Submitted:
10 October 2023
Posted:
11 October 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Detail of Analysis Model
3. Sizing Theories and Procedure
3.1. Magnet Flux Loss
3.2. Back-EMF Constant(Ke)
3.3. Motor Inductance
3.4. Current Density
3.5. Winding Capability Study
3.6. Resistance
3.7. Torque Constant Saturation, Torque Ripple and Demagnetization
3.8. Torque-Speed Performance
3.9. Sizing Procedure
4. Verification
4.1. Study Case1
4.2. Study Case2
5. Conclusion
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hendershot, J.R.; Miller, T.J.E. Design of Permanent Magnet Brushless Machines, 2nd ed.; Motor Design Books LLC, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Islam, R.; Husain, I.; Fardoun, A.; McLaughlin, K. Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor Magnet Designs with Skewing for Torque Ripple and Cogging Torque Reduction. IEEE Transaction 2007, 7, 1552–1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lipo, T.A. Introduction to AC Machine Design; IEEE Press Wiley, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Gieras, J.F. Permanent Magnet Motor Technology, 3rd ed.; CRC Press, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Hamdi, E.S. Design of Small Electrial Machines; Wiley, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Fei, W.; Zhu, Z.Q. Comparison of Cogging Torque Reduction in Permanent Magnet Brushless Machines by Conventional and Herringbone Skewing Techniques. IEEE Transaction on Energy Conversion 2013, 28, 664–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.S.; Mir, S.; Sebastian, T. Issues in Reduction the Cogging Torque of Mass-Produced Permanent-Magnet Brushless DC Motor. IEEE Transaction on Industry Application 2004, 40, 813–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanselman, D.C. Effect pf skew, pole count and slot count on brushless motor radial force, cogging torque and back emf. IEE Proc.-Electr. Power Appl. 1997, 144, 325–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Yang, Y.; Fu, D. Study of cogging torque in surface-mounted permanent magnet motors with energy method. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 2003, 267, 80–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianchi, N.; Blolgnani, S. Design techniques for reducing cogging torque in surface-mounted PM motors. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2002, 38, 1259–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, S.M.; Eom, J.B.; et al. Various design techniques to reduce cogging torque by controlling energy variation in permanent magnet motors. IEEE Trans. on Magn. 2001, 37, 2806–2809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colin McKerracher, Electric Vehicle Outlook 2023, September 2017, BloombergNEF. 20 September 2023; 17.
- Jung, T.C. A study on IPMSM basic design using per-unit design methods and construction of non-linear data set. Ph.D, Hanyang University, Korea, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Harrer, M.; Pfeffer, P. Steering Handbook; Springer, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y. Discussion on several principal problems aroused from measuring high performance permanent magnetic materials. International Journal of Applied Electromagnetics and Mechanics 2017, 55, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ju.Lee, K.C. Kim, J.S.Ahn, S.H.Won, Design and Control of IPMSM, Intervision, Korea, 2007, pp.10-35.
- Shigeo Morimoto, Design, Analysis, and Control of Interior PM Synchronous Machines, October 3rd, 2004. IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting Seattle. Chapter8. p.8.1-p.8.8. 3 October.


















| Parameters | Values | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance | 11.8 | mOhm |
| Synchronous Inductance | 53.1 | uH |
| Back-EMF Constant | 0.0384 | V-s/rad |
| Stack Length | 37.5 | mm |
| Coil Dia-Meter | 2 | mm |
| Series Turns | 18 | Turns |
| Residual Flux Density of PM | 1.37 | Tesla |
| Coercivity of PM | 1030 | kA/m |
| Surface Treatment | Thickness[um] |
|---|---|
| Phosphate | 0.1- 0.5 |
| Nickel | 10-20 |
| Zinc | 8-20 |
| Cupper | 10-20 |
| Epoxy | 15-20 |
| Parameters | Values | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance | Max 14 | mOhm |
| Synchronous Inductance | 57 - 63 | uH |
| Back-EMF Constant(Ke) | 0.04 - 0.044 | V-s/rad |
| Max Phase Current | 109 | Arms |
| Current Density | 10-25 | A/mm |
| Demag. Currnet | 167.4 | A |
| Demag. Tempeature | 130 | Deg.C |
| Demag. Ratio | Max 5 | % |
| Kt Saturation | Max 5 | % |
| Torque Ripple | Max 4 | % |
| Rated Torque @30rpm | Min 5 | Nm |
| Parameters | Unit | Sizing Result | FEM Analysis | Test Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coil Diameter | mm | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Series Turns | Turns | 18 | 18 | 18 |
| Stack Length | mm | 40.5 | 40.5 | 40.5 |
| Resistance | mOhm | 11.32 | 11.32 | 11.9(5%) |
| Inductance | uH | 57.4 | 58.5(2%) | 59(3%) |
| Ke | V-s/rad | 0.0416 | 0.0415(0%) | 0.0415(0%) |
| Demag. Ratio | % | 3.37 | 3.5(4%) | 3.21(5%) |
| Torque Ripple | % | 2.57 | 2.31(10%) | 2.91(13%) |
| Torque@30rpm | Nm | 5.26 | 5.13(2%) | 5.18(2%) |
| Torque@3900rpm | Nm | 2.05 | 2.29(12%) | 2.23(9%) |
| Total Calculation Time | - | <1sec. | around 1.5Hr | - |
| Parameters | Values | Unit |
|---|---|---|
| Resistance | Max 18 | mOhm |
| Synchronous Inductance | 80 - 90 | uH |
| Back-EMF Constant(Ke) | 0.067 - 0.074 | V-s/rad |
| Max Phase Current | 103 | Arms |
| Current Density | 10-25 | A/mm |
| Demag. Currnet | 176 | A |
| Demag. Tempeature | 130 | Deg.C |
| Demag. Ratio | Max 5 | % |
| Kt Saturation | Max 5 | % |
| Torque Ripple | Max 4 | % |
| Rated Torque @30rpm | Min 8.7 | Nm |
| Parameters | Unit | Sizing Result | FEM Analysis | Test Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coil Diameter | mm | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 |
| Series Turns | Turns | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Stack Length | mm | 73.5 | 73.5 | 73.5 |
| Resistance | mOhm | 15.1 | 15.1(0%) | 15.5(5%) |
| Inductance | uH | 83.8 | 82.6(1%) | 81(3%) |
| Ke | V-s/rad | 0.0675 | 0.0675(0%) | 0.0675(0%) |
| Demag. Ratio | % | 1.58 | 1.4(11%) | 1.2(23%) |
| Torque Ripple | % | 2.2 | 2.4(9%) | 2.7(23%) |
| Torque@30rpm | Nm | 8.93 | 8.85(1%) | 8.91(0%) |
| Torque@2000rpm | Nm | 3.34 | 3.6(8%) | 3.71(11%) |
| Total Calculation Time | - | <1sec. | around 1.5Hr | - |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).