Identification of a hysteresis model parameters with genetic algorithms
Introduction
Hysteresis phenomena are widespread in various branches of technology. Recent progress in magnetic technology and its application in mechatronics and telecommunication result in growing interest in the development of descriptions of magnetization processes.
The description of magnetization process in soft magnetic materials proposed by Jiles and Atherton [8] is attractive from engineering point of view, because of simplicity of its computer implementation and physical interpretation of its parameters. However, as already noticed [11], the iterative procedure of estimation of J–A model parameters [9], [10], might pose convergence problems. The classic procedure is very sensitive to initial values of parameters and to the order of their evaluation. Therefore, other estimation techniques have been proposed recently. They are usually based either on implementations of global optimization techniques, e.g. simulated annealing method [6] or on exhaustive search in the trusted solution space [4], [13], [16]. Much attention has also been paid recently to heuristic methods such as genetic algorithms [1], [12], [15], [19].
In the paper, the results of estimation of J–A model parameters using an implementation of genetic algorithm toolbox for MatLab environment [7] for selected soft magnetic materials are given. The core materials were non-oriented electrical steel V3250-50A and amorphous material VITROVAC 6025 F [17].
It has been proved that the genetic algorithm approach resulted in smaller errors in comparison to the direct search method, examined in [4].
Section snippets
Implementation
The following form of Jiles–Atherton equation was considered [3], [18]:where is anhysteretic magnetization, is effective field, are model parameters, is the sign of , whereas is defined asIntroduction of keeps unphysical negative susceptibility away from numerical solutions of Eq. (1) ([5], [18]) and makes the problem
Results
Fig. 1 presents the measured and the modelled major hysteresis loop for the non-oriented steel. The model parameters are given in Table 1.
The genetic algorithm was run for 30 times for different initial states of random number generator to assure the repetitiveness of convergence. It has been stated, that the obtained final solutions do not differ much. The results in Tables 1 and 2 are averaged.
Fig. 2 depicts the evolution of error during an exemplary action of genetic algorithm. It can be
Conclusions
It can be stated that the genetic algorithms estimate the J–A model parameters with an accuracy sufficient for technical applications, in spite of the fact, that their use generally does not guarantee reaching the global minimum [14].
The measurement data are inevitably affected with noise, whereas the model equations tend to give an averaged description of some macroscopic properties of magnetic material, expressed by major hysteresis loop. This explains obtainment of relatively high values of
References (19)
- et al.
Modeling a magnetostrictive transducer using genetic algorithm
J. Magn. Magn. Mater.
(2001) - et al.
Comparison of Preisach and Jiles–Atherton models to take into account hysteresis phenomenon for finite element analysis
J. Magn. Magn. Mater.
(2003) - et al.
Identification of the Jiles–Atherton model parameters using random and deterministic searches
Physica B
(2000) - et al.
Theory of ferromagnetic hysteresis
J. Magn. Magn. Mater.
(1986) Influence of eddy currents on magnetic hysteresis loops in soft magnetic materials
J. Magn. Magn. Mater.
(2001)Komputerowy system do pomiaru dynamicznych wlasciwosci magnetycznych materialow magnetycznie miekkich (Computer-aided system for measurement of dynamic magnetic properties of soft magnetic materials) (in Polish)
Zesz. Nauk. PSwietokrz. Elekt.
(1984)- K. Chwastek, J. Szczyglowski, M. Najgebauer, A direct search algorithm for estimation of Jiles–Atherton hysteresis...
Modeling the dynamics of nonlinear inductor circuits
IEEE Trans. Magn.
(1994)- C. Houck, J.A. Joines, M.G. Kay, A genetic algorithm for function optimization: a Matlab implementation, NCSU-IE TR...
Cited by (89)
Linearising anhysteretic magnetisation curves: A novel algorithm for finding simulation parameters and magnetic moments
2024, Mathematics and Computers in SimulationRobust adaptive parameter estimator design for a multi-sinusoidal signal with fixed-time stability and guaranteed prescribed performance boundary of estimation error
2023, Journal of the Franklin InstituteCitation Excerpt :These algorithms usually are time consuming and can only be used in offline applications. Recently, plentiful metaheuristic algorithms composed with the least square method (Genetic Algorithm (GA) [12–14], GA- differential evolution (GADE) [15], Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) [16], GA- Levenberg–Marquardt (GALM) [17], Differential Evolution (DE) [18], Shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA) [19], bilinear recursive least square (BRLS) [20], etc.) have been proposed for the parameter estimation of sinusoidal signals in power systems [20–23]. An in common downside of most of these algorithms is that they can get stuck in local minimums based on the search level, which leads their performances to decrease over iterations.
Measurement and Gaussian model of ferromagnetic viscosity
2022, Physica B: Condensed MatterOn the modelling of the anhysteretic magnetization of homogeneous soft magnetic materials
2021, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic MaterialsNumerical determination of Jiles-Atherton hysteresis parameters: Magnetic behavior under mechanical deformation
2018, Physica B: Condensed MatterCitation Excerpt :However, it requires many evaluations of the objective function to achieve the global minimum as it does not converge quickly. Several researchers have used the GA in their optimization studies and identification of parameters of magnetic models in [17,18,33–35]. All these studies have shown a considerable reliability of this algorithm.
Model selection and parameter estimation in structural dynamics using approximate Bayesian computation
2018, Mechanical Systems and Signal ProcessingCitation Excerpt :Due to the nonlinear nature of the problem, stochastic optimisation algorithms have been also found to be well suited. Algorithms such as genetic algorithms [37,38], particle swarm optimisation [39], and differential evolution [40] have been successfully implemented. However, optimisation algorithms provide a single optimum value, while the Bayesian inference allows users to get the full parameter distribution, yielding more important information.