A Modified Inverse Vector Hysteresis Model for Nonoriented Electrical Steels Considering Anisotropy for FEA

Abstract

This paper presents a modified Mayergoyz-based vector hysteresis model to describe the anisotropic material behavior of nonoriented (NO) steels over a wide range of rotational excitations. The proposed model adopts a new representation of a vector Everett function, which is actually an elliptical interpolation motivated by the real anisotropic behavior of NO steel, to deal with the uniaxial anisotropy characteristic, which is especially pronounced at low induction levels. The biaxial anisotropy occurring at high densities is described by a nonlinear coefficient, which is actually a function of the magnitude of magnetic flux density. A systematic identification algorithm is given in detail. The validity of this model is verified through comparison with experimental data under both alternating and rotational excitations. The 2-D finite element analysis (FEA) of incorporating this model into TEAM problem 32 simulation is also illustrated.

An Energy-Based Anisotropic Vector Hysteresis Model for Rotational Electromagnetic Core Loss

“…The transverse direction (TD) of the sample is along the x-axis and the rolling direction (RD) is along the y-axis. A detailed description of the measurement setup and the approach followed hereinafter is given in [6].…”

“…To overcome this problem, other researchers added exponential and phase shift terms to the expression of projection to consider the anisotropy, but these developed models reproduce inaccurately the change of anisotropy with the amplitude of magnetization. Alternatively, the vector properties can be modeled in spite of an excessive computational effort for the parameter identification [5], [6]. There is a vector Preisach model that can simulate the rotational loss by the transformation of variables, whereas it is isotropic [7].…”

Internal Characterization of Magnetic Cores, Comparison to Finite Element Simulations: A Route for Dimensioning and Condition Monitoring

“…For these positions, the comparisons are inaccurate and considerably alter quantitative evaluation. Different paths can be followed to improve these results: from the simulation perspective, alternative vectorial hysteresis models have been described in scientific literature [24], [66]- [67]. Accuracy was claimed to be improved and will be evaluated in the future.…”

Comparison between different models of magnetic hysteresis in the solution of the TEAM 32 problem

“…With the progress of more powerful computers and suitable numerical algorithms, the dynamic magnetic power losses can be estimated by the computation of the magnetic field and the magnetic flux density in time, with the help of numerical techniques to solve Maxwell's equations, such as finite difference time domain (FDTD) or finite element analysis (FEA). [20][21][22][23][24] In order to get better accuracy and correctly reproduce the nonlinear and hysteretic behavior of the electrical steels, the Preisach 25 and the Jiles-Atherton 26 models have been widely proposed and used in literature, coupled to a finite-element method (FEM) for the computation of the dynamic losses in magnetic cores. In this case, the hysteresis and eddy current losses can be better estimated, while the additional losses are evaluated by suitable post-processing formulations.…”