1985
DOI: 10.1109/tia.1985.349720
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of No-Load Flux Density Distribution in Permanent Magnet Machines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
77
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 164 publications
(77 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
77
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of these analytical methods is called the "subdomain" method and consists in solving directly the Maxwell's equations in the different subdomains, i.e., air-gap, stator slots and magnets, by the variables separation method [6,7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…One of these analytical methods is called the "subdomain" method and consists in solving directly the Maxwell's equations in the different subdomains, i.e., air-gap, stator slots and magnets, by the variables separation method [6,7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In magnetic field calculation of electrical permanent magnet machines, most authors consider a real direction of magnetization (parallel) [6][7][8][9][24][25][26][27][28]. They consider only one permanent magnet by pole.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These ironless motors [1][4] differ from iron-core motors [5][6] because the last ones are used up to a few hundred of hertz. Even though ironless motors are less efficient than iron-core motors, they constitue technological solutions [7] [8] for avoiding the drawbacks of eddy currents that appear in iron-core motors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem of magnetically generated vibration has been addressed by other investigators. Boules [3] analytically predicted the flux density in permanent magnet machine. Sabonnadiere et al [4] calculated the magnetic force using the finite element method, while Lefevre et al [5] did so with finite difference method along with determining the dynamic reaction with FEM.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%