Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13


2, FEBRUARY 2015 909

Charging Method for the Secondary Battery in

Dual-Inverter Drive Systems for Electric Vehicles
Jinseok Hong, Student Member, IEEE, Heekwang Lee, Student Member, IEEE, and Kwanghee Nam, Member, IEEE

Abstract—A dual-inverter with an open-end winding motor con- high efficiency in a high-speed region. In [10]–[15], an mo-
figuration is an attractive method to supply a higher voltage to a tor control scheme for a dual-inverter with a floating capacitor
motor for electric vehicle (EV) applications. A topology utilizing bridge has been developed. However, this scheme provides only
two isolated dc sources is considered to reap the advantages of re-
liability and high voltage. Although this design may require two a reactive voltage component from the secondary inverter to
battery chargers, in this study, the use of only one charger to a the motor. Welchko [16] suggested unity power factor control,
main battery was considered. The central issue is to charge the voltage quadrature control, and an optimum inverter utilization
secondary battery from the main battery via the motor, whether control for a dual-inverter with two isolated dc sources. Rossi
it is at a standstill or running. The inverter voltage margin re- et al. [17], [18] proposed a series hybrid power trains based on an
maining after motor torque production determines the charging
capacity. The unity-power-factor operation is shown to be useful open-winding machine drive. An open-end winding permanent-
to maximize the charging power. Simulations and experiments are magnet (PM) generator was coupled to an internal combustion
presented that show the validity of the proposed scheme. engine (ICE), and the generated power was split into two iso-
Index Terms—Battery charging, dual-inverter, electric vehicle lated dc buses through individual rectifiers.
(EV), interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM), Two popular topologies for the dual-inverter drive system are
open-end winding machine, unity-power-Factor (UPF). shown in Fig. 1 with the corresponding voltage vector hexagons.
In Fig. 1(a), two dc links are connected to a single voltage source.
However, two separate voltage sources are utilized in Fig. 1(b).
I. INTRODUCTION Note in the case of a single voltage source that a substantial
HE propulsion motors for electric vehicles (EVs) are char- amount of a triplen harmonic current is caused by a triplen
T acterized by high power densities and wide operating
ranges. The two issues are not separate because the high-speed
harmonic voltage. For this reason, many research efforts in the
field of open-winding motor drives have been spent on pulse
capability is necessary to increase the power density [1]. How- width modulation (PWM) techniques to suppress the triplen
ever, high-speed operation requires a high dc link voltage, as the harmonic current [19]–[26]. Nevertheless, a triplen harmonic
back electromotive force (EMF) grows linearly with the speed. current does not occur, even in the presence of a triplen harmonic
However, a high voltage is not favorable for a battery because voltage if the voltage sources are separated as shown in Fig. 1(b).
the cell balancing pays a penalty for battery efficiency. To ac- The triplen harmonic current is nothing but a common mode
commodate a high voltage, some vehicles, such as the Toyota (zero sequence) current in the motor, which is normally harmful,
Prius, are utilizing a boost converter in the inverter dc link. causing additional copper loss and core saturation. Fig. 1(c)
The Z-source inverter [2] provides another means to increase shows the PWM hexagons constituted by the two sets of inverter
the inverter output voltage without using a separate boosting switch configurations. The switch configurations corresponding
stage. The Z-source inverter, however, requires two bulky ca- to points G, I, K, M, P, and R produce common mode voltages
pacitors and inductors, and the boosting ratio is limited by the in Fig. 1(a). Because they cannot be used, the feasible region is
output voltage and shoot-through zero state. reduced to a small hexagon, HJLNQS, with solid lines.
A dual-inverter with an open-end winding motor configu- Two insulated dc supplies inherently eliminate the common-
ration is one method to supply a higher voltage to the ma- mode voltage and current [27]–[29], thereby no limitation is
chine [3]–[9]. Typically, two inverters are connected to both imposed on PWM switching, i.e., all of the space-vector com-
terminals of an open-end winding motor. Though it requires binations can be utilized, and the PWM region is represented
six additional switches, the increased voltage output leads to by the dotted hexagon, GIKMPR. Furthermore, this topology
offers a highly reliable solution. In fact, in case of a fault in
one inverter, its output terminals can be short-circuited, and the
system can operate using a healthy inverter as a standard three-
Manuscript received November 5, 2013; revised February 12, 2014; phase two-level inverter [30]. However, the main drawback is
accepted March 7, 2014. Date of publication March 17, 2014; date of current that this topology needs two isolated dc power sources and may
version October 7, 2014. Recommended for publication by Associate Editor require two sets of battery chargers if it is applied to an electric
S. Williamson.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Pohang vehicle (EV) or a hybrid EV.
University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Korea (e-mail: jinsuk00@ In this study, we focus on the EV application of a dual source
postech.ac.kr; draco@postech.ac.kr; kwnam@postech.ac.kr). inverter and consider using one charger for the dual source in-
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. verters. In this proposed scheme, only Battery 1 is charged by an
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TPEL.2014.2312194 external charger. Battery 2 is charged via Inverters 1 and 2 from

0885-8993 © 2014 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.




Fig. 1. Configuration of dual-inverter system (a) single voltage source, (b) isolated dual voltage source, and (c) corresponding voltage vector hexagon.

Battery 1. The charging algorithms differ based on the motor a separate dc voltage source, as shown in Fig. 1(b). Because it
operation status: at standstill, running under a base speed, and carries two isolated batteries, we may need two separate chargers
running over a base speed in the field-weakening region. This or may need to charge the batteries individually. Using two
paper is organized as follows. In Section II, the open-end wind- chargers is an obvious drawback in EVs from the perspectives
ing interior permanent-magnet synchronous motor (IPMSM) of cost, convenience, and weight management. We assume that
model is developed, and the power flow of the dual-inverter sys- only one battery (Battery 1) is charged from the grid at a station
tem is discussed. In Section III, the proposed battery charging or at home. Table I compares the advantages of charge methods.
methods and algorithms are illustrated at various running con- Obviously, additional cost and weight should be paid to the
ditions. Finally, the proposed charging algorithms are verified two charger system. The charging efficiency of the two charger
through simulation and experiments in Sections IV and V. system would be better because it does not include the motor
in the charging path. Thus, the iron and copper losses of the
motor can be avoided. Note that users may get bothered more
by the two charger method, since it requires two connections
each charging time.
EV propulsion motors are required to run at a high speed be- Further, we may regard Battery 1 to have a larger energy
cause most EVs use fixed reduction gears. At the same time, the capacity than Battery 2, and consider Battery 2 as an auxiliary
zero-speed torque should be sufficiently high to start the vehicle battery. In this study, we consider charging methods of Battery
on a slope. A high-torque machine, having a high back EMF 2 from the precharged battery (Battery 1) when the motor is at
constant, requires a large dc link voltage as the speed increases. a standstill or running.
However, the battery voltage cannot be easily increased owing
to the efficiency issue in the series cell connection. A. Dynamic Model of Dual-Inverter System
To make a high-voltage battery pack, battery cells are usu-
ally connected in parallel and in series. Overcharging, as well In the dual-inverter system, two inverters are connected at
as overdischarging, causes lithium-ion batteries an irreversible both ends of the stator windings. It follows from Fig. 1(b) that
damage. In a serially connected battery stack, the discharging, as the voltage equations for a dual-inverter system are expressed
well as the charging, process has to be stopped immediately as as
soon as one of the terminal cell voltages fall below the discharge d
vaa  = Rs ias + λaa  (1)
voltage limit or exceeds the charging voltage limit [31]. As the dt
voltage level increases, the complexity of a battery management d
system (BMS) increases correspondingly, and the battery sys- vbb  = Rs ibs + λbb  (2)
tem efficiency decreases because the voltage balancing normally
fits each cell voltage to a minimum level by burning away the vcc  = Rs ics + λcc  (3)
excess voltages of the other cells. dt
The dual-inverter topology offers a method of increasing the where vaa  , vbb  , and vcc  are the motor phase voltages;
voltage to the motor, as was indicated in [3], [27], [28], and [29]. λaa  , λbb  , and λcc  are the flux linkages of the a-, b-, and
Throughout the paper, we consider the dual-inverter system with c-phase stator windings, respectively; and Rs is the stator


resistance. Note that resulted from the current polarity. Therefore, the motor power
is equal to
vaa  = vao − va  o  + voo  (4)
3 3
vbb  = vbo − vb  o  + voo  (5) Pm ot = [(vd1 −vd2 )id +(vq 1 − vq 2 )iq ] = (vdm id + vq m iq ).
2 2
vcc  = vco − vc  o  + voo  (6)
where vao , vbo , and vco are the pole voltages of Inverter 1, III. BATTERY CHARGING METHODS FOR
va  o  , vb  o  , and vc  o  are the pole voltages of Inverter 2, and DUAL-INVERTER SYSTEM
voo  is the voltage difference between the dc link center taps of Battery 2 is an auxiliary battery that can be used as an assistant
Inverters 1 and 2. Thus, adding up (1), (2), and (3), we have voltage source when a high voltage is necessary for a motor
(vao + vbo + vco ) − (va  o  + vb  o  + vc  o  ) + 3voo  operation. In the low-speed range, Battery 1 acts as the main
power source, and Battery 2 is shut down by setting a 0 or 7
= Rs (ias + ibs + ics ) + (λaa  + λbb  + λcc  ). (7) vector at Inverter 2. At a high speed, Inverter 2 contributes to
dt increasing the supply voltage to the motor in series with Inverter
Assume that the terminal voltages of Inverters 1 and 2 are 1. Hence, the use of Battery 2 is not continuous but intermittent.
symmetrical such that vao + vbo + vco = 0, and va  o  + vb  o  + Whenever the voltage level is low, it needs to be charged for
vc  o  = 0. Then, it follows that ias + ibs + ics = 0 and λaa  + later operation. First, we consider a method of charging Battery
λbb  + λcc  = 0 owing to the impedance symmetry of the motor. 2 when the motor is under 1) the stationary state, 2) low-speed
Thus, it follows that voo  = 0, i.e., o and o are virtually equipo- operation, and 3) high-speed operation.
tential. It is assumed here that the motor is an IPMSM. In the
synchronous reference frame, we have A. Charging Method at Standstill
did At a standstill, only the d-axis current is utilized for charging
vdm  vd1 − vd2 = Rs id + Ld − ωe Lq iq (8)
dt while letting the q-axis current be regulated to zero. Because
diq no torque is produced with the d-axis current, the rotor remains
vq m  vq 1 − vq 2 = Rs iq + Lq + ωe Ld id + ωe ψm (9) fixed at a point. Note that, on the other hand, the positive d-axis
current may saturate the motor core, leading to a decrease in
where vdm , vq m , id , iq , Ld , and Lq are the d- and q-axis
inductance. However, a small decrease in inductance is not a
voltages, currents, and inductances of the motor, respectively;
problem in the charging mode. Furthermore, a positive d-axis
vd1 , vq 1 , vd2 , and vq 2 are the d- and q-axis voltages of Inverters
current does not cause a PM demagnetization.
1 and 2, respectively; ωe is the electrical angular frequency; ψm
Because iq = 0 and ωe = 0, it follows from (8) and (9) that
is the rotor linkage flux.
Based on (8) and (9), we obtain an equivalent circuit for the did
vsm = (vdm , vq m ) = (vd1 − vd2 , 0) = (Rs id + Ld , 0).
dual-inverter system as shown in Fig. 2. Note that the volt- dt
age sources representing Inverters 1 and 2 appear in a series (13)
connection. Fig. 3 shows a corresponding equivalent circuit and a vector
The power delivered to the motor from each inverter can be diagram.
written as Note that the maximum inverter terminal voltage that Inverter
2 can generate is vd2 = √13 Vbat2 because the dc link voltage is
PI n v 1 = (vd1 id + vq 1 iq ) (10) equal to the battery voltage. Then, it follows from the power
relation between Inverter 2 and Battery 2 that
PI n v 2 = − (vd2 id + vq 2 iq ) (11) 3 3 Vbat2
2 Vbat2 Ibat2 = vd2 id = √ id . (14)
2 2 3
where the subscripts Inv1 and Inv2 represent Inverters 1 and
2, respectively. It should be noted that the minus sign in (11) Therefore, we have id = √2 Ibat2 .

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit of dual-inverter system in a synchronous reference frame: (a) d-axis and (b) q-axis.

Fig. 3. (a) Equivalent circuit and (b) vector diagram for standstill operation of dual-inverter system.

Fig. 4. Control block diagram for standstill charging.

In general, the maximum charging current is determined by a

BMS, which monitors the battery state of charge, temperature,
and other variables. For fast charging, Battery 2 is charged in
a constant-current mode, and we denote by Ibat2 the allowed
charging current of Battery 2. Then, the d-axis current command
should be chosen as
2 c
i∗d = √ Ibat2 . (15)
Utilizing a proportional-integral (PI) controller to the system
(13), we obtain
  Fig. 5. Motor voltage vector with the voltage limit and a pair of v s1 and v s2
vd1 = vd2 + Kp + (i∗d − id ) for unity power factor operation at a low speed.
Vbat2 Ki
= √ + Kp + (i∗d − id ) (16) given torque. If there remains a voltage margin for Inverter 1, it
3 s will be used for charging Battery 2.
where Kp and Ki are the proportional and integral gains, In the steady state, the voltage equation for the motor is
respectively. written as
Fig. 4 shows the control scheme for the standstill charging. A vd1 = −ωe Lq iq + vd2 (17)
PI controller is constructed for Inverter 1 with the current com-

mands, (15) and i∗q = 0. For Inverter 2, we set vd2 = Vbat2 / 3 vq 1 = ωe Ld id + ωe ψm + vq 2 . (18)
and vq 2 = 0.
The voltage vector, vsm = (−ωe Lq iq , ωe Ld id + ωe ψm ) for the
motor is depicted with a voltage limit curve in Fig. 5. Because
B. Charging Method in Low-Speed Operation
the motor is not operating at high speed, vsm does not hit the
There are numerous ways of charging Battery 2 while the voltage limit, thereby we have numerous choices for Inverter 2
motor is running below a base speed. It is assumed here that voltages vs2 . Several pairs of vs1 and vs2 are drawn in Fig. 5.
the primary task is to produce a desired shaft torque. Hence, It is necessary to consider which vs2 is the most appropriate for
the main job of Inverter 1 is to generate the motor current for a charging Battery 2. This needs to be determined based on the

Fig. 6. Control block diagram for charging method under low-speed operation.

charging power. Note from (11), (17), and (18) that the charging
power delivered via Inverter 2 is
3 3
PI n v 2 = (vd2 id + vq 2 iq ) = [(vd1 + ωe Lq iq )id
2 2
+ (vq 1 − ωe Ld id − ωe ψm )iq ].

The power maximization problem is formulated as follows:

max PI n v 2 subject to 2
vd1 + vq21 − ≤ 0.
(v d 2 ,v q 2 ) 3
Hence, we set the Lagrangian with a coefficient of λ

L(vd1 , vq 1 , λ) = [(vd1 +ωe Lq iq )id +(vq 1 − ωe Ld id − ωe ψm )iq ]


+ λ vd1 + vq 1 −
2 2
The necessary conditions are Fig. 7. Change in operation points to charge Battery 2 in the field-weakening
region (a) vectors at “B,” (b) vectors at “A,” and (c) operation point change for
∂L a voltage margin.
= id + 2λvd1 = 0 (19)
∂L The charging current of Battery 2, Ibat2 , is calculated as
= iq + 2λvq 1 = 0 (20)
∂vq 1
PI n v 1 − Pm ot
∂L V2 Ibat2 =
= vd1 + vq21 − bat1 = 0. (21) Vbat2
∂λ 3
3 Vs1 Is + ωe Lq iq id − (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )iq
Solving (19), (20), and (21), we obtain = (24)
2 Vbat2
vs1 = (vd1 , vq 1 ) = √ (id , iq ) (22) where Vs1 = vs1  = vd1 2 + v 2 . Note from (24) that the
 charging current depends on the motor speed ωe , as well as the
where Is = i2d + i2q . This shows that the PI n v 2 -maximizing currents id and iq . Therefore, there is a chance that Ibat2 in (24)
solution is obtained when the Inverter 1 voltage vector is in is higher than the maximum charging current Ibat2 requested by
parallel with the current, i.e., the maximum power delivery to Battery 2 when the motor speed is low. If Ibat2 > Ibat2 , then it
Battery 2 is realized when the power factor of Inverter 1 is unity. is necessary to replace Ibat2 by Ibat2 in (24). In such a case, the
Correspondingly, the Inverter 2 voltage is obtained as maximum Vs1 is calculated as
− ωe Lq iq id + (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )iq
Vbat1 Vbat1 3 Vbat2 Ibat2
vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) = √ id + ωe Lq iq , √ iq Vs1,lim it ≡ .
3Is 3Is Is
Fig. 6 shows the whole control scheme under the base speed,
− ωe Ld id − ωe ψm . (23)
and the corresponding algorithm is summarized as follows:

Fig. 8. Available battery charging current and power depending on the motor output power in high-speed operation: (a) 5000 r/min, and (b) 9000 r/min.

TABLE II current minimizing point that yields torque, T ∗ . It follows from

Fig. 7(b) that

ωe (Lq iq A )2 + (ψm + Ld idA )2 = √ . (27)

However, one may choose a point “B” on the same constant-

torque line on the left-hand side of “A.” The best point is a tan-
gential intersection. It should be noted that |vsm | corresponding
VEHICLE PARAMETERS to (idB , iq B ) is less than V√
, i.e.,

|vsm (idB , iq B )| = ωe (Lq iq B )2 + (ψm + Ld idB )2 < √ .
In other words, a voltage margin V√ bat1
− |vsm (idB , iq B )| > 0
is secured by changing the operation point from “A” to “B,”
and can be used for charging Battery 2. Fig. 7(a) and (b) shows
1) Choose (i∗d , i∗q ) for a given torque, Te∗ , from the maximum the voltage vectors for (idA , iq A ) and (idB , iq B ) in the voltage
torque per ampere lookup table. plane (vd , vq ). It should be noted that the voltage limits appear
2) Determine the voltage vector for the motor, vsm = as circles in the voltage plane. The voltage margin obtained by
(−ωe Lq iq , ωe ψm + ωe Ld id ). changing the operation points is depicted in Fig. 7(a) and (c).
3) Determine vs1 = VIss1 (id , iq ) for Inverter 1, where Similarly to the previous case (Section III-B), the voltage of
  Inverter 1, vs1 for (idB , iq B ), can be set in parallel with a current
Vs1 = min Vs1,lim it , √ . vector IsB so as to achieve a unity power factor at Inverter 1,
4) Determine vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) for Inverter 2 such that Vbat1
  vs1 = √ (idB , iq B ) (29)
id iq 3IsB
(vd2 , vq 2 ) = Vs1 +ωe Lq iq , Vs1 −ωe Ld id −ωe ψm . 
Is Is
(26) where IsB = i2dB + i2q B . Then, the voltage of Inverter 2 is
obtained as
C. Charging Method in the Field-Weakening Region 
Vbat1 idB Vbat1 iq B
vs2 = vs1 − vsm = √ + ωe Lq iq B , √
In the field-weakening region, the motor terminal voltage is 3 IsB 3 IsB
limited by the maximum available voltage from the inverter. 
However, even in the field-weakening region, some voltage − ωe Ld idB − ω e ψm (30)
margin, though not sufficient, can be attained by increasing
the d-axis current in the negative direction. In such a case, the and used as a charging source voltage for Battery 2.
current vector increases so that the motor copper loss increases In a very high-speed region, the operation point is found
somewhat. uniquely at the tangential point. More specifically, the maximum
Consider a specific example shown in Fig. 7(c). Note that CA torque is determined at a tangential intersection with a voltage
is a voltage curve limited by V√bat1
, and “A”= (idA , iq A ) is an limit in a vicinity of (id , iq ) = (ψm /Ld , 0). The locus of those
intersection point with a constant-torque line. Then, “A” is the points is often called the “maximum torque per flux” (MTPF)

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9. Simulation results for charging with the motor at a standstill (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and v q 2 (c) three-phase current of the motor,
ia s , ib s , and ic s (d) V b a t 2 and Ibca t 2 .

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 10. Simulation results for charging in low-speed motor operation (300 r/min): (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (c) A-phase current of the
motor, ia s ; A-phase voltage of Inverters 1 and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (d) V b a t 2 and Ibca t 2 .

[33] or “maximum torque per voltage” (MTPV) [34]. In those Minimize(ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )2 + (ωe Lq iq )2
cases, charging Battery 2 is not possible.
The charging algorithm in the field-weakening region is sum- ∗ ∗
4 (ψm iq + (Ld − Lq )id iq ) = T , where T is a
subject to 3P
marized as follows: given torque. The Lagrangian for this problem is defined as
1) find, if any, in the current plane, a tangential intersection
(idB , iq B ) between a torque curve and a voltage limit
L(id , iq , λ) = (ωe Ld id + ωe ψm )2 + (ωe Lq iq )2
2) determine the motor voltage corresponding to (idB , iq B ); 3P
+λ (ψm iq + (Ld − Lq )id iq ) − T ∗ .
3) determine vs1 for Inverter 1 as (29); 4
4) determine vs2 = (vd2 , vq 2 ) for Inverter 2 as (30).
1) Finding an Operating Point “B” in the Field-Weakening Then, the necessary conditions for minimization are ∂∂iLd =
Region: The operating point to maximize the voltage margin
0, ∂∂ iLq = 0, ∂∂Lλ = 0. Solving the necessary conditions simul-
[“B” in Fig. 7(c)] is found at a tangential intersection between
the torque and voltage limit curves. This can be formulated as a taneously for id , we obtain a fourth-order polynomial
constraint minimization problem:
i4d + Ai3d + Bi2d + Cid + D = 0 (31)

(a) (b)


Fig. 11. Simulation results for Battery 2 charging in ECE-15 urban driving cycle (a) ECE-15 driving cycle, (b) Battery 2 charging current, and (c) a frequency
map of charging current versus vehicle speeds.

Fig. 12. Experimental setup (a) open-end winding IPMSM, (b) two inverters, and (c) battery pack.

2 2
A = ψm
+ 3ψ m 3ψ m 3ψ m Table II is used. Fig. 8 shows the available charging current
where Ld (L d −L q ) , B= (L d −L q )L d + (L d −L q ) 2 ,
3ψ m ψm3 4
and power for Battery 2 and the motor current versus the motor
C = (L d −L q ) 2 L d + (L d −L q ) 3 , and D = (L d −L q ) 3 L d − output power at 5000 and 9000 r/min. It is obvious that there is
16L 2q T ∗2 no power available for charging the battery if the motor power
9P 2 (L d −L q ) 2 L 2d
Then, the meaningful solution for the operating point is ob- reaches its maximum of 100 kW. However, a fairly high charging
tained as follows [32]: rate is feasible even in high-speed operation, as far as the motor

is not operating at the maximum power. For example, Battery 2
√ can be charged at 34 kW if the motor is running at 60 kW and
− α1 + 2ξ1 − − 3α1 + 2ξ1 − √α2β+2ξ 1
A1 1 1 5000 r/min.
idB = − +
4 2
4T ∗ 1 Simulations were performed using Ansoft Simplorer with the
iq B = · (33) motor parameters for an EV shown in Table II. Fig. 9 shows
3P ψm + (Ld − Lq )idα
simulation results with the proposed charging control scheme
2 3
where α = − 3A8 + B, β = A8 − A2B + C, γ = − 256 3
A4 + at a standstill. The command value for battery charging current
2 3
was set to 100 A, and the corresponding charging power was
16 A B − 4 AC + D, η = − α12 − γ, κ = − 108 + α3γ − β8 ,
1 2 1 α

3 36 kW. According to (15), the d-axis current√ command was

μ = − κ2 ± κ4 + η27 , and
calculated as 115.5 A, where vd2 = Vbat2 / 3 = 207.8 V, and
⎧ 5 √ η vq 2 = 0. Fig. 9(a) and (b) shows the controlled currents and

⎨ − α + 3μ − √ if μ = 0 terminal voltages of Inverters 1 and 2. Fig. 9(c) and (d) shows
6 3 3μ
ξ= the motor phase current and the voltage and current of Battery
⎩ − 5 α + √3μ − √3κ

if μ = 0. 2, respectively.
6 Fig. 10 shows a case when a motor running at 300 r/min
To show the charging capacity during high-speed operation produces 80 Nm of shaft torque. Before t = 0.1 s, charging was
of the motor, an example motor with the parameters listed in not activated. Inverter 1 was dedicated to only operating the

Fig. 13. Experimental results for charging operation at a standstill: (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and v q 2 ;
(d) three-phase current of the motor, ia s , ib s , and ic s .

Fig. 14. Experimental results for charging operation in the low-speed region (300 r/min): (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ;
(c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltage of Inverters 1
and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (e) the output torque.

motor, and Inverter 2 was locked at zero voltage (zero or seven Inverter 1 increased to accommodate the terminal voltage of
vector in the switch status). The charging started at t = 0.1 Inverter 2, as shown in Fig. 10(c). Note that the charging rate
s as shown in Fig. 10(d), by applying a voltage command of was 32.4 kW and a unity power factor operation of Inverter 1
(vd2 , vq 2 ) = (−72, 178) V to Inverter 2. Fig. 10(a) shows that was achieved during the charging.
the motor currents did not change to maintain a constant-torque Fig. 11 shows a scenario of maximum charging effort during
production, even during charging. However, voltage levels of in an ECE-15 urban driving cycle (UDC). The previous same

Fig. 15. Experimental results for charging operation in the low-speed region (2000 r/min): (a) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (b) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ;
(c) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltages of Inverters 1
and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 , respectively; (e) the magnified view of Region A; (f) the magnified view of Region B; (g) the output torque.

TABLE IV energy recovery during deceleration was not considered. Note

that the average charging current was 106 A, and a charging
current frequency map versus speed is shown in Fig. 11(c).

Fig. 12 shows the experimental environments with a specially
manufactured test motor having open ends, two inverters, and
battery packs. The motor specifications are the same as those
(see Table II) used in the simulation. The dc link voltage of
Inverter 1 was fixed at 360 V dc. A battery pack was constructed
with 16 Calcium MF 12 V batteries (lead-acid) by connecting
them serially as shown in Fig. 12 (c). The maximum charging
motor parameters were used, and the vehicle parameters are current was set to 100 A.
listed in III. In this simulation, the maximum charging current Fig. 13 shows the experimental results of charging perfor-
was set to 200 A. Note that the battery was charged to the full mance when the motor was at a standstill. Note that the charging
extent during stops, and that charging action was maintained current was regulated at 100 A. Initially, the battery voltage was
while the vehicle was running, though the proportion decreased 200 V but soon jumped to 300 V as soon as charging started.
as the speed increased. In this simulation, the regeneration Note that the phase currents were dc at standstill.

Fig. 16. Experimental results for charging operation in the field-weakening region (5000 r/min): (a) i∗d , id , i∗q , and iq ; (b) v d 1 , v d 2 , v q 1 , and id ;
(c) V b a t 1 , V b a t 2 , Ib a t 1 , and Ib a t 2 ; (d) the magnitude of the terminal voltage of Inverter 1, V s 1 ; A-phase current of the motor, ia s ; A-phase voltages of
Inverters 1 and 2, v a 1 and v a 2 ; (e) the magnified view of Region A; (f) the magnified view of Region B; (g) the output torque.

Fig. 14 shows the charging performance when the motor was factor of Inverter 1 was achieved after the charging started.
running at 300 r/min. Note from Fig. 14 (d) that the phase voltage Fig. 15(g) is a shaft torque plot drawn from the controller area
va1 increased from 27.2 to 197.5 V in order to supply charging network (CAN) data and shows that the torque was undisturbed
current to Battery 2. Note, however, that the magnitudes of the even after charging started.
motor current and torque remained fixed. Additionally, note that Fig. 16 shows an experimental result, but the speed was as
82% of the voltage of Inverter 1 was used for charging at this high as 5000 r/min. Before charging, Inverter 1 was already uti-
low-speed operation. lizing its maximum voltage, as shown in Fig. 16(d). As explained
Fig. 15 shows a similar experimental result, but the speed was in Section III-C, the operation point moved to increase the d-axis
increased to 2000 r/min with an 80-Nm load torque (17 kW). current from −60 to −145.7 A, as shown in Fig. 16(a). Thereby,
Note from Fig. 15 (d) that the phase voltage va1 was increased a new voltage margin was developed [observe that Vs1 changed
from 117.5 to 207 V, the maximum phase voltage available from 207 to 133.3 V in Fig. 16(d)]. As the charging started, Vs1
from the 360-V dc link. With the unity power factor option, increased to 207 V again, providing Inverter 2 with a voltage
the charging current reached 60 A, which was the maximum [see vd2 , vq 2 in Fig. 16(b)]. The charging current was 75 A, as
effort. At this time, 43% of the voltage of Inverter 1 was used shown in Fig. 16(c). Fig. 16(e) and (f) shows magnified views
for charging. Fig. 15 (e) and (f) shows the magnified views of the inverter terminal voltages along with the current before
of the terminal voltages and currents of Inverter 1 and 2 along and after battery charging, respectively. It should be noted that
with current before and after battery charging, respectively. Note a negative consequence
 of this operation was a current increase
from the a-phase current ias and voltage va1 that the unity power from Is = i2d + i2q = 77 to 150 A.

Table IV provides the summary of the key working process [17] C. Rossi, G. Grandi, and P. Corbelli, “Series hybrid powertrain based on
for experiments. the dual two-level inverter,” in Proc. Optim. Electr. Electron. Equipment
OPTIM, Brasov, Romania, 2008, pp. 277–286.
[18] C. Rossi, G. Grandi, P. Corbelli, and D. Casadei, “Generation system for
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS series hybrid powertrain based on dual two-level inverter,” in Proc. Eur.
A battery charging method was proposed for a dual-inverter Power Electron. Appl. Conf., Barcelona, Spain, 2009.
[19] V. T. Somasekhar, K. Gopakumar, A. Pittet, and V. T. Ranganathan, “PWM
drive system with an open-end winding IPMSM. Throughout inverter switching strategy for a dual two-level inverter FED open-end
the paper, a secondary battery charging method was considered. winding induction motor drive with a switched neutral,” IEE Proc., Electr.
The charging scheme covered the whole speed range of the Power Appl., 2002, vol. 149, pp. 152–160
[20] V. T. Somasekhar, M. R. Baiju, and K. Gopakumar, “Dual two level in-
motor: at a standstill, in the low-speed region, and in the field- verter scheme for an open-end winding induction motor drive with a single
weakening region. At a standstill, only the d-axis current was dc power supply and improved dc bus utilization,” Proc. Inst. Electr. Eng.
used for charging in order to not produce a torque. In the field- Electr. Power Appl., vol. 151, no. 2, pp. 230–238, Mar. 2004.
[21] E. G. Shivakumar, K. Gopakumar, S. K. Sinha, A. Pittet, and V. T. Ran-
weakening region, the operating point was moved along the ganathan, “Space vector PWM control of dual inverter FED open-end
constant-torque line to a tangential intersection with a voltage winding induction motor drive,” Proc. IEEE 16th Ann. Appl. Power Elec-
limit curve to gain a potential to charge the battery. Furthermore, tron. Conf. Expo., 2000, pp. 394–404
[22] V. Oleschuk, F. Profumo, G. Griva, R. Bojoi, and A. M. Stankovic,
it was shown that the unity power factor operation of Inverter “Analysis and comparison of basic schemes of synchronized PWM for
1 yielded the maximum power to Battery 2. Evidence from the dual inverter-FED drives,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Ind. Electr., 2006,
simulation and experiments was provided that demonstrated the pp. 2455–2461.
[23] J. Kalaiselvi and S. Srinivas, “Hybrid PWMs for shaft voltage reduction
effectiveness of the proposed charging scheme. in a dual inverter FED induction motor drive,” in Proc. Conf. IEEE Ind.
Technol., Feb. 2013, pp. 539–544.
REFERENCES [24] G. Grandi and D. Ostojic, “Dual inverter space vector modulation with
power balancing capability,” in Proc. IEEE Reg. Conf. EUROCON, St.
[1] K. Rajashekara, “Present status and future trends in electric vehicle propul- Petersburg, Russia, May 18–23, 2009, pp. 721–728.
sion technologies,” IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Topics Power Electron., vol. 1, [25] M. R. Baiju, K. K. Mohapatra, R. S. Kanchan, and K. Gopakumar, “A
no. 1, pp. 3–10, Mar. 2013. dual two-level inverter scheme with common mode voltage elimination
[2] F. Z. Peng, “Z-source inverter,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 39, no. 2, for an induction motor drive,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 504–510, Mar./Apr. 2003. pp. 794–805, May 2004.
[3] H. Stemmler and P. Guggenbach, “Configurations of high-power voltage [26] V. T. Somasekhar, S. Srinivas, and K. K. Kumar, “Effect of zero-vector
source inverter drives,” in Proc.Fifth Eur. Conf. Power Electron. Appl., placement in a dual-inverter FED open-end winding induction-motor drive
1993, vol. 5, pp. 7–14. with a decoupled space-vector PWM strategy,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl.,
[4] H. Stemmler, “High-power industrial drives,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 82, no. 8, vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 2497–2505, Jun. 2008.
pp. 1266–1286, 1994. [27] D. Casadei, G. Grandi, A. Lega, C. Rossi, and L. Zarri, “Switching tech-
[5] T. Kawabata, E. C. Ejiogu, Y. Kawabata, and K. Nishiyama, “New open- nique for dual-two level inverter supplied by two separate sources,” in
winding configurations for high power inverters,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Elec. Conf., Anaheim, CA, USA, 2007, pp. 1522–
Ind. Electron., 1997, vol. 2, pp. 457–462. 1528.
[6] Y. Kawabata, M. Nasu, T. Nomoto, E. C. Ejiogu, and T. Kawabata, “High [28] D. Casadei, G. Grandi, A. Lega, and C. Rossi, “Multilevel operation and
efficiency and low acoustic noise drive system using open-winding AC input power balancing for a dual two-level inverter with insulated dc
motor and two space-vector-modulated inverters,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec- sources,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1815–1824, Nov.
tron., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 783–789, Aug. 2002. 2008.
[7] K. A. Corzine, S. D. Sudhoff, and C. A. Whitcomb, “Performance charac- [29] C. Rossi, D. Casadei, G. Grandi, and A. Lega, “Multilevel operation
teristics of a cascaded two-level converter,” IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., and input power balancing for a dual two-level inverter with insulated dc
vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 433–439, Sep. 1999. sources,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1815–1824, Nov./Dec.
[8] B. A. Welchko and J. M. Nagashima, “The influence of topology selection 2008.
on the design of EV/HEV propulsion systems,” IEEE Power Electron. [30] Y. Wang, D. Pan, T. A. Lipo, and D. Pan, “Open-winding power conversion
Lett., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 36–40, Jun. 2003. systems FED by half-controlled converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron.,
[9] M. S. Kwak and S. K. Sul, “Flux weakening control of an open winding vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 2427–2436, May 2013.
machine with isolated dual inverters,” in Proc. Ind. Appl. Conf., 2007, [31] M. Einhorn, W. Roessler, and J. Fleig, “Improved performance of serially
pp. 251–255. connected li-ion batteries with active cell balancing in electric vehicles,”
[10] J. Kim, J. Jung, and K. Nam, “Dual-inverter control strategy for high-speed IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 2448–2457, Jul. 2011.
operation of EV induction motors,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 51, [32] D. Zwillinger, CRC Standard Mathematical Tables and Formulae. Boca
no. 2, pp. 312–320, Apr. 2004. Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 1996.
[11] J. Ewanchuk, J. Salmon, and C. Chapelsky, “A method for supply voltage [33] K. H. Nam, AC Motor Control and Electric Vehicle Applications. Boca
boosting in an open-ended induction machine using a dual inverter system Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2010.
with a floating capacitor bridge,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 28, [34] S. Morimoto, Y. Takeda, T. Hirasa, and K. Taniguchi, “Expansion of
no. 3, pp. 1348–1356, Mar. 2013. operation limits for permanent magnet motor by current vector control
[12] J. S. Park and K. Nam, “Dual inverter strategy for high speed operation considering inverter capacity,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 30, pp. 866–
of HEV permanent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. IEEE Ind. Appl. 871, Sep./Oct. 1990.
Conf., Oct. 2006, no. 1, pp. 488–494.
[13] D. Pan, F. Liang, Y. Wang, and T. A. Lipo, “Extention of the operating
region of an IPM motor utilizing series compensation,” in Proc. IEEE
Energy Convers. Congr. Expo., Sep. 2012, pp. 823–830. Jinseok Hong (S’08) was born in Incheon, Korea, in
[14] Y. Lee and J. I. Ha, “Power enhancement of dual inverter for open-end per- 1982. He received the B.S. degree in electrical en-
manent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power Electron. gineering and mechanical engineering from Hongik
Conf. Expo., Mar. 2013, pp. 1545–1551. University, Seoul, Korea, in 2007, and the M.S. de-
[15] Y. Lee and J. I. Ha, “Six step phase modulation of dual inverter for openend gree in electrical engineering in 2009 from Pohang
permanent magnet synchronous motor,” in Proc. Energy Convers. Congr. University of Science and Technology, Pohang, Ko-
Expo., Sep. 2013, pp. 3874–3879. rea, where he is currently working toward the Ph.D.
[16] B. A. Welchko, “A double-ended inverter system for the combined propul- degree.
sion and energy management functions in hybrid vehicles with energy His research interests include design, analysis, and
storage,” in Proc. IEEE 31st Annu. Conf. Ind. Electron. Soc., Raleigh, control of power electronic systems, ac motor drive,
NC, USA, Nov. 6–10, 2005, pp. 1401–1406. and electric vehicle.

Heekwang Lee (S’14) was born in Seoul, Korea, in Kwanghee Nam (S’83–M’86) was born in Seoul,
1988. He received the B.S. degree in electronic en- Korea, in 1956. He received the B.S. degree in chem-
gineering from Chungnam National University, Dea- ical technology and the M.S. degree in control and in-
jeon, Korea, in 2012. He is currently working toward strumentation engineering from Seoul National Uni-
the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering at the Po- versity, Seoul, Korea, in 1980 and 1982, respectively,
hang University of Science and Technology, Pohang, and the M.S. degree in mathematics and the Ph.D.
Korea. degree in electrical engineering from the University
His research interests include the design, analysis, of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA, in 1986.
and control of power electronic systems, ac motor From 1998 to 2000, he was the Director of the In-
drive, and electric vehicle. formation Research Laboratories and the Dean of the
Graduate School of Information Technology, Pohang
University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang, Korea, where he
is currently a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering. His current
research interests include ac motor control, power converters, motor design,
and electric vehicle. Now, he is director of POSTECH E-Car Research Center,
developing electric power train. He is the author of a book, “AC Motor Control
and Electrical Vehicle Applications,” published by CRC Press.
Best Paper Award in 2000.