IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 27, NO.

3, SEPTEMBER 2012 689

Detection of Airgap Eccentricity for Induction

Motors Using the Single-Phase Rotation Test
Doosoo Hyun, Student Member, IEEE, Sungho Lee, Student Member, IEEE, Jongman Hong, Student Member, IEEE,
Sang Bin Lee, Senior Member, IEEE, and Subhasis Nandi, Senior Member, IEEE

AbstractThe single-phase rotation test (SPRT) is a simple and

reliable offline test frequently used for detecting problems in the
rotor cage of induction motors without motor disassembly. Air-
gap eccentricity due to bearing degradation, shaft flexing, etc., is
another problem that is difficult to detect, which can cause catas-
trophic motor failure. In this paper, the feasibility of using the
SPRT for detecting eccentricity, which has not been reported be-
fore, is investigated. The variation in the inductive component as
a function of rotor position and time under static, dynamic, and
mixed eccentricity conditions is analyzed. It is shown that airgap
eccentricity can be detected in addition to rotor cage problems with
the SPRT. An experimental study on a 7.5-Hp induction motor un-
der controlled eccentricity and broken bar conditions shows that
airgap eccentricity can be reliably detected with high sensitivity Fig. 1. Test setup for SPRT [2].
and distinguished from broken rotor bars.
Index TermsCondition monitoring, eccentricity, electrical
fault detection, inductance measurement, induction motors, pre-
ventive maintenance, spectral analysis, testing.

I. INTRODUCTION
HE single-phase rotation test (SPRT) is an offline test for
T detecting rotor cage problems, where the change in current
due to rotor impedance variation is observed as the rotor is
manually rotated under single-phase pulsating field excitation,
as shown in Fig. 1 [1], [2]. Since it is a simple and reliable test
that does not require rotor removal, it is popular and frequently
used in the field or manufacturing facilities for detecting broken Fig. 2. Stator core failure initiated by a stator rotor rub.
rotor bars/end rings. Although the SPRT is only used for broken
bar detection, it is also expected that eccentricity in the airgap
can be observed, since the impedance changes with varying A. Rotor Airgap Eccentricity
airgap as the rotor is rotated. The objective of this paper is to Although much effort is spent by motor manufacturers to
evaluate the feasibility of using the SPRT for detecting airgap minimize the asymmetry in the airgap, an inherent level of airgap
eccentricity in addition to broken bars. eccentricity (typically within 10%) exists due to imperfections
in the manufacturing or assembly process [3]. The position of the
minimum radial airgap is fixed with static eccentricity (SE), and
the position of the minimum radial airgap rotates with the rotor
Manuscript received November 4, 2011; revised February 28, 2012; accepted
April 26, 2012. Date of publication May 25, 2012; date of current version July
with dynamic eccentricity (DE). SE can be caused by stator core
27, 2012. This work was supported by the Human Resources Development of ovality or incorrect positioning of rotor/stator at commissioning
the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) or repair, and the level of SE usually does not change over
grant funded by the Korea government Ministry of Knowledge Economy (No.
20114010203010). Paper no. TEC-00584-2011.
time once the machine has been assembled [4]. DE can be
D. Hyun, S. Lee, J. Hong, and S. B. Lee are with the Department produced by shaft bending, worn bearings, high level of SE,
of Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul 136-713, Korea (e-mail: etc. [3], [4]. Rotor eccentricity causes unbalanced magnetic pull
doosoo.hyun@eecs.korea.ac.kr; soleil20@korea.ac.kr; jongman.hong@eecs.
korea.ac.kr; sangbinlee@korea.ac.kr). which results in vibration, acoustic noise, bearing wear, and/or
S. Nandi is with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineer- rotor deflection. This increases the risk of stator-rotor rub, which
ing, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC V8P5C2, Canada (e-mail: snandi@ can cause serious damage in the stator or rotor core, conductor,
ece.uvic.ca).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online and/or insulation [5]. An example of a stator core and insulation
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. failure due to interlaminar insulation failure initiated by stator-
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TEC.2012.2198218 rotor rub is shown in Fig. 2.
0885-8969/$31.00 2012 IEEE
690 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 27, NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2012

B. Limitations of Existing Eccentricity Tests

There has been a lot of research activity on developing of-
fline and online techniques for detecting airgap eccentricity to
prevent unexpected forced outages due to motor failures. The
total indicated reading (TIR) measures the out of roundness
of the rotor with a dial test indicator as a measure of DE. The
measurements are performed on the rotor surface as the rotor is
manually rotated, and therefore, it is usually only measured at
the manufacturing stage. In the tests described in [6] and [7],
the phase-to-phase inductance pattern of the three phases is ob-
served to detect eccentricity under low-flux [low-voltage and
high-frequency (100 s of Hz to over 1 kHz)] excitation as the
rotor is manually rotated (in [7]). This test can be performed with Fig. 3. Experimental measurement of stator current PSD at rotor rotational
frequency for a motor with (a) 0% and (b) 40% DE (and inherent SE) operating
the motor assembled; however, the interpretation is unclear and under 75% rated load.
has not been verified under controlled eccentricity conditions.
Moreover, it is shown in [7] and [8] that the influence of resid-
ual magnetism and stator winding configuration can cause false
indications.
Online spectrum analysis techniques for detecting airgap
eccentricity rely on indirectly observing the influence of the
nonuniform airgap in the frequency spectrum of the current,
vibration, axial/radial flux, or acoustic noise measurements
[1][7], [9][16]. Motor current signature analysis (MCSA) is
a popular approach since it can provide remote monitoring us-
ing the current transformers (CT) installed in the motor control
center (MCC), whereas other techniques require sensors to be
installed in the vicinity of the motor. With MCSA, eccentricity
can be monitored by observing the rotor rotational speed fre-
quency fr and/or the rotor slot passing frequency components Fig. 4. Experimental measurement of stator current PSD at rotor slot harmonic
frequency for a motor with (a) 0% and (b) 40% DE (and inherent SE) operating
shown in under 75% rated load.
fecc,LF = fs kfr = fs (1 k(1 s)/p) (1)
fecc,HF = fs [(kR nd ) (1 s) /p ] (2)
from the 79 dB increase in (1). However, the increase can also
respectively where fs is the fundamental frequency; s is the slip; be caused by load torque oscillation due to alignment problems
k is an integer; p is the number of pole pairs; R is the number or position-varying load, which makes detection ambiguous.
of rotor slots, nd is the eccentricity order, and is the order Many of the MCSA-based products rely on using the rotor
of stator time harmonics [4], [13]. Some drawbacks of MCSA slot passing frequency shown in (2), since it is independent of
include the requirement of speed (slip) information and heavy load torque oscillations [7], [8], [12]. If (2) is used, eccentricity
data processing capability for obtaining a reliable assessment. can also be detected for cases where either SE or DE is small;
In addition, the magnitude of the sidebands is small and load however, it is shown in [14] and [15] that this is only valid
dependent, and MCSA is ineffective for applications where the for motors that satisfy a certain relationship between p and R.
load constantly changes such as crushers or ball mills, since fecc In addition, R is required to be known, and the speed must be
also changes with slip. known with high accuracy for obtaining a reliable assessment.
The rotor rotational frequency shown in (1) is very effective It can also be seen in the measurements in Fig. 4 that it is
for current- or vibration-based detection of mixed eccentricity difficult to observe 40% DE clearly from (2) due to the small
(ME) [13][15]. Although inherent SE and DE always exist to level and increase in the fault frequency components [20]. The
some degree [13], (1) is not very sensitive for detecting eccen- DE components that increased were below 80 dB, which is
tricity when either SE or DE is small [14], [15]. Another problem very difficult to detect in the field environment.
of using (1) comes from the fact that load torque oscillation due It can be seen in the existing offline and online tests that
to alignment problems or unbalanced load (compressor, etc.) or there are many limitations to applying the eccentricity detection
coupling produces sidebands larger than that caused by eccen- tools that are currently available. Therefore, any type of new or
tricity at identical frequency [16][18]. A number of techniques existing test method that can provide a reliable assessment of
for eliminating the influence of load torque oscillation have been eccentricity would be of great value to the maintenance com-
proposed [18], [19], but there is no practical means of separating munity. In this paper, an analytical and experimental evaluation
them. According to measurements of (1) under controlled eccen- of using the existing SPRT (used for broken bar detection) for
tricity conditions shown in Fig. 3 [20], 40% DE can be observed detecting airgap eccentricity is provided.
HYUN et al.: DETECTION OF AIRGAP ECCENTRICITY FOR INDUCTION MOTORS USING THE SINGLE-PHASE ROTATION TEST
Fig. 5. 2-D FE simulation of induction motor excited with 60 Hz pulsating
field at standstill (s = 1); rotor is manually rotated for SPRT.
II. DETECTION OF AIRGAP ECCENTRICITY WITH THE SPRT
A. SPRT
In the SPRT, the motor is supplied with a pulsating field
at mains frequency by applying 1/81/4 of the rated voltage
between two phases, as shown in Figs. 1 and 5 [1], [2]. The
pattern in the current magnitude is observed as the rotor is
manually rotated to detect damage in the rotor bars or end ring.
The equivalent circuit of an induction motor excited with a
pulsating field is derived from the double revolving field theory
for analyzing the proposed method [24]. A pulsating field can be
resolved into the forward and backward rotating fields, which
have equal magnitude and opposite direction of rotation. The
equivalent circuit of an induction machine can be derived by
representing the effects of the forward and backward fields and
the rotor slip s as in single-phase induction machines, as shown
in Fig. 6(a). This circuit can be simplified for the case under
consideration where the motor is at standstill (s = 1), as shown
in Fig. 6(b). The equivalent input impedance can be derived as
Zeq = Req + jXeq (Rs + Rr ) + j (Xls + Xlr ) (3)
where subscripts l, s, and r represent leakage, stator, and rotor
components, respectively. The magnetizing reactance Xm can
be ignored at standstill since Xm >> | Rr + jXls |, and it is
difficult for the flux to penetrate into the rotor due to the cage
eddy current effect at motor standstill under supply frequency
excitation, as shown in Fig. 5.
If the rotor is in healthy condition, the stator current is constant
independent of rotor position r since the rotor is symmetrical.
However, if a broken bar or end ring is present, the current
decreases P times per 360 rotor rotation due to the increase
in the effective rotor resistance Rr and leakage inductance Llr .
If the current fluctuation exceeds 35%, defects in the rotor
bar or end ring are suspected. The fluctuation in the real or
reactive power or Req or Leq can also be measured and used as
an indicator of rotor defects [21]. This test is frequently used
691
Fig. 6. (a) Induction machine equivalent circuit under pulsating magnetic field
excitation (forward and backward rotating field analysis according to double
revolving field theory). (b) Simplified electrical equivalent circuit model of an
induction motor with pulsating field excitation under standstill conditions (s =
1) [24].
Fig. 7. Stator zigzag leakage flux path through one phase belt.
since it is a simple, inexpensive, and reliable test that can be
performed without rotor removal.
B. Equivalent Impedance Variation With Airgap Eccentricity
If airgap eccentricity is present, Zeq changes as a function of
rotor position due to the nonuniform airgap distribution, and the
change in the pattern of Zeq versus r can be trended over time
to detect eccentricity. The equivalent resistance components,
Rs and Rr , in Fig. 6 are independent of airgap distribution and
eccentricity. However, it is shown in this section that the equiva-
lent leakage inductance components, Lls and Llr , in (3) increase
with airgap asymmetry.
The stator/rotor leakage inductance of squirrel cage induc-
tion motors mainly consists of the slot, end-winding, and zigzag
leakage inductances. The slot and end-winding leakage induc-
tances are independent of the airgap length since their leakage
flux paths do not cross the airgap. On the other hand, the zigzag
leakage flux crosses the airgap as it jumps between the stator
and rotor teeth in a zigzag fashion, as shown in Fig. 7 [21][23].
Therefore, the zigzag leakage inductance Lzz is influenced by
the nonuniform airgap distribution. At motor standstill under
supply frequency excitation, it can be seen in Fig. 5 that a major
portion of the inductive component is due to zigzag leakage flux.
692
Fig. 8. (a) Normalized Lz z () versus for concentric and eccentric (50%)
motor. (b)% increase in average of Lz z () versus% eccentricity.
An analytic expression for the zigzag leakage inductance Lzz
is derived as a function of the airgap in many resources [21][
23]. The resulting equations of this nontrivial derivation differ
depending on slot/winding design and the assumptions made;
however, Lzz is inversely proportional to the airgap length g for
all cases. For instance, Lzz per phase for a three-phase single
layer, open slot (stator and rotor) winding is derived as
2Ns2 le 0 ts tr (t2s + t2r )
Lzz =
Sgs3
where Ns is the total number of series stator turns per phase, le
is the effective axial core length, ts and tr are the stator and rotor
tooth widths, respectively, s is the stator slot pitch, and S is the
total number of stator slots [23]. The coefficient of (4) changes
for different slot/winding designs and the assumptions made,
but Lzz is always inversely proportional to g, independent of the
design. To analyze how the Lzz component in the equivalent Lls
and Llr vary with eccentricity, a motor at standstill with airgap
eccentricity expressed as (5) is considered:
g() = g0 (1 a cos ) (5)
where g0 is the airgap of a concentric machine, is the angle with
respect to the position of the smallest airgap, and a is the degree
(or %) of eccentricity (0 a < 1) [3], [4], [13][15], [20].
Since Lzz is inversely proportional to the airgap, as shown in
(6), the value of Lzz changes depending on the airgap at the
circumferential position of the coil:
Lzz () 1/g(). (6)
The distribution of Lzz for the eccentric airgap distribution
in (5) normalized to the nominal airgap g0 as a function of
is shown in Fig. 8(a) for 50% eccentricity (a = 0.5). The
Lzz versus graph represents the circumferential distribution
of the zigzag leakage inductance. It can be seen in this figure
that the average of Lzz () of an eccentric motor is larger than
that of a concentric motor. This implies that the zigzag leakage
inductance increases with eccentricity, since it can be thought
of as the sum of the individual winding inductances connected
in series. The value of Lzz becomes insensitive to the position
of the eccentric rotor as the number of poles increase since the
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 27, NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2012
Fig. 9. Definitions of variables under (a) SE and (b) DE at motor standstill.
order of stator winding space harmonics given by (2n 1)P/2
for an integral slot winding is higher as the number of poles
P increases [20]. The % increase in Lzz () as a function of %
eccentricity is calculated from (6), and shown in Fig. 8(b). It can
be seen in this figure that the airgap-dependent Lzz component
increases with the degree of eccentricity.
C. Pattern of SPRT Measurements of Leq Under Static,
Dynamic, and ME Conditions
Analytical expressions for airgap as a function of angle
(4)
under SE and DE conditions at motor standstill can be derived
from Fig. 9 in a form similar to that of (5), as
gs () = g0 (1 as cos ( s )) (7)
gd () = g0 (1 ad cos ( d r )) (8)
where as and ad represent the degree of SE and DE (0 a < 1),
respectively, r is the circumferential position of a reference
rotor position with respect to = 0 , and s and d are the
angle of the location of minimum airgap with respect to =
0 and r , respectively. An analytic expression for ME can be
derived from the combination of (7) and (8) as
gm () = g0 (1 as cos ( s ) ad cos ( d r )) .
(9)
It is shown in Section III-B that the value of Lzz is determined
by the degree of eccentricity at the time of SPRT measurement.
For SE and DE, the degree of eccentricity is constant at as and
ad , respectively, independent of the rotor position r as can be
seen in Fig. 9, and (7) and (8). Therefore, the value of Leq is
constant independent of r under pure SE or DE conditions, as
shown in Fig. 10, which shows the predictions and FE simulation
results, respectively. The FE results in Fig. 10(b) were obtained
with a 2-D FE tool (FEMM) under 40% SE, 40% DE, ME (40%
SE and 40% DE), and broken rotor bar conditions (2 of 44
broken bars). Since the value of Xeq increases with the level of
eccentricity, SE and DE can be detected if the increase in Xeq is
monitored over time under identical test conditions.
In practice, SE and DE coexist to some degree due to
imperfections in the manufacturing and assembly procedure
[13][15]. If the level of eccentricity increases over time, it
is usually due to DE; therefore, it is assumed that as and ad
HYUN et al.: DETECTION OF AIRGAP ECCENTRICITY FOR INDUCTION MOTORS USING THE SINGLE-PHASE ROTATION TEST
Fig. 10. Pattern of SPRT measurement of Le q under SE (40%), DE (40%), ME
(40% SE and 40% DE), and broken rotor bar (2 of 44 broken bars) conditions
for a 4-pole motor: (a) predictions based on analysis in Section II-C and (b) FE
simulation (FEMM).
are nonzero, and that ad is larger than as for analyzing the ME
conditions of concern (0 < as < ad ). If the rotor with ME is
rotated during the SPRT, the degree of eccentricity changes de-
pending on the rotor position. From (9), it can be seen that the
degree of eccentricity is maximum at as +ad , when the positions
of minimum airgap of SE and DE are aligned (r = s d ).
The amount of eccentricity is minimum at ad as , when the
position of minimum airgap of DE is in the opposite direction
from that of SE (r = s d + ). This can be expressed as
gm () = g0 (1 am cos( r ))
where
 Artificial SE, DE, ME, and broken rotor bar conditions were
am = a21 + a22 , r = tan1 (a1 /a2 )
a1 = as cos(s ) + ad cos(d + r )
a2 = as sin(s ) + ad sin(d + r ).
Since the level of eccentricity varies once per mechanical revo-
lution and Leq increases with eccentricity, the pattern of Leq is
expected to vary once as the rotor is rotated 360 with the SPRT,
as shown in Fig. 10.
D. Expected Benefits of SPRT for Eccentricity Monitoring
It can be seen from the expected pattern of Leq under SE, DE,
and ME conditions (see Fig. 10) that it can be detected if the Leq
pattern can be monitored and trended over time with the SPRT.
A device that measures the voltage and current for extraction
of Leq can be easily implemented. When a damaged rotor bar
or end ring is present, the Leq pattern varies P times per 360o
rotor rotation, as shown in Fig. 10 (4-pole motor). This implies
693
Fig. 11. (a) Original bearing, (b) new bearing, and (c) inner (DE) and outer
(SE) sleeves for producing eccentricity conditions.
that two faults can be detected and classified with a single test,
which is very economic and convenient as it allows the user to
kill two birds with one stone.
Eccentricity monitoring with the SPRT is also meaningful
since eccentricity faults that are difficult to observe with online
monitoring can be detected without ambiguity. Eccentricity can
be detected independent of pR relationship, and the slip or R
information is not required. The test is also independent of the
influence of variations or oscillations in torque, or alignment
issues since it is an offline test.
III. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
A. Experimental Setup
A laboratory experimental study was performed on 4-pole,
380-V, 7.5-Hp induction motors (g0 = 0.43 mm, R = 44)
to verify the validity of the analysis and proposed detection
method. A 380-V single-phase variable voltage autotransformer
was used for applying 1/8 of the rated voltage (47.5 V) between
two phases, as described in [1] and [2]. The rotor was manually
rotated in 5 intervals between 0 and 360 for obtaining data
points of Xeq for the SPRT. The applied voltage and current
were measured using commercial voltage and current sensors
(10)
and the data acquisition system to verify the theory presented
in Section III.
produced using two motors. The original motor bearings [see
Fig. 11(a)] of motor 1 were replaced with new bearings with
smaller OD and larger ID [see Fig. 11(b)] and inner and outer
(11) sleeves [see Fig. 11(c)] to simulate eccentricity conditions. The
inner and outer sleeves were machined with the hole offset by
20%, 40%, 60%, 80% of the airgap to produce the eccentricity
conditions. Asymmetric outer sleeves were used for SE, asym-
metric inner sleeves were used for DE, and a combination of
both sleeves were used for ME conditions. Since the expecta-
tions on the quality control for inherent eccentricity were low
for small mass produced motors (when compared to large mo-
tors), the inherent SE and DE were measured and compensated
for, as described in [20]. After the compensation for minimiz-
ing the inherent eccentricity, the inherent levels of SE and DE
were measured to be between 5% and 10%. Broken rotor bar
conditions were simulated by drilling holes in the bar-end ring
joint of the rotor of motor 2. The cases of eccentricity and
broken rotor bars tested with the SPRT are summarized in the
694
Fig. 12. Experimental results of cases AC: SPRT measurements of Xe q
versus r under 0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% DE and 0%, 20%, 40% SE (and
inherent SE and DE).
following:
Case A: Concentric
Case B: 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% DE
Case C: 20%, 40% SE
Case D: ME with 20% SE + 20%, 40%, 60% DE
Case E: ME with 40% SE + 20%, 40% DE
Case F: 2 (of 44) broken rotor bars
Case G: Two broken rotor bars and ME (20% SE and 40% DE).
B. Experimental Results
The values of Xeq versus r measured with the SPRT for
cases AC using the concentric, 20, 40, 60, and 80% DE and
20, 40% SE sleeves inserted are shown in Fig. 12. It can be seen
that Xeq is independent of r and increases with the severity of
DE and SE, as predicted in Figs. 8 and 10. Since the value of
zigzag leakage inductance is independent of the circumferential
position of minimum airgap, the Xeq values for SE and DE of
the same percentage eccentricity are similar, as can be seen in
Fig. 12 (20% SE and DE, 40% SE and DE). The difference
between SE and DE at 20% and 40% eccentricity and the vari-
ation in the pattern of Xeq with r can be attributed to inherent
eccentricity, space harmonics of the stator winding, and other
motor nonidealities. Although the pattern of Xeq varies depend-
ing on r , the average of Xeq , Xeq,dc , increases with eccentricity,
and therefore, it can be monitored over time for detecting the
increase in airgap eccentricity.
The Xeq versus r measurements for ME conditions with
20% and 40% SE and varying DE conditions (cases D and E)
are shown in Figs. 13 and 14, respectively. With ME, the level
of eccentricity changes depending on the rotor position, as can
be seen in (9)(11) and Fig. 10. The minimum and maximum
levels of eccentricity for all the cases of D and E are summa-
rized in Table I according to (10) and (11). In Figs. 13 and 14,
the Xeq measurements for pure 080% SE and DE eccentricity
conditions are shown in the background for comparison of the
minimum and maximum values in the variation of Xeq with r
under ME conditions. For instance, the minimum and maximum
eccentricity levels under 20% SE and 60% DE conditions are
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 27, NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2012
Fig. 13. Experimental results of case D: SPRT measurements of Xe q versus
r under ME conditions: 20% SE + 20%, 40%, 60% DE (and inherent SE and
DE).
Fig. 14. Experimental results of case E: SPRT measurements of Xe q versus
r under ME conditions: 40% SE + 20%, 40% DE (and inherent SE and DE).
TABLE I
MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM AIRGAP ECCENTRICITY UNDER SPRT UNDER ME
CONDITIONS (CASES D AND E) FOR 360 REVOLUTION
40% and 80% of the airgap, respectively (see Table I). In Fig. 13,
the variation in Xeq under this ME condition (20% SE and 60%
DE) is between 40% and 80% of the SE/DE values, as predicted.
The Xeq values vary within the minimum and maximum values
for the other ME conditions shown in Figs. 13 and 14 as well,
which confirms the validity of the analysis. The experimental
results clearly show that ME conditions can be detected from
the pattern of the Xeq versus r measurements obtained with the
SPRT.
The SPRT was also performed on a motor with broken rotor
bars, which is what the test is originally intended for. Two of
44 bars of the rotor of motor 2 were broken and inserted in the
stator of motor 1 with concentric inner and outer sleeves. The
Xeq measurements for two broken bars (case F) and two broken
bars with ME at 20% SE and 40% DE (case G) are shown in
Fig. 15. It can be clearly observed that the variation of Xeq is
repeated four times per revolution (4-pole motor) due to broken
HYUN et al.: DETECTION OF AIRGAP ECCENTRICITY FOR INDUCTION MOTORS USING THE SINGLE-PHASE ROTATION TEST
Fig. 15. Experimental results of cases F and G: SPRT measurements of Xe q
versus r under broken bar conditions (2 of 44) with and without ME (20% SE
+ 40% DE).
Fig. 16. Experimental results of cases AG: SPRT measurements of peak-to-
peak values of the dc (Xe q , d c ), once per revolution (Xe q , 1 ), and four times per
revolution (Xe q , 4 ) components of Xe q : (a) Xe q , d c versus Xe q , 1 and (b) Xe q , 4
versus Xe q , 1 .
bars, whereas it is repeated once for ME as in Figs. 13 and
14. When 2 (of 44) bars of a rotor with ME are broken, the
Xeq variation also includes a once per revolution variation as
shown in the results of case G in Fig. 15. This clearly shows
that coexisting broken bars and ME faults can be detected and
classified with the SPRT.
The peak-to-peak values of the component that is repeated
once and four times per revolution, Xeq,1 and Xeq,4 , can be
extracted from the Xeq versus r graph and used as indicators
for fault detection and classification. The amount of increase in
the Xeq,dc , Xeq,1 , and Xeq,4 components over time are different
depending on the type of fault in the motor. It can be seen
from Figs. 10, 1215 that Xeq,dc increases for SE, DE, ME, and
broken bars, Xeq,1 increases only for ME, and Xeq,4 increases
only for broken bars. This is plotted as Xeq,dc versus Xeq,1 and
Xeq,4 versus Xeq,1 graphs in Fig. 16(a) and (b), respectively. The
experimental results shown in this section verify the validity of
the analysis of the patterns of Xeq given in Section III for SE, DE,
and ME faults. It can also be seen that all types of eccentricity
faults can be detected and distinguished from broken rotor bars
with the SPRT, if the pattern of Xeq is monitored over time. Xeq
can be considered a reliable fault indicator as it does not change
695
with temperature or other ambient conditions if measured under
identical excitation conditions.
IV. CONCLUSION
An analytical and experimental evaluation of using the stan-
dard offline SPRT (used for broken bar detection) for detecting
airgap eccentricity was presented in this paper. It was verified
under controlled eccentricity and broken bar conditions on a
7.5-Hp induction motor that airgap eccentricity can be reliably
detected with the SPRT in addition to broken bar faults. The
main advantage of the eccentricity detection method presented
in this study is that it can be performed using an existing standard
test method frequently used in the field. There are also many
advantages in comparison to the existing online eccentricity
monitoring methods such as MCSA in terms of reliability and
sensitivity of fault detection, as summarized in the following.
1) Static/dynamic and ME faults can be detected and distin-
guished without ambiguity from the pattern and change of
Xeq over time.
2) Independent of operating conditions such as load varia-
tion, oscillations, and alignment issues and noise.
3) Independent pR relationship
4) No information on R or rotor speed (slip) required.
The SPRT can be used for the verification of online fault in-
dications without motor disassembly or to verify the quality of
repair or manufacturing. The proposed test method is expected
to provide valuable information to the maintenance engineers
who use the SPRT frequently since airgap eccentricity can be
monitored in addition to broken rotor bars. Although the poten-
tial of the method has been evaluated in this paper, more analytic
and experimental work is required on determining fault severity
since the amount of change in Xeq with eccentricity is expected
to vary depending on the motor design.
REFERENCES
[1] G. C. Stone, E. A. Boulter, I. Culbert, and H. Dhirani, Electrical Insulation
for Rotating Machines (IEEE Press Series on Power Engineering). New
York: Wiley, 2004.
[2] Testing of squirrel cage rotors, Electrical Apparatus Service Association,
Inc., EASA Tech. Note 23, 2003.
[3] W. T. Thomson and A. Barbour, On-line current monitoring and ap-
plication of a finite element method to predict the level of static airgap
eccentricity in three phase induction motors, IEEE Trans. Energy Con-
vers., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 347357, Dec. 1998.
[4] J. R. Cameron, W. T. Thomson, and A. B. Dow, Vibration and current
monitoring for detecting airgap eccentricity in large induction motors,
Proc. Inst. Elect. Eng.Pt. B, vol. 133, no. 3, pp. 155163, May 1986.
[5] A. H. Bonnett and T. Albers, Squirrel cage rotor options for AC induction
motors, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 11971209, Jul./Aug.
2001.
[6] The Multi-Technology Approach to Motor Diagnostics, All-Test Pro
LLC, (2012). [Online]. Available: http://www.alltestpro.com/articles-
testimonials/
[7] P. Bechard, Fault zone anlaysisAirgap, in Proc. Motor Reliab. Tech.
Conf., 2004, pp. 3746.
[8] Testing the Rotor of a Induction Motor by Measuring the Inductance as
a Function of Shaft Position, GET-8065 rev. 1, GE Industrial Control
Systems, Sep. 1997.
[9] VibroSystM, Airgap capacitive sensor, (2011). [Online]. Available:
http://www.vibrosystm.com/en/MC_AGP.html
[10] S. Nandi, H. A. Toliyat, and X. Li, Condition monitoring and diagnosis of
electrical motors, IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 719729,
Dec. 2005.
696
[11] A. Bellini, F. Filippetti, C. Tassoni, and G. A. Capolino, Advances in
diagnostics techniques for induction machines, IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec.,
vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 41094126, Dec. 2008.
[12] M. Fenger, B. A. Lloyd, and W. T. Thomson, Development of a tool to
detect faults in induction motors via current signature analysis, in Proc.
IEEE IAS Cement Ind. Tech. Conf., 2003, pp. 3746.
[13] D. G. Dorrell, W. T. Thomson, and S. Roach, Analysis of airgap flux,
current, and vibration signals as a function of the combination of static and
dynamic airgap eccentricity in 3 phase induction motors, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 2434, Jan./Feb. 1997.
[14] S. Nandi, S. Ahmed, and H. A. Toliyat, Detection of rotor slot and
other eccentricity related harmonics in a three phase induction motor
with different rotor cages, IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 16, no. 3,
pp. 253260, Sep. 2001.
[15] S. Nandi, R. M. Bharadwaj, and H. A. Toliyat, Performance analysis of
a three phase induction motor under mixed eccentricity condition, IEEE
Trans. Energy Conv., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 392399, Sep. 2002.
[16] W. T. Thomson, D. Rankin, and D. G. Dorrell, On-line current monitoring
to diagnose airgap eccentricity in large three-phase induction motors
Industrial case histories verify the predictions, IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 13721378, Dec. 1999.
[17] R. R. Schoen and T. G. Habetler, Effect of time-varying loads on rotor
fault detection in induction machines, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 31,
no. 4, pp. 900906, Jul./Aug. 1995.
[18] G. Salles, C. Tassoni, G. Grellet, and G. Franceschini, Monitoring of
induction motor load by neural network techniques, IEEE Trans. Power
Electr., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 762768, Jul. 2000.
[19] T. Wolbank and P. E. Macheiner, Monitoring of static and dynamic
airgap eccentricity of inverter fed induciton machine drives, in Proc.
IEEE IECON, 2006, pp. 15041509.
[20] D. Hyun, J. Hong, S. B. Lee, K. Kim, E. J. Wiedenbrug, M. Teska,
S. Nandi, and I. T. Chelvan, Automated monitoring of airgap eccentricity
for inverter-fed induction motors under standstill conditions, IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 12571266, May/Jun. 2011.
[21] H. A. Toliyat and G. B. Kliman, Handbook of Electric Motors, 2nd ed.
New York: Marcel Dekker, 2004.
[22] P. Cochran, Polyphase Induction Motors. New York, NY: Marcel
Dekker, 1989.
[23] T. A. Lipo, Introduction to AC Machine Design, Madison. WI: Madison,
Univ. Wisconsin Press, 1996.
[24] S. J. Chapman, Electric Machinery Fundamentals, 5th ed. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill, 2012.
Doosoo Hyun (S09) received the B.S. and M.S.
degrees in electrical engineering from Korea Uni-
versity, Seoul, Korea, in 2009 and 2011, respec-
tively, where he is currently working toward the Ph.D.
degree.
In 2009, he was with Baker Instrument Company,
An SKF Group Company, Fort Collins, CO, where he
was involved in the development of condition moni-
toring tools for electric machines, as a Summer Intern.
In 2011, he was with the Austrian Institute of Tech-
nology, Vienna, Austria, as an Intern. His research
interests include condition monitoring, diagnostics, and analysis of electric
machinery.
Sungho Lee (S11) received the B.S. degree in
electrical engineering from Korea University, Seoul,
Korea, in 2011, where he is currently working toward
the M.S. degree.
In 2011, he was a Summer Intern at the Vienna
University of Technology, Vienna, Austria. His re-
search interests include condition monitoring, diag-
nostics, and control of electric machinery.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 27, NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 2012
Jongman Hong (S08) received the B.S. degree in
electrical engineering from Korea University, Seoul,
Korea, in 2008, where he is currently working toward
the Ph.D. degree.
In 2009, he was with Baker Instrument Company,
An SKF Group Company, Fort Collins, CO, where he
was involved in the development of condition moni-
toring tools for electric machines, as a Summer Intern.
In 2011, he was with the Austrian Institute of Tech-
nology, Vienna, Austria, as an Intern. His research
interests include condition monitoring, diagnostics,
and control of electric machinery.
Mr. Hong received the 2011 First Prize and 2008 Second Prize Paper Award
from the Electric Machines Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Soci-
ety and the 2009 SDEMPED Prize Paper Award from the Technical Committee
on Diagnostics of the IEEE Power Electronics Society.
Sang Bin Lee (S95M01SM07) received the
B.S. and M.S. degrees from Korea University, Seoul,
Korea, in 1995 and 1997, respectively, and the Ph.D.
degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, GA in 2001, all in Electrical Engineering.
From 2001 to 2004, he was with the Electric
Machines and Drives Laboratory, General Electric
Global Research Center (GRC), Schenectady, NY.
At GE GRC, he developed an interlaminar core fault
detector for generator stator cores, and worked on
insulation quality assessment for electric machines.
From 2010 to 2011, he was with the Electric Drive Technologies, Austrian In-
stitute of Technology, Vienna, Austria, as a Research Scientist where he was
involved in condition monitoring of PM synchronous machines. Since 2004,
he has been a Professor of Electrical Engineering at Korea University, Seoul,
Korea. His current research interests include protection, monitoring, diagnos-
tics, and analysis of electric machines and drives.
Dr. Lee received the 2005 PES Prize Paper Award from the IEEE Power
Engineering Society, the 2011 First Prize, 2008 Second Prize, 2005 First Prize,
and 2001 Second Prize Paper Awards from the Electric Machines Committee of
the IEEE Industry Applications Society, and the 2011, 2009 SDEMPED Prize
Paper Awards from the Technical Committee on Diagnostics of the IEEE Power
Electronics Society. He serves as an Associate Editor for the IEEE TRANSAC-
TIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS for the IAS Electric Machines Committee.
Subhasis Nandi (S97M00SM06) received the
B.E. degree from Jadavpur University, Calcutta,
India, the M.E. degree from the Indian Institute
of Science, Bangalore, India, and the Ph.D. degree
from the Texas A&M University, College Station, in
1985, 1988, and 2000, respectively, all in electrical
engineering.
He joined the Department of Electrical and Com-
puter Engineering, University of Victoria, Victoria,
Canada, where he is currently an Associate Profes-
sor. Between 1988 and 1996, he was with TVS Elec-
tronics and the Central Power Research Institute, Bangalore, India, where he
was involved in the areas of power electronics and drives. Between September
2008 and August 2009, he was a Contract Professor with the Department of
Electrical Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, Korea. His main research in-
terests include power electronics and drives and analysis and design of electrical
machines, with special emphasis on fault diagnosis.