Study of Double Cage Induction Motors with Different Rotor Bar Materials

K. N. Gyftakis, D. Athanasopoulos, J. Kappatou

Abstract -- This paper consists a study of the influence of specific design parameters on the double-cage induction motor behavior. The study is carried out using FEM analysis. Three double rotor bar induction motors have been simulated and their electromagnetic characteristics are compared to each other. The differences in the three motors' design are: the first one has a single rotor cage and the other two have double rotor cage with different materials for the upper and inner rotor bars. The simulations performed, offer an insight and comparison between the three motors electromagnetic variables and behavior under the same speed operation, as well as under the same applied mechanical load. Index Terms--Bar material, Design, Double-cage, FEM analysis, Induction motors.

he induction motors in which each rotor slot has two conducting bars are characterized by higher starting torque, lower starting current and normal efficiency at nominal speed, compared to the standard NEMA's class A induction motors [1]. The upper rotor bar contributes during the starting of the motor because the magnetic flux does not penetrate deep into the rotor core, due to increased leakage flux, and also because of the skin effect. Upper and inner rotor bars contribute at nominal speed both, because of the low slip frequency and also because of the strongly magnetized rotor body. Due to the above characteristics, common double cage induction motors applications are: conveyors, crushers, stirrers, compressors, loaded pumps, etc [2], [3]. Despite their higher manufacturing cost, these motors give solution in applications, where the motor needs to start loaded and continue to carry the load at nominal speed. This is an advantage compared to the standard NEMA class A induction motor, which is characterized by difficult starting due to the increased starting stator current [2]. Double bar induction motors can be divided into two large categories, depending on the construction of the rotor cage. If both, the upper and the deep bar, are from the same material, they are short-circuited to the same end-ring and the rotor has one cage, similar to the standard class A induction motor. On the other hand, if the two bars are from different materials, then the upper bars are short-circuited independently from the deep bars and the rotor is manufactured with two cages. Usually, when two different conducting materials are implemented into the rotor, the material of the greatest resistivity, forms the outer cage, in order to improve the motor's starting behavior. The middle area of the rotor slot between the upper and the deep rotor bars can be of iron or dielectric material and it is a subject of interest and research [4].
This work was supported by the research program: "K. Karatheodoris 2010", of the Research Committee of the University of Patras, Greece.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Several works have been published in the literature concerning double cage induction motors. In [5] the authors have presented a numerical method for the estimation of double cage induction motor parameters from standard manufacturer data. In the same work, it is also indicated that the leakage flux of the inner cage is always greater than the one of the upper cage. Furthermore, through the appropriate design of the rotor slots, the skin effect can be used to benefit for high starting torque or high breakdown torque in double cage induction motors [6]. On the other hand, it has been shown in previous publications that the outer cage of double cage induction motors is vulnerable to failure due to its structure and applications [3], [7], [8]. Also, because the manufacturing cost is increased with the double cage structure [1], special care should be given through the design process of these motors concerning not only their electromagnetic characteristics but also their general behavior (thermal, vibrations, etc) and reliability. This can be achieved, as mentioned in [9], with oversized rotor bars and good quality magnetic plates. In this paper, the dependence of the electromagnetic characteristics of double cage inductions motors, on the specific manufacturer design options is studied. For this purpose, three different induction motor models have been created and studied with FEM analysis. The stator of the three models has been kept intact, as well as the number and shape of rotors bars. In the first model, both the upper and inner rotor bars are from aluminum, whereas in the other two the upper bar is from aluminum and the inner bar from copper. Moreover, what differs in the last two models is the middle slot area, between aluminum and cooper, which is considered as iron for the first and dielectric for the second. In sections III-V, the three models will be examined under FEM AC time-harmonic analysis, whereas in section VI they will be examined under FEM transient analysis which takes the rotor movement into account, in order to extract both their spatial and time-dependent electromagnetic characteristics. In all simulations, FEM analysis will take into account the non-linear magnetic B-H characteristic of the rotor and stator iron core, which was extracted from the manufacturers data. II.
THE MODELS' DESIGN

In Fig. 1, the three models are presented. One may observe in Fig. 1-a that the rotor bar is consisted by a single material, which is in this case aluminum. In Fig. 1-b and Fig. 1-c the other two models are presented. In these models the upper and inner rotor bars are independent and from different materials. The upper bar is from aluminum whereas the inner from copper. Moreover, the middle bar area between upper and inner bars is considered to be air for the case presented in Fig. 1-b model and iron for the case of Fig. 1-c model. The number of rotor slots for all models is 28 and the rotors are considered un-skewed.

978-1-4673-0142-8/12/$26.00 2012 IEEE

1450

Furthermore, the stator is designed acco ording to a real 4pole single-cage induction motor and has h been kept the same for all models with 36 stator slots. The stator circuits form a delta wound and the phase resista ance was measured in the laboratory through DC current inje ection. The models are fed by symmetrical sinusoidal 3-phas se 380V and 50Hz system.

ars is presented for the three along the depth of the rotor ba models. The skin effect is pre esent in all cases, provoking significant current displaceme ent inside the bars towards their surface. At the same tim me, there is not any current flowing through the middle bar area, which does not ction in the models B and C, contribute to the torque produc since it is not made from condu ucting material.

a) a a)

b)

b b)

c)
Fig. 1. The three simulated motors. a) Single alu uminum rotor bars. b) Upper bar from aluminum, inner bar from copper an nd air between them. c) Upper bar from aluminum, inner bar from copper an nd iron between them.

ns, will be referred The three models, for simplicity reason to as: model A, B and C from now, where model A g. 1-b and finally corresponds to Fig. 1-a, model B to Fig model C to Fig. 1-c.
EHAVIOR III. THE MOTORS STARTING BE

c c)
Fig. 2. The magnetic flux distribution at starting for a) model A, b) model B and c) model C.

In Fig. 2, the magnetic flux distribu ution for the three models at starting, is presented. It is obvious that the p less into magnetic flux lines in models B and C penetrate the rotor core, compared to model A. d amplitude Furthermore, in Fig. 3 the current density

1451

IV. TORQUE AND CUR RRENT VERSUS SPEED

CHARACTE ERISTICS

a)

b)

The electromagnetic torque and stator current amplitude ors are presented respectively versus speed for the three moto in Fig. 4-a and Fig. 4-b. Mod del A is characterized by the greatest starting and pull-out to orque as well as the greatest stability area. On the other hand, h for speed greater than 1350rpm, one may observe that the model A presents significantly lower electromag gnetic torque than the other two models, as well as lower st tator current. The starting behavior of models B and C, has no e model A and at the same significant difference than the time, for the same speed valu ues they are characterized by importantly greater output pow wer. The present remark is of great value if one considers tha at for applications such as the pumps, the motors are comp pared under specific speed values (eg. 1450rpm and 2950r rpm). Furthermore, in Fig.4-c,d,e,f, the motors' power factor, efficiency, input and outp put power are presented respectively. Model A is characterized by greater power or every speed. Also, its input factor and greater efficiency fo power is greater than the others o for speed less than 1200rpm and the same stands for f its output power for speed less than 1300rpm. Models B and a C, compared to model A, have both greater input pow wer for speed greater than 1200rpm and greater output power p for speed greater than 1300rpm.

c)
Fig. 3. The current density amplitude along the dep pth of the rotor bars at starting for: a) model A, b) model B and c) model C.

f torque and stator In TABLE I, one can see the values of current amplitude for the three simulated models at starting. ame for the three The stator current is practically the sa models. Also, the electromagnetic torque e has been slightly reduced in models B and C. The model l B has 5.3% less starting torque than the model A, wherea as model C 3.2%. Models B and C present lower total ba ar resistance, than model A. As, a consequence their electrom magnetic torque at starting was expected to be significantly less than model's A. This does not happen and the differ rence between the starting torque of the three models is small. This small difference presented in the motors startin ng behavior occurs from the fact that, although in models B and a C the total bars resistance is lower due to the copper, th he leakage flux is greater compared to model A as seen befo ore in Fig. 2.
TABLE I TORQUE AND STATOR CURRENT AMPLITUDE FO OR THE 3 MODELS

a)

Model A B C

Torque (Nm) 79.26 75.05 76.69

Sta ator current (A) 56.1 56.3 55.6

b)

1452

V.

ELECTROMAGNETIC CHARACTERISTICS AT 1470RPM

c)

In the following TABLE II, the analysis results of the three models at the same speed 1470rpm, are presented. The electromagnetic torque as well as the mechanical output power of model B is 40% greater than the model A, whereas for the model C it is 35.7%. At the same time, model B draws 21.4% more stator current and model C, 20% respectively than the model A. The power factor has increased for both models B and C, but on the other hand their efficiency has decreased, compared to the model A. The results indicate that for fixed speed, double-cage induction motors present much greater output power than double bar single cage motors, at the cost of lower efficiency and increased stator current. In order to be more precise and accurate in order to compare the three models, it is important to make one more step and examine the motors behavior under the same load operation.
TABLE II ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE 3 MODELS AT 1470RPM

d)

models Speed (rpm) Torque (Nm) Stator Current (A) Output Power (W) Cos Efficiency

A 1470 27.38 8.84 4213 0.63 0.94

B 1470 38.36 10.73 5902 0.74 0.92

C 1470 37.15 10.61 5717 0.72 0.92

e)

In Fig. 5, the spatial harmonic content of the radial component of the magnetic flux density, in the middle of the air-gap and for speed 1470rpm, is presented for the three simulated models. The relative position of the rotor and stator are the same and as a consequence the even rank harmonics do not present any difference between the three models. The even rank harmonics are indicative of the airgap asymmetry in space, for a specific relative position between rotor and stator. Furthermore, harmonic rank numbers indicative of the saturation, such as 3 and 9, have slightly increased in models B and C compared to model A, but this is easily explained if one thinks that the stator current is increased in models B and C (Table II). Moreover, the stator MMF harmonics such as 5, 7 etc as well as the rotor MMF harmonics such as 13, 15 etc have increased about 4dB in the models B and C compared to model A. In order to compare the spatial harmonic index of the three models, their THD has been calculated as an amplitude ratio. The model A presents THD equal to 44.1%, whereas for model B it is 48.7% and for model C it is 48.3%.

f) Fig. 4. Characteristics versus speed: a) Electromagnetic torque, b) Stator current amplitude, c) Power factor, d) Efficiency, e) Input power and f) Output power for the three motors.

1453

applied mechanical load has been chosen to be: firstly 30Nm and secondly 60Nm. The presented results have been hed steady-state. extracted after the models reach In Fig. 6, the electromagn netic torque versus time is presented for all models for r applied load 30Nm. The electromagnetic torque oscillat tions are similar for the three models because the load torque e is low.

a)

a)

b) )

b) c)
or a) model A, b) model B and c) Fig. 6. The electromagnetic torque fo model C, for applied mechanical load 30Nm. 3

magnetic torque versus time is Also, in Fig. 7, the electrom presented for all models for ap pplied load 60Nm. Model A and B present similar torque oscillation while Model C presents about 6% greater elect tromagnetic torque pulsation.

c)
Fig. 5. The spatial harmonic index of the radial com mponent of the magnetic flux density for the: a) Model A, b) Model B and c) Model C.

a)

VI. SIMULATION UNDER THE SAM ME LOAD ll be simulated and In this paragraph, the three models wil compared while operating under th he same applied mechanical load. The analysis, also for these cases, takes ic characteristic of into account the non-linear B-H magneti the stator and rotor iron core. Two cases are a examined. The
1454

b) )

previous case (30Nm), the sta ator current of the models B and C is greater than the mod del A. The model C presents 26% greater stator current than n the model A. Furthermore, the model A is characterized by the greater power factor, which is 15% greater than the model m C.
TABLE E III ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR APPLIED ME ECHANICAL LOAD 30NM FOR THE 3

c)
A b) model B and c) Fig. 7. The electromagnetic torque for a) model A, model C, for applied mechanical load 60Nm.

MODE ELS

Moreover, in Fig. 8 the speed versus time is presented for the two cases examined. In Fig. 8-a a, the applied load torque is 30Nm, whereas in Fig. 8-b, it is 60 Nm.

models Speed (rpm) Torque (Nm) Stator Current (A) Output Power (W) Cos Efficiency (%)

A 1470.4 4 30 5.66 4617 0.836 6 85.6

B 1480 30 5.76 4646 0.87 81.3

C 1478 30 6 4641 0.74 91.7

TABLE E IV ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR APPLIED ME ECHANICAL LOAD 60NM FOR THE 3
MODE ELS

a)

models Speed (rpm) Torque (Nm) Stator Current (A) Output Power (W) Cos Efficiency (%)

A 1423.6 6 60 11.5 8940 0.9 75.6

B 1446.5 60 11.6 9084 0.89 77.5

C 1428.3 60 14.5 8970 0.75 72.3

b)
Fig. 8. The speed versus time for the three models for the case of: a) load 0Nm. torque equal to 30Nm and b) load torque equal to 60

Finally, in Fig. 9, the spat tial harmonic content of the radial component of the air-g gap magnetic flux density is presented for the three mode els, when the applied load torque is 30Nm. The 3rd har rmonic, which indicates the saturation, has the greatest valu ue in model A. The model A presents THD equal to 43% wh hereas for model B it proved to be 49.1% and for model C it is 43.3%.

It is clear that the model B operates at t greater speed for the same applied mechanical load comp pared to the other two models. Furthermore, one may obser rve in Fig.8-b, that the model C operates at a middle speed value between the other two models. But, as the mechanic cal load decreases, the model C tends to operate at speed sim milar to the model B (Fig. 8-a). In Table III and IV, the analysis resu ults for the case of applied load torque 30Nm and 60N Nm are presented respectively. o 30Nm, both the In Table III, for applied load equal to models B and C operate at greater speed d and draw greater stator current than the model A. Moreover r, the efficiency of model C is much greater than the model A (about 6.1%). On the other hand, model's B power factor is greater than b the power the model A about 3.4%. The difference between factor and the efficiency of models B and C can be explained. Model C is characterized by y greater leakage rotor flux because of the iron area betwe een the upper and inner rotor bars. As a consequence, its po ower factor will be less than model B, which leads to improve ed efficiency. In Table IV, it is obvious that the effici iency of the model B is greater than the other two mode els. Same as the
1455

a)

VIII.
[1]

REFERENCES

[2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

b)

[7] [8] [9]

J. Park, B. Kim, J. Yang, S.B. Lee, E.J. Wiedenbrug, M. Teska and S. Han, Evaluation of the Detectability of Broken Rotor Bars for Double Squirrel Cage Rotor Induction Motors, 2010 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2010 - Proceedings , art. no. 5617950, pp. 2493-2500, 2010. Motors and generators, NEMA standards pub. MG 1-2006, 2006. H.A. Toliyat, G.B. Kliman, Handbook of electric motors, 2nd edition, Marcel Dekker, 2004. I. Boldea and S.A. Nasar, "The Induction Machines design handbook", 2nd Edition 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, pp. 23-24. J. Pedra and F. Corcoles, Estimation of Induction Motor DoubleCage Model Parameters From Manufacturer Data, IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp 310-317, June 2004. S. Williamson and C.I. McClay, Optimization of the Geometry of Closed Rotor Slots for Cage Induction Motors, IEEE Trans. on Industry Applications, Vol. 32, No. 3, May/June 1996 T.A. Lipo, "Introduction to AC machine design", Wisconsin Power Electronics Research Center, University of Wisconsin, 2004. ] M.G. Say, "The performance and design of alternating current machines", Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons LTD., London, 1955. M.A. Saidel, M.C.E.S. Ramos and S.S. Alves, Assessment and Optimization of Induction Electric Motors Aiming Energy Efficiency in Industrial Applications, 19th International Conference on Electrical Machines, ICEM 2010, Rome, Italy, 6-8 Sep. 2010.

IX. BIOGRAPHIES
Konstantinos N. Gyftakis was born in Patras, Greece, in May 1984. He received the diploma in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Patras, Patras, Greece in 2010. He is a PhD candidate in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras. His research activities are in FEM design, fault diagnosis and optimization of electrical machines. He is an IEEE member, member of IEEE PES and Magnetics Society, member of the HELIEV (Hellenic Institute of Electric Vehicles) and finally member of the Technical Chamber of Greece. (Email: kosgyftak@upatras.gr) Dimitrios Athanasopoulos was born in Patras, Greece in November 1989. He is a senior undergraduate student at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras, Greece. Currently, he pursues his diploma thesis focusing on FEM design and electromagnetic analysis of double-cage induction motors. (E-mail: athanas_3@yahoo.gr) Joya C. Kappatou was born in Argostoli, Greece. She received the diploma in Electrical Engineering from the University of Patras, Patras, Greece and the PhD from the same University in 1991 in the field of Electrical machines and Power Electronics. She is Assistant Professor in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department of the University of Patras. Her teaching and research activities are in electrical machines, power electronics, modeling and design using FEM, faults diagnosis in electrical machines. (University of Patras, Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, 26500 RionPatras, Greece, Tel: +30 2610/996413, Fax: +30 2610/997362, E-mail: joya@ece.upatras.gr)

c)
Fig. 9. The spatial harmonic index of the radial component of the magnetic flux density for the: a) Model A, b) Model B and c) Model C, when 30Nm mechanical load is applied.

VII.

CONCLUSION

In this paper, 3 different models of double cage induction motors have been studied using FEM analysis. Since the models B and C have two different rotor cages, their manufacturing cost will be greater than model A. On the other hand, the comparison between their characteristics reveals that the use of different materials for the upper and inner rotor bars presents several advantages compared to a single aluminum double bar induction motor. The comparison of the 3 motors for the same speed operation showed that: the models B and C present much greater output power as well as greater power factor and almost the same efficiency, than the model A. The simulation results under the same mechanical load for the three motors indicated that: for high load operation model B presented 2% greater efficiency than the model A, while for low load operation the model C was characterized by 6.1% greater efficiency than the model A. For both models B and C, the advantage of greater efficiency came at the cost of lower power factor and slightly greater stator current. Finally, depending on the specific application criteria, the optimization of the design of models B and C could lead to even better characteristics, and this is considered as promising future work.

1456
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)