List of Symbols:: C Ext

Magnetic Bearing Actuator Group 6
1. List of symbols:
B Flux Density
H Field Intensity
Magneto-motive Force (MMF)
Rc Resistance of the coil
Rext Resistance of the external circuit
R Total resistance
E Electro-motive force (EMF)
I Current
lav Average length of the wire
N Number of turns
Acond Cross-Sectional Area of the conductor
Acoil Cross-Sectional Area of the coil
j Current Density
r Radius to the centre of the coil
Resistivity
OT Resistivity at operating temperature
o Permeability of air
ROT Resistance at operating temperature
1
2. Introduction:
This report is to explain the necessary steps that were taken to achieve the task of
theoretically building a Magnetic Bearing Actuator. This specific report entails the
design details of a radial 8-pole, hetero-polar magnetic bearing actuator. The design
had to be within certain specifications had to adhere to. The bearing had to be
optimized in accordance to certain design criteria (such as coil area, resultant force
on the journal, minimum core volume etc).
There are two parts to the design a magneto-statics component which was used to
obtain the load capacity and a thermal component that determines the temperature
operating range of the bearing depending on the insulation class given.
The main aim of the design was to make sure that:
- The bearing develops the required load capacity (slightly higher) result
must be confirmed by FE model and relevant calculations.
- The winding temperature was within the acceptable range for the required
insulator class.
2
3. Theory:
Magnetic Bearings:
Magnetic bearings are used to in lieu of rolling element or fluid film journal bearings
in some high performance turbo machinery applications. Specific applications
include pumps for hazardous/caustic fluids, precision machining spindles, energy
storage flywheels, and high reliability pumps and compressors.
Magnetic bearings yield several advantages. Since there is no mechanical contact in

magnetic bearings, mechanical friction losses are eliminated. In addition, reliability
can be increased because there is no mechanical wear.
Besides the obvious benefits of eliminating friction, magnetic bearings also allow
some perhaps less obvious improvements in performance. Magnetic bearings are
generally open loop unstable, which means that active electronic feedback is
required for the bearings to operate stably. However, the requirement of feedback
control actually brings great flexibility into the dynamic response of the bearings. By
changing controller gains or strategies, the bearings can be made to have virtually
any desired closed-loop characteristics. For example, flywheel bearings are
extremely compliant, so that the flywheel can spin about its inertial axis--the
bearings serve only to correct large, low frequency displacements.
Typical Bearing Geometry
Conceptually, the typical magnetic bearing is composed of eight of horseshoe-

shaped electromagnets. This configuration is shown in Figure 1. The eight magnets
are arranged evenly around a circular piece of iron mounted on the shaft that is to
be levitated. Each of the electromagnets can only produce a force that attracts the
rotor iron to it, so all eight electromagnets must act in concert to produce a force of
arbitrary magnitude and
direction on the rotor.
3
Fig.1: Eight Pole Magnetic Bearing with 4 poles active at any time
4. Design Process Electromagnetic (parts a-k)
4.1 Initial implementation of the design:
The design procedure involved several steps:
- Bearing dimension calculations

- Coil calculations
- Thermal calculations
Bearing Dimension Calculations:
a) Selection of a reasonable flux density:
The example given from the lecture notes was

Bj of 1.6 1.7T. For the design of
the model took the average of the example value hence

B j =1.65T. This then
required steel that will provide the necessary flux density. Through trial and error it
was discovered that Steel M-14 would provide the best results for our design.
b) Estimate the flux density in the air gap

B g . Assuming 10% leakage:
B g=0.9 B j
B g=0.9 ( 1.65 )=1.485 T
c) From the known load capacity (LC or F) calculate force per/pole F1:
For the design the decision was taken to make three active poles:
360 360
Pole Pitch:
= = =450
p 8
Hence
F=F1 +2 F1 cos 45=2.41 F 1
F=2.41 F1
4
F 1000
F 1= = =414.214 N
2.41 2.41
d) Using the approximate expression for force/pole,
1 2
F 1= B A
2 0 g g
Calculate the required cross-sectional are of the stator pole

Ag , to do this make
Ag the subject of the formula:
2 F 1 0 414.214 (4 x 107)
Hence
A g= = =472.1mm 2
B2g 2
1.485
e, f) Calculation of the width of the pole

W p , journal thickness W j and
journal outside diameter

Dj :

2W j= ( Ds +2 W j )= (115 x 103 +2 W j)
16 16
2 W j=0.0226+ 0.393W j
0.0226
W j= =14.1 mm
(20.393)
Therefore the width of pole: W p=2W j=2 ( 14.1 )=28.2 mm
Hence to obtain the journal OD:

D j =Ds +2 W j
D j =( 115 x 103 ) + 2 ( 14.1 )=143.2 mm
g) Calculate the axial length of the bearing

Lb :
A g 472.1
Lb= = =16.74 mm
W p 28.2
5
h) Estimate the pole (radial) length

Lp :
Used 1.25 as it was the average between the 1 and 1.5.
1
L p=( 1.5 ) W p =1.25 (28.2 )=35.3 mm
i) Calculate back iron (radial) width:
W bi=0.5 W p
W bi=0.5 ( 28.2 )=14.1 mm
j) Calculate the stator outside diameter OD:
OD=D j +2 ( g+ L p +W bi )
OD=143.2+ 2 ( 0.3+ 35.3+ 14.1 )=242.6 mm
k) Calculate the required MMF/pole; assuming (20-25) % leakage and infinite

permeability of the steel:
Bg
=( 1.21.25 ) (g)
0
1.485
=1.225 7
( 0.3 x 103 ) =434.284 At
4 x 10
l) The area of the coil was assumed to be quite small for the initial calculations and
had to be optimized in the process of achieving the specified load capacity.
m) Calculate number of turns and wire diameter:
To obtain this value required the calculation of

l av ,this was done by assuming
the shape of the coil to be a trapezium.
6
The value of
Zy is taken as the distance between the centroid (point were the
diagonals intersect) and the line DC.
For this model

Z y =5.567 , taken from the FE model.
l av =2 ( W p +Z y ) +2 ( Lb +Z y )
2 ( 28.2+5.567 )+ 2 ( 16.74+ 5.567 )=112.148 mm
Standard copper wire is to be used: resistivity at 20C is 20 = 0.17241*10-7 m and

temperature coefficient = 0.0039 1/C.
Due to the class H insulation maximum operation temperature was 180 0C. Assuming
an acceptable temperature range means winding temperature between 65% and
80%.
Therefore class H would be (0.65 to 0.8)*180 = 117 0C to 1440C
To obtain resistivity at maximum operating temperature is as follows:
144 =0.17241 x 107 [ 1+ ( 14420 ) 0.0039 ] =2.55 x 108 m
6
Assuming J= 4.5 x 10 A/m2
V
N=
j 144 l av
7
60
6
=4662.373 turns
4.5 x 10 ( 2.55 x 108 ) ( 112.148 x 103 )
434.284 2
A cond = = =0.02069 mm
Nj 4662.373 ( 4.5 x 106 )
Therefore actual
A cond taken from the standard metric wire sizes =
0.02270 mm2
Coil filling co-efficient

kf was not assumed but was calculated and then adjust
to produce the best results.
N A cond 4 (0.02270)
k f= = =0.83
A coil 126.27

k f Max) = 4 =0.78
The coil filling factor is too high and this was unacceptable (
k f >0.78 )
n) Calculate resistance and current
At the actual area of conductor = 0.02270mm 2 the corresponding nominal

resistance at 200C is 0.7596/m.
Therefore at 1440C the nominal resistance is:

R =0.7596 [ 1+ (14420 ) 0.0039 ]=1.1269
m
m
The resistance at 1440C is:
R144 =R Nl av
m
1.12694662.373( 112.148 x 103 )=589.22
8
V 60
I= = =0.102 A
R 144 589.22
o) Calculation of Actual MMF and MMF density
Actual =NI =4662.3730.102=475.562 At
Actual 442.086 At
density= = =3.766 x 10 6 2
Acoil 126.27 m
9
Figure 1:
Schematic of the initial design implementation
4.2 Final Optimization of Design:

a) Selection of a reasonable flux density:
The example given from the lecture notes was

Bj of 1.6 1.7T. For the design of
the model took the average of the example value hence

B j =1.65T. This then
required steel that will provide the necessary flux density. Through trial and error we
discovered that Steel M-14 would provide the best results for our design.
b) Estimate the flux density in the air gap

B g . Assuming 10% leakage:
10
B g=0.9 B j
B g=0.9 ( 1.65 )=1.485 T
c) From the known load capacity (LC or F) calculate force per/pole F1:
For the design the decision was taken to make four active poles:
360 360
Pole Pitch:
= = =450
p 8
Hence
F=2 F 1 cos 22.5+2 F 1 cos 67.5=2.61 F1
F=2.61 F1
F 1000
F 1= = =383.14 N
2.61 2.61
d) Using the approximate expression for force/pole,
1 2
F 1= B A
2 0 g g
Calculate the required cross-sectional are of the stator pole

Ag , to do this make
A g the subject of the formula:
2 F 1 0 7
383.14(4 x 10 )
Hence
A g= = =436.7 mm 2
B2g 2
1.485
e, f) Calculation of the width of the pole

W p , journal thickness W j and
journal outside diameter

Dj :

2W j= ( Ds +2 W j )= (115 x 103 +2 W j)
16 16
11
2 W j=0.0226+ 0.393W j
0.0226
W j= =14.1 mm
(20.393)
Therefore the width of pole: W p=2W j=2 ( 14.1 )=28.2 mm
Hence to obtain the journal OD:

D j =Ds +2 W j
D j =( 115 x 103 ) + 2 ( 14.1 )=143.2 mm
g) Calculate the axial length of the bearing

Lb :
A g 436.7
Lb = = =15.5 mm
W p 28.2
h) Estimate the pole (radial) length

Lp :
Used 1.25 as it was the average between the 1 and 1.5.
1
L p=( 1.5 ) W p =1.25 (28.2 )=35.3 mm
ii) Calculate back iron (radial) width:
W b i=0.5W p
W bi=0.5 ( 28.2 )=14.1 mm
j) Calculate the stator outside diameter OD:
OD=D j +2 ( g+ L p +W bi )
OD=143.2+ 2 ( 0.3+ 35.3+ 14.1 )=242.6 mm
k) Calculate the required MMF/pole; assuming (20-25) % leakage and infinite

permeability of the steel:
12
Bg
=( 1.21.25 ) (g)
0
1.485
=1.225 7
( 0.3 x 103 ) =434.284 At
4 x 10
Coil design Calculations
l) Calculate the cross-sectional area of the coil

AC :
This value was not calculated but was done using trial and error until the
maximum or optimal load capacity was achieved.
A coil =545.73 mm2 , this is obtained from the FE model.
m) Calculate number of turns and wire diameter:
To obtain this value required the calculation of

l av , this was done by assuming
the shape of the coil to be a trapezium.
The value of
For this model

Z y =8.266 mm , taken from the FE model.
13
l av =2 ( W p +Z y ) +2 ( Lb +Z y )
2 ( 28.2+8.266 )+ 2 ( 15.5+ 8.266 )=120.64 mm

80%.
144 =0.17241 x 107 [ 1+ ( 14420 ) 0.0039 ] =2.55 x 108 m
6
V
N=
j 144 l av
60
6
=4334.18 turns
4.5 x 10 ( 2.55 x 108 ) ( 120.64 x 103 )
434.284 2
A cond = = =0.0226 mm
Nj 4334.18 ( 4.5 x 10 )
6
Therefore actual
0.02270 mm2

kf was not assumed but was calculated and then adjust
to produce the best results.
N A cond 4334.18(0.02270)
k f= = =0.18
A coil 545.73
14
It can be seen that the coil filling factor was low

k f <0.78


R =0.7596 [ 1+ (14420 ) 0.0039 ]=1.1269
m
m
R144 =R Nl av
m
1.12694334.18( 120.64 x 103 )=589.22
V 60
I= = =0.102 A
R 144 589.22
Ac tual =NI =4334.180.102=442.086 At
Actual 442.086 At
density= = =0.81 x 106 2
Acoil 545.73 x 106
m
The value of mmf density that was used in Quick-Field did not produce the required
force and required further optimization.
This was done by recalculating with a thicker wire diameter but keeping the same
number of turns.
2
Chosen A cond =0.05515 mm and the nominal resistance was
0.3126
m
15
m) The new
k f is:
4334.18( 0.05515)
k f= =0.64
545.73
This value of
k f is higher than the original but is still lower than the expected
value

R =0.3126 [1+ (14420 ) 0.0039 ]=0.464
n) m
m
R144 =R Nl av
m
0.4644334.18( 120.64 x 103 )=242.49
V 60
I= = =0.247 A
R 144 242.49
Actual =NI =4334.180.247=1070.5 At
The actual MMF is higher than the initial MMF but at this value we were able to
obtain the correct MMF density to be used in the simulation.
Actual 1070.5 6 At
density= = =1.96 x 10 2
Acoil 545.73 x 106
m
16
Figure 2: Schematic of
the Final design
implementation
4.3 Thermal design:

Using the maximum allowable temperature for class H insulation of 180 0C, ambient
temperature of the shaft is 400C and of the air is 200C
The temperature operating range for class H insulation assuming (65 to 80)%of the
winding temperature from the maximum 180oC.
RANGE DEGREES KELVIN(+273)

0.65*180OC 117OC 390K
0.8*180OC 144OC 417K
Copper loss in the winding (coil):
V2
Pcu =
R 144
1
R=N l av 144
A cond
4334.18 ( 120.64 x 103 ) ( 2.55 x 108 )

6
=241,79
0.05515 x 10
Hence
17
2
60
Pcu = =14.85 W
242
Volume of the coil:
N Acond
Vol= Acoil l av = l av =( 545.73 x 106 ) ( 120.64 x 103 ) =65836.867 mm3
kf
Volume of Coil = 65836.867mm3, taken from the FE Model
Power density in the coil (in W/m3):

2
Pcu V kf 14.85 W
p= = 2 2
= =225557.5 3
Vol 144 N l av 65836.867 x 109
m
5. Simulation Results:
5.1 Initial design implementation:
18
Figure 3: Showing
the initial implementation, where we obtained a less than required flux density in
the core (1.45T as compared to 1.6T)
This was the initial simulation of the magnetic bearing actuator design. Please note
that the actual load capacity for this model was 767.92N. This was unacceptable as
the specified load capacity was given to be 1000N. Further optimization was
necessary.
5.2 Final design implementation:
19
Figure 6:
Showing the final implementation of the design, with the correct flux flowing
through the journal
Selecting the x-
component and utilizing
the equations to follow
Figure 4: Showing the Force calculation interface

When setting the problem properties of the model on Quick-
Field, we set the model class Plane-Parallel value
20
Lz =Lb=15.5 mm . By doing this the force obtained in Quick-field already accounted
for the length of the bearing. Thus the resultant force becomes:
Fqf =0.5F1
But
F=2.61F 1
F ( LC ) =2.612Fqf =2.612194.25=1013.985 N
This result is slightly higher then the required load capacity. The error obtained can
be found below:
% Error = ( 1013.9851000
1000 ) 100=1.3985
The load capacity obtained is acceptable as the requirement was to produce the
load capacity given or produce slightly higher.
5.3 Thermal design results:
21
Figure 5: Showing
the thermal
response of the
model
6.
Summary of Final Design Parameters:

Parameter Unit Value
Winding No of turns - 4334.18
Wire diameter (std) mm 0.05515
Average length of turn mm 120.64
Operating temp. 242.49
resistance
Developed MMF A-t 1070.5
Coil volume mm3 65836.867
Power loss density W/m3 225558
Force per pole (based on FE model) N 383.14
Number of poles switched on - 4
Axial length of the bearing mm 15.5
0
Winding max. temperature (FE model) C 119
22
7. Discussion of results:
The simulation design of the magnetic bearing was to achieve the maximum load
capacity that was initially given and for the thermal properties of the bearing to in
the range of the maximum temperature.
Initial Approach:
Initially it was decided to design the bearing using 3-pole activation. By activating
three active poles it produced a high force per pole (414.214N) as a result of the
high force, the cross-sectional area of the stator pole was large. Reason being the
cross-sectional area of the stator pole is directly proportional to the force per pole
obtained. Since the cross-sectional are of the stator pole is high it resulted in the
axial length of the bearing to be high.
The actual value of MMF (475.562A-t) calculated, using the number of turns and
current which was calculated using the area of conductor and coil. Resulted in a
higher value of MMF, although this value was acceptable it produced an error of:
Initial value of MMF = 434.284A-t
%Error = ( 475.562434.284
434.284 )100=9.5
The MMF density that was produced using the actual MMF and the area of coil was
relatively high. However when used in the simulation of the model the MMF density
23
did not produce the expected results such as the force and flux density. The force
produced using this design was 767.92 a value well below the expected load
capacity of 1000N, an error of:
%Error = ( 1000767.92
1000 )100=23.2
This was unacceptable, as the requirement for the design was to produce the given
load capacity or slightly higher.
The flux density was assumed to 1.65T but in the simulation at some points the flux
density was 1.45T. The coil filling co-efficient was 0.83, above the maximum of 0.78.
As a result of the results not meeting expectations, we decided to change the

approach used.
Final Approach:
In this approach we decided to use 4-pole activation, although by doing this the
value of the force per pole would decrease, directly influencing both the cross-
sectional area of the stator pole and the axial length of the bearing (a decrease in
both).
This design produced an actual MMF closer to the initial calculations being
442.086A-t; the decrease was a result of using a larger coil that dropped the
average length. This decrease the number of turns used. The error between the
actual and initial is:
%Error = ( 442.086434.284
434.284 )100=1.8
The model produced a smaller MMF density as the area of coil was much larger and
the MMF itself was lower. When used in the FE model once again the load capacity
was lower and so was the coil filling co-efficient.
On optimizing this model by increasing the area of conductor; the result was a large
coil filling co-efficient. This changed caused a decrease in the resistance, producing
a higher current. The number of turns stayed the same.
A result of the above change produced an actual MMF considerably larger then the
initial calculation, an error of:
Actual MMF= 1070.5A-t
24
%Error = ( 1070.5434.284
434.284 )100=146.5
This is large error; however the MMF density that was calculated using this MMF
produced a high value.
When used in the simulation the MMF density generated through the journal
produced the required load capacity although higher, the value is acceptable.
Load capacity achieved = 1013.985N
%Error = ( 1013.9851000
1000 )100=1.4 a minimal error.
The thermal design used the design that was just discussed. The result of the
simulation of thermal design produced a temperature of 392K. The expected range
of the winding temperature was 390K to 417K. The model produced a temperature
in range of the insulation class H (1800C max).
8. Conclusion:
The aim of the design was to simulate a magnetic bearing actuator using Quick-
Field. The design had to adhere to certain constraints whilst some could be
optimized.
The results of our design had met the specifications asked such as the achievement
of the load capacity and the thermal properties.
With respect to the load capacity it required it to have a minimum volume to

maximum force ratio. Although we had not met this requirement to exact levels, we
still produce a high load capacity. Another aspect was the high MMF we achieved on
the design, this value produced the required results.
25
The thermal design had utilized the same model used for magneto-statics, this
allowed for maximum expected results as the design had already been optimized.
The difficulty was achieving the optimal power density that would be used in the
simulation. Once we obtained the correct power density and boundary conditions
we were able to produce the required temperature of the winding.
In all we had met most of the requirements, errors can be expected. We had worked
through most difficulties and produce required expectations.
9. References:
1. Lecture notes distributed by Professor M. Hippner , based on magneto-statics
and
magnetic circuit analysis using Quick Field.
2. Electro-mechanics and Electric Machines , by S.A. Nasar and L.E. Unnewehr.
26
10. Appendix:
10.1 Optimization 1:
27
The value of
For this model

Z y =5.567 , taken from the FE model.
l av =2 ( W p +Z y ) +2 ( Lb +Z y )
93.24 mm

80%.
144 =0.17241 x 107 [ 1+ ( 14420 ) 0.0039 ] =2.55 x 108 m
6
V
N=
j 144 l av
28
60
6
=5607.84 turns
4.5 x 10 ( 2.55 x 108 ) ( 93.24 x 103 )
434.284 2
A cond = = =0.01720mm
Nj 5607.84 ( 4.5 x 106 )
Therefore actual
0.01767 mm2

kf was not assumed but was calculated and then
adjusted to produce the best results.
N A cond 5607.84(0.01767)
k f= = =0.27
A coil 365.199

k f Max) = 4 =0.78
The coil filling factor was too low and unacceptable


R =0.9757 [ 1+ (14420 ) 0.0039 ]=1.4475
m
m
R144 =R Nl av
m
1.44755607.24( 93.24 x 103 ) =756.80
V 60
I= = =0.0792 A
R 144 756.80
29
Actual =NI =5607.240.0792=444.093 At
Actual 444.093 6 At
density= = =1.216 x 10 2
Acoil 365.199 m
Figure 6: Showing the Flux line distribution and hence flux density
30
Figure 7: Showing the schematic where we used a greater concentration of nodes on

the core, rather than the air gap in order to increase the accuracy of the force
calculated on the
journal
Figure 8: Showing the actual flux density distribution, it can be noted that were not
achieving approx. 1.6T in the air gap
31
Selecting the x-
component, the required
load capacity was not
achieved
F ( LC ) =2.612Fqf =2.612144.18=752.619 N . The load capacity obtained was
unacceptable as the requirement was to produce the given load capacity of 1000N.
32

List of Symbols:: C Ext

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

List of Symbols:: C Ext

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Magnetic Bearing Actuator Group 6

The main aim of the design was to make sure that:

Magnetic bearings yield several advantages. Since there is no mechanical contact in

Typical Bearing Geometry

Conceptually, the typical magnetic bearing is composed of eight of horseshoe-

4. Design Process Electromagnetic (parts a-k)

4.1 Initial implementation of the design:

The design procedure involved several steps:

- Bearing dimension calculations

Bearing Dimension Calculations:

a) Selection of a reasonable flux density:

The example given from the lecture notes was

the model took the average of the example value hence

b) Estimate the flux density in the air gap

B g=0.9 ( 1.65 )=1.485 T

d) Using the approximate expression for force/pole,

Calculate the required cross-sectional are of the stator pole

Ag the subject of the formula:

e, f) Calculation of the width of the pole

journal outside diameter

Therefore the width of pole: W p=2W j=2 ( 14.1 )=28.2 mm

Hence to obtain the journal OD:

D j =( 115 x 103 ) + 2 ( 14.1 )=143.2 mm

g) Calculate the axial length of the bearing

h) Estimate the pole (radial) length

Used 1.25 as it was the average between the 1 and 1.5.

i) Calculate back iron (radial) width:

W bi=0.5 ( 28.2 )=14.1 mm

j) Calculate the stator outside diameter OD:

OD=143.2+ 2 ( 0.3+ 35.3+ 14.1 )=242.6 mm

k) Calculate the required MMF/pole; assuming (20-25) % leakage and infinite

m) Calculate number of turns and wire diameter:

To obtain this value required the calculation of

For this model

2 ( 28.2+5.567 )+ 2 ( 16.74+ 5.567 )=112.148 mm

Standard copper wire is to be used: resistivity at 20C is 20 = 0.17241*10-7 m and

Therefore class H would be (0.65 to 0.8)*180 = 117 0C to 1440C

To obtain resistivity at maximum operating temperature is as follows:

144 =0.17241 x 107 [ 1+ ( 14420 ) 0.0039 ] =2.55 x 108 m

Coil filling co-efficient

n) Calculate resistance and current

At the actual area of conductor = 0.02270mm 2 the corresponding nominal

Therefore at 1440C the nominal resistance is:

The resistance at 1440C is:

1.12694662.373( 112.148 x 103 )=589.22

o) Calculation of Actual MMF and MMF density

Actual =NI =4662.3730.102=475.562 At

Schematic of the initial design implementation

4.2 Final Optimization of Design:

The example given from the lecture notes was

the model took the average of the example value hence

b) Estimate the flux density in the air gap

B g=0.9 ( 1.65 )=1.485 T

d) Using the approximate expression for force/pole,

Calculate the required cross-sectional are of the stator pole

A g the subject of the formula:

e, f) Calculation of the width of the pole

journal outside diameter

Therefore the width of pole: W p=2W j=2 ( 14.1 )=28.2 mm

Hence to obtain the journal OD:

D j =( 115 x 103 ) + 2 ( 14.1 )=143.2 mm

g) Calculate the axial length of the bearing

h) Estimate the pole (radial) length