Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract: The permanent magnet transverse differences for an axial flux PMTFM design-
flux motor (PMTFM) has an excellent torque to volume estimation was discussed briefly in [5]. A
ratio compared to any of the conventional motors. The mathematical model of the TFM is presented in
two phase disc rotor PMTFM to be discussed in this [7]. A basic view on the way the numerical
paper has a quite simple and robust construction models, finite element method (FEM) included,
compared with the usual rotating PMTFM. Therefore
such a motor can be considered as a competitor for
can be employed in the PMTFM design is given
different automotive drives. In the paper two in [8].
constructive variants are presented and for one of The automotive application, which is
them the design procedure and the performance considered here, requires, besides a very large
calculations are carried on by using a coupled torque to volume ratio, constructive simplicity
analytical and 2D or 3D-FEM computation strategy. and good reliability. Consequently the proposed
PMTFM structure a two phase stator and one
1. INTRODUCTION has active rotor in an axial flux pattern, Fig. 1.
Figure 3. View of the disc rotor with alternate Figure 4. A partial view of the axial field
polarity PMs PMTFM, UP variant
In the AP variant case each stator has half of
the rotor pole numbers, Fig. 5, and the rotor has
the PMs with alternate polarity, Fig. 3. In both
variants the stator and rotor pole length is equal
and the same.
a) Rotor PMs with the same polarity b) Rotor PMs with alternate polarity
Figure 8. Simplified air-gap flux density variation in a stator pole axis
It is quite clear that in the AP variant the The stator current density was adopted
stator and the rotor number of poles should be J = 4 A/mm2, even it could be larger, to avoid any
increased in order to obtain a larger value for the problems concerning the PMs temperature
stator phase induced emf. One must consider over-increase. With a slot fill factor kfill = 0.5 and
the fact that by increasing the number of rotor a slot area Asl = 400 mm2 resulted a stator phase
poles the PMs volume is increased, too, and so current I = 16 A. The input voltage adopted is
is the motor cost. Therefore such an option V1 = 45 V and consequently the input power is:
should be carefully evaluated and adopted only if S1 = 2 45 16 = 1440 VA (6)
the output torque increases justify the extra cost.
It was not our intention to develop here a study For such a low power motor the efficiency
on this subject and to offer some solutions, it is and the power factor should be = 0.88,
the object of a paper which will follow this year. cos = 0.65 and the rated output power resulted:
Anyway, by calculating the main harmonic P2 = S1 cos = 824 W (7)
amplitude the results are:
B gM (1)UP = 0.5 B gM 0.64 T (1) which is near by the initial estimation.
The no-load air-gap flux density, with the
stator and rotor pole in aligned position, is
B gM (1) AP = B gM 1.15 T (2) obtained via a 2D-FEM calculation [5],
where the maximum actual amplitude of the air- Bg0 = 1.2 T and consequently the polar flux
gap flux density BgM was considered the same. produced by the PMs mmf results:
Obviously the above given values are gs = B g 0 AP = 0.415 10 3 Vs (8)
calculated considering only the PMs mmf, which
means a no-load operating for PMTFM. the no-load air-gap flux can be computed by
Considering that the number of turns is the same employing the magnetic equivalent circuit given
in both variants then the induced emf values, in Fig. 9a, where the leakage coefficient k,
computed by Faradays law, computed via a 2D-FEM analysis [5] is 0.0265.
d The air-gap flux produced by the stator phase
e = N (3) mmf with the poles in aligned position can be
dt computed by using the magnetic equivalent
are: circuit given in Fig. 9b. The stator phase leakage
magnetic reluctance can be computed in an
E MUP = N 2 n p A p 0.32 B gM (4)
usual manner, as for a rotating PMTFM [3].
E MAP = N 2 n p * A p 1.15 B gM (5)