Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

Using MathCAD To Solve Polynomial nonlinear

Complex Induction Machine Equations
K A. Nigim M. M. Salama M. Kazerani,

University of Waterloo
Electrical and Computer Department
Waterloo, ON. N2L 3G1
Canada

Abstract

This paper describes the use of MathCAD’s “Given and Find” built in functions to solve
nth order nonlinear complex induction machine equations. Various energy-capturing
schemes use machine models that incorporate nonlinear elements with complex
mathematical formulas that need numerical computation. The use of general-purpose
mathematical software GPMS, such as MathCAD, is advancement in evaluating unknown
variables and obtaining simulation results. By following the described procedures
described in this paper, both graduate and undergraduate students enhance their problem-
solving abilities with minimal programming skills. By using example, the paper presents
an approach to evaluate the polynomial variables required to evaluate the performance of
self-excited induction generator SEIG under variable excitation and loading conditions.
SEIG systems are proposed for energy capturing to supply power to remote areas from
renewable energy resources such as wind and hydro.

I- INTRODUCTION

It quite possible that the lack of interaction between traditional course syllabus and
mathematical or simulation tools has resulted in a fall of student enrollment in the courses
classified as heavy current or power engineering in comparison with computer based courses.
With the availability of mathematical and engineering simulation software, this trend can be
averted. Starting from the use of dedicated software incorporated in the textbook package [1] to
navigated hyperlink data sites [2], the tutor can introduce the course material in such a way that
student interaction is ensured. However, the uses of dedicated software packages are so specific
that they are normally confined to the assigned dedicated objectives and lack the interaction
between the student and the software. The use of dedicated software is probably acceptable for
senior or graduate level, when the students learns industrial problem solving techniques. The
drawback of using dedicated programs as a learning and research tool is that the student requires
intensive training to familiarize him with the programming algorithm. A second effort is required
to develop the link between the software built in-functions and the physical application. If the
link is not established, the student develops a feeling that the theory is not needed and problems
Page 7.1262.1

can be simulated without sufficient background knowledge.

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

The use of GPMS provides a flexible tool for the teacher to integrate the theory with
problem solving techniques. Several articles focused on the practicality of using GPMS for a
wide range of topics in the electrical engineering discipline. The emerging trend is towards
paperless classrooms and laboratory setups. Reference [1] demonstrates the use of GPMS as a
link to enforce laboratory experimentation and measurement in an interactive environment with
reduced manual and repetitive data calculation. Several reported references [3 – 4] show the
strength in the practicality of not only using GPMS as an educational tool, but as a research tool
that is capable of analyzing sophisticated engineering applications. MatLab, MathCAD, and
Mathematica are the most popular GPMS. The most powerful program at the junior level is
MatLab, which requires a long time to master. On the other hand, students can learn to use
MathCAD and Mathematica in a short time and with little practice. In the case of MathCAD, the
equations appear in a similar format as handwriting, which is an advantage at the junior level.

An important advantage of using ‘GPMS’ is the possibility of development or enhancing

the student’s problem solving abilities. Also, the laborious and uninteresting numerical
calculations using calculators can be avoided. However, the student has to learn how to apply
the equations and methods taught in the theory. This can be achieved by teaching the student to
use the equations and calculation method directly and perform the actual calculations with one of
the GPMS software. Therefore, by avoiding the need for the students to learn programming
languages at the junior level, students will have the desire to continue exploring the engineering
fields. Computer modeling and interactive problem solving has been incorporated during the last
years at many universities. Integrating the course material and the laboratory experimentation
improves the student interaction with minimal knowledge of computer programming [5 – 9].

To summarize, the advantages of using GPMS particularly, MathCAD software the

studies of advanced courses in electrical engineering are:

The students write the equations in the familiar textbook format that requires little algebraic re-
arrangement.
The problems are solved interactively by using defined and undefined variables using the
symbolic notation boosting the student interest.
The students analyze the results and in text and graphical format in one document.
The general-purpose math calculation programs are frequently used by industry.
There is no need to learn dedicated, input output type computer programs.

In the following sections, an electric machine is used as an example in order to

demonstrate the application of built-in functions and routines to manipulate the engineering
problem into interactive problem solving techniques [9]. The focus is on the use of MathCAD’s
“Given and Find” built in functions to solve what could be a 5th to 9th order nonlinear complex
induction machine equation. By using the described procedures, both graduate and
undergraduate students enhance their problem-solving abilities with minimal programming
skills.
Page 7.1262.2

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

II- USING MATHCAD TO EVALUATE THE STAND ALONE SELF-EXCITED

GENERATOR VARIABLES

Since induction machines are not equipped with field windings to establish the required
excitation magnetic field (the responsible media of converting and transfer energy), the
excitation for a stand-alone induction generator must be supplied externally. The external source
for self-excitation is a capacitor bank across the machine terminals to provide the necessary
leading current required to supply the machine and load reactive power requirements [10] – [12].
The generated terminal voltage decreases with increasing load even when the speed is
maintained at a constant value and sufficient capacitive energy is supplied. The voltage collapse
is due to the non-linearity of the magnetizing element that furbishes the magnetic flux within the
generator and is affected by the internal impedance of the windings. The voltage is also sensitive
to external variables such as the prime mover speed and the load size and nature. The same trend
is followed by the generated frequency. This makes it more difficult to predict the generator
performance, compared to the case if the generator is connected to a power grid in which the
voltage and frequency are tied to the network.
R1/a jX1 R2/a jX2

IL I1 I2
jXL rc/a
γ R2/a
-jXc/a2 jXm
Mechanical Input power
[note: γ = b/(a-b)]
RL/a

Load Excitation Stator Magentizing Rotor

Capacitor Windings branch Windings
YLC1 Ym Y2
Fig. 1 Self-excited induction generator per phase equivalent circuit

Due to the complexity of the variables, symbolic mathematical presentation is needed to

evaluate the machine magnetizing reactance Xm as a function of the rotor speed and frequency at
the preset value of excitation reactance Xc. To initiate and sustain the voltage build up in the
generator windings, the generator magnetic and inductive reactive power with the load
requirement must be matched by the external source. This means that the net volt-ampere within
the generator equivalent circuit shown in Fig. 1 and the connected load must be equal to zero at
any instant, otherwise the voltage will collapses. Therefore, the total node admittance at the
magnetizing element is zero;

YLC1 + Ym + Y2 = 0 (1)
where,
YLC1 = 1/ [((RL/a + jXL)// -jXc/a2)+(R1/a + jX1)] (2)
Ym = (1/ jXm) + (a/rc ) (3)
Page 7.1262.3

Y2 = 1/ (R2/a + jX2) (4)

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

Example: Use MathCAD solving block to determine the unknown variables

First step: Initial guess of the variables (denoted with subscript o, here we selected three)
Magnetizing reactance Xm := Xmo Ω
Per unit frequency a := ao and Per unit speed b := bo
Second step: Arrange the generator equations to represent the operation under the variables
listed in step 1 by separating the real and imaginary parts as given in equation (i) and (ii)
respectively.
Third step: Use ‘Given’ solving blocks as follows:
Given
Real part(YLC1 +Ym+Y2) = 0

RL ⋅ XL ⋅ Xc
−
Xc ⋅ RL
⋅  XL −
Xc 
3  3  2 
a  a  a  + R1
2 2 a
 RL  +  XL − Xc 
 a R2
   2
a  a ( a− b)
+ + 0
2 rc 2
 2 2   R2  + X22
 RL ⋅ XL ⋅ Xc −  Xc ⋅ RL ⋅  XL − Xc     XL ⋅ Xc  ⋅  XL − Xc  + Xc ⋅ RL   
        ( a − b)
 a
3
 a
3

2
a  R1   a2   2
a  a
4 
+ + − X1
 2 2 a  2 2
  RL  +  XL − Xc     RL  +  XL − Xc  
       
  a 

2
a     a 

2
a   (i)
Imaginary part(YLC1+Ym+Y2) = 0
2
 XL ⋅ Xc  ⋅  XL − Xc  + Xc ⋅ RL
 2  2 4
 a   a  a
− X1
2 2
 RL  +  XL − Xc 
 a
   2
a  1 X2
− − 0
2 Xm 2
   XL ⋅ Xc  ⋅  XL − Xc  + Xc ⋅ RL   
2 2 R2 2
 RL ⋅ XL ⋅ Xc −  Xc ⋅ RL ⋅  XL − Xc    ( a − b)  + X2
  3  2 
    
 a
3
 a  a  R1  a 2
 
2
a  a
4 
+ + − X1
 2 2 a  2 2
  RL  +  XL − Xc 
    RL  +  XL − Xc 


  a   2    a   2 
  a     a   (ii)

Step 4: List the constraints Xc ≥ Xcmax,

Xm = Xmmax and Xmmin
1< ao < bo, (a varies between 1 to 2)
bo > 1 (b varies 1 to 2),
Step 5: Get the results of the variables using the ‘Find’ statement as follows
Find (a, b, Xm)
Page 7.1262.4

Fig. 2 Equation listing using Mathcad solving block

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

The nodal admittance method of separating the real and imaginary components of the
equivalent circuit as described in references [13] to [14], is used for numerical analysis. The
conventional method of solving for the variables in the above equations is to equate the real and
imaginary parts to zero. The resulting equations are then solved using a gradient method such as
the Newton-Raphson method. This process is tedious and evolves several algebraic
manipulations that make it difficult if any of the variables are to be optimized. Furthermore, in
the event of any changes in the connection of the load, the derived equations have to be re-
arranged. Using Mathcad solving blocks “Given” and “Find”, replace the numerical step-by-step
algebraic manipulation [15]. Only positive realistic values that meet the constraints criteria of
energy balance will be accepted as a solution for the variables. Using the nodal admittance
principle to separate the machine admittance to real and imaginary components, where equation
(i) presents the real components while equation (ii) presents the imaginary components. The two
equations are simultaneously solved for the desired variable as demonstrated in Fig. 2.

The system equivalent circuit shown in Fig. 1 relates two variables for successful
dynamic operation. The first variable is “a”, the ratio relating the operating frequency and the
base frequency. It depends on the rotating speed and has a dominant effect upon the operating
slip and hence, the amount of power being transferred to the load. The solution of equation (i)
will result in estimating the per unit frequency a. The second variable is the magnetizing
reactance Xm that is determined by the open circuit characteristics and is a function of the
excitation capacitance Xc, load ZL (ZL= RL+ jXL) and operating per unit speed ratio “b”. The
solution of equation (ii) will result in estimating the magnetizing reactance Xm that gives the
value of the air gap voltage induced across the generator terminal. Both equations must satisfy
the constraints of zero sums. Once the variables are evaluated, the air gap voltage Em is
estimated from the magnetizing curve in which the values are collected experimentally. The
procedures to solve the unknown variables “a” and “Xm” are as follow:
i) Define all constants such as R1, R2, X1, X2, rc, RL and XL in ohms. The terminal frequency
is defined as a per unit ratio “a” with the base frequency of 50 or 60Hz. The rotor speed is
also defined in per unit ratio “b” with the base speed being 1500 or 1800 rpm.
ii) Define the generator-magnetizing element Xm with the air gap induced voltage Em. This
must be obtained experimentally and can be represented in a piecewise linearized form due
to the non-linearity or as polynomial curve fitted equation;

Em(Xm) = k1 + k2 Xm + k3 Xm2 + k4 Xm3 … (5)

where, Em(Xm) is in per unit volt the constants for the tested generator of 11 Kwatt,
380V, and 50Hz induction machine are;
k1 = -184.5267 k2 = 17.636
k3 = -.6236 k4 = .009
iii) Define the nodal admittances YLC1, Ym and Y2
iv) Give initial guess values for the variables a = 1.01, b = 1.1 and Xm = 3
v) Solve with “Given” the nodal equations is equated to zero and “Find” the variables a, b
and Xm that satisfy the condition.
Page 7.1262.5

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

Fig. 2 illustrates the aforementioned procedures of entering data in a MathCAD sheet using the
solving blocks of “Given” and “Find”. In the next section, an experimental set up was used to
compare the estimated values from the analysis algorithm listed in Fig. 2 with laboratory
experiment.

III – VERIFICATION OF THE METHODOLOGY

An 11 kW induction generator was coupled mechanically to a dc machine that acts as the

prime mover. A 60 µF per phase capacitor bank was connected across the terminal as shown in
Fig. 3. Various tests were performed to supply power to resistive loads. The terminal voltage
and frequency were simulated and verified with the experimental results as shown in Fig. 4. The
unknown variables stated in Fig. 2 were repeatedly evaluated for each operating point. The data
is stored in data matrix and is compared with the experimental results. Close agreement between
the simulation using the proposed technique and the experiment is shown in Fig. 4 that present a
plot of the experiment results with the analysis. Using the solving block diagram enabled the
solution of the nonlinear equations without the need for programming.

1.4
T,ω
Terminal Voltage and Frequency- PU

3ph 1.12
PM
DC IG
0.84
Frequency
Prime mover 0.56

Excitation Voltage
0.28
Capacitors
3ph
.
balanced load 0
0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
Load Current - PU

Fig. 3 The experimental set up Fig. 4 Terminal voltage and frequency

variation with resistive load

IV- CONCLUSION

The main contribution of the paper are as following:

1) The paper presents a teaching method that uses general-purpose mathematical software to
solve a polynomial equation using a predefined simple algorithm.
2) The paper emphasizes the practical use of theory and gives chance to the students to enhance
the problem-solving abilities using MathCAD by minimizing the manual algebraic
manipulation of the system equations.
3) The approach as demonstrated by the example gives flexibility in estimating the variables,
thus allowing the students to search the generator characteristics under different variables.
Page 7.1262.6

4) A possible application of the solution methodology for engineering application, particularly

in circuit analysis that require solution of several simultaneous algebraic equations.

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”
 Session # 1433 (Energy Programs and software Tools)

5) The proposed method was experimentally verified and proved to be a practical tool in solving
polynomial equations using “Find and Given” solving blocks.

V- REFERENCES

[1] Z. A. Yamayee and J. L. Bala “ Electromechanical Energy Devices and Power Systems”.
John Wiley & Sons publication, 1994 edition.
[2] E. O. Harger “Learning In A Computer Classroom With An Interactive Book”, FIE’96
Proceedings, PP (1413-1415).
[3] V. G. Agelidis “Incorporating Software Tools in Electrical Engineering Laboratory
Experiments – AN Example”. IEEE Multimedia Engineering Education, PP (319-328).
[4] M. H. Nehrir, F. Fatehi and V. Gerez “Computer Modeling For Enhancing Instructions of
Electric Machinery”. IEEE Transactions On Education, Vol. 38, No.2, May 1995, PP(166-170).
[5] M. Lightner and J. Avery “ A paperless Circuits Laboratory: Vision and Reality”. FIE’96
proceedings, PP(1186-1190).
[6] A. Veglis, C. A. Barbargires and A. Pombortsis “ An Interactive Laboratory Exercise for
Teaching Computer Science Students Network Performance Evaluation Using MathCad and
Mathconnex”. 29th ASEE, IEEE frontiers in Education conference, pp. 13b3-16 November 10-
13, 1999.
[7] J. E. Froyd and B. J. Winkel “A New Integrated First-Year Core Curriculum In Engineering,
Mathematics And Science: A Proposal”. IEEE, AES, Frontiers in Education Conference
Proceedings, pp. 92- 97, 1998.
[8] G. Karady and K. A. Nigim, “Improve learning efficiency by using computers for junior level
electrical engineering courses” ASEE Annual Conference, Albuquerque, NM, July 2001.
[9] Nigim, K. A. and Delyser, R. R. “Using MathCAD in understanding the induction motor
characteristics”. IEEE Transactions on Education, Volume: 44 Issue: 2, May 2001, Page(s): 165
–169.
[10] A. L. Alolh, and M.A. Alkanhal, “Optimization-Based Steady State Analysis of Three Phase
Self-Excited Induction Generator”. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 15, No. 1,
March 2000, pp. 61 - 65.
[11] N. H. Malik, A. A. Mazi, “Capacitance Requirements for Isolated Self Excited Induction
Generators,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. EC-2, March 1987, pp. 62 - 69.
[12] L. Shridhar, B. Singh, C. S. Jha, “A Step Towards Improvements in the Characteristics of
Self Excited Induction Generator”. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. EC-8, No. 1,
March 1993, pp. 40 – 46.
[13] L. Quazene, G. McPherson “Analysis of the Isolated Induction Generator ” IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-102, No. 8, August 1983, pp. 2793 -
2798.
[14] T. F. Chan “Capacitance Requirement of Self Excited Induction Generators”. IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion, Vol. 8, No. 2, June 1993, pp. 304 – 311.
[15] Mathcad user guide 2001, Mathsoft Engineering & Education, Inc., Cambridge, USA.
Page 7.1262.7

“Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”