4.7 Article

Investigation of Interior Permanent Magnet Motor With Dampers for Electric Vehicle Propulsion and Mitigation of Saliency Effect During Integrated Charging Operation

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON VEHICULAR TECHNOLOGY
卷 68, 期 2, 页码 1254-1265

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TVT.2018.2865852

关键词

Integrated charging; machine design; maximum-torque per-ampere; IPMSM with dampers; winding inductances

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Power electronics and motor drive components existing in a conventional electric vehicle (EV) drivetrain employed to propel the EV can also be used to charge the battery under level 3 fast charging capacity. This integrated battery charging technology can be realized by employing the winding inductances of the three-phase interior permanent magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM) used for propulsion as line inductors while charging the EV's battery pack. The difference in the d- and q-axis inductances in the IPMSM offers unbalanced Thevenin impedances as viewed from stator terminals. This causes the voltages across the stator windings to become unbalanced when balanced three-phase currents synchronized with the grid utility voltages are forced into the three armature phases during charging. This paper first presents a case study employing a conventional laboratory IPMSM to illustrate the unbalanced phase winding impedance during an emulated integrated charging operation. Thereafter, the authors derive motivation to design and analyze an IPMSM with dampers in the rotor for propulsion and mitigation of the saliency effect, that is, the effect of unequal armature phase impedance at standstill during integrated charging. A novel design approach is presented and employed to design an IPMSM with dampers. Performance of the designed IPMSM with dampers is compared to that of the conventional IPMSM under both integrated charging and traction conditions. The proposed design is also validated experimentally using a laboratory IPMSM with dampers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据