Dynamic and pole-zero analysis of self-excited induction generator

using a novel model with iron losses

Mateo Baic

, Dinko Vukadinovic , Goran Petrovic
University of Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, R. Bokovic a 32, 21000 Split, Croatia
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 18 May 2011
Received in revised form23 September 2011
Accepted 10 March 2012
Keywords:
Self-excited induction generator
Iron losses
Dynamic model
Pole-zero analysis
Efciency
a b s t r a c t
In this paper, we propose and analyze a novel self-excited induction generator (SEIG) dynamic model
with iron losses. The iron losses are represented by means of an equivalent iron loss resistance connected
in parallel with the stator inductance. Moreover, the iron loss resistance is modeled as variable with
respect to both synchronous frequency and magnetizing ux, whereas the magnetizing ux inuence
is expressed by means of the corresponding iron loss current. We determined this variation by perform-
ing a series of standard no-load tests over a wide range of frequencies and using sinusoidal supply. In
order to validate the performance of the proposed model, we carried out a number of simulations and
experiments. The results obtained by the proposed model are compared with the results obtained by
other commonly used SEIG models, as well as with the results obtained by measurement. All SEIG models
were built in the MATLAB/Simulink environment. It is shown that, of all the considered models, the pro-
posed model is the best choice for a comprehensive SEIG analysis because of the high accuracy, high
numerical stability and low computational demands. For the same reasons, the proposed model is also
a very good candidate for control system design. Finally, the pole-zero maps of two SEIG models and
the corresponding pole-zero analysis are given for the rst time in this paper.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Induction machines, especially squirrel cage induction motors,
are the most used electric machines in todays industry. However,
in recent years, induction generators have signicantly gained in
importance due to the fact that they have several advantages over
other types of electric generators, such as the conventional
synchronous generator [1]. Furthermore, unlike the conventional
synchronous generator, induction generators have a capability to
self-excite, i.e. to excite without an external reactive power source,
which has led to their increased application in stand-alone power
generating systems, where reactive power from the grid is not
available. In such applications, induction generators are usually ex-
cited by means of three AC capacitors (capacitor bank), connected
across its stator terminals, and are called self-excited induction
generators (SEIGs). Although the principle of self-excitation has
been known since the 1930s [2,3], until recently it was not possible
to effectively utilize it. Today, SEIGs are particularly preferred in
power generating systems that employ wind or hydro energy, of
power up to 15 kW [4], and are gaining in popularity. This is partly
because renewable energy systems are receiving much attention
worldwide due to the rapid exploitation of fossil fuels and associ-
ated environmental pollution [58]. The main disadvantage of SEI-
Gs is that their output frequency and voltage, when unregulated,
are highly dependent on the speed of the prime mover, value of
the excitation capacitor, machines parameters and both value
and power factor of the load impedance.
At a given rotor speed it is possible to dene a minimum capac-
itance value needed for the onset of self-excitation and vice versa
[2,9]. Hence, when a SEIG is driven by a prime mover at a certain
speed and a suitable capacitance is connected across its stator
terminals, the generated voltage builds up through the process of
self-excitation until it nally settles at a certain value. This value
is, for given speed and capacitance, mainly determined by the mag-
netic saturation, but it is also determined by other factors, such as
copper and iron losses. These losses have the effect of reducing
both magnitude and frequency of the generated voltage, in propor-
tion to their value, and can be, in a way, considered as an additional
load. In general, connecting a load to a SEIG causes a reduction in
generated voltage, even when the rotor speed is kept constant. In
SEIG models, the copper losses, both stator and rotor, are usually
represented by means of the corresponding equivalent resistance,
whereas the iron losses are usually completely omitted for the sake
of convenience. However, even in the machines with low amount
of iron losses, their impact is not negligibly small. Moreover,
neglecting the iron losses of an induction machine is also reported
0142-0615/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2012.03.003

Corresponding author. Tel.: +385 21305615; fax: +385 21305776.

E-mail addresses: mabasic@fesb.hr (M. Baic ), dvukad@fesb.hr (D. Vukadinovic ),
goran.petrovic@fesb.hr (G. Petrovic ).
Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Electrical Power and Energy Systems
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ i j epes
to cause detuning within a corresponding vector control system
[10]. In literature, in cases when the iron losses are included in
an induction machine model, they are usually represented by
means of an equivalent iron loss resistance whose value is either
constant [11,12] or linearly dependent on the air-gap voltage
[13,14], whereas in the actual machine, the iron losses vary with
both magnetizing ux and synchronous frequency [15]. Hence, to
obtain a more accurate assessment of the performance of the
induction machine it is important to consider these inuences. It
is especially important to do so when modeling a SEIG because
of the variable ux levels, loads and speeds they work with. Since
inclusion of the iron losses inevitably complicates the SEIG model,
it needs to be carried out in a way that meets the requirements of
both accuracy and simplicity.
In this paper, we propose and analyze a novel dynamic SEIG
model in which the iron loss resistance is represented as variable
with respect to both magnetizing ux and synchronous frequency
(two-dimensional parameter). Unlike the most common approach
in which the iron loss resistance is placed in parallel with the mag-
netizing inductance (hereafter: the parallel model), we propose
placing the iron loss resistance in parallel with the stator induc-
tance. In this way, the parallel iron loss conguration is retained,
thus ensuring better accuracy in comparison with series iron loss
congurations over a wider speed range [16]. In addition, the con-
guration of the conventional SEIG model equations, in which the
iron losses are completely omitted, is retained as well, thus ensur-
ing numerical advantages over the parallel model and easy transi-
tion between the conventional and proposed model equations. We
validated the proposed model both on simulation level and
through comparison with experimentally obtained results. On
the simulation level, the proposed model is validated through com-
parison with both conventional and parallel SEIG model. The need
for two-dimensional representation of the iron loss resistance is
also brought into question and compared with two more common
representations. To clarify the experimentally obtained results,
contribution of the iron losses in the SEIGs overall losses is ana-
lyzed by using the proposed model. Finally, we conducted the
pole-zero analysis of the SEIG, thus providing a new and interest-
ing perspective on SEIG related phenomena. Pole-zero maps of
both conventional and proposed model and the analysis of changes
in the position of dominant poles during both magnetization and
loading are given. In addition, this kind of analysis is, to our best
knowledge, conducted for the rst time in this paper.
2. Conventional self-excited induction generator model
Mathematical equations of the conventional SEIG model are de-
rived by applying the following modications to the well known
equations of the conventional induction motor model:
1. The stator voltage term, u
s
, is either shifted to the right side
of the stator voltage equation or its sign is changed (the
stator voltage has the character of the induced voltage).
2. The initial conditions, i.e. the residual magnetizing ux in
the rotor core and initial voltage across the excitation capac-
itor, are included.
3. If a resistive load is connected in parallel with the excitation
capacitor, two additional voltage and current equations are
added.
Nomenclature
C excitation capacitance
i
ca
and i
cb
a-axis and b-axis capacitor current components,
respectively
i
Lsa
and i
Lsb
a-axis and b-axis stator inductance current compo-
nents, respectively
i
La
and i
Lb
a-axis and b-axis load current components, respec-
tively
i
ma
and i
mb
a-axis and b-axis magnetizing current components,
respectively
I
o
and I
Rmo
total no-load current and no-load iron loss current,
respectively
i
Rma
and i
Rmb
a-axis and b-axis iron loss current components,
respectively
i
ra
and i
rb
a-axis and b-axis rotor current components, respec-
tively
i
sTa
and i
sTb
a-axis and b-axis Thevenins equivalent stator cur-
rent components, respectively
i
sa
and i
sb
a-axis and b-axis stator current components, respec-
tively
K
ra
and K
rb
a-axis and b-axis components of the initially induced
voltage due to residual rotor ux linkage, respectively
L
m
and X
m
magnetizing inductance and magnetizing reactance,
respectively
L
r
= L
rr
+ L
m
rotor inductance
L
rr
rotor leakage inductance
L
s
= L
sr
+ L
m
stator inductance
L
sr
and X
sr
stator leakage inductance and stator leakage reac-
tance, respectively
n mechanical speed in r/min
p number of machine pole pairs
P
Fe
no-load iron losses
Q
o
no-load reactive power
R
L
load resistance
R
m
iron loss resistance
R
r
rotor resistance
R
s
stator resistance
R
sT
Thevenins equivalent stator resistance
s Laplace operator
T
e
electromagnetic torque
u
ca
and u
cb
a-axis and b-axis capacitor voltage components,
respectively
u
La
and u
Lb
a-axis and b-axis load voltage components, respec-
tively
u
sTa
and u
sTb
a-axis and b-axis Thevenins equivalent stator volt-
age components, respectively
u
sa
and u
sb
a-axis and b-axis stator voltage components, respec-
tively
u
sao
and u
sbo
a-axis and b-axis components of the initial voltage
across the excitation capacitor, respectively
X
s
= X
sr
+ X
m
stator reactance
g efciency factor
w
ra
and w
rb
a-axis and b-axis rotor ux linkage components,
respectively
w
rao
and w
rbo
a-axis and b-axis residual rotor ux linkage com-
ponents, respectively
w
sa
and w
sb
a-axis and b-axis stator ux linkage components,
respectively
x
r
and x
e
rotor angular speed and synchronous angular speed in
electrical rad/s, respectively
106 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
The conventional SEIG model is given by the following set of
equations in the stationary, ab, reference frame:
u
sa
R
s
i
sa

dw
sa
dt
; u
sb
R
s
i
sb

dw
sb
dt
1
0 R
r
i
ra

dw
ra
dt
x
r
w
rb
; 0 R
r
i
rb

dw
rb
dt
x
r
w
ra
2
w
sa
L
sr
i
sa
L
m
i
ma
; w
sb
L
sr
i
sb
L
m
i
mb
3
w
ra
L
rr
i
ra
L
m
i
ma
w
rbo
; w
rb
L
rr
i
rb
L
m
i
mb
w
rao
4
i
ma
i
sa
i
ra
; i
mb
i
sb
i
rb
5
T
e

3
2
p
L
m
L
r
w
ra
i
sb
w
rb
i
sa
6
u
ca
u
sa

1
C
Z
t
0
i
ca
dt u
sao
; u
cb
u
sb

1
C
Z
t
0
i
cb
dt u
sbo
7
u
La
u
sa
R
L
i
La
; u
Lb
u
sb
R
L
i
Lb
8
i
sa
i
La
i
ca
; i
sb
i
Lb
i
cb
9
From Eqs. (1)(9), the conventional SEIG equivalent circuit in the
stationary reference frame, shown in Fig. 1, is obtained.
In Fig. 1, the load is connected across the capacitor through the
switch S, thus enabling a SEIG to be started at no load and the load
to be connected only after the steady state is reached. Since the
magnetic saturation is the key factor for buildup and stabilization
of the generated voltage, it must be accounted for. In Fig. 1, this is
done by representing the magnetizing inductance as a variable
parameter, as explained in Section 4.2.
Note that within the conventional SEIG model, the iron losses
are completely omitted. Inclusion of the iron losses in the machine
model results in a more accurate assessment of the actual machine,
but also inevitably complicates the corresponding model. In this
paper, we propose a new way of modeling the SEIG iron losses that
meets the requirements of simplicity and accuracy.
3. Proposed self-excited induction generator model
The iron losses of an induction machine are most often modeled
by means of the equivalent iron loss resistance, R
m
, connected in
parallel with the magnetizing inductance, L
m
. In comparison with
the model in which the iron loss resistance is connected in series
with the magnetizing inductance (hereafter: the series model),
the parallel model provides better estimation of the iron losses in
a wider range of rotor speeds. Regardless of which model is used,
the power loss on the equivalent iron loss resistance should always
be equal to total iron losses in the induction machine.
Equations for the parallel model can be derived from Eqs. (1)
(9) and are given in [17]. Consequently, by using Laplace transform,
four 2nd order differential equations describing the stator and ro-
tor currents can be derived. These equations are given in Appendix
A. However, solving four 2nd order differential equations simulta-
neously implies high computational demands and may cause
numerical stability issues. This presents a major drawback of the
parallel model and asks for a better arrangement.
In this paper, a novel approach for modeling the SEIG iron losses
is proposed. The proposed equivalent circuit of the SEIG is shown
in Fig. 2.
Inthe proposedmodel, the ironloss resistance is connectedinpar-
allel with the stator inductance (L
sr
and L
m
). In this way, the parallel
iron loss conguration is retained and the stator current is equiva-
lently separated into two currents: the iron loss current, i
Rm
, and
the stator inductance current, i
Ls
. Although such a representation of
the iron losses has been already proposed and considered for induc-
tionmotors in[18,19], this is, toour best knowledge, therst timeit is
considered for induction generators and, particularly, for SEIGs.
By substituting the dashed area in Fig. 2 with Thevenins equiv-
alents, the equivalent circuit shown in Fig. 3 is obtained. Note that
the conguration of the proposed equivalent circuit is the same as
of the conventional model. In addition, the iron loss resistance is
represented as a variable parameter, as explained in Section 4.1,
and included within the new stator resistance, R
sT
.
The Thevenins equivalents for stator voltages/currents and sta-
tor resistance are calculated as follows:
R
sT
R
s
jjR
m

R
s
R
m
R
s
R
m
10
u
sTa
u
sa
R
m
R
s
R
m
; u
sTb
u
sb
R
m
R
s
R
m
11
i
sTa
i
sa
R
s
R
m
R
m

u
sa
R
m
; i
sTb
i
sb
R
s
R
m
R
m

u
sb
R
m
12
Eqs. (1)(9), given for the conventional model, are also valid for
the proposed model, providing that the following substitutions are
made:
R
s
!R
sT
u
sa
!u
sTa
; u
sb
!u
sTb
i
sa
!i
sTa
; i
sb
!i
sTb
13
Fig. 1. Conventional SEIG equivalent circuit in stationary reference frame: (a) a-
axis and (b) b-axis.
Fig. 2. Proposed SEIG equivalent circuit (iron loss resistance connected in parallel
with stator inductance): (a) a-axis and (b) b-axis.
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 107
Hence, the conguration of the conventional model equations is
also retained within the proposed model. More importantly, the
1st order of the current differential equations is retained, thus
ensuring lower computational demands and higher numerical sta-
bility in comparison with the parallel model.
From the proposed model equations, by using Laplace trans-
form, the following 1st order differential equations are derived:
si
sTa

1
rL
s
L
r
L
2
m
x
r
i
sTb
L
r
R
sT
i
sTa
L
m
x
r
L
r
i
rb
L
m
R
r
i
ra
L
r
u
sTa
L
m
K
ra
14
si
sTb

1
rL
s
L
r
L
r
R
sT
i
sTb
L
2
m
x
r
i
sTa
L
m
R
r
i
rb
L
m
x
r
L
r
i
ra
L
r
u
sTb
L
m
K
rb
15
si
ra

1
rL
s
L
r
L
s
x
r
L
m
i
sTb
L
m
R
sT
i
sTa
L
s
x
r
L
r
i
rb
L
s
R
r
i
ra
L
m
u
sTa
L
s
K
ra
16
si
rb

1
rL
s
L
r
L
m
R
sT
i
sTb
L
s
x
r
L
m
i
sTa
L
s
R
r
i
rb
L
s
x
r
L
r
i
ra
L
m
u
sTb
L
s
K
rb
17
By comparison with the conventional model, the only addi-
tional datum required in realization of the proposed or the parallel
model is the value of the equivalent iron loss resistance. When an
induction machine is subject to signicant changes in load, magne-
tizing ux and speed during operation, as is generally the case with
SEIGs, the iron loss resistance should be, for the sake of accuracy,
represented as variable with respect to both synchronous fre-
quency and magnetizing ux. This variation can be determined
experimentally by performing a series of standard no-load tests
over a wide range of frequencies, as explained in Section 4.1.
4. Experimental determination of iron loss resistance and
magnetizing inductance characteristics
4.1. Determination of iron loss resistance characteristics
We identied the iron losses experimentally. In order to provide
sinusoidal supply at the induction machine terminals, we used a
synchronous generator driven by a DC motor. The measured data
were obtained by means of both Fluke 435 power quality analyzer
and conventional analog instruments. Within the performed tests,
we encompassed frequencies from 10 Hz to 60 Hz. During testing,
the stator leakage inductance and copper losses were considered
constant. In general, the iron losses found from no-load testing
may be used for assessing performance during loading when an
induction machine is driven up to rated load. However, it has to
be noted that only the stator component of the total iron losses
(stator core losses) can be determined from no-load testing.
In this paper, the magnetizing ux inuence on the iron losses is
expressed by means of the corresponding iron loss current, i
Rm
. We
used the procedure described in [15] to identify the equivalent iron
loss resistance and magnetizing reactance from the no-load mea-
sured data, taking into account the mechanical losses as well.
The expressions for calculating the iron loss resistance of the par-
allel and the proposed model, respectively, are given by
R
m

Q
o
3I
2
o
X
sr

2
P
2
Fe
3I
2
o
P
Fe
18
R
m

Q
2
o
P
2
Fe
3I
2
o
P
Fe
19
The corresponding iron loss currents are determined from
I
Rmo
I
o
X
m

R
2
m
X
2
m
q 20
I
Rmo
I
o
X
m
X
sr

R
2
m
X
m
X
sr

2
q I
o
X
s

R
2
m
X
2
s
q 21
All quantities on the right hand side of Eqs. (18) and (19) are deter-
mined from the standard no-load tests. Hence, the iron loss charac-
teristics for both parallel and proposed model can now be obtained
by solving Eqs. (18)(21) for different values of measured no-load
Fig. 3. Proposed SEIG circuit with Thevenins equivalents: (a) a-axis and (b) b-axis.
Fig. 4. Measured equivalent iron loss resistance characteristics: (a) proposed model and (b) parallel model.
108 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
quantities and the corresponding magnetizing reactance [15], in the
frequency range of interest. These characteristics are shown in Fig. 4.
From Fig. 4, it is evident that the value of the iron loss resistance
signicantly depends on both synchronous frequency and iron loss
current, as well as on its position in the equivalent circuit. For some
of the characteristics (e.g. at 20 Hz, 35 Hz and 50 Hz), there is not a
smooth change in the iron loss resistance value at low iron loss
current values (i
Rm
< 0.15 A), due to measurement deviations.
However, since these deviations are only noted to the left of the
peak of the iron loss characteristic, which can be characterized as
the unstable area of the characteristic where no self-excitation
can occur (similar as for the magnetizing inductance characteris-
tic), the deviations are of no practical signicance for the analysis
conducted in this paper.
4.2. Determination of magnetizing inductance characteristics
When modeling a SEIG, inclusion of the magnetic saturation is
mandatory. This is usually done by representing the magnetizing
inductance as variable with respect to the magnetizing current
[17,2022]. We determined this variation experimentally, within
the same set of no-load tests as in Section 4.1. Fig. 5 shows the
measured magnetizing inductance characteristics for both pro-
posed and parallel model, obtained at 50 Hz. With the given scale,
the characteristics are overlapping. Hence, the same characteristic
can be used for both models and for all operating frequencies, since
the magnetizing inductance is frequency independent when it is
expressed as a function of the magnetizing current [17].
The magnetizing inductance characteristic that is convenient for
use in simulations is obtained by means of interpolationextrapola-
tion of the measured values (look-up table) and by approximating
the unsaturated part of the characteristic (I
m
6 1.437 A) with the
constant value of 0.4058 H. This approximation is done due to
numerical stability issues that otherwise may occur during self-
excitation. However, the approximation is well justied since the
steady-state operating point of the SEIGis always located in the sat-
urated part of the characteristic (I
m
> 1.437 A).
5. Simulation and experimental results
In order to validate the proposed model, its performance is ana-
lyzed under various operating conditions in the MATLAB/Simulink
environment. The results obtained by the proposed model are
compared with the results obtained by both conventional and par-
allel model. In simulations, the iron loss resistance is modeled
according to the characteristics shown in Fig. 4. In addition, the
proposed two-dimensional representation of the iron losses is
compared on the simulation level with two other, more common
approaches. Finally, the proposed model is experimentally veried
and the obtained results are discussed in detail.
Parameters of the induction machine used in this investigation
are given in Appendix B.
5.1. Proposed Simulink model of a self-excited induction generator
The proposed Simulink model of a SEIG is shown in Fig. 6.
As it can be seen from Fig. 6, the inputs are x
r
, K
ra
, K
rb
, u
sao
, u
sbo
,
R
L
and C, whereas the outputs are u
sa
, u
sb
, i
sa
, i
sb
, i
ra,
i
rb
and T
e
. The
inputs are implemented by means of blocks placed outside of the
shown subsystem block. Namely, the capacitance and the initial
voltages are implemented as constant values, whereas the load is
implemented by means of a step function block. The rotor speed
is implemented by means of either constant value or signal builder
block. The signal builder block is used for implementation of the
measured speed signal, as explained in Section 5.4.
The synchronous angular frequency is obtained by the following
expression [13]:
x
e

w
sa
u
sTb
R
s
i
sTb
w
sb
u
sTa
R
s
i
sTa

w
2
sa
w
2
sb
22
In this way, numerical instability issues that may occur due to
derivation of the related space angle, e.g. the stator voltage space
vector angle, are avoided.
Gray colored blocks in Fig. 6 represent Eqs. (6), (10)(12), (14)
(17), and 22, and also algorithms for the magnetizing inductance
and iron loss resistance calculation. Value of the equivalent iron
loss resistance is obtained as the look-up table output, whereas
values of the synchronous frequency and the iron loss current
are used as the inputs.
Fig. 5. Measured magnetizing inductance characteristics.
Fig. 6. Proposed SEIG model in Simulink (SEIG subsystem block).
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 109
The approximate minimum capacitance value required for the
onset of self-excitation at no-load conditions, for a given rotor
speed, can be calculated as [13,23]:
C
min

1
x
2
r
L
n
m
23
However, using the minimum capacitance value is not recom-
mended because any change in load or rotor speed may result in
loss of excitation. On the other hand, due to economic and technical
reasons, use of excessive capacitance values is also not recom-
mended. Hence, we used about 25% overestimated capacitance val-
ues (C 1.25C
min
).
5.2. Simulation results
We carried out simulations of the following two operating
regimes:
1. The SEIG is magnetized under no load and, at t = 3 s, the
SEIG is loaded with the resistive load of 220 X. The rotor
speed is xed at 1200 r/min and the capacitance value is
xed at 50 lF.
2. The SEIG is magnetized under no load and, at t = 3 s, the
SEIG is loaded with the resistive load of 220 X. The rotor
speed is xed at 600 r/min and the capacitance value is xed
at 200 lF.
In both simulations, the initial voltages across the capacitors are
xed at 5 V, whereas the initial voltages due to residual rotor ux
linkages are xed at 0 V.
The results obtained from running the rst simulation are
shown in Figs. 710. Space vector magnitudes of the stator voltage
and stator current are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively.
Fig. 7 shows that due to inclusion of the iron losses, the self-
excitation process is extended for about 0.2 s and the no-load sta-
tor voltage magnitude is reduced for about 2.8 V. The maximum
relative steady-state difference between the stator voltage space
vector magnitudes occurred while the SEIG is loaded. However,
the maximum noted difference is within 5%, which can be consid-
ered negligible. In addition, at t = 3 s, the stator voltage space vec-
tor magnitudes are decreased due to loading for about 10%. Similar
conclusions can be drawn for the stator currents (Fig. 8).
More signicant impact of the iron losses can be seen in Fig. 9.
The rotor current increase can be explained as follows: increase
of the overall losses in the machine, due to iron losses, causes an
increase in the slip value, which, in turn, leads to reduced value
of the equivalent steady-state rotor resistance, R
r
/s, so an increase
in the rotor current value is obtained. The maximum relative stea-
dy-state difference between the rotor current space vector magni-
tudes is noted during no load. This is because at no-load conditions
iron losses have a more dominant contribution in the overall SEIG
losses than when a SEIG is loaded. However, since the rotor current
squared has a signicantly lower value than the stator current
squared and stator and rotor resistances have similar values, rotor
losses have a signicantly smaller contribution in the machines
overall losses than the stator losses.
The magnetizing inductance and the iron loss resistance are
shown in Fig. 10a and b, respectively.
Obtained torque values are: 2.70 Nm conventional model,
3.24 Nm parallel model and 3.19 Nm proposed model. The tor-
que values obtained by the proposed and parallel model are some-
Fig. 7. Stator voltage space vector magnitudes: (a) magnetization and (b) loading.
Fig. 8. Stator current space vector magnitudes: (a) magnetization and (b) loading.
110 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
what higher due to higher mechanical input power demand,
caused by the iron losses.
Finally, the efciency is calculated as the ratio between the
electrical output power and the mechanical input power so the
following values are obtained: 83.65% conventional model,
67.18% parallel model and 67.47% proposed model. The ob-
tained efciency deteriorations of 16.47% parallel model and
16.18% proposed model, in comparison with the conventional
model, are due to iron losses only.
Similar results were obtained from running the second simula-
tion. Namely, the maximum noted relative steady-state differences
between the stator voltage/current space vector magnitudes,
although slightly higher than in the rst simulation, were still all
within 5%. Because the speed used in the second simulation was
half the speed used in the rst simulation, value of the generated
voltage was approximately half the value of the generated voltage
obtained in the rst simulation (in both simulations C 1.25C
min
).
The obtained torque values were also somewhat lower than in
the rst simulation, namely: 1.79 Nm conventional model,
2.25 Nm parallel model and 2.22 Nm proposed model.
Finally, the obtained efciency values were: 60.48% conven-
tional model, 45.16% parallel model and 45.29% proposed model.
In general, when a SEIG is considered, including the iron losses
in a model results in lower generated voltage and output power
than for the case they are neglected. On the other hand, neglecting
the iron losses results in lower input power and, therefore, in high-
er overall efciency.
5.3. Two-dimensional versus one-dimensional representations of iron
loss resistance
Based on the analysis conducted so far, the proposed model
proved to be quite appropriate for the SEIG analysis. Still, the need
Fig. 9. Rotor current space vector magnitudes: (a) magnetization and (b) loading.
Fig. 12. Mechanical input power: (a) magnetization and (b) loading.
Fig. 10. Magnetizing inductance (a) and iron loss resistance (b).
Fig. 11. Equivalent iron loss resistance.
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 111
for the proposed two-dimensional representation of the iron loss
resistance can be brought into question. In literature, the iron loss
resistance is most often represented as constant, as in [11,12], or
linearly dependent on the air-gap voltage, as in [13,14]. To conrm
the validity of the proposed approach, we compared it on the sim-
ulation level with these more common approaches. For this pur-
pose, we had to modify the proposed model as follows:
(a) the proposed iron loss resistance is replaced with the con-
stant value resistance R
m
= 1070 X, and
(b) the proposed iron loss resistance is replaced with the line-
arly dependent resistance R
m
= U
Rm
+ 932.1.
Simulation results shown in Figs. 11 and 12 are obtained for the
operating regime described in Section 5.2 (2nd operating regime).
Since the results obtained for the constant value iron loss resis-
tance differ very slightly from those obtained for the linearly
dependent iron loss resistance (D
max
1.5%), due to similar iron
loss resistance values (Fig. 11), only the results obtained for the
constant R
m
, along with the results obtained for the proposed R
m
,
are shown in Fig. 12.
The error in the obtained generated voltage/current introduced
by the constant R
m
is negligible (under 5%). However, Fig. 12 shows
that it introduces signicant error in calculation of the input power
and, consequently, efciency. For this case, the relative difference
of 7.74% is noted between the efciencies obtained for the constant
R
m
and the proposed R
m
(output power difference 4.3%). Hence,
when a SEIG is analyzed for the overall efciency and/or input
power demand, it is advisable, if not mandatory, to use the pro-
posed iron loss representation.
5.4. Experimental verication of the proposed model
For the SEIG experimental setup we used a DC motor as the
induction generator prime mover. DC motor speed was controlled
by means of SIMOREG DC-MASTER converter, type 6RA7031, man-
ufactured by Siemens [24]. All of the measured quantities were col-
lected by means of the digital signal processing (dSpace DS1104
microcontroller board).
First, we carried out the following two experiments:
1. The rotor speed is held constant at 1200 r/min and, at t = 4 s,
the SEIG is loaded with the resistive load R
L
= 220 X.
2. The rotor speed is held constant at 1200 r/min and, at t = 4 s,
the SEIG is loaded with the resistive load R
L
= 110 X.
In both experiments, we used three star-connected capacitors
with the capacitance value of 50 lF.
We also carried out simulations of these operating regimes by
using all three models: the conventional, the parallel and the pro-
posed. In addition, we recreated and employed the measured speed
signal within the simulations by means of a signal builder block, as
mentioned in Section 5.1. In this way, unnecessary modeling of the
prime mover and related speed control system is avoided and, at
the same time, qualitative dynamic analysis and comparison with
the experimental results during changes in load and speed is
ensured.
The results obtained from running the rst experiment, along
with the simulation results, are shown in Figs. 1315. However,
the results obtained by the parallel model are not shown on the g-
ures, but are given in Table 1.
As it can be seen from Fig. 13, connecting the load at the stator
terminals resulted in 3.71% relative transient drop of the measured
speed, which, in turn, caused corresponding transient drops of the
generated voltage/current and output power, both simulated and
measured. In Fig. 14a and b, there is a disagreement between the
Table 1
Maximum relative errors obtained in steady state 1st experiment.
U
s
(%) I
s
(%) P
e
(%) P
m
(%) g (%)
Conventional model 3.46 2.75 2.80 23.28 21.23
Parallel model 1.42 0.55 1.21 8.15 4.72
Proposed model 0.89 0.16 0.28 10.17 4.72
Table 2
Maximum relative errors obtained in steady state 2nd experiment.
U
s
(%) I
s
(%) P
e
(%) P
m
(%) g (%)
Conventional model 9.22 8.13 13.65 13.65 17.53
Parallel model 2.29 1.25 0.30 9.19 6.73
Proposed model 1.40 3.11 7.71 15.69 7.18
Fig. 15. Electrical output power.
Fig. 13. Measured rotor speed.
Fig. 14. Space vector magnitudes of stator voltage (a) and stator current (b).
112 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
measured and simulated voltages and currents, respectively. How-
ever, the disagreement is evidently smaller for the proposed mod-
el, especially for the current. From Fig. 15 it can be seen that the
output power obtained by the proposed model corresponds very
closely to the measured output power. The maximum steady-state
differences/errors between the simulated and measured values oc-
curred while the SEIG was loaded and are given in Table 1.
From the presented results, it is evident that the results ob-
tained by both proposed and parallel model are in closer agree-
ment with the experimental results, compared to the results
obtained by the conventional model. Still, as far as the generated
voltage/current and output power are concerned, errors introduced
by the conventional model can be considered negligible. From this,
one could conclude that the conventional model can provide suf-
ciently accurate assessment of the SEIGs performance. However,
signicantly higher errors arise when the conventional model is
used for the input power and/or efciency analysis. When either
proposed or parallel model are used, these errors are signicantly
reduced, as it can be seen from Table 1.
The obtained efciency values are: 62.46% measured, 67.18%
parallel model, 67.18% proposed model and 83.69% conven-
tional model.
The results obtained from running the second experiment are
given in Table 2. In this case, similar can be concluded considering
the efciency errors as in the rst experiment, giving priority to
both proposed and parallel model before the conventional model.
However, if we analyze the generated voltage/current and output
power, it turns out that the errors introduced by the conventional
model are signicantly higher than in the rst experiment and are
no longer negligible, whereas the errors introduced by the pro-
posed model, and especially by the parallel model, can still be con-
sidered negligible. The errors introduced by the conventional
model are increased in comparison with the rst experiment due
to increase in load (decrease in load resistance value).
The obtained efciency values are: 68.76% measured, 75.49%
parallel model, 75.94% proposed model and 86.29% conven-
tional model.
We carried out several additional experiments to determine
how the variations of rotor speed and load affect the efciency
and power. Fig. 16 shows the efciency variation with rotor speed
for two different capacitance values. The results are obtained for
the resistive load of 220 X.
For the considered speed range, the efciency values obtained
by the proposed model differ very slightly from the ones obtained
by the parallel model and are both in much closer agreement with
the measured efciency values, compared to the values obtained
by the conventional model. Regardless of the model, there is no
signicant variation in efciency for the considered speed range.
These conclusions apply for both 50 lF and 40 lF capacitance
values.
As it can be seen from Fig. 17, large efciency errors introduced
by the conventional model are due to inaccurate input power
provided by this model. This is particularly emphasized at no load
because then the iron losses have a more dominant share in the
overall SEIG losses than when a SEIG is loaded. On the other hand,
signicantly more accurate assessment of the actual input power is
achieved when either the proposed or parallel model is used.
Fig. 18 shows the efciency variation with load for constant
speed and capacitance values.
Fig. 16. Efciency variation with speed (R
L
= 220 X): (a) C = 50 lF and (b) C = 40 lF.
Fig. 17. Mechanical input power variation with speed (C = 50 lF): (a) no load and
(b) R
L
= 220 X.
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 113
Again, the efciency obtained by both proposed and parallel
model corresponds signicantly better to the actual efciency
compared to the one obtained by the conventional model. In this
case, an increase in efciency with increasing load (decreasing load
resistance value) is noted.
Finally, the electrical output power variation with load, for con-
stant speed and capacitance values, is shown in Fig. 19.
As far as the accuracy of the actual output power assessment is
considered, the parallel model is the best choice. At the same time,
the results obtained by the conventional model are the least accu-
rate ones. Deciencies of the conventional model are particularly
emphasized at lower load resistance values. As for the proposed
model, accuracy of the output power obtained for load values of
220 Xand 154 X is very good and similar to the one of the parallel
model, whereas for the load value of 110 X, the accuracy is re-
duced. Still, despite the reduced accuracy, the proposed model
gives satisfactory and signicantly better results than the conven-
tional model. Also, it has to be noted that the load value of 110 Xis
close to the value that would cause a loss of excitation for the con-
sidered speed and capacitance values, as shown in Section 6.
The proposed SEIG model, although slightly less accurate than
the parallel model, provides high numerical stability and low com-
putational demands, which is benecial in conducting the SEIG
analysis and especially in designing the control system and devel-
oping the corresponding control algorithm because of the implied
lower hardware and software requirements and, thus, lower costs.
Bearing in mind all the above considerations, the proposed model
appears to be the best candidate for both comprehensive SEIG
analysis and control system design.
All the SEIG models analyzed in this paper introduce certain er-
rors in assessment of the actual machines performance. In partic-
ular, the conventional model introduces signicant errors in
assessment of both efciency and mechanical power compared
to the other two models. To a smaller extent, the errors in the con-
ventional model are introduced due to neglecting of the additional
losses in the actual machine, such as stray load losses and friction
and windage losses. However, the errors are, to a much larger ex-
tent, introduced due to neglecting of the iron losses. As for the er-
rors introduced by the other two models, they can be almost
exclusively related to the additional losses. Moreover, additional
errors can be introduced due to a change in machines parameters
during operation and also due to wrongly determined parameters.
For all the operating regimes considered in this paper, both pro-
posed and parallel model provided much lower efciency values
compared to the ones obtained by the conventional model, which
can only be related to the signicant amount of the iron losses. In
fact, the iron losses obtained in this paper are so excessive that
they are clearly larger than the copper losses. Since induction ma-
chines are known as highly efcient machines with relatively low
amount of iron losses (much lower than the copper losses), these
results need to be claried, as it is done in Section 5.5.
5.5. Analysis of iron losses contribution
For the purpose of clarication of the results presented in Sec-
tion 5.4 as well as for determination of the iron losses contribution
in the overall losses, several factors affecting the iron losses of a
SEIG have to be considered as follows:
5.5.1. Magnetic saturation
Iron losses of the induction machine are highly dependent on the
magnetic induction (i.e. magnetizing ux) [25]. Since for stable
operation, SEIGs have to operate in the region of magnetic satura-
tion (Fig. 10a), they are expected to have more pronounced iron loss
component compared to induction machines operating at lower
levels of saturation (higher magnetic saturation ?higher magne-
tizing current ?higher magnetic induction ?higher iron losses).
Fig. 20a shows both iron and copper losses of the SEIG as a func-
tion of the magnetizing inductance (i.e. magnetic saturation), ob-
Fig. 19. Electrical output power variation with load: n = 1200 r/min and C = 50 lF.
Fig. 18. Efciency variation with load: n = 1200 r/min and C = 50 lF.
Fig. 20. Impact of magnetizing inductance (magnetic saturation) on: (a) iron and
copper losses and (b) efciency.
114 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
tained for the proposed model and for the constant value of torque
(10 Nm) and frequency approximately equal to 50 Hz (n = 1500 r/
min), both close to the rated values. Different values of the magne-
tizing current and, hence, magnetizing inductance, were obtained
by varying the capacitance value. In order to keep the torque con-
stant, we had to vary the load resistance value accordingly. RMS
value of the stator phase voltage was in the range from 189 to
228 V (also close to the rated value). From Fig. 20a, it is clear that
the iron losses are highly dependent on the magnetic saturation
(31.96% decrease in the magnetizing inductance resulted in
81.54% increase in the iron losses). The copper losses are also
dependent on the saturation, but to a lesser extent than the iron
losses (29.25% increase in the copper losses). It can be concluded
that the iron losses contribution in the overall losses (copper losse-
s + iron losses) increases with the saturation (from 34% to 42% in
this case), but with both torque and frequency close to the rated
values, the copper losses are dominant. Fig. 20b shows the ef-
ciency as a function of the magnetizing inductance.
In addition, it is stated in [26] that when the induction machine
is already saturated at no load, increase of the iron losses can be
signicant. As it can be seen from Fig. 10a, not only that the SEIG
is saturated at no load, but it is even more saturated than when
it is loaded. This also explains the large differences obtained in
Fig. 17a.
5.5.2. Generator load
When operating close to its rated torque and speed, the induc-
tion machine is highly efcient electrical machine and the copper
losses are in balance with the iron losses. For induction motors
with low loss magnetic core and operating at rated conditions,
the iron losses contribution in the overall losses is about 20%
[25], whereas for low power 50(60) Hz induction machines it can
be in the range 2535% [15]. However, at partial loads there is a
considerable reduction in the efciency due to no balance in be-
tween copper and iron losses [27,28], i.e. the inuence of the iron
losses becomes more signicant [26].
Fig. 21a illustrates the torque dependent distribution of the iron
and copper losses in the SEIG and conrms the above consider-
ations. The results in Fig. 21 were obtained for the proposed model,
for the constant value of magnetizing inductance (0.2 H) and fre-
quency approximately equal to 50 Hz (n = 1500 r/min). To obtain
different values of the electromagnetic torque, we had to vary
the load resistance value, and to keep the magnetizing inductance
constant, we had to vary the capacitance value accordingly. RMS
value of the stator phase voltage was in the range from 220 to
235 V (close to the rated value). From Fig. 21a, it is clear that the
copper losses are highly dependent on the torque (the higher the
torque, the higher the copper losses). On the other hand, the iron
losses are almost constant for the whole considered torque range.
This is because of the constant magnetic saturation (magnetizing
inductance) and almost constant frequency (variable slip). Hence,
the iron losses contribution in the overall losses (copper losses + ir-
on losses) increases and even becomes dominant for low torque
values. Fig. 21b shows the efciency as a function of the electro-
magnetic torque.
Since all the operating regimes considered in this paper are in
the low range of electromagnetic torque (1.94.1 Nm?for the
proposed model), high efciency values could not be expected.
5.5.3. Generator speed
The iron losses of the induction generator are usually divided
into hysteresis losses, directly proportional to the synchronous fre-
quency and to the square of the magnetic induction, and eddy cur-
rent (Foucault) losses, directly proportional to the square of both
synchronous frequency and magnetic induction [15,25]. The syn-
chronous frequency of the induction generator is determined by
the number of poles, slip value and speed of the prime mover.
For constant number of poles and constant torque, by changing
the speed of the prime mover, the synchronous frequency changes
as well. Hence, the iron losses are indirectly dependent on the
prime movers speed, i.e. the higher the speed, the higher the iron
losses (for constant values of both magnetic saturation and
torque).
5.5.4. Generator mode versus motor mode
Induction generators are known to be less efcient than induc-
tion motors, except in case of a machine with low stator and rotor
resistance and a non-saturated core (high efciency machines or
machines with high power rating), as shown in [29].
5.5.5. Generator size
Small size generators (<10 kW) are known to be less efcient
than larger ones [28].
5.5.6. Generator design
Iron losses of an induction machine are dependent on its con-
structional aspects, especially on the stator slot design. For exam-
ple, it is stated in [15] that iron losses can be increased by 4060%
when stamping is used to produce stator slots.
When all the individual impacts of the above factors are added
together, it becomes clear that the iron loss values obtained in this
paper are very much consistent with reality.
6. Pole-zero analysis of self-excited induction generator
In this section, the pole-zero map of a SEIG is presented, thus
providing a new and interesting perspective on phenomena that
occur within a SEIG and also providing a clear idea about the posi-
tion of dominant poles. We also analyze the processes of magneti-
zation and loading through changes in the position of dominant
poles, for both conventional and proposed model. To our best
knowledge, this is the rst time the SEIG is analyzed in this way.
The poles and zeros of the conventional SEIG model loaded with
the resistive load can be calculated starting from its matrix
equation:
Fig. 21. Impact of electromagnetic torque on: (a) iron and copper losses and (b)
efciency.
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 115
R
s
sL
s

R
L
1sCR
L
0 sL
m
0
0 R
s
sL
s

R
L
1sCR
L
0 sL
m
sL
m
x
r
L
m
R
r
sL
r
x
r
L
r
x
r
L
m
sL
m
x
r
L
r
R
r
sL
r
2
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
5
i
sa
i
sb
i
ra
i
rb
2
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
5

Usao
1
1
sCR
L

U
sbo
1
1
sCR
L
K
ra
K
rb
2
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
24
By applying Cramers rule to Eq. (24), the expression for the cur-
rent i
sa
can be obtained. The poles (i.e. the roots of the characteris-
tic equation) are then obtained by setting the denominator equal to
zero, whereas the zeros are obtained by setting the numerator
equal to zero. By analogous procedure, the poles and zeros for both
proposed and parallel SEIG model can be calculated. The corre-
sponding matrix equations are given in Appendix C.
Although the equation similar to Eq. (24) is given in [13], it con-
tains errors in the initial conditions (right side of the equation)
which have been corrected here. Moreover, in [13,30], the poles
are considered only in terms of the minimum (and maximum
for large loads) capacitance and speed needed for the onset of
self-excitation both at no load and with the resistive load con-
nected. However, their visual representation in terms of a pole-
zero map is not given. Besides, it is not analyzed how connecting
a load after the SEIG is already magnetized affects the poles.
Fig. 22 shows the pole-zero maps of the conventional and the
proposed SEIG model, obtained in steady state and at no-load con-
ditions (R
L
?1), for the capacitance and speed values of 50 lF and
1200 r/min, respectively. The poles are denoted with x and the
zeros are denoted with o.
As it can be seen from Fig. 22, most poles and zeros of the pro-
posed model are slightly shifted to the left in comparison with the
conventional model. In addition, all the poles and zeros occur in
complex-conjugate pairs, except for the zero settled in the origin
of the coordinate system, whereas the number of poles and zeros
is the same for both models due to the same conguration of the
related equations. In general, the zeros only affect the constants
with which the exponential stator current expression is multiplied
in the time domain, whereas the poles determine not only the syn-
chronous frequency (imaginary part) but also whether the stator
current magnitude will grow (positive real part) or decay (negative
real part) with time. The closer the poles are to the imaginary axis,
the more signicant impact they have on the behavior of the stator
current. Hence, the most dominant poles are those nearest to the
imaginary axis (Fig. 22b). In this case, the non-dominant poles
are associated with the quickly damped transient components of
the stator current and are signicant only for the transient analy-
sis. When the SEIG is loaded with the resistive load, non-dominant
poles (and zeros) move away from the imaginary axis so their sig-
nicance is further reduced. Since the equivalent iron loss resis-
tance, in a way, represents an additional resistive load for the
SEIG, non-dominant poles (and zeros) of the proposed model are
shifted even further away from the imaginary axis. Hence, regard-
less of which SEIG model is used for the steady state analysis, it is
sufcient to consider only dominant poles and zeros. In addition, to
determine the slip value or to determine whether the self-excita-
tion will occur, or even to determine the load value with which
the SEIG is on the verge of demagnetization (i.e. the critical load
value), it is sufcient to know only the dominant poles position.
Movement of the dominant pole during magnetization and
loading is shown in Fig. 21a and b, respectively.
For initiationof the self-excitationprocess it is necessary that the
dominant pole has a positive real part. Hence, the dominant pole is
initially positioned on the right side of the complex plane, as it can
be seen in Fig. 23a. For lower capacitance or rotor speed value, the
dominant pole would be initially positioned more to the left (lower
positive value of the real part) and vice versa. FromFig. 23a it is clear
that the initial value of the real part of the proposed models domi-
nant pole is positive, but lower compared to the conventional mod-
el. This means that for a certain lower capacitance or speed value,
the proposed models dominant pole would have a negative or zero
real part, resulting in unsuccessful self-excitation, whereas the con-
ventional models dominant pole would still have a positive real
part. Hence, using the conventional model for determining the min-
imumcapacitance (speed) value needed for the onset of self-excita-
tion could lead to wrong conclusions.
During the process of magnetization, the magnetizing ux sat-
urates (i.e. the magnetizing inductance decreases Fig. 10a), caus-
Fig. 22. Conventional and proposed model pole-zero maps at no-load steady state: (a) all poles and zeros and (b) only dominant poles and zeros.
Fig. 23. Movement of dominant pole during magnetization(a) andduring loading (b).
116 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118
ing the dominant pole to move towards the imaginary axis. Finally,
the pole settles exactly on the imaginary axis (real part is equal to
zero), thus reaching the equilibrium point. With the dominant pole
positioned one the imaginary axis, the stator current oscillates
with constant magnitude and frequency, as expected.
In general, the imaginary part of the dominant pole is equal to
the synchronous angular speed, x
e
. Therefore, from Fig. 21a and
b it is evident that inclusion of the iron losses causes an increase
in the value of slip (i.e. lower synchronous angular speed). In addi-
tion, by connecting the resistive load, the slip value increases even
more and the dominant pole shifts to the left of the imaginary axis,
as indicated in Fig. 23b. Both slip and shift are proportional with
the load. With the load connected the equilibrium state is dis-
turbed, so SEIG naturally attempts to reestablish it by increasing
the magnetizing inductance (Fig. 10a). Consequently, the dominant
pole moves towards the imaginary axis until it reaches the equilib-
rium point. However, in cases when load exceeds the critical value
then the equilibrium state can not be reestablished even for the
unsaturated (maximum) value of the magnetizing inductance
and, inevitably, loss of excitation (i.e. demagnetization) occurs.
From Fig. 23b, it can be seen that when the resistive load of
100 X is connected at the terminals, loss of excitation occurs for
the proposed model. On the other hand, the conventional model
succeeds to maintain the excitation even for this load value. Hence,
using the conventional model for determination of the critical load
value could also lead to wrong conclusions.
7. Conclusion
From the carried analysis and the obtained simulation and
experimental results, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. The conventional SEIG model can provide a good enough
approximation of the actual generated voltage/current and
actual generated power only for a limited range of loads.
2. The input power calculated by the conventional SEIG model
differs signicantly fromthe actual input power, resulting in
poor approximation of the overall efciency.
3. Inclusion of the iron losses in the SIEG model ensures a
more accurate assessment of the actual machines perfor-
mance and it is mandatory in cases when the overall ef-
ciency and/or input power demand are considered.
4. The parallel SEIG model provides the most accurate assess-
ment of the actual machine, but implies high computational
demands and numerical stability issues.
5. The proposed SEIG model combines very good accuracy of
the parallel model and low computational demands and
high numerical stability of the conventional model.
6. Representing the iron loss resistance as constant or one-
dimensional parameter can provide sufciently accurate
assessment of the actual machine only for a limited range
of speeds.
7. The proposed two-dimensional representation of the iron
losses ensures the most accurate assessment of the actual
machine in a wide range of loads and speeds.
8. The signicant efciency deterioration due to iron losses is a
distinctive characteristic of small size SEIGs, especially
when they are operating at partial loads, high speeds and
high levels of magnetic saturation.
9. The pole-zero analysis conducted in this paper conrmed
that by using the conventional SEIG model for determining
the minimum capacitance (speed) and/or critical load value,
false values could be obtained.
Appendix A
s
2
i
sa

R
s
L
rs

R
m
L
m

R
m
L
rs

si
sa

R
s
R
m
L
rs
L
m
i
sa

R
m
L
rs
si
ra

1
L
rs
su
sa

R
m
L
rs
L
m
u
sa
A:1
s
2
i
sb

R
s
L
rs

R
m
L
m

R
m
L
rs

si
sb

R
s
R
m
L
rs
L
m
i
sb

R
m
L
rs
si
rb

1
L
rs
su
sb

R
m
L
rs
L
m
u
sb
A:2
s
2
i
ra

R
m
L
rr
si
sa

R
r
L
rs

R
m
L
m

R
m
L
rr

si
ra
x
r
si
rb
x
r
R
m
L
rr
i
sb

R
r
R
m
L
rr
L
m
i
ra
x
r
R
m
1
L
rr

1
L
m

i
rb

1
L
rr
sK
ra

R
m
L
rr
L
m
K
ra
A:3
s
2
i
rb

R
m
L
rr
si
sb

R
r
L
rs

R
m
L
m

R
m
L
rr

si
rb
x
r
si
ra
x
r
R
m
L
rr
i
sa

R
r
R
m
L
rr
L
m
i
rb
x
r
R
m
1
L
rr

1
L
m

i
ra

1
L
rr
sK
rb

R
m
L
rr
L
m
K
rb
: A:4
Appendix B
P
n
= 1.5 kW, U
n
= 380 V, p = 2, Y, I
n
= 3.81 A, n
n
= 1391 r/min,
L
n
m
0:4058 H, L
sr
= 0.01823 H, L
rr
= 0.02185 H, R
s
= 4.293 X,
R
r
= 3.866 X (at 20 C), T
n
= 10.5 Nm, J = 0.0071 kgm
2
.
Appendix C
Matrix equation for the proposed SEIG model with the resistive
load:
R
sT
R
L
Rs 1sCR
L

R
sT
sL
s

Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
0 sL
m
0
0
R
sT
R
L
Rs 1sCR
L

R
sT
sL
s

Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
0 sL
m
sL
m
Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
x
r
L
m
Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
R
r
sL
r
x
r
L
r
x
r
L
m
Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
sL
m
Rs
R
sT

R
L
Rm1sCR
L

h i
x
r
L
r
R
r
sL
r
2
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
i
sa
i
sb
i
ra
i
rb
2
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
5

U
sao
R
sT
Rs
U
sbo
R
sT
Rs
K
ra
K
rb
2
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
5
C:1
M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118 117
Matrix equation for the parallel SEIG model with the resistive
load:
R
s
sL
sN

R
L
1sCR
L
0 sL
N
0
0 R
s
sL
sN

R
L
1sCR
L
0 sL
N
sL
N
x
r
L
N
R
r
sL
rN
x
r
L
rN
x
r
L
N
sL
N
x
r
L
rN
R
r
sL
rN
2
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
5
i
sa
i
sb
i
ra
i
rb
2
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
5

Usao
1
1
sCR
L

U
sbo
1
1
sCR
L
K
ra
K
rb
2
6
6
6
6
6
6
4
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
C:2
where
L
N

R
m
L
m
R
m
sL
m
; L
sN
L
sr
L
N
and L
rN
L
rr
L
N
:
References
[1] Singh GK. Self-excited induction generator research a survey. Electr Pow Syst
Res 2004;69:10714.
[2] Wagner C. Self-excitation of induction motors. AIEE Trans Electr Eng
1939;58:4751.
[3] Basset ED, Potter FM. Capacitive excitation for induction generators. AIEE Trans
Electr Eng 1935;54:5405.
[4] Simoes MG, Chakraborty S, Wood R. Induction generators for small wind
energy systems. IEEE PELS Newslett 2006:1923.
[5] Kamalapur GD, Udaykumar RY. Rural electrication in India and feasibility of
photovoltaic solar home systems. Int J Electr Pow 2011;33:5949.
[6] Degeilh Y, Singh C. A quantitative approach to wind farm diversication and
reliability. Int J Electr Pow 2011;33:30314.
[7] Ghedamsi K, Aouzellag D. Improvement of the performances for wind energy
conversions systems. Int J Electr Pow 2010;32:93645.
[8] Margeta J, Glasnovic Z. Feasibility of the green energy production by hybrid
solar + hydro power system in Europe and similar climate areas. Int J Electr
Pow 2010;14:158090.
[9] Grantham C, Sutanto D, Mismail B. Steady-state and transient analysis of self-
excited induction generators. IEE Proc Elec Pow Appl 1989;136:618.
[10] Levi E, Sokola M, Boglietti A, Pastorelli M. Iron loss in rotor-ux-oriented
induction machines: identication, assessment of detuning, and
compensation. IEEE T Pow Electr 1996;11:698709.
[11] Leidhold R, Garcia G, Valla MI. Field-oriented controlled induction generator
with loss minimization. IEEE T Ind Electron 2002;49:14756.
[12] Senjyu T, Ochi Y, Kikunaga Y, Tokudome M, Yona A. Sensor-less maximum
power point tracking control for wind generation system with squirrel cage
induction generator. Renew Energy 2009;34:9949.
[13] Seyoum D. The dynamic analysis and control of a self-excited induction
generator driven by a wind turbine. Ph.D. thesis. School of Electrical
Engineering and Telecommunications UNSW. Sydney; 2003.
[14] Wee SD, Shin MH, Hyun DS. Stator-ux-oriented control of induction motor
considering iron loss. IEEE T Ind Electron 2001;48:6028.
[15] Boldea I, Nasar SA. The induction machine handbook. CRC Press; 2002.
[16] Kaido C. Equivalent circuit of electromagnetic steelsheet core considering
magnetic characteristics distribution inside steel Sheets. Trans Jpn Soc Appl
Magn 1995;19:3944.
[17] Baic M, Vukadinovic D, Lukac D. Novel dynamic model of self-excited
induction generator with iron losses. Int J Math Mod Meth Appl Sci
2011;5:2219.
[18] Shinnaka S. Proposition of new mathematical models with stator core loss
factor for induction motor. Electr Eng Jpn 2001;134:6475.
[19] Nadjafabadi TA, Salmasi FR. A ux observer with online estimation of core loss
and rotor resistances for induction motors. IREE 2009;4:81624.
[20] Baic M, Vukadinovic D, Lukac D. Analysis of an enhanced SEIG model
including iron losses. In: WSEAS Proceedings of 6th International Conference
EEESD; 2010, p. 3743.
[21] Vukadinovic D, Smajo M. Analysis of magnetic saturation in induction motor
drives. IREE 2008;3:32636.
[22] Vukadinovic D, Smajo M, Kuliic L. Rotor resistance identication in an IRFO
system of a saturated induction motor. Int J Robot Autom 2009;24:3847.
[23] Ahmed T, Nishida K, Nakaoka M. Advanced control of PWM converter with
variable-speed induction generator. IEEE T Ind Appl 2006;42:93445.
[24] Simoreg DC-Master Operating Instructions, Siemens, Edition 13, 2007, <http://
www.sea.siemens.com/us/Products/Drives/DC-Drives/Pages/DC-Master-
Manuals.aspx>.
[25] Pires WL, Mello HGG, Nau SL, Sobrinho AP. Minimization of losses in
converter-fed induction motors optimal ux solution. In: Chomat M,
editor. Electric machines and drives. Rijeka (Croatia): InTech; 2011. p. 6176.
[26] Dexters A, Deprez W, Belmans R. The effect of practical operation conditions
on the performance of induction machines. CIRED 2007:4.
[27] Raj TC. Energy efcient control of three-phase induction motor a review.
IJCEE 2009;1:6170.
[28] Johnson GL. Wind energy systems. 4th ed. Manhattan: Kansas State
University; 2006.
[29] Deprez W, Dexters A, Driesen J, Belmans R. Energy efciency of small induction
machines: comparison between motor and generator mode. ICEM 2006:6.
[30] Seyoum D, Grantham C, Rahman MF. The dynamic characteristics of an
isolated self-excited induction generator driven by a wind turbine. IEEE T Ind
Appl 2003;39:93644.
118 M. Baic et al. / Electrical Power and Energy Systems 42 (2012) 105118