Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
82
Fig. 3. Single-rotor-single-stator axial flux surface magnet PM machine (a), Double-rotor-single-stator TORUS type axial flux surface magnet PM machine with
non-slotted and slotted alternatives (b), and Single-rotor-double-stator AFIR type axial flux surface magnet PM machine with non-slotted and slotted alternatives
(c)
The second alternative of the three disc option is two-stator- attention in all AFPM machine. Another drawback is related
single-rotor AFPM machine. This topology is also called to the winding. Placing AC windings into slots in slotted
Axial Flux Internal Rotor (AFIR) PM machine demonstrated machines and creating gramme windings in slotless machines
in (Fig. 3 (c)) [8-11]. AFIR type axial gap machines could be are difficult to realize. Also slot fill are usually less than the
again slotless or slotted with strip wound core. The winding in RFMs. One should not forget about the fact that unbalanced
slotless AFIR machine is usually gramme type while in slotted forces between the stator and rotor discs could complicate the
AFIR machine is usually distributed winding. AFIR type manufacturing process. All these drawbacks presented here
AFPM machines are used in the literature frequently as are most peculiar to AFPM machines and limits the use of
generators among other AFMs. these machines in industry.
One of the main benefits of AFPM machines is higher
power and torque densities compared to other electric IV. DESIGN OF HIGH POWER PM GENERATORS AND
machines. The torque density might exceed 3 times than the COMPARISON
induction machine with high energy NdFeB magnets. It has Design procedure for any AFPM generator includes three
geometric advantages with short stack and larger diameter main aspects: Electromagnetic design using design models and
which might be suitable for some applications such as wheel finite element analysis (FEA), structural check and thermal
mounting as traction motors or engine mounting as traction design and analyses of the generators. The first and the third
generators. Certain topologies of AFMs have significant stages are crucial for finalizing the disc type PM generator
efficiency advantage with short end windings. Planer and design but structural analysis is not a necessity due to the low
adjustable airgaps with the flexibility of increasing the number centrifugal forces acting on the magnets and the position of
of rotor or stator discs is one of the major benefits of such the rotor disc where magnets are placed. The first step during
machines. the design stage is to carry out a series of optimizations such
The main drawbacks and limits of AFPM machines are as pole number, loading, current density, dimensional limits
related to the stator structure. Because of the tape wound core and so on to find the optimum values. After finding a design
and axial laminations, the manufacturing is cumbersome and for each generator that meets the spec, the structure has to be
costly although material cost is less or comparable to other modeled in 3D FEA to verify the actual generator
machines. In addition, mechanical designs need special
83
performance. If the design passes this test, structural and then in the engine block. Flowchart of this process is shown in Fig.
thermal checks need to be carried out to finalize the generator 4. Finally, it should be mentioned that sizing analysis is
design. If the generator does not meet the structural or thermal carried out in order to chose the appropriate generator
tests, then the electromagnetic design study should be repeated topology for D7 type tractor in addition to both structural and
for a better design. It must be emphasized that thermal design thermal analyses. Detailed design and optimization as well as
is crucial for demanding Caterpillar applications due to the the structural and thermal checks are performed for some
high inlet temperature and the location of the generator placed topologies if required.
Sizing analysis of PM machines has been accomplished in small diameter ratios result in larger airgap flux density and
earlier studies [12-14]. One of the common sizing approaches higher ratio of active winding. Large diameter ratios give rise
is the equations developed by S. Huang and etc. [13-14]. In to smaller airgap flux density and lower ratio of active
general, the sizing equations for a 3 phase AFPM machine winding. More details of this sizing approach are given in the
have the following form: literature in detail [13-14].
f 1+ 2
PR = K ABg A (1 2 ) Do Le (1)
p 2 A. General Sizing and Optimization
In order to optimize the performance of the AFMs for D7
where PR is rated output power of the machine, Le is effective
stack length of the machine, f is frequency, p is pole pair, Bg is truck application, the diameter ratio and the airgap flux
airgap flux density, is efficiency, KA is waveform constant density Bg have to be chosen cautiously because the ratio, ,
and is the diameter ratio of the machine which is defined as and Bg are design parameters which have significant effect on
the characteristics of the generator. This approach is repeated
D
= i (2) for all of the 3-disc AF generators and optimum operating
Do points are found. The results for all of the generators used in
where Do and Di are machine diameters at outer and inner the comparison are displayed in Fig. 5.
surfaces. This parameter is the most important design
parameter of AFPM machines. It should be mentioned that
Fig. 5. Power density plots of each generator type (a) Slotless TORUS, (b) Slotted TORUS, (c) Slotless AFIR and (d) Slotted AFIR generators
84
comparison of the generator topologies after finalizing the
B. Criterias for Comparison design at the optimum operating point. During the design
The quantities used to compare the 179kW PM generators process structural analysis for AFIR type generators and
with stringent operating conditions and mechanical thermal analysis for both slotted TORUS and slotted AFIR
specifications are torque density, power density, efficiency, generators are completed as well.
utilization factor, active weight, total volume, active material
volume, inertia and material cost. C. Comparison of Generators
Before documenting the comparison effort, it is useful to After all the analyses are completed and the generator
provide a few definitions since many common terms are used designs are finalized, the comparison of the generators in
for both axial and radial flux machines. The quantity Ltot is the terms of power/torque density, efficiency, weight, utilization
total axial length or stack length for AFMs. However, the factor, and heat dissipation has been accomplished for 179 kW
same parameter is the total axial length including stack length 1600 rpm 16 pole radial and axial flux PM generators. Some
and protrusion of the end winding for RFMs. The quantity Dtot design values such as current density and electrical loading are
is the total outer diameter including the protrusion of the end kept the same throughout the designs and each generator
winding for AFMs. provides the same output power. In order to see the effects of
The power density (W/cm3) and torque density (Nm/cm3) of higher pole numbers, the pole number is increased to 16 for
a generator are expressed as, the sizing of the D7E generator. The detailed sizing results
PR obtained for D7 type 179kW tractor are provided in Fig. 6, Fig. 7
Pden. = (3) and Fig. 8. The following conclusions are drawn from these
2
Dtot Ltot analyses:
4
Slotted dual-stator-single-rotor generator (AFIR-S)
PR
Tden. = (4) has the highest power and torque densities among
2 the other structures. It has 59.8% higher
r Dtot Ltot
4 power/torque density than the conventional
where PR is the rated power of the machine and r is the rated generator. In general, all of the axial gap generators
rotor speed. have higher power/torque densities than the
Another torque density comparison used in the study is the conventional generator.
active torque density where active material volume is used
AFIR-S generator has the highest torque-to-weight
rather than total volume of the generator. The active torque
ratio. This machine offer 2.58 times more torque
density is given by
per weight than the RFPM generator.
TR
Tden. = (5) The generator efficiencies are approximately the
V PM + Viron + Vcopper same except for the RFPM generator. Slotless
where VPM is the magnet volume, Viron is the total stator and TORUS generator has the highest efficiency while
rotor volume and Vcopper is the copper volume of the generator. the RFPM generator has the lowest efficiency.
The generators are also compared for torque-to-weight
RFPM generator has higher loss component than the
ratios defined as
axial gap generator. Slotless TORUS structure has
T the lowest loss value among the other structures
Tden-kg = R (6)
Weight resulting in the highest efficiency.
Also, the utilization factor in (kW/kg) is expressed as Heat dissipation factor is the lowest for slotless
P . AFIR and the highest for the RFPM generator. In
Cw = R , (7)
Weight other words, RFPM generator is very difficult to
where Weight is the active generator weight. cool while AFIR-NS is the easiest to cool because
Heat dissipation factor is nice definition to consider the of the larger surface area.
temperature rise. This factor for radial gap and single stator AFIR type topologies are easier to cool than
axial gap and dual stator axial gap generators is respectively TORUS type topologies because of the larger stator
defined as surface area. In other words, AFIR type generators
PCu + PFe . are the best, and conventional generator is the worst
H diss = (8) in terms of transferring the heat to the generator
D o Ltot
frame.
PCu + PFe .
H diss = (9) When the generator material costs are compared,
( Do + Di ) Ls + 2( Do2 Di2 ) / 4 slotted generators are cheaper than the slotless
PCu + PFe . generators, and the material cost for the slotted
H diss = (10) topologies are roughly the same. The reason is that
2 ( Do + Di ) Ls + 4( Do2 Di2 ) / 4
the slotless structures use more magnet material
All of the definitions given in this section are used in the
resulting in higher cost than the other structures.
85
179kW AFIR-S machine is the lightest structure of In general, slotless generators have larger inertia
all while the conventional generator is the heaviest than the others because of more magnet material
one. It can also be observed that the RFPM used.
generator uses the most amount of iron while
slotless structures use the most amount of magnet
material.
Slotted AFIR structure is the smallest in volume
Slotted AFIR structure has the lowest moment of
inertia compared to any other structure.
5 0.03
0.025
4
0.02
3
0.015
2 0.01
1 0.005
0 0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
Torque-to-weight (Nm/kg)
2
10
Cost ratio (%)
8 1.5
6
1
4
0.5
2
0 0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
W_pm
250 W_copper
W_iron
200
Weight (kg)
150
100
50
0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
Fig. 6. Comparison of 179 kW 16pole 1600 rpm radial and axial gap permanent magnet generators. (a) Power density [W/cm3], (b) Torque density [Nm/cm3], (c)
Torque to weight ratio [Nm/kg] comparisons, (d) Material cost ratio comparison, (e) Distribution of material weight [kg]
P_cu
97 7 P_iron
6 P_other
96
Efficiency (%)
5
Loss (%)
95 4
94 3
2
93 1
92 0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
Utilization Factor (kW/kg)
1.5 3
2.5
1 2
1.5
0.5 1
0.5
0
0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
Fig. 7. Comparison of 179 kW 16pole 1600 rpm radial and axial gap permanent magnet generators. (a) Efficiency [%] and (b) Loss distribution [%] comparisons,
(c) Utilization factor [kW/Kg], (d) Heat dissipation [w/cm2] comparisons,
86
0.06 0.035
0.05
0.025
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.015
0.02
0.01
0.01 0.005
0 0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
4
Interia ratio
2
0
RFSM TORUS-NS TORUS-S AFIR-NS AFIR-S
Fig. 8. Comparison of 179 kW 16pole 1600 rpm radial and axial gap permanent magnet generators. (a) Total volume (using Dtot and Ltot) [m3], (b) Total active
volume (material volume only) [m3], (c) Inertia comparisons [kgm2]
REFERENCES
[1] E. Spooner and B. J. Chalmers, TORUS, A toroidal-stator, permanent
magnet machine for small scale power generation, International
Conference on Electrical Machines 1990, MIT, Cambridge, pp. 1053-
1058.
[2] C. C. Jensen, F. Profumo and T. A. Lipo, A low loss permanent magnet
brushless DC motor utilizing tape wound amorphous iron, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications, Vol.28, No. 3, May/June 1992,
pp. 646-651.
[3] E. Spooner and B. J. Chalmers, TORUS, a slotless, toroidal-stator,
permanent magnet generator, Proc. IEE, Part-B, Vol.139, No. 6, Nov.
1992, pp. 497-506.
[4] R. L. Ficheux, F. Caricchi, F. Crescimbini and O. Honorati, Axial-flux
permanent-magnet motor for direct-drive elevator systems without
87