4.5 Article

Field-oriented control strategy for double-stator single-rotor and double-rotor single-stator permanent magnet machine: Design and operation

期刊

COMPUTERS & ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
卷 90, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2020.106953

关键词

Double stator single rotor PM machine; Double rotor single stator PM machine; Electric vehicles; FOC strategy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electric vehicle industry is seeking advanced traction systems to enhance performance and reliability. Magnetic materials are crucial for the performance specifications of brushless DC or AC machines, and advancements in power electronic devices have made AC motors more suitable for EVs and allowed for advanced topology circuits to fit machines with two rotors or two stators. This paper presents two configurations of electrical machine control for EVs, discusses their pros and cons, and develops mathematical models to enhance a Field Oriented Control (FOC) strategy through MATLAB-based simulations.
There has been a rapid adoption of electric vehicles (EVs), and the industry has been looking for the most enhanced traction system to improve performance and reliability. Such specifications are mostly dependent on the magnetic materials for brushless DC or AC machines, and typically EVs are manufactured with those machines. In the past two decades, there have also been improved performance ratings of power electronic devices. On one hand, making possible AC motors more suitable for EVs. On the other hand, it allows further advanced topology circuits to fit machines with two rotors or two stators. This paper shows two configurations of electrical machine control for EVs, discuss the pros and cons, and corresponding mathematical models have been developed in order to enhance a Field Oriented Control (FOC) strategy, which has been analyzed and studied through MATLAB based simulations, allowing novel design based on the analytical models developed by the authors.

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

4.5
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