consideration both harmonic components of output voltage and
the power loss of power devices in the three-phase bridge inverter.
Energies 2017,
Energies 2017, 10,
10, 2030
2030 33 of
of 28
28

efficiency of
efficiency of aa PMSM
PMSM drivedrive system,
system, The The PWM
PWM control
control strategy
strategy must
must take
take consideration
consideration bothboth harmonic
harmonic
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 3 of 27
components of
components of output
output voltage
voltage andand thethe power
power lossloss ofof power
power devices
devices inin the
the three-phase
three-phase bridge
bridge inverter.
inverter.
This paper
This paper proposes
proposes aa novel
novel efficiency
efficiency control
control strategy
strategy to to improve
improve the the power
power loss
loss of
of PMSM
PMSM drivedrive
systema,
systema, which
This which can
paper proposes optimize
a novel
can optimize both
both motor
efficiency
motor and and inverter
control losses.
strategy
inverter An accurate
to improve
losses. An accurate nonlinear
the power loss
loss loss
nonlinear of PMSMmodel of aa
modeldrive
of
three-phase
systema,
three-phase which half-bridge
half-bridge inverter
can optimize
inverterbothis built
is built
motor to and
to predict
predict the conduction
inverter
the conduction
losses. Anlossloss and switch
accurate
and switch loss loss
nonlinear
loss exactly in the
model
exactly in the
of
sine-wave
a three-phase
sine-wave PMSM
PMSM system.
half-bridge This
system.inverter paper
This paper applies
is built the
to predict
applies double Fourier
the conduction
the double integral
loss and
Fourier integral analysis
switch to
analysis to
loss analytically
exactly in
analytically
calculate
the
calculate the fundamental
sine-wave
the fundamental
PMSM system. component
This paper
component and
and harmonics
applies
harmonicsthe doubleof the
of the inverter
Fourier
inverter output
integral
output voltage,
analysis
voltage, by
to by which aa
analytically
which
global
calculate motor
the loss model
fundamental of the
component PMSM
and is established.
harmonics of the
global motor loss model of the PMSM is established. The global motor loss model can The global
inverter outputmotor loss
voltage, bymodel
which can take
a global
take
consideration
motor loss model
consideration of both
of both the
of thethe
PMSM fundamental
is established.
fundamental motor
motor loss
Theloss and
global harmonic
andmotor motor
loss model
harmonic motorcan loss,
take
loss, which shows
consideration
which shows the the
of
coupling
both relationship between
the fundamental
coupling relationship between
motor loss motor
motor loss
andloss and inverter
harmonic
and inverter loss.
motorloss. Based
loss,Based
whichonon the nonlinear
shows
the nonlinear
the couplinginverter loss and
and
relationship
inverter loss
global motor
global
between motor
motor loss
loss model,
model,
loss the proposed
the
and inverter proposed efficiency
efficiency
loss. Based on the optimization
optimization control loss
control
nonlinear inverter strategy
strategy can optimize
can
and global optimize
motor lossthe
the
motor
motor current
model,current
the proposedand PWM
and PWM frequency
frequency
efficiency together,
together,
optimization by which
by which
control strategythe PMSM
the can
PMSM drive system
drivethe
optimize system can
motorcan achieve
achieve
current higher
andhigher
PWM
system efficiency
system
frequency efficiency
together, compared
compared
by whichwithwith traditional
traditional
the PMSM drive control
control strategies.
systemstrategies.
can achieve Thehigher
The loss reduction
loss reduction effect is
effect
system efficiency is tested
tested
comparedand
and
verified
verified
with by experiments.
by experiments.
traditional control strategies. The loss reduction effect is tested and verified by experiments.

2. Nonlinear
2. Nonlinear Loss
Loss Model
Model of
of Three-Phase
Three-Phase Inverter
Inverter
The most
The most common
common three-phase
three-phase inverter
inverter for
for PMSM
PMSM system
system isis the three-phase half-bridge
the three-phase half-bridge voltage
voltage
source inverter,
source inverter, which
which is shown in
is shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The
1. The main inverter
The main inverter losses
losses of of the
the PMSM
PMSM system
system are
are
conduction loss and switch loss within power devices. To optimize the inverter loss,
conduction loss and switch loss within power devices. To optimize the inverter loss, it is important it is important
to build
to build an
an accurate
accurate loss
loss model
model forfor the
the power
power device.
device. Although
Although there
there is is strongly
strongly nonlinearity
nonlinearity inin the
the
conduction characteristics
conduction
conduction characteristics
characteristics and
andand
switchswitch characteristics
characteristics
switch of power
characteristics of device,
of powerthedevice,
power device, the most
most common
the most common
mathematical
common
mathematical
model of powermodel of
device power
loss is adevice
linear loss is
model, a linear
which model,
is shown which
in is
Figure shown
mathematical model of power device loss is a linear model, which is shown in Figure 2.2. in Figure 2.

aa bb cc
V11
V V33
V V55
V

+
+ Uaa
U
Udc
U zz Ubb
U PMSM
dc PMSM
-- Ucc
U

V44
V V66
V V22
V

Figure
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Typical
1. Typical topology
Typical topology of
topology of three-phase
of three-phase voltage source
three-phase voltage
voltage source inverter.
source inverter.
inverter.

Ice
ce
Linear
Linear
model
model
Nonlinear
Nonlinear
model
model
Condcution
Condcution
characteristics
characteristics
Inn

Rce
ce
Ut0
t0 Uce
ce
Figure 2. Linear
Figure Linear model and
and nonlinear model.
model.
Figure 2.
2. Linear model
model and nonlinear
nonlinear model.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 4 of 27

The linear model of conduction characteristics in IGBT can be expressed as:

Ucesat = Ut0 + Rce · Ice (1)

where Ucesat is the saturation voltage of power device, Ut0 is the equivalent conduction voltage of
power device in rated current In , Rce is equivalent conduction resistance of power device in rated
current In .
It can be seen that the traditional linear model of power device can only obtain accurate power
device loss at the rated current In . The prediction error will increase when the current of power device
deviates from the rated working point. However, the motor current in PMSMs is a sinusoidal current,
whose value is changing all the time. Therefore, the traditional linear model will not calculate the
inverter loss of PMSM drive system exactly.
To acquire the inverter loss accurately, this paper builds a novel nonlinear model of power devices,
which can fit the nonlinear conduction and switch characteristics in each operation condition of a
PMSM system. The nonlinear conduction model of IGBT can be shown as:

2
Uce = ac + bc · Ice + cc · Ice (2)

where ac , bc and cc is fitting coefficients of the nonlinear conduction characteristics. From Figure 2,
it can be seen that the nonlinear model can accurately fit the power device nonlinear conduction
characteristics in the whole operation range of a PMSM system.
As the stator current in PMSM system is changing in a sinusoidal way, the inverter loss will also
change at any moment. Therefore, the average conduction loss of IGBT in on current period can be
calculated as: Z Tcurrent
1
Pconduction_IGBT = uce ·ice dt (3)
Tcurrent 0
where Tcurrent is the period of sinusoidal stator current.
By substituting Equation (2) into Equation (3), the conduction loss of IGBT can be shown as:

ac 2cc 3 bc 2 a c 2bc 3cc

Pconduction_IGBT = I0 + I0 + I0 + M cos ϕ· I0 + M cos ϕ· I02 + M cos ϕ· I03 (4)
π 3π 4π 4 3π 16
where I0 is amplitude of stator current, M is the modulation ratio of sine-wave pulse-width modulation
(SPWM), and ϕ is power factor of the PMSM:
q
U0 2U0 2 u2d + u2q
M= Udc
= = (5)
Udc Udc
2

The nonlinear conduction model of free-wheeling diode (FWD) can be also expressed as:

U f = a f + b f I f + c f I 2f (6)

where af , bf and cf is fitting coefficients of the nonlinear conduction characteristics of FWD.

Similar to the average conduction loss of IGBT, the average conduction loss of FWD in one current
period can be shown as:

af 2c f 3 bf 2 af 2b f 3c f
Pconduction_FWD = I0 + · I0 + · I0 − M cos ϕ· I0 − M cos ϕ· I02 − M cos ϕ· I03 (7)
π 3π 4π 4 3π 16
From Equations (4) and (7), the average conduction loss of three-phase half-bridge inverter in one
current period can be calculated as:

Pconduction_inverter = 6·( Pconduction_IGBT + Pconduction_FWD ) (8)

Energies 2017, 10, 2030 5 of 27

The switch characteristics of power devices can also be fitted by proposed nonlinear model. The
nonlinear switch-on and switch-off model of IGBT can be expressed as:

Udc  2

Eon = · aon + bon · Ice + con · Ice (9)
Udc_test

Udc  2

Eo f f = · ao f f + bo f f · Ice + co f f · Ice (10)
Udc_test
where Eon and Eoff are the energy consumption in a switch -on and switch-off process, respectively.
Udc is the DC voltage, and Udc_test is the DC voltage when the chip manual tested switching
characteristics of the power device. aon , bon , con , aoff , boff and coff is the fitting coefficients of the
nonlinear switch characteristics.
Based on the nonlinear model of switch characteristics, the average switch loss of IGBT in one
current period can be shown as:
 
f sw Udc 1  
2 1  1
Pswitch_IGBT = · con + co f f I0 + bon + bo f f I0 + aon + ao f f (11)
Udc_test 4 π 2

where fsw is the switch frequency of PWM.

Similar to the switch loss of IGBT, the reverse recovery loss of FWD can be also expressed as:
 
f sw Udc 1 2 1 1
Prec_FWD = · crec I0 + brec I0 + arec (12)
Udc_test 4 π 2

where arec , brec and crec are fitting coefficients of reverse recovery characteristics.
Therefore, the switch loss of inverter can be predicted as:

Pswitch_inverter = 6·( Pswitch_IGBT + Prec_FWD ) (13)

and the total loss of power devices in the three-phase half-bridge inverter can be expressed as:

Ploss_inverter = P
conduction_inverter
 + Pswitch_inverter  
ac + a f 2( c c + c f ) 3 bc + b f 2 ac − a f


  π
 I0 + 3π I 0 + 4π 0 I + 4 M cos ϕ · I0



2 ( bc − b f ) 2 + 3(cc −c f ) M cos ϕ · I 3
  (14)
=6 + M cos ϕ · I
 h3π 0  16  0   i 
 f sw Udc · 1 con + co f f + crec I 2 + 1 bon + bo f f + brec I0 + 1 aon + ao f f + arec

 


Udc_test 4 0 π 2

3. Global Loss Model of PMSM

As the PMSM is fed by a three-phase inverter, there must be fundamental current and harmonic
current in the PMSM, which is caused by the PMW output voltage of the inverter. The fundamental
current drives the motor with the output electromagnet torque and produces a fundamental copper
loss and a fundamental iron loss. The harmonic current will impact the stability of the system and
creates harmonic copper loss and harmonic iron loss. To optimize the losses of a PMSM drive system,
it is important to build an accurate global loss model of the PMSM which consider about both the
fundamental motor loss and the harmonic motor loss.

3.1. Fundamental and Harmonic Components of PWM Output Voltage

The PWM output voltage of inverters must induce a harmonic stator current in the PMSM drive
system. The harmonic stator current produces a harmonic motor loss which will affect the system
efficiency of the PMSM drive system. To build an accurate harmonic loss model of a PMSM, it is
necessary to create an analytic method to calculate the harmonic motor current quickly and exactly.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 6 of 27

By sine-wave pulse-width modulation (SPWM), the PMSM can obtain a sinusoidal current from
the Energies
three-phase
2017, 10,half-bridge
2030 inverter. The typical working principle of SPWM is shown in Figure
6 of3.28

Fundamental for phase leg c

Fundamental for phase leg b Triangular carrier
Fundamental for phase leg a

1 Swtiched waceform for phase leg a

+ U dc
2
1
− U dc t
2
1 Swtiched waceform for phase leg b
+ U dc
2

1
− U dc t
2
Swtiched waceform for phase leg c
1
+ U dc
2

1
− U dc t
2

Figure 3. Typical working principle of SPWM in the three-phase PMSM drive system.
Figure 3. Typical working principle of SPWM in the three-phase PMSM drive system.
The three-phase sinusoidal references displaced in time by 120°, which can be expressed as:
The three-phase sinusoidal references displaced in time by 120◦ , which can be expressed as:
 1
  U * = U 0 cos ω0 t = 1 MU dc cos ω0 t
∗ =az U cos

  U az 0 ω 0 t = 22 MUdc cos ω0 t
∗  = U cos ω t − 22π = 11 MU cos ω t − 2 32π



Ubz (15)
bz = U 0 cos  ω0 t −2 π
 = 1 MU dc cos  ω0 t − π2

* 0 0 dc 0
 U ∗ U
3 2 (15)
cz = U0 cos ω0 t + 33π = 22 MUdc cos ω0 t + 3 3π

 *  2  1  2 
ω0t + π  =references.
U cz = U 0 cos sinusoidal
where U0 is the amplitude of three-phase MU dc cos  ω0 t + π 
  3  2  3 
To obtain the harmonics of the motor current, the harmonics of the inverter PWM output voltage
mustwhere U0 is the amplitude
be acquired. of three-phase
As it is a complicated sinusoidal
problem references.
to measure the harmonics of PWM voltage signal in
To obtain the harmonics of the
the SPWM and the harmonic components of PWM signalmotor current, the harmonics
are alwaysof the inverterfrom
obtained PWMthe output
timevoltage
varying
must be acquired. As it is a complicated problem to measure the harmonics of PWM voltage signal in
simulated signal of PWM output voltage by fast Fourier transform (FFT) analysis. Although the
the SPWM and the harmonic components of PWM signal are always obtained from the time varying
FFT method can conveniently solve the harmonics in a relatively accurate way, the precision of FFT
simulated signal of PWM output voltage by fast Fourier transform (FFT) analysis. Although the FFT
results is limited by the computing capacity and the simulated round-off. The FFT analysis can only
method can conveniently solve the harmonics in a relatively accurate way, the precision of FFT results
obtain the harmonics of PWM signal at a certain working point of the PMSM drive system and cannot
is limited by the computing capacity and the simulated round-off. The FFT analysis can only obtain the
acquire the harmonics of the inverter output voltage for the whole operation condition. In contrast,
harmonics of PWM signal at a certain working point of the PMSM drive system and cannot acquire the
the harmonics
double Fourier
of the integral
inverter analysis
output voltagecan calculate
for the wholethe fundamental component
operation condition. and harmonics
In contrast, the doubleof a
periodic
FourierPWM waveform
integral analysis incanan analyticthe
calculate method,
fundamental whichcomponent
ensures the andaccuracy
harmonics of of
the harmonics
a periodic PWM and
acquires the harmonic voltage of the inverter leg across overall operation
waveform in an analytic method, which ensures the accuracy of the harmonics and acquires the condition of the PMSM direct
drive system.voltage of the inverter leg across overall operation condition of the PMSM direct drive system.
harmonic
TheThedouble Fourier
double Fourierintegral
integral analysis
analysis[30,31]
[30,31]applies
appliestwotwo time-varying variables(x(t)
time-varying variables (x(t)and y(t))toto
andy(t))
define thethe
define PWMPWM signal of of
signal inverter
inverter output
outputvoltage.
voltage.The Thex(t)
x(t) is
is used define the
used to define thecarrier
carriersignal,
signal,which
which
cancan
be shown as:
be shown as:
x ( t ) = ωc t + θc (16)
x (t ) = ωc t + θ c (16)
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 7 of 27

where ω c is the carrier angular frequency and θ c is the arbitrary phase offset angle for the
carrier waveform.
y(t) is applied to delimit the fundamental signal (as the sinusoidal reference signal of SPWM),
which can be expressed as:
y ( t ) = ω0 t + θ 0 (17)

where ω 0 is the fundamental angular frequency and θ 0 is the arbitrary phase offset angle for the
fundamental waveform.
The PWM output voltage of the inverter leg can be presented as:
(
Udc y(t) > x (t)
an (t) = f ( x (t), y(t)) = (18)
0 y(t) ≤ x (t)

where an (t) is defined with respect to the negative DC bus.

By applying double Fourier integral analysis theory, the time-varying function f (x(t), y(t)) can be
expressed as a summation of the harmonic components:
∞
A00
f ( x, y) = 2 + ∑ { A0n cos[n(ω0 t + θ0 )] + B0n sin[n(ω0 t + θ0 )]}
n =1
∞
+ ∑ { Am0 cos[m(ωc t + θc )] + Bm0 sin[m(ωc t + θc )]}
m =1 (19)
∞ ∞
+ ∑ ∑ { Amn cos[m(ωc t + θc ) + n(ω0 t + θ0 )] + Bmn sin[m(ωc t + θc ) + n(ω0 t + θ0 )]}
m =1 n = − ∞
( n 6 = 0)

where A00 is the DC offset; A0n and B0n are the fundamental component and base-band harmonics;
Am0 and Bm0 are the carrier harmonics; Amn and Bmn are side-band harmonics.
The fundamental component and harmonic components of the inverter PWM output signal can
be calculated by the double Fourier integral analysis as:
π (1+ M cos y )
1
Z π Z
2
Amn + jBmn = Udc e[ j(mx+ny)] dxdy (20)
2π 2 −π − π2 (1+ M cos y)

Substituting Equation (15) into Equations (19) and (20), the fundamental and harmonic
components of the inverter phase-leg PWM output voltage can be expressed as:
 ∞


 u az (t) = 12 Udc + 21 Udc M cos ω0 t + 2Uπdc ∑ m1 J0 (m π2 M ) sin(m π2 )· cos[m(ωc t + θc )]
 m =1
∞ n=∞

 n o
+ 2Uπdc ∑ 1

∑ J ( m π
M ) sin [(m + n) π2 ]· cos[m(ωc t + θc ) + nω0 t]

m n


 2
m =1
n = −∞





n 6= 0



∞


ubz (t) = 21 Udc + 12 Udc M cos(ω0 t − 23 π ) + 2Uπdc ∑ m1 J0 (m π2 M )· sin(m π2 )· cos[m(ωc t + θc )]





 m =1
∞ n=∞

 n o
2Udc 1 2
+ π ∑ ∑ m Jn ( m 2 M )· sin[( m + n ) 2 ]· cos[ m ( ωc t + θc ) + n ( ω0 t − 3 π )]
π π (21)
m =1
n = −∞





n 6= 0



∞


ucz (t) = 12 Udc + 12 Udc M cos(ω0 t + 32 π ) + 2Uπdc ∑ m1 J0 (m π2 M )· sin(m π2 )· cos[m(ωc t + θc )]





 m =1
∞ n=∞

 n o
2Udc 1 2

+ π ∑ ∑ J ( m π
M ) sin [( m + n ) π
]· cos [ m ( t + ) + n ( t + )]



 m n 2 2 ω c θ c ω 0 3 π
m =1
n = −∞





n 6= 0


where the constant term 12 Udc is caused by the output voltage definition with respect to the negative
DC bus. Jn (ξ) is the Bessel function of the nth order.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 8 of 27

The fundamental voltage creates the fundamental current in the PMSM, which will bring the
Energies 2017, 10,motor
fundamental 2030 loss. Furthermore, the harmonic current caused by the harmonic components 8 of of
28
inverter output voltage will generate harmonic motor losses.
3.2. Fundamental Motor Loss
3.2. Fundamental Motor Loss
The fundamental motor loss of PMSM can be divided into two parts: the fundamental copper
loss and fundamental motor
The fundamental iron loss.
loss The fundamental
of PMSM copperinto
can be divided losstwo
is caused byfundamental
parts: the the fundamentalcopper stator
loss
current through the
and fundamental iron stator
loss. armature winding.copper
The fundamental The fundamental
loss is caused iron
by loss consists of stator
the fundamental statoriron loss
current
and rotorthe
through iron loss.armature
stator Compared with theThe
winding. stator iron loss, the
fundamental ironrotor
loss iron lossof
consists is stator
so small that
iron it and
loss will rotor
have
little effectCompared
iron loss. on the loss optimization.
with Hence
the stator iron loss,this
thepaper
rotor only considers
iron loss the stator
is so small that itiron
willloss
haveand ignores
little effect
the rotor
on the lossiron loss. The fundamental
optimization. mathematical
Hence this paper modelthe
only considers of stator
PMSMiron in the
lossd-axis and q-axis
and ignores is shown
the rotor iron
in Figure
loss. 4.
The fundamental mathematical model of PMSM in the d-axis and q-axis is shown in Figure 4.

L1d Rs_f uod iod Lmd

id

icd
-
ud
Rc_f
npωrLmqioq +

(a)
L1q Rs_f uoq ioq Lmq
iq
+ -
icq npωrψf
npωrLmdiod +
uq
Rc_f
-

(b)

Figure 4. Fundamental mathematical model of PMSM. (a) Fundamental motor model in the d-axis;
Figure 4. Fundamental mathematical model of PMSM. (a) Fundamental motor model in the d-axis;
(b) fundamental motor model in the q-axis.
(b) fundamental motor model in the q-axis.

The voltage equation and current equation of a PMSM can be expressed as:
The voltage equation and current equation of a PMSM can be expressed as:
  di di
ud = L1ddi d + Rs _ f id + Lmd diod − n pωr Lmqioq
 ud = L1d dtdt+ Rs_ f id + Lmd dt dt − n p ωr Lmq ioq
d od



 u = L diqdi+ Rs_ f iq + Lmq di
dioq


q u =1q L dt q + R i + L dtoq +
+ nnppωωr ψ r ψ f++ n pnωprω r Limd iod
Lmd (22)

 q 1q
dt
s _ f q mq
di od dt
uod = Lmd dt − n p ωr Lmq ioq
f od

 (22)


uoq = Lumq =dtoqL + di

di


n podω−r ψn pfω+r Lnmqpiω r Lmd iod

 od md
dt
oq

 
diioqd = icd + iod
 uoq = Lmq + n pωr ψ f + n pωr Lmd iod


dtiq = icq + ioq


(23)
icd = R1c uod
 id = icd 1+ iod



icq = Rc uoq
iq = icq + ioq

where Lmd ,q and L1d,q are the stator’s self-inductance and leakage-inductance in the d-axis and q-axis,
 1
respectively; Rs_f is defined as the fundamental i = uod resistance without consideration of (23)
 cd stator’s skin
R
 resistance for the fundamental iron loss and np is the
c
effects and proximity effects, Rc_f is the iron loss
 1
pole pairs of the PMSM; ω r is the motor rotation u ud,q and id,q are the stator’s voltage and the
i =speed;  cq oq
 Rc

where Lmd,q and L1d,q are the stator’s self-inductance and leakage-inductance in the d-axis and q-axis,
respectively; Rs_f is defined as the fundamental stator’s resistance without consideration of skin effects
and proximity effects, Rc_f is the iron loss resistance for the fundamental iron loss and np is the pole
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 9 of 27

stator’s current, respectively; iod and ioq are the magnetizing currents of the PMSM in the d-axis and
q-axis; icd and icq are the exciting current of PMSM in the d-axis and q-axis. Ψf is the flux linkage of
permanent magnet.
From the mathematical model of PMSM, the fundamental copper loss can be shown as:

3  
PCu_ f = Rs_ f i2d + i2q (24)
2

where the transformation coefficient 32 is caused by the d-q axis current calculation with CLARKE and
PARK transmission in the principle which remains the motor flux value invariable.
The fundamental iron loss can be described as:
3 2 
PFe_ f = Rc icd + i2cq (25)
2
The stator iron loss consists of the eddy current loss and hysteresis loss. From the Bertotti iron
loss formula [24], the eddy current loss and hysteresis loss per volume can be expressed as:

2 π 2 σk2d 2 2
dPFe = dPFe_h + dPFe_d = k h Bm f+ Bm f (26)
6
where dPFe_h is the eddy current loss per volume and dPFe_d is the hysteresis loss per volume; kh is the
coefficients of the hysteresis loss; σ is the conductivity of the material; and kd is the thickness of the
lamination. These three parameters are material characteristics of the motor core; f is the frequency,
and Bm is the peak value of the magnetic flux density.
Equation (26) shows that there is a linear relationship between hysteresis loss and the frequency
of the magnetic field. In addition, the relationship between the eddy current loss and the square of
magnetic field frequency is a direct ratio. Therefore, the iron loss resistance can only describe the eddy
current loss precisely. To acquire an accurate iron loss, the iron loss resistance Rc is a variable of the
rotor speed.
From Equations (24) and (26), the fundamental motor loss of PMSM drive system can be shown as:

Pmotor_ f = PCu_ f 
+ PFe_ f   
= 32 Rs_ f i2d + i2q + 32 Rc i2cd + i2cq
"
di
2  dioq 2 #
3 Lmd dtod −n p ωr Lmq ioq Lmq dt +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod (27)
= 2 Rs_ f iod + Rc + ioq + Rc
 diod
2  dioq
2
Lmd dt −n p ωr Lmq ioq + Lmq dt +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod
+ 32 Rc

Equation (27) shows that the fundamental motor loss of a PMSM is a function of d-axis magnetizing
current iod , q-axis current magnetizing current ioq and motor speed ω r . The electromagnetic torque can
be expressed as:
3 h i
Te = n p ψ f ioq + ( Lmd − Lmd )iod ioq (28)
2
Therefore, the q-axis current magnetizing current ioq can be acquired by the electromagnetic
torque as:
2Te
ioq = h i (29)
3n p ψ f + ( Lmd − Lmd )iod

By substituting Equation (29) into Equation (27), it is seen that the fundamental motor loss of
a PMSM drive system is a function a function of the d-axis magnetizing current iod , electromagnetic
torque Te and motor speed ω r . For a constant operation condition where the electromagnetic torque
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 10 of 28

By substituting Equation (29) into Equation (27), it is seen that the fundamental motor loss of a
PMSM drive system is a function a function of the d-axis magnetizing current iod, electromagnetic
Energies 2017,
torque Te and10, 2030 10 of 27
motor speed ωr. For a constant operation condition where the electromagnetic torque
and motor speed are given, the fundamental motor loss is only a function of d-axis magnetizing
current
and motor iod: speed are given, the fundamental motor loss is only a function of d-axis magnetizing
current iod : Pmotor _ f = f ( iod , Te , ωr ) (30)
Pmotor_ f = f (iod , Te , ωr ) (30)

3.3.
3.3. Harmonic
Harmonic Motor
Motor Loss
Loss
The
The harmonic motor loss model of a PMSM is shown in Figure 5.

Lms
ioa_mn

uaz_mn ia_mn Rs_mn ica_mn Rc_mn

uoaz_mn

iob_mn Lms

ubz_mn ib_mn Rs_mn icb_mn Rc_mn

unz_mn
uobz_mn
ioc_mn Lms

ucz_mn ic_mn Rs_mn icc_mn Rc_mn

uobz_mn
Figure
Figure 5.
5. Harmonic
Harmonic motor
motor loss
loss model
model of
of aa PMSM.
PMSM.

The harmonic voltage equation and harmonic current equation can be described as:
The harmonic voltage equation and harmonic current equation can be described as:
 u
az _ mn
u az_mn
= uoaz _ mn
= uoaz_mn
+ ia _·mn
+ i a_mn
⋅R
Rs_mns _ mn

ib _·mn

= u=obz_mn
ubz _ mn uobz _ mn+ i+ ⋅ Rs _ mn





 ubz_mn b_mn Rs_mn
 ucz_mn  · Rs_mn

= u=ocz_mn
ucz _ mn uocz _ + mn + ic _ mn ⋅ Rs _ mn


 ic_mn
 uoaz_mn = ioa_mn · jωmn Lms (31)
 uoaz _ mn = ioa _ mn ⋅ jωmn Lms
 uobz_mn = iob_mn · jωmn Lms

(31)




= i·objω_ mn
uobz=_ imnoc_mn L jωmn Lms
mn ⋅ ms



 uocz_mn
 unz_mn = 3 (uaz_mn

1
 + ubz_mn + ucz_mn )
uocz _ mn = ioc _ mn ⋅ jωmn Lms

 1 = ioa_mn + ica_mn
( u=az i_ob_mn  _ mn + ucz _ mn )

i a_mn
unz _ mn

 = mn + u
3 +bzicb_mn



 ib_mn

 ic_mn = ioc_mn + icc_mn

1 (32)

 ica_mn = Rc_mn uoaz_mn
1

 icb_mn = Rc_mn uobz_mn




1
icc_mn = Rc_mn uocz_mn


where u az_mn , ubz_mn and ucz_mn are the A-phase, B-phase and C-phase output voltages of the inverter
in the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal, respectively. uoaz_mn , uobz_mn and uocz_mn
are the three-phase magnetizing voltages of PMSM in the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier
signal. i az_mn i az_mn and i az_mn are the three-phase motor currents in the n-th fundamental signal and
the m-th carrier signal. i a,b,coz_mn and i a,b,ccz_mn are the three-phase magnetizing currents and exciting
currents of PMSM in the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal, respectively. Rc_mn is
the harmonic iron loss resistance of the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal, and the
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 11 of 27

ω mn is the angular frequency of the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal, which can be
expressed as:
ωmn = n·n p ωr + 2πm· f sw (33)

Rs_mm is the stator’s resistance in the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal which
has been considered about skin effect and proximity effect:

Rs_mn = α· Rs_ f (34)

where α is the coefficient of skin effect. α is affected by the frequency of harmonic current, which can
be described as:        
d 0 √d 0 √d d
d ber 0 √ · bei0 − ber0 · bei √
2δ 2δ 2δ 2δ
α= √ h  i2 h  i2 (35)
2 2δ ber00 √d + bei00 √d
2δ 2δ

where d is the copper wire diameter of stator windings, and δ is the depth of penetration. The depth of
penetration is 2030
Energies 2017, 10, affected by the current frequency, which is shown in Figure 6. 12 of 28

Figure
Figure 6.
6. Penetration
Penetration depth
depth of
of copper
copper wire
wire with
with current frequency.
current frequency.

The terms ber0 and bei0 are the zero order Kelvin function, which can be expressed as:
The terms ber0 and bei0 are the zero order Kelvin function, which can be expressed as:
   − j 33ππ

 ber ber(0u()u−
) jbei(0 u( u) )== JJ 0 ue
−jbei ue− j 44 
0 0 0
   (36)
 0 (u) − jbei 0 (u) = −e−3πj 3π (36)

 ber 4 · J1 ue − j 3π
 0 0 −j  −j
3π 4

 ber0 ( u ) − jbei 0 ( u ) = −e
' ' 4
⋅ J1  ue 4 
  
From Equations (31) and (32), the amplitude of three-phase currents of PMSM can be described as:
From Equations (31) and (32),  the amplitude of three-phase currents of PMSM can be described
 (2·u az_mn − ubz_mn − ucz_mn )· jωmn Lms · Rc 
as: Is_mn =   (37)
3[ Rc · Rs_mn + jωmn Lms ·( Rc + Rs_mn )] 
( 2 ⋅ uaz _ mn − magnetizing
ubz _ mn − ucz _ mn ) ⋅ jωmn Lms ⋅ Rc
_ mn =
where Is_mn is the amplitudeI s of three-phase currents, and Is_ms is the amplitude
(37)of
three-phase currents. 3  Rc ⋅ Rs _ mn + jωmn Lms ⋅ ( Rc + Rs _ mn ) 

where Is_mn is the amplitude of three-phase magnetizing currents, and Is_ms is the amplitude of three-
phase currents.
Therefore, the harmonic copper loss can be expressed as:

∞ ∞ ∞

PCu _ h = 3   I s2_ 0 n ⋅ Rs _ mn +   I s2_ mn ⋅ Rs _ mn  (38)
 n =2 m =1 n =−∞

 n ≠0 
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 12 of 27

Therefore, the harmonic copper loss can be expressed as:

 
 ∞ ∞ ∞ 
PCu_h = 3 ∑ Is_0n
2
· Rs_mn + ∑ ∑ 2
Is_mn · Rs_mn  (38)
 
 n =2 m =1 n = −∞

n 6= 0

From Equation (26), it can be seen that the harmonic iron loss is affected by the frequency of
magnetic field and amplitude of magnetic flux density. As the magnetic flux density is different
between stator tooth and yoke, the harmonic iron loss can be presented as:

PFe_mn = PFe_t_mn + PFe_y_mn = dPFe_t_mn ·Vt + dPFe_y_mn ·Vy (39)

where Vt and Vy is the total volume of stator tooth and stator yoke, respectively. dPFe _t _mn is the iron
loss density of the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal in the stator tooth, which is
shown as:

2 π 2 σk2d 2
dPFe_t_mn = dPFe_h_t_mn + dPFe_d_t_mn = k h Bm_t_mn f mn + Bm_t_mn f mn 2 (40)
6
where fmn is the frequency of the n-th fundamental signal and the m-th carrier signal, and Bm_t_mn is
the amplitude of harmonic magnetic flux density in the stator tooth:

Φmn
Bm_t_mn = α i · Q · St
(41)
2n p

where αi is the pole arc factor, Q is the number of slot, St is the physical area of a stator tooth.
As the harmonic fluxes can be obtained from harmonic flux linkage as:

Ψmn
Φmn = (42)
N1 ·Kdp_mn

where N1 is the number of turns per phase, and Kdp_mn is the harmonic winding factor.
Therefore, from Equations (40)–(42), the harmonic iron loss in the stator tooth can be expressed as:
  2  2 
Ψmn π 2 σk2d Ψmn
PFe_t_mn = k h 
  f mn +   f mn 2 
·Vt (43)
i QSt 6 i QSt
N1 ·Kdp_mn α2n p
N1 ·Kdp_mn α2n p

Similar to the calculation of magnetic flux density in the stator tooth, the magnetic flux density in
the stator yoke can be:
Ψmn
Bm_y_mn = 1 (44)
2 1 dp_mn · Sy
N · K
where Sy is the physical areas of a stator tooth.
From Equations (39) and (44), the harmonic iron loss in the stator yoke can be calculated as:
 !2 !2 
Ψmn π 2 ·σ ·k2d Ψmn
PFe_y_mn = k h 1
f mn + 1
f mn 2 ·Vy (45)
2 1 dp_mn · Sy
N · K 6 2 1 dp_mn · Sy
N · K

Therefore, the harmonic iron loss can be expressed as:

Energies 2017, 10, 2030 13 of 27

PFe_mn =
PFe_t_mn + PFe_y_mn 
!2 !2
Lms Ios_mn π 2 σk2d Lms Ios_mn
= k h αi · Q · St f mn + 6 αi · Q · St f mn 2 ·Vt
N1 ·Kdp_mn 2n p N1 Kdp_mn 2n p (46)
"  2  2 #
Lms Ios_mn π 2 σk2d Lms Ios_mn
+ kh 1 f mn + 6 1 N ·K f mn 2 ·Vy
2 N1 · Kdp_mn · Sy 2 1 dp_mn · Sy

As the harmonic iron loss can also be expressed as:

2 (ωmn · Ios_mn · Lms )2

PFe_mn = 3Rc_mn · Ics_mn =3 (47)
Rc_mn

Substituting Equation (46) to Equation (47), the harmonic iron loss resistance can be obtained as:

3π 2 · f mn
2 · N 2 ·K2
1 dp_mn
Rc_mn =    (48)
π 2 σk2d 2 n2 V Vy
k h · f mn + 6 f mn · α2 Qp 2 St 2 + Sy2
i t

From Equation (48), it can be seen that the harmonic iron resistance is more susceptible to the
frequency of the harmonic signals. To obtain the accurate harmonic iron loss, the harmonic iron loss
should be calculated in each harmonic component of the PWM voltage.
Based on the harmonic loss model, the amplitude of the three exciting currents of PMSM can be
described as:
2 L2 · R
 
 (ubz_mn + ucz_mn − 2·u az_mn )·ωmn ms c

Ics_mn = 
  (49)
3[ Rc · Rs_mn + jωmn Lms ·( Rc + Rs_mn )]·( Rc + jωmn Lms ) 
Hence, similar to the harmonic copper loss, the harmonic iron loss can be expressed as:
 
 ∞ ∞ ∞ 
PFe_h = 3 ∑ Ics_0n
2
· Rc + ∑ ∑ 2
Ics_mn · Rc  (50)
 
 n =2 m =1 n = −∞

n 6= 0

Therefore, from the harmonic copper loss model and harmonic iron loss model, the harmonic
motor loss of PMSM drive system can be shown as:
 
 ∞ 2 ∞ ∞
2 2
∞ ∞ ∞
2

n∑
Pmotor_h = PCu_h + PFe_h = 3
=2
Is_0n · Rs_mn + ∑ ∑ Is_mn · Rs_mn + ∑ Ics_0n · Rc + ∑
n =2
∑ Ics_mn · Rc  (51)
m =1 n = − ∞ m =1 n = − ∞

n 6= 0 n 6= 0

3.4. Global Loss Model of PMSM

Based on the fundamental motor loss model and harmonic motor loss model, the global loss
model can be expressed as:

Ploss_motor = Pmotor_"f + Pmotor_h

 diod
2  dioq 2 #
L −n ω L i Lmq +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod
= 23 Rs_ f iod + md dt Rcp r mq oq + ioq + dt
Rc
 diod
2  dioq
2
Lmd −n p ωr Lmq ioq + Lmq dt +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod
+ 23 dt (52)
Rc 
 ∞ 2 ∞ ∞
2 2
∞ ∞ ∞
2

 ∑ Is_0n · Rs_mn + ∑
+3
n =2
∑ Is_mn · Rs_mn + ∑ Ics_0n · Rc + ∑
n =2
∑ Ics_mn · Rc 
m =1 n = − ∞ m =1 n = − ∞

n 6= 0 n 6= 0
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 14 of 27

By substituting Equations (22) and (29) to Equation (52), the global motor loss can be described as:

Ploss_motor = Pmotor_ f + Pmotor_h

= f iod , ioq , ωr + f ( M, ωr , f sw ) (53)
= f (iod , Te , ωr ) + f (iod , Te , ωr , f sw )

Equation (53) shows that the fundamental component of the global motor loss is a function of
d-axis magnetizing current iod , electromagnetic torque Te and motor speed ω r , while the harmonic
components of global motor loss are a function of d-axis magnetizing current iod , electromagnetic
torque Te , motor speed ω r and PWM frequency fsw .

4. System Loss Optimized Control for PMSM Drive System

From Equations (14) and (53), the system loss of PMSM drive system can be expressed as:

Ploss_system = Ploss_inverter
 + Ploss_motor  
ac + a f 2( c c + c f ) 3 bc + b f 2 ac − a f
  π I0 + 3π I0 + 4π I0 + 4 M cos ϕI0 

 

 

2 ( bc − b ) 3( c c − c )
=6 + h3πf M cos ϕI02 +  16 f M cos ϕI03
   i 
 f sw Udc · 1 con + co f f + crec I 2 + 1 bon + bo f f + brec I0 + 1 aon + ao f f + arec

 


Udc_test 4 0 π 2
"
di
2  dioq 2 #
3 Lmd dtod −n p ωr Lmq ioq Lmq dt +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod
+ 2 Rs_ f iod + Rc + ioq + Rc (54)
 di
2  dioq
2
Lmd dtod −n p ωr Lmq ioq + Lmq dt +n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod
+ 23 Rc 
 ∞ 2 ∞ ∞
2 2
∞ ∞ ∞
2

 ∑ Is_0n · Rs_mn + ∑
+3
n =2
∑ Is_mn · Rs_mn + ∑ Ics_0n · Rc + ∑
n =2
∑ Ics_mn · Rc 
m =1 n = − ∞ m =1 n = − ∞

n 6= 0 n 6= 0

Equation (54) shows that the system loss of a PMSM drive system is so complicated that it is
impossible to directly optimize the system loss by an analytical method. Therefore, to maximize the
system efficiency of PMSM system, the system loss can be divided into two parts: one part is the loss
only affected by motor operation state and the other part is the loss affected by motor and inverter
operation state, which can be shown as:

Ploss_system = PMotor_a f f ect_loss + PDouble_a f f ect_loss (55)

where the loss only affected by motor state in the steady state can be expressed as:

6( a c + a f ) 4( c c + c f ) 3 6 ( bc + b f ) 2 3( a c − a f )
PMotor_a f f ect_loss = π I0 + π I0 + 4π I0 + 2 M cos ϕ· I0
4 ( bc − b f ) 2 9( c c − c f ) 3
+ π  M cos ϕ· I0 + M cos ϕ· I0
 28   
n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod 2
3 n p ω r L mq i oq
+ 2 Rs_ f iod − Rc + ioq + Rc
(56)
2 2
(n p ωr Lmq ioq ) +(n p ωr ψ f +n p ωr Lmd iod )
+ 23 Rc
= Pconduction_inverter + Pmotor_ f

and the loss affected by motor and inverter operation state in the steady state can be shown as:
h      i
f sw Udc
PDouble_a f f ect_loss = U · 3 con + co f f + crec I02 + 6
bon + bo f f + brec I0 + 3 aon + ao f f + arec
dc_test 2 π 
 ∞ 2 ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞
2 2 2 (57)

 ∑ Is_0n · Rs_mn + ∑
+3
n =2
∑ Is_mn · Rs_mn + ∑ Ics_0n
n =2
· Rc + ∑ ∑ Ics_mn · Rc 
m =1 n = − ∞ m =1 n = − ∞

n 6= 0 n 6= 0

= Pswitch_inverter + Pmotor_h
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 15 of 27

Based on the system loss model, this paper proposes a system efficiency improvement control
which aims to optimize the system loss and improve the system efficiency of a PMSM system over the
whole operation condition range of EVs. As the system loss model is too complex to solve, the proposed
control strategy optimizes the system efficiency by minimizing the loss affected by motor operation
condition (PMotor_affect_loss ) and the loss affected by motor and inverter operation state (PDouble_affect_loss ).
Equation (57) shows that PMotor_affect_loss is only affected by the motor drive parameters (iod , ioq ,
M, ω r ). By substituting Equations (5), (15) and (22) into Equation (57), the PMotor_affect_loss can be
simplified as:
PMotor_a f f ect_loss = Pconduction_inverter + Pmotor_ f = f (iod , Te , ωr ) (58)

Equation (58) shows that the loss PMotor_affect_loss is a function of d-axis magnetizing current iod ,
electromagnetic torque Te and motor speed ω r . Therefore, for each certain operation point, there must
be an optimal d-axis magnetizing current iod *, which can minimize the loss affected by motor state.
The optimal d-axis magnetizing current iod * can be expressed as:

∂PMotor_a f f ect_loss  Te =const,ωr =const


 =0 (59)
∂iod 
iod =i∗
od

By keeping the d-axis magnetizing current iod at the optimal value, the proposed system efficiency
improvement control can minimize the loss affected by motor operation condition at each working
point of the PMSM system in EVs.
There are two constraints for the optimal d-axis magnetizing current iod *. One is that, in order to
protect permanent magnet, the optimal d-axis magnetizing current should smaller than the maximum
flux-weakening current, which can be shown as:
 
∗
|iod | ≤ id_ f luxweakening_max  (60)
 

where id_fluxweakening_max is the max flux-weakening current.

When the d-axis current is larger than the maximum flux weakening current, the magnetic
performance of the permanent magnet will be damaged beyond retrieval. Therefore, to maintain
the system stability of PMSM drive system, the d-axis current should not exceed the max
flux-weakening current.
The other one is the total motor current should smaller than the maximum value of inverter
current, which can be expressed as:
i2d + i2q ≤ Is_max
2
(61)

where Is_max is the maximum allowable current of inverter.

When the d-axis magnetizing current iod is controlled at iod *, the motor operation state is
determined. Therefore, the second part of system loss PDouble_affect_loss will be only affected by the
PWM frequency fsw of the power converter, which is shown as:

PDouble_a f f ect_loss = Pswitch_inverter + Pmotor_h = f ( f sw ) (62)

The PWM frequency fsw impacts on the switching loss of the inverter and harmonics of motor
loss. The high carrier to noise ratio (CTNR) in the higher PWM frequency will decrease the harmonics
of the motor current, which will reduce the harmonic motor loss. However, an increasing switch loss
will be caused by the higher PWM frequency. Therefore, it is significant to obtain the optimum PWM
frequency fsw * which can achieve the minimum value of switching loss and harmonic motor loss.
However, the PWM frequency fsw not only has an important influence on the loss affected by the
motor and inverter operation state, but also affects the system stability of the PMSM system in EVs.
As mentioned above, the PWM output voltage of the inverter must cause the harmonic current in the
PMSM and the harmonic current will be greater in the low CTNR with small PWM frequency, which
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 16 of 27

Energies 2017, 10, 2030 17 of 28

may seriously affect the stability of the PMSM system. In order to ensure the security and stability of
the PMSM system,
Therefore, the PWMPWM
the optimum frequency must fbe
frequency carefully chosen by which the CTNR will meet the
sw* can be obtained by the proposed system efficiency
requirement ofcontrol
improvement currentas:total harmonic distribution (THD).
Therefore, the optimum PWM frequency fsw * can be obtained by the proposed system efficiency

improvement control as:
Te = const ,ω r = const


 I0

  Te=const,ωr=const
∞ ∞ ∞
≤ THDmax

 =1 n
 
2 2
I ⋅ R + I ⋅ R

 


cs _ 0 n c cs _ mn c

 
I0

n =1 ≤ THDmmax =−∞

·

∞ ∞ ∞

 n ≠0

2 2 fsw = fsw*

∑ Ics_0n Rc + ∑ ∑ Ics_mn · Rc 
 
 m =1 n = − ∞

(63)

 n =1
 

f U  3 6

Uh 3  ⋅  2 ( con + coff+2crec )6 I0 + π ( bon + boff +brec ) I 0+ 3 ( aon + aoff + ai rec )  

 
 n 6= 0 sw dc 2
∗

f sw= f sw
(63)
 

f sw Udc
U  2 · dc _ c
test
on + c + c rec I + b on + b + b rec I0 + 3 a on + a + a rec

o f f o f f o f f
  
0
 
  π 
Min ( Pswitch _ inverter + Pmotor _ h )= Min  
 dc_test

 
 

  

 


Min( Pswitch_inverter + Pmotor_h ) = Min ∞ 2 ∞ 2 ∞ ∞∞ ∞ ∞∞ ∞∞ ∞ ∞
·R

 Is_0n
 ∑+ ∑ Is_mn  c c++  ∑ ∑I cs2 _Imn

2 2 ·R 22
+ 3 ·IRs _s_mn ⋅ R I ⋅ R ++ ∑ IIcs_0n ⋅ R 2
⋅ R
 
 +3 ∑ +s _ mn ·R

 
s_mn c
 n =2  n = 2 
cs_mn
   
0 n s _ mn s _ mn cs _ 0 n c

 
n = 2

m=1 nm= m =
 
  − ∞
=1 n =−∞ n=2 1 n =
m =1 n =−∞ − ∞ 
    

 
 

n 6=n0≠ 0 n ≠n0 6= 0

As
As there
there are
are infinite
infinite sums
sums in
in the
the calculation
calculation formula
formula ofof harmonic
harmonic motor
motor loss,
loss, itit is
istoo
toocomplicated
complicated
to
to solve
solve optimum
optimum PWM PWM frequency
frequency fsw sw*.*.Therefore,
Therefore,this
thispaper
paperapplies
applies the
the genetic
genetic algorithm
algorithm (GA)
(GA) to
to
improve
improve calculation
calculation efficiency
efficiency of
of the
the optimized
optimized PWMPWM frequency.
frequency. TheThe GA
GA isis aa random
random global
global search
search
method
method based
based on
on applying
applying thethe principle
principle withwith survival
survival of
ofthe
thefittest
fittestsolution
solutionwhich
whichselects
selectsaageneration
generation
by
by fitness
fitness functions
functions andand manipulates
manipulates the next generation by genetic operators. The The flowchart
flowchart in
in
Figure
Figure 77 shows
shows the
the steps
steps applied
applied to design optimized PWM frequency by the GA.

Generation of random
initial parameters

Evaluation of the objective

fitness function for each
individual

End of the optimization:

Stop criterion
best parameter

Ranking individuals
from best to worst

Selection

Generating a
new Crossing
population

Mutation

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Flowchart
Flowchartof
ofthe
theGA
GA for
for system
system loss
loss optimized
optimized control.
control.

The GA uses the goal of minimizing the loss affected by the motor and inverter operation state
The GA uses the goal of minimizing the loss affected by the motor and inverter operation state
as the objective function for parameter tuning. The function of the second term is to penalize the THD
as the objective function for parameter tuning. The function of the second term is to penalize the
of the motor current. By the GA, the optimized PWM frequency fsw* of each operation condition for
THD of the motor current. By the GA, the optimized PWM frequency fsw * of each operation condition
EVs can be obtained in a simple and fast way. Based on the optimization of the two parts of the system
for EVs can be obtained in a simple and fast way. Based on the optimization of the two parts of the
loss, the system efficiency improvement control can minimize the system loss by adjusting the
system loss, the system efficiency improvement control can minimize the system loss by adjusting the
magnetizing d-axis current and PWM frequency at the optimum value over the whole operation
range. The proposed control strategy can increase the efficiency of the PMSM drive system and
reduce the energy consumption of EVs, by which the endurance mileage of EVs in one charge will be
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 17 of 27

magnetizing d-axis current and PWM frequency at the optimum value over the whole operation range.
The proposed
Energies 2017, 10, control
2030 strategy can increase the efficiency of the PMSM drive system and reduce 18 the
of 28
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 18 of 28
energy consumption of EVs, by which the endurance mileage of EVs in one charge will be significantly
significantly
improved. The improved.
structureThe structure
diagram diagram
of the of the
proposed proposed
system system loss
loss optimized optimized
control control
system system
is shown in
significantly improved. The structure diagram of the proposed system loss optimized control system
is shown
Figure 8. in Figure 8.
is shown in Figure 8.
*
f *PWM Dynamometer
f PWM Dynamometer
for EVs
for EVs
id* + u d re f u α ref Speed
Tref System efficiency id* +- PI u d re f u u Speed
Tref System efficiency - PI αβ α ref u a ba bc c PMSM
Throttle improvement i u αβ uu β ref SPWM
SPWM PMSM
Throttle improvement
control
control
i q qreref f +
+- PI u q qrefref β ref Torque
PI id Torque
-
id
iq dq isα ia
iq dq iisα abc iia
sβ abc b
isβ αβ iibc
αβ ic

ω d θe
ω rr d
dt θe Resolver
Resolver
dt
Figure 8. Structure
Structure diagramof
of theproposed
proposed systemefficiency
efficiency improvementcontrol
control system.
Figure 8. Structure diagram
Figure 8. diagram of the
the proposed system
system efficiency improvement
improvement controlsystem.
system.

5. Experimental Results and Discussion

5. Experimental
5. Experimental Results
Results and
and Discussion
Discussion
Figure 9 shows an experimental platform of a PMSM drive system which is designed and
Figure 99 shows
Figure shows an an experimental
experimental platform
platform ofof aa PMSM
PMSM drive
drive system
system which
which isis designed
designed and and
implemented to verify the performance of the proposed system loss optimized control strategy.
implemented to
implemented to verify
verify the
the performance
performanceof ofthe
theproposed
proposedsystem
systemloss
lossoptimized
optimizedcontrol
controlstrategy.
strategy.
The motor in the test platform is a 21 kW outer rotor surface PMSM, which parameters are listed
The motor
The motor in in the
the test
test platform
platform is
is aa 21 kW outer rotor
rotor surface
surface PMSM,
PMSM, which
which parameters
parameters are
are listed
listed
in the Table 1. The 45 kW PMSM inverter is based on the Si-IGBT power devices to drive the outer
in the
in the Table
Table1.1. The
The 4545 kW
kW PMSM
PMSM inverter
inverter isis based
based on
on the
the Si-IGBT
Si-IGBT power
power devices
devices to
to drive
drive the
the outer
outer
rotor PMSM. The Si-IGBT modules used in the experimental platform are the FF300R06KE3, and the
rotor PMSM.
rotor PMSM. The The Si-IGBT
Si-IGBT modules
modules used
used inin the
the experimental
experimental platform
platform are
are the
the FF300R06KE3,
FF300R06KE3, and and the
the
fitted coefficients of FF300R06KE3 are shown in the Table 2.
fitted coefficients
fitted coefficientsofofFF300R06KE3
FF300R06KE3are areshown
shownin inthe
theTable
Table2.2.

Heat pipe Dynamometer

Heat pipe
radiators Dynamometer
for EVs/HEVs
radiators for EVs/HEVs
21kW
21kW
PMSM
PMSM

40kW
40kW
PMSM
PMSM
inverter
inverter Power
Power
resistance
resistance
(a) (b)
(a) (b)

Figure 9. Cont.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 18 of 27
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 19 of 28

Power Analyzer

Dynamometer
for EVs
a b c
V1 V3 V5
UA
Torque
Udc UB
PMSM
UC Speed
V4 V6 V2

Resolver

System Efficiency Dynamoneter Controller

Improvement Contoller

(c)

Figure 9. Experimental platform of PMSM drive system. (a) Si-IGBT based inverter; (b) Physical
Figure 9. Experimental platform of PMSM drive system. (a) Si-IGBT based inverter; (b) Physical
prototype experimental platform; (c) Diagram of the experimental platform.
prototype experimental platform; (c) Diagram of the experimental platform.
Table 1. Parameters of the outer rotor surface PMSM.
Table 1. Parameters of the outer rotor surface PMSM.
Parameter Value
Rated Power 21 kW
Parameter Value
Rated Speed 300 r/min
Poles Rated Power 21 kW 22
Rated Speed 300 r/min
Slots 24
Poles 22
Stator Outer Diameter Slots 24
278 mm
Rotor Outer Diameter
Stator Outer Diameter 278 mm 312 mm
Active Length
Rotor Outer Diameter 312 mm 170 mm
Air Gap Length Active Length 170 mm1 mm
Number of Turns PerAir Gap Length
Phase 1 mm 104
Number of Turns Per Phase
Spacer Factor 104 45%
Phase Resistance Spacer Factor 45% 0.06 Ω
Phase Resistance 0.06 Ω
Phase Inductance 3.18 mH
Phase Inductance 3.18 mH
Rated Current Rated Current 74 A 74 A
Current DensityCurrent
at RatedDensity
Torqueat Rated Torque 4.25 A/mm
4.25 A/mm 2 2

Flux Linkage Flux Linkage 0.623 0.623

Wb Wb
DC Link RangeDC Link Range 360 V–420
360 V–420 V V

Table 2. Fitting coefficients of Si-IGBT modules.

Table 2. Fitting coefficients of Si-IGBT modules.
Parameter Value
Parameter
Fitted coefficient of conduction characteristics ac Value−1.025 × 10−5
FittedFitted
coefficient of conduction
coefficient characteristics
of conduction bc ac
characteristics −1.025 × 100.005367
−5
FittedFitted
coefficient of conduction
coefficient characteristics
of conduction cc bc
characteristics 0.005367 0.6158
FittedFitted
coefficient of conduction
coefficient characteristics
of conduction af cc
characteristics 0.6158−3.075 × 10−5
FittedFitted coefficient
coefficient of conduction
of conduction bf af
characteristics
characteristics −3.075 × 10−0.01074
5

FittedFitted coefficient
coefficient of conduction
of conduction cf bf
characteristics
characteristics 0.01074 0.4758
Fitted
Fitted coefficient
coefficient of conduction
of switch characteristics
characteristics aon cf 0.4758 6.992 × 10−9
−9
6.992 × 105.187
FittedFitted coefficient
coefficient of switch
of switch bon aon
characteristics
characteristics × 10−6
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics b 5.187 × 10−6
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics con on 0.0009089
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics con 0.0009089
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics aoff 6.903
− × 10−9
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics aoff 6.903 × 10 9
FittedFitted
coefficient of switch
coefficient characteristics
of switch boff b
characteristics 3.486 × 10 3.486
− 5 × 10−5
off
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics coff 0.00164
Fitted coefficient of recovery characteristics arec −3.107 × 10−8
Fitted coefficient of recovery characteristics brec 2.599 × 10−5
Fitted coefficient of recovery characteristics crec 0.001242
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 19 of 27

The 330 kW, 8000 r/min special dynamometer for HEVs/EVs are applied as the mechanical load
for the outer rotor PMSM to simulate the operation load characteristics of EVs. The power converter
for PMSM is controlled by a TMS320F28335-based DSP controller (produced by Texas Instruments
Company, Dallas, TX, USA). The controller applies the proposed system efficiency improvement
control method and traditional MTPA control strategy on the PMSM drive system. The experimental
results of the PMSM drive system by MTPA control are shown in Tables 3 and 4. Table 3 shows the
experimental results of the Si-IGBT-based PMSM drive system with different power at rated torque,
and Table 4 shows the experimental results with different torque at rated speed.

Table 3. Experimental results at rated torque in the MTPA control.

Motor Speed System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(r/min) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
300 24.17 22.83 21 94.44 91.98 86.87
250 20.79 19.08 17.5 91.76 91.72 84.16
200 17.09 15.38 14 90.02 91.05 81.96
150 13.61 11.72 10.5 86.14 89.62 77.20
100 10.05 8.10 7 80.62 86.41 69.66
50 6.86 4.53 3.5 66.06 77.26 51.04

Table 4. Experimental results in the rated speed by the MTPA control.

Motor Torque System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(Nm) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
668 24.17 22.83 21 94.44 91.98 86.87
600 21.73 20.47 18.85 94.18 92.09 86.73
500 18.19 17.06 15.71 93.80 92.08 86.37
400 14.68 13.70 12.57 93.31 91.74 85.60
300 11.22 10.38 9.42 92.50 90.75 83.94
200 7.83 7.12 6.28 90.96 88.22 80.24
100 4.49 3.90 3.14 86.88 80.41 69.86

Tables 5 and 6 show the performance of the PMSM drive system with the proposed control
strategy. The experimental results at rated torque are shown in Table 5, and the experimental results at
different torque is presented in Table 6.

Table 5. Experimental results at rated torque in the system efficiency improvement control.

Motor Speed System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(r/min) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
300 24.15 22.81 21 94.45 92.07 86.96
250 20.63 19.07 17.5 92.44 91.77 84.83
200 16.78 15.37 14 91.60 91.08 83.43
150 13.12 11.71 10.5 89.25 89.68 80.03
100 9.40 8.10 7 86.17 86.42 74.47
50 5.89 4.53 3.5 76.91 77.26 59.42

Table 6. Experimental results in the rated speed by the system efficiency improvement control.

Motor Torque System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(Nm) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
668 24.15 22.81 21 94.45 92.07 86.96
600 21.71 20.44 18.85 94.15 92.22 86.82
500 18.17 17.03 15.71 93.73 92.24 86.46
400 14.65 13.66 12.57 93.24 92.02 85.80
300 11.18 10.33 9.42 92.40 91.17 84.26
200 7.79 7.07 6.28 90.76 88.83 80.62
100 4.46 3.86 3.14 86.55 81.35 70.40

Tables 5 and 6 show that the proposed control strategy can improve the efficiency of the PMSM
direct drive system at each operation condition. Compared with traditional MTPA control, Figure 10
shows that the proposed system efficiency improvement control can decrease both the motor loss and
inverter loss.
 100
100 4.46
4.46 3.86
3.86 3.14
3.14 86.55
86.55 81.35
81.35 70.40
70.40

Tables 55 and
Tables and 66 show
show that
that the
the proposed
proposed control
control strategy
strategy can
can improve
improve the
the efficiency
efficiency of
of the
the PMSM
PMSM
direct drive
direct drive system
system atat each
each operation
operation condition.
condition. Compared
Compared with
with traditional
traditional MTPA
MTPA control,
control, Figure
Figure 1010
shows
shows that the proposed system efficiency improvement control can decrease both
that the proposed system efficiency improvement control can decrease both the motor the motor loss
loss
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 20 of 27
and inverter
and inverter loss.
loss.

0.94
0.94
0.92
0.92
0.9
efficiency

0.9
Motorefficiency

Motor efficiency by MTPA control

Motor efficiency by MTPA control
0.88 Motor efficiency by proposed control
0.88 Motor efficiency by proposed control

0.86
0.86
Motor

0.84
0.84
0.82
0.82
0.8
0.8100 200 300 400 500 600 700
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Torque/(Nm)
Torque/(Nm)
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 10.
Figure 10. Efficiency
10. Efficiency optimization
Efficiency optimization performance
optimization performance on
performance on the
on the motor
the motor efficiency
motor efficiency and
efficiency and inverter
and inverter efficiency
inverter efficiency by
efficiency by the
by the
the
proposed
proposed system
proposed system efficiency
system efficiency improvement
efficiency improvement control.
improvement control. (a)
control. (a) Motor
(a) Motor efficiency
Motor efficiency at
efficiency at rated
at rated speed;
rated speed; (b)
speed; (b) inverter
(b) inverter
inverter
efficiency
efficiency at
efficiency at rated torque.
at rated torque.

Figure 10
Figure 10 shows thatthat the system
system efficiency improvement
improvement control strategy
strategy can decrease
decrease the motor
motor
Figure 10 shows
shows that the the system efficiency
efficiency improvement control
control strategy can
can decrease the
the motor
loss and
loss and increase
increase thethe 0.94%
0.94% motor
motor efficiency
efficiency atat rated speed.
speed. Furthermore,
Furthermore, thethe proposed
proposed control
control
loss and increase the 0.94% motor efficiency at ratedrated
speed. Furthermore, the proposed control strategy
strategy
strategy can also reduce the losses of power converter, by which the inverter efficiency can be added
can also can alsothe
reduce reduce
lossesthe
of losses
powerofconverter,
power converter,
by whichby thewhich theefficiency
inverter inverter efficiency can be
can be added added
at 10.85%
at
at 10.85% at rated torque. Figure 11 shows the system efficiency by the traditional MTPA control
at 10.85% at rated
rated torque. torque.
Figure Figure
11 shows the11system
showsefficiency
the system efficiency
by the by the
traditional MTPAtraditional MTPA control
control method and the
method
method and
and the proposed
the proposed control strategy.
proposed control strategy. control strategy.
efficiency
efficiency

Inverterefficiency
Systemefficiency

Inverter
System

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure 11.
Figure 11. Efficiency
Efficiency optimization
optimization performance
performance on on the
the system
system efficiency
efficiency by
by the
the proposed
proposed system
system
Figure 11. Efficiency optimization performance on the system efficiency by the proposed system
efficiency
efficiency improvement control. (a) System efficiency at rated speed; (b) system efficiency at rated torque.
efficiency improvement
improvement control.
control. (a)
(a) System
System efficiency
efficiency at
at rated
rated speed;
speed; (b)
(b) system
system efficiency at rated
efficiency at torque.
rated torque.
It can
It can be
be seen
seen that
that the
the system
system efficiency
efficiency improvement
improvement control
control method
method can
can obtain
obtain higher
higher system
system
It can be
efficiency than
efficiency seen
than the that the system
the traditional
traditional MTPAefficiency
MTPA control improvement
control over
over the
the wholecontrol method
whole operation can obtain
operation condition
condition rangehigher
range of
of the system
the PMSM
PMSM
efficiency than the traditional MTPA control over the whole operation condition range of the PMSM
direct drive system. The proposed control strategy can increase the system efficiency by 0.54% at rated
speed and improve the efficiency of PMSM drive system by 8.38% at rated torque.
To verify the efficiency optimization performance of the proposed system efficiency improvement
respect to conventional MTPA control, this paper also designs a SiC-MOSFETs-based power converter
which is shown in Figure 12.
The SiC-MOSFETs based power converter utilizes SiC-MOSFET modules (CAS300M12BM2) as
the power devices which can obtain lower switching losses than Si-IGBT. The fitted coefficients of
CAS300M12BM2 are shown in Table 7.
 To verify the efficiency optimization performance of the proposed system efficiency
improvement respect to conventional MTPA control, this paper also designs a SiC-MOSFETs-based
power converter which is shown in Figure 12.
The SiC-MOSFETs based power converter utilizes SiC-MOSFET modules (CAS300M12BM2) as
the power
Energies 2017, devices
10, 2030 which can obtain lower switching losses than Si-IGBT. The fitted coefficients
21 of of
27
CAS300M12BM2 are shown in Table 7.

Figure 12. SiC-MOSFETs-based inverter for a PMSM drive system.

Figure 12. SiC-MOSFETs-based inverter for a PMSM drive system.

Table 7. Fitting coefficients of the SiC-MOSFET modules.

Table 7. Fitting coefficients of the SiC-MOSFET modules.
Parameter Value
Parameter
Fitted coefficient of conduction characteristics ac 4.505Value × 10−6
Fitted
Fitted coefficient
coefficient of conduction
of conduction characteristics
characteristics ac bc 0.005021
4.505 × 10−6
Fitted coefficient of conduction characteristics
Fitted coefficient of conduction characteristics bc cc 0.04258
0.005021
Fitted
Fitted coefficient
coefficient of conduction
of conduction characteristics
characteristics cc af −3.30.04258
× 10−6
Fitted coefficient
Fitted of conduction
coefficient characteristics
of conduction af bf
characteristics −3.3 × 10−6
0.004911
Fitted coefficient
Fitted of conduction
coefficient characteristics
of conduction bf cf
characteristics 0.004911
0.5673
Fitted Fitted
coefficient of conduction
coefficient characteristicscf aon
of switchcharacteristics 4.141 0.5673
× 10−12
Fitted coefficient
Fitted of switch
coefficient characteristics
of switch aon bon
characteristics 4.141× ×
1.418 −8 −12
1010
Fitted coefficient
Fitted of switch
coefficient characteristics
of switch bon con
characteristics 1.418× ×
1.361 10−8
10−6
Fitted coefficient
Fitted of switch
coefficient characteristics
of switch con aoff
characteristics 1.361
3.48 ×−1110−6
× 10
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics a × −11
off boff
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics 8.972 × 1010
3.48 −9
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics boff 8.972 × −1010−9
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics coff 1.083 × 10 −10
Fitted coefficient of switch characteristics coff 1.083 × 10

The experimental results of the PMSM system drivne by the SiC-MOSFETs based power
The experimental
converter are shown inresults
Tablesof8–11.
the PMSM
Tables system
8 and 9drivne by the
show the SiC-MOSFETs
performance based
of the PMSMpower converter
drive system
are shown in Tables 8–11. Tables 8 and 9 show the performance of the PMSM drive system
under the traditional MTPA control. Table 8 shows the experimental results of the PMSM drive under the
traditional
system MTPA
at rated control.
torque, andTable
Table89shows
showsthe
theexperimental
performanceresults of the PMSM
of the PMSM drive system
drive system at ratedatspeed.
rated
torque, and Table 9 shows the performance of the PMSM drive system at rated speed.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 22 of 27

Table 8. Experimental results of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system at rated torque in the
MTPA control.

Motor Speed System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(r/min) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
300 23.14 22.83 21 98.67 91.98 90.76
250 19.56 19.08 17.5 97.54 91.72 89.46
200 16.04 15.38 14 95.90 91.05 87.32
150 12.56 11.72 10.5 93.29 89.62 83.61
100 9.17 8.10 7 88.37 86.41 76.36
50 5.87 4.53 3.5 77.20 77.26 59.64

Table 9. Experimental results of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system in the rated speed by the
MTPA control.

Motor Torque System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(Nm) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
668 23.14 22.83 21 98.67 91.98 90.76
600 20.74 20.47 18.85 98.69 92.09 90.88
500 17.31 17.06 15.71 98.56 92.08 90.75
400 13.95 13.70 12.57 98.24 91.74 90.13
300 10.66 10.38 9.42 97.38 90.75 88.37
200 7.45 7.12 6.28 95.53 88.22 84.28
100 4.33 3.90 3.14 89.98 80.41 72.35

Table 10. Experimental results of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system at rated torque in the
system efficiency improvement control.

Motor Speed System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(r/min) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
300 23.115 22.80 21 98.64 92.10 90.85
250 19.523 19.064 17.5 97.65 91.80 89.64
200 15.969 15.366 14 96.22 91.11 87.67
150 12.44 11.709 10.5 94.12 89.67 84.41
100 8.98 8.094 7 90.13 86.48 77.95
50 5.579 4.527 3.5 81.14 77.31 62.74

Table 11. Experimental results of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system in the rated speed by
the system efficiency improvement control.

Motor Torque System Input Power Motor Input Power Mechanical Power Inverter Motor System
(Nm) (kW) (kW) (kW) Efficiency Efficiency Efficiency
668 23.115 22.80 21 98.64 92.10 90.85
600 20.716 20.44 18.85 98.67 92.22 90.99
500 17.283 17.02 15.71 98.49 92.30 90.90
400 13.917 13.66 12.57 98.15 92.02 90.32
300 10.616 10.33 9.42 97.31 91.19 88.73
200 7.406 7.06 6.28 95.33 88.95 84.80
100 4.285 3.84 3.14 89.61 81.77 73.28

Tables 10 and 11 show the experimental results of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system
by the proposed system efficiency improvement control strategy. The experimental results at rated
torque are shown in Table 10, and the experimental results at different torque are presented in Table 11.
From Tables 10 and 11, it can be seen that proposed system efficiency improvement control
method can improve the efficiency performance of the PMSM drive system over the whole operation
range. Figure 13 shows that, the proposed control strategy can reduce both the losses of PMSM and
losses of power converter, by which the system efficiency is obviously improved.
Figure 13 shows that the proposed system efficiency improvement control method can reduce the
losses of PMSM and increase the motor efficiency at 1.36% at rated speed. In addition, the proposed
control can also decrease the inverter losses, by which the efficiency of power converter can be raised
by 3.94% at rated torque.
Energies
Energies 2017,
2017, 10,
10, 2030
2030 24
24 of
of 28
28

Figure
Figure 13 13 shows
shows that
that the
the proposed
proposed system
system efficiency
efficiency improvement
improvement control
control method
method can
can reduce
reduce
the
the losses of PMSM and increase the motor efficiency at 1.36% at rated speed. In addition, the
losses of PMSM and increase the motor efficiency at 1.36% at rated speed. In addition, the
proposed
proposed control
control can
can also
also decrease
decrease the
the inverter
inverter losses,
losses, by
by which
which the
the efficiency
efficiency of
of power
power converter
converter
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 23 of 27
can
can be
be raised
raised by by 3.94%
3.94% atat rated
rated torque.
torque.

efficiency
efficiency

Inverterefficiency
Motorefficiency

Inverter
Motor

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 13.
13. Efficiency
Efficiency of
of the
the SiC-MOSFETs-based
SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM
PMSM drive
drive system
system byby the
the traditional
traditional MTPA
MTPA control
control
and proposed system
proposed system
and proposed efficiency
system efficiency improvement
efficiency improvement control.
improvement control. (a)
control. (a) Motor efficiency
(a) Motor efficiency at
efficiency at rated
rated speed; (b)
at rated speed; (b) inverter
inverter
efficiency
efficiency at
efficiency rated
at rated
at torque.
rated torque.
torque.

Figure
Figure 14
14 shows
shows the
the system
system efficiency
efficiency of
of the
the SiC-MOSFETs-based
SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM
PMSM drive
drive system
system under
under the
the
Figure 14 shows the system efficiency of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM drive system under the
traditional MTPA
traditional MTPA control
MTPA control and
controland the
andthe proposed
theproposed system
proposedsystem efficiency
systemefficiency improvement
efficiencyimprovement control
improvementcontrol strategy.
controlstrategy.
strategy.
traditional
efficiency
Systemefficiency
System

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 14.
14. System
System efficiency of the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM direct drive system by the MTPA
Figure 14. System efficiency
efficiency of
of the
the SiC-MOSFETs-based
SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM
PMSM direct
direct drive
drive system
system by
by the MTPA
the MTPA
control
control and
and the
the proposed
proposed system
system efficiency
efficiency improvement
improvement control
control method.
method. (a)
(a) System
System efficiency
efficiency at
at
control and the proposed system efficiency improvement control method. (a) System efficiency at rated
rated speed;
rated speed; (b) system
(b) system efficiency
efficiency at rated torque.
at torque.
rated torque.
speed; (b) system efficiency at rated
It
It can
can be
be seen
seen from
from Figure
Figure 14 14 that
that the
the proposed
proposed control
control strategy
strategy can
can achieve
achieve better
better system
system
It canthan
efficiency be seen from Figure MTPA 14 thatcontrol
the proposed control strategy can achieve better system
efficiency than the conventional MTPA control for each operation condition of PMSM direct
the conventional for each operation condition of PMSM direct drive
drive
efficiency
system. than
The the conventional
system efficiency is MTPA control
increased by for each
0.93% at operation
rated speed condition
and of PMSM
improved by direct
3.10% at drive
rated
system. The system efficiency is increased by 0.93% at rated speed and improved by 3.10% at rated
system.Figure
torque. The system efficiency is increased by 0.93% at rated speedthe and improved by 3.10% at rated
torque. Figure 15 15 shows
shows thethe system
system efficiency
efficiency difference
difference between
between the Si-IGBTs-based
Si-IGBTs-based PMSM
PMSM direct
direct
torque.
drive Figure
system 15 the
and shows the system efficiency
SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM difference
direct between
drive the Si-IGBTs-based PMSM direct
system.
drive system and the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSM direct drive system.
driveFigure
system and the SiC-MOSFETs-based PMSMofdirect drive system. system efficiency of the SiC-
Figure 1515 shows
shows that,
that, as
as aa result
result of
of the
the use
use of SiC-MOSFETs,
SiC-MOSFETs, the the system efficiency of the SiC-
Figure 15 shows that,
MOSFET-based as a result of the use of SiC-MOSFETs, the systeminefficiency of the
MOSFET-based PMSM PMSM direct
direct drive
drive system
system is is higher
higher than
than the
the Si-IGBT-based
Si-IGBT-based system
system in the
the both
both MPTA
MPTA
SiC-MOSFET-based
control PMSM direct drive system is higher than the Si-IGBT-based system in the both
control andand proposed
proposed system
system efficiency
efficiency improvement
improvement control.
control. AsAs the
the SiC-MOSFET
SiC-MOSFET power
power device
device has
has
MPTA
lower control and proposed system efficiency improvement control. As the SiC-MOSFET power device
lower switching losses than the Si-IGBT power device, the switching losses’ ratio of system losses in
switching losses than the Si-IGBT power device, the switching losses’ ratio of system losses in
has SiC-MOSFET-based
the lower switching losses than is the Si-IGBT power in device,Si-IGBT-based
the switching losses’ ratio of system losses
the SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM PMSM is lower lower than
than that
that in the
the Si-IGBT-based PMSM PMSM system.
system. Therefore,
Therefore, itit
in the
can SiC-MOSFET-based PMSMconventional
is lower than thatSiC-MOSFET-based
in the Si-IGBT-based PMSMsystem, system. Therefore, it
can bebe seen
seen that,
that, compared
compared with with conventional the the SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM PMSM system, the the proposed
proposed
can be seen
control that, compared with conventional the SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM system,Si-IGBT-based
the proposed
control strategy
strategy can
can have
have better
better efficiency
efficiency optimized
optimized performance
performance in in the
the conventional
conventional Si-IGBT-based
control direct
PMSM strategy cansystem.
drive have better efficiency optimized performance in the conventional Si-IGBT-based
PMSM direct drive system.
PMSM direct drive system.
The experimental results show that the proposed system efficiency improvement control strategy
aims to decrease the system losses by optimizing both motor losses and inverter losses, and improves
the system efficiency under each operational condition. The PMSM direct drive system with either
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 24 of 27

Si-IGBT or SiC-MOSFET can achieve lower energy consumption by using the proposed control method
Energies
over the 2017, 10, 2030
whole operation
range of EVs. 25 of 28

System efficiency
System efficiency

(a) (b)
System efficiency

(c)

Figure 15. System

Figure 15. Systemefficiency
efficiencyofof
thethe Si-IGBT-based
Si-IGBT-based PMSMPMSMdrivedrive
systemsystem and SiC-MOSFET-based
and SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM
PMSM drive system by MTPA control and the proposed control. (a)
drive system by MTPA control and the proposed control. (a) System efficiency System efficiency
of theof the PMSM
PMSM drive
drive system by MTPA control; (b) System efficiency of the PMSM drive system by
system by MTPA control; (b) System efficiency of the PMSM drive system by the proposed control; the proposed
control;
(c) System(c)efficiency
System efficiency
difference difference
between the between theMTPA
traditional traditional MTPA
control control
and the andcontrol
proposed the proposed
method
control method in the Si-IGBT-based system and
in the Si-IGBT-based system and SiC-MOSFET-based system.SiC-MOSFET-based system.

The experimental results show that the proposed system efficiency improvement control
6. Conclusions
strategy aims to decrease the system losses by optimizing both motor losses and inverter losses, and
This paper
improves designs
the system a novel efficiency
efficiency under eachoptimization control
operational named
condition. system
The PMSMefficiency improvement
direct drive system
control strategy for the PMSM direct drive systems which aims to increase the system
with either Si-IGBT or SiC-MOSFET can achieve lower energy consumption by using the proposed efficiency by
optimizing the motor losses and inverter losses
control method over the whole operation range of EVs.together. As the traditional linear loss model can
only accurately determine the inverter loss at rated operation conditions, a nonlinear inverter loss
model
5. which applies polynomials to fit the nonlinear characteristics of the power device is built in
Conclusions
this paper. The proposed nonlinear model can obtain a more accurate loss of power converter is
This paper designs a novel efficiency optimization control named system efficiency
obtained over the whole operation condition of PMSM drive system. As the PMSM is fed by the
improvement control strategy for the PMSM direct drive systems which aims to increase the system
switching-mode inverter, the PWM output voltage of inverter will cause the harmonic current in the
efficiency by optimizing the motor losses and inverter losses together. As the traditional linear loss
PMSM, which will lead harmonic motor loss and affect the system stability. To obtain a more accurate
model can only accurately determine the inverter loss at rated operation conditions, a nonlinear
harmonic motor loss, this paper uses the double Fourier integral analysis to analytically calculate
inverter loss model which applies polynomials to fit the nonlinear characteristics of the power device
the fundamental component and harmonics of inverter output voltage, by which the fundamental
is built in this paper. The proposed nonlinear model can obtain a more accurate loss of power
motor losses and harmonic motor loss can be accurately analyzed. From the inverter loss model and
converter is obtained over the whole operation condition of PMSM drive system. As the PMSM is fed
motor loss model, this paper presents a whole-frequency-domain system loss model which consider
by the switching-mode inverter, the PWM output voltage of inverter will cause the harmonic current
both fundamental loss and harmonic loss. Based on the whole-frequency-domain system loss model,
in the PMSM, which will lead harmonic motor loss and affect the system stability. To obtain a more
this paper applies the system efficiency improvement control strategy to optimize the motor current
accurate harmonic motor loss, this paper uses the double Fourier integral analysis to analytically
and PWM frequency together. The PMSM direct drive system can achieve higher efficiency without
calculate the fundamental component and harmonics of inverter output voltage, by which the
serious influence on the system stability under each operational condition of EVs. Compared with the
fundamental motor losses and harmonic motor loss can be accurately analyzed. From the inverter
loss model and motor loss model, this paper presents a whole-frequency-domain system loss model
which consider both fundamental loss and harmonic loss. Based on the whole-frequency-domain
system loss model, this paper applies the system efficiency improvement control strategy to optimize
the motor current and PWM frequency together. The PMSM direct drive system can achieve higher
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 25 of 27

traditional MTPA control strategy, the proposed control method can improve the system efficiency by
3.1% in the SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM direct drive system and by 8.38% in the Si-IGBT-based PMSM
drive system.
Both theoretical analysis and experimental results prove that, with the consideration of the
coupling relationship between the power converter and PMSM, the proposed efficiency optimization
control strategy can synthetically optimize the fundamental motor loss, harmonic motor loss and
inverter loss. Without serious influence on the system stability, the system efficiency improvement
control strategy can minimize the system losses. By decreasing the energy consumption of the
PMSM system, the proposed optimization control method will significantly increase the endurance
mileage in one charge and improve the performance of EVs. This paper provides a more accurate
whole-frequency-domain system loss model, and as the control strategy is based on the system
loss model, the optimized performance is limited by the motor parameters and inverter parameters.
The experimental results show that although the SiC-MOSFET-based PMSM direct drive system has
higher system efficiency than the Si-IGBT-based PMSM drive system, the Si-IGBT-based system has
better optimized performance in the proposed optimization control method than the SiC-MOSFET-
based system. Therefore, from point of view about reducing the energy consumption, the Si-IGBT-
based system is more suitable for the urban complex traffic situation. Otherwise, the SiC-MOSFET-
based system is more suitable for high speed road conditions and industrial application. Future
research will attempt to find a establish a optimization design method which can optimize the
motor parameters, inverter parameter and control method from a systems perspective. According
to the operation condition characteristics, the system parameters and control method should be
more specifically designed. After the system optimization of the parameter and control method, the
performance of the power system in EVs will be great improved and the EVs will have a wider scope
of application in modern society.

Acknowledgments: This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(No. 51677041) and in part by the State Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China
(No. 51537002) and in part by the National key S&T Special Projects of China (No. 2012ZX045001051).
Author Contributions: Chengming Zhang and Liyi Li designed the system loss model of the PMSM
direct drive system, Qingbo Guo designed the proposed system efficiency improvement control method,
Mingyi Wang designed the experimental platform of the PMSM drive system and Tiecheng Wang analyzed
the experimental data.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the
decision to publish the results.

References
1. Gu, W.; Zhu, X.; Quan, L.; Du, Y. Design and Optimization of Permanent Magnet Brushless Machines for
Electric Vehicle Applications. Energies 2015, 8, 13996–14008. [CrossRef]
2. Sui, Y.; Zheng, P.; Wu, F.; Yu, B.; Wang, P.; Zhang, J. Research on a 20-Slot/22-Pole Five-Phase Fault-Tolerant
PMSM Used for Four-Wheel-Drive Electric Vehicles. Energies 2014, 7, 1265–1287. [CrossRef]
3. Cheng, M.; Sun, L.; Buja, G.; Song, L. Advanced Electrical Machines and Machine-Based Systems for Electric
and Hybrid Vehicles. Energies 2015, 8, 9541–9564. [CrossRef]
4. Wang, T.; Wang, H. Research on an Integrated Hydrostatic-Driven Electric Generator with Controllable Load
for Renewable Energy. Energies 2017, 10, 1299. [CrossRef]
5. Liu, X.; Chen, H.; Zhao, J.; Belahcen, A. Research on the Performances and Parameters of Interior PMSM
Used for Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2016, 63, 3533–3545. [CrossRef]
6. Chu, L.; Jia, Y.-F.; Chen, D.-S.; Xu, N.; Wang, Y.-W.; Tang, X.; Xu, Z. Research on Control Strategies of an
Open-End Winding Permanent Magnet Synchronous Driving Motor (OW-PMSM)-Equipped Dual Inverter
with a Switchable Winding Mode for Electric Vehicles. Energies 2017, 10, 616. [CrossRef]
7. Sant, A.V.; Khadkikar, V.; Xiao, W.; Zeineldin, H.H. Four-Axis Vector-Controlled Dual-Rotor PMSM for
Plug-in Electric Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 3202–3212. [CrossRef]
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 26 of 27

8. Fodorean, D.; Sarrazin, M.M.; Marţiş, C.S.; Anthonis, J.; Van der Auweraer, H. Electromagnetic and Structural
Analysis for a Surface-Mounted PMSM Used for Light-EV. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016, 52, 2892–2899.
[CrossRef]
9. Zhao, J.; Gu, Z.; Li, B.; Liu, X.; Li, X.; Chen, Z. Research on the Torque and Back EMF Performance of a High
Speed PMSM Used for Flywheel Energy Storage. Energies 2015, 8, 2867–2888. [CrossRef]
10. Gerlach, T.; Steckel, R.; Hubert, T.; Kremser, A. Eddy current loss analysis in permanent magnets of
synchronous machines. In Proceedings of the 2016 6th International Electric Drives Production Conference
(EDPC), Nuremberg, Germany, 30 November–1 December 2016; pp. 246–252.
11. Liu, Y.; Tong, C.; Bai, J.; Yu, S.; Tong, W.; Fu, W. Optimization of an 80 kW Radial-Radial Flux
Compound-Structure Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Machine Used for HEVs. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2011, 47,
2399–2402. [CrossRef]
12. Dinh, B.M.; Tien, H.M. Mathematical Model for MTPA Control of Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motor in
Stator Flux Linkage Synchronous Frame. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2015, 51, 3620–3628.
13. Thomas, F.; Kay, H. Design and optimization of an IPMSM with fixed outer dimensions for application in
HEVs. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Electric Machines and Drives Conference, Miami, FL, USA,
3–6 May 2009; pp. 887–892.
14. Shinohara, A.; Inoue, Y.; Morimoto, S.; Sanada, M. Maximum Torque Per Ampere Control in Stator Flux
Linkage Synchronous Frame for DTC-Based PMSM Drives Without Using q-Axis Inductance. IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl. 2017, 53, 3663–3671. [CrossRef]
15. Preindl, M.; Bolognani, S. Optimal State Reference Computation with Constrained MTPA Criterion for PM
Motor Drives. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 4524–4535. [CrossRef]
16. Inoue, T.; Inoue, Y.; Morimoto, S.; Sanada, M. Maximum Torque per Ampere Control of a Direct
Torque-Controlled PMSM in a Stator Flux Linkage Synchronous Frame. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2016,
52, 2630–2637. [CrossRef]
17. Sepulchre, L.; Fadel, M.; Pietrzak-David, M.; Porte, G. Flux-weakening strategy for high speed PMSM for
vehicle application. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Electrical Systems for Aircraft,
Railway, Ship Propulsion and Road Vehicles & International Transportation Electrification Conference
(ESARS-ITEC), Toulouse, France, 2–4 November 2016; pp. 1–7.
18. Guo, Q.; Zhang, C.; Li, L.; Zhang, J.; Liu, J.; Wang, T. Efficiency Optimization Control of Permanent-Magnet
Synchronous Machines for Electric Vehicle Traction Systems. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Vehicle Power
and Propulsion Conference (VPPC), Hangzhou, China, 17–20 October 2016; pp. 1–5.
19. Moussa, M.F.; Helal, A.; Gaber, Y.; Youssef, H.A. Unity Power Factor control of permanent magnet motor
drive system. In Proceedings of the 12th International Middle-East Power System Conference, Aswan, Egypt,
12–15 March 2008; pp. 360–367.
20. Wu, F.; Wan, S.-M.; Huang, S.-H. Unity power factor control for PMSM position sensorless drive.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems, Wuhan, China,
17–20 October 2008; pp. 1618–1620.
21. Xiao, X.; Zhang, S.; Ding, Y.; Song, Y. Control Method of PMSM Driving System with Small DC-Link
Capacitor. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Cincinnati,
OH, USA, 1–5 October 2017; pp. 1925–1931.
22. Lee, J.; Nam, K.; Choi, S.; Kwon, S. A Lookup Table Based Loss Minimizing Control for FCEV Permanent
Magnet Synchronous Motors. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference,
Arlington, TX, USA, 9–12 September 2007; pp. 175–179.
23. Lemmens, J.; Vanassche, P.; Driesen, J. Optimal Control of Traction Motor Drives under Electrothermal
Constraints. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 2014, 2, 249–263. [CrossRef]
24. Ni, R.G.; Xu, D.G.; Wang, G.L.; Ding, L.; Zhang, G.Q.; Qu, L.Z. Maximum Efficiency Per Ampere Control of
Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2015, 62, 2135–2143. [CrossRef]
25. Aguirre, M.; Madina, P.; Poza, J.; Aranburu, A.; Nieva, T. Analysis and comparison of PWM modulation
methods in VSI-Fed PMSM drive systems. In Proceedings of the 2012 XXth International Conference on
Electrical Machines, Marseille, France, 2–5 September 2012; pp. 851–857.
26. Wang, Y.; Wen, X.; Zhao, F. Vector control of six-phase PMSMs with selective harmonic elimination
PWM. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Conference and Expo Transportation Electrification Asia-Pacific
(ITEC Asia-Pacific), Beijing, China, 31 August–3 September 2014; pp. 1–6.
Energies 2017, 10, 2030 27 of 27

27. Zhang, Z.; Ge, X.; Tian, Z.; Zhang, X.; Tang, Q.; Feng, X. A PWM for Minimum Current Harmonic Distortion
in Metro Traction PMSM with Saliency Ratio and Load Angle Constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017,
9. [CrossRef]
28. Kravaritis, E.; Sourkounis, C. Efficiency analysis of pumps drives for Space Vector PWM and Hysteresis Band
PWM with on operation transaction of the control method. In Proceedings of the 2017 25th Mediterranean
Conference on Control and Automation (MED), Valletta, Malta, 3–6 July 2017; pp. 473–477.
29. Liang, W.; Wang, J.; Luk, P.C.; Fang, W.; Fei, W. Analytical Modeling of Current Harmonic Components in
PMSM Drive with Voltage-Source Inverter by SVPWM Technique. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2014, 29,
673–680. [CrossRef]
30. Holmes, D.G.; Lipo, T.A. Pulse Width Modulation for Power Converters: Principles and Practice; EI-Hawart, M.E.,
Ed.; Wiley-IEEE Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 276–353.
31. Yamazaki, K.; Seto, Y. Iron loss analysis of interior permanent-magnet synchronous motors-variation of main
loss factors due to driving condition. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2006, 42, 1045–1052. [CrossRef]

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).