IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO.

5, SEPT'EMBEIUOCTOBER 1995 1121

Safe Operating and Safe Design Areas

of Induction Motor Drives
Andrzej M. Trzynadlowski, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract-An overview of safe operating areas of induction

motors under various control options is presented. The concept of
safe design area of a drive system is introduced. A computer aided
design method is developed to achieve the best match between a
given load and the proposed drive system. Practical examples
of scalar and vector controlled systems illustrate the described
approach to the optimal design of drive systems with induction
motors.

I. INTRODUCTION
I
NDUCTION motors have been for a long time the principal
workhorses of industry. Widespread introduction to indus-
trial practice of adjustable speed drives, typically based on
invertcr-fed induction motors, can be observed in all developed
countries. New control techniques, particularly those of vector
control, are under intensive development and implementation
[l], [2]. Yet, in the avalanche of publications devoted to the
control of induction motors, disappointingly little can be found
about the optimal selection of a motor for a designed drive
system and optimal matching of the system to the operat-
ing conditions of the load. In all considerations concerning
dynamically or economically optimal control of drives, the
motor is assumed to have already been selected and in the
outlined control strategy its parameters appear as known or
measurable quantities. On the other hand, it is well known
that enormous reserves of energy and cost savings can be
uncovered by retrofitting many existing drive systems so that
they could be utilized in a more efficient fashion [3].
This paper presents an overview of safe operating areas of
induction motors under various control options, and introduces
the idea of safe design area of a drive system. A computer
aided design method is described that allows a drive designer
to achieve the best match between the given load and proposed
system. The method facilitates a comparative analysis of
available motors and control options, so that the optimal
structure of the drive can be determined. In particular, the
proposed approach allows answering the following questions:
1) Which of the available motors is best suited for the given
application?
2) Which control option results in the most efficient oper-
ation of the motor?
Paper IPCSD 95-23, approved by the Industrial Drives Committee of the
IEEE Industry Applications Society for presentation at the 1994 IEEE Industry
Applications Society Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, October 2-7. Manuscript
released for publication March 10, 1995.
The author is with the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Nevada, Reno, NV 89557-0153 USA.
IEEE Log Number 9412793.
0093-9994/95$04.00 0 1995 IEEE
1 I,
-
1 I
Fig. 1. Steady-state equivalent circuit of induction motor.
What are the optimal values of the gear ratio between
motor and load, and of the controlled flux of the motor?
How would possible changes in the design specifications
affect operation of the designed drive system?
What are the safety margins of a given design with re-
spect to unforeseen variations in the operating conditions
of the drive, e.g., overloads or supply voltage sags?
AREAS
11. SAFE OPERATING
The variety of the existing control techniques for induction
motors can roughly be classified as speed control and torque
control methods. The classic Constant Volts/Hertz (CVH)
scalar control and the vector control, based on the field orienta-
tion principle, are typical representatives of these two classes,
respectively [4]. For an analysis of steady-state operation of
an induction niotor, the classic, per-phase equivalent circuit,
shown in Fig. 1, can be used.
Equations can be derived to express the stator voltage and
current in terms of the developed torque, T, rotating speed
(r/min>, n, and selected flux, A, of the motor using the so-
called slip factor, x, defined as
5 w,7, (1)
where w, denotes the radian frequency of currents in the rotor
winding (slip frequency) while 7, is the time constant of the
rotor. Now, the safe operating area (SOAR) of a motor can
be defined as such a three-dimensional region in the (n, A, T )
space that if the operating point of the motor lies within it,
the stator voltage and current, as well as the motor speed and
slip factor, do not exceed their allowable values. The voltage,
current, and speed constraints are self explanatory. The slip

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1122 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO. 5, SEPTEMBEIUOCTOBER 1995

factor limitation, as explained later, is required under most of where

the known control options, except for drive systems with rotor R, stator resistance,
flux control. Rr rotor resistance,
The following equations express the stator current, I,, rotor L, stator inductance,
current, I,, stator voltage, V,, and developed torque, T , of an L, rotor inductance,
induction motor in terms of the three fluxes of the motor, i.e., Lm magnetizing inductance, and
stator flux, A,, airgap flux, A,, and rotor flux, A,, supply p number of poles.
radian frequency, w , and slip factor, x . The rotor current The supply radian frequency, w , can be expressed in terms
equations, although immaterial for the SOAR determination, of the speed, n, of a motor and the slip factor, z, as
will be used for computation of losses in a motor. All the
electric and magnetic quantities are represented by their rms w = -pn
7r

60
+ TrX
-

values.
A) In terms of the stator flux: Substituting (14) in (4), (8), and (12) allows relating the stator
voltage directly to the motor speed.
Further considerations are limited to the motoring operation
of an induction motor since, as seen from (2) through ( 1 3), the
sign of the slip factor does not affect absolute values of the
motor currents and torque, while the effect on the stator voltage
is minimal. Boundaries of a SOAR can now be determined as

d 2 2
follows:
(U+?) +($-ows) The upper speed limit is taken as the maximum allow-
V, = A,
1 +(Oxy able speed of the motor, nail.
X The upper limit of the considered flux is taken as the
T = kill:
1 + (ox)’, rated value of this flux, Rrat, on the assumption that
exceeding this value would result in excessive core
B) In terms of the airgap flux: losses and an undesirable level of saturation of the
magnetic circuit of the motor.
The upper torque limit, calculated from (3,(9), or (13)
for each of the allowable ( n , A ) points, corresponds to
such value of the slip factor that
a) the stator current, I,, does not exceed its maxi-
mum allowable value, I,9,a~l,
b) the stator voltage, V,, does not exceed its rated
value,
For motors with stator or airgap flux control, the slip
factor may not exceed certain critical value, z,,it, equal
110 for stator flux control and 1 / 0 , for airgap flux control.
C ) In terms of the rotor flux: The corresponding critical value of the developed torque is
the highest possible with a given level of the flux. Vector
controlled drive systems with stator or airgap flux orientation
lose their stability when forced to operate with a supercritical
value of the reference torque [4].
At certain levels of the speed and flux, no allowable torque
can be determined since V, > VJ,rat for all the permissible
values of the slip factor. Clearly, such a situation indicates
the need for field weakening. The common approach to
T = k2A:~. field weakening in systems with explicit torque and flux
control consists in adjusting the reference flux in inverse
Coefficients appearing in (1) through (13) are proportion to the motor speed (vector controlled drives) or
stator time constant, supply frequency (scalar controlled drives) when the speed
rotor time constant, or frequency is higher than rated. This simple, feedforward
total leakage factor, method will subsequently be called imposed field weakening.
rotor leakage factor, In certain circumstances, the imposed field weakening un-
inductance coefficient 1, necessarily reduces the SOAR. An altemate method, used
inductance coefficient 2, primarily in the classic CVH scalar speed control drives,
torque coefficient 1, and ensures that the stator voltage does not exceed the rated level
torque coefficient 2. by a simple means of limiting the output voltage of the power

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TRZYNADLOWSKI: SAFE OPERATING AND SAFE DESIGN AREAS OF INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 1123

u.uu -,
FLUX (Wb)

Fig. 2. SOAR of the example motor with stator flux control: No current Fig. 3. SOAR of the example motor with rotor flux control: No current
overload permitted. overload permitted.

converter supplying the motor. This can be called natural

field weakening, for the flux in the field weakening mode
/l
is not controlled, but allowed to assume a value resulting
from the operating conditions of the motor. The natural field
weakening is, however, difficult to realize in systems requiring
precise flux control within the whole operating range. For
each operating point in the field weakening mode, the control
system would have to determine such a value of the reference
flux that results in the rated value of the stator voltage.
All the subsequent considerations are illustrated using a
specific, 7.5-kW, 230-V, 6-pole, wye-connected example mo-
tor with parameters listed in the Appendix. The maximum
allowable speed of the motor, nailr has been assumed at -,
0.00
3000 r/min, i.e., at 250% of the rated synchronous speed. FLUX (wb)
The SOAR of a motor depends on the employed control
Fig. 4. SOAR of the example motor with stator flux control and imposed
strategy, especially in the field weakening mode and, above field weakening: A 200% current overload permitted.
all, on the allowable value of the stator current. This value
is affected by several factors, such as the cooling system,
distortion of the current waveform, and duty cycle of the drive. and imposed field weakening is shown in Fig. 4, and that with
For the following illustrations of the SOAR concept, specific natural field weakening in Fig. 5 . This example shows that
certain reserves of the available torque can be uncovered by
ratios of the allowable current to the rated current had been
improving the techniques of field weakening in drive systems
assumed.
with explicit flux control. Indeed, in recent years, the issue of
The SOAR of the example motor with the imposed field
maximization of the static and dynamic torque has become a
weakening and stator flux control is shown in Fig. 2, while that
topic of intensive studies [5]-[9].
with rotor flux control is shown in Fig. 3. No current overload
is permitted in both cases, i.e., the allowable value of the stator
current equals the rated value. The flux coordinates denote the DI. SAFE DESIGNAREA
constant values of flux in the constant-torque mode (no field The required operating conditions of a load constitute the
weakening). The left-hand limit of the flux range represents starting point to the design of an electric drive system. A
the rated flux and the black surface of the maximum available properly designed system should involve a motor of the
torque encloses the SOAR. It can be seen that although similar, lowest power rating such that it will always operate within its
the SOAR’s in Figs. 2 and 3 are not identical. SOAR. In addition, an effort should be made to minimize the
There is practically no difference between SOAR’s with the power consumption of the motor by means of the parametric
imposed and natural field weakening when the stator current optimization of the system. Additional energy savings can be
is not permitted to exceed its rated value. If, however, a realized by efficiency-optimal control [ 101, [ 111.
current overload is allowed, e.g., for intermittent operation, For the subsequent considerations, the following assump-
then, in comparison with the imposed field weakening, the tions are made:
natural field weakening results in higher available values of 1) The load operating area (LOAR), defined as a set of
the torque at high speeds. The SOAR of the example motor possible operating points in the load torque-load speed
with a 200% current overload permitted, stator flux control, space, is specified.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1124
Fig. 5. SOAR of the example motor with stator flux control and natural field
weakening: A 200% current overload permitted.
The flux to be controlled (stator, airgap, or rotor) is
specified. Except for the field weakening mode, the flux
is to be maintained at a constant reference level, Aref.
The method of field weakening (none, imposed, or
natural) is specified.
The goal of the design procedure is to determine a motor
of the lowest power rating capable of safe operation with
the given load, as well as such values of the reference
flux, Aref, and gear ratio, G, that will result in the
extreme value of a specified objective function related
to the energy consumption of the motor.
The gear ratio is defined here as the ratio of motor speed
to load speed. This allows determination of the maximum
allowable gear ratio, G,,, from the maximum allowable
motor speed and maximum load speed.
Parameters, G and Rref, subsequently called key parame-
ters, define the so-called safe design area (SDA). The SDA
represents such a set of points in the (G,Aref) coordinates
that the motor operates safely under all operating conditions
of the drive. Specifically, the motor speed and stator current
do not exceed their maximum allowable values, the stator
voltage and reference flux do not exceed their rated values,
and the slip factor does not exceed the critical value. A
point within the SDA that yields the extreme value of the
objective function is called an optimal design point (ODP)
The idea of key parameters that transform the LOAR into a
corresponding motor operating area has already been pursued
in papers [ 121-[ 151 concerning, however, different types of
drive systems.
In contrast with the maximum allowable values of the speed,
voltage, flux, and slip factor, that of the stator current is,
generally, not a fixed number, specific for a given motor.
If, for instance, only the intemal fan is used, the maximum
allowable stator current should be taken as such a function
of the motor speed that even the lowest speed of the fan is
sufficient to prevent overheating of the motor. Since motors
with no external cooling typically have a relatively narrow
range of speed control, the simplest solution is to assume a
linear relation between the speed and the allowable current.
For motors supplied by power electronic converters, a rule
Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IF323 TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO. 5, SEPTEMBERKXTOBER 1995
of thumb is to use a motor with the service factor of 1.15
and derate it to the service factor of 1, i.e., assume that
the stator current should not exceed the rated value 1161.
In the subsequent considerations, the allowable stator current
is assumed to be independent of speed of the motor, which
implies an external cooling system, typical for wide-range
adjustable speed drives.
A simple computer program, based on the presented equa-
tions of induction motor, has been developed for the SDA and
ODP determination. It can easily be shown that it is sufficient
to check whether the considered motor operates safely under
the conditions represented by the upper, maximum-torque,
boundary of the LOAR. Therefore, for each point on that
boundary and for each allowable value of the gear ratio
and reference flux, the program calculates the corresponding
values of the slip factor, stator current, and stator voltage. If
a given quantity exceeds its maximum allowable value, the
corresponding point in the (G, A,,f) coordinates is assigned a
specific mark. As a result, an SDA plot is generated in which
the unmarked points represent the SDA of the drive. In the next
step, the corresponding values of the objective function are
calculated for the individual points of the SDA and compared.
The point with the extreme value is selected as the ODP.
No SDA indicates an underrated motor while too large an
SDA implies an overrated one. Therefore, as a measure of
utilization of the given motor in a designed drive system, the
so-called utilization factor, UF,has been defined as
f
uF= 1 - , SDA
\ umaxlkrat
~ )/ x 100%.
If no SDA exists for a considered motor, the utilization
factor is assumed to be zero, while UF close to 100% indicates
full utilization of the motor, i.e., the best match between the
motor and the load.
EXAMPLES
IV. DE~IGN
To illustrate the basic principles of the outlined method, four
design examples are presented below. Comparison of (2) to (5)
with (6) to (9) shows a distinct formal similarity between the
stator flux orientation and airgap flux orientation. Therefore,
only stator and rotor flux orientation schemes are considered.
Regrettably, the limited space does not allow highlighting
all the potentials of the proposed approach to the design of
induction motor drives.
Example I : Pump Drive with CVH Control: A pump is
driven by an induction motor operating under the CVH
control. The required speed range for the pump is 1500
r/min to 2500 r/min and the load torque is proportional to the
square of the speed, with the coefficient of proportionality
varying between 2.5 x N . m/r/min2 and 4 x
N . m/r/min2, depending on the pressure of the pumped
fluid. The LOAR of the pump and the SDA plot for the
example motor are shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. The
SDA plot was produced under the assumptions that no field
weakening is needed because of the progressive load torque,
and no current overload is permitted because of the expected
continuous operation of the drive. As the objective function
 TRZYNADLOWSKI, SAFE OPERATING AND SAFE DESIGN AREAS OF INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 1125

.75

0 --TI,, ,,,
1400 16W la00 ZOO0 2200 2400
LOAD SPEED (rpm)

Fig. 6. LOAR of the example pump drive.

Fig. 9. OF plot for the example pump drive: zoom-in.

0 0 0 0 0 EXCESSIVE SLIP FACTOR

0 U F = 9 3 1 %
**e** EXCESSNE STATOR CURRENT
RATED = 32 Wb OcOx,EXCESSIVE STATOR VOLTAGE

ol,
0,05-0-

LOAD SPEED ( r p m )
Fig. 10. LOAR of the example winder drive.

Fig. 7. SDA plot for the example pump drive.

' '"6,
Fig. 8. OF plot for the example pump drive.
to be minimized, the maximum required stator current was
used. The dots in the objective function (OF) plot in Fig. 8
represent individual points of the SDA from Fig. 7. Zooming
in on the bottom portion of this plot, as shown in Fig. 9,
allows pinpointing the ODP. If a direct connection between
the motor and the pump is required, i.e., G = 1, another,
suboutimal solution can be determined as ODP-I.
Example 2: Winder Drive with Stator Flux Orientation: A
continuously operating winder is to be driven by a vector
controlled induction motor with stator field orientation. The
radius of an empty coil is 0.15 m and that of a full coil is
0.5 m. The web speed varies from 2 m / s to 5 m / s and the
web tension is to be controlled within the 600 N to 1000 N
range. The winder LOAR is shown in Fig. 10. If no field
weakening is assumed, the SDA for the example motor does
not exist, as illustrated in Fig. 11. Therefore, another SDA
plot was generated for the imposed field weakening option.
This plot is shown in Fig. 12, with the SDA appearing in
the upper right corner. The OF plot, with the maximum power
loss incurred in the motor taken as the objective function to be
minimized, is shown in Fig. 13. The power loss includes core
losses, modeled by an addition of a core loss resistance, R,,
in parallel with the magnetizing inductance in the equivalent
diagram in Fig. 1. It is assumed that this resistance is so large
that its inclusion does not affect (2) to (13).
Example 3: Positioning Drive with Rotor Flux Orientation:
A 70-N . m, 0.8-kgm' load is to be rotated through 50
revolutions in time of 3 s. A parabolic speed trajectory is to be
realized, resulting in the LOAR shown in Fig. 14 as a parabolic
curve. The driving motor is vector controlled with rotor flux
orientation and a 200% current overload is permitted. No field
~~ weakening is required, and the corresponding SDA plot for

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1126 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31, NO. 5, SEPTEMBEWWTOBER 1995

0
N

c +7
O O \
LOAD SPEED (rpm)
Fig. 14. LOAK of the example positioning drive.
GEAR RATIO
Fig. 11. SDA plot for the example winder drive: no field weakening.
0 * * a * * EXCESSIVE STATOR CURREM

in U F - 9 9 1 s OODOO EXCESSIVE SLIP FACTOR

(I**** EXCESSIVE STATOR CURRENT
‘1 UF 948 %
Z A T t I1 F1 L.X = 0 306 Wb
ooco3 EXCESSIVE STATOR VOLTAGE

‘1 P I T F n Fi I M = 0 3? W h ax03EXCESSIVE STATOR VOLTAGE

04 08 12 16 20 24
GEAR RATIO
Fig. 15. SDA plot for the example positioning drive: rotor flux orientation.

Fig. 12. SDA plot for the example winder drive: imposed field weakening.

. 0.90

Fig. 16.
Fig. 13. OF plot for the example winder drive.

the example motor is shown in Fig. 15. The energy loss per
operating cycle of the motor is employed as the objective
function to be minimized, and the OF plot is shown in Fig. 16.
As in the drive in Example 1, either a gearing with a certain
optimal ratio can be selected (ODP) or direct coupling of the
motor with the load can be used as a slightly less efficient but
technically sounder solution (ODP-1).
Example 4: Positioning Drive with Stator Flux Orientation:
The same load as in Example 3 is considered, but the vector
controlled motor is oriented along the stator, not rotor, flux
vector. Interestingly, as shown in Fig. 17, no SDA exists for
the example motor in this case. However, the minimal overlap
of the excessive current and excessive voltage areas of the
plot indicates a near miss, If the required displacement time

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TRZYNADLOWSKI: SAFE OPERATING AND SAFE DESIGN AREAS OF INDUCTION MOTOR DRIVES 1127

UF = 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 EXCESSIVE SLIP FACTOR

* * e * * EXCESSIVE STATOR CURRENT
RATED = 0 3 2 Wb OOCrJ3EXCESSiVE STATOR VOLTAGE

0.90

m
f%,
2.4
Fig. 19. OF plot for the example operating system: stator flux orientation,
Fig. 17. SDA plot for the example positioning system: stator flux orientation. relaxed operating conditions.

OOODOEXCESSIVE SLIP FACTOR

relaxed if the SDA plot indicates a near miss and the next
94.7 m
0 UF = ****eEXCESSIVE STATOR CURRENT
COCOOEXCESSIVE STATOR VOLTAGE in line motor is significantly larger and more expensive.
RATED FLUX = o,52 Wb
2 ) Control methods and field weakening options: In par-
ticular, in vector controlled drive systems, orientation
along the stator, airgap, and rotor flux vectors can be
comparatively evaluated.
3) Safety margins: If, for example, supply voltage sags up
to 20% are expected, the maximum allowable voltage
of the motor can be taken at 80%, instead of loo%,
of the rated voltage. If the motor can still drive the
load, in spite of the corresponding 36% reduction in the
developed torque, it certainly can operate when no sags
are experienced. A similar approach can be used with
respect to other operating conditions.
m
2.5 The proposed method of design of induction motor drives
is flexible and interactive. Development of a self-contained
Fig. 18. SDA plot for the example positioning system: stator flux orientation, software package linked with motor databases is planned to
relaxed operating conditions.
serve drive engineers as a practical design tool.

is increased by lo%, to 3.3 s, in order to relax the operating APPENDIX

conditions of the drive, the SDA appears as shown in Fig. 18. PARAMETERS OF THE EXAMPLEMOTOR
The OF plot in Fig. 19, when compared with that in Fig. 16
Rated power, Prat 7.5 kW
for the rotor flux oriented motor, shows that this solution,
Rated voltage, Vs,rat 230 V
if acceptable, would result in significant reduction of energy
Rated current, Is,rat 23.8 Nph
consumed by the motor.
Rated frequency, frat 60 Hz
Rated speed, nrat 1164 r/min
V. CONCLUSION 0.32 Wblph
Rated stator flux,
For illustration purposes, the design examples presented Rated rotor flux, 0.306 Wblph
have been tailored to fit the example motor. In practice, No. of poles, p 6
the SDA and OF plots should be constructed for a variety Stator connection WYe
of available motors, so that the finally selected machine Stator resistance, R, 0.294 Wph
represents a truly optimal choice. Apart from the motor Stator inductance, L, 0.0424 Wph
utilization and energy consumption issues, other considerations Stator time constant, T~ 0.144 s
can be taken into account, such as the cost, efficiency, or power Rotor resistance, R, 0.156 Wph
factor of the motor. Rotor inductance, L, 0.0417 Hlph
In addition to the specific type of motor, the following Rotor time constant, T~ 0.267 s
factors are suggested for a comparative analysis: Rotor leakage factor, ( T ~ 0.017
1) Operating conditions ofthe loud: These can be made Total leakage factor, (T 0.049
more stringent than initially specified, to increase the Magnetizing inductance, L , 0.041 Wph
utilization factor of the motor or, vice versa, somewhat Core loss resistance, R, 75 Wph

Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 1128 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 31. NO. 5, SEETEMBEFUOCTOBER 1995
Inductance coefficient 1,y1 0.983
Inductance coefficient 2 , y ~ 1.034
Torque coefficient 1,IC1 202 N . m/wb2
Torque coefficient 2, k2 216 N . m/wb2
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author thanks the anonymous reviewers for the thor-
ough reviews of the paper, and many useful suggestions.
REFERENCES
J. M. Murphy and F. G. Turnbull, Power Electronic Control of AC
Drives. New York: Pergamon, 1988.
P. C. Sen, “Electric motor drives and control-Past, present, and future,”
IEEE Trans. Ind Electron., vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 562-575, 1990.
MoforMaster Reference Guide, Washington State Energy Office, 1992.
A. M. Trzynadlowski, The Field Orientation Principle in Control of
Induction Motors. Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 1994.
R. D. Lorenz and S. M. Yang, “Efficiency optimized flux trajectories for
closed cycle operation of field oriented induction machines,” in Conf:
Rec. IEEE Ind. Applicai. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1988, pp. 457-462.
R. D. Lorenz and D. W. Novotny, “Saturation effects in field oriented
induction machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 26, no. 2, pp.
262-268, 1990.
R. D.Lorenz and D. B. Lawson, “Flux and torque decoupling control for
field weakened operation of field-oriented induction machines,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Applicat.. vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 290-295, Mar/Apr. 1990.
I. T. Wallace, D. W. Novotny, R. D. Lorenz, and D. M. Divan,
“Increasing the dynamic torque per ampere capability of induction
machines,” IEEE Truns. Ind. Applicar., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 146153,
Jan./Feb. 1994.
-, “Verification of enhanced dynamic torque per ampere capability
in saturated induction machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 30,
no. 5 , pp. 1193-1201, Sept./Oct. 1994.
P.Famouri and J. J. Cathey, “Loss minimization control of an induction
motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 32-37,
Jan./Feb. 1991.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Reva Institute of Tehnology and Management. Downloaded on October 11, 2008 at 04:28 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[ I l l J. C. Moreira, T. A. Lip0 and V. Blasko, “Simple efficiency maximizer
for adjustable frequency induction motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Applicat., vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 940-946, Sept./Oct. 1991.
[12] A. M. Trzynadlowski, “Computer aided preliminary design of electric
drives in key-parameters space,” Electr. Mach. and Power Syst., vol.
12, no. 6, pp. 445-457, 1987.
[I31 -, “Energy optimization of a certain class of incremental motion
dc drives,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 35, no. I , pp. 60-66, 1988.
[14] J. C. Brierley, R. E. Colyer, and A. M. Trzynadlowski, “The SOAR
method for computer aided design of energy-optimal dc drive sys-
tems,” in Conf: Rec. IEEE Ind. Applicat. Soc. Annu. Meeting, 1989, pp.
464-467.
[I51 R. E. Colyer and A. M. Trzynadlowski, “Computer-aided selection of
optimal drives for motion control applications,” in Proc. Int. Aegean
Con$ Elec. Mach. and Power Electron., 1992, pp. 315-320.
[16] T. F. Lowery and D. W. Petro, “Application considerations for PWM
inverter-fed low-voltage induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Applicat.,
vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 286293, Mar./Apr. 1994.
Andrzej M. Rzynadlowski (M’83-SM’86)
received the M.S. degree in electrical engineering
In 1964, the M S degree in electronics in 1969,
and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering in
1974, from the Technical University of Wroclaw,
Poland.
From 1966 to 1979, he was a faculty member
of the Technical University of Wroclaw In the
following years, he worked at the University of
Salahuddin, Iraq, the University of Texas, Arlington,
and the University of Wyoming, Laramie Since
1987, he has been with the University of Nevada, Reno, where he is now
Professor of Electncal Engineering and Assistant Director of Energy Analysis
and Diagnostic Center. He has authored or coauthored over 80 publications
in the areas of power electronics and electric drive systems and has been
granted 11 patents. He is the author of The FieM Orientation Principle in
Control of Induciion Motors (Norwell, MA: Kluwer, 1994).
Dr Trzynadlowski is a member of the Industrial Drives Committee and
the Industrial Power Converters Committee He was the recipient of the 1992
IEEE Industry Applications Society Myron Zucker Student-Faculty Grant.