International Journal of Applied Power Engineering (IJAPE)

Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022, pp. 251~263

ISSN: 2252-8792, DOI: 10.11591/ijape.v11.i4.pp251-263  251

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems

with permanent magnet synchronous machine

Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje1, Candidus Ugwuoke Eya2

1
Department Electrical Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
2
Department Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: Permanent magnet synchronous machines (PMSMs) are gaining popularity
due to renewable energy and the electrification of transportation. Permanent
Received Aug 12, 2022 magnet synchronous machines are receiving interest because of their great
Revised Oct 20, 2022 dependability, low maintenance costs, and high-power density. This research
Accepted Oct 27, 2022 compares surface mounted permanent magnet (SMPM) with interior
permanent magnet (IPM) synchronous machines using MATLAB.
Mathematical models and simulation analyses of two permanent magnet
Keywords: synchronous machines under regenerative braking are presented. Maximum
regeneration power point (MRPP) and torque (MRPP-torque) for two
Field oriented control machine types were simulated at variable electrical speed and q-axis current.
IPMSM Simulation results showed IPMSM produced more output power due to
Mathematical modeling saliency than SMPM at varying speed and current with higher MRPP and
MRPP MRPP-Torque. Simulation was used to compare the dynamic impacts of
MRPP-torque constant and variable braking torques on an auto-electric drive's speed and
Regenerative braking produced torque on a plain surface and a sloppy driving plane. 81.68% and
SMPM 74.95% braking efficiency were measured on level ground and a sloppy
Three-level VSI plane, respectively. Simulations indicated that lithium-ion battery state of
charge varied linearly with constant braking torque and exponentially with
varying braking torque, reflecting efficiency values. All simulations were in
MATLAB/Simulink 2014.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje
Department Electrical Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Port
Port Harcourt, Nigeria
Email: crescent.omeje@uniport.edu.ng

1. INTRODUCTION
The inherent environmental challenges and sporadic energy dissipations associated with fossil fuel
operated automobiles have drawn much needed attentions to the evolution of new energy saving vehicles that
is environmentally benign. To achieve the proposed plan for sustainable development (SD) on climate
change, energy availability and affordability is crucial. Though concerted effort is being made by several
nations around the world towards the search for sustainable and renewable energy (RE) source that will
supplement the energy requirements with due considerations to factors such as the increasing demand for
energy, the decline in fossil fuel reserves, CO2 reduction and global climate change [1].
The necessities of adopting battery operated electric vehicles with the obvious advantages of high
efficiency and zero gas emissions have intensively been researched upon and implemented in most
automotive industries. This method appears to have its specific limitations which are embedded in the driving
range and cost of battery size [2]. These limitations have been addressed through the regenerative braking
process and energy recycling method as referenced in [3]. During a regenerative braking process, the electric

Journal homepage: http://ijape.iaescore.com

252  ISSN: 2252-8792

automobile operates as a generator and releases electrical energy that is recycled to charge the batteries of the
electric vehicle through a power electronic bidirectional converter [4]. A hybrid energy storage system
(HESS) by composition is made up of energy recharged batteries with ultra-capacitor bank. This has been
adopted to significantly improve the driving range limitations of most electric automobiles [5].
Regenerative braking has a great advantage to electric vehicles than the conventional vehicles.
Kinetic energy usually is been recovered to energy storage devices than been wasted as heat [6], [7]. At low-
speed range where insufficient braking torque is delivered, plug braking becomes very essential however
energy is drawn out of the battery instead of being recovered in the process [8]. In recent time, high
performance with proven high density powered permanent magnet synchronous machine is been deployed as
a major traction motor in the drive system of most electric vehicles [9]. A major concern in permanent
magnet synchronous machines (PMSM) design is traced to the nature and type of permanent magnet material
used. Neodymium iron-boron (Nd2Fe3B) stands as the finest option with regard to its excellent B-H
characteristic though its high cost and limited supply poses a challenge [10].
IPMSM and SMPM forms the two main types of permanent magnet synchronous machine
obtainable with respect to the placement of the magnets on the rotor. SMPM has its magnet mounted directly
at the surface which makes it adaptable to low-speed application. The motor has equal inductance which
implies that the d-axis inductance is equal to the q-axis inductance (Ld=Lq) and therefore the saliency is
entirely zero [11]. SMPM power output is relative to the magnetic excitation. The interior permanent magnet
machine has its magnet positioned inside the rotor and is applied in high-speed operation. The motor has
saliency since quadrature-axis inductance is always greater than the direct-axis inductance (Lq>Ld). Hence,
presence of saliency results in an appreciable cumulative power output than the SMPM. Figures 1(a) and 1(b)
present the magnet arrangement in the rotor of IPMSM and SMPM.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 1 the introductory section; Section 2 is reviewed
literature of related work; Section 3 is the research methods which enumerated the mathematical models of
the machine showing the maximum regenerative power point MRPP and MRPP-Torque; Section 4 presents
the simulation results while part V is the conclusions and recommendations.

(a) (b)

Figure 1. The structure of (a) IPMSM and (b) SPMSM

2. RELATED WORKS
Currently, most electric vehicles are basically designed on the principles of reformative braking
which imply converting a seemingly lost energy during brake back into the battery via the power inverter. A
compact reformative braking scheme for electric automobiles development was presented in [12]. Research
work carried out in [13], discussed the regenerative braking, modeling and control of the machine in extreme
condition. In [14], a combined three torque control methods in regenerative braking design was elaborated.
Some published research works have dwelt on the system braking design of electric motors based on short-
circuit braking which converts motor back-EMF directly to braking torque [15], [16]. Though this technology
is applied to electric bicycles and motorcycles, its speed limitation and losses makes it very inefficient. The
short circuit braking is another approach which can be amended through a reverse field brake with rheostat.
This method can be applied at any speed as proposed in [17]. The maximum torque per ampere (MTPA)
control is adopted as the preferred control method applied in driving the IPMSM in electric vehicle due to the
high torque capability at low speed and wide speed range as reported in [18]. The significance of maximum
torque per ampere (MTPA) control method is to trace the minimum current vector that gives the required
torque and current which also provides the maximum constant torque as given in [19].
In this paper, the electrical braking torque and maximum regenerative power produced by the two
selected permanent magnet synchronous machines (IPMSM and SMPM) were modelled and simulated at
varying load current and motor speed. The dynamic effects at a constant and varying braking torques of the
auto-electric drive on a plain surface and on a sloppy driving plane in terms of speed and developed torque
were also considered through simulation. The variations in the lithium-ion battery state of charge under a
constant braking torque and under a varying braking torque was also assessed through simulation. Efficiency

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  253

values of 81.68% and 74.95% were obtained during braking at a constant torque on level ground and at a varied
torque on a sloppy plane. The variation in efficiency is indicative of more energy dissipation on a sloppy plane.

3. METHOD
Braking process generally can either be classified as a constant speed braking or variable speed
braking depending on the driving state arrangement. A constant speed braking is frequently applied in the
plain sailing driving while the variable speed braking often occurs on a swift slowing down process [20]. In
both processes energy is either regenerated or recycled in a storage scheme. General hybrid energy storage
scheme in electric vehicle is shown in Figure 2(a) while the flow chart algorithm for the control operation of
the electric vehicle in terms of regenerative braking and battery state of charge is presented in Figure 2(b).

(a)

(b)

Figure 2. A hybrid energy storage scheme: (a) block diagram of battery–ultra high capacitor hybrid energy
storage system and (b) flow chart of battery powered electric vehicle

Basic operations of the HESS-system presented in Figure 2(a) are illustrated in three modes as
presented:
− Normal mode: In this mode, PMSM mechanically coupled load is fed through the battery supplied PWM
inverter scheme while the ultra-high capacitor is been charged in the process.

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)

254  ISSN: 2252-8792

− Outage mode: During a drop in the battery voltage as indicated by the voltage sensor, the ultra-capacitor
is propelled to provide the required energy to the PWM inverter through the static switch as an ancillary
measure for energy boost.
− Regenerative braking mode: When there is an electrical brake in speed with maximum energy recovery,
the battery regains its voltage and supplies the required voltage to the PWM inverter thereby maintaining
a continuous operation.
Electric braking based on field-oriented control (FOC) is achieved by applying a q-axis current in
the negative polarity to the braking torque or by controlling the motor speed to track a ramp reference that
progressively get to zero [21]. Maximum regenerative power point (MRPP) of SMPM and IPMSM for a
given motor speed is derived directly from the conventional voltage and power equations. Voltage equation
of the SMPM with the same inductance (Ld = Lq ) under dynamic state operation is given by (1).

Vde R s + SLs −Ls ωe i𝑑 0

[ e
]=[ ][ ]+[ ] (1)
Vq Ls ωe R s + SLs i𝑞 ωe ψf

Motor active electrical power is made up of copper loss and dynamic power which is given by (2).
3
Pe−SPMSM = (R s i2q + ωe ψf i𝑞 ) (2)
2

The maximum regenerative power point (MRPP) current can be obtained by setting the derivative of (2) to
zero.
dPe−SPMSM 3
= (2R s iq + ωe ψf ) (3)
diq 2

dPe−SPMSMmin 3
= (2R s iq + ωe ψf ) = 0 (4)
diq 2

The MRPP current in terms of motor speed and flux linkage is therefore given by (5).
− ψ f ωe
𝑖𝑞𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (5)
2Rs

Similarly, the maximum regenerative power is obtained by substituting in (5) into (2).
3 3 ψ f 2 ωe 2 ψ f 2 ωe 2 −3ψf 2 ωe 2
Pe−MRPP = (R s i2qmin + ωe ψf i𝑞𝑚𝑖𝑛 ) = ( − ) = (6)
2 2 4Rs 2Rs 8Rs

Dynamic voltage equation of IPMSM with different dq-axis inductance (Ld ≠ Lq ) is given by (7).

Vde R s + SLd −Lq ωe i𝑑 0

[ e
]=[ ][ ] +[ ] (7)
Vq Ld ωe R s + SLq i𝑞 ωe ψf

Motor active electrical power for the IPMSM is given by (8) with integrated copper losses, power due to
saliency and excitation.
3
Pe−IPMSM = (R s i2d + R s i2q + (Ld − Lq )ωe id iq + ωe ψf iq ) (8)
2

Maximum regenerative power point currents for the IPMSM are obtained by setting the gradient of (8) to
zero.

dPe−IPMSM 3
= (2R s id − Lq iq ωe + Ld iq ωe )
did 2
dPe−IPMSM 3 } (9)
= (2R s iq + Ld i𝑑 ωe − Lq id ωe + ωe ψf )
diq 2

At a maximum regenerative power point condition, the derivative (9) is set to zero to obtain the MRPP
currents.

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  255
dPe−IPMSM 3
= (2R s id − Lq iq ωe + Ld iq ωe ) = 0
did 2
dPe−IPMSM 3 } (10)
= (2R s iq + Ld i𝑑 ωe − Lq id ωe + ωe ψf ) = 0
diq 2

− (Ld −Lq ) ωe iq
id−min =
2Rs
} (11)
− (Ld −Lq )ωe id + ωe ψf
iq−min =
2Rs

Cross-coupling component for the minimum dq-axes current in (11) can be eliminated if the q-axis
current equation is substituted in the direct-axis current. The same substitution done for the d-axis gives rise
to the independent dq-axes current equation as presented in (12).

(Ld −Lq ) ωe 2 ψf
id−min = 2
4Rs 2 − (Ld −Lq ) ωe 2
− 2Rs ωe ψf
} (12)
iq−min = 2 2
4Rs − (Ld −Lq ) ωe 2

Substituting (12) into (8) gives rise to the maximum regenerative power as presented in (13).
3
Pe−MRPP = (R s i2d−min + R s i2q−min + ωe ψf iq−min + (Ld − Lq )ωe id−min iq−min ) (13)
2

Braking torque equations for the SMPM and IPMSM are given in (14) and (15).
3P
Te−SPMSM = (ψf iq ) (14)
4

3P
Te−IPMSM = ( ψf iq + (Ld − Lq ) id iq ) (15)
4

The maximum regenerative power point torque (MRPP-Torque) equations for the SMPM and
IPMSM are obtained by substituting in (5) and (12) into (14) and (15) which gives rise to (16) and (17).

− 3( ψf 2 P ωe )
Te−SPMSM|MRPP = (16)
8Rs

2
− 3K4
b ψf P ωe
Te−IPMSM|MRPP = × (ω 2 2 (17)
8Rs e + Kb ) (ωe −Kb )

2𝑅𝑠
Where K b = and P = pole numbers. For ease in computer simulations and accuracy, general electrical
Ld −Lq
dynamic equations of the PMSM in terms of voltage, flux linkage and currents are presented in (18)-(23).
dψds
Vds = R s ids − ωe ψqs + (18)
dt

dψqs
Vqs = R s iqs − ωe ψds + (19)
dt

ψds = ψf + 𝐿𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑑𝑠 (20)

ψqs = 𝐿𝑞𝑠 𝑖𝑞𝑠 (21)

dids Vds Rs ids Lqs ωe iqs
= − + (22)
dt Lds Lds Lds

diqs Vqs Rs iqs Lds ωe ids ωe ψ f

= − − − (23)
dt Lqs Lqs Lqs Lqs

The general mechanical dynamic equations for the PMSM are presented in (24)-(27) respectively.

dωmr
Tem = J + TL + Bωmr (24)
dt

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)

256  ISSN: 2252-8792

dωmr 1
= (Tem − TL − Bωmr ) (25)
dt 𝐽

dθr dωmr
= 𝜔𝑚𝑟 = ∫ (26)
dt dt

dθr
θr = ∫ 𝜔𝑚𝑟 = ∫ (27)
dt

The overall controlled block diagram that succinctly described the field-oriented control for the
machine discussed is presented in Figure 3. A tachometer senses the mechanical speed which is converted to
electrical speed. The electrical speed is been compared with a reference speed to generate a speed error. The
speed error generated is tuned by a PI-controller to reduce its percentage error to a minimal value. The output of
the controller serves as the d-axis reference current. Similarly, a three-phase current sensor senses the three-
phase output current from the PMSM which is been converted to αβ two phase current using the Clarks
transform.
The Parks transform is further applied to convert αβ to dq-axes currents. The dq-axes currents are
compared with their respective reference values to ascertain the percentage error value. The error generated is
reduced with the required PI-Controller to produce the assumed dq-axes voltage which is re-transformed by
the inverse Parks into three phase voltage needed in the pulse modulator. The IGBT firing signals produced
from the pulse modulator is applied in switching on the inverter which controls the PMSM. The complete
illustration is shown in Figure 3. The architectural block diagram of the PMSM battery powered electric vehicle
(BEV) is presented in Figure 4 while the Simulink model is shown in Figure 5. The detailed analysis of different
methods of regenerative braking control are presented in references [22]–[25]. The machine parameters
presented in Table 1 was applied in the realization of the simulation results for the SMPM and IPMSM.

Figure 3. Overall Controlled diagram for field-oriented control scheme of PMSM

Figure 4. Diagram of PMSM operated battery powered electric vehicle

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  257

Stator Phase C back EMF

Figure 5. Simulink diagram of PMSM operated battery powered electric vehicle

Table1. Simulation parameters of PMSM and inverter used

Variable IPMSM-machine SPMSM-machine
Power Input (kW) 40 40
Frequency Supply (Hz) 50 50
Phase voltage (V) 400 400
Switching Frequency (KHz) 4 4
Modulation Index 0.9 0.9
Resistance of the stator (Ω) 0.0906 0.2306
direct-axis stator inductance (µH) 2080 2080
quadrature-axis stator inductance (µH) 4041 2080
Moment of inertia (Kgm2) 0.025 0.025
Number of poles 8 8
Flux linkage (Weber.Turn) 0.107147 0.107147
Viscous friction (N.M.S) 0.0003035 0.0003035

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The plot of the active power against the q-axis current for the SMPM at varied speed is shown in
Figure 6(a). It is observed that as the q-axis current increases in the positive region, the active power
increases proportionately with speed whereas in the negative region the active power increases with large
negative value of speed above the synchronous value of 78.55 rad per sec. In Figure 6(b), the plot of active
power against dq-axes current for IPMSM at varied speed is presented in 3D-plot as against the 2D-plot in
Figure 6(a). A comparative analysis of the two plots in Figures 6(a) and 6(b) proved that more active power
is generated by the IPMSM than the SMPM under the same mode of operation. In Figure 7(a), the MRPP-
torque for SMPM decreases as the speed increases since it is proportional to the negative value of speed as
reflected in (16).
However, in Figure 7(b), the MRPP-torque of the IPMSM goes to infinity as speed increases and
then assumes a large negative value after a slight reduction in speed which is in conformity with equation
(17). In like manner, the slope of the maximum regenerative power in Figures 7(a) and 7(b) changes in line
with the value of MRPP-torque. This implies that MRPP increases along with the electrical braking torque
only if the absolute value of torque is smaller than the MRPP-torque in the regenerative region. Additionally,
the total amount of regenerated energy for the IPMSM is higher than that for SMPM since it has larger
MRPP-torque and maximum regenerative power point (MRPP) values. Figure 8(a) depicts the battery state of
charge, the current drawn and the voltage waveforms. The state of charge decreases linearly with the constant
braking torque while almost a zero current is being drawn from the battery. Inverter dc-link capacitor
supplied voltage is presented in Figure 8(b) while the switching signals for the one arm inverter switches are
shown in Figure 9(a). The phase and line voltages of the three-level inverter supply to the PMSM are shown
in Figure 9(b). The characteristics of the auto-electric drive system on a plain surface at constant braking
torque are illustrated in the simulation waveforms herein.

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)

258  ISSN: 2252-8792

The three-phase output current shown in Figures 10(a) indicates that at a constant braking torque of
1.3 Nm and simulation time of 0.2016 sec., the current waveform changed in response to the change in torque
and remained constant under a steady state. In Figure 10(b), the waveforms for the three phase (A, B and C)
back EMF are presented. Prior to the constant braking torque, a transient rise was obtained which decreased
in magnitude and retained a steady state value after a constant braking torque of 1.3 Nm. Figure 11(a) shows
the constant braking torque of 1.3 Nm on a plane driving surface while Figure 11(b) presents the
electromagnetic torque. It is observed that before the braking torque is applied, the electromagnetic torque
rose to 3.2473 Nm due to the rise in current on no-load and decreased to -0.9809Nm while maintaining a
steady state value of 1.98026 Nm at constant braking torque. The motor speed is presented in Figure 12(a).
At start, the motor speed rose to 35.2195 Rad per sec and decreased to 16.5 Rad per sec at constant braking
torque. The power output is presented in Figure 12(b). It is also observed that a constant power output of
32.675 kW was obtained which gave rise to a percentage efficiency value of 81.68% at a rated input power of
40 kW. Figure 13 represents the characteristic response of the battery state of charge at varied braking torque.
It depicts an exponential variation during the varying torque on a sloppy driving plane. The three-phase
output current is presented in Figure 14(a). It shows that the current waveforms changed in response to the
varying torque producing almost twice the values obtained in Figure 10(a) during a constant braking torque.
The waveforms for the three-phase back EMF are presented in Figure 14(b). It is observed that the magnitude
of the back EMF increased as a result of an increased current which is in conformity with the voltage
equation (V+IR=E) under a regenerative braking condition. The varying braking torque of the machine on a
sloppy driving plane is presented in Figure 15(a) with their various values at different application time. The
electromagnetic torque is also presented in Figure 15(b). It shows that at a maximum braking torque, the
electromagnetic torque value of 2.204Nm was achieved. In Figure 16(a), the motor speed at a varied braking
torque is presented. It is obvious that the motor speed responded swiftly to the changes in the braking torque.
The waveform in Figure 16(a) is descriptive of an auto-electric drive on a sloppy plane. The power output
obtained under a varying braking torque is shown in Figure 16(b). It is observed that the maximum power
output generated under this condition is 29.98 kW which resulted in 74.95% efficiency at a rated power input
of 40 kW. The lithium-ion battery characteristic is presented in Table 2 while the overall summary of the
machine dynamic characteristics is shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Lithium-ion battery Table 3. Dynamic characteristics of the machine at

characteristics a varying load torque
Parameters Value Driving on a plane Driving on a sloppy
Nominal Voltage (V) 48 V surface surface
Rated Capacity (AH) 80 Rated power input (kW) 40 40
Initial state of charge (%) 60 Maximum electromagnetic 1. 98026 2.204
Battery response time (mS) 30 torque (Nm)
DC-DC boost converter duty 0.8 Maximum power output (kW) 32. 6752 29. 98
cycle Efficiency value (%) 81. 68 74. 95

(a) (b)

Figure 6. Active power (W) against current (A) for (a) SMPM and (b) IPMSM

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  259

(a) (b)

Figure 7. Torque (Nm) against speed (Rad/Sec.) for (a) SMPM MRPP-torque and (b) IPMSM MRPP-torque

(a) (b)

Figure 8. A Plot of (a) battery characteristic and (b) DC-link capacitor voltage (V)

Time Series Plot: Time Series Plot: A Plot of Three-Level Inverter Phase A Voltage (V) against Time (Sec.)
Inverter Gate Signal for IGBT1

Inverter Gate Signal for IGBT2

1.5 1.5 300

IGBT1 GATE SIGNAL IGBT2 GATE SIGNAL
200

1 1 100
Van (V)

0.5 0.5 -100

-200

0 0 -300
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Time(Sec) Time(Sec) Time(Sec.)
Time Series Plot: Time Series Plot: A Plot of Three-Level Inverter Line Voltage(V) against Time (Sec.)
Inverter Gate Signal for IGBT3

Inverter Gate Signal for IGBT4

1.5 1.5 500

IGBT3 GATE SIGNAL IGBT4 GATE SIGNAL

1 1
Vab (V)

0.5 0.5

0 0 -500
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Time(Sec) Time(Sec) Time(Sec.)

(a) (b)

Figure 9. A plot of (a) gate signals for the inverter switches and (b) phase and line voltages
of the three-level inverter

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)

260  ISSN: 2252-8792

(a) (b)

Figure 10. A Plot of (a) three phase output current (A) against time (S) and (b) three phase back EMF (V)
against time (S)

(a) (b)

Figure 11.A plot of (a) braking torque (Nm) against time (S) and
(b) electromagnetic torque (Nm) against time (S)

(a) (b)

Figure 12. A plot of (a) motor speed (Rad/Sec) against time (S) and (b) power output (kW) against time (S)

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  261

Figure 13. Plot of battery characteristic against time (S)

(a) (b)

Figure 14. A plot of (a) three phase output current (A) against time (S) and
(b) three phase back EMF (V) against time (S)

(a) (b)

Figure 15. A plot of (a) braking torque (Nm) against time (S) and
(b) electromagnetic torque (Nm) against time (S)

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)

262  ISSN: 2252-8792

(a) (b)

Figure 16. A plot of (a) motor speed (rad per Sec) against time (S) and
(b) power output (kW) against time (S)

4. CONCLUSION
Regenerative braking in PMSM was discussed in this work and illustrated with simulations. The
simulation results obtained indicated that more active power is generated by the IPMSM than the SMPM
under the same operational condition. The total regenerated energy for the IPMSM is higher than that
obtained for the SMPM due to the higher values in the maximum regenerative power point (MRPP) and
MRPP-torque. The dynamic effects at a constant and varying braking torque on a plain and on a sloppy
driving surface in terms of speed and developed torque were evaluated with simulation. Efficiency values of
81.68% and 74.95% were obtained while braking with a constant torque on level ground and with varied
torque on a sloppy plane. The lithium-ion battery state of charge also decreased linearly with the constant
braking torque and exponentially varied with the varying braking torque which is reflective of the variation in
the efficiency values. The research findings therefore showcased the characteristic differences in running
performance of the auto-electric drive at different operating surfaces which is very essential to design
engineers in component selection and speed regulation. Dearth of adequate laboratory facilities formed the
major limitations of the research validation and Future Scope is therefore geared towards real life
implementation.

REFERENCES
[1] C. Kuamoah, “Renewable Energy Deployment in Ghana: The Hype, Hope and Reality,” Insight on Africa, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 45–
64, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1177/0975087819898581.
[2] S. Heydari, P. Fajri, N. Lotfi, and B. Falahati, “Influencing Factors in Low Speed Regenerative Braking Performance of Electric
Vehicles,” in 2018 IEEE Transportation Electrification Conference and Expo (ITEC), Jun. 2018, pp. 494–499, doi:
10.1109/ITEC.2018.8450260.
[3] S. Heydari, P. Fajri, M. Rasheduzzaman, and R. Sabzehgar, “Maximizing regenerative braking energy recovery of electric
vehicles through dynamic low-speed cutoff point detection,” IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 262–270, 2019, doi:
10.1109/TTE.2019.2894942.
[4] K. H. Nam, AC Motor Control and Electrical Vehicle Applications. 2018.
[5] F. Naseri, E. Farjah, and T. Ghanbari, “An efficient regenerative braking system based on battery/supercapacitor for electric,
hybrid, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles with BLDC motor,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 66, no. 5, pp. 3724–3738, 2017,
doi: 10.1109/TVT.2016.2611655.
[6] X. Zhang, D. Gohlich, and J. Li, “Energy-Efficient Toque Allocation Design of Traction and Regenerative Braking for
Distributed Drive Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 285–295, Jan. 2018, doi:
10.1109/TVT.2017.2731525.
[7] S. Heydari, P. Fajri, R. Sabzehgar, and M. Rasouli, “A Novel Approach for Maximizing Regenerative Braking Energy Extraction
of Electric Vehicles Using Motor Performance Lookup Table,” ITEC 2019 - 2019 IEEE Transp. Electrif. Conf. Expo, 2019, doi:
10.1109/ITEC.2019.8790633.
[8] P. Suntharalingam, “Kinetic energy recovery and power management for hybrid electric vehicles,” Main, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 3428–
3440, 2011, [Online]. Available: http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/6154.
[9] C. H. Tu, Y. C. Chang, C. L. Lin, and V. T. Liu, “Motor driving/braking control scheme with integration of multiple driving
components,” Asian J. Control, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1110–1120, 2021, doi: 10.1002/asjc.2417.
[10] M. Sanada, Y. Inoue, and S. Morimoto, “Structure and Characteristics of High-Performance PMASynRM with Ferrite Magnets,”
Electr. Eng. Japan, vol. 187, no. 1, pp. 42–50, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1002/eej.22362.
[11] N. Mohan, Advanced Electric Drives: Analysis, Control, and Modeling Using MATLAB/Simulink, vol. 9781118485. 2014.

Int J Appl Power Eng, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 2022: 251-263
Int J Appl Power Eng ISSN: 2252-8792  263

[12] G. Tzortzis, A. Amargianos, S. Piperidis, E. Koutroulis, and N. C. Tsourveloudis, “Development of a compact regenerative
braking system for electric vehicles,” 2015 23rd Mediterr. Conf. Control Autom. MED 2015 - Conf. Proc., pp. 102–108, 2015,
doi: 10.1109/MED.2015.7158736.
[13] K. Itani, A. De Bernardinis, Z. Khatir, A. Jammal, and M. Oueidat, “Regenerative braking modeling, control, and simulation of a
hybrid energy storage system for an electric vehicle in extreme conditions,” IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 465–
479, 2016, doi: 10.1109/TTE.2016.2608763.
[14] K. Itani, A. De Bernardinis, Z. Khatir, and A. Jammal, “Optimal traction and regenerative braking reference current synthesis for
an IPMSM motor using three combined torque control methods for an Electric Vehicle,” 2016 IEEE Transp. Electrif. Conf. Expo,
ITEC 2016, 2016, doi: 10.1109/ITEC.2016.7520214.
[15] S.-M. Liu, C.-H. Tu, C.-L. Lin, and V.-T. Liu, “Field-Oriented Driving/Braking Control for Electric Vehicles,” Electronics, vol.
9, no. 9, p. 1484, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.3390/electronics9091484.
[16] W. C. Lin, C. L. Lin, P. M. Hsu, and M. T. Wu, “Realization of anti-lock braking strategy for electric scooters,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 2826–2833, 2014, doi: 10.1109/TIE.2013.2276775.
[17] M. K. L. C.I. Lin, C.H. Tu, Method of adjusting Electro- Magnetic Braking Force for Electric bikes. Taiwan: Taiwan Patent,
2018.
[18] K. M. Choo and C. Y. Won, “Design and Analysis of Electrical Braking Torque Limit Trajectory for Regenerative Braking in
Electric Vehicles with PMSM Drive Systems,” IEEE Trans. Power Electron., vol. 35, no. 12, pp. 13308–13321, 2020, doi:
10.1109/TPEL.2020.2994615.
[19] S. Lim, “Sensor less-FOC with flux-weakening and MTPA for IPMSM motor Drives,” Texas Instrum. Inc. Dallas Texas, 2018.
[20] P. Fajri, S. Heydari, and N. Lotfi, “Optimum low speed control of regenerative braking for electric vehicles,” 2017 6th Int. Conf.
Renew. Energy Res. Appl. ICRERA 2017, vol. 2017-Janua, pp. 875–879, 2017, doi: 10.1109/ICRERA.2017.8191185.
[21] H. Gashtil, V. Pickert, D. Atkinson, D. Giaouris, and M. Dahidah, “Comparative Evaluation of Field Oriented Control and Direct
Torque Control Methodologies in Field Weakening Regions for Interior Permanent Magnet Machines,” in 2019 IEEE 13th
International Conference on Compatibility, Power Electronics and Power Engineering (CPE-POWERENG), Apr. 2019, pp. 1–6,
doi: 10.1109/CPE.2019.8862320.
[22] Y. Lian, Y. Zhao, L. Hu, and Y. Tian, “Longitudinal Collision Avoidance Control of Electric Vehicles Based on a New Safety
Distance Model and Constrained-Regenerative-Braking-Strength-Continuity Braking Force Distribution Strategy,” IEEE Trans.
Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 4079–4094, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2015.2498949.
[23] W. Xu, H. Zhao, B. Ren, and H. Chen, “A regenerative braking control strategy for electric vehicle with four in-wheel motors,” in
2016 35th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Jul. 2016, pp. 8671–8676, doi: 10.1109/ChiCC.2016.7554741.
[24] G. Xu, K. Xu, C. Zheng, X. Zhang, and T. Zahid, “Fully Electrified Regenerative Braking Control for Deep Energy Recovery and
Maintaining Safety of Electric Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 1186–1198, 2016, doi:
10.1109/TVT.2015.2410694.
[25] C. D. Xu and K. W. E. Cheng, “All-electric intelligent anti-lock braking controller for electric vehicle under complex road
condition,” 2016 Int. Symp. Electr. Eng. ISEE 2016, 2017, doi: 10.1109/EENG.2016.7845986.

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje received his Bachelor’s degree in Electrical

Engineering, in 2004 from University of Nigeria, Nsukka. He also obtained his Masters of
Engineering (M. Eng) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) in 2011 and 2019 respectively in
Electrical Engineering, from the same University. He is a Member of Nigeria Society of
Engineers (MNSE), a registered member Council for the regulation of Engineering in Nigeria
(COREN), a member of the Institute of Electrical/Electronic Engineering (IEEE) and a full-
time lecturer in the Department of Electrical/Electronic Engineering, University of Port
Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. He has published widely in local and international journals.
His research work focuses on power electronics, new energy conversion system, multilevel
inverter applications, Electric motor drives and Power systems modeling. He can be contacted
at email: crescent.omeje@uniport.edu.ng.

Candidus Ugwuoke Eya received his B. Eng degree in Electronics Engineering,

2006 from University of Nigeria, Nsukka. He also obtained his M. Eng and Ph.D. degrees in
Electrical Engineering, from the same University of Nigeria, Nsukka respectively in 2011 and
2017. He is a full-time Senior Lecturer in UNN. A member of Nigeria Society of Engineers
(MNSE), registered member Council of the regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN),
member of IAENG. Areas of his research interests include power electronics and New energy
systems applications, Multilevel inverter system, smart grid intelligent systems, condition
monitoring, power electronics and Electric motor drives, control systems, parametric system
applications and solar system applications. He can be contacted at email:
candidus.eya@unn.edu.ng.

A comparative braking scheme in auto-electric drive systems … (Crescent Onyebuchi Omeje)