Upgrade to PRO for Only $50/Yearโ€”Limited-Time Offer! ๐Ÿ”ฅ

210518_iemdc

Avatar for yuki yuki
May 18, 2021
140

ย 210518_iemdc

Avatar for yuki

yuki

May 18, 2021
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Investigation of Irreversible Demagnetization Constraints in Magnet Volume Minimization Design

    of IPMSM for Automotive Applications Using Machine Learning Osaka Prefecture University, Japan โ—ŽYuki Shimizu, Shigeo Morimoto, Masayuki Sanada, and Yukinori Inoue 2021/5/18 IEMDC 2021
  2. 2 Agenda โšซ Research background and purpose โšซ Construction of

    surrogate models - Generation of training data - Feature engineering โšซ Permanent magnet volume minimization design โšซ Conclusion
  3. 3 โœ“ Motors are used in a variety of products

    that run on electricity โšซ Electric Vehicles โšซ Drones โšซ Industrial Robots โœ“ IPMSMs have been widely adopted for such applications *IPMSM: Interior Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Stator core Rotor core Permanent magnet (high cost) About IPMSM
  4. 4 Issue with IPMSMs for Automotive Applications โœ“ IPMSMs for

    automotive applications face the problem of a long development period Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Because characteristics computations are performed for each element, characteristics analysis is highly time-intensive Characteristics in a Wide Speed Range To obtain driving characteristics within a speed-torque region, FEA must be performed repeatedly under various current conditions Torque Speed The speed-torque characteristics under various current conditions
  5. 5 Surrogate Model Construction โœ“ Surrogate models trained by machine

    learning reduce design time Structure Surrogate Model Surrogate model Structure Speed Torque Driving characteristics Finite Element Analysis (FEA) FEA A few hours to a few days A few seconds Speed Torque Driving characteristics
  6. 6 Previous Research โœ“ Proposed surrogate models that can accurately

    predict the speed-torque characteristics and minimized permanent magnet volume in a shorter time โœ“ Irreversible demagnetization was not considered 0 500 1000 1500 2000 FEAใฎใฟ ๆๆกˆๆณ• Computation time (hour) 1762 hour 78.5 hour ร— ๐Ÿ ๐Ÿ๐Ÿ Reduced permanent magnet volume Proposed Y. Shimizu et al., SAMCON2021, TT2-1 (2021) Design time to minimize magnet volume under torque constraint Conventional Only FEA (estimated) Surrogate Model Demagnetization properties were not considered, and permanent magnets are too thin
  7. 7 Speed Torque IPMSM shape Speed-torque characteristics Predicted by machine

    learning โœ“ Propose a surrogate model construction method that can accurately predict the irreversible demagnetization of the permanent magnets of IPMSMs for automotive applications โœ“ Minimize the permanent magnet volumes with the trained surrogate models and show that our surrogate models can reduce the design time significantly Presentation Contents Irreversible demagnetization characteristics (This research)
  8. 8 Agenda โšซ Research background and purpose โšซ Construction of

    surrogate models - Generate training data - Select input/output variables โšซ Permanent magnet volume minimization design โšซ Conclusion
  9. 9 Example Fig. Settings for geometrical parameters d 9 d

    8 (r 1 ,ฮธ 1 ) d 2 *Polar coordinate with the axis center as the origin Settings for Geometrical Parameters โœ“ Set geometrical parameters based on the rotor geometry of the double-layered IPMSM [2] โœ“ Generate random numbers within the range of the upper and lower limit values of the geometry, and generate 12,000 shapes [2] Y. Shimizu et al., IEEJ Trans. Ind. Appl., Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 401-408 (2017)
  10. 10 Analysis Conditions for Irreversible Demagnetization โœ“ The analysis conditions

    and evaluation method for irreversible demagnetization are as follows How to Evaluate Irreversible Demagnetization Evaluate demagnetization by comparing the minimum flux density of each magnet with the knee point The mesh width of the magnet edge is fixed to 0.5 mm regardless of the shape Phase currents are randomly generated 12,000 conditions between 50~250% of the maximum value Current Vector Conditions ~134ร— (0.5,2.5) (Arms) e I U ( , ) U a b : Uniform distribution on interval (a,b) a b Probability Maximum value : Magnetization direction Current phase is fixed under ฮฒ=90ยฐ
  11. 11 d 9 d 8 (r 1 ,ฮธ 1 )

    d 2 d 1w a 1 (r 2 ,ฮธ 2 ) (r 3 ,ฮธ 3 ) a 2 Selecting Input Variables โœ“ Important dimensions are selected with the library Boruta and used for learning โœ“ To improve the prediction accuracy, dimensions other than the geometrical parameters are included as options Boruta: Feature selection methods using random forest and hypothesis testing Red: Geometrical parameter Black: Dimension automatically determined from geometrical parameter
  12. 12 Selecting Output Variables โœ“ Since flux density of each

    magnet is nonlinear around the knee point, apparent permeance coefficient is set as the prediction target Number of cases Apparent permeance coefficient P c 0 min c min B P H ๏ญ = Minimum value of flux density (T) Number of cases Histogram of FEA results for 12,000 cases Nonlinear behavior below the knee point B-H Curve of NMX-S49CH (at 60ยฐC) -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 -1000 -750 -500 -250 0 H [kA/m] B [T] B min H min Remove nonlinearities 2nd layer/ side 2nd layer/ side Working point
  13. 13 Prediction Results โœ“ Learning apparent permeance coefficients by Gaussian

    process regression โœ“ Prediction accuracies are high and no overfitting occurs Gaussian Process Regression e selected I ๏ƒฆ ๏ƒถ = ๏ƒง ๏ƒท ๏ƒจ ๏ƒธ x x Feature Target 0 min c min B P H ๏ญ = Predicted P c r2=0.970 r2=0.968 train test 2nd layer/Center Predicted P c Analyzed P c train test r2=0.992 r2=0.988 1st layer Predicted P c r2=0.977 r2=0.976 train test 2nd layer/Side 2nd layer/Side 2nd layer/Center 1st layer ๐’™๐‘ ๐‘’๐‘™๐‘’๐‘๐‘ก๐‘’๐‘‘ : Dimension vector selected by Boruta Analyzed P c Analyzed P c Analyzed P c Analyzed P c Analyzed P c Predicted P c Predicted P c Predicted P c r2: the coefficient of determination (higher is better)
  14. 14 Agenda โšซ Research background and purpose โšซ Construction of

    surrogate models - Generation of training data - Feature engineering โšซ Permanent magnet volume minimization design โšซ Conclusion
  15. 15 Minimizing PM Volume by Real-Coded GA โœ“ Minimize the

    permanent magnet volumes with a combination of the surrogate models and real-coded genetic algorithm Fitness function (minimization) ๐‘‰(๐ฑ๐‘”๐‘’๐‘œ๐‘š ): PM volume ๐‘‰๐‘–๐‘›๐‘–๐‘ก : PM volume of initial shape (100cm3) ๐‘“๐‘–๐‘ก๐‘›๐‘’๐‘ ๐‘  = ๐‘‰(๐ฑ ๐‘”๐‘’๐‘œ๐‘š ) ๐‘‰ ๐‘–๐‘›๐‘–๐‘ก + ๐‘ƒ๐ด๐ท + ๐‘ƒ๐‘‡ + ๐‘ƒ๐‘‘๐‘’๐‘š๐‘Ž๐‘” AD constraint Demag. constraint Torque constraint Initialized PM volume AD (Applicability domain) constraints *OCSVM: One-Class Support Vector Machine ใƒปSet the applicability domain using OCSVM ใƒปUse geometrical parameters of training dataset x geom (1) x geom (2) ๏ผštraining data Decision boundary Applicability domain Penalty function ( ) ( ) ( ) max 0, AD geom OCSVM geom P f = โˆ’ x x ๐‘“๐‘‚๐ถ๐‘†๐‘‰๐‘€ : output of OCSVM ๏ผˆnegative when outside AD๏ผ‰ *Applicability domain: Area where the accuracy of a model is guaranteed
  16. 16 Other Constraints โœ“ Minimize the permanent magnet volumes with

    a combination of the surrogate models and real number genetic algorithm Demag. constraints; assumes 100% and 150% of the maximum current -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 -1000 -750 -500 -250 0 H [kA/m] B [T] 150%: ๐ต๐‘—๐‘ข๐‘‘๐‘”๐‘’ = 0.122T (by 3% demag. line) 100%: ๐ต๐‘—๐‘ข๐‘‘๐‘”๐‘’ = 0.245T Knee point Penalty function ๐ต ๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘‘ (๐‘–) : Prediction results of the minimum flux density of each PM ( ) max 0, i judge pred demag i judge B B P B ๏ƒฆ ๏ƒถ โˆ’ = ๏ƒง ๏ƒท ๏ƒง ๏ƒท ๏ƒจ ๏ƒธ ๏ƒฅ Penalty when lower than B judge Torque constraints ๐‘ƒ ๐ฑgeom = max 0,197 ร— 1.03 โˆ’ ๐‘‡๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘‘1 + max 0,40 ร— 1.03 โˆ’ ๐‘‡๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘‘2 ๐‘‡๐‘๐‘Ÿ๐‘’๐‘‘1,2 : Torque prediction N T P B 11000min-1 P A 40Nm 197Nm 3000min-1 Penalty when not satisfied Prediction T pred1 T pred2 Penalty function
  17. 17 Results of Shape Optimization โœ“ Reduced PM volume while

    satisfying the required drive points Conventional shape Best shape Reduced PM volume by 26.2% Torque (Nm) Speed (min-1) I em = 134 A P A P B Fig. Speed-torque characteristics of the best shape. Satisfy required points PM volume (p.u.) Generation Fig. Speed-torque characteristics of the best shape. Terminated in the 166th generation
  18. 18 Demagnetization Characteristics of Best Shape โœ“ The first layer

    magnet at 150% current is closest to the constraint โœ“ Best shape satisfies demagnetization constraint Fig. Minimum flux density of the best shape 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 1ๅฑค็›ฎ 2ๅฑค็›ฎ ไธญๅคฎ 2ๅฑค็›ฎ ใ‚ตใ‚คใƒ‰ 1ๅฑค็›ฎ 2ๅฑค็›ฎ ไธญๅคฎ 2ๅฑค็›ฎ ใ‚ตใ‚คใƒ‰ ๅฎšๆ ผ100%้€š้›ปๆ™‚ ๅฎšๆ ผ150%้€š้›ปๆ™‚ Minimum flux density (T) ไบˆๆธฌ FEA Reqd: 0.245T Reqd: 0.122T 100% of the maximum current 0.8 0.1 Flux density in the magnetization direction [T] A margin against required value โ‡’Torque constraint is active 150% of the maximum current Pred. 1st layer 2nd layer/ Center 2nd layer/ Side 1st layer 2nd layer/ Center 2nd layer/ Side OK NG
  19. 19 Comparison of Optimization Design Time โœ“ The total computation

    time of the proposed method can be reduced to less than 1/32nd Fig. Computation time for optimization design (lower is better) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 FEAใฎใฟ ๆๆกˆๆณ• Computation time (hour) 2280 hour 70.5 hour ร— ๐Ÿ ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ Only FEA (estimated) Proposed method
  20. 20 Agenda โšซ Research background and purpose โšซ Construction of

    surrogate models - Generation of training data - Feature engineering โšซ Permanent magnet volume minimization design โšซ Conclusion
  21. 21 Conclusion โœ“ Proposed a surrogate model construction method that

    can accurately predict the irreversible demagnetization characteristics by using Gaussian process regression โšซ Select geometrical parameters for features using Boruta โšซ Set the prediction target to the apparent permeance coefficient โœ“ Proposed shapes that 26.2% reduced the PM volumes while satisfying the required torques and demagnetization characteristics using the surrogate models and real-coded genetic algorithm โœ“ The proposed method took less than 1/32nd of the optimization design time compared to FEA-only design