Estimation of Induction Motor Equivalent Circuit

Parameters from Nameplate Data

Keun Lee, Stephen Frank,
and Pankaj K. (PK) Sen
Division of Engineering
Colorado School of Mines
Golden, Colorado 80401
Email: kelee@mines.edu

Luigi Gentile Polese

Mahmoud Alahmad and Clarence Waters

Electricity, Resources,&
Building Systems Integration
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Golden, Colorado 80401

Charles W. Durham School of

Architectural Engineering and Construction
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Omaha, Nebraska 68182

AbstractThe induction motor equivalent circuit parameters

are required for many performance and planning studies involving induction motors. These parameters are typically calculated
from standardized motor performance tests, such as the no load,
full load, and locked rotor tests. However, standardized test
data is not typically available to the end user. Alternatively,
the equivalent circuit parameters may be estimated based on
published performance data for the motor. This paper presents
an iterative method for estimating the induction motor equivalent
circuit parameters using only the motor nameplate data.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Induction motors are extensively used to drive mechanical
loads in commercial and industrial power systems due to
their low cost and reliability. Many engineering studies
including efficiency studies, fault studies, calculation of voltage drop during motor starting, planning studies for power
factor correction, and the development of the motor torquespeed characteristicrequire the induction motor equivalent
circuit model in order to evaluate motor behavior [1][3].
The induction motor equivalent circuit parameters are usually computed from full load, no load, and locked rotor test
data as per IEEE Standard 112 [4]. For most commercially
available or previously installed motors, however, neither the
original test data nor the equivalent circuit parameters are
available from the motor manufacturer. In many cases, only
the motor nameplate data are available. These data include
the rated voltage, rated output power, speed, efficiency, and
power factor of the motor, as well as (in the United States) its
NEMA (National Electrical Manufacturers Association) design
characteristics. In this paper, we present a method to estimate
the induction motor equivalent circuit parameters from the
motor nameplate data.
Several previous papers have described methods to estimate
the induction motor equivalent circuit parameters given a set
of performance data [2], [5], [6]; these methods are reviewed
in Section II. Our method differs in that it requires only the
motor nameplate data. Because the nameplate is physically
affixed to the motor, the nameplate data are reliably available
even for already installed motors.
The estimation method proposed in this paper extends the
algorithm proposed by Haque [2] and consists of four steps:

1) Computation of the motor full load and starting power

requirements;
2) Estimation of the motor losses from the nameplate data,
NEMA design characteristics, and published typical
values [4], [7];
3) Development of a set of simultaneous, nonlinear equations that relate motor power and losses to the circuit
parameters; and
4) Solution of this system of nonlinear equations by an
iterative Gauss-Seidel method.
Section III provides a review of the induction motor equivalent
circuit, while Section IV discusses the proposed method in
detail. The proposed method converges reliably in very few
iterations and computes estimates of parameters very close to
the true values, as illustrated by the case studies in Section V.
II. P RIOR W ORK
IEEE Standard 112 [4] outlines methods for determining
the rated losses and the various equivalent circuit parameters
of an induction motor. Some of the tests required include
A DC test for stator resistance,
One or more three-phase locked rotor tests (performed at
rated or reduced frequency),
A no load test, and/or
One or more load tests (performed at full or reduced
load).
These tests require controlled conditions and calibrated test
equipment [3]. Except for very large motors, manufacturers
do not typically provide the data from these tests. Moreover,
performing these or similar performance tests in the field is
both difficult and time consuming [2]. Therefore, the end user
does not have easy access to the data required to compute the
equivalent circuit parameters using standard methods.
Responding to this need, both Natarajan [5] and Haque [2],
[8] developed methods to estimate induction motor equivalent
circuit parameters from nameplate and published performance
data. The method of Natarajan requires both the motor nameplate data and specific performance data from the manufacturers catalog, including the motor full-load torque, starting
torque, and power factor and efficiency at 50%, 75%, and

PAG
I1

X1

R1

I2

PConv
R2

PAG

PConv

X2

Pout
VRated

Fig. 1.

RC

XM

RLoad+Stray+Mech
= R2(1-s)/s

Pin

PSCL

Equivalent Circuit Model for Induction Motor [3].

Fig. 2.

100% loading. The method uses a spreadsheet to solve a

system of linear equations that relate the circuit parameters
to these data.
Haques method requires the nameplate data, the ratio of
starting torque to full load torque, and power factor and efficiency at 50% and 100% loadingfewer data than are required
Natarajans method. Using these data, Haque develops a set
of nonlinear equations that relate the circuit parameters to the
motor input power and losses. These equations are solved
by an iterative Gauss-Seidel method. Haque later described
a similar method which also models deep bar or double cage
rotor construction [8].
The primary shortcoming of both these methods is the
requirement of catalog data for motor torque and performance
at other than full load. Manufacturers often do not provide
these data, particularly for smaller motors. Catalog data may
also be difficult to find for older motors.
III. BACKGROUND
A. Induction Motor Equivalent Circuit
Induction motors operate by inducing current and torque in
the rotor circuit via transformer action due to slip (difference
in frequency) between the rotor and the stator. Such motors
are typically modeled with the well-known per-phase induction
motor equivalent circuit, shown in Figure 1. R1 and X1 are
the stator impedance, R2 and X2 are the rotor impedance
as referred to the stator, RC models the core loss, and XM
represents the magnetizing reactance. The motor output power
is modeled by RLoad , which is a function of slip,

PCore

PRCL

PStray

PFriction

Power-flow Diagram of an Induction Motor [3].

power in addition to losses. Typical full load slip values are in

the range of 0.030.05 p.u. [3], although newer motors may
have significantly lower full load slip.
B. Induction Motor Losses
Figure 2 shows the power flow diagram of an induction
motor. Each loss in the figure is modeled by a specific
resistance in the motor equivalent circuit; see Table I. The
stator and rotor resistive losses are modeled by R1 and R2 ,
respectively. RC models core loss, while stray and mechanical
losses are included in RLoad .
TABLE I
I NDUCTION M OTOR L OSS D EFINITION
Loss
Stator Winding
Rotor Winding
Core
Stray
Friction & Windage

Type
Resistive
Resistive
Magnetic
Magnetic
Mechanical

Circuit Element
R1
R2
RC
RLoad
RLoad

Stray and mechanical losses are accounted for

in the load resistance.

R2 (1 s)
(1)
s
In this paper, RLoad models stray loss and mechanical loss
(windage and bearing friction) in addition to the output power.
The induction motor equivalent circuit is further described in
many textbooks, such as [3].
The motor output power is

In order to calculate the equivalent circuit parameters, it

is necessary to separate the resistive losses from the other
losses (core, stray, and mechanical). In the absence of test
data, these losses may be assumed as a ratio of the total
loss based on typical values. In modern motors, mechanical
losses account for approximately 14% of the total loss and core
losses account for approximately 12% [7]. Stray load loss is
higher for smaller machines. IEEE Standard 112 [4] provides
assumed values of the stray load loss as a function of the
machine power rating; see Table II. This paper uses assumed
values of the mechanical loss and stray load loss based on
these ratios to correct the power in RLoad and to calculate
RC .

POut = I22 RLoad

IV. P ROPOSED M ETHOD

RLoad =

(2)

Typically, slip s varies approximately linearly from no load to

full load. At no load, s is nearly zero, such that RLoad is very
large, I2 is very small, and the power in RLoad represents only
mechanical and stray losses. At full load slip, RLoad decreases,
I2 increases, and the power in RLoad includes the rated output

The proposed method to estimate the circuit parameters

requires the following nameplate data:
1) Rated output power (POut )
2) Rated terminal voltage (VRated )
3) Full load efficiency ()

TABLE II
A SSUMED S TRAY L OAD L OSS AS A F RACTION OF R ATED L OAD [4]
Motor Rating
090 kW
91375 kW
3761850 kW
>1850 kW

TABLE III
TABLE OF NEMA C ODE L ETTERS [3]

Stray Load Loss

0.018
0.015
0.012
0.009

Code Letter

4) Full load power factor (PF)

5) Full load speed in RPM (N ) and number of poles
6) NEMA design type
7) NEMA code letter
From these data, the method estimates all relevant circuit parameters: R1 , X1 , R2 , X2 , RC , and XM . The equations in the
method description use the per-unit system. Any convenient
base may be used; the rated output power and terminal voltage
are one possibility.
A. Derivation of Known Parameters
First, several intermediate data are derived from the nameplate data. The total input power and total loss at rated load
are
POut
(3)
PIn =

PLoss = PIn POut

(4)
Similarly, the apparent and reactive input powers are
POut
PF
q
2
= |SIn |2 PIn

|SIn | =
QIn

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
K

Locked Rotor
kVA/HP
0-3.15
3.15-3.55
3.55-4.00
4.00-4.50
4.50-5.00
5.00-5.60
5.60-6.30
6.30-7.10
7.10-8.00
8.00-9.00

PMech = PLoss FMech

(11)

PStray = POut FStray

(12)

PCore = POut FCore

(13)

The converted power, PConv , includes the output power, stray

loss, and mechanical loss:

(5)

PConv = POut + PMech + PStray

(6)

The electromagnetically developed power, or air gap power,

PAG is

PIn jQIn
IRated =
(7)
VRated
The motor synchronous speed NS in RPM is derived from
the number of poles,
120f
(8)
Number of Poles
where f is the system electrical frequency in Hz. Given the
synchronous speed and the full load speed, the full load slip
is
NS N
(9)
s=
NS
The approximate locked rotor current ILR can be determined from the rated voltage, rated power, and NEMA code
letter. The NEMA code letter gives a range of starting kVA
values based on the motor horsepower rating, as shown in
Table III. As an approximation, the locked rotor kVA |SLR |
may be set to the midpoint of the range corresponding to
the NEMA code letter. Then the corresponding locked rotor
current magnitude is
NS =

|SLR |
VRated

L
M
N
O
P
R
S
T
U

Locked Rotor
kVA/HP
9.00-10.00
10.00-11.20
11.20-12.50
12.50-14.00
14.00-16.00
16.00-18.00
18.00-20.00
20.00-22.40
22.40 and up

Next, the motor losses are segregated according to known

relationships and reasonable assumptions regarding the loss
distribution. The mechanical, stray, and core losses are assumed to be fixed fractions of the total loss (see Section III),
such that

The phasor input current is

|ILR | =

Code Letter

(10)

PAG =

R2
PConv
= |I2 |2
1s
s

(14)

(15)

The stator and rotor resistive (copper) loss may be determined from the other losses and the air gap power,
PSCL = PIn PAG PCore

(16)

PRCL = PAG PConv

(17)

The stator resistance can then be determined exactly from the

stator copper loss,
R1 =

PSCL
|I1 |2

(18)

B. Development of Simultaneous Equations

After R1 is determined from (18), the remaining
parametersX1 , R2 , X2 , RC , and XM may be estimated by
solving a set of simultaneous nonlinear equations, developed
here.
Given the input current and an estimate of the stator
impedance, the air gap voltage E may be calculated,
E = VRated I1 (R1 + jX1 )

(19)

TABLE IV
T YPICAL RATIO OF X1 AND X2 TO XLR [3], [4]

The rotor current magnitude is

I2 =

R2
+ jX2
s
|E|
|I2 | = r
R2 2
(( ) + (X2 )2 )
s

(20)

Substituting |I2 | from (20) into (15) yields

2
PAG

R2
|E|

=
r R
s
2 2
2
(( ) + (X2 ) )
s

Rotor Design
NEMA Design
NEMA Design
NEMA Design
NEMA Design

A
B
C
D

(21)

QM = QIn |I1 |2 X1 |I2 |2 X2

|E|2
XM =
QM
|E|2
XM =
QIn |I1 |2 X1 |I2 |2 X2

(22)

In practice, the larger root gives the correct value for the rotor
resistance. Therefore, for a given value of E, R2 is
!
p
|E|2 + |E|4 4PAG X22
(23)
R2 = s
2PAG
(Here, R2 is written as a function of E rather than of I2
because the estimate of I2 depends strongly on R2 while the
estimate of E does not. When used in an iterative method,
(23) has superior convergence properties to an update using
only I2 .)
Assuming the value of R2 is similar at the locked rotor and
full load conditions, the locked rotor reactance XLR may be
then estimated from
V
= ILR (R1 + R2 + jXLR )
 Rated q
 VRated 
2
2


 ILR  = (R1 + R2 ) + XLR
s
|VRated |2
XLR =
(R1 + R2 )2
|ILR |2

(27)

(28)

Similarly, RC is estimated based on the require core loss

PCore ,
RC =

p
|E|4 4PAG X22
2PAG

X2
0.5 XLR
0.6 XLR
0.7 XLR
0.5 XLR

require magnetizing reactive power QM ,

From (21), a quadratic expression in R2 /s is derived,

 2
R2
R2
PAG
|E|2
+ PAG X22 = 0
s
s
|E|2
R2
=
s

X1
0.5 XLR
0.4 XLR
0.3 XLR
0.5 XLR

|E|2
PCore

(29)

A total of eight simultaneous equations are required to find

the unknown parameters, three of which are auxiliary equations. The primary equations give estimates for the unknown
circuit parameters:
R2 from (23),
X1 from (25),
X2 from (26),
XM from (28), and
RC from (29).
These are supplemented by auxiliary equations for E, |I2 |,
and XLR :
E from (19),
|I2 | from (20), and
XLR from (24).
C. Iterative Solution Method

(24)

where |VRated | and |ILR | are input data. It is known that

XLR = X1 + X2 , but the exact ratio of X1 to X2 cannot
be determined from only the nameplate data. Instead, a ratio
is assumed from typical values based on the NEMA design
class [3], [4]; see Table IV. Defining Ratio = X1 /XLR , the
stator and rotor reactances are
X1 = XLR Ratio

(25)

X2 = XLR (1 Ratio)

(26)

Once estimates for I1 , I2 , and E are available and the

rotor impedance is calculated, XM can be estimated from the

The set of eight simultaneous equations may be solved

via an iterative, Gauss-Seidel type algorithm. The GaussSeidel solution method improves upon an initial estimate by
sequentially solving each equation using the current estimate
of all parameter values in order to obtain an updated estimate
of a given parameter value. For reliable convergence, the
method requires that
1) The initial estimate of the parameters is reasonably close
to their true values, and
2) The right-hand-side value of each equation is not a
strong function of the parameter being updated.
The iterations continue until all the process converges within
a specified tolerance.
The proposed iterative method is as follows:
1) Compute known motor powers and currents as described
in Section IV-A.
2) Compute R1 from (18).

3) Define initial estimates for air gap voltage E and rotor

current magnitude I2 ,
E VRated 6 0
|I2 | Re {I1 }
(These are similar to the initial estimates proposed by
[2].) Initialize the values of the five unknown circuit
parameters to zero.
4) Store the present estimates of X1 , R2 , X2 , RC , and XM
for later comparison.
5) Update R2 from (23) using the present estimates for
E and X2 . (An initial zero value for X2 has minimal
impact on this step because the rotor impedance is
mostly resistive at full load.)
6) Compute XLR from (24) using the present estimate of
R2 .
7) Update X1 and X2 from (25)(26) using the present
estimate of XLR and the reactance ratio derived from
the NEMA design type.
8) Update XM from (28) using the present estimates of E,
X1 , and X2 .
9) Update RC from (29) using the present estimate of E.
10) Check for convergence by comparing the updated values
of X1 , R2 , X2 , RC , and XM with their previous values.
a) If all parameters have converged within a specified
tolerance, STOP.
b) Otherwise, update E and |I2 | from (19)(20) using
the updated parameter values. Then, return to Step
4.
11) Save final parameter values and display results.
At the end of the iterative procedure, the validity of the
computed parameters may be checked by solving the full load
powers in the resulting induction motor equivalent circuit and
comparing to known values, such as PIn , PAG , and PConv .
D. Limitations
As with previous methods of this type [2], [5], the proposed
method has a number of limitations.
The rotor resistance and reactance are assumed identical
under the locked rotor conditions as at full load. This
is not the case for deep bar and double cage rotors,
which are designed to experience significant skin effect
at high slip. Caution should therefore be used when using
the computed parameters for starting and pull-out torque
calculations. Methods are available to correct the model
for rotor skin effect [8], [9], but they require additional
data beyond the nameplate data.
The ratio between stator and rotor reactance is assumed,
rather than determined from calculation.
The parameters are fit to the full load condition only.
Stray loss, core loss, and mechanical losses are assumed
to be fixed ratios of the full load loss based on typical
values [4], [7].
The core loss is placed in the stator, when in reality it is
distributed between stator and rotor.

The proposed method makes no special provisions for

single-phase machines.
These limitations are a compromise required by the limited
set of data.

V. N UMERICAL R ESULTS
The proposed method was implemented as a MATLAB
script and tested using nameplate data from various motors
available online. In all cases, the procedure converged within
a 0.001 per unit tolerance in five or fewer iterations. In order
to verify the accuracy of the computations, the method was
also tested for a motor with known parameters: a textbook
example from [3]
Chapman [3, Example 7-3] provides an example of a threephase induction motor with known circuit parameters and loss
breakdown. TableV provides the data for this motor. In the
TABLE V
E XAMPLE M OTOR DATA [3, E XAMPLE 7-3]
Rated voltage
Rated power output
Mechanical Loss
Core Loss
Stray Loss
Stator Resistance
Stator Reactance
Rotor Resistance
Rotor Reactance
Magnetizing Reactance

VRated
POut
PMech
PCore
PStray
R1
X1
R2
X2
XM

460 V
25 HP (18.64 kW)
1100 W
0W
0W
0.641 W
1.106 W
0.332 W
0.464 W
26.3 W

example, the full load slip is not provided. It is therefore

calculated at s = 0.04189 by determining the slip at which
the output power equals the rated value. Similarly, appropriate
values for the rated power factor and efficiency were computed
by solving the circuit at rated slip.
The parameters for this motor were calculated using the
proposed method but using exact values for the locked rotor
current, reactance ratio, and loss distribution. Table VI compares the results of the parameter estimation method with the
actual circuit parameters.
TABLE VI
C OMPUTED C IRCUIT PARAMETERS FOR E XAMPLE M OTOR [3, E XAMPLE
7-3]
Parameter

Exact

Proposed Method

R1
X1
R2
X2
RC
XM

0.641
1.106
0.332
0.464

26.3

0.6573
1.0983
0.3332
0.4607
1721
26.03

Units are

Proposed Method +
Exact Motor Data
0.6408
1.1061
0.3320
0.4640

26.30

The results demonstrate first that the proposed method with

the proposed assumptions returns results very close to actual
values, and second that the proposed method recovers the exact

R2
X2
RC
XM
Ratio
RLoad

250
Exact
Exact + Proposed
Proposed

Torque (Nm)

200

s
SIn
POut
PLoss
PMech

150

100

50

200

400

600
800
1000 1200
Mechical Speed (r/min)

Fig. 3.

1400

1600

1800

Torque Vs. Speed Curve

circuit parameters when the loss distribution and reactance

ratio assumptions are replaced with the actual motor data.
Figure 3 shows the torque vs. speed curves of the example
with the given information and Table VI. The solid line,
dashed line, and dotted line are the curves using the parameters
from the exact, proposed and exact, and proposed methods,
respectably. Since their parameters are very close to each
other, the curves appear overlapped, but the curve using the
parameters from the proposed method is slightly different in
the range of the pullout torque.
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper proposes a new iterative method to estimate
the induction motor circuit parameters using only the nameplate data and typical assumptions regarding motor behavior.
The use of only the nameplate data is an advantage over
previous methods which require additional performance data.
The proposed method converges reliably and calculates circuit
parameters very close to the true values.
N OTATION
VRated
I1
ILR
R1
X1

Rated voltage
Stator current of full load input current
Locked rotor current
Stator resistance due to stator copper loss
Stator reactance

FMech
PStray
FStray
PCore
FCore
PConv
PAG
PRCL
PSCL
E

Rotor resistance due to rotor copper loss

Stator reactance
Core loss resistance
Magnetizing reactance
Ratio of X1 to XLR
Equivalent load resistance including mechanical
and stray loss
Full load motor slip
Input apparent power
Output power
Total motor loss
Mechanical loss, including windage and bearing
friction loss
Fraction of mechanical loss to total loss
Stray loss
Fraction of stray loss to output power
Core loss
Fraction of core loss to output power
Converted power
Air gap power
Rotor copper loss
Stator copper loss
Air gap voltage
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The research presented in this paper resulted from work

performed under direction of the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL) in Golden, CO, with funding from the
Bonneville Power Administration, TI Project No. 192, Contract No. 51353, and Interagency Agreement No. IAG-111801, which the authors gratefully acknowledge.
R EFERENCES
[1] IEEE Recommended Practice for Industrial and Commercial Power
Systems Analysis, IEEE Std. 399, 1997.
[2] M. H. Haque, Estimation of three-phase induction motor parameters,
Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 187193, 1993.
[3] S. Chapman, Electric Machinery Fundamentals, 4th ed. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill Education, 2005.
[4] IEEE Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and
Generators, IEEE Std. 112, 2004.
[5] R. Natarajan and V. Misra, Parameter estimation of induction motors
using a spreadsheet program on a personal computer, Electric Power
Systems Research, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 157164, 1989.
[6] G. Rogers, Demystifying induction motor behavior, IEEE Computer
Applications in Power, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 2933, Jan. 1994.
[7] R. Saidur, A review on electrical motors energy use and energy savings,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 877898,
2010.
[8] M. Haque, Determination of nema design induction motor parameters
from manufacturer data, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion,
vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 9971004, Dec. 2008.
[9] J. Pedra and L. Sainz, Parameter estimation of squirrel-cage induction
motors without torque measurements, IEEE Proceedings Electric
Power Applications, vol. 153, no. 2, pp. 263270, march 2006.