VOL. 7, NO.

9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

DIAGNOSIS AND CHARACTERIZATION OF EFFECTS OF BROKEN

BARS IN THREE PHASE SQUIRREL CAGE INDUCTION MOTOR
USING FINITE ELEMENT METHOD
Nagarajan S. and RamaReddy S.
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Jerusalem College of Engineering, Anna University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
E-Mail: nagu_shola@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
Three Phase Induction Motors are widely used for industrial and domestic applications. There are various faults
that occur in induction motors like stator inter-turn fault, bearings faults and eccentricity fault. Out of these faults, the
rotor broken bar fault is very specific in squirrel cage induction machines. This paper deals with the detection of broken
bars in three phase squirrel cage induction motor using finite element model of the induction machine. Finite element
method is more precise than the winding function approach method, as it is based on the actual geometry of the machine.
This paper uses a CAD package called Magnet for the Static 2D and Transient 2D analysis. The various machine
parameters like flux density, flux function, magnetic energy, etc are calculated using this CAD package and their values are
compared under healthy and faulty conditions.
Keywords: rotor broken bars, finite element method, induction motor, magnet, flux density, flux function, magnetic energy.

INTRODUCTION
Three phase induction motors have wide
applications in various industries. It is recognized that a
variety of faults can occur in these motors during normal
operation such as rotor fault (broken bars or end ring),
stator inter-turn fault, eccentricity fault and bearing fault.
Hence early detection and diagnosis of such faults are very
essential for the protection of induction motors against
failures and permanent damages. A sudden motor failure
may reduce productivity and may be catastrophic in an
industrial system if undetected. In recent years, the
problem of failures in large machines has become more
significant. The desire to improve the reliability of the
industrial drive systems has led to researches and
developments in various countries to evaluate the cause
and consequences of various fault conditions.
The interior faults of induction motor accounts
for more than 70% in proportion of induction motor
failures. Interior faults include stator and rotor faults of
induction motors. Rotor faults are related to broken bars.
Rotor failures are caused by a combination of various
stresses that act on the rotor and these stresses can be
identified as electromagnetic, thermal, dynamic,
environmental and mechanical. Therefore these leads to
low-frequency torque harmonics, which increases noise
and vibration.
The transient analysis was done using coupled
electric circuit with 2D finite element electromagnetic
field analysis. The designed geometric dimension is
modeled in the finite element domain and transient
performances are predicted at the starting of motor with no
load [1]. An MCSA technique is adopted for the diagnosis
of rotor breakages in squirrel cage induction motor and
finite method to calculate the parameters and modeled
using state space modeling approach. It computes the
characteristic frequency components which are indicative
of rotor bar and connector breakages and developed torque
profiles [2].

A local approach was proposed to tackle the

problems of breaking bars and end rings. It was
implemented by CAD software, Flux 2D and allows better
accuracy and simpler mode of detection [3]. The analysis
of a three phase induction motor fed by a symmetric three
phase AC voltage source is done using two different
approaches. The first method is based on the electrical
circuit of the motor and the second method is based on the
field solution. Both the approaches implemented in Ansoft
Maxwell and Cedrat Flux 2D [4]. Broken bars are detected
using experimental set ups and computation were done
using non-linear complex steady state technique [5].
The effect of adjacent and non adjacent bar
breakages was done in squirrel cage induction machines. It
describes how the non adjacent bar breakages result in the
masking of fault indices and problems related to it [6]. A
corrosion rotor bar model was derived from
electromagnetic field theory and simulated using Matlab
Simulink [7]. Detection of dynamic, static eccentricities
and bar, end-ring connector breakages is done using TimeStepping Coupled Finite-Element State Space method and
generates the fault case performance data which contain
the phase current waveforms and tine domain torque
profiles [8].
The optimization of Fractional Fourier Transform
was proposed to generate a spectrum where the frequence
varying fault harmonics appears as a single spectral line
and therefore facilitate the diagnostic process [9]. A new
technique based on rotor magnetic field space vector
orientation was proposed to diagnose the broken bar faults
at steady state [10].
The behavior of three phase induction motor with
internal fault condition under sinusoidal supply voltage
was examined by discrete wavelet transform and extracts
the different harmonic components of stator currents [11].
Equivalent circuit approach usually gives adequate
predictions of torque and current but gives no information
on flux distribution. This deficiency is overcome by

1170

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
numerical approach which uses 2D, nonlinear, time
stepping finite element method for excitation from a
constant voltage source [12].
The effect of pole pair and rotor slot numbers was
presented under different harmonics in healthy and
eccentric conditions. The simulation technique was not as
accurate as Finite Element Method [13]. A dynamic model
for IM under inter turn insulation failure fault was derived
using reference frame theory. Finite element analysis is
used for parameter determination of the machine in
healthy and faulty condition [14]. An MCSA technique to
diagnose the faults in the three phase induction motor
drives was focused [15]. The use of Partial Relative
Indexes (PRI) is proposed as a new fault indicator to
ameliorate the reliability of fault detection task and uses
MCSA method [16].
The above literature uses vibration monitoring
techniques, MCSA, and Thermal Monitoring for the
detection of faults. In this paper Finite element analysis is
adopted to perform Static and Transient 2D analysis to
detect the faults of three phase squirrel cage induction
motor. The analysis is carried out with a CAD package
called Magnet.
FINITE ELEMENT METHOD
Finite element analysis (FEA) is a computer
based numerical technique for calculating the parameters
of electromagnetic devices. It can be used to calculate the
flux density, flux linkages, inductance, torque; induced
emf etc., in the finite element method, the large
electromagnetic device is broken down into many small
elements. The behavior of an individual element can be
described with a relatively simple set of equations. The
equations describing the behavior of the individual
elements are joined into an extremely large set of
equations that describe the whole device. The computer
can solve this large set of simultaneous equations. From
the solution, the computer extracts the behavior of the
individual elements. Finite element methods (FEM) of
analysis have emerged in the past decades as the useful
numerical methods for magnetic field analysis of electrical
machines.

Table-1. Induction machine data.

Rated power
Rated voltage

22KW
415V

Rated line current

70.87A

Rated frequency

50Hz

Rated speed

1458 rpm

Number of poles

Number of stator slots

36

Number of rotor slots

28

Slip

0.028

Efficiency

0.85

Power factor

0.88

The induction machine data is given in Table-1.

Each component of the field quantities is assumed to vary
sinusoidal with time. The approach is based on field
solution. The stator winding is a double cage winding and
star connection is adopted. From the design data the
average flux density is taken as 0.45 Wb/m. For good
overall design, the ratio of length to pole pitch ratio is 1.
The slots per pole per phase are assumed to be 3 and the
air gap length is fixed to be 0.7mm.
Induction motor model
The model of an induction motor is shown in
Figure-1. There are four steps involved in finite element
analysis. They are Discretisation, Shaping Function,
Stiffness matrix and Solution Technique. The steps
involved in the CAD package are Pre processing where the
discretisation of model is done, Solver and Post
processing.

To determine the magnetic field distribution

inside the motor, the following assumptions are made:

The magnetic field outside the motor periphery is

negligible.
Hysteresis effects are neglected.
The magnetic field distribution is constant along the
axial direction of the motor.
The displacement currents are neglected.

The energy stored in a current carrying coil is defined in

(1).
Wm = LI

(1)

Figure-1. Discretisation of induction motor model.

First the original field problem domains are
discretized or divided into number of sub domains or
elements. The shaping function is defined at each node. To
achieve minimization, it is convenient to separate the

1171

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
global energy into its element components and to
minimize one triangle at a time. Then appropriate solution
technique is used to solve the equations and obtain the
necessary parameters like energy, flux function, current,
torque etc.
STATIC ANALYSIS
In this section, the simulation results for the
Static Analysis of Three Phase Induction Motor for
healthy motor, faulty motor with 2, 4, 6 and 8 broken bars
under no load, half load and full load are presented.

(d)

Distribution of magnetic field and flux

Under the healthy conditions, the distribution of
magnetic field is symmetrical, while the symmetry of
magnetic field distribution is unsymmetrical in the case of
broken bars and a higher degree of magnetic saturation can
be observed around the broken bars.
Field and flux distribution plots for healthy and
faulty motor under no load is shown in the Figure-2 and
under full load is shown in Figure-3. It can be observed
that plots appear to drastically change its symmetry when
the number of broken bars in the rotor increases.

Figure-2. Magnetic field and flux distribution under no

load (a) Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6
broken bar (e) 8 broken bar.

(a)

(a)

(b)

(b)

(c)

(c)

(e)

1172

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
5. The flux density and flux function values under various
loads are tabulated in Table-3 and Table-4.

(d)

(a)

(e)
Figure-3. Magnetic field and flux distribution under full
load (a) Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar
(d) 6 broken bar (e) 8 broken bar.

(b)

The stored magnetic energy under various loads

is tabulated in Table-2. It can be observed that the stored
magnetic energy reduced when the number of broken bars
increases.
Table-2. Stored magnetic energy.

Healthy

Stored
magnetic
energy (Joules)
0.0005013

Percentage
Change
(%)
-

2 broken bar

0.0004984

0.58

4 broken bar

0.0004939

1.48

6 broken bar

0.0004871

2.83

8 broken bar

0.0004783

4.58

Healthy

0.0273506

2 broken bar

0.0270617

1.05

4 broken bar

0.0266133

2.69

6 broken bar

0.0259341

5.17

8 broken bar

0.0250502

8.41

Healthy

0.0501441

2 broken bar

0.0500637

0.16

4 broken bar

0.0497823

0.72

6 broken bar

0.0490010

2.28

8 broken bar

0.0484359

3.40

Condition

No
load

Half
load

Full
load

Field and flux profile

The waveforms for field distribution and flux
density for healthy and faulty motor under no load is
shown in Figure-4 and under full load is shown in Figure-

(c)

(d)

(e)
Figure-4. Field and flux distribution under no load
(a) Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar
(d) 6 broken bar (e) 8 broken bar.

1173

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
and under faulty condition with two-broken bars is 0.0025
Wb, with four-broken bars is 0.0032 Wb, with six-broken
bars is 0.0034 Wb and with eight-broken bars is 0.0035
Wb.
Table-3. Flux function.
Condition
(a)

Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar
Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar
Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar

No
load

(b)

Half
load

Full
load

(c)

Flux
function
(Wb)
0.0023
0.0025
0.0032
0.0034
0.0035
0.0115
0.0131
0.0141
0.0157
0.0191
0.0229
0.0348
0.0428
0.0432
0.0435

Percentage
change (%)
8.69
39.13
47.82
52.17
13.91
22.60
36.52
66.08
51.96
86.89
88.64
89.95

Similarly, the amplitude for flux density under no

load for healthy condition is 0.1229 Wb/m2 and under
faulty condition with two-broken bars is 0.1250 Wb/m2,
with four-broken bars is 0.1298 Wb/m2, with six-broken
bars is 0.1363 Wb/m2 and with eight-broken bars is 0.1401
Wb/m2. Similarly it is continued for half and full load.
Table-4. Flux density
Condition

(d)

No
load

Half
load
(e)
Figure-5. Field and flux distribution under half load (a)
Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken bar
(e) 8broken bar.
It is observed that the amplitude of the flux
function under no load for healthy condition is 0.023 Wb

Full
load

Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar
Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar
Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar

Flux density
(Wb/m)
0.1229
0.1250
0.1298
0.1363
0.1401
0.8532
0.9061
0.9548
1.0043
1.0425
1.2278
1.3745
1.4830
1.4861
1.5032

Percentage
change (%)
1.70
5.61
10.90
13.99
6.20
11.90
12.89
22.18
11.94
21.03
20.78
22.43

1174

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
From the above analysis, it is clear that the
amplitude of flux function and flux density increases as
the number of broken bars increases. There is a drastic
increase in flux function and flux density when the load
increases from no load to full load. Also when the number
of broken bars increased from two broken bars to eight
broken bars, the flux function and flux density increases
and respective percentage change is obtained.
TRANSIENT ANALYSIS
In this section, the simulation results for the
Transient Analysis of Three Phase Induction Motor for
healthy motor, faulty motor with 2, 4, 6 and 8 broken bars
under no load, and full load are presented.
Transient model of induction motor
The electrical model representation of three phase
squirrel cage star connected induction motor is shown in
Figure-6. The power source is considered as a voltage
source connected with the series resistances and
inductances of the stator windings in each phase.

Figure-7. Electric circuit model of induction motor.

The voltage relations for all the phases are defined as:
V1 = Vmsinwt

(2)

V2 = Vmsin (wt-2/3)

(3)

V3 = Vmsin (wt+2/3)

(4)

Instantaneous magnetic energy plot

When electric current flows in an inductor,
energy is stored in the magnetic field. The instantaneous
magnetic energy plot for healthy and faulty motor under
no load is shown in Figure-8, under full load is shown in
Figure-9.
The time step is taken as 10ms. The instantaneous
energy at the starting instant is found to be high and
gradually decreases to attain a steady value when the time
is increased to 4000 ms.

Figure-6. Transient model of induction motor.

The rotor circuit model is made of short-circuited
bar conductors. The circuit model of the three phase
induction motor is shown in Figure-7.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

1175

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

(e)
Figure-8. Instantaneous magnetic energy under no load
(a) Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar
(d) 6 broken bar (e) 8broken bar.
Figure-10. Instantaneous magnetic energy- graphical
representation.
Table-5. Instantaneous magnetic energy.
Instantaneous
magnetic
energy (Joules)

Percentage
change (%)

Healthy

1.58446

2 broken bar

1.57958

0.307

4 broken bar

1.28950

18.61

6 broken bar

1.21112

23.56

8 broken bar

1.16965

26.17

Healthy

194.2153

2 broken bar

157.6726

18.81

4 broken bar

125.8326

35.20

6 broken bar

107.2033

44.80

8 broken bar

91.4319

52.92

Condition

(a)

(b)
No load

(c)

(d)

Full
load

Hence the above analysis shows that there is an

increase in the percentage change when the broken bars
increase. Hence this observation shows that the
instantaneous magnetic energy decreases as the broken
bars increases.
(e)
Figure-9. Instantaneous magnetic energy under full load
(a) Healthy (b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken
bar (e) 8broken bar.
The instantaneous magnetic energy values under
various load are tabulated in Table-5. Under no load, the
instantaneous magnetic energy for healthy is 1.58446
Joules, for 2 broken bars is 1.57958 Joules, for 4 broken
bars is 1.28950 Joules, for 6 broken bars is 1.21112 Joules
and for the 8 broken bars is 1.16965 Joules. Under full
load, the instantaneous magnetic energy for healthy is
194.2153 Joules, for 2 broken bars is 157.6726 Joules, for
4 broken bars is 125.8326 Joules, for 6 broken bars is
107.2033 Joules and for the 8 broken bars is 91.4319
Joules. The graphical representation for Instantaneous
magnetic energy is shown in Figure-10.

Stator phase current plot

The stator phase current plot for healthy and
faulty motor under no load is shown in Figure-11 and for
full load is shown in Figure-12. The time step is taken as
10ms.

(a)

(b)

1176

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
the current obtained for healthy is 57.23 A, for 2 broken
bars is 69.97 A, for 4 broken bars is 84.30 A, for 6 broken
bars is 98.35 A and for the 8 broken bars is 106.90 A.
Table-6. Stator phase current.
Condition
(c)

(d)
No
load

(e)
Figure-11. Stator phase current under no load (a) Healthy
(b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken bar
(e) 8broken bar.

Full
load

Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar
Healthy
2 broken bar
4 broken bar
6 broken bar
8 broken bar

Stator phase
current (A)
10.40
14.13
14.87
15.07
15.79
57.23
69.97
84.30
98.34
106.9

Percentage
change (%)
35.86
42.96
44.89
51.79
22.25
47.29
71.83
86.78

Hence the above analysis show that the stator

phase current increases as the broken bars increases.

(a)

(b)

(C)

(d)

Flux linkage plot

The flux linkage plot for healthy and faulty motor
under no load is shown in Figure-13 and for full load is
shown in Figure-14. The time step is taken as 10ms. The
flux linkage values under various loads are tabulated in
Table-7.

(a)

(b)

(c )

(d)

(e)
Figure-2. Stator phase current under full load (a) Healthy
(b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken ba
(e) 8 broken bar.
The stator phase current values under various
loads are tabulated in Table-6. Under no load, the current
obtained for healthy is 10.40 A, for 2 broken bars is 14.13
A, for 4 broken bars is 14.87 A, for 6 broken bars is 15.07
A and for the 8 broken bars is 15.79 A. Under full load,

(e)
Figure-13. Flux linkage under no load (a) Healthy (b) 2
broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken bar
(e) 8 broken bar.

1177

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
Hence it is observed that the value of flux linkage
increases when the number of broken bars increases.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Magnetic torque plot

The Magnetic Torque has been increased when
the number of broken bars was increased. The value for
Magnetic Torque is tabulated in Table-8. It can be
observed that under no load the magnetic torque obtained
for healthy motor is 1.4562 Nm, for 2 broken bars is
2.0683 Nm, for 4 broken bars is 2.5302 Nm, for 6 broken
bars is 2.7809 Nm and for 8 broken bars is 2.8211 Nm.
Under full load the magnetic torque obtained for is
123.684 Nm, for 2 broken bars is 161.468 Nm, for 4
broken bars is 187.245 Nm, for 6 broken bars is 207.047
Nm and for 8 broken bars is 225.006 Nm.
Table-8. Magnetic torque.

Healthy

1.4562

Percentage
change
(%)
-

2 broken bar

2.0683

42.03

4 broken bar

2.5302

73.75

6 broken bar

2.7809

90.96

8 broken bar

2.8211

93.73

Healthy

123.684

2 broken bar

161.468

30.54

4 broken bar

187.245

51.38

6 broken bar

207.047

67.39

8 broken bar

225.006

81.92

Magnetic
torque (Nm)

Condition

No load
(d)
Figure-14. Flux linkage under full load (a) Healthy
(b) 2 broken bar (c) 4 broken bar (d) 6 broken bar
(e) 8 broken bar
It can be observed that under no load, the flux
linkage obtained for healthy is 0.01104 Wb, for 2 broken
bars is 0.01327 Wb, for 4 broken bars is 0.01791 Wb, for
6 broken bars is 0.01822 and for 8 broken bars is 0.02205
Wb. Under full load, the flux linkage obtained for healthy
is 0.16668 Wb, for 2 broken bars is 0.19386 Wb, for 4
broken bars is 0.22034 Wb, for 6 broken bars is 0.25851
Wb and for 8 broken bars is 0.31012 Wb.

Full
load

The graphical representation for Magnetic Torque

is shown in Figure-15.

Table-7. Flux linkage.

Healthy

0.01104

Percentage
change
(%)
-

2 broken bar

0.01327

20.19

4 broken bar

0.01791

62.22

6 broken bar

0.01822

65.04

8 broken bar

0.02205

99.72

Flux Linkage
(Wb)

Condition

No
load

Full
load

Healthy

0.16668

2 broken bar

0.19386

16.30

4 broken bar

0.22034

32.19

6 broken bar

0.25851

55.09

8 broken bar

0.31012

86.05

Figure-15. Magnetic torque-graphical representation.

Hence the above analysis shows that there is an
increase in the percentage change when the broken bars
increase.

1178

VOL. 7, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2012

ISSN 1819-6608

ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences

2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com
CONCLUSIONS
A three phase squirrel cage induction motor is
modeled on the basis of finite element method. The
simulation result was obtained for broken bar faults.
Comparisons are made with the healthy motor condition
and the result was tabulated. It was found that the faults
due to the broken bars saturate the magnetic field
distribution on the rotor tooth adjacent to the bars that
were broken. In the static analysis, the stored magnetic
energy decreased when the number of broken bars
increased. The Flux Function and Flux Density was
increased when the number of broken bars was increased.
In the transient analysis, it was found that the flow of
current in the stator phases and the flux linkage produced
in the motor was increased, whereas, the stored magnetic
energy was decreased when the number of broken bars
was increased. Also the magnetic torque was increased
when the number of broken bars was increased. The
simulated results are verified theoretically for the values
like flux function and flux density.
REFERENCES
[1] Balamurugan S., Arumugam R., Paramasivam S. and
Malaiappan M. 2004. Transient Analysis of induction
Motor Using Finite Element Analysis. IEEE Industrial
Electronics Society, 30th annual conference. pp. 15261529.
[2] John.F. Bangura, Richard J. Povinelli, Nabeel A. O.
Demerdash and Ronald H. Brown. 2003. Diagnostics
of Eccentricities and Bar/End-Ring Connector
Breakages in Polyphase Induction Motors through a
combination of Time-Series Data Mining and Time
Stepping Coupled FE - State Space Technique. IEEE
Trans. on Industrial Applications. 39(4): 1005-1013.
[3] Bentounsi A. and Nicolas A. 1998. On Line Diagnosis
of Defaults on Squirrel Cage Motor Using FEM. IEEE
Trans. Magn. 34(5): 3511-3574.
[4] Bianchi N., Bolognani S. and Comelato G. 1999.
Finite Element Analysis of Three Phase Induction
Motors: Comparison of Two Different Approaches.
IEEE Trans. on Energy Conversion. 14(4): 15231528.
[5] Elkasabgy N. M. and Eastham A. R. 1992. Detection
of Broken Bars in the Cage Rotor on an Induction
Machine. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 28(1): 165-171.
[6] Genadi Y. Sizov and Ahmed Sayed-Ahmed nabeel.
2009. Analysis and Diagnostics of Adjacent and
Nonadjacent Broken-Rotor-Bar Faults in SquirrelCage Induction Machines. IEEE Trans. on Industrial
Electronics. 56(11): 4627-4641.

in Induction Motors. IEEE Trans. on Industrial

Electronics. 53(6): 1829-1841.
[8] Li Weili, XieYing, Shen Jiafeng and Luo Yingli.
2007. Finite Element Analysis of Field Distribution
and Characteristic Performance of Squirrel-Cage
Induction Motor with Broken Bars. IEEE Trans. on
Magnetics. 43(4): 1537-1540.
[9] Manuel Pineda-Sanchez, Riera-Guasp. M, Jose A.
Antonino-Daviu, Roger-Folch J., Perez-Cruz J. and
Puche-Panadero R. 2010. Diagnosis of Induction
motor faults in the Fractional Fouries Domain. IEEE
Trans. on Instrumentation and Measurement. 59(8):
2065-2075.
[10] Mirafzal B. and Demerdash N. A. O. 2004. Induction
Machine Broken-Bar Fault Diagnosis Using the Rotor
Magnetic Field Space-Vector Orientation. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Appl. 40(2): 534-542.
[11] Mohammed O.A., Abed N.Y. and Ganu S. 2007.
Modeling and Characterization of induction motor
internal faults using Finite Element and Discrete
Wavelet Transforms. IEEE 2007. pp. 250-253.
[12] Preston T. W., Reece A. B. J. and Sangha P. S. 1988.
Induction Motor Analysis by Time-Stepping
Techniques. IEEE Trans. on Magnetics. 24(1): 471474.
[13] Subhasis Nandi, Shehab Ahmed and Hamid A.
Toliyat. 2001. Detection of Rotor Slot and other
Eccentricity Related Harmonics in a Three Phase
Induction Motor with different rotor cages. IEEE
Trans. on Energy Conversion. 16(3): 253-260.
[14] Vaseghi B., Takorabet N. and Meibody-Tabar F.
2008. Modeling of 1M with Stator Winding Inter-turn
Fault Validated by FEM. Proceedings of the 2008
International Conference on Electrical Machines.
[15] William T. Thomson and Mark Fenger. 2001. Current
Signature Analysis to detect Induction Motor Faults.
IEEE Industry Application Magazine. pp. 26-34.
[16] Zou Zou S.E. 2010. Detection of Inter-Turn ShortCircuit and broken Rotor Bars in Induction Motors
Using the Partial Relative Indexes: Application on the
MCSA. Int. Conf.
[17] Sawhney A. K. A Course in Electrical Machine
Design. Dhanpat Rai and Sons.

[7] Jee-Hoon Jung and Bong-Hwan Kwon. 2006.

Corrosion Model of a Rotor Bar under Fault Progress

1179