SPE-192177-MS

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

Induction versus Permanent Magnet Motors for ESP Applications
J.J. Xiao, Saudi Aramco; Rafael Lastra, Saudi Aramco

Copyright 2018, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition held in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, 23–26
April 2018.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or stora ge of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
This paper provides an overview comparing Induction Motors (IM) and Permanent Magnet Motors
(PMM) for Electric Submersible Pump (ESP) applications. What are the design differences and how the
performances of the two types of motors are stacked against each other? What are the advantage and
unique applications of PMMs? Why and how are PMMs controlled differently from IMs? Are there
safety aspects that field engineers need to be aware of with PMMs? These questions will be addressed in
the paper.

The information presented includes literature review and latest R&D results. It covers operating
principles of IM and PMM, selection of permanent magnet materials, operating frequency, stator
windings and magnetic poles.

PMMs offer better efficiency, higher power factor performance and compactness. Ideal applications
include slim well applications, through-tubing rigless deployment, Y-tool completion and Electric
Submersible Progressive cavity Pump (ESPCP). The paper will also shed some light on why
conventional IMs cannot be used to drive ESPCPs directly without speed reduction gearboxes.

It is very likely that the use of PMM will increase for ESP applications in the near future and this will
require engineers to acquire a basic understanding of this technology. A high level comparison between
IM and PMM is missing in the ESP industry and this paper fills the gap. PMMs need to be operated with
a different type of control for Variable Speed Drive (VSD) and require matching transformers for high
frequency applications. The paper also intends to highlight the safety aspects of PMMs in shop and field
handling.

Introduction
ESP is a key, high rate artificial lift method. As shown in Figure 1, the system is a complex electro-
hydraulic system consisting of a centrifugal pump, a protector and an electric motor in addition to a
downhole sensor unit and a power delivery cable. The pump is used to lift well fluids to the surface. The
motor converts electric power to mechanical power to drive the pump via the shaft. The power delivery
cable provides a means of supplying the motor with the needed electrical power from the surface. The
protector absorbs the thrust load from the pump, transmits power from the motor to the pump, provides
means for motor oil expansion/contraction as a result of temperature changes and equalizes motor
SPE-192177-MS 2

internal and external pressures, preventing well fluids from entering the motor. The pump consists of
centrifugal stages, which are made up of impellers and diffusers. The impeller, which is rotating, adds
energy to the fluid as kinetic energy, whereas the diffuser, which is stationary, converts the kinetic
energy of fluids into head. The pump stages are typically stacked in series to form a multi-stage system
that is contained within a pump housing. The sum of head generated by each individual stage is

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

summative; hence, the total head developed by the multi-stage system increases from the first to the last
stage. The downhole sensor or monitoring sub/tool is installed below the motor to measure parameters
such as pump intake and discharge pressures, intake and motor oil temperature, and vibration. Measured
downhole data is communicated to the surface via the power cable.

Worldwide installations of ESPs are in the order of 150,000 units. Induction motors are the dominant
workhorse due to historic reasons. Permanent magnet motor is a new technology for ESP applications
and its use has been increasing over the last decade. There is a need to acquire a basic understanding the
two types of electric motors in order to make informed decisions in the applications of each technology.

Design Differences between IM and PMM

IMs for ESP applications are often described as three-phase, two poles, squirrel cage motors; Figures
2-3. An IM, within its housing, is built with a single extended stator and a multi-section rotor supported
with multiple radial bearings and an axial thrust bearing. The stator is made of a multitude of silicon
steel laminations compressed in place (non-steel laminations sometimes are used for sections opposite to
rotor bearings). Each thin lamination has an oxide coating that acts as an insulator to reduce the eddy
currents. Winding slots (commonly closed) are cut within the lamination for copper or commonly called
magnetic wires to be installed back and forth as loops between two paired slots from end to end of the
stator. The copper wires are insulated with insulation materials such as Kapton or PEEK and further
protected with varnish, a transparent, protective plastic film or silicone rubber gel. Windings treated
with vanish have the slots open for dielectric oil to circulate and cool the conductors directly. Some
motor designs use stator potting or encapsulation in which the voids of the slots are filled with thermally
conductive epoxies. This allows the motor to run at higher temperatures as heat transfer is believed to be
more effective with conduction than convection of varnished stators. The wire size is chosen to balance
electrical requirement and the percentage of slot fill. Three-phase refers to the three-phase Alternate
Current (AC) applied to the stator windings. Utilizing three-phase instead of single-phase or two-phase
AC will allow the motor to generate more horsepower for a given length and there is also a benefit of
less electrical vibration with a three-phase system. Another key advantage of a three-phase system is that
motor can easily change direction because the definition of rotational direction is very straightforward in
the three-phase system, while the single-phase and two-phase cannot.

When three-phase AC is applied to the stator windings, rotating magnetic fields will be generated.
Depending the way in which the winding is installed in the stator, two, four, six and even higher number
of magnetic poles can be generated. Installing the magnetic wires as coil loops between two slots that
are 180o apart will result in two poles (Figure 3), 90o apart for four poles, 60o apart for six poles, and so
on. The two-pole design allows the system to operate at a higher rotational speed for any given AC
frequency which translates into smaller motor and pump requirements. This is one reason why two-pole
motors have been the preferred design for downhole ESP motors. Besides, building higher pole-number
IMs in a small diameter is challenging. The equation below describes the relationship between the
rotational speed of the stator magnetic fields and the number of magnetic poles and AC input frequency.
SPE-192177-MS 3

Squirrel cage refers to the rotor configuration. The rotor is also made of a stack of steel laminations

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

with slots cut for the installation of copper bars. The number of rotor slots is chosen to be a non-integral
multiple of stator slots in order to prevent magnetic interlocking of rotor and stator when the motor
starts. The long copper bars are connected on each end with a copper end ring, completing the electric
circuit in the rotor for current to flow. The rotor can also be constructed using copper windings instead
of copper bars but in comparison squirrel cage rotor is more efficient and rugged. Due to diameter
constraints in the motor, rotors are long and thin; very long rotors tend to wobble, which increases the
chances of rotor striking the inside of the stator and resulting in a motor failure. A multi-section motor
design is preferred, which allows the installation of radial bearings between sections to support and
centralize the rotor in the middle of the stator. Every radial bearing has a rotating element keyed to the
motor shaft and riding on a stationary outer race. Each rotor section produces horsepower proportional
to its length. A number of rotor sections are used within a motor to achieve the required horsepower, and
this number has to be designed by balancing the horsepower need and the motor length dictated by
practicality and reliability. There is a thin gap termed “air gap” between the Inside Diameter (ID) of the
stator and the Outside Diameter (OD) of the rotors. High strength dielectric oil is used to fill the air gap
and all voids inside the motor. The motor shaft is hollow and with holes cross-drilled at the bearing
locations for motor oil circulation, cooling and lubrication. In addition, each motor is designed with a
thrust bearing located at the motorhead. The thrust bearing supports the weight of the rotors and
provides pumping action for motor oil circulation.

As the stator windings are energized with three-phase AC of varying voltage amplitude and polarity,
rotating magnetic fields are generated. The copper bars of the rotors will break across the lines of the
stator magnetic field flux, and a low voltage and high current will be induced in the rotor electric
circuits, as described by Faraday's law of induction. The induced current in the rotor will produce a
corresponding magnetic field within the rotor. A magnetic pole in the stator induces an opposite
magnetic pole in the rotor. The rotor magnetic field is attracted to and follows the rotating stator
magnetic fields, creating rotor and shaft rotation. The rotor field always lags behind the stator field by
some amount in order for the copper bars to continuously break the stator magnetic field flux and induce
voltage and current in the rotor. The rotor rotates at a speed that is 2-3% slower than that of the stator
rotating magnetic fields. This speed difference, termed the slip, is the reason that an IM is called
asynchronous motor. The amount of slip is a function of the load put on the motor. No load condition
has the smallest slip. As load is placed on the motor, the rotors slow down. This makes the rotors break
even more lines of stator magnetic field flux, induce stronger magnetic field in the rotor, and produce
more power for the motor to overcome the load.

PMM also uses three-phase AC power to energize the stator windings. The difference between
PMMs and IMs is in the rotor design. In PMM rotors, copper bars are replaced with rare earth strong
permanent magnets. These magnets can be either mounted on the surface of the rotors or installed in the
interior of the rotors. In the latter case, slots are machined in the steel laminations to accept shaped
permanent magnets. Retaining/hiding the magnets inside allows them to overcome the centrifugal forces
at high rotational speeds. Figure 4 shows the cross-section areas of an IM and a PMM.

For downhole applications, the choice of permanent magnet materials is limited to two common ones:
Samarium Cobalt (SmCo, an alloy of samarium and cobalt) and neodymium magnet also known as Neo
SPE-192177-MS 4

magnet (NdFeBr, an alloy of neodymium, iron and boron). Magnet material is selected based on
magnetic strength and magnetic thermal resistance. Tests show that NdFeBr magnetic strength declines
with temperature and become weak after 150o C, making SmCo the most commonly used magnets for
downhole motor applications. Samarium Cobalt was developed in the 1960s. Better performance
permanent magnets are under development (Cochran et al. 2013).

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

In Figure 4, the PMM is shown to have 4 poles as north, south, north and south in the rotor facing the
stator. This is a four-pole PMM. It is important to note that the same number of magnetic poles are
required for stator and rotor in order to have a functional motor. For PMMs, adding and arranging
permanent magnets in the rotor will provide 2, 4, 6 and even higher number of magnetic poles. The
challenge is to design the stator winding so that the number of magnetic poles of the stator magnetic
fields matches the number of magnetic poles in the rotor. Figure 5 shows an example of how the stator
winding is configured to make a 4-pole PMM. PMMs used today for ESP applications are almost
exclusively 4-pole motors. High frequency two-pole PMMs are being developed for high speed
applications targeting wet gas centrifugal compression. As to be discussed later in the paper, PMMs with
the number of poles 6 and above are being used for Electric Submersible Progressive Cavity Pump
(ESPCP) applications. The number of magnetic poles, complexity of construction, operating speed,
motor efficiency, and the power cable length (tied with the system installation depth) are all
interconnected. Specific applications require optimization of these parameters. For example, two-pole
PMMs are easier to construct, but the design has to be made to reduce cogging torque and speed ripple.
Increasing the number of poles has the benefit of smoother motor operation, yet if the required operating
speed is high, the AC power supply has to be made in a higher frequency. For example, for a 6-pole
PMM to be operated at 10,000 Revolution per Minute (RPM), the required AC frequency is 500 Hz.
Increasing AC frequency can potentially result in higher power loss in Variable Speed Drives (VSD),
step-up transformers and power cables. Balancing these parameter is key when designing for a specific
application.

As three-phase AC is fed into the stator windings of a PMM, rotating magnetic fields are generated as
in the case with IMs. With no copper bars and no electric circuits in the rotors of PMMs, there is no
induced voltage and current, and no induced magnetic field. Instead, the rotors already have the
magnetic fields with the strong permanent magnets installed. With proper control mechanisms (to be
discussed in a later section), the rotating magnetic fields generated with stator windings interacts with
the permanent magnets to produce rotor and shaft rotation. The rotors rotate at a speed identical to the
speed of the rotating magnetic fields of the stator windings. PMMs are synchronous motors. Table 1
summarizes some key difference between IMs and PMMs.

Table 1 – ESP IMs vs PMMs

IM PMM

Rotor speed vs stator Asynchronous Synchronous

magnetic field (“Slip” is required to induce (The shaft speed is the same as the
rotational speed current in rotor electric circuits) rotating magnetic fields of the stator)
Number of poles 2 2, 4, 6, 10, 12 (ESP/ESPCP)
AC Frequency (Hz) 40-90 10-550, 750
RPM 2400-5400 - slip 50-500, 720, 3600, 6000, 10000,
12000, 45000
SPE-192177-MS 5

PMM Advantages
PMMs offer advantages of compactness, higher power factor, and higher efficiency. Strong
permanent magnets provide higher magnetic flux, leading to higher power density. The horsepower per
rotor volume for PMMs is typically twice of that for IMs. For the same horsepower requirement, PMMs

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

can be made smaller in OD (slim systems), shorter in length and lighter in weight in comparison with
IMs. Without electric circuits made of copper bars and end rings, there is no induced voltage and
current, no power required to magnetize the rotor and no loss from Joule effect. This results in higher
motor efficiency and lower motor heat rise which in turn helps with motor run life. In addition to
efficiency, it is also important to take power factor into consideration. To understand and facilitate the
electrical discussion, reference is made with Figure 6 which is adopted from Dewidar 2013.

As discussed previously, when a motor is energized with three-phase AC, rotating magnetic fields are
created on the stator. As the rotor starts to turn, the rotor’s magnetic fields will interact with the stator
magnetic fields, creating a voltage called back Electro-Motive Force (EMF) in opposition to the applied
voltage. Because of back EMF, the supply current lags the applied voltage. Component of the current
that is out of phase with the applied voltage does not provide useful work. This is where the concept of
power factor comes into play. Figure 6 shows an equivalent electric circuit for one phase of an IM where
the stator electrical branch is shown to run in parallel with the rotor electrical branch, separated by the
air gap. The total current has two components: the stator branch current and the rotor branch current.
The total current is not in phase with the voltage applied. When AC is supplied to the stator, part of the
current is used to generate the rotating magnetic fields. This current is the magnetizing current (Im). This
current lags the applied voltage by near 90o due to the inductive nature of the motor. The other
component of the total current is the load or torque current (I2). This current is in phase with the voltage
applied. Correspondingly, the total power consumed by the motor consists of two components: reactive
power corresponding to magnetizing current and real power corresponding to load current. The vector
sum of real and reactive power is the apparent power. Figure 7 illustrates the power triangle, power
factor and power efficiency.

The reactive power is required for the magnetization of a motor. It is not used to do useful work on
the load, but rather it is stored in and discharged by the motor. The reactive power required by the motor
increases the amounts of apparent power. The ratio of the real power over the apparent power is the
power factor. Defined equivalently, power factor is the cosine of the electric phase angle between
voltage and current. The reactive power causes the real power to be less than the apparent power, and
so, the electric load has a power factor of less than 1. Electrical companies need to build, generate and
distribute the apparent power, pass on the additional cost to the ESP users even though not all the power
is used to do real work. When the power factor is low, more apparent power needs to be transmitted
through the power system in order to provide the same real power. Higher power results in high current
flow, higher voltage drop and heat loss in the system. In PMMs, there is no rotor magnetization needed,
and the motor reactive power is greatly reduced, and as a result, PMMs have higher power factors than
IMs.

Motor efficiency measures how much real power provided to the motor stator is made available as
the motor brake horsepower at the shaft to drive the pump after various losses within the motor, Figure
7. These losses include stator winding loss and iron loss, rotor copper loss and iron loss and friction and
windage loss. For PMMs, there is no rotor copper loss. Furthermore, with strong permanent magnets, the
size of the rotor can be made more compact (reduced OD), resulting in a larger air gap. This has the
benefit of reducing the windage loss, heat generation and rotor strike. Elimination of rotor copper loss
SPE-192177-MS 6

and reduction of windage loss make PMMs more efficient in comparison with IMs. In addition, compact
rotors make it possible to encapsulate the stator and rotor, resulting in a completely different motor
architecture for some applications.

Another PMM characteristics worth mentioning is the load-current and load-efficiency relationships.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

At low load, the current is low so it is easier to protect the motor for underload situations such as gas
lock or pump-off. For IMs, the low load current is high, and it can be difficult to protect the motor with
current control. Also at low load, the IM efficiency drops significantly. In general, IMs cannot be used
below 50-60% of their load ratings. PMMs maintain efficiency over a wider range of loads.

The advantages of PMMs discussed above have been reported in various publications. Table 2
provides high level summaries of case studies reported in the literature.

Table 2 – Case Studies of PMMs for ESP Applications

References Location Key Results/Comments
Hamzah et al. 2017 (SPE- Indonesia 10-30% higher efficiency than IMs; Comparable
189211-MS) procurement cost
Guindi et al. 2017 (SPE- USA Un-shrouded PMM below perforations
185273-MS)
Gorlov and Shakirov 2017 Russia 12000 RPM slim ESPs with PMMs; 30-60% power saving
(SPE-185143-MS)
Ballarini et al. 2017 Argentina 10% better efficiency than IMs
(SPE-185137-MS)
Gad et al. 2017 (OMC- Egypt PMMs used to overcome challenges of low productivity,
2017-635) unstable flow, viscous fluids and high solid production
Harris et al. 2017 (SPE- USA Better performance of PMMs verified through extensive
185129-MS) tests under controlled conditions
Abou-Houzifa and Ahmed Egypt 6000 RPM slim ESPs with PMMs
2017 (SPE-184195-MS)
Garcia et al. 2015 Mexico 6000 RPM slim ESPs with PMMs
(SPE-173966-MS)
Saveth 2014 (SPE- Russia Slim ESPs with PMMs
171348-MS)
Brinner et al. 2014 USA 20% power saving with PMMs
Seczon and Sagalovskiy US/Russia/Brazil 10-20% power saving with PMMs
2013 (SPE-165030-MS)
Refaie et al. 2013 (SPE- Egypt 10% better efficiency and over 50% reduction in system
164666-MS) length with PMMs
Pavlenko 2008 (SPE- Russia 15-25% energy saving with PMMs
117375-MS)
SPE-192177-MS 7

One recent trend in the industry is to develop slim high speed ESP systems with PMMs, as indicated
in Table 2, for slim completions with casing sizes smaller than 7”. In some fields, wells were originally
completed with 7” casing. Overtime, corrosion occurred with the 7” casing, and to restore well integrity,
5” or 4 ½” liners are run inside the original casing. In other fields, the original 7” casing well is slimmed
down to 5” casing once side track drilling is performed to plug and abandon the original completion.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

These slim wells may still have good well productivity and can potentially produce at high rates. This
requires slim ESPs capable of high rate production. Combining the compactness of PMMs and high
speed allows the development of a practical solution for slim wells. Table 3 shows an example of a slim
high speed ESP technology recently developed for 4 ½” casing wells. The system OD is 3.5”. For a
production rate of 3500 Bbls Per Day (BPD) and a required Total Dynamic Head (TDH) of 3400 ft, the
high speed slim technology is the only viable solution. For a conventional slim system with an IM, the
length of the system will be too long to be practical. To insure reliability with high speed systems, robust
bearing design, material selection, and stage balance are essential to minimize vibration.

Table 3 – Slim High Speed High Rate System with PMM vs Conventional Slim System with IM
Conventional IM and High Speed PMM
Pump (60 Hz) and Pump (200 Hz)

RPM 3500 6000

Motor: 80 ft long 26 ft long

170 HP, 3.5” OD
Pump: 600 stages 24 ft, 80 Stages
3400 TDH, 3500 BPD (338 series) (350 series)

Ideal Applications of PMMs

In addition to high productivity wells with slim completion, highly deviated and horizontal wells can
also take advantage of the compactness of PMMs, especially with the slim and high speed design. Due
to its smaller OD and shorter length, the system can facilitate running through tortuous wellbore and
installation in higher dogleg severity sections. Furthermore a full system can possibly be assembled in
the workshop, minimizing human error and speeding up field installation (Gorlov and Shakirov 2017).

Rigless through tubing deployment of ESPs, either wireline deployed or cable deployed, can benefit
from ESP technologies with PMMs. One wireline deployed ESP technology for 4 ½” tubing deployment
reported by Nutter et al. 2017 shows that the 130 HP PMM is 3.75”OD, 10 ft long, 250 lb whereas an
equivalent IM would be 50 ft long, 2000 lb. Deployment of such an IM system would be very
challenging with slickline. Case histories of a similar wireline deployed ESP technology with PMMs
were reported by Spagnolo et al. 2013. Cable deployed ESP allows the entire system to be retrievable
including the power cable and it does not rely on downhole electric wet connector technology. Slim,
high speed and high rate ESPs with PMMs are most suitable for cable deployment. Their shorter length
permits live well deployment with manageable surface lubricators. This can speed up field installation,
save well kill fluids and avoid damage to well productivity.

Y-tool is often used for reservoir access (logging or stimulation) with ESP completions. With Y-tool
installation, the bypass tubing and the ESP system run in parallel and share the same casing ID. This
makes Y-tool installation challenging for high productive wells for 7” or 6 5/8” casing completions.
Slim, high speed ESPs with PMMs make it possible to install Y-tools with bypass tubing size large
SPE-192177-MS 8

enough to accommodate running of intervention tools and at the same time permit high rate production
(Azancot et al. 2015).

There is also an increasing use of PMMs to drive Progressive Cavity Pumps (PCP). PCPs are positive
displacement pumps and normally operated at 50-500 RPM, much lower speeds than ESPs to insure

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

PCP reliability when handling viscous and sand laden fluids. Typical operating speed range of 2-pole
IMs for ESP is 2400-5400 RPM with corresponding AC frequencies in the range of 40-90 Hz. To drive
PCPs with 2-pole IMs, speed reduction gears are needed, resulting in adding another failure prone
component to the downhole assembly. Driving PCPs with PMMs eliminates the need of speed reduction
gears. These PMMs are designed with pole numbers equal or greater than 6 in order to reduce the motor
speed, and also more poles means more electromagnets working in parallel to provide more torque;
Table 4. More poles in the PMMs will separate the flux lines in back iron, thus reduce the flux density in
the back iron, so that the back iron could be thinner. Thinner back iron means either smaller motor OD
with the same output torque (higher power density), or the same size of motor (with increased stator ID)
with larger rotor OD (thus larger output torque).

Table 4 – ESPCP with PMMs

References Location Key Results/Comments
Hao et al. 2017 (SPE-186193- China PMM 50-500 RPM
MS)
Cui et al. 2016 China 12-pole PMM 150 RPM
(SPE-184228-MS)
Al Ajeel et al. 2016 (SPE- Kuwait 6-pole PMM 300 RPM
184207-MS)
Kommaraju et al. 2016 (SPE- Kuwait 6-pole PMM 300 RPM
184129-MS)
Zhu et al. 2016 (SPE-183366- China 10-pole PMM 50-500 RPM
MS)
Saveth 2014 (SPE-171349-MS) Russia 10-pole PMM 500-700 RPM

Saveth and Sagalovsky 2013 Russia 10 pole PMM 720 RPM

(SPE-165654-MS)
Garcia 2013 (SPE-165421) Canada PMM 50-500 RPM

Can 2-pole IMs be operated at lower AC frequencies and hence lower RPM to accommodate PCPs
without gear reduction? The answer is yes in theory but not recommended in practice.

To ensure maximum utilization of the iron core, the maximum magnetic flux in IMs is selected just
below the iron core saturation point. If the motor is operated above this point iron core losses will
dramatically rise and overheating will occur. To ensure that no iron saturation occurs in the IM the
V/Hz ratio applied to the motor should maintained constant. The V/Hz ratio is calculated by dividing the
nameplate voltage of the motor by the nameplate frequency.
SPE-192177-MS 9

To understand the effect of V/Hz on iron core saturation, refer to Figure 6, the equivalent electric
circuit for one phase of an IM. Assuming that the effect of resistance and capacitance can be
disregarded, the AC impedance of the stator can be written as 𝑋𝑚 = 2𝜋𝐿𝑓, where L is the inductance
(which is a function of physical factors including the number of turns in the magnetic wire loops, the
diameter and length of the wire) and f is the AC frequency. The magnetizing current to the stator
𝑉 1 𝑉

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

winding is 𝐼𝑚 = 𝑋 = ( ). If the AC frequency is reduced, the AC impedance of the stator circuit is
𝑚 2𝜋𝐿 𝑓
reduced, and if AC voltage applied stays the same, the magnetizing current will increase, this will result
in an increase in the magnetic flux density above the iron core saturation.

The speed of IM motors can be controlled by changing AC frequency f, as long as voltage is adjusted
to maintain a pre-set V/Hz ratio. The motor will maintain constant magnetic flux density and deliver a
constant torque at nameplate current. Therefore, at least in theory, an IM designed to operate at
3500RPM and 60Hz could be operated at 350RPM by reducing the AC frequency and voltage by factor
of 10.

In practice, the motor will be greatly oversized for the application and in addition, at low f the change
of impedance in the motor becomes non-linear, resulting in torque and efficiency reduction. Back at
Figure 6, this time considering the resistance R, as the frequency f decreases, Xm decreases, however,
the resistance R remains constant. At low frequencies R becomes dominant and current of the circuit
reduces, the proportion of heat losses also increase and additional voltage is required to develop
magnetizing current and nominal torque. In practice torque and efficiency will decrease drastically in an
IM operated at frequencies below 10 Hz. Furthermore, motor horsepower is a product of torque and
RPM. Reductions in torque and RPM at low frequencies will lead to reductions in motor horsepower.

To operate standard 2-pole IMs at 100-500 RPM for PCPs, the AC frequency and the voltage will
have to be reduced significantly, and a result, the motor will not be able to deliver the torque and
horsepower demanded by the PCPs. The most sensible solution is to design the motor with more poles
or use gear reduction so that the motor can be operated at higher frequencies and speeds.

PMM Control
Unlike IMs, PMMs are not self-starting machines. The rotor will stall when the stator is energized
directly without a controller, i.e., PMMs cannot be operated with switchboard or Direct-On-Line (DOL)
starter. A hybrid PMM is in the market with a design that has at least one IM type rotor to make the
PMM self-starting. The concept is innovative, however, this PMM requires a very special VSD and
control algorithm.

For PMMs, tracking of the rotor position is required to control the stator and rotor magnetic field flux
at a near 90º angle and to synchronize the stator magnetic fields with the rotor’s at all times to maximize
torque and eliminate slip. Since conventional VSDs do not have this capability, they usually cannot be
used to control PMMs without motor performance being significantly degraded or motor integrity being
compromised. For a surface PMM, having a rotor positioning encoder or other device on the shaft of the
motor is one way to solve this problem. However, for downhole applications, this approach is not
practical. PMMs require specifically designed VSDs with sensorless motor control capability.

Different PMM control methodologies are in use in the ESP industry. They include scalar and vector
control algorithms as described by Takacs 2009. The main difference lies on whether the rotor position
is determined by measuring and analyzing the back EMF or from digital signal processing of the current.
SPE-192177-MS 10

The rotor is initially at standstill, and calculating its initial position may require special strategies
involving signal injection and feedback processing. PMM control remains as an active research area.

In the ESP industry literature, Refaie et al. 2013 provided a somewhat more detailed discussion about
one PMM control method. At each moment of time, only two of the three-phase windings are energized

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

and the third phase is switched off and used to measure EMF and calculate the positioning of the rotor.
Knowing the rotor position, phase shifting (switching of power supply from one phase to the next on the
stator) is done so that the stator poles interact with the rotor poles to ensure and sustain rotor rotation
and torque. If the motor load changes, for example, when solid laden fluids come to the pump, the
position sensor can tell that the rotor speed decreases. The VSD will automatically increase the voltage
frequency to ramp up the motor torque and keep synchronous motor operation.

The need for specifically designed VSDs for PMMs means that an existing conventional VSD will
have to be swapped when a failed ESP driven by an IM is replaced with an ESP having a PMM.
Moreover, if the new PMM requires high frequency (above 90 Hz) for high speed operation, the step-up
transformer also needs to be upgraded to reduce power losses. Changing out existing surface skids
(VSDs and transformers) can be challenging for offshore platforms. The idea that a retrofit add-on
device or firmware upgrade can be developed to allow a conventional VSD to be used for PMM control
is most likely not feasible since old VSDs typically have power electronics that are too slow to handle
output higher than 90 Hz.

Safety Cautions with PMM

The use of strong permanent magnets in PMMs calls for the need to exercise special safety cautions
in equipment handling in the workshop and the field. When rotors are being built, strong magnets pose
as pinch hazard, requiring special tools and safety measure to prevent injury. When working around the
rotor, electronic and magnetic devices such as cell phones, medical devices and credit cards should be
kept away to prevent from damage.

In field installations, as the ESP system is being assembled on the rig floor, it is a common practice to
conduct motor shaft rotation check before the protector section is installed and flange connected with the
motor. For IMs the shaft is free, but for PMMs, the shaft rotation is more restricted due to the rotor
permanent magnet interaction with the stator (Garcia et al. 2015). Field engineers need to be
familiarized with the new technology.

When a motor is forced to spin, it becomes a generator, and the voltage that the spin generates can be
potentially hazardous (Brinner et al. 2014). This can occur during ESP installation (run-in hole),
operation (fluids fall back during shutdown, well kill operation, chemical bullheading) and ESP pull-out.
For IMs, the free spin voltage generated is low due to the weak residual magnetism in rotors. However,
PMMs can generate high lethal voltage in the stator windings due to the strong magnets in the rotors.
Such voltage can reach the junction box or open end of the cable, posing personal safety hazard. The
open end of cable needs to be isolated and operating procedure needs to be revised to insure personal
safety.

Summary
PMM’s advantages include higher efficiency, better power factor, lower temperature rise, and higher
power density. Their unique application areas ranges from slim well installation, rigless through tubing
deployment, Y-tool completions and ESPCPs. PMMs requires VSDs with rotor position determination
SPE-192177-MS 11

capability to run. Special safety cautions should be exercised during assembly, installation, retrieval and
teardown of PMMs. The industry has gained sufficient experience with PMM technology. The period
for trial testing is over, and the technology is ready for wider applications.

Acknowledgements

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

The authors thank Kuo-Chiang (K-C) Chen of Upwing Energy and Thomas Orlowski of Al-khorayef
Petroleum Company for their consultation on PMM design and control.

References
Abou-Houzifa, Ossama Ahmed and Ahmed, Abdalah Ismail, 2016. 1st Slim Line ESP Deployment in
Side Track Slim 5 Inch Casing In Middle East. Presented at Presented at the SPE Middle East
Artificial Lift Conference and Exhibition, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 30 November – 1
December, SPE-184195-MS.
Al-Ajeel, Fatemah Abdullah, et al. 2016. Deployment of a Multiphase Progressive Cavity Pump
Coupled with a Submersible Permanent Magnet Motor. Presented at the SPE Middle East Artificial
Lift Conference and Exhibition, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 30 November – 1 December, SPE-
184207-MS.
Azancot A. et al. 2015. New Approach for Reservoir Management through the Implementation of Slim
ESP with Bypass System for Production Logging in a Field with Rod Pumping Systems. Presented
at the SPE Artificial Lift Conference – Latin America and Caribbean, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, 27-28
May. SPE-173953-MS/
Ballarini, Mariano, et al. 2017. High Efficiency ESP Applications for Slim Wells. Presented at the SPE
Electric Submersible Pump Symposium, Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24-28 April. SPE-185137-MS.
Brinner, Thomas R. et al. 2014. Induction versus Permanent-Magnet Motors for Electric Submersible
Pump Field and Laboratory Comparison. IEE Transaction on Industry Applications, Vol. 50, No. 1,
January/February.
Cochran, Jamie, et al. 2013. Development of Downhole Magnetic Drive Systems for Rigless Artificial
Lift Applications. Presented at the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA, 6-9
May. OTC-24266.
Cui, Junguo, et al. 2016. Electric Submersible Progressing Cavity Pump Driven by Low-Speed
Permanent Magnetic Synchronous Motor. Presented at the SPE Middle East Artificial Lift
Conference and Exhibition, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain, 30 November – 1 December, SPE-
184228-MS.
Dewidar, Mohamed, 2013. Electric Submersible Pumps, Chapter 3 Submersible Motors.
Gad, M. et al. 2017. Permanent Magnet Motor (PMM) as the Right Solution for Electric Submersible
Pump System Challenges in Beleyem Oilfields (Case Study). Presented at the Offshore
Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition, Ravenna, Italy, 29-31 March. OMC-2017-635.
Garcia, Edgar Lopez, et al. 2015. Electric Submersible Pumping, First Application in a Mature Field in
Mexico, Using the Unconventional Technology with Synchronous Permanent Magnet Motor (PMM)
+ Power Save Pump. Presented at the SPE Artificial Lift Conference – Latin America and
Caribbean, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, 27-28 May. SPE-173966-MS.
Garcia, G. J. 2013. Rodless PCP Technology: From Theory to Reality; Analyzing One Year of
Performance. Presented at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 11-13 June.
SPE-165421.
Gorlov, A. and Shakirov, A. 2017. Ultra-High Speed ESP PMM System Application in Salym
Petroleum Development. Presented at the SPE Electric Submersible Pump Symposium, the
Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24-28 April. SPE-185143-MS.
SPE-192177-MS 12

Hamzah, Kamal, et al. 2017. Extensive Application of ESP with Permanent Magnet Motor: Continuous
Improvement for Energy Saving and Cost Reduction. Presented at the SPE Symposium: Production
Enhancement and Cost Optimization, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 7-8 November. SPE-189211-MS.
Harris, Dennis, et al. 2017. Leveraging EPS Energy Efficiency with Permanent Magnet Motors.
Presented at the SPE Electric Submersible Pump Symposium, Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24-28 April.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021

SPE-185129-MS.
Kommaraju, Srinivas Rao, et al. 2016. Permanent Magnet Motor-Hydraulically Regulated-PCP PMM-
HR-PCP: An Innovative Artificial Lift System for Horizontal and Deviated Wells Producing High
Viscous Oil with Gas and Sand. Presented at the SPE Heavy Oil Conference and Exhibition, Kuwait,
6-8 December. SPE-184129-MS.
Nutter, G. et al. 2017. Live Well Deployment of Retrievable ESP Systems, Case Histories. Presented at
the SPE Electric Submersible Pump Symposium, the Woodlands, Texas, USA, 24-28 April. SPE-
185160-MS.
Pavlenko, V. 2008. Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM) – New Type of Drives for
Submersible Oil Pumps. Presented at the SPE Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Moscow, Russia, 28-30 October. SPE-117375.
Refaie, Ahmed, et al. 2013. Permanent Magnet Motor Application for ESP Artificial Lift. Presented at
the North Africa Technical Conference & Exhibition, Cairo, Egypt, 15-17 April. SPE-164666.
Saveth, Ken, Sagalovsky Andrey, 2013. Case Histories of Running Progressing cavity Pumps with
Submersible Permanent Magnet Motors. Presented at the SPE Progressing Cavity Pumps
Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 26-27 August, SPE-165654.
Saveth, Ken, 2014. New Stage Material Combined with Permanent Magnet Motor Technology Widen
ESP Application Window. Presented at the SPE Artificial Lift Conference & Exhibition-North
America, Houston, Texas, USA, 6-8 October. SPE-171348-MS.
Saveth, Ken, 2014. PMM-PCP Field Trials Using a New Generation Permanent Magnet Motor
Technology. Presented at the SPE Artificial Lift Conference & Exhibition-North America, Houston,
Texas, USA, 6-8 October. SPE-171349-MS.
Seczon, L., Sagalovskiy, A. 2013. Field Experience with the Application and Operation of Permanent
Magnet Motors in the ESP Industry: Success Stories and Lessons Learned. Presented at the SPE
Artificial Lift Conference - Americas, Cartagena, Colombia, 21-22 May. SPE-165030.
Spagnolo, S. et al. 2013. Fully Retrievable ESP: A New Artificial Lift Concept. Presented at the
International Petroleum Technology Conference, Beijing, China, 26-28 March. IPTC-17203.
Takacs, Gabor, 2017. Electrical Submersible Pumps Manual: Design, Operations, and Maintenance. 2nd
Edition, Gulf Professional Publishing, Published Date: 26th September 2017.
Zhu, Shijia, et al. 2016. A robust and Environment Friendly Artificial Lift System: ESPCP with PMM.
Presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 7-
10 November. SPE-183366-MS.
 Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021
13

Fig. 1 - ESP as a High Rate Artificial Lift Method

Fig. 3 – Three-phase, Two-Pole Motor

Fig. 2 - ESP Induction Motor
SPE-192177-MS

Figures
 Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021
14

Fig. 4 –Induction Motor versus Permanent Magnet Motor

Fig. 6 – Per-phase IM Equivalent Circuit (Dewidar 2013)

Fig. 5 – Four-pole Permanent Magnet Motor
SPE-192177-MS
 Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPESATS/proceedings-pdf/18SATS/All-18SATS/SPE-192177-MS/1244680/spe-192177-ms.pdf by Universidad Industrial De Santander user on 23 August 2021
15

Fig. 7 – Motor Power Factor and Efficiency

SPE-192177-MS