Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Reports
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

Efficiency analytical of five-phase induction motors with different

stator connections for fracturing pump drives
∗
Shuting Fan, Dawei Meng , Mengmeng Ai
School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering; Harbin University of Science and Technology, Harbin, 150080, China

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: Improving the efficiency of fracturing pump drive motors is key to improving the performance of
Received 26 September 2021 fracturing equipment. For this purpose, this paper investigates the losses and efficiency of five-phase
Received in revised form 5 November 2021 fracturing pump drive motors with different stator winding connections. Inverters generate different
Accepted 16 November 2021
phase voltages in different stator winding connections, which leads to different spatial harmonics and
Available online xxxx
losses. Of the various losses in the motor, the iron loss is hard to measure. Component theory is
Keywords: proposed, and a corresponding equivalent circuit is developed in this paper. Calculation of the iron
Fracturing pump loss based on the phase voltage of the different stator winding connections. In order to verify the
Five-phase motor validity of the equivalent circuit, the proposed model was simulated in MATLAB/Simulink and some
Combined winding experimental tests were carried out on several 15 kW motors. The results show that the total harmonic
Iron loss model
distortion (THD) coefficient of voltage and current is the smallest for the pentacle winding in the single
winding, the voltage, and current THD coefficient is the smallest for the pentagon–star winding in the
combine d winding. And according to the efficiency calculation, it can be seen that the fracturing pump
drive motor with the pentagon–star winding is highly efficient and energy-saving, as well as having
a high fault tolerance.
© 2021 Economic Society of Australia, Queensland. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 405
2. Winding connection and prototype parameters........................................................................................................................................................... 406
3. Iron loss model for five-phase motors windings ......................................................................................................................................................... 407
4. Simulation and experimental results ............................................................................................................................................................................. 410
5. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 412
CRediT authorship contribution statement ................................................................................................................................................................... 413
Declaration of competing interest.................................................................................................................................................................................. 413
Data availability ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 413
Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 413
References ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 413

1. Introduction a long time, with low equipment efficiency. Traditional diesel-

driven fracturing pumps have high vibration noise and low en-
Against the backdrop of growing global energy demand and ergy efficiency. Improving the efficiency of fracturing equipment
dwindling recoverable oil and gas reserves, shale oil is of great requires fracturing pump motors with high fault tolerance, the
value as an unconventional energy source to supplement lique- ability to work for long periods of time and high efficiency.
fied fuels. China has the world’s largest reserves of liquefied gas. Electric fracturing pumps are highly efficient and have obvious
However, the newly discovered shale gas resources are placing advantages in terms of environmental protection and energy
increasing demands on fracturing equipment (Jia et al., 2016). saving (Guo, 2014). However, the current electric fracturing pump
Fracturing pumps as a vital part of the fracturing equipment drive motors are all three-phase inverter induction motors (Li
works in high pressure and high load working environment for et al., 2020). Compared to three-phase induction motors, five-
phase induction motors are more forgiving and have lower losses,
∗ Corresponding author. which helps to improve the efficiency of fracturing pump drive
E-mail address: mengdawei@hrbust.edu.cn (D. Meng). motors (Liu et al., 2021).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.11.240
2352-4847/© 2021 Economic Society of Australia, Queensland. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai
Fig. 1. The fundamental branch EMFs of combined winding.
According to the available literature, there are various single
winding connections for the stator winding of five-phase mo-
tors (Sadeghi et al., 2012). At the same time, previous unpublished
research has shown that stator winding of five-phase motors have
several ways of combined winding connections. In this paper, the
combined winding of a five-phase motor is a winding consisting
of two branches with different winding connections. The number
of external interfaces of the motor differs from the number
of phases of the star connection motor corresponding to the
internal magneto-dynamic potential. The two winding branches
of a five-phase motor combined winding differ by 18◦ electrical
angles (Raziee et al., 2019). Moreover, the combined winding has
five external interfaces and the same internal magneto-dynamic
potential distribution as the ten-phase winding (Abdel-Khalik
et al., 2016c). When the two winding potential vector positions
overlap, the combined winding connection cannot change the
internal phase of the motor, and the potential vector is shown
in Fig. 1.
As Fig. 1 described, the a1, b1, c1, d1 and e1 denote the first
set of five-phase winding and the a2, b2, c2, d2 and e2 denote
the second set of five-phase winding. EL1 , EL2 , EL3 , EL4 and EL5
denote the line voltage between external interfaces. The five-
phase motor combined winding that meets the requirements
has four combinations: star–pentagon winding, pentagon–star
winding, star-pentacle winding, and pentacle–star winding. On a
fundamental power supply, the combined winding has a higher
fundamental winding factor, less harmonic content and more
redundancy than a single winding (Misir et al., 2017), which is
workable in various phase number motor. Accurate calculation of
fracturing pump loss is a prerequisite for temperature analysis
of the fracturing pump motor as well as for energy efficiency
analysis, which plays a key role in the long-term stable operation
of the fracturing pump under high pressure and large loads. In
the calculation of the energy consumption of the fracturing pump
drive motor, the calculation method for copper loss and mechan-
ical loss is high accuracy. However, the measurement method for
iron loss is more complicated, especially in the case of inverter
power supply. Iron loss is influenced by the parameters of the
inverter (Xue et al., 2017). Therefore, the key to energy efficiency
calculations for fracturing pumps is iron loss. However, existing
methods for calculating combined windings do not distinguish
between the different combined windings (Alteheld et al., 2018).
When extended to five-phase motors, the use of this equivalent
method for calculating the iron loss of five-phase combined wind-
ing motors is not suitable for distinguishing between different
combinations of winding connections. Hereby, it is difficult to
accurately calculate the energy efficiency of fraction pump drive
motors (Levi, 1995). Therefore, the influence of the two connec-
tion modes on the iron loss of the motor requires an effective iron
loss prediction model.
Compared with existing models, the proposed model for cal-
culating combined winding connections was to equate the com-
bined winding to a star winding (Misir et al., 2016). This method
406
Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413
ignored the neutral point and could not distinguish the effect
of different connections of the combined winding on the core
loss. In the literature (Abdel-Khalik et al., 2016a,b), the proposed
star–pentagon winding model did not address the core loss, and
only compared the efficiency of the star–pentagon winding with
that of the star winding and pentagon winding, without further
study of the effect of the pentagon–star winding on efficiency.
Therefore, for the combined winding of a five-phase motor, a new
model is needed to determine which connection mode can fur-
ther reduce the iron loss of the motor. The main methods for cal-
culating the iron loss of combined winding motors can be divided
into three categories. Firstly, the finite element analysis method.
Under spwm supply, the motor iron loss is influenced by the
harmonics generated by the inverter, which produces an increase
in iron loss. The model has a long calculation time and is not easy
to converge when accounting for the effect of the inverter on the
iron loss. The literature (Cristaldi et al., 2011) uses a direct inte-
gral hysteresis loop method to calculate the core loss, which ig-
nores the effect of the inverter on the loss and requires high com-
puter performance. The second is the use of the Steinmetz equa-
tion (Toulabi et al., 2019). This calculation method requires a high
level of accuracy of the data for the material. For example, the
revised calculations of the Steinmetz equation in literature (Zhang
et al., 2018) and literature (Zhang et al., 2016). Thirdly, the equiv-
alent circuit method. Steady-state models based on equivalent
resistance per phase and dynamic models only single winding
three-phase motors (Yang et al., 2014; Liu and Bazzi, 2017).
Different winding connections of five-phase motors have differ-
ent harmonic components in the third harmonic plane. Generic
methods for calculating iron loss in three-phase motors do not
clear the effect of the winding connection mode on iron loss.
The various winding models for a five-phase motor in this
paper take into account the higher harmonics in the power supply
under the inverter. Separate dq0 models are developed for the
two winding sets to calculate the iron loss, which can illustrate
the effect of the winding connections on the iron loss. In this
paper, the iron loss is represented by a parallel resistor Rc in the
magnetization set. The part of the stator current passing through
Lm to produce the magnetic linkage and the other part passing
through Rc to produce the iron loss. The model was simulated
using MATLAB/Simulink and the results were tested using several
15 kW motors.
2. Winding connection and prototype parameters
To unify the calculation method of single winding connections
and combined winding connections, the single winding connec-
tions are connected in series with two winding branches. As Fig. 2
described, the superscribe s, p1 and p2 represent star set, pen-
tagon set and pentacle set, respectively. The winding connections
were shown in Fig. 2, where the windiugs are arrangad as shown
in Fig. 3. The electrical angle between the two consecutive slots
is 18◦ . The two winding sets are one slot apart.
To ensure that the total number of ampere-turns of the two
winding sets was equal, which resulted in producing the same
magnitude of the magnet motive force (MMF). The relationship
between the number of turns of the corresponding two branches
in series is:
Np1 = 1.1756 · Ns (1)
Np2 = 1.902 · Ns (2)
where the number of turns of the star winding branch is Ns;
the number of turns of the pentagon winding branch is Np1; the
number of turns of the pentacle winding branch is Np2 .
It has been proven in the literature that when the number of
slots occupied by the two winding sets is the same, the motor has
the highest fundamental winding factor and the lowest harmonic
leakage resistance coefficient (Abdel-Khalik et al., 2016a). The
parameters of the prototype used are shown in Table 1.
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

Fig. 2. The winding connection types. (a) Star winding. (b) Pentagon winding; (c) Pentacle winding. (d) Star–pentagon winding. (e) Pentagon–star winding. (f)
Star-pentacle winding. (d) Pentacle–star winding.

Fig. 3. The winding layout.

3. Iron loss model for five-phase motors windings Table 1

The parameters of prototype.
Based on the available literature, a dual three-phase motor op- Power (kW) 15 Ns 18
erates independently between the two winding sets (Suzuki and Poles 4 Np1 21
Doki, 2020). The five-phase combined winding motor is similar Frequency (Hz) 50 Np2 34
to the dual winding motor in that the combined winding motor Number of 40/34 Line voltage for single winding, 252
is dynamically balanced for each parameter of each winding stator/rotor slots star–pentagon winding, and
branch during steady-state operation. Moreover, current litera- star-pentacle winding (V)
ture proved that the iron loss is generated by the two winding Rs () 0.1698 Line voltage for pentagon–star 126
branches separately (Khoshhava et al., 2021). Furthermore, to- winding and pentacle–star winding
tal iron loss of a multi-winding motor can be calculated and (V)
summed up by each winding separately in steady state operation. Rp1 () 0.2857 Slot-filling factor (star) 0.7772
Therefore, when the motor is in steady-state operation, the two Rp2 () 0.6423 Slot-filling factor (pentagon) 0.7692
branches of the combined winding can be considered to be oper- Number of slots per 2 Slot-filling factor (pentacle) 0.7643
ating independently and the iron loss of the motor is generated phase per pole
by the two winding branches independently. The total iron loss
of the motor Pcore is expressed as:
∑
Pcore = Pcorek k = 1, 2 (3) 1. Neglecting the inter-bar currents in the rotor.
k 2. The assumption that the rotor is equivalent to a five-phase
where Pcorek represent the iron loss generated by the kth winding
set.
The proposed calculation model is based on the following winding.
assumptions: 3. Motor magnetic density not saturated.
407
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

Fig. 4. The proposed induction machine equivalent circuit considering iron loss. (a) ⃝
1 and ⃝2 represent the stator model for star set with neutral point and without
neutral point. (b) and (c) represent the stator model for pentagon set and pentacle set. (d), (e) and (f) represent rotor model for star, pentagon and pentacle set.

4. Ignoring the influence of motor parameter changes on in- The voltage equation for the two winding sets is:
verter parameters, the inverter supply voltage does not
change during operation.
Λsk
[ ] [ ][ ] [ ]
Vsk Rsk E 0 Isk d
The calculation models for different winding connection con- = + (7)
sidering iron loss are shown in Fig. 4. Vrk 0 Rrk E Irk dt Λrk
In Fig. 4, each phase of the stator winding is composed of [ ] [ ] [ ]
stator resistance (Rs ), stator leakage inductance (Lls ), stator–rotor Isk Imsk Lmsk d Imsk
= + (8)
mutual inductance (Lms ) and iron loss resistance (Rc ). Each phase Irk Irk Rck dt 0
of the rotor winding is composed of rotor resistance (Rr ), rotor
Λsk
[ ] [ ][ ] [ ]
leakage inductance (Llr ) and stator–rotor mutual inductance (Lms ). Lsk Lsrk Isk Llsk Lmsk d Isk
This shows that stator current generates the stator–rotor mag- = + (9)
Λrk Lrsk Lrk Irk Rck dt 0
netic linkage through the mutual inductance, the copper loss and
the iron loss through Rc .
A dq0 decoupling model is developed for the calculation model
in Fig. 4. The two winding sets of the combined winding were where E is the unit matrix. The kth winding set stator inductance,
calculated separately. The voltage can be expressed as: stator–rotor mutual inductance and rotor inductance parameters
are:
dλask
uask = Rsk iask + (4)
dt
2π 8π
and λask can be calculated as:
⎡ ⎤
where iask Llsk + Lmsk Lmsk · cos ··· Lmsk · cos
⎢ 5 5 ⎥
Lmsk diamsk ⎢
2π 6π ⎥
⎥
iask = iamsk + (5) ⎢
⎢Lmsk · cos Llsk + Lmsk ··· Lmsk · cos
Rck dt Lsk = ⎢ 5 5 ⎥
⎥
(10)
⎢ .. .. .. .. ⎥
2π 4π
(
. . . .
⎢ ⎥
λask = Llsk iask + Lmsk iamsk + cos · ibmsk + cos · icmsk
⎢ ⎥
8π 6π
⎣ ⎦
5 5 Lmsk · cos Lmsk · cos ··· Llsk + Lmsk
6π 8π 5 5
+ cos · idmsk + cos · iemsk + cosθ r · iark ⎡ (
2π
) (
8π
)⎤
5 5 cosθ r cos θr + · · · cos θr +
2π 4π
( ) ( )
(6) 5 5 ⎥
+ cos θr + · ibrk + cos θr +
⎢
· icrk ⎢ ( )⎥
8π 6π ⎥
) (
5 5
⎢ ⎥
⎢cos θr + cosθ r · · · cos θr +
⎢
6π 8π
( ) ( ) ) ⎥
Lsrk = Lmsk ⎢ 5 5 ⎥
+ cos θr + · idrk + cos θr + · ierk ⎢
.. .. .. ..
⎥
5 5
⎢ ( . . . .
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
2π 4π
) ( ) ⎥
In the above equation, iamsk is the current through Lmsk . The ⎣
cos θr + cos θr + ··· cosθ r
⎦
voltage, current and magnetic linkage equations for the other four 5 5
phases can be calculated. (11)
408
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

2π 8π
⎡ ⎤
L + Lmsk Lmsk · cos ··· Lmsk · cos
⎢ lrk 5 5 ⎥
2π 6π ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢
⎢Lmsk · cos Llrk + Lmk ··· Lmsk · cos ⎥
Lrk = ⎢ 5 5 ⎥ (12)
⎢ .. .. .. .. ⎥
. . . .
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
8π 6π
⎣ ⎦
Lmsk · cos Lmsk · cos ··· Llrk + Lmsk
5 5
where θr is the rotor angle.
The relationship between the dq0 model parameter (Fdq0 ) and
the model parameter in the natural coordinate system (Fk ) is
Fdq0k = TFk (13)
where the transformation matrix from the natural coordinate
system to the dq0 coordinate system is
2π 4π 6π 8π
⎡ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ⎤
cosθ cos θ − cos θ − cos θ − cos θ −
⎢ 5 5 5 5 ⎥
⎢ ) ⎥
2π 4π 6π 8π
⎢ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ⎥
⎢sinθ sin θ − sin θ − sin θ − sin θ −
⎥
5 5 5 5
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ )⎥
6π 2π 8π 4π ⎥
( ) ( ) ( ) (
2 ⎢
⎢ ⎥
T= ⎢cos (3θ) cos 3θ − cos 3θ − cos 3θ − cos 3θ − ⎥
5 ⎢ 5 5 5 5 ⎥
⎢ )⎥
6π 2π 8π 4π ⎥
⎢ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ⎥
⎢sin (3θ) sin 3θ − sin 3θ − sin 3θ − sin 3θ −
⎢
⎥
⎢ 5 5 5 5 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
1 1 1 1 1
⎣ ⎦
2 2 2 2 2

(14)
The relevant parameters under the two coordinate systems
include voltage, current, and magnetic chain. In dq0 coordinate
system, the voltage equation is:
d Fig. 5. The equivalent circuit of dq0 model for kth branch.
Vdq0sk = Rsk Idq0sk + ωE′ Λqd0sk + Λdq0sk (15)
dt
d
Vdq0rk = Rrk Vdq0rk + (ω − ωr ) E′ Λqd0rk + Λdq0rk (16)
dt
⎡ ⎤
1
−1
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
′
E =⎢ 0 (17)
⎢ ⎥
⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ 0
⎥ Fig. 6. The equivalent circuit of a1 phase.
⎣ ⎦
0
The equation for the magnetic chain in the dq0 coordinate The αβ space losses include copper and iron loss, which was
system is: calculated as:

Λdq0sk = Llsk Idq0sk + Lmk Idq0smk + Idq0rk Pαβ k = Pcorek_αβ + PCuk_αβ (23)
( )
(18)
Λdq0rk = Llrk Idq0rk + Lmk Idq0smk + Idq0rk The formula for iron loss in αβ space is:
( )
(19)
5 Pcorek_αβ = vα sk iα sk + vβ sk iβ sk − iα sk R2sk − iβ sk R2sk
( )
(24)
Lmk = Lmsk (20)
2
To determine the value of Rck in Fig. 5, a per-phase equivalent
Lmsk Lmsk dIdq0smk
Idq0sk = Idq0smk + ωi E′ Iqd0smk + (21) circuit was created as shown in Fig. 6.
Rck Rck dt According to Fig. 6, R̃ck can be expressed as:
The equivalent circuit is shown in Fig. 5. ( )
In Fig. 5, the subscripts d, q, α , β and 0 represent each spatial jωe Lmk Ĩasmk + Ĩark
parameter. ω is the angular velocity of the reference system. Z R̃ck = (25)
Ĩas − Ĩasmk
is the impedance. As can be seen from Fig. 5, each winding set
has three harmonic subspaces. Dq space is involved in electrome- where ωe is the synchronous speed of the motor.
chanical energy conversion. α β space harmonic currents do not According to (21), neglecting the rotor current at no load,
produce rotational MMF, only losses. Iron loss can be divided into Eq. (25) can be rewritten as:
dq-space iron loss and α β -space iron loss. Dq-space iron loss can
( )
Ĩamsk + Ĩark
be calculated[( as :
2 R̃ck = 2.5Rck = 2.5Rck
∼ (26)
Pcorek_dq = idsk ωλqsk + idrk ωλqrk + Lmk (idsk − idsmk ) Ĩamsk
5
The total torque is the sum of the torques produced by the two
d
× (idsmk + idrk ) − iqsk ωλdsk − iqsk ωλdsk (22) windings. The torque equation is expressed as:
dt )] ∑5 (
) d ( ∑
p Λdrk iqrk − Λqrk idrk
)
Te = Tek = (27)
( )
+ Lmk iqsk − iqsmk iqsmk + iqrk 4
dt k k

409
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai
Fig. 7. Experiment equipment for five-phase motor.
Fig. 8. Simulation implementation of winding branch voltage. (a) Pentagon. (b) Star–pentagon..
4. Simulation and experimental results
The simulation and experiment were carried out with the
inverter switching frequency at 6 kHz, and the regulating system
at 1. To verify the accuracy of the proposed iron loss calculation
model, experimental verification is carried out in this paper. The
eddy current brake was used as a constant power load. The
experimental platform is shown in Fig. 7.
The simulation were carried out using MATLAB/Simulink. The
simulation model of the inverter is shown in Fig. 8.
The voltage in Fig. 8(a) is the a1 winding voltage. Since in
a single winding, the a1 winding is connected in series with
the a2 winding and has the same parameters, the voltage across
a1 and a2 is the same and the resulting losses are the same.
Ignoring the effect of the winding on the inverter voltage, the two
winding branches are considered as independent operation in a
steady-state condition. To calculate the two winding branches
separately, the voltage of different winding branches is obtained
by using resistors. Fig. 8(a) shows the pentagon winding, where
the resistors are connected according to the topology of the
winding connection, and the resistor voltage is equal to the motor
winding voltage. In which, the R of each winding branch is equal,
which represents the equal supply voltage of each branch of the
single winding. The other single winding connections are similar
to Fig. 8(a). The winding voltage is obtained by replacing the
part of the winding in the topology of the star winding and the
410
Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413
pentacle winding with a resistor. Fig. 8(b) shows a star–pentagon
winding voltages for a1, a2 branch, respectively. Where R2 =
1.1756 ∗ 1.1756 ∗ R1, it can be realized that Ua2 = 1.1756Ua1 .
The other combined winding connections are similar to Fig. 8(b).
For simulation of pentagon–star and star–pentagon windings, R2
= 1.902 ∗ 1.902 ∗ R1. Simulink simulation of the proposed model
in the line-fed situation is shown in Fig. 9, it can be realized that
Ua2 = 1.902Ua1 .
When powered by the spwm, the voltages of the each winding
sets are shown in Fig. 10.
In steady state operation, the five-phase motor winding cur-
rents are symmetrical. The current simulation results for the
different winding connections are shown in Fig. 11.
The THD coefficients for each branch voltage in Fig. 10 are
analyzed as shown in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2 and Fig. 11, the pentacle winding has the
lowest THD coefficients for current and voltage. Compared with
the corresponding single winding, the star–pentagon winding
increases the THD coefficient of the voltage in the star branch
while decreasing the THD coefficient of the voltage in the pen-
tagon branch, and the THD coefficient of the current of both
branches increases. The THD coefficient of the star branch voltage
of the pentagon–star winding is reduced by 15.83% and the THD
coefficient of the two branch currents is the smallest among the
combined windings, which are reduced by 6.42% and 13.87%,
respectively. The THD coefficients of voltage and current of the
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

Fig. 9. Simulink simulation of the proposed model in line-fed situation.

Fig. 10. Voltage waveform of each winding set. (a) Star. (b) Pentagon. (c) Pentacle. (d) and (e) are a1 and a2 voltage for star–pentagon. (f) and (g) are a1 and a2
voltage for pentagon–star. (h) and (i) are a1 and a2 voltage for star-pentacle. (j) and (k) are a1 and a2 voltage for pentacle–star..

Table 2 pentagon–star winding are similar to those of the star-pentacle

The THD coefficient of phase voltage. winding, where the THD coefficients of voltage and current of
Winding connection %THD phase voltage %THD phase current the pentacle branch increase by 19.54% and 1.1%. The harmonic
a1 a2 a1 a2 content of the star-pentagon winding is not advantageous in the
Star 75.23% 9.86% combined winding. In conclusion, in the case of single winding,
Pentagon 70.22% 15.25% the pentacle winding has the least harmonic content; in the case
Pentacle 58.16% 1.95%
of combined winding, the harmonic content of the pentagon–star
Star–pentagon 88.56% 64.64% 36.65% 25.45%
Pentagon–star 59.40% 77.85% 3.44% 1.38% winding is similar to that of the star-pentacle winding.
Star-pentacle 59.45% 77.77% 2.0% 3.05% The no-load loss of the motor was tested by a no-load ex-
Pentacle–star 88.50% 64.88% 4.34% 21.74% periment. At this time, the rotor copper loss and stray loss of
the motor could be neglected. The mechanical loss of the motor
was separated according to different input voltages, and its value

411
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413

Fig. 11. Steady-state current of a1 and a2. (a) Star. (b) Pentagon. (c) pentacle. (d) Pentagon–star. (e) Star–pentagon. (f) Star-pentacle. (g) pentacle–star..

Table 3 Table 4
The parameters of prototype. The parameters of prototype.
Winding connection Simulation Experiment Estimation error Winding Copper Iron Machine Stray Efficiency
Star 479 W 528 W 9.3% connection loss loss loss loss
Pentagon 487 W 532 W 8.5% Star 1094.9 W 528 W 154 W 150 W 88.6%
Pentacle 439 W 486 W 9.7% Pentagon 1122.8 W 532 W 154 W 150 W 88.4%
Star–pentagon 502 W 552 W 9.1% Pentacle 1020.1 W 486 W 154 W 150 W 89.2%
Pentagon–star 453 W 495 W 8.5% Star–pentagon 1216.1 W 552 W 154 W 150 W 87.9%
Star-pentacle 446 W 489 W 8.8% Pentagon–star 1007.4 W 495 W 154 W 150 W 89.3%
Pentacle–star 488 W 532 W 8.3% Star-pentacle 1119.9 W 489 W 154 W 150 W 88.7%
Pentacle–star 1155.4 W 532 W 154 W 150 W 88.3%

was 154 W. Then the input power of the motor was calculated
by testing the input current and voltage. The stator copper loss
was calculated according to the stator current. Removed the
mechanical loss and stator copper loss from the input power of
the motor, and the iron loss was obtained. The simulation and test
results of iron loss after steady-state operation and the estimation
error were shown in Table 3.
The results in Table 3 showed that the iron loss calcula-
tion model presented in this paper applies to five-phase com-
bined winding connections and single winding connections, it
also showed the effect of the different connections on the iron
loss of the motor. The pentagon–star winding and star-pentacle
combined winding generating less iron loss than the other com-
bined winding. The pentacle winding has the least iron loss
among all five-phase winding.
Of the various losses in the motors, the copper loss can be
calculated by measuring the current in each branch, which is
easy to measure in practice. The mechanical loss is related to
the speed of the motor, and winding connection modes do not
affect the speed of the motor, so the difference in mechanical
losses within several motors is not significant. According to the
experiments, the losses of the several winding connection motors
were given, the mechanical losses and stray losses are calculated
using empirical parameters, and the motor efficiency is shown in
Table 4.
According to Table 4, the efficiency of the fraction pump
drive motor can be improved by using a pentagon star winding.
Although the star–pentagon winding has less harmonic content
and less iron loss, it suffers from copper loss and is less efficient
than the pentagon–star winding. Among the single windings, the
412
pentacle winding has the least harmonic content, the least loss
and the highest efficiency.
5. Conclusion
This paper analyzed the effect of different connections of the
star/pentagon combined winding on the iron loss and establishes
a model for calculating the iron loss. The efficiency of the motor
was calculated based on the copper and iron loss of the motor.
The following conclusions are obtained from the study of this
paper.
i. A pentagonal winding with a combined winding can be
considered to be operating independently under stable operating
conditions, with the total losses being generated by each of the
two winding branches. In steady operation, the power supply of
the two winding branches varies with the time cycle.
ii. The THD coefficient of the pentacle winding in single wind-
ing is lower under spwm supply. Of the combined windings,
the pentagon–star winding and star–pentagon windings have a
smaller THD factor. The harmonic content in winding voltage is
influenced by both the inverter control method and the winding
connection.
iii. The fracturing pump drive motor with pentagon–star wind-
ing consumes less energy, making the fracturing pump more
energy efficient. And compared to diesel, electricity is a cleaner
energy source for the environment.
iv. The motor losses in this article are for operation under an
inverter supply using the spwm control method. Inverters with
different control methods have different harmonic content, which
in turn affects the losses of the motor. Further calculations are
S. Fan, D. Meng and M. Ai
required for motor losses with inverters using different control
methods.
For motors powered by inverter, the winding connection
method has an impact on the copper loss and iron loss of the
motor. When the inverter supplies power to the pentagon wind-
ing and the pentacle winding, the phase voltage of the winding is
the inter-leg voltage of the inverter. The inverter and the winding
connection method affect both the harmonic content and the
efficiency of the motor. This paper only considers the loss con-
ditions for calculation, the loss and fault tolerance performance
of different winding connection methods under fault conditions
need further study.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Shuting Fan: Mainly conceived the paper, Drafted the
manuscript, Organized the discussion. Dawei Meng: Contribute
equally in writing and editing this review. Mengmeng Ai:
Participated in data organization and discussion.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
All data required for reproducing this research are contained
in this manuscript.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a grant from the National Nature
Science Foundation of China (Nos. 52077047) and a Natural Sci-
ence Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (LH2020E092).
All authors agree with the final version of this article.
References
Abdel-Khalik, A.S., Ahmed, S., Massoud, A.M., 2016a. Dynamic modeling of a
five-phase induction machine with a combined star/pentagon stator winding
connection. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 31 (4), 1645–1656.
Abdel-Khalik, A.S., Ahmed, S., Massoud, A.M., 2016b. Steady-state mathematical
modeling of a five-phase induction machine with a combined star/pentagon
stator winding connection. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63 (3), 1331–1343.
Abdel-Khalik, A.S., Elgenedy, M.A., Ahmed, S., Massoud, A.M., 2016c. An improved
fault-tolerant five-phase induction machine using a combined star/pentagon
single layer stator winding connection. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63 (1),
618–628.
Alteheld, C., Gottkehaskamp, R., Möckel, A., 2018. Analytical calculation model
of an induction machine with combined star-delta winding and analysis
of possible connections. In: 2018 XIII International Conference on Electrical
Machines (ICEM). pp. 79–85.
413
Energy Reports 8 (2022) 405–413
Cristaldi, L., Faifer, M., Piegari, L., Rossi, M., Toscani, S., 2011. An analytical model
of the induction machine for the development of diagnostic techniques.
In: 8th IEEE Symposium on Diagnostics for Electrical Machines, Power
Electronics & Drives. pp. 598–605.
Guo, Z.Q., 2014. Research on Virtual Prototype Simulation and Experimental
Scheme of New Fracturing Pump. Southwest Petroleum University.
Jia, C.Z., Pang, X.Q., Jiang, F.J., 2016. Research status and development directions
of hydrocarbon resources in China, 1 (1) 2-23.
Khoshhava, M.A., Zarchi, H.A., Markadeh, G.A., 2021. Iron loss modeling in dual
stator winding induction machines with unequal pole pairs and squirrel cage
rotor. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 68 (4), 2931–2941.
Levi, E., 1995. Impact of iron loss on behavior of vector controlled induction
machines. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 31 (6), 1287–1296.
Li, L., Zhang, Z., Dong, F., Wang, Z., Li, H., Liu, Q., 2020. Application of high-power
frequency conversion technology in the fracturing pumping equipment.
In: 2020 IEEE 5th Information Technology and Mechatronics Engineering
Conference (ITOEC). pp. 627–632.
Liu, Y., Bazzi, A.M., 2017. A general analytical three-phase induction machine
core loss model in the arbitrary reference frame. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 53
(5), 4210–4220.
Liu, H., Wang, D., Yi, X., Meng, F., 2021. Torque ripple suppression under
open-phase fault conditions in a five-phase induction motor with harmonic
injection. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Power Electron. 9 (1), 274–288.
Misir, O., Raziee, S.M., Hammouche, N., Klaus, C., Kluge, R., Ponick, B., 2016.
Calculation method of three-phase induction machines equipped with com-
bined star-delta winding. In: 2016 XXII International Conference on Electrical
Machines (ICEM). pp. 166–172.
Misir, O., Raziee, S.M., Hammouche, N., Klaus, C., Kluge, R., Ponick, B., 2017.
Prediction of losses and efficiency for three-phase induction machines
equipped with combined star-delta winding. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 53 (4),
3579–3587.
Raziee, S.M., Misir, O., Ponick, B., 2019. Multiple multiphase combined
star-polygon winding analysis. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 66 (10), 7468–7479.
Sadeghi, S., Guo, L., Toliyat, H.A., Parsa, L., 2012. Wide operational speed range
of five-phase permanent magnet machines by using different stator winding
configurations. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 59 (6), 2621–2631.
Suzuki, T., Doki, S., 2020. Control method that reduces the high harmonic in
over modulation drive of dual winding motor under condition of voltage
supplies unbalance. In: 23rd International Conference on Electrical Machines
and Systems, ICEMS 2020, Hamamatsu, Japan. pp. 918–923.
Toulabi, M.S., Wang, L., Bieber, L., Filizadeh, S., Jatskevich, J., 2019. A universal
high-frequency induction machine model and characterization method for
arbitrary stator winding connections. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 34 (3),
1164–1177.
Xue, S., Feng, J.H., Guo, S.Y., Chen, Z.C., Peng, J., Chu, W.Q., Xu, P.L., Zhu, Z.Q.,
2017. Iron loss model for electrical machine fed by low switching frequency
inverter. IEEE Trans. Magn. 53 (11), 1–4.
Yang, G.Q., Z.Z., Cui., Song, L.W., 2014. Analysis of iron losses in induction
motor with an improved iron-loss model. In: 2014 IEEE Conference and Expo
Transportation Electrification Asia-Pacific(ITEC Asia-Pacific). pp. 1–4.
Zhang, N., Li, L., Wei, X.G., 2016. Calculation method and experimental verifica-
tion of core losses under non-sinusoidal excitation. Trans. China Electrotech.
Soc. 31 (17), 24–232.
Zhang, W., Zheng, X.Q., Wu, X.Z., 2018. Three-dimensional electromagnetic
analysis and loss calculation of multiphase induction motor. Trans. China
Electrotech. Soc. 33 (S2), 331–337.