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

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

Optimum Design of a Single-Phase Line-Start PM Motor Considering

Efficiency, Maximum Torque, and Starting Torque
Soo-whang Baek and Byung-il Kwon, Members, IEEE

Department of Electronics, Electrical, Control & Instrumentation Engineering, Hanyang University, Ansan 426-791, Korea

In this paper, an optimum design for a single-phase line start permanent magnet (LSPM) motor with respect to efficiency,
maximum torque, and starting torque is proposed. The design variables, objective functions, and constraints are selected for this
optimum design, which is divided into three steps. Step I maximizes the rated efficiency while maintaining a balanced operation and
minimizing the stator copper loss. Step II utilizes equivalent circuit analysis to consider the efficiency and the maximum torque, while
step III calculates the precise starting torque using finite element (FE) analysis. The validity of the optimum design is verified by
comparing the efficiency, maximum torque, and starting torque characteristics of the time-step FE analysis with experimental results.

Index Terms— Line-start, permanent magnet motor, single-phase, symmetric field, synchronous motor, balanced operation, stator
copper loss, optimum design, equivalent circuit, finite element method, efficiency, maximum torque, starting torque

examines the efficiency and maximum torque by an equivalent

I. INTRODUCTION circuit analysis, and Step III investigates the starting torque by

L INE-START permanent magnet (LSPM) motors have

induction starting capability, eliminating the need for any
additional devices to turn on. Additionally, LSPM motors
have better power factor and efficiency than induction motors,
since they possess PM synchronous machines in the steady-
state [1]-[3]. Accordingly, LSPM motors are highly efficient
when applied to constant-speed type loads such as fans,
blowers, and compressors used in industry [4], [5]. However,
single-phase LSPM motors have low starting torque due to the
braking torque from the permanent magnet [6], [7]. It would
be desirable to increase the maximum torque for suitable
operation with various system loads [8], [9]. Thus, the
optimum design for single-phase LSPM motors must not only
possess at-rated high efficiency, but must also consider the
maximum and starting torques.
Previous studies have investigated the design of a single-
phase LSPM motor by considering its efficiency, maximum
torque, and starting torque characteristics separately. For
example, to improve the efficiency, several studies have
investigated the length and position of the permanent magnet
and a suitable magnetic barrier [13]-[17]. Likewise, to
improve the starting torque, some studies have investigated the
use of skewed conductors to minimize the influence of the
space harmonics in the air gap, while others have examined
the length and position of the permanent magnet and various
stator winding pole arrangements [18]-[20]. In general, the
maximum torque is designed to be about 3 times the rated
torque [21], [22]. In previous research, we investigated the
effect of the stator winding and rotor shape on the efficiency
and starting torque while maintaining a balanced operation
[23], [24], but did not consider the maximum torque.
In this paper, we propose an optimum design for a single-
phase LSPM motor with respect to the efficiency, starting
torque, and maximum torque. The optimum design consists of
three steps: Step I maximizes the rated efficiency, Step II
a time-step FE analysis. In the proposed optimum design, the
sampling points are chosen by the Latin hypercube sampling
(LHS) strategy [25]. Using these results, an approximation
model is made using a radial basis function (RBF) [26]. Then
the optimization results are obtained using a genetic algorithm
(GA) [27]. The validity of the presented optimum design is
verified through experimental results.
II. MODELING OF A SINGLE-PHASE LSPM MOTOR [24]
A single-phase LSPM motor has an unbalanced magnetic
field and rotates with synchronous speed, so it is convenient to
analyze LSPM motors using a symmetric field theory. With
this theory, the unbalanced currents of the stator winding are
divided into a positive sequence current I p and a negative
sequence current I n , and the operating characteristics of the
rotor by the two currents are calculated respectively. Fig. 1
presents the circuit diagram of a single-phase LSPM motor,
where I m and I a are the currents of the main and auxiliary
winding, respectively, the subscript p and n indicate positive
and negative sequences, respectively, and a represents the turn
ratio. The single-phase LSPM motor exhibits asymmetries
both on the stator (unbalanced windings and supply voltages)
and the rotor (saliency). The auxiliary winding has two
capacitors for the start (Cs) and the run (Cr), and the Cs of the
auxiliary winding is switched off by the positive temperature
coefficient (PTC) switch after start-up. The rotor has an
aluminum squirrel cage and four pieces of permanent magnet.
Fig. 2 depicts the equivalent steady-state circuit for a single-
phase LSPM motor using the symmetric field theory. In
steady-state operation, the motor performance can be
predicted. The unbalanced stator winding fields of the single-
phase LSPM motor are divided into positive and negative
sequence components, where Z m and Z a are the impedances
of the main and auxiliary windings, respectively.

Manuscript received June 2, 2012. Corresponding author: B. I. Kwon

(e-mail: bikwon@hanyang.ac.kr).
Digital Object Identifier inserted by IEEE

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

where λmag is the flux linkage of the permanent magnet. The

subscripts d and q represent the d- and q-axis stator
components, respectively. The positive sequence components
are represented as a phasor diagram using the dq-frame in Fig.
3.
q - axis
-X q Iq
Ep
jX d I d
Vm
d jwlmag
Ip
j
Iq
jVm cos j
Fig. 1. Circuit diagram of a single-phase LSPM motor. d - axis
-Vm sin j Id lmag
I p +I n Ip
Zm + Zp Fig. 3. Phasor diagram for a positive sequence.
Positive sequence
Ep of main winding
For the single-phase LSPM motor, the positive sequence
-
Vm Em In impedance Z p is variable with the load angle δ and is
+ Zn determined through an iterative process, and the negative
Negative sequence
En of main winding sequence impedance Z n is calculated as the average of the d-
- and q-axis impedances. Thus, the impedances of the positive
(a)
and negative sequence components can be written as follows
[28], [29]:
j ( I p -I n ) / a jI p / a
Za + a2 Z p
E p jX d Id - X q Iq + jwlmag
Positive sequence Zp = = (4)
jaE p of auxiliary winding Ip Id + jIq
-
Va Ea - jI n / a
+ ì
ï æR ö æR öïü
a2 Z n ïï jX d çç 2 d + jX 2 d ÷÷÷ jX q çç 2 q + jX 2 q ÷÷÷ ï
ï
Negative sequence of 1 ï ç
è 2 ø çè 2 ÷
øïï (5)
-jaEn auxiliary winding Zn = ï í + ý
2ï R
ï 2d + j( X d + X 2d ) R ï
-
ï
2q
+ j ( X q + X 2 q ) ïï
ï
ï 2 2 ï
ï
(b) ï
î ï
þ
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of a single-phase LSPM motor. (a) Main winding.
(b) Auxiliary winding. where the subscripts 2d and 2q represent the rotor d- and q-
axis components, respectively.
The respective voltage equations of the main and auxiliary
windings can be expressed as The currents I p and I n can be calculated by solving the
voltage equations of (1) and (2). During balanced operation,
the negative sequence voltage is zero, which causes the
V m = Z m (I p + I n ) + Z p (d)I p + Z n I n (1)
backward revolving field to vanish and the negative sequence
torque to disappear. Consequently, the total torque can be
V a =V m = Za {( j I p }
- j I n ) / a + jaZ p (d ) I p - jaZ n I n (2) calculated as follows:

Ttot = Tp -Tn = 2 {Re ( Z p (d )) I p2 - Re ( Z n ) I n2 } / w (6)

where δ is the angle between E p and the q–axis, and φ is
the angle between V m and the q–axis. The load angle δ can where Re indicates the real part of each component.
be expressed as
III. OPTIMUM DESIGN
æ -X q Iq ö÷
d = tan ççç
-1 ÷÷ (3) The proposed optimum design considers the efficiency,
çè X d I d + wlmag ø÷ maximum torque, and starting torque for a single-phase LSPM
motor in a three-step process. A flowchart of the optimum
design is depicted in Fig. 4.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

Start
A. Step I of the Optimum Design: Determine the Specifications
for Maximized Rated Efficiency
Decision of the initial slot dimension of core In Fig. 2, the magnetic field generated in a single-phase
LSPM motor contains both a positive component and a
Step I of optimum design negative component simultaneously. The positive sequence
(Strategy for considering maximized rated efficiency)
components generate synchronous output characteristics,
Decision of main winding specification while the negative sequence components generate only eddy
current losses and do not contribute to the output. Thus, if the
Calculate parameters in Calculate parameters in negative component is removed, the rated efficiency will
order to satisfy order to satisfy stator theoretically improve. This effect is referred to as balanced
balanced operation minimal copper loss
condition condition
operation [23]. Step I of the optimum design is to design a
system that maintains a balanced operation and minimized the
stator copper loss in order to maximize the rated efficiency.
Coupling both conditions For the optimum design, the main winding specification is
based on the initial model described in Table I. Then, by
Decision of the auxiliary winding specification
according to an arbitrary main winding. setting the negative sequence current, I n , to zero in (2), Z a
for balanced operation can be found as
Decision of specification with

Z a = -a 2 Z p (d ) - j (aV a / I p )
maximized rated efficiency
(7)
Step II of optimum design
(Strategy for considering maximum torque using equivalent circuit analysis)
Select of design variables and design range This result indicates that, for balanced operation, Z a exists
(Turn ratio and ratio of main winding turns) when I p , V a , and the impedance of the positive sequence
Reconstruct
design 1. Design of Experiment (by LHS) component for a specific load angle δ are given.
variables 2. Approximation modeling (by RBF) In addition, the efficiency of the motor can be maximized
and design 3. Optimum design (by GA) by minimizing the stator copper loss with a magnetic balanced
range
condition [24]. Assuming the operation is balanced, the
Decision of specification with
the optimum rated efficiency and the maximum torque condition for minimizing the copper losses in the stator can be
expressed as
Step III of optimum design
(Strategy for considering starting torque using FE-analysis)
Ra  a 2 Rm (8)
Select of design variables and design range
(Area of rotor bar and end-ring height)
Substituting (8) into (7) unites the conditions for balanced
1. Design of Experiment (by LHS)
2. Approximation modeling (by RBF)
operation and copper loss minimization, resulting in the
3. Optimum design (by GA) following:

Decision of specification with

the optimum starting torque
Z a = a 2 Rm + jX a = -a 2 Z p (d ) - j ( aV a / I p ) (9)

No Balanced operation
satisfy?
However, in order to satisfy the conditions for balanced
Yes operation and copper loss minimization, new design
Optimum design confirmation parameters for (9), such as the turn ratio anew, the resistance of
the auxiliary winding Ra,new, and the reactance of the auxiliary
End
winding Xa,new, must be obtained.. Hence, separating out the
Fig. 4. Proposed optimum design flowchart. real and imaginary parts of (9), the turn ratio a can first be
expressed as
Throughout this optimum design, the dimensions of the stator
and rotor – i.e., the stack length and diameter of cores – are
fixed. On the other hand, the design variables for the stator { }
a a ( Rm + R p (d )) - Im (V a / I p ) = 0 (10)
component are the main and auxiliary winding specifications,
and the design variables for the rotor component are the ratio where Im denotes the imaginary part of each component.
of the rotor bar area and the end-ring height. Then, using the
three optimum design steps, we developed an optimum model Then, using (10), the new turn ratio anew, which satisfies the
that maintains the high efficiency while increasing the conditions of balanced operation and minimized copper losses,
maximum and starting torques. Note that, if the developed can be calculated:
model does not satisfy the balanced operation condition, a
redesign of the main windings may be required.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

Vm ,im I d -Vm ,re I q B. Step II of the Optimum Design: Determine the

anew = 2 2
wlmag I q + R I + R I - R I - R I
p d p q
Next, by replacing the turn ratio a in (9) with the new turn
ratio anew, the new auxiliary winding impedance Z a ,new , which
still satisfies the conditions of balanced operation and
minimized copper losses, can be calculated:
2 2
(11) Specifications for Maximum Torque
m d m q Using step II of the optimum design shown in Fig. 4, the
characteristics of the rated efficiency and maximum torque of
a single-phase LSPM motor are considered using an
equivalent circuit analysis. The objective function is intended
to maximize the rated efficiency, and the constraint functions
and design variables are as follows:

Objective Maximize rated efficiency

2
Z a , new = -anew Z p (d ) - j (anewV a / I p ) (12)
Constraints Maximum torque > 1 [Nm]
Design variables 0.3< Turn ratio (Q1)<1.3
As before, the Z a , new in (12) can be divided into its real and 0.9<Ratio of main winding turns (Q2)<1.1.
imaginary component, and the new auxiliary winding
resistance and reactance, Ra,new and Xa,new, respectively, can be The design variables Q1 and Q2 are defined as follows:
found such that
Na (15)
Q1 =
Ra ,new = a 2
new Rm (13) N m,base

2
X a ,new = anew (-R p I q - X p I d - wl ) + anewVm ,re - Ra I q / I d (14)
Thus, one can calculate the turn ratio anew, the auxiliary
winding resistance Ra,new, and the auxiliary winding reactance
Xa,new, which satisfy the conditions of balanced operation and
minimized copper losses for an arbitrary main winding.
Additionally, assuming the efficiency is maximized, Fig. 5
presents the rated efficiency as the number of main winding
turns. Then, using these characteristics, step I of the optimum
design can determine the single-phase LSPM motor with the
maximum efficiency. Specifically, the efficiency of the initial
model was maximized with 796 turns for its main winding, as
shown in Table I.
91.8
Rated efficiency [%]
N m,new
Q2 = (16)
N m,base
where Nm is the number of turns of the main winding, Na is the
number of turns of the auxiliary winding. Nm,base is the number
of main winding turns based on the maximum efficiency
model, and Nm,new is the number of changed main winding
turns.
Then, the LHS method is used to perform the optimum
design strategy [25]. LHS is a space-filling design technique
that utilizes an n  k matrix, where n is the number of sampling
data points and k is the number of design variables. In order to
find good sampling data points, an optimal design using LHS
is performed. Fig. 6 shows the determined sampling points as
a function of the design variables, Q1 and Q2. Accounting for
the number of design variables, the total number of sampling

91.6 points in this design of experiment (DOE) was 77.

1.1
91.4 1.08
1.06
91.2 1.04
1.02
Q2 1
91.0 0.98
780 784 788 792 796 800 804 808 812 816
0.96
Turns of main winding 0.94
Fig. 5. Rated efficiency of the motor as the number of turns of the main 0.92
winding. 0.9
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Step I of the optimum design determines a single-phase Q1
LSPM motor with a maximum rated efficiency, which is Fig. 6. Distribution of Latin hypercube sampling points according to Q1 and
described as the maximum efficiency model in Table I. Yet, Q2.
the specifications of this model, which only consider the
conditions necessary for magnetic balance and minimized at- To consider the characteristics of the rated efficiency and
rated stator copper loss, simultaneously decrease the maximum torque based on the sampling points, Figs. 7 (a) and
maximum torque and starting torque [24]. Hence, steps II and (b) represent these characteristics as functions of the turn ratio
III of the optimum design improve the maximum and starting (Q1) and the ratio of main winding turns (Q2). Concurrently,
torques while maintaining the high-rated efficiency. Fig. 7 (c) shows the running capacitor of the auxiliary winding
required for balanced operation and copper loss minimization.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

is the number of boundary nodes, and f is a given basis

function with respect to the Euclidean distance
x = ( x 2 +  + x 2 ) . The coefficients a j and the polynomial g
1 d

are determined by the interpolation conditions.

A GA is utilized to solve the optimization problem [27].
Using an approximation model, the optimum design can
increase the accuracy of the optimal results more than by only
using a GA because the approximation model is suitable for
developing a nonlinear model. Fig. 8 shows the convergence
history plots for the design variables in finding optimal points.
Q1 Q2 The design variables Q1 and Q2 were determined to be 0.501
and 0.96, respectively.
(a)

1.4
1.2
1.0

Turn ratio (Q1)

0.501
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 50 100 150 200
Number of iterations
Q1 Q2 (a)
Ratio of main winding turns (Q2)

1.02
(b)
1.00
0.96
0.98

0.96

0.94

0.92
0 50 100 150 200
Number of iterations
(b)
Fig. 8. Convergence history of design variables. (a) Turn ratio (Q1) (b) Ratio
Q2 of main winding turns (Q2).
Q1

(c) C. Step III of the Optimum Design: Determine the

Fig. 7. Characteristics according to Q1 and Q2 (Equivalent circuit). (a)
Rated efficiency. (b) Maximum torque. (c) Running capacitor.
Next, using a RBF has become a well-established tool to
interpolate scattered data and increase the accuracy of the
optimum results [26]. In fact, by extrapolating the
characteristics of the rated efficiency and maximum torque
shown in Figs. 7 (a) and (b), an approximation function model
can be created by the RBF. In the global interpolation strategy
of the objective function, the RBF is one of the most
impressive methods from the viewpoint of its smoothness and
fitting ability with a limited number of sampling points in the
design space. The interpolation function, y, describing the
displacement in the whole domain, can be approximated by a
sum of basis functions as follows:
nb
y ( x) = å a j f ( x - xb ) + g ( x) (17)
j =1
where xb j = éê xb j , yb j , zb j ùú are the centers in which the values are
ë û
known (in this case, the boundary nodes), g is a polynomial, nb
Specifications for Starting Torque
Using Step III of the optimum design shown in Fig. 4, the
characteristics of the starting torque are considered. The
starting torque calculation is performed by FE analysis
because it is difficult to calculate starting torque accurately
using equivalent circuit analysis. In order to increase the
starting torque, the rotor resistance can be tuned to a suitable
value. Hence, the optimum model was designed to consider
the starting torque with the design variables of the ratio of the
rotor bar area (Q3) and the end-ring height (Q4). Note that the
rotor bar area of the initial model was 10.3 mm2, and the end-
ring height of the initial model was 7 mm. Furthermore, the
design variables Q3 and Q4 from the initial model and the
maximum efficiency model are identical. Thus, the objective
function is to maximize the maximum torque, and the
constraint functions and design variables are as follows:
Objective Maximize starting torque
Constraints Maximum torque > 1[Nm]
Design variables 5[%]<Ratio of rotor bar area (Q3)<100[%]
1[mm]<End-ring height (Q4 )<7[mm].

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

Then, LHS is used to determine the sampling points to Figs. 10 (a) and (b), an approximation function modeling can
implement the optimum design, according to the design be developed by the RBF. Then, the optimum design process
variables Q3 and Q4, as shown in Fig. 9. Accounting for the can be performed, which utilizes the GA. Figs. 11 (a) and (b)
number of design variables, the total number of sampling show the convergence history plots according to Q3 and Q4 for
points for the DOE was 77. the starting torque. Using the indicated region in Fig. 10, the
optimization process for step III determined the design
7
variables Q3 and Q4 to be 80% and 4 mm of the initial model,
6 respectively. The optimized ratio of the rotor bar area and the
end-ring height of the single-phase LSPM motor are presented
5
in Fig. 12.
Q4 4
120

Ratio of rotor bar area(Q3) [%]

3 80%
100
2 80
60
1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
40
Q3
20
Fig. 9. Distribution of Latin hypercube sampling points according to Q3 and
Q4. 0
0 50 100 150 200
Number of iterations
To consider the characteristics of the starting and maximum
torques based on the sampling points, Figs. 10 (a) and (b) (a)
represent these characteristics as functions of Q3 and Q4. 8

End-ring height(Q4) [mm]

7
6 4mm
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 50 100 150 200
Number of iterations
(b)
Fig. 11. Convergence history of design variables. (a) Ratio of rotor bar area
(Q3). (b) End-ring height (Q4).

Q3[%] Q4[mm] Ratio of rotor bar area(Q3)

(a)
Stator

Optimum
1.2 (80%)
Maximum torque [Nm]

1.1
1.0 Rotor
Initial
0.9 (100%)
0.8
0.7
Initial Optimum
0.6 (a)
0.5 End-ring
height(Q4) Rotor
0 0
20 1
40 2
60 4 3
80
Q3[%]
100 7 6 5 Q4[mm]

(b) Initial (7mm) Optimum (4mm)

Fig. 10. Characteristics according to Q3 and Q4 (FE-analysis). (a) Starting
torque. (b) Maximum torque.
As is evident from the lower region of Q3 and Q4 in Fig. 10,
the starting torque increases and the maximum torque
deceases. In particular, the starting torque tends to increase
proportional to the rotor resistance while the maximum torque
is not related to the rotor resistance; yet, the rotor leakage
reactance causes the maximum torque to decrease. Based on
characteristics of the starting torque and maximum torque in
(b)
Fig. 12. Comparisons of initial and optimum models. (a) Rotor bar. (b) End-
ring.
Nevertheless, if the designed model does not satisfy the
balanced operation condition, a redesign of the main winding
is required. Thus, in order to confirm that this presented model
satisfied the balanced operation condition, phasor diagrams for
the currents of the main and auxiliary windings are presented
in Fig. 13. As is evident from Fig. 13 (a), the initial model had

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

an unbalanced magnetic field since the magnetomotive forces between the two currents are 90 degrees and the two
are distinctively different from each other and the phase magnetomotive forces are nearly identical, especially
difference between currents is about 72 degrees. Moreover, for considering that the turn ratios are 0.296 and 0.501,
the maximum efficiency and the optimum models, the phase respectively, as given in Table I.
differences between the currents of the main and auxiliary
windings are both 90 degrees, which satisfies the condition for
balanced operation completely. In optimum design process,
the specifications of main and auxiliary windings have
changed. Therefore, the angle φ between V m and the q–axis
has changed due to the variation of main and auxiliary
windings. The specifications for the initial, the maximum
efficiency, and the optimum models are shown in Table I.
q  axis q  axis q  axis
Vm Vm Vm
  29   33   35
(a)
Im Im Im

72
aI a aI a aI a
d  axis d  axis d  axis
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 13. Current phasor diagrams. (a) Initial model. (b) Maximum efficiency
model. (c) Optimum model.

TABLE I
SPECIFICATIONS OF A SINGLE-PHASE LSPM MOTOR
Maximum (b)
Initial Optimum
Items Unit efficiency
model model
model
Power Rating W 120 120 120
Input voltage/frequency V/Hz 220/50 220/50 220/50
Number of poles - 2 2 2
Turn ratio - 0.875 0.296 0.501
Number of winding turns
800/700 796/236 764/382
(main/aux.)
Winding diameter
mm 0.65/0.45 0.65/1.1 0.65/0.85
(main/aux.)
Winding resistance
Ω 21.1/18 20.4/1.8 20.8/ 6.8
(main/aux.)
Total slot area (c)
mm2 914.4/594.4 866.7/866.7 879.5/879.5
(main/aux.) Fig. 14. Characteristics of the winding currents (FE analysis). (a) Initial model.
Rotor resistance (b) Maximum efficiency model. (c) Optimum model.
Ω 37.4/16.8 37.4/16.8 42.1/17.1
/leakage reactance
Running capacitor uF 3 14 7
Starting capacitor uF 60 60 60
To verify our results, the experimental setup was organized
as shown in Fig. 15. The measurement targets were the current,
the speed, and the speed versus the efficiency and torque
IV. ANALYSIS AND EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS characteristics. The voltage and frequency were 220 V and 50
To verify the characteristics of the designed motor, time-step Hz.
2D FE analysis was performed. The end turn effects of the
windings were considered by including the circuit elements in Dynamometer
a voltage equation. The skin effect in the rotor bars, the
nonlinearity of the materials, and the asymmetrical induced
current distribution in the rotor cage bars due to magnetic Starting
saliency were also considered. The characteristics of the at- capacitor

rated winding currents are represented in Fig. 14. In particular,

Fig. 14 (a) shows that the initial model had a severe magnetic
unbalance since the magnetomotive forces are distinctively
different and the phase difference between currents is about 72 Single-phase
degrees. Conversely, Figs. 14 (b) and (c) show that the LSPM motor
Running
maximum efficiency model and the optimum model satisfy the capacitors
balanced operation condition because the phase differences Fig. 15. Experimental setup.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

The experimental characteristics of the at-rated winding

currents are presented in Fig. 16. The performances were
tested using manufactured motors. Clearly, the measured
currents closely match the analysis results from Fig. 14.

(a)

(a)

(b)

(b)

(c)
Fig. 17. Comparisons of speed characteristics. (a) Initial model. (b)
Maximum efficiency model. (c) Optimum model.

For comparisons with the maximum torque, the motors

were started with a rated load of 0.382 Nm and the load torque
was similarly increased during the simulations. Comparisons
of the maximum characteristics according to speed are shown
in Fig. 18. From the perspective of the maximum torque, the
initial and maximum efficiency models lose synchronization
2.5 times and 2 times, respectively, with the rated torque load.
(c) The optimum model, on the other hand, lost synchronization 3
Fig. 16. Characteristics of the winding currents (Experiment). (a) Initial model. times with the rated torque load, thereby indicating that the
(b) Maximum efficiency model. (c) Optimum model.
maximum torque of the optimum model is stronger than that
of the initial and maximum efficiency models.
In order to compare the starting torques, the speed
characteristics of the simulation and experiment are shown in
Fig. 17. Using a mounted optical encoder to determine the
experimental speed characteristic, the motors were started
with a rated load of 0.382 Nm. During the simulations, a rotor
inertia of 0.00045 kgm2 was used for comparison with the
experimental results. From the perspective of the starting
torque, the optimum model easily out-performed the initial
and maximum efficiency models. As shown in Fig. 17, the
synchronization time decreased from 0.3 sec for the initial
model and 0.5 sec for the maximum efficiency model to 0.2
sec for the optimum model, due to the increased starting
torque of the optimum model. Fig. 18. Comparisons of maximum characteristics according to speed (FE
analysis).

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.

A dynamo test was conducted to further verify the The characteristics of the initial, the maximum efficiency,
experimental results. Fig. 19 shows the speed as a function of and the optimum models are shown in Table II. These
the efficiency and torque characteristics. It is clear that the characteristics were verified by the experimental results.
experimental results nearly align with the analysis results from
TABLE II
Fig. 18. CHARACTERISTICS OF A SINGLE-PHASE LSPM MOTOR
Rated Maximum Starting
Items
efficiency (%) Torque (Nm) Torque (Nm)
Initial (FE analysis) 90.11 1.014 1.045
model (Experiment) 88 0.985 1
Maximum (FE analysis) 91.56 0.955 0.471
efficiency
model (Experiment) 91.2 0.95 0.5
Optimum (FE analysis) 90.74 1.146 1.104
model (Experiment) 90 1.2 1.05

V. CONCLUSION
We have proposed an optimum design that considered the
efficiency, maximum and starting torque of a single-phase
LSPM motor. First, the maximum efficiency that satisfied the
balanced operation condition and minimized stator copper loss
was determined using equivalent circuit analysis. Then, the
maximum and starting torques were improved via time-step
(a) FE analysis simulations. Experimental results verified that,
using the proposed optimum design, an optimum model with a
high efficiency and increased maximum and starting torques
was attained. Consequently, the proposed optimum design
process may be very useful for the design of single-phase
LSPM motors.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by WCU (World Class
University) program through the National Research
Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education,
Science and Technology (R33-2008-000-10104-0)

REFERENCES
[1] Tine Marcic, et al., "Line-starting three- and single-phase interior permanent
magnet synchronous motors—Direct comparison to induction motors", IEEE
Trans. on Magnetics. Vol. 44, No.11, pp.4413-4416, Nov., 2008.
(b) [2] B.-I. Kwon, B.-T. Kim, and C.-J. Jun, “Analysis of axially non-uniform
loss distribution in 3-phase induction motor considering skew effect,”
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 1298–1301, May 1999.
[3] C. K. Lee and B. I. Kwon, “Design of post-assembly magnetization
system of line start permanent-magnet motors using FEM,” IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 1928–1931, May 2005.
[4] Y. Ouazir, N. Takorabet, R. Ibtiouen, and S. Mezani, “Consideration of
space harmonics in complex finite element analysis of induction motors
with an air-gap interface coupling,” IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, vol. 42,
no. 4, pp. 1279–1282, Apr. 2006.
[5] Fei, W, et al., “A High-Performance Line-Start Permanent Magnet
Synchronous Motor Amended From a Small Industrial Three-Phase
Induction Motor”, IEEE Trans. on Magnetics. Vol. 45, No.10, pp.4724-4727,
Oct., 2009.
[6] M. A. Rahman, “Performance of large line-start permanent magnet
synchronous motors,” IEEE. Trans. Energy Convers., vol. 5, no. 1,
pp.211–217, Mar. 1990.
[7] T. J. E. Miller, “Line-start permanent motor single-phase steady state
performance analysis,” IEEE. Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 40, no. 2, pp.651–
658, Mar./Apr. 2004.
[8] D. Stoia, M. Antonoaie, D. Ilea, and M. Cernat, “Design of line start PM
motors with high power factor,” in Int. Conf. Power Engineering,
(c)
Energy and Electrical Drives, 2007, pp. 342–346.
Fig. 19. Comparisons of dynamo test (Experiment). (a) Initial model. (b)
Maximum efficiency model. (c) Optimum model.

Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
 This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication.
[9] Isfahani, A.H., et al., "Effects of Magnetizing Inductance on Start-Up and
Synchronization of Line-Start Permanent-Magnet Synchronous Motors",
IEEE Trans. on Magnetics. Vol. 47, No.4, pp.823-829, Apr., 2011.
[10] Tingting Ding, et al., "Design and Analysis of Different Line-Start PM
Synchronous Motors for Oil-Pump Applications", IEEE Trans. on Magnetics,
Vol. 45, No. 3, pp.1816-1819, Mar., 2009.
[11] Tine Marcic, et al., "Determining Parameters of a Line-Start Interior
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Model by the Differential Evolution",
IEEE Trans. on Magnetics. Vol. 44, No. 11, pp.4385-4388, Nov., 2008.
[12] A. H. Isfahani and S. Vaez-Zadeh, “Line start permanent magnet
synchronous motors: Challenges and opportunities,” Elsevier J. Energy,
vol. 34, no. 11, pp. 1755–1763, Nov. 2009.
[13] T. J. E. Miller, “Single-phase permanent motor analysis,” IEEE. Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 651–658, May/Jun. 1985.
[14] Aliakbar Damaki Aliabad, et al., "Line-Start Permanent-Magnet Motors:
Significant Improvements in Starting Torque, Synchronization, and
Steady-State Performance", IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, Vol. 46, No. 12,
pp.4066-4072, Dec., 2010.
[15] L. Lefevre, J. Soulard, and H.-P. Nee, “Design procedure for line-start
permanent magnet motors,” in Proc. IEEE Nordic Workshop on Power
and Industrial Electronics, Aalborg, Denmark, Jun. 2000, pp. 261–265.
[16] B. Stumberger, et al., "Design and Finite-Element Analysis of Interior
Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor with Flux Barriers ", IEEE Trans. on
Magnetics. Vol. 44, No.11, pp.4389-4392, Nov., 2008.
[17] W.-H. Kim, et al., “A study on the optimal rotor design of LSPM
considering the starting torque and efficiency,” IEEE Trans. on Magnetics,
vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 1808–1811, Mar. 2009.
[18] B. T. Kim, et al., "Influence of Space Harmonics on Starting Performance of
a Single-Phase Line Start Permanent-Magnet Motor", IEEE Trans. on
Magnetics, Vol. 44, No.12, pp.4668-4672, Dec., 2008.
[19] J. Zhou and K.-J. Tseng, “Performance analysis of single-phase line start
permanent-magnet synchronous motor,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,
vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 453–462, 2002.
[20] F. Libert, J. Soulard, and J. Engstrom, “Design of a 4-pole line start
permanent magnet synchronous motor,” presented at the Proc. ICEM
2002, Brugge, Belgium, Aug. 25–28, 2002.
Copyright (c) 2011 IEEE. Personal use is permitted. For any other purposes, permission must be obtained from the IEEE by emailing pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
10
[21] Peralta-Sanchez, E. et al., "Steady-State Analysis of a Canned Line-Start PM
Motor", IEEE Trans. on Magnetics. Vol.47, No.10, pp.4080-4083, Oct., 2011.
[22] M. Popescu, T. J. E. Miller,M. I. McGilp, G. Strappazzon, N. Trivillin,
and R. Antarossa, “Line-start permanent-magnet motor: Single-phase
starting performance analysis,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 4, pp.
1021–1030, 2003.
[23] Soo-Whang Baek, et al., “Design Methodology of a Single-phase Line Start
PM Motor Using Conditions for Magnetic Balance and Copper Loss
Minimization”, The 14th Biennial IEEE Conference on Electromagnetic
Field Computation, 20P8, May, 2010.
[24] Soo-whang Baek, et al., "Practical Optimum Design Based on Magnetic
Balance and Copper Loss Minimization for a Single-Phase Line Start PM
Motor", IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, Vol. 47, No. 10, pp.3008-3011, Oct.,
2011.
[25] P.-S. Shin, S.-H. Woo, Y. Zhang, and C.-S. Koh, “An application of
latin hypercube sampling strategy for cogging torque reduction of large-
scale permanent magnet motor,” IEEE Trans. on Magnetics, vol. 44,
no.11, pp. 4421–4424, Nov. 2008.
[26] Guangyuan Yang, et al., "A Novel Superposition RBF Collocation Method to
Solve Moving Conductor Eddy Current Problems", IEEE Trans. on
Magnetics, Vol. 45, Issue, 10, pp.3977 – 3980, Oct., 2009.
[27] Youngjun Ahn et al., "Novel memetic algorithm implemented with GA
(Genetic Algorithm) and MADS (Mesh Adaptive Direct Search) for
optimal design of electromagnetic system", IEEE Trans. on Magnetics,
Vol. 46, No. 6, June, 2010.
[28] Chaudhari, B. N., Fernandes, B. G., "Equivalent circuit of single phase
permanent magnet synchronous motor", Power Engineering Society
Winter Meeting, 2001. IEEE, Vol. 3, No. 28, pp1378-1381, Jan.-/Feb.
2001.
[29] S. S .L. Chang, "An analysis or Unexcited Synchronous Capacitor
Motors", AIEE Rotating Machinery Committee and approved by the
AIEE Technical Program Committee for presentation at the AIEE Fall
General Meeting, Paper 51-364, pp.1978-1982, October 1951.