3562 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO.
5, MAY 2020
Analysis of Reactive Power Compensation
Effect of a New Hybrid Excitation Brushless
DC Generator
Linnan Sun , Student Member, IEEE, Zhuoran Zhang , Senior Member, IEEE, Xiangpei Gu ,
Li Yu , Student Member, IEEE, and Jincai Li , Student Member, IEEE
Abstract—A new hybrid excitation brushless dc gener-
ator (HEBLdcG) is comprised of the structure-paralleled
permanent magnet machine part and flux modulation
machine part (FMMP). The reactive power compensation
effect of the HEBLdcG is illustrated and investigated in this
paper. It is shown that the operation modes of the FMMP
are influenced by both, the field current and armature
current. Based on this, the three ranges in terms of the field
current are divided. Three typical operation states rep-
resentatively selected in the three ranges are defined as
the power-balance state, compensator state, and short-
circuit state, respectively. The short-circuit current can be
diminished on account of the reactive power compensa-
tion effect. Furthermore, the analysis of the short-circuit
characteristics shows that the short-circuit characteristic
curve—short-circuit output current versus field current—is
not a straight line, due to the saturation of the d-axis flux
path of the FMMP. And the HEBLdcG at −8-A field current
features the lowest total loss at the short-circuit state.
At last, a prototype HEBLdcG is manufactured and the
experiments validate the simulations.
Index Terms—Brushless dc power generation system,
hybrid excitation machine (HEM), permanent magnet (PM)
machine, reactive power compensation.
I. INTRODUCTION
S CORE components of the hybrid electric vehicle and the
A more electric aircraft, onboard generators supply electrical
power for the electric drive system and battery charging [1], [2].
The permanent magnet (PM) machine has attracted exten-
sive interests as it has high power density and high efficiency
[3]. However, relatively poor flux-weakening capability and ir-
reversible demagnetization risk restrict the applications of the
Manuscript received December 28, 2018; revised March 16, 2019;
accepted April 26, 2019. Date of publication May 21, 2019; date of current
version January 3, 2020. This work was supported by the National
Natural Science Foundation for Excellent Young Scholar of China under
Grant 51622704. (Corresponding author: Zhuoran Zhang.)
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, College
of Automation Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and As-
tronautics, Nanjing 211106, China (e-mail:, sunlinnan_nuaa@163.com;
apsc-zzr@nuaa.edu.cn; guxiangpei_nuaa@163.com; yulipc@126.com;
cae_vsvf@163.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIE.2019.2916361
0278-0046 © 2019 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.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
PM machine [4]. Therefore, diverse methods of flux regulation
in PM machines have been developed in recent years.
Basically, with an associated inverter, the armature current
can be used to regulate the flux in the PM machine to achieve
a wider constant power speed range in the driving application.
However, as a result of inverter limitations in terms of maximum
current and maximum voltage, the speed range is still limited.
Similarly, the controlled rectifier and position sensor are also
needed in the generation system, which inevitably reduce the
reliability [5], [6].
In addition, mechanical devices are developed to help achieve
better flux-regulation characteristics. The PM flux-linkage reg-
ulation using relative movement between the two parts, such as
rotor plates, PMs, or windings, is the method utilized in both
axial-flux PM machines and radial-flux PM machines [7], [8].
Harnessing the movable ferromagnetic pieces to provide short-
circuit paths for the PM flux is another way to weaken the PM’s
flux [9], [10].
Then, the memory machines featuring special materials, such
as Al-Ni-Co magnets, are proposed and investigated. This kind
of magnets can readily be magnetized or demagnetized by
current pulses in the d-axis to regulate the flux [11], [12].
Finally, hybrid excitation machines (HEMs) have been inves-
tigated in the past ten years and various topologies have been
developed. Generally, HEMs can be divided into those with se-
ries or parallel topologies depending on the coupling types of
flux paths of PMs and wound field (WF) flux [13]. The design
and optimization methods, the structures and operating princi-
ples, as well as the torque characteristics and control schemes of
parallel HEMs (PHEMs) are illustrated in detail [14]–[17]. The
WF flux does not pass through PMs in PHEM, which avoids the
disadvantages of irreversible PM demagnetization risks existing
in series HEMs [18]–[20]. Besides, using low-cost magnets to
reduce the q-axis armature reaction is another kind of HEM. In
[21] and [22], the BEGA, featuring flux barriers and low-cost
magnets, has the same mathematical models and external char-
acteristics with the dc machine, which has wider constant power
speed range and lower peak stator current for peak stall torque.
In this paper, the reactive power compensation effect of the
hybrid excitation brushless dc generator (HEBLdcG) is in-
vestigated. The configurations and operation principles of the
HEBLdcG are analyzed. In addition, the operation modes of
 SUN et al.: ANALYSIS OF REACTIVE POWER COMPENSATION EFFECT OF A NEW HEBLDCG
Fig. 1. Explosive view of the PHEM.
Fig. 2. Equivalent magnetic circuits and equivalent electric circuits
(F1 —magnetic potential of the PMs, Rp m —magnetic reluctance of the
PMs, R g 1 —magnetic reluctance of the PMMP air gap, R i s 1 —magnetic
reluctance of the PMMP stator core, R i r 1 —magnetic reluctance of the
PMMP rotor core, F2 —magnetic potential of the field winding, R g 2 —
magnetic reluctance of the FMMP air gap, R i s 2 —magnetic reluctance
of the FMMP stator core, R i r 2 —magnetic reluctance of the FMMP ro-
tor core, Φ 1 —magnetic flux provided by PM, and Φ 2 —magnetic flux
provided by field current).
the flux modulation machine part (FMMP) are illustrated with
the help of the block schemes of the energy flow and the three
field current ranges are divided. Three typical operation states
selected representatively in these ranges and the phase-shift
performances at those operation states are analyzed in detail.
Furthermore, the losses and efficiencies under a given speed
range with the constant output voltage and power are analyzed;
the short-circuit performances are also elucidated in detail. At
last, the experiments are conducted with respect to the three
typical operation states and the simulations are validated. Both
experiments and finite-element analysis (FEA) results show that
the HEBLdcG is a promising candidate in the onboard dc power
generation system.
II. CONFIGURATION AND OPERATION PRINCIPLES
The explosive view of the PHEM is presented in Fig. 1.
The equivalent magnetic circuits of the PHEM and equivalent
electric circuits of the HEBLdcG consisting of the PHEM and
associated diode rectifier are given in Fig. 2.
The PHEM consists of two separated machine parts with one
flux barrier gap sandwiched between them. The left part is the
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3563
Fig. 3. Design flowchart.
PM machine part (PMMP) and the right part is the FMMP.
The two rotors separately belonging to the two machines are
installed on the same shaft as shown in Fig. 1. The magnetic
circuits of the two machines in Fig. 2 are independent from
each other because of the sandwiched barrier gap. The armature
windings of the two parts and the diode rectifier are connected in
series.
In order to achieve a proper superposition of the electromag-
netic performances of the PMMP and FMMP, it is crucial for
the two parts to share an electrical frequency. Therefore, the
rotor pole number of the FMMP must equal the number of pole
pairs of the PMMP. To be specific, the 12/10-pole FMMP is
chosen to achieve a bipolar flux linkage. And as for the slot
pole combinations of the PMMP, many combinations having 20
poles could be utilized, such as 96-slot/20-pole, 75-slot/20-pole,
60-slot/20-pole, 48-slot/20-pole, and 24-slot/20-pole. After the
optimization of the cross sections of the PMMP and FMMP, the
stack lengths and the turns of the armature windings of each
electrical machine part are selected based on the FEA results
in order to achieve a wider constant-voltage speed range and
higher output power of the HEBLdcG. The design flowchart is
given in Fig. 3.
The field source consists of the PM surface mounted on the
rotor of the 60-slot/20-pole PMMP and the nonoverlapping con-
centrated dc field winding wound on the stator of the 12/10-pole
FMMP, which are illustrated in Fig. 4. The independent flux
paths of the two parts present the merit of stable operation point
of PMs with an attractive flux-regulation capability. In addition,
Fig. 4 also shows the flux-density distributions and the flux vec-
tor at open circuit, where the FMMP features a 32-A positive
field current If (5.1 A/mm2 field current density Jf ).
Fig. 5 shows the flux-linkage waveforms and the correspond-
ing spectra at open circuit of the PMMP, FMMP, and HEBLdcG,
whose specifications are listed in Table I. The open-circuit flux
linkage of the HEBLdcG in Fig. 5(a) is the sum of those of
the PMMP and FMMP. The flux linkage of the HEBLdcG
can be readily controlled by regulating the field current of the
FMMP. In Fig. 5(b), there is no even-order harmonic in the
flux linkage and the magnitude of fundamental-waveform flux
 3564
Fig. 4. Cross-sectional views, flux density distributions, and flux vectors
at open circuit. (a) PMMP. (b) FMMP with the positive dc field current
(If = 32 A and Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ).
Fig. 5. Flux linkage of the PMMP, FMMP, and HEBLdcG at open circuit
(If = 32 A and Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ). (a) Waveforms. (b) Spectra.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO. 5, MAY 2020
TABLE I
PROTOTYPE MACHINE SPECIFICATIONS
Fig. 6. Inductance versus field current at open circuit.
linkage of the HEBLdcG is the sum of those of the PMMP and
FMMP.
The inductances in the d-axis and q-axis of the PMMP and
FMMP versus field current are given in Fig. 6. The inductance of
the HEBLdcG is the sum of those of the PMMP and FMMP. The
d-axis and q-axis of the PMMP and FMMP are marked in Fig. 4.
The saliency ratio of the surface mounted PMMP is independent
from the variable field current due to the isolation of the flux
paths of the two parts. The values of the d-axis inductance Ld
and q-axis inductance Lq are stable in the FMMP when the field
current ranges from −20 to 20 A. With the increase in the field
current, the Ld and Lq both decline. The magnetic saturation
in the d-axis of the FMMP is more severe than that in the q-
axis with the increase in the field current. Hence, the d-axis
inductance decreases more sharply.
Fig. 7 shows the dc output voltage after rectifying versus field
current. Excellent flux-regulation capability can be realized.
III. PHASE-SHIFT CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS AT LOAD
In this section, the phase-shift performances of the HEBLdcG
at load are investigated. First, operation modes of the FMMP
are illustrated when the HEBLdcG operates in the generator
mode. And the definition of operation modes of the FMMP is
elucidated by block schemes of the energy flow. In addition,
phase-shift factors (PSFs) of the HEBLdcG with different field
currents are analyzed in detail. The PSF is defined as the cosine
of the phase difference between the fundamental component
 SUN et al.: ANALYSIS OF REACTIVE POWER COMPENSATION EFFECT OF A NEW HEBLDCG
Fig. 7. Output voltage versus field current (n = 1200 r/min).
Fig. 8. Block schemes of the energy flow. (a) FMMP works in the
generator mode. (b) FMMP works in the motor mode (T1 —torque of
the PMMP, T2 —torque of the FMMP, P1 —mechanical power of the
PMMP, P2 —mechanical power of the FMMP, P e 1 —electrical power of
the PMMP, P e 2 —electrical power of the FMMP, P e —electrical power
of the HEBLdcG, P f —field power, R f —reluctance of the field winding,
P o —output power of the HEBLdcG, pc o re 1 —core loss of the PMMP,
pc o re 2 —core loss of the FMMP, pP M —PM loss, p a 1 —armature loss of
the PMMP, p c 2 —copper loss of the FMMP, and pre c —rectifier loss).
of the phase voltage and fundamental component of the phase
current.
A. Operating Modes
The operation modes of the FMMP are relevant to both the
field current and armature current, while the PMMP always
works in the generator mode, when the HEBLdcG operates in
the generator mode. The block schemes of active power flow
between the two electrical machine parts are shown in Fig. 8.
Fig. 8(a) shows the block scheme of active power flow of the
HEBLdcG when the FMMP works in the generator mode, where
both the PMMP and FMMP provide the electrical power for the
HEBLdcG. Fig. 8(b) elucidates the block scheme of energy flow
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3565
Fig. 9. Operation modes of the FMMP and three divided ranges
(n = 1200 r/min).
of the HEBLdcG when the FMMP works in the motor mode,
where the PMMP provides the electrical power of the HEBLdcG
and the electrical power of the FMMP. The operation modes of
the FMMP are defined by the direction or sign of Pe2 . When the
electrical power of the FMMP is positive, the FMMP operates
in the generator mode. By contrast, the FMMP operates in the
motor mode when the electrical power of the FMMP is negative,
which means that the FMMP absorbs the power generated by
the PMMP.
Fig. 9 elucidates the operation modes of the FMMP with
different combinations of the dc field current and rms armature
current. The solid gray line represents the short-circuit armature
current versus the field current of the HEBLdcG. The red squares
and black circles denote that the FMMP operates in the motor
mode and generator mode, respectively. The combinations that
the FMMP operates in the motor mode are defined as the motor
mode area, and the combinations that the FMMP operates in the
generator mode are defined as the generator mode area. Such
two areas are separated by the dashed line. [18]
Based on the operation modes of the FMMP, three different
areas related to the field current are divided. First, the range I
(in the yellow area) features a field current greater than 16 A,
where the FMMP always works in the generator mode without
considering the short-circuit condition. Second, in the range
II shown in the green area, the field current is positive and
smaller than 16 A, and the operation modes of the FMMP are
associated with the value of the armature current. To be specific,
when the field current is relatively higher and the armature
current is lower, the FMMP operates in the generator mode.
By contrast, when the field current is relatively lower and the
armature current is higher, the FMMP works in the motor mode.
Finally, when the field current is negative, which is defined as
the range III and marked in the red area, the FMMP always
operates in the motor mode and absorbs the power generated by
the PMMP.
B. Power-Balance State
Fig. 10(a) shows the output voltage versus output current of
a PM brushless dc generator (PMBLdcG) and the HEBLdcG
at a representative field current in the range I. The PMBLdcG
 3566
Fig. 10. Phase-shift characteristics (If = 32 A, Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 , and
n = 1200 r/min). (a) Output voltage versus output current of the HEBLdcG
and PMBLDCG. (b) PSF versus output current of the HEBLdcG, PMMP,
and FMMP. (c) Fundamental-wave phasor diagram at the power-balance
state.
consists of the PM machine featuring the same specifications
with the PMMP in the HEBLdcG and an associated diode rec-
tifier. In the range I, the FMMP always works in the generator
mode irrespective of the value of the armature current. With the
influence of the FMMP, the HEBLdcG has a higher open-circuit
output voltage and a lower short-circuit current compared to the
PMBLdcG. Therefore, two such external characteristic curves
certainly intersect with each other and the intersection is further
defined as the power-balance state. At the power-balance state,
the diminished output active power of the PMMP Pe1 and the
output active power of the FMMP Pe2 strike a balance.
Fig. 10(b) shows the PSF versus output current of the
HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP. The higher output current re-
sults in lower PSFs of the PMMP and FMMP, while the PSF of
the HEBLdcG in a wide range of output current is approximately
unity. When the field current is 32 A (Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ), the
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO. 5, MAY 2020
PSF of the PMMP is 0.8 and the PSF of the FMMP is 0.4 at the
power-balance state which is circled with purple.
Fig. 10(c) expounds the fundamental-wave phasor diagrams
of the HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP at the power-balance state.
U represents the phase voltage. Due to the series connection
armature windings of the two parts, the phase currents of the
three machines are equal to each other, which are sinusoidal and
represented with I. It can also be seen that the phase voltage of
the PMMP Upm is prior to that of the load phase current, while
the phase voltage of the FMMP Uf m is lagging in comparison.
As the output current goes smaller, the phase differences become
smaller.
As analyzed above, resulting from the lower PSF of the
PMMP, the Pe1 value is smaller in comparison with the PM-
BLdcG having the same specifications at the power-balance
state. In other words, the PMMP produces a lagging reactive
power Q1 , thereby, Pe1 is diminished. The value of Pe1 and Q1
can be calculated by (1) and (2), where θpm is the phase-shift
angle of the PMMP shown in Fig. 10(c)
Pe1 = 3Upm · I · cos (θpm ) (1)
Q1 = 3Upm · I · sin (θpm ) (2)
Pe2 = 3Uf m · I · cos (θf m ) (3)
Q2 = 3Uf m · I · sin (θf m ) (4)
Q1 = Q2 . (5)
In addition, the difference in output active power between
the PM machine in the PMBLdcG and the PMMP is equal to
the Pe2 at the power-balance state. The power of the FMMP
Q2 and Pe2 can be calculated by (3) and (4), where θf m is the
phase-shift angle of the FMMP. Q1 equals Q2 . See (5).
C. Compensator State
Fig. 11(a) shows the output power versus output current
of the HEBLdcG, FMMP, and PMMP at 8-A field current
(Jf = 1.3 A/mm2 ), which is a representative field current in
the range II where the FMMP operation modes are influenced
by the armature current. The output power of the HEBLdcG
Po is the sum of Pe1 and Pe2 subtracting the loss of the diode
rectifier prec . See (6). With the increase in the output current, Po
increases initially and then decreases. When the active power
of the FMMP Pe2 reaches zero, the FMMP only generates the
reactive power, which is defined as the compensator state in this
paper.
Fig. 11(b) gives the PSF versus output current of the
HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP. The high output current re-
sults in low PSFs of the PMMP and FMMP, while the PSF of
the HEBLdcG in a wide range of output currents is approxi-
mately unity due to the diode rectifier. When the field current is
8 A (Jf = 1.3 A/mm2 ), the PMMP PSF is 0.72 and the FMMP
PSF is zero at the compensator state, which is also circled in
purple.
Fig. 11(c) represents the fundamental-wave phasor diagrams
of the HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP at the compensator state.
It can also be known that the phase of the Upm is prior to the
 SUN et al.: ANALYSIS OF REACTIVE POWER COMPENSATION EFFECT OF A NEW HEBLDCG
Fig. 11. Phase-shift characteristics (If = 8 A, Jf = 1.3 A/mm2 , and
n = 1200 r/min). (a) Output power versus output current of the HEBLdcG,
FMMP, and PMMP. (b) PSF versus output current of the HEBLdcG,
PMMP, and FMMP. (c) Fundamental-wave phasor diagram at the
compensator state.
load-phase current, while the phase of the Uf m is lagging. As
the output current goes lower, the phase differences become
smaller.
At the compensator state, Po equals the difference between
Pe1 and prec , which can be represented in (7). The FMMP
only outputs reactive power and the PSF of the FMMP is zero.
The FMMP acts as a reactive power compensator at this state.
When the output current is smaller than the output current of the
compensator state, the FMMP operates in the generator mode.
Otherwise, when the output current is greater than the output
current of the compensator state, the FMMP works in the motor
mode
Po = Pe1 + Pe2 − prec (6)
Po = Pe1 − prec (7)
prec = Pe1 − Pe2 . (8)
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3567
Fig. 12. Phase-shift characteristics (If = −16 A, Jf = 2.5 A/mm2 ,
and n = 1200 r/min). (a) Output power versus output current of the
HEBLdcG. (b) PSF versus output current of the HEBLdcG, PMMP, and
FMMP. (c) Fundamental-wave phasor diagram at the short-circuit state.
D. Short-Circuit State
Fig. 12(a) shows the output power versus output current of
the HEBLdcG at −16A field current (Jf = 2.5 A/mm2 ), which
is a representative field current in the range III where the FMMP
always operates in the motor mode and absorbs the power gen-
erated by the PMMP. The short-circuit output current of the
HEBLdcG is 270 A.
Fig. 12(b) gives the PSF versus output current of the
HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP. The FMMP PSF is negative
and the absolute value of the PSF decreases with the increase
in the output current. The FMMP PSF is −0.1 and the PMMP
PSF is 0.25 at the short-circuit state, which is marked with the
purple circle. When the output end of the diode rectifier is at
the short-circuit condition, the phase voltage of the HEBLdcG
is not zero due to the diode rectifier.
Fig. 12(c) represents the fundamental-wave phasor diagrams
of the HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP at the short-circuit state.
 3568 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO. 5, MAY 2020

Fig. 13. Operation modes of the FMMP and the PMMP PSF Fig. 14. Field current, loss, and efficiency versus speed at the 30-V
(n = 1200 r/min). output voltage and 6-kW output power (1—core loss of the PMMP, 2—
core loss of the FMMP, 3—armature loss, 4—field loss, 5—rectifier loss).

The phase of the Upm is prior to the load-phase current, while

the phase of the Uf m is lagging over 90 degrees. As the output
current goes lower, the phase difference between the phase volt-
age and phase current of the PMMP becomes smaller, while the
phase difference between the phase voltage and phase current of
the FMMP becomes greater. At the open-circuit condition, the
Upm phasor reaches the positive real axis and the Uf m phasor
reaches the negative real axis.
prec is the difference between Pe1 and Pe2 at short circuit,
which is represented in (8). The PSFs of the PMMP and FMMP
are quite small and almost zero. In addition, in the range III, the
PSF of the FMMP is always negative.

E. Summary Fig. 15. Inductance versus field current at the short-circuit state
(n = 1200 r/min).
Fig. 13 shows the operation modes of the FMMP and the
PSF of the PMMP at different combinations of armature current
and field current. The PMMP always operates in the generator
mode, regardless of the polarity of the field current. Under the
heavy current load and relatively lower field current, the PSF of
the PMMP is small.
In the range I, at the power-balance state, the difference in the
output active power between the PM machine in the PMBLdcG
and the PMMP is equal to Pe2 . In the range II, at the compensator
state represented with the gray dashed line in Fig. 13, Po equals
the difference between Pe1 and prec , whereas the FMMP outputs
reactive power only. In the range III, at the short-circuit state,
the difference between Pe1 and Pe2 equals prec .

IV. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS AT LOAD

Fig. 14 illustrates the field current and the total loss versus
speed at the 30-V output voltage and 6-kW output power. The
output voltage and output power are constant in a speed range
between 1000 and 1800 r/min by regulating the field current.
In addition, the loss distributions and corresponding efficiencies
are given in the pie charts. The total losses are approximately
0.9 kW in the given speed range with core losses accounting for
larger proportions with the increase in speeds. The efficiencies
hover at about 86% in the given speed range.
Fig. 15 elucidates the inductance versus the field current at
short circuit. Different from the open-circuit condition, the Ld
Fig. 16. Output current versus field current of the HEBLdcG and the
flux density distributions of the FMMP at short circuit (n = 1200 r/min).
of the HEBLdcG at short circuit decreases with the decline of
the field current.
Fig. 16 gives the output current versus field current of the
HEBLdcG under the condition of short circuit of the diode rec-
tifier output end and the flux-density distributions of the FMMP
at three different field currents are also shown. With the decrease
in the field current, the short-circuit current decreases to the low-
est value at −16 A field current initially and increases slightly

Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 SUN et al.: ANALYSIS OF REACTIVE POWER COMPENSATION EFFECT OF A NEW HEBLDCG
Fig. 17. Loss distributions at short circuit (n = 1200 r/min).
Fig. 18. Prototype. (a) Assembling. (b) Prototype mounted on the
test rig.
later. At the same time, the d-axis flux path of the FMMP is
gradually saturated.
Fig. 17 presents the loss distributions versus field current at
short circuit. With the decrease in the field current, the armature
losses of the PMMP and FMMP decrease synchronously, the
core loss of the FMMP decreases and the core loss of the PMMP
is almost unchanged.
In short, with the decrease in the field current at short circuit,
the armature current decreases initially and then increases. The
d-axis flux path of the FMMP is gradually saturated, but the core
loss decreases due to the demagnetization of the whole FMMP.
V. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
An HEBLdcG prototype and the corresponding test rig are
shown in Fig. 18. The key specifications of the prototype are
listed in Table I in Section II. Fig. 19 shows the open-circuit elec-
tromotive force (EMF) waveforms of the HEBLdcG, PMMP,
FMMP, and output voltage after rectifying at 32-A field current
(Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ). It can be seen clearly that the zero points
of the EMF waveforms of the HEBLdcG, PMMP, and FMMP
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3569
Fig. 19. Open-circuit waveforms (If = 32 A, Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 , and
n = 1200 r/min). (a) Measured. (b) FEA.
Fig. 20. Output voltage versus output current (If = 32 A, Jf =
5.1 A/mm2 , and n = 1200 r/min).
are overlapped, which validates that there are approximately no
phase differences between the EMF of each part at open circuit.
The measured data and FEA results of the output voltage ver-
sus output current at 32-A field current (Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ) on
resistive loads are comparatively given in Fig. 20. The measured
results agree well with the FEA.
Fig. 21 shows the phase-voltage waveforms of the HEBLdcG,
PMMP, FMMP and phase-current waveforms at 32-A field cur-
rent (Jf = 5.1 A/mm2 ) and 30-V output voltage on a resistive
load. The overlap between the zero points of the Uhe and I means
that the HEBLdcG PSF is approximately unity. The phase of the
Upm is prior to the load-phase current, while the phase of the
Uf m is lagging in comparison. The fundamental-wave phasor
diagram at the same load condition is illustrated in Fig. 22.
The dashed arrows represent the phase-voltage phasors of the
PMMP and FMMP at the power-balance state defined in Sec-
tion III-B. The solid arrows represent the phase-voltage phasors
of the PMMP and FMMP at the 30-V output voltage, which
 3570
Fig. 21. Phase shifts at load (If = 32 A and U o = 30 V). (a) Measured.
(b) FEA.
Fig. 22. Fundamental-wave phasor diagram at load (If = 32 A, Jf =
5.1 A/mm2 , and U o = 30 V).
Fig. 23. Waveforms at the compensator state (If = 8 A).
features a lower output current than the power-balance state.
As the output current goes smaller, the phase differences be-
come smaller. Featuring the same field current, the PSFs of the
PMMP and FMMP are influenced by the armature current.
In addition, the phase-voltage waveforms of the HEBLdcG,
PMMP, FMMP and phase-current waveform at the compensator
state are shown in Fig. 23. The experimental waveforms at the
short-circuit condition are given in Fig. 24. The output voltage
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO. 5, MAY 2020
Fig. 24. Waveforms at the short-circuit state (If = −8 A). (a) Mea-
sured. (b) FEA.
of the HEBLdcG is zero and the phase current is quite sinusoidal
in Fig. 24(a). It can be seen that the phase difference between the
PMMP and FMMP is almost 180° in Fig. 24(b), which validates
the analyses.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, the HEBLdcG, which is the integration of the
surface-mounted PMMP and stator-wound FMMP was inves-
tigated and analyzed. The inductance characteristics were ana-
lyzed based on the definition of the d-axis and q-axis flux paths.
A remarkable flux regulation in the HEBLdcG was achieved
due to the bidirectional field regulation capability of the FMMP.
In addition, the FMMP operates as a reactive power compen-
sator in the HEBLdcG. The leading reactive power generated by
the FMMP is equal to the lagging reactive power of the PMMP.
With the help of the block schemes of the energy flow, it is
clear that, when the HEBLdcG works in the generator mode,
the operation modes of the FMMP are influenced by the field
current and armature current, while the PMMP always oper-
ates in the generator mode. Three different ranges are divided
and representatively three typical operation states were eluci-
dated. First, the range I features a field current greater than
16 A (Jf = 2.5 A/mm2 ), where the FMMP always works in
the generator mode. At the power-balance state, the difference
in the output active power between the PM machine in the PM-
BLDCG and the PMMP is equal to Pe2 . Second, in the range
II, the field current is positive, and the modes of the FMMP
are associated with the armature current. At the compensator
state, Phe equals the difference between Pe1 and prec . As a
compensator, the FMMP outputs reactive power only. Finally,
in the range III, the field current is negative and the FMMP al-
ways operates in the motor mode. At the short-circuit state, the
difference between Pe1 and Pe2 equals prec . It is the reactive
 SUN et al.: ANALYSIS OF REACTIVE POWER COMPENSATION EFFECT OF A NEW HEBLDCG
power in the HEBLdcG that restricts its own short-circuit
current.
Furthermore, the analysis of short-circuit characteristics
showed the short-circuit characteristic curve—short-circuit out-
put current versus field current—is not a straight line. This is
because the d-axis flux path of the FMMP is saturated with
the decrease in the field current and armature current. The
HEBLdcG at −8-A field current (Jf = 1.3 A/mm2 ) features the
lowest total loss at short circuit. An HEBLdcG prototype was
manufactured and the experiments validated the simulations.
Both experiments and FEA results showed that the HEBLdcG
is promising for application in onboard dc power generation
systems.
REFERENCES
[1] C. C. Chan, “The state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell vehicles,”
Proc. IEEE, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 704–718, Apr. 2007.
[2] K. Rajashekara, “Power conversion technologies for automotive and air-
craft systems,” IEEE Electrific. Mag., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 50–60, Jun. 2014.
[3] K. T. Chau, C. C. Chan, and C. Liu, “Overview of permanent-magnet
brushless drives for electric and hybrid electric vehicles,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 2246–2257, Jun. 2008.
[4] I. Boldea, L. N. Tutelea, L. Parsa, and D. Dorrell, “Automotive electric
propulsion systems with reduced or no permanent magnets: An overview,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 5696–5711, Oct. 2014.
[5] A. M. El-Refaie, “Motors/generators for traction/propulsion applications:
A review,” IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 90–99, Mar. 2013.
[6] P. Bajec, B. Pevec, D. Voncina, D. Miljavec, and J. Nastran, “Extending
the low-speed operation range of PM generator in automotive applications
using novel ac–dc converter control,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52,
no. 2, pp. 436–443, Apr. 2005.
[7] Z. Zeng and Q. Lu, “Investigation of novel partitioned-primary hybrid-
excited flux-switching linear machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 9804–9813, Dec. 2018.
[8] F. G. Capponi, R. Terrigi, F. Caricchi, and L. Del Ferraro, “Active output
voltage regulation for an ironless axial-flux PM automotive alternator with
electromechanical flux weakening,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 45, no. 5,
pp. 1785–1793, Jul. 2009.
[9] Z. Q. Zhu, M. M. J. Al-Ani, X. Liu, and B. Lee, “A mechanical flux
weakening method for switched flux permanent magnet machines,” IEEE
Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 806–815, Jun. 2015.
[10] A. Shakal, L. Yuefeng, and T. A. Lipo, “A permanent magnet ac machine
structure with true field weakening capability,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp.
Ind. Electron., 1993, pp. 19–24.
[11] L. Hengchuan, L. Heyun, Z. Q. Zhu, H. Mingming, and J. Ping, “Per-
manent magnet remagnetizing physics of a variable flux memory motor,”
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1679–1682, Jun. 2010.
[12] C. Yu and K. T. Chau, “Design, analysis, and control of dc-excited mem-
ory motor,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 479–489,
Jun. 2011.
[13] N. Patin, L. Vido, E. Monmasson, J. P. Louis, M. Gabsi, and M. Lecrivain,
“Control of a hybrid excitation synchronous generator for aircraft ap-
plications,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 3772–3783,
Oct. 2008.
[14] X. Zhao and S. Niu, “Design and optimization of a new magnetic-geared
pole-changing hybrid excitation machine,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.,
vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 9943–9952, Dec. 2017.
[15] Y. Wang and Z. Deng, “A controllable power distribution strategy for
open winding hybrid excitation generator system,” IEEE Trans. Energy
Convers., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 122–136, Mar. 2017.
[16] H. Hua and Z. Q. Zhu, “Novel parallel hybrid excited machines with
separate stators,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 1212–
1220, Sep. 2016.
[17] W. Hua, P. Su, M. Tong, and J. Meng, “Investigation of a five-phase E-core
hybrid-excitation flux-switching machine for EV and HEV applications,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 124–133, Jan./Feb. 2017.
[18] L. Sun, Z. Zhang, L. Yu, and X. Gu, “Development and analysis of a
new hybrid excitation brushless dc generator with flux modulation effect,”
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 4189–4198, Jun. 2019.
Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3571
[19] X. Luo and T. A. Lipo, “A synchronous/permanent magnet hybrid ac
machine,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 203–210,
Jun. 2000.
[20] G. Henneberger, J. Minaglou, and R. Ciorba, “Design and test of per-
manent magnet synchronous motor with auxiliary excitation winding for
electric vehicle application,” in Proc. Eur. Power Electron. Chapter Symp.,
Oct. 1994, pp. 645–649.
[21] S. Scridon, I. Boldea, L. Tutelea, F. Blaabjerg, and A. E. Ritchie, “BEGA—
A biaxial excitation generator for automobiles: Comprehensive characteri-
zation and test results,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 935–944,
Jul./Aug. 2005.
[22] I. Boldea, V. Coroban-Schramel, G. Andreescu, F. Blaabjerg, and
S. Scridon, “BEGA starter/alternator—Vector control implementation and
performance for wide speed range at unity power factor operation,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 150–158, Jan./Feb. 2010.
Linnan Sun (S’17) received the B.S. degree in
electrical engineering in 2016 from the Nanjing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nan-
jing, China, where she is currently working to-
ward the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering.
Her main research interests include hybrid
excitation generator design for electric vehicle
application.
Zhuoran Zhang (M’09–SM’12) received the
B.S. degree in measurement engineering and
the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engi-
neering from the Nanjing University of Aeronau-
tics and Astronautics (NUAA), Nanjing, China, in
2000, 2003, and 2009, respectively.
Since 2003, he has been a Faculty Member
with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
NUAA, where he is currently a Full Professor
of Aircraft Electrical Power and Vice Director of
Jiangsu Provincial Key Laboratory of New En-
ergy Generation and Power Conversion. From 2012 to 2013, he was
a Visiting Professor with the Wisconsin Electric Machines and Power
Electronics Consortium (WEMPEC), University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Madison, WI, USA. From 2016 to 2017, he was with the Commercial
Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. (COMAC) and was appointed Deputy
Director of Electrical System Designers of C919 Civil Jet Aircraft. He has
authored or coauthored over 120 technical papers and one book, and is
the holder of 30 issued patents in his research areas which include de-
sign and control of permanent magnet machines, hybrid excitation elec-
tric machines, and doubly salient electric machines for aircraft power,
electric vehicles, and renewable energy generation.
Xiangpei Gu received the B.S. degree in elec-
trical engineering in 2018 from the Nanjing Uni-
versity of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing,
China, where she is currently working toward the
Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering.
Her main research interests include hybrid
excitation generator design.
 3572 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL ELECTRONICS, VOL. 67, NO. 5, MAY 2020

Li Yu (S’15) received the B.S. and M.S. degrees Jincai Li (S’17) received the B.S. degree from
in electrical engineering, in 2011 and 2014, re- the Henan University of Urban Construction,
spectively, from the Nanjing University of Tech- Pingdingshan, China, in 2012, and the M.S. de-
nology, Nanjing, China, where he is currently gree from Shanghai Dianji University, Shanghai,
working toward the Ph.D. degree in electrical China, in 2015, both in electrical engineering. He
engineering. is currently working toward the Ph.D. degree in
His main research interests include doubly electrical engineering with the Center for More-
salient electric machine design and control for Electric-Aircraft Power System, Nanjing Univer-
electric vehicle and aircraft power systems. sity of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing,
China.
His main research interests include design
and control of brushless synchronous starter/generator and electrical
power generation system for More Electric Aircraft (MEA).

Authorized licensed use limited to: NANJING UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS. Downloaded on March 23,2020 at 12:17:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.