Heartmate Iii

Bourque, Kevin; Poirier, Victor L.; Gernes, D.; Loree, H.; Richardson, J S; Barletta, N.; Fleischli, A.; Schoeb, Reto

doi:10.1097/00002480-200003000-00101

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While there are a wide variety of different suspension principles for two-phase and three-phase configurations, as reported by [27,28], we chose the standard N ps = N pr + 1, where N ps represents the number of suspension pole pairs and N pr signifies the number of rotor pole pairs. The aforementioned suspension principle is commonly used [21,22] and corresponds to the configurations of both the CentriMag and HeartMate III [17,18]. Furthermore, the equal, conventional dipole rotor [29,30] was used in this study, meaning that N pr = 1, which then required that N ps = 2.…”

Section: Suspension Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 1 illustrates a unique blood pump technology that integrates both an axial and a centrifugal pump into one medical device [3]. Notably, the two blood pumps most frequently used clinically, CentrigMag (Abbott, Abbott Park, IL, USA) and HeartMate III (Abbott, Abbott Park, IL, USA), share a twophase configuration [17,18]. In contrast, BPMSMs in other industries conventionally employ three-phase motors due to the abundance of empirical and developmental data that are readily available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Practical Comparison of Two- and Three-Phase Bearingless Permanent Magnet Slice Motors for Blood Pumps

Lawley,

Matlis,

Throckmorton

et al. 2024

Actuators

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of bearingless permanent magnet slice motors (BPMSMs) used in commercially available rotary blood pumps use a two-phase configuration, but it is unclear as to whether or not a comparable three-phase configuration would offer a better performance. This study compares the performance of two-phase and three-phase BPMSM configurations. Initially, two nominal designs were manufactured and empirically tested for their performance characteristics, namely, the axial stiffness, radial stiffness, and current force. Subsequently, finite element analysis (FEA) models were developed based on these nominal devices and validated against the empirical results. Simulations were then employed to assess the sensitivity of performance characteristics to variations in seven different geometric features of the models for both configurations. Our findings indicate that the nominal three-phase design had a higher axial stiffness and radial stiffness, but resulted in a lower axial-to-radial-stiffness ratio when compared to the nominal two-phase design. Additionally, while the nominal two-phase design shows a higher current force, the nominal three-phase design proves to be slightly superior when the force generated is considered relative to the power usage. Notably, the three-phase configuration demonstrates a greater sensitivity to dimensional changes in the geometric features. We observed that alterations in the air gap and rotor length lead to the most significant variations in performance characteristics. Although most changes in specific geometric features entail equal tradeoffs, increasing the head protrusion positively influences the overall performance. Moreover, we illustrated the interdependent nature of the head height and rotor height on the performance characteristics. Overall, this study delineates the strengths and weaknesses of each configuration, while also providing general insights into the relationship between specific geometric features and performance characteristics of BPMSMs.

show abstract