Analytical calculation of magnetic field of bearingless flux‐switching permanent‐magnet machine based on doubly‐salient relative permeance method

Zhou, Yangzhong; Wu, Xin

doi:10.1049/iet-epa.2019.0522

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A summarized review of AM techniques used to solve the magnetic field on PMSM presented in Table C1. In this table, the calculation of flux density and all other machine quantities for Sd / Ss , internal/external rotor machine using different magnetization pattern has been addressed 1–75 …”

Section: Machine Quantitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review on analytical models of brushless permanent magnet machines

Abbas,

Iqbal,

Lewicki

et al. 2023

Int J Numerical Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides an in‐depth investigation of the use of analytical and numerical methods in analyzing electrical machines. Although numerical models such as the finite‐element method (FEM) can handle complex geometries and saturation effects, they have significant computational burdens, are time‐consuming, and are inflexible when it comes to changing machine geometries or input values. Analytical models based on magnetic equivalent circuits (MEC) or solving Maxwell's equations can be faster and more flexible, but less accurate for complex machine structures. The paper focuses on the recent development of analytical models for brushless permanent‐magnet (PM) machines that have become increasingly popular in low and medium‐power applications. The literature review covers the recent developments in analytical models for PM machines with respect to various machine quantities such as magnetic flux density components, induced voltage, inductances, electromagnetic force/torque, efficiency, or unbalanced magnetic force (UMF). It outlines the advantages and disadvantages of different analytical models such as the zero‐dimensional (0‐D), one‐dimensional (1‐D), two‐dimensional (2‐D), and three‐dimensional (3‐D) analytical methods, as well as the Maxwell and basic mathematical analysis. Although the MEC models are faster than the numerical model, they are not as accurate for various structures of electrical machines including a great magnetic air gap. They also note that the analytical models based on the Maxwell equations are faster than the numerical ones and have the potential to obtain acceptable accuracy similar to the numerical models in electrical machines. Overall, this literature review provides valuable insights for researchers and engineers in selecting appropriate analytical models for PM machines. It highlights the trade‐offs between accuracy and computational efficiency when choosing between numerical and analytical models, and the flexibility of analytical models to address changes in machine geometries or input values. Additionally, this helps researchers save time in determining appropriate references regarding the analytical models of brushless PM machines.

show abstract

Section: Machine Quantitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another criterion of the classification is the number of dimensions, the formulation dimensions carried out in polar or rectangular (Cartesian) coordinates, as indicated for each reference in the eighth column of Table C1 . Last column of Table A2 represents the various consideration and calculations of each reference [1–75].…”

Section: Machine Quantitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review on analytical models of brushless permanent magnet machines

Abbas,

Iqbal,

Lewicki

et al. 2023

Int J Numerical Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, these researches can be grouped by: 1) different stator topologies, i.e., E-core and U-core stator modules [14] [15] [28]; 2) different winding configurations, i.e., concentrated winding, distributed winding and toroidal winding [18]; 3) different PM magnetization directions, i.e., adjacent PMs with same and with opposite magnetizing direction. What's more, some theoretical analysis on the electromagnetic performance of FSPM have been presented, such as MMF-permeance-model method [13], permeance and inductance modeling [19], magnetic circuit modeling [20], non-linear analytical modelling [21], doubly-salient relative permeance method [22]. Among the AFFSPM machines, double-stator or doublerotor axial-field flux-switching PM motors are widely studied due to their compact structure, small size, stable operation, great thermal management, high torque density and high efficiency [23]- [25], which is especially suitable for the wheel hub drive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of E- and U-core Modular Dual-Stator Axial-Field Flux-Switching Permanent Magnet Motors With Different Stator/Rotor-Pole Combinations Based on Flux Modulation Principle

Wang

Lin

et al. 2021

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, the dual-stator axial-field flux-switching permanent magnet (DSAFFSPM) motors with E-and U-core stator modular segments, as well as different stator/rotor-pole combinations are compared. The operation performance of the DSAFFSPM machines are explored by using the MMFpermeance model method. A more comprehensive theoretical analysis, no more limited to numerical calculation, is presented. This reveals directly the relations between the operation performance and design parameters of the machine. The performance comparisons between the E-shaped and U-shaped teeth DSAFFSPM machines are given, including the effects of the structural parameters on the electromagnetic torque, different stator/rotor-pole combinations on the winding factor and gear ratio, the differences of the average torque and the torque density and the efficiency in the 12/10 U-core and 6/10 E-core topology. These are the basis of the DSAFFSPM machine design and optimization. Finally, the experiments on the two prototype, 6/10 E-core and 12/10 U-core DSAFFSPM machines are carried out. The results show that the average torque of the 12/10 U-core prototype is higher than that of the 6/10 E-core prototype, while the torque density and the efficiency of 6/10 E-core DSAFFSPM machines are much higher.

show abstract

“…clearer physical principle. Some analytical methods have been proposed, including the separation variable method [11], the conformal mapping model [12]- [15], the magnetic equivalent circuit (MEC) method [16], relative permeance method [17], and subdomain model method [18]. In [11], the separation variable method was applied to brushless permanent magnet DC motors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But the slotting effect on tangential flux density cannot be calculated accurately. In [18], general subdomain models for internal and external rotor multiphase FSPMMs were developed, and the subdomain model can also account for the slotting effect [19], [20]. Refs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%