This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 1

A New 9-Phase Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor with

Consequent Pole Rotor for High Power Traction Applications
M. Onsal1, Y. Demir1, Student Member, IEEE, and M. Aydin1,2, Member, IEEE
1
R&D Department, MDS Motor Design Ltd., Kocaeli, 41275, Turkey
2
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, 41380, Turkey

Although three-phase permanent magnet (PM) motors are quite common in industry, multi-phase PM motors are used in special
applications where high power and redundancy are required. Multi-phase PM motors offers higher torque/power density than
conventional three-phase PM motors. In this paper, a novel multi-phase consequent pole permanent magnet (CPPM) synchronous
motor is proposed. The constant power-speed range of the proposed motor is quite wide as opposed to conventional PM motors. The
design and detailed finite-element analysis of the proposed 9-phase CPPM motor and performance comparison with a 9-phase surface
mounted PM motor are completed to illustrate the benefits of the proposed motor.

Index Terms— Consequent pole, field weakening, multi-phase, 9-phase motor, permanent magnet motor.

I. INTRODUCTION magnets in addition to significant reduction of magnet cost.

The new motor has significantly wider constant power-speed
R educing magnet cost in permanent magnet (PM) motors is
of interest to researchers for many years especially in cost
region than surface magnet PM motors with some reduction
on the average torque.
sensitive applications such as appliance and automotive
industries. Electric motor designers working on brushless II. NEW 9-PHASE CPPM TRACTION MOTOR
motor design for electric vehicle applications have been
The rotor structure of the proposed 9-phase CPPM traction
focusing on less PM or PM-less motor options after the
motor is illustrated in Fig. 1. It has 12 magnet poles and 12
magnet crises in early 2000s [1]. Various types of
consequent iron pole with segmented rotor. 5 Rotor segments
conventional surface mounted PM and interior PM motors are
are used to minimize the torque pulsations. Integer-slot
proposed for most e-vehicle application. However, most of
traction motor with various winding configurations are also
electric motors for such vehicle applications are three phase
introduced for the machine.
motors. As the power level increases, the necessity of utilizing
multi-phase motors becomes inevitable. Permanent
There are numerous studies reported in the literature magnets
describing different multi-phase machine topologies, modeling
and design methods, and control techniques [2-5]. Surface Segmented
mounted PM motors are commonly used for both low and laminated iron
poles
high-power traction applications both as generator and traction
motor. Although they do provide simpler and cheaper Rotor
construction, their flux weakening capability is quite poor. It is lamination

also known that consequent pole (CP) rotor topology improves

field weakening capability [6], [7].
In this work, a new 9-phase consequent pole permanent
magnet (CPPM) synchronous motor is proposed with reduced
magnet compared to conventional multi-phase PM motors for
high power traction applications. The new rotor topology takes
advantage of both simpler and cheaper construction in
addition to wider flux weakening capability than conventional
PM motors. The topology is composed of semi inset type
magnets for high speed protection of the magnets and the
laminated iron rotor poles. Furthermore, the proposed
structure provides less demagnetization risk for the surface
Manuscript received Mar 10, 2017. Accepted for publication May 21,
2017.
Y. Demir is with MDS Motor Design Ltd. Kocaeli, Turkey
(corresponding author, phone: +90 (262) 303-3231; fax: +90 (262) 341-
4472; e-mail: yucel@mdsmotor.com).
M. Aydin is with Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey (Phone: +90 (262)
303-3231; fax: +90 (262) 303-3003; e-mail: metin.aydin@kocaeli.edu.tr).
Fig. 1. Rotor structure of 9-phase CPPM synchronous motor
There are three winding options to define the proposed 9-
phase CPPM motor. Winding alternatives and phasor
diagrams for all three options are given in Fig. 2, Fig. 3 and
Fig. 4. The motor windings consist of three different
independent three-phase winding sets.
The first option is distributed 9-phase set. In this option,
A1-B1-C1 denotes 3-phase winding set. A2-B2-C2 denotes 3-
phase winding set shifted by 40 electrical degrees with respect
to A1-B1-C1. A3-B3-C3 denotes 3-phase winding set shifted
by 80 electrical degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1.
Furthermore, Option-2 is again distributed triple 3-phase set
with 20 electrical degrees shift. A2-B2-C2 denotes 3-phase
winding set shifted by 20 electrical degrees with respect to
A1-B1-C1. A3-B3-C3 denotes 3-phase winding set shifted by
40 electrical degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1. Finally, in

0018-9464 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information. (Inserted by IEEE.)
0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 2

Option-3, both A2-B2-C2 and A3-B3-C3 denotes 3-phase

winding sets in phase with A1-B1-C1. In this option, all the   2   2 
three winding sets are distributed along 120 mechanical cos  cos   3  cos   3 
vdi       v Ai 
degrees along the stator circumference. Since phase belt here v   2  sin  sin    2  sin    2    v  (1)
(coil length from phase A1 to A1’) is the shortest, the motor  qi  3     
3  
Bi
 3  
end windings are the smallest, thus copper losses are lower for  v0   0.5 0.5 0.5   vCi 

this configuration in comparison to other alternatives.  
 

Option-1 where the d-axis is oriented at an angle of θ ahead of phase a-

axis and each winding sets have same orientation angle
between d-axis and a-axis. VAi, VBi, VCi, and Vdi – Vqi denote
the ith winding set and d-q axis voltages, respectively. The
Distributed
9-phase set torque magnitude produced by each winding set is equal to
each other.
The total output torque of the CPPM motor can be
obtained by the sum of the torques that are generated for each
winding set as
(a) (b)
Fig. 2. (a) Phasor diagram of 9-phase winding (b) distribution of winding sets
m p 3
  pmI qi  Ldi  Lqi I qi I di 
along the stator circumference – Option-1. A1-B1-C1 denotes 3-phase
winding set. A2-B2-C2 denotes 3-phase winding set shifted by 40 electrical Tout  (2)
degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1. A3-B3-C3 denotes 3-phase winding set
2 i 1
shifted by 80 electrical degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1.
where m is the phase number, p is the number of pole pair, Lqi
Option-2 and Ldi are the q- and d- axis inductances of the ith winding set,
λpm is the total magnet flux, Iqi and Idi is the q- and d-axis
currents of the ith winding set, respectively.
Distributed
triple 3-phase III. PRELIMINARY MOTOR DESIGN
sets
Design of a novel 9-phase CPPM motor is completed based
on magnetic equivalent circuit modelling approach for 750V
DC bus voltage. Optimum pole number simulations are also
(a) (b)
carried out. As seen in Fig. 5, the pole number reaches a
Fig. 3. (a) Phasor diagram of 9-phase winding (b) distribution of winding sets plateau region after the 24 poles. Therefore, 24, 30 and 36
along the stator circumference – Option-2. A1-B1-C1 denotes 3-phase poles appear to be the optimum pole numbers for the high-
winding set. A2-B2-C2 denotes 3-phase winding set shifted by 20 electrical power traction application.
degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1. A3-B3-C3 denotes 3-phase winding set
shifted by 40 electrical degrees with respect to A1-B1-C1.
The main parameters and specifications of the 9-phase
CPPM motor are summarized in Table I. The CPPM motor
Option-3 has 293kW output power at the rated speed of 3000rpm.

12
1st 3-phase
20
Torque per Weight [Nm/kg]

set 10
Power Density [W/cm3]

2nd 3-phase 16
8
set
3rd 3-phase 12
6
set
4 8

2 4

(a) (b) 0 0
Fig. 4. (a) Phasor diagram of 9-phase winding and (b) winding sets on the 1/3 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48
Number of poles Number of Poles
of the stator – Option-3. A1-B1-C1 denotes 3-phase winding set. A2-B2-C2
denotes 3-phase winding set in phase with A1-B1-C1. A3-B3-C3 denotes 3- Fig. 5. Pole number optimization of 9-phase CPPM traction motor
phase winding set in phase with A1-B1-C1.
TABLE I
MAIN PARAMETERS AND SPECIFICATIONS
Due to smaller end windings and simpler manufacturing, OF NEW MULTI-PHASE PM MOTOR
Option-3 is used for this design. According to [8], the d-q
model of the 9-phase CPPM motor can be expressed as the Rated speed 3000 rpm Magnet type NdFeB
conventional d-q set of the three-phase machine. Thus, the d-q Rated voltage 750 V Lamination type M19 Steel
Rated power 293 kW Cooling Method 40°C Water
axes voltage transformation of one winding set can be written
as

0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 3

windings 300
stator Phase A1
windings 200 Phase B1

Back EMF [V]

Phase C1
100 Phase A2

0 Phase B2

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Phase C2

-100 Phase A3

magnets -200 Phase B3

Phase C3
-300
rotor Angle [Electrical Degrees]
Fig. 6. Proposed CPPM motor structure
(a)
300
IV. FEA OF 9-PHASE CONSEQUENT POLE MOTOR Phase A1

200 Phase B1
Finite element analyses (FEA) of the 9-phase CPPM

Back EMF [V]

Phase C1
traction motor was carried out by Flux FEA package by Altair 100 Phase A2
Co. in this section. Motor structure and FEA model of the 0 Phase B2
motor is given in Fig. 6. 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Phase C2
-100 Phase A3
A. No-load Analyses
-200 Phase B3
First, no-load analysis is carried out to determine important Phase C3
-300
parameters such as flux density, cogging torque, back Angle [Electrical Degrees]
electromotive force (back-EMF) voltage and total harmonic (b)
distortion (THD) level. No-load analysis is performed without 300 Phase A1
energizing the motor windings. The magnetic saturation level
200 Phase B1
and flux lines of the CPPM motor are illustrated in Fig. 7.
Back EMF [V]
Phase C1
Cogging torque is the one of the crucial performance data, 100 Phase A2
which occurs due to the interaction between stator teeth and 0 Phase B2

the magnets. Cogging torque generates vibration and noise at 0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Phase C2
-100 Phase A3
low speeds and has a significant negative effect on the output
torque. It is also critical for traction applications. The variation -200 Phase B3
Phase C3
of the cogging torque of the CPPM motor is minimized using -300
Angle [Electrical Degrees]
various techniques and provided in Fig. 8. It is seen that the
maximum value of the cogging torque is %0.016 of rated (c)
torque, which can be considered extremely low for this Fig. 9. Back-EMF variations of 9-Phase CPPM motor: (a) Option-1, (b)
particular application. Option-2 and (c) Option-3

Variations of back-EMF voltages and the THD levels are

also simulated for all the three winding alternatives and the
results are illustrated in Fig. 9. The phase shifts between the 3-
phase sets can be clearly seen from the FEA results. The THD
level of Option-3 is 3.1% and it shows that back-EMF voltage
waveform is quite sinusoidal with low harmonic content.

B. On-load Analyses
On-load analyses of the proposed 9-phase CPPM motor are
also performed. Furthermore, torque and power vs. speed
Fig. 7. No-load flux density and flux lines of the CPPM motor curves are obtained by FEA. The variation of the output torque
is given in Fig. 10. The output torque of the CPPM motor is
0.15 about 931.4Nm and torque ripple is roughly 0.5% of the rated
Cogging Torque [Nm]

0.1 torque after optimization.

0.05
Although the CPPM motor has magnets on the surface as in
the case of the SPM motors, the consequent poles between the
0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
two magnets create higher saliency ratio than conventional
-0.05 SPM motors. Thus, the increased saliency ratio between d-
-0.1 CPPM Motor and q-axis increases the flux weakening capability of the
-0.15 proposed motor. The control algorithm of the CPPM motor
Rotor Position [Mechanical Degrees] considers the maximum torque per ampere (MTPA) condition
Fig. 8. Cogging torque variation for CPPM motor with segmented rotor for constant torque region. In this region, only q-axis current

0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 4

(Iq) is controlled to obtain the maximum torque. To obtain 1.20 Stator

I=0

Magnet
Airgap

Backiron
constant power region especially in high rotor speeds the 1.00

Flux Density [T]

controller is used field weakening method by applying d-axis I=Irx1
0.80 I=Irx2
current (Id) to the motor. I=Irx3
The voltage equation of a CPPM motor can be expressed as: 0.60
0.40 Rotor

Vs  e Lq I q  e Ld I d  pm 

2 2 (4) 0.20
Shaft
0.00
where Vs is the terminal voltage of the stator windings, ω e is Fig. 11. Flux density variation of CPPM motor along d-axis
the mechanical speed of motor, Lq and Ld are the q- and d- axis
inductances, λpm is the total magnet flux, Iq and Id denote the q- of 123Arms. However, some risk can be seen when the stator
and d-axis currents respectively. As seen from the equation, current is doubled.
the speed of the motor can be given as:
D. Torque-Speed Curves by FEA
Vmax
e  (5) Speed control of CP synchronous motors is also expressed
L Id d   pm   Lq I q 
2 2
by the voltage and current vectors shown in Fig. 12. First, the
motor run along with MTPA on OA curve. At point A, motor
voltage and current reaches the limit. Up to this point only q-
1200 axis current is applied. Then, field weakening (FW) is applied
1000 to reach higher speeds. It is needed to control current vector to
run along the current limit to increase speed to ω2. As can be
Torque [Nm]

800
600 seen from the diagram, when the current vector goes from
400 CPPM Motor-option1 point A to B, the d-axis current is increased. Therefore, d-axis
CPPM Motor-option2 current can weaken the magnet flux linkage and the motor can
200 CPPM Motor-option3
0
reach to high speeds. It should be noted that the vector sum of
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 Id and Iq will have to be equal to IS. It means that as the d-axis
Rotor position [Electrical Degrees] current increases, q-axis current decreases due to the current
(a) circle limit.
120 0 2.5 The torque-speed curve of the proposed 9-phase motor with
1008.5 2.06
Av er. Torque [Nm]

100 0 Option-3 winding configuration considering FW and without

Torque Ripple [%]

888.5 931.4 2
800 FW is illustrated in Fig. 13(a). It can be seen from the figure
1.5
600 1.09 that the knee point of the CPPM motor is equal to 3000rpm
1
400 and the output torque decreases immediately to zero if the
0.5
200 0.16 field weakening is not applied in the control algorithm. On the
0 0 other hand, the CPPM motor speed reaches up to about
option1 option2 option3 option1 option2 option3
8000rpm with field weakening control. The power-speed
(b) (c)
Fig. 10. Output torque variation (a), average torque (b) and torque ripple
variation of the proposed motor considering FW is also shown
levels (c) of CPPM motor with different winding option, in Fig. 13(b). The 9-phase CPPM motor with 24-pole can be
operated in an extremely wide constant power region.
It is seen from Eq. (5) that the speed increase depends on
the values of Id and Iq, the amount of magnet used, and Iq
saliency which are the variable parameters d-axis and q-axis ωe1< ωe2< ωe3 A: Is=Iq
currents. B: Is2=Iq2+ Id2
A C: Is=-Id
ωe1 B Voltage limit
C. Demagnetization Control circle
ωe2
Demagnetization is a major concern in traction motors, ωe3
which occurs due to high stator currents with permanent Id
O
magnets. High d-axis current in stator windings produces flux C
against the PM flux. Thus, permanent magnet loses its flux
Icd= λpm/Ld
ability under the reverse flux. As a result, flux density of the
magnet has to be controlled to see demagnetization effect. Current limit
Flux density of permanent magnets along d-axis of the circle
proposed 9-phase motor is illustrated in Fig. 11. As seen from
Fig. 12. Stator voltage and current vector diagram
the figure, no demagnetization risk is observed at rated current

0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 5

MTPA Field Weakening TABLE II

1200 IRON AND MAGNET LOSS OF 9-PHASE CPPM MOTOR (@2000RPM)
CPPM Motor without
1000 FieldWeakening
CPPM Motor with CPPM SPM
800
Torque [Nm]

FieldWeakening
Iron Loss 1.4kW 2.2kW
600
400 Magnet Loss [W] 24W 38W
200
0 1500
1000 3000 5000 7000 9000 1250
Speed [rpm] CPPM Motor

Torque [Nm]
(a) 1000 SPM Motor
350 750
300 500
250
Power [kW]

250
200
0
150 CPPM Motor without 1000 3000 5000 7000 9000
100 FieldWeakening Speed [rpm]
CPPM Motor with (a)
50 FieldWeakening
0 350
1000 3000 5000 7000 9000 300
Speed [rpm] 250
(b) Power [kW] 200
Fig. 13. (a) Torque-speed and (b) power-speed curves of the CPPM motor
150
considering FW and MTPA obtained by FEA CPPM Motor
100
50 SPM Motor
V. COMPARISON OF CPPM VS. SPM 0
1000 3000 5000 7000 9000
Performance comparison of 9-phase conventional SPM Speed [rpm]
motor and proposed 9-phase CPPM motor are provided in this (b)
section. It has to be noted that the magnet cost is important in Fig. 14. (a) Torque-speed and (b) power-speed curves of the CPPM motor and
the motor industry. Hence, SPM motor with the same external SPM motor considering FW method obtained by FEA
dimensions and stator structure is designed and compared with
the proposed 9-phase CPPM motor. In addition, RMS currents VI. CONCLUSION
are kept the same in both motors. Proposed CPPM motor has
50% less magnet usage than that of SPM motor. Field In this paper, a new 9-phase consequent pole permanent
weakening analyses are performed to determine speed and magnet synchronous motor is proposed, analyzed and
torque limits for both traction motors. The results are given in designed for the first time in literature. Initial design, detailed
Fig. 14(a). There is a 33% reduction in the CPPM motor finite element modelling and torque quality investigation are
torque compared to the SPM motor, although it has 50% less all performed to validate the proposed motor for a high- power
magnet usage. It can also be seen that the maximum speed of traction applications. Besides the motor has the fundamental
the proposed 9-phase CPPM motor can reach up to 8000rpm benefits of multi-phase motors, it offers wider constant power
while the constant power region ends around 6900rpms. In region with respect to its surface magnet counterpart. It is
addition, constant-power-speed-ratio (CPSR), which is defined shown that the proposed CPPM motor topology helps to
as the ratio of the speed at the end of constant power region to improve field weakening capability. The main benefits of the
rated speed, is 2.3 for the proposed motor while the CPSR is proposed motor are lower magnet cost with comparable torque
only 1.4 for the conventional 9-phase SPM motor. It can be density as opposed to 9-phase conventional surface magnet
considered as a big benefit for traction applications. Power- motor, simpler rotor structure, lower demagnetization risk, and
speed variations of both motor is also seen in Fig. 14(b). The lower temperatures.
maximum power levels of the both motors are close, although
there are less magnets on the proposed CPPM motor. REFERENCES
The loss comparison of both motors is also shown in Table
[1] S. U. Chung, J. W. Kim, Y. D. Chun, B. C. Woo and D. K. Hong,
II. The used magnet amount for CPPM motor has 50% less "Fractional Slot Concentrated Winding PMSM With Consequent Pole
than SPM motor, and thus flux density level of the proposed Rotor for a Low-Speed Direct Drive: Reduction of Rare Earth
motor is lower than that of SPM motor. Therefore, there is Permanent Magnet," in IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol.
30, no. 1, pp. 103-109, March 2015.
36% reduction in iron and magnet losses in the proposed 9- [2] L. Parsa, “On advantages of multi-phase machines,” in Proc. 31st
phase CPPM motor compared to the SPM motor. Annual Conf. IEEE Ind. Electron. Soc., Nov. 2005, pp. 6–10.

0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2709788, IEEE
Transactions on Magnetics
FT-04 6

[3] Xiao Chen; Jiabin Wang; Patel, V.I., "A Generic Approach to Reduction
of Magnetomotive Force Harmonics in Permanent-Magnet Machines
with Concentrated Multiple Three-Phase Windings," IEEE Transactions
on Magnetics, vol.50, no.11, pp.1-4, Nov. (2014).
[4] Gautam, A.; Karugaba, S.; Ojo, J., "Modeling of nine-phase interior
permanent magnet machines (IPM) including harmonic effects," IEEE
International Electric Machines & Drives Conf. (IEMDC), pp.681-686,
15-18 May (2011).
[5] Y. Burkhardt, A. Spagnolo, P. Lucas, M. Zavesky, and P. Brockerhoff,
"Design and analysis of a highly integrated 9-phase drivetrain for EV
applications," Int. Conf. on Electrical Machines (ICEM), pp, .450-456,
2-5 Sept. 2014.
[6] M. Wang, X. Qiu, J. Yang, X. Chen and Y. Dou, "Study on the
Electromagnetic Characteristics of the Consequent Pole In-Wheel
Motor," 2016 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference (VPPC),
Hangzhou, China, 2016, pp. 1-5.
[7] S. U. Chung, S. H. Moon, D. J. Kim and J. M. Kim, "Development of a
20-Pole–24-Slot SPMSM With Consequent Pole Rotor for In-Wheel
Direct Drive," in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 63,
no. 1, pp. 302-309, Jan. 2016.
[8] M. Andriollo, G. Bettanini, G. Martinelli, A. Morini and A. Tortella,
"Analysis of Double-Star Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Generators
by a General decoupled – Model," in IEEE Transactions on Industry
Applications, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1416-1424, July-Aug. 2009.
[9] J.R. Ruiz, J.A. Rosero, A.G. Espinosa, and L. Romeral, “Detection of
demagnetization faults in permanent-magnet synchronous motors under
non-stationary conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 45,
no.7, pp. 2961-2969, July 2009.
[10] G.-H. Kang, Jin Hur, H. Nam, J.-P. Hong and G.-T. Kim “Analysis of
Irreversible Magnet Demagnetization in Line-Start Motors Based on
the Finite-Element Method”, IEEE Trans. on Magn., vol. 39.No. 4, pp.
1488-1491, May 2003.
[11] J. D. McFarland and T. M. Jahns, “Investigation of the rotor
demagnetization characteristics of interior PM synchronous machines
during fault conditions,” in Proc. IEEE Energy Convers. Congr. Expo.
(ECCE), Sep. 2012, pp. 4021–4028.

0018-9464 (c) 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.