Page 1

CM: 318
Team No. 32

ME 321-01
Measurement Systems
Richard A. Layton
Winter 2016-2017

Determining the Motor Constant of a DC Motor.

19 January 2017

Grant Brown
Ellie Honious
Robert Means
Mark Stamper

Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

5500 Wabash Ave.
Terre Haute, IN 47803
 Page 2

Introduction

Layton Inc. sent team 32 to a R&D facility, Rotz Lab, to obtain the value of the motor constant
of a Dayton DC motor 3XE19. This constant will be used to determine the most efficient motor
for client 3210-3. In order to obtain this motor constant, it must first be understood that the motor
constant described within this experiment is the value that describes a motors ability to
transform electrical power into mechanical power. Knowing the motor constant allows users and
buyers to compare relative efficiencies and output power capabilities to competing motors.
Within this experiment the motor torque constant was used. This constant can be obtained by
evaluating the applied motor torque, with current, as shown in equation (1).

An alternate motor constant option is the motor voltage constant. This motor constant, KV ,
also describes the motors ability to transform electrical power into mechanical power, however
it does so by relating an input voltage with angular speed. K t was used instead of K V
because through extensive research Kt was found to be the most common and standard motor
constant over multiple brands of motors.

This report will describe the physical model from the experiment, the experimental apparatus by
explaining each measurement and present data as well as final results and conclusions for the
values of the motor constant.
 Page 3

System and Model

When observing the DC Motor, it was important to understand the inter-mechanics between
sections and understand how to obtain the necessary measurands (current and torque), to find the
motor torque constant. In Figure 1 below, the model of overall setup of the DC motor and the
readout devices, describes where to find the measurands and how they are found.

Figure 1. Overview of DC Motor setup with placement of readout devices

As shown above, readout measurements can be obtained for output torque and through current in
the motor. The thought behind the constant explains that finding output torque per input power
describes DC motors in a comparative sense, thus prescribing the relationship below. This
concept is represented as

(1)
Kt= ,
P
which when considering Ohms law:
 Page 4

I=
P
R ,
(2)

leads us to the torque motor constant relationship of

(3)
Kt= .
I

The output torque in this relationship can be read from the dynamometer, attached to the DC
motor; and the input current from the digital multi-meter (DMM). At this point, you are able to
begin testing for both output torque and through current, with each data set yielding a direct
relationship with the torque motor constant.
 Page 5

Apparatus and Methods

Apparatus
To calculate the motor constant, torque and current must be measured. The torque value is
acquired using a dynamometer coupled with a DC motor. The dynamometer will indicate the
current torque being outputted by the motor on a scale located at its top. The value of current is
acquired by introducing a Digital Multimeter (DMM) to the connection between the motor and
its power supply unit (PSU), which is set to measure the DC current flowing from the PSU into
the motor. The brake current unit (BCU) is a part of the dynamometer and is used to adjust the
brake current applied to the dynamometer which will result in variations of torque and current
entering the motor. The arrangement of these units is shown in Figure 1. The components of this
arrangement that may require adjustments are shown in Figures 2-4.

Figure 2. Apparatus Setup

Figure 3. Dynamometer
 Page 6

Figure 4. Brake Current Unit

Figure 5. Digital Multimeter

 Page 7

Procedure
Once familiar with the apparatus, a test sequence was created. The range for the test sequence
was created by measuring the initial number of amps present before applying a brake current to
the apparatus. This value dictated the low end of our test sequence. The top value of our test
sequence was derived based on the full-scale output of the DC motor, and by researching how
much the motor could run full-scale without damaging it, Appendix E: reference [ ]. By
inspecting the specification sheet for the DC Motor, it was determined that 130% of the full-scale
output (service factor of 1.3) could be used to test the motor for short intervals and yet still be
long enough to extract the readout values. Upon determining boundaries for our test condition, 5
intervals of output currents were set and 6 trials of each value were to be conducted. These trials
were randomized by using a randomization code, created in Matlab. The randomized trials were
also corrected to be non-repetitive so as to reduce systematic error in the readings of the test.
Trial randomization and correction can be seen in Table 1, found in Appendix A. To run the
experiment, brake current was adjusted - yielding a correlating current into the motor which was
measured, as well as a torque readout via dynamometer. Values of the input current were run
through the test sequence, and the resulting torque readouts were documented. The exact values
of each readout may be found in Appendix A, as well.
 Page 8

Results and Discussion

The maximum uncertainty was the one reported. All the uncertainties were relatively close in
value to each other, however a blanketing uncertainty for all values was desirable because the
goal was to find the motor constant. The torque constant was found to be 7.010.05 (oz in)/A for
the Dayton DC motor. The full load values from the manual, as referenced in Appendix E, were
= 0.8 in lbs (12.8 oz in) and I = 2.74 A. Substituting these into equation 2, the expected torque
constant was calculated to be 4.67 (oz in)/A. The experimental torque constant is much higher
than the expected. The expected value was calculated using manufacturer specifications of full
load torque and current, it was assumed that by using these two values an accurate guess for
motor constant could be made. By using this method, it was assumed that the slope of the motor
constant intercepted the y-axis at 0 oz in. As the experimental data in Figure 5 shows, the slope
does not intercept the y-axis at 0, therefore the assumption used to calculate the expected motor
constant was invalid. That being said, the experimental and expected values are still in the same
order of magnitude therefore the data is approximately where it should be. The data was linear
before the outlier test was performed as shown in Appendix A, and Figure 5 shows the data
without the outlier. By definition of torque constant (equation 2), it was expected that the
relationship between torque and current would be linear. Also, the uncertainty was found to be
0.05 (oz in)/amp, which is 0.7% of the resultant. This is a reasonable uncertainty for any
practical application of the motor.

Figure 6. Analyzed Data

 Page 9

Conclusion
The object of this experiment was to obtain the motor constant of a Dayton DC motor. It was
found that the tested DC motor had a motor constant of 7.01 (oz in)/A with an uncertainty value
of 0.05 (oz in)/A. This was determined after obtaining 30 randomized trials using five different
values of output currents.
 Page 10

Appendix A: Data

Table 1 shows all recorded data for the experiment. Trial order was determined by using a
randomization code in Matlab. Each NA trial was used to input a different current so that when
the randomization created two input currents of the same value in a row, there was some switch
value used to ensure a new torque reading. Figure 6 shows the resulting, recorded torque plotted
against Current, as well as the determined outlier.
Table 1: Recorded data from experimental trials 1-30.
 Page 11

Figure 7. A plot of the recorded data from the 30 trails. Later trail 17 was determined to be an
outlier.
 Page 12

Appendix B: Uncertainty Calculations

It was assumed that all random uncertainty only attributed to torque because the current was
known to a high degree of accuracy. With this assumption, the uncertainty was calculated using

(3)
.
The total uncertainty is denoted by w Kt , wrandom is the random uncertainty, wIsys and wsys are the
systematic uncertainty in current and torque respectively.

The systematic uncertainty in the current was calculated using

, (4)
where wIAccuracy is the accuracy of the digital multimeter, which was 0.8% of the reading. The error
in the readability of the digital multimeter was captured in wIReadability.

The systematic uncertainty associated with the torque was calculated using
, (5)
where wAccuracy is the accuracy of the dynamometer, which was 1% of the reading. This lead to an
array of error, just like that of the uncertainty for the current. The uncertainty associated with
each trial can be found below, as well, in Table 2. The error in the readability of the
dynamometer was captured in wReadability.

The random uncertainty was represented by using

. (6)
The t-statistic, denoted by t, was based on the 95% confidence interval of our 30 trails. The
standard error estimate, assuming all error is in error is in the torque, is denoted by SI.

An overall uncertainty was calculated for each trail using equation (3), all of which can be found
below, in Table 2. The max uncertainty was the reported uncertainty. All uncertainties were
relatively close and a blanketing uncertainty for all values was desired because the goal was to
find the overall motor constant.
 Page 13

Table 2 describes both torque and current systematic uncertainties as well as the total uncertainty
associated with each trail. Because there were 30 readings, an array of uncertainties was created,
through propagation in equation (3) for each reading.

Table 2: Total systematic uncertainties for torque and current as well as total uncertainty
for each trail.
 Page 14

Appendix C: Determining Outliers

Using the Wheeler and Ganji method of determining outliers for dependent data, as seen in
Appendix E: reference [ ], trail 17 was determined to be an outlier. This method looked at the
magnitude of the deviation between the expected torque through linear regression and the
measured torque. If any of the deviations are greater than twice the standard error, then the point
is considered to be an outlier. As shown in Table 3, the standard error was found to be 0.18,
making trail 17 an outlier.
Table 3: Outlier Test
 Page 15

Appendix D: Matlab Code

The following code was used to make all calculations.

clc
clear all

%Inputs
data = 'Project1_Data2.csv';
M = xlsread(data); %read the file
[N,c] = size(M); %get file size, N= number of data points
T = M(:,1); %create array of Torque values
A = M(:,2); %create array of Current values

WTAcc = T * 0.01; %Accuracy for Torque

WTRead = 0.5; %Readability Uncertainty for Torque
WARead = 0.005; %Readability Uncertainty for Current
WAAcc = A * 0.008 ; %Accuracy for Current

%Plot the data

hold on;
plot(A,T,'.b');

%Best fit line

p = polyfit(A,T,1); %find best fit line
yfit = p(1) .* A + p(2); %use data x values to make a fitted line

%Plot the best fit line

hold on
plot(A,yfit,'k')
ylabel('Torque (oz-in)')
xlabel('Current (amps)')

%Find Sxy, assumes Current is known to a high degree and all random is in
%Torque
stats = regstats(T,A,'linear','mse');
Syx = sqrt(stats.mse);

%Random Uncertainty
tCrit = tinv(0.975, N-1);
wrand = tCrit * Syx;

%Systematic Uncertainty
WsysA = sqrt(WAAcc.^2 + WARead^2);
WsysT = sqrt(WTAcc.^2 + WTRead.^2);
 Page 16

%Sensitivity Coefficient 1 Numerator

meanT = mean(T);
errT = (T - meanT).^2;
num1 = sum(errT);

%Sensitivity Coefficien 1 Denominator

meanA = mean(A);
errA = (A-meanA).^2;
errAsum = sum(errA);
den1 = errAsum^2;

%Sensitivity Coefficient 1
SenCoe1 = num1 ./ den1;

%Sensitivity Coefficient 2
SenCoe2 = 1./errAsum;

%Total Uncertainty
wfromA = SenCoe1^2 .* WsysA.^2
wfromT = SenCoe2^2 .* WsysT.^2
wfromrandom = SenCoe2^2 .* wrand.^2
wtot = sqrt(wfromA + wfromT + wfromrandom)

%error bars
errorUpper = yfit + wtot;
errorLower = yfit - wtot;
plot(A,errorUpper,'--r',A,errorLower,'--r')
 Page 17

Appendix E: Motor Manual