ITEC Asia-Pacific 2014 1569950701
Analysis and Comparison of Two Brushless DC
Generators with Doubly Salient Structure and Stator
Field Winding
Yiwei Zhao, Student Member, IEEE, Zhuoran Zhang, Senior Member, IEEE
Jiangsu Key Laboratory of New Energy Power Generation and Power Conversion
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China
ywzhao915@126.com; apsc-zzr@nuaa.edu.cn
Abstract—In this paper, comparison of 12/8-pole doubly
salient electro-magnetic generator (DSEG) and 12/10-pole flux-
switching electro-magnetic generator (FSEG) for dc generator
application is performed. The configuration, operation principle
and electromagnetic performance (i.e. field distribution, phase
flux linkage, phase voltage, winding inductance and cogging
torque) are comparatively studied with finite element analysis
(FEA) based on simulation. Besides, the copper loss and iron loss
are considered as the key features. The simulation results
indicate that the FSEG has good sinusoidal and symmetric
output voltage, hence the rectified output voltage ripple is
smaller. Although the maximum output power of the FSEG is
approaching to that of the DSEG, the field current of the DSEG
is better utilized. The total losses and efficiencies of the two
generators are very close, whereas the copper consumption of
the FSEG is around 10% larger. With the merits of robustness
and flexible control, both the FSEG and the DSEG can be a
potential low-cost candidate for DC generation system.
I. INTRODUCTION
Research interest in doubly salient structured brushless
machines (DS-BLMs) has grown significantly in recent years.
As two typical doubly salient structured brushless machines,
the doubly salient machine (DSM) and flux-switching
machine (FSM) are under intensive study since they inherit
the advantages from DS-BLMs such as brushless nature,
simple low-cost construction and flexible control [1], [2].
A doubly salient permanent magnet (DSPM) machine was
firstly proposed in [1], which essentially adopts the same
structure as a switched reluctance (SR) machine but with
permanent magnets (PMs) placed in the stator. Then, the
design and analysis method of the DSPM were introduced in
[3]. Since the DSPM has very specific characteristics, the
main researches are focusing on the design optimization [4],
torque ripple minimization [5], control strategies [6], and core
loss as well [7].
The flux-switching principles was first introduced in 1955
[8] as a single alternator, while the 3-phase version was first
investigated in 1997 [9]. In [2], typical structures of the flux-
switching permanent magnet machine (FSPM) are proposed.
The stator of FSPM usually adopt C-shaped or E-shaped
laminated segments, and the circumferentially magnetized
PMs are placed between the laminated segments. With the
1
flux-concentrating effect in the stator, the FSPM can easily
obtain a high magnetic flux density in the air gap and hence
produce a similar high torque density as that of a fractional-
slot PM machine [10]. Currently, benefitting from this
advantage, different types of FSPM were developed and
many of them were reviewed and summarized in [11].
Merits of using rare-earth PM material have been proved to
bring a high power density. However, these machines are
seldom running as generators, because their fluxes in air-gaps
are hard to control. Moreover, the low heat resistance, and
from a commercial point of view, constantly increasing price
are also bottleneck problems as well as other PM machines.
Therefore, in certain applications, electrical machines without
permanent magnets are required.
For generator operation, by replacing all the PMs with DC
coils, a doubly salient electro-magnetic generator (DSEG)
[12], [13] and a flux-switching electro-magnetic generator
(FSEG) [11], [14] are brought forward, respectively. The
excitation can be adjusted freely and both two generators are
suitable for high operation temperature. Additionally, the
rotor position sensor is not necessary due to their independent
field windings.
Since the DSEG and the FSEG share the same doubly
salient structure, whereas the operation principles and the
characteristics are different. Then, a comprehensive analysis
and comparison is necessary. The purpose of this paper is to
quantitatively compare the DSEG and FSEG based on the
same peripheral dimensions. Particular emphasis is placed on
practical techniques of output properties where the inherent
advantages of two generators make commercial sense for
industrial applications.
II. CONFIGURATION AND OPTIMIZATION
A. Configuration
Fig. 1 shows the cross section of 12/8-pole DSEG [13] and
12/10-pole FSEG [11], [15] in which the dc-field and armature
windings are both installed in stator instead of rotor. It is
found that in the DSEG, the dc-field windings are wounded on
very three stator poles, while that of the FSEG are wounded
around two adjacent stator teeth.
It should be noticed that the topology of 12/10-pole FSEG
in this paper may not be the most optimal configuration. With
the help of [11] and [15], slot area for field winding is The armature windings and the field windings are both
enlarged for installing more field coils, consequently the slot stationary. But nevertheless, the polarity of the flux linked by
fill factor is reduced. Meanwhile, the flux-linkage and back- armature windings switches as the rotor rotates, resulting from
EMF of the 12/10-pole FSEG remains bipolar and sinusoidal. changes of the alignment between the saliencies of stator and
rotor. Thus, the phase flux-linkage is bipolar.
C. Parameter Optimization
To compare meaningfully, a 12/10-pole FSEG is designed
on the basis of prototype of a conventional 12/8-pole DSEG
under the same electric conditions such as rated speed, stator
outer diameter, air-gap length, core length, excitation current
density, slot fill factors, etc. Table I lists the major design
specifications and key parameters. Moreover, the stator and
rotor cores of both generators are made up of laminations of
(a) (b) DW 310-35.
Fig. 1. Cross section. (a) 12/8-pole DSEG. (a) 12/10-pole FSEG. TABLE I
The conventional 3-phase DSEG is developed on the basis KEY PARAMETERS OF DSEG AND FSEG
of a 6N/4N-pole structure, and the number of pole pairs is 12/8-pole 12/10-pole
4N. Then, So the phase difference αwp1 of the adjacent DSEG FSEG
armature windings is 240o. Number of phases 3
For the FSEG, there is a different matching relationship Rated speed (r/min) 3600
between the stator pole number and rotor pole number, which Stator outer diameter (mm) 158
is (1): Air-gap length (mm) 0.25
Ns = mNc Rotor inner diameter (mm) 35
(1)
Nr = Ns ± 2 Core length (mm) 63.5
Where, Ns is the number of the stator pole, Nr is the number Stator pole arc (degree) 15 7.5
of the rotor pole, Nc is the number of the armature coils per Rotor pole arc (degree) 18 12
phase, m is the number of the phase. The phase difference αwp2 Number of armature turns per phase 32
of the adjacent armature windings of the stator poles is 120o, Number of excitation coils 4 6
The electrical angle αs and the mechanical angle αm of the Number of excitation turns per coil 50 100
DSEG and the FSEG can be described with the help of (2):
Current density/armature windings (A/mm2) 7.3
α s = Nr ⋅α m (2)
Current density/field windings (A/mm2) 7.2
B. Operation Principle
Armature winding slot fill factor 0.76 0.73
The operation principles of a 12/8-pole DSEG are illustrated
Field winding slot fill factor 0.71
in Fig. 2. It can be seen that with the rotation of the rotor, the
polarity of the stator flux-linkage is unchanged, while only the Conventionally, broadening the rotor pole width can result
magnitude is varying. Consequently, the phase flux-linkage of in increasing of the maximum power for the 12/8-pole DSEG.
the DSEG is unipolar. In this paper, the rotor pole width of the DSEG is broadened
Stator Field windings Stator Field windings Stator Field windings from 15 mechanical degree to 18 mechanical degree.
Maximum output power (kW)

4
C A B C A B C A B
3
Fl ux lines

2
Rotor Armature windings Rotor Armature windings Rotor Armature windings
1 DSEG
(a) (b) (c) FSEG
Fig. 2. Operation principle of 12/8-pole DSEG. (a) Rotor position 1. (b) 0
5 9 13 17 21
Rotor position 2. (c) Rotor position 1 Pole arc (degree)
Fig. 3 shows the operation principles of the 12/10-pole Fig. 4. Maximum output power versus rotor pole arc of 12/10-pole FSEG
FSEG. and 12/8-pole DSEG. (If=17A, n=3600r/min)
Stator Field windings Stator Field windings
For the 12/10-pole FSEG, according to [15], the optimized
design dimensions are as follows:
A A
360D
hys = hts = hslot = he = 1.6htr1 = (3)
4 Ps
Armature windings Rotor Armature windings Rotor
Where, hys is the original design of the stator yoke thickness,
(a) rotor position 1 (b) rotor position 2
Fig. 3. Operation principle of 12/8-pole DSEG. (a) rotor position 1. (b) rotor hts is the stator pole arc, hslot is the stator slot arc, htr1 is the
position 2. rotor pole arc and he is the field excitation area arc. The rotor

2
arc of the 12/10-pole FSEG is also broadened moderately, seen that the magnetic saturation level in the teeth of stator
which is designed to be increased from 7.5 mechanical degree and the air-gap flux density in the FSEG machines is higher
to 12 mechanical degree. Fig. 4 gives the maximum power than that of the 12/8-pole DSEG due to flux concentration.
versus rotor arc of both two generators. When the field current On the contrary, the magnetic saturation of the rotor poles of
(If) is 17A, the MMF of the 12/10-pole FSEG is 10,200 A.T the 12/8-pole DSEG is more significant.
which is almost 300% higher than that of the 12/8-pole
DSEG. Hence, the field current of the DSEG is better utilized.
III. ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON
A. 2D Finite-Element Analysis of Electromagnetic Field
By Maxwell 2D software, the magnetic field distributions at
no load are shown in Fig. 5.

(a)

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Open-circuit field distribution of the DSEG and the FSEG.
In both two generators, more flux is looped through A-
phase due to the rotor pole width is broadened. However,
compared with the 12/8-pole DSEG, the other rotor poles of
the 12/10-pole FSEG are sliding into C-phase and sliding off
the B-phase which constitutes another magnetic flux path
when A-phase stator poles are aligned with the rotor poles.
Because the rotor pole width is broadened, more flux is looped
through B-phase and C-phase and thus it improves the
material utilization relatively.
1.8
1.6
(b)
Fig. 7. Contour maps of magnetic flux density. (If=8A, n=3600rpm) (a)
12/8-pole DSEG. (b) 12/10-pole FSEG.
B. Field-circuit Coupling Analysis
For full-period generator operation, the rectifier topologies
commonly are full-bridge rectifiers (FBRs) as shown in Fig. 8.
In this paper, the situation without a DC filter capacitor is
investigated chiefly. In the actual application, the DC filter
capacitor is helpful to obtain the smooth DC voltage.
ua
-

+
+

ea
Flux density (T)

La Ra D1 D3 D5 iL
ia
1.2 eb Lb Rb
Uo RL
0.8 ec Lc Rc
D4 D6 D2
0.4 -

Fig. 8. DSEG or FSEG with full-bridge rectifier.

0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 The A-phase flux-linkage waveforms of the 12/8-pole and
Angle (degree)
12/10-pole FSEG at no load are depicted in Fig. 9, then the
(a) no-load EMF can be obtained from:
2.2 T
⎡ dψ dψ dψ ⎤
[ ea , eb , ec ]
T
2 = −⎢ a , b , c ⎥ ω (4)
⎣ d θ dθ d θ ⎦
Flux density (T)

1.8
1.6 Where, ψi, ei (i=a,b,c) are each phase flux linkage and EMF
1.2 of the generator, ω is the rated speed. It can be found that the
0.8 most significant difference is that the flux-linkage of the
0.4 FSEG is bipolar as foregoing mentioned in Section II.
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Obviously, the peak value of the EMF in a FSEG is higher.
Angle (degree) Fig. 10 shows the A-phase self-inductance at no load. For
(b) the 12/8-pole DSEG, the inductance is larger than that of the
Fig. 6. Air-gap flux density distributions. (If=8A, n=3600rpm) (a) 12/8-pole 12/10-pole FSEG at aligned position and it changes only once
DSEG. (b) 12/10-pole FSEG. in a period. Meanwhile, the inductance fluctuation of the
Then, the air-gap flux density distributions are shown in 12/10-pole FSEG is smaller because of the shorter reluctance
Fig. 6, and the flux density plots are shown in Fig. 7. It can be paths.

3
 40
Induced voltage
30 density, the cogging torque of the 12/10-pole FSEG is much
larger. Due to the symmetric phase flux paths, the cogging

Flux linkage (mWB)

Induced voltage (V) Flux lingkage 25
20 torque waveforms of the 12/10-pole FSEG are more regular.
20
12
0 15
8
10

Torque (Nm)
-20 4
5
0
-40 0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
-4
Rotor Angle (electrical degree)
-8 DSEG
(a) FSEG
60 15 -12 0
Induced voltage
90 180 270 360 450 540 630 720

Flux linkage (mWB)

40 10 Rotor Angle (electrical degree)
Induced voltage (V)

Flux lingkage

20 5 Fig. 11. Cogging torque at no load. (If=17A, n=3600rpm)

0 0
C. Output Characteristics
According to the circuit in Fig. 8, when the FBR is adopted,
-20 -5
the induced current flows through the armature windings when
-40 -10
the rotor pole is entering or leaving the corresponding poles.
-60
0 60 120 180 240 300
-15
360 Normally, the mutual inductances such as Lab, Lac are far
Rotor Angle (electrical degree) smaller than the self-inductance such as La. Then, take A-
(b) phase as an example, the phase flux can be expressed as:
Fig. 9. A-phase flux linkage and EMF waveforms at no load. (If=4A, ψ a = Laf i f + La ia (6)
n=3600rpm) (a) 12/8-pole DSEG. (b) 12/10-pole FSEG.
0.6 Where, Laf is the mutual inductance between the phase
winding and the field winding; La is the self-inductance of
phase windings. The output voltage can be obtained:
Inductance (mH)

0.4
dψ
ua = − a − ia Ra (7)
dt
0.2 Where, Ra is the resistance of phase windings. Examples
with RL=1.1Ω, the three phase voltages, A-phase current and
A-phase B-phase C-phase
0
60 120 180 240 300 360
A-phase flux-linkages of the 12/8-pole DSEG and the 12/10-
0
Rotor Angle (electrical degree) pole FSEG are shown in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13. It can be seen
(a) that in both two generators, since the load current increases
0.4 with the reducing resistance, the flux-linkage distorts seriously
and delays owing to armature reaction.
Inductance (mH)

0.3
A-phase Flux linkage (mWB)

50
t1 t2 t3 t4
0.2 40

30
0.1
A-phase B-phase C-phase 20
0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 10 No Load
Rotor Angle (electrical degree) RL=1.1Ω
RL=2.8Ω
(b) 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Fig. 10. A-phase self-inductance waveforms at no load. (If=8A, n=3600rpm) Times (ms)
(a) 12/8-pole DSEG. (b) 12/10-pole FSEG.
(a)
The cogging torque of the 12/8-pole DSEG and the 12/10-
100
pole FSEG are compared and shown in Fig. 11. According to t1 t2 t3 t4
A-Phase Current (A)

(5), the cogging torque waveforms can be explained: 50

∂S
Tcog = − kcog (5)
∂θ 0

Where, -kcog is the cogging torque coefficient, S is the

-50
overlapping area between the stator and the rotor, θ is the rotor RL=1.1Ω
RL=2.8Ω
angular position. Corresponding to the rotor angular position, -100
the overlapping area changes, hence the cogging torque occur 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Times (ms)
approximately. The peak value appears when the rotor aligns
(b)
with the edge of the stator teeth. With the higher air-gap

4
 60 A-phase period, which causes larger commutation overlapping angle.
Three phase voltages (V)
B-phase t1 t2 t3 t4
40 C-phase The three phase output voltage of the 12/10-pole FSEG is
20
more symmeric.
Comparison using flux-current (ψ-i) diagram is given in Fig.
0
14. With the help of (8), it can be concluded that the larger
-20 area reveals the higher output power, consequently the output
-40 power of 12/8-pole DSEG is higher.
-60
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Wa = ∫ ia dψ a (8)
Times (ms) 50 DSEG FSEG
(c) 40

Flux linkage (mWB)

Fig. 12. The flux linkage, current and voltage curves with different loads of 30
12/8-pole DSEG. (If=17A, n=3600rpm) (a) A-phase flux-linkage. (b) A-
phase currents with different loads. (c) The three phase voltages with 20
RL=1.1Ω. 10
20 0
A-phase Flux linkage (mWB)

t1 t2 t3 t4
15 -10
10 -20
5 -100 -75 -50 -25 0 25 50 75 100
0 Lord current (A)
-5 Fig. 14. Comparison between the DSEG and the FSEG using flux-current
-10 No Load diagram. (If=17A, n=3600rpm)
RL=1.1Ω
-15 RL=2.8Ω Fig. 15 shows the output voltage versus field current at no
-20
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
load. The peak value of the 12/10-pole FSEG is 108V, higher
Times (ms) than that of the 12/8-pole DSEG. The rectified dc voltage of
(a) the two generators is shown in Fig. 16. Obviously, the voltage
100 ripple of the 12/10-pole FSEG is smaller because of its more
t1 t2 t3 t4 sinusoidal and symmetric phase voltage, according to:
A-Phase Current (A)

50 u = max( u A , uB , uC ) (9)
120
0
100
Output voltage (V)

-50 80
RL=1.1Ω
RL=2.8Ω
60
-100
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
40
Times (ms) DSEG n=3600rpm
(b) 20 FSEG n=3600rpm
FSEG n=2880rpm
80 A-phase 00 5 10 15 20 25
Three phase voltages (V)

B-phase t1 t2 t3 t4
60 C-phase
Field current (A)
40
Fig. 15. Output voltage versus field current at no load. (If=17A)
20
0
80
Output voltage (V)

-20
-40 60
-60
-80 40
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Times (ms) DSEG
20
(c) FSEG
Fig. 13. The flux linkage, current and voltage curves with different loads of 0
0 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5
12/10-pole FSEG. (If=17A, n=3600rpm) (a) A-phase flux-linkage. (b) A-
Times (ms)
phase currents with different loads. (c) The three phase voltages with
RL=1.1Ω. Fig. 16. Rectified DC voltage with RL=1.1Ω. (If=17A, n=3600rpm)
In the t1-t2 time range, the rotor pole is sliding into the stator Fig. 17 shows the results of the output properties of the two
pole, the flux increases as the negative current flows. generators. The maximum output power of the 12/8-pole
However, the peak value of the flux-linkage is reducing. In the DSEG is 3.95kW and that of the 12/10-pole FSEG is 3.87kW.
t2-t3 time range, the rotor pole is aligned with the stator pole. The voltage regulation of the 12/8-pole DSEG is slightly
Thus, the armature action remains demagnetizing effect until higher, simultaneously it has larger short-circuit current.
the current is positive. In the t2-t3 time range, with the current Fig. 15 and Fig. 17 also give the output properties of the
increasing, the magnetizing effect is enhanced, and the two generators at the same electrical frequency. The output
negative current of the 12/8-pole DSEG lasts longer in a

5
voltage of 12/8-pole DSEG is slightly higher, yet the output copper consumption of the FSEG is 10% larger. Meanwhile,
power of the 12/10-pole FSEG is lower. the manufacturing process of the FSEG is more complicated.
4 In summary, the comparison of two types of machines is not
an easy task, calling for a long term and in-depth
Output Power (kW)

3 investigation. The comparison of the two brushless machines

2
in motoring need to be further investigated in the future work.
Both two generators with doubly salient structure have no
1 DSEG n=3600rpm permanent magnets so that they can overcome irreversible
FSEG n=3600rpm
FSEG n=2880rpm demagnetization and uncontrollable PM flux, which makes
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 them very good candidates for dc generator operation.
Load current (A)
(a) ACKNOWLEDGMENT
120 This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation
DSEG n=3600rpm
FSEG n=3600rpm
100 of Jiangsu Province under Award BK2011731, by the
Output voltage (V)

FSEG n=2880rpm

80 Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

60 (No.NE2014102), by the Program for NCET in University,
40
and by the Qing Lan Project of Jiangsu Province.
20 REFERENCES
0 [1] Y. Liao, F. Liang and T. A. Lipo, “A novel PM machine with doubly
0 30 60 90 120
salient structure,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 1069-1078,
Load current (A) Sep./Oct. 1995.
(b) [2] Z. Q. Zhu and J. T. Chen, “Advanced flux-switching permanent magnet
Fig. 17. Output properties. (If=17A) (a) Output power versus load current. brushless machines,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1447–1453,
(b) Terminal characteristic. Jun. 2010.
D. Loss Calculation and Efficiency [3] Y. Fan, K. T. Chau, and M. Cheng, “A new three-phase doubly salient
In this paper, the iron losses are estimated and obtained by permanent magnet machine for wind power generation,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 53–60, Jan./Feb. 2006.
simulation. TABLE II gives the losses and the efficiencies. It
[4] W. Wang, M. Kiani, and B. Fahimi, “Optimal design of doubly fed
can be seen that the total masses of the two generators are very induction generators using field reconstruction method,” IEEE Trans.
close. However, the copper consumption of the 12/10-pole Magn., vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 3453–3456, Aug. 2010.
FSEG is 2.89kg, which is around 10% larger than the 12/8- [5] K. T. Chau, Q. Sun, Y. Fan, and M. Cheng, “Torque ripple minimization
pole DSEG. Due to absence of PMs, the power density of the of doubly salient permanent magnet motors,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 352–358, Jun. 2005.
two generators are relatively low.
[6] M. Cheng, Q. Sun, and E. Zhou, “New self-tuning fuzzy PI controller
TABLE II of a novel doubly salient permanent-magnet motor drive,” IEEE Trans.
LOSS CALCULATION AND EFFICIENCY OF DSEG AND FSEG Industrial Electron., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 814–821, Jun. 2006.
[7] S. Zhu, M. Cheng, “Core Loss Analysis and Calculation of Stator
12/8-pole DSEG 12/10-pole FSEG
Permanent-Magnet Machine Considering DC-Biased Magnetic
Output power (w) 3947 3870 Induction,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 5203-5212,
Copper loss at 130℃ (W) 513.56 578.29 Oct. 2014.
Iron loss (W) 93.72 66.97 [8] S. E. Rauch and L. J. Johnson, “Design principles of flux-switching
Rectification loss (W) 207.6 216 alternators,” AIEE Trans., Power App. Syst. Part III, vol. 74, no. 3, pp.
Weight (kg) 8.46 8.31 1261-1268, Jan. 1955.
Power density (W/kg) 466.5 465.7 [9] E. Hoang, A. H. Ben-Ahmed, and J. Lucidarme, “Switching flux PM
Efficiency (Ideal value) 82.9% 81.8% poly-phased synchronous machines,” in Proc. 7th Eur. Conf. Power
Electron. Appl., Sep. 1997, vol. 3, pp. 903-908.
IV. CONCLUSION [10] R. L. Owen, Z. Q. Zhu, A. S. Thomas, G. W. Jewell, and D. Howe,
“Alternate poles wound flux-switching permanent-magnet brushless
In this paper, a 12/8-pole DSEG and a 12/10-pole FSEG AC machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 790–797,
for dc generator application are optimized and compared. Mar./Apr. 2010.
Several important conclusions are drawn as follows: 1) With [11] Z. Q. Zhu, “Switched flux permanent magnet machines—Innovation
the same filed current, the FSEG exhibits smaller inductance continues,” Int. Conf. Electrical Machines and Systems, Aug. 2011,
Beijing, China, pp. 1–10.
and rectified output voltage ripple, yet lower output power,
[12] Z.R. Zhang, Y.Y. Tao, and Y.G Yan, “Investigation of a new topology
voltage regulation and short-circuit current. Moreover, the of hybrid excitation doubly salient brushless dc generator,” IEEE Trans.
total losses, efficiencies and power densities of the two Ind. Electron., vol. 59, no. 6, pp.2550-2556, Jun. 2012.
generators are very close, whereas the field current of the [13] L. Yu, Z. R. Zhang, Y.G, Yan, “Development and Analysis of Doubly
DSEG is better utilized. 2) The cogging torque of the DSEG Salient Brushless DC Generators for Automobile Auxiliary Power Unit
Application,” Int. Conf. Vehicle Power and Propulsion, Oct. 2013,
is smaller and irregular. 3) Although the armature reaction Beijing, China, pp.1-6.
has great influence on both two generators, the flux-linkage [14] Y. Wang and Z.Q. Deng, “Analysis of electromagnetic performance
of the FSEG is sinusoidal, hence it has more symmetric and control schemes of electrical excitation flux-switching machine for
dc power system,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 27, no. 4, pp.
loading phase voltage. 4) Under the same dimensions, the 844-855, Dec. 2012.