Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
k = 0, 1, 2, . . . (1)
where
3Nc Im
Jn = Kdcn Kpcn (2)
p
2n
mn = (3)
Ns s
sin(mn b0 /2)
Kdcn = (4)
mn b0 /2
2p n 3n
Kpcn = 2 sin sin (5)
Ns s Ns Ns
where Nc is the number of turns per coil, Ns is the number of
slots over the modular pitch of ten-poles, Im is the peak phase
current, is the electrical angular frequency, given by v/p , v
is the linear velocity, and t is the time. is an angle which is
used to bring the current into phase with the back electromotive
force (EMF) in order to achieve maximum force per ampere
operation.
When the permanent magnet armature travels at a velocity v
its z coordinate referred in the stator coordinate system is given
by
z = zr + v t (6)
where zr is the axial position referred to the moving-magnet
armature. From the foregoing equations, it can be shown that
Fig. 4. Eddy-current density in a magnet. (a) Time variation. (b) Time har-
the magnetic field in the moving-magnet armature which results monic distribution.
from the stator MMF harmonics varies at an integer multiple of
the frequency (3 /5). Fig. 4(a) and (b) shows, respectively, TABLE I
the waveform of the induced eddy-current density in the mid- LEADING DESIGN PARAMETERS OF MODULAR TUBULAR MOTOR
dle of one of the permanent magnets and its harmonic content
normalized to the fundamental frequency of 3 /5, when the
velocity of the armature is 11 m/s and the motor has the param-
eters given in Table I.
As can been seen from Fig. 4(b), the dominant harmonics in
the eddy current density are third, sixth, and ninth multiples of
the fundamental frequency 3 /5. Fig. 5 shows the variation
of the skin depth normalized to the axial length of the radially
magnetized magnets m and the radial thickness hm of the from the following:
magnets (Fig. 3) as functions of the harmonic order. It is evident
that, for most of the dominant harmonics, the skin depth is much 1 A (r, zr , t)
greater than the radial thickness of the magnets, which indicates Je (r, zr , t) = + C(t) (7)
t
that the eddy currents are predominantly resistance limited [15].
Thus, the induced eddy current density in the permanent mag- C(t) = Cn (t) (8)
nets, as well as in the titanium support tube, can be obtained n =1
764 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 20, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2005
mn (zr + vt)]
3an BI 1 (mn r)
cos[t +
2
n =3k +2
+ mn (zr + vt)],
k = 0, 1, 2, . . . (12)
0 Jn
an = (13)
BI 0 (mn Rs )mn
where BI 0 () and BI 1 () are modified Bessel functions of the
first kind of order zero and one, respectively. The flux density
components are deduced from A by
1 A
Bz = (rA ) Br = . (14)
r r z
The average eddy-current loss over a fundamental electrical
period in a given magnet or in the titanium tube may be evaluated
from
0 R 2 z r 0 + /2 2 / 0
Pe = 2rJe2 (r, zr , t)dtdzr dr
2 R 1 z r 0 /2 0
(15)
where 0 is the fundamental angular frequency of the induced
eddy current in the moving armature. The analytical expressions
for the eddy current density and the eddy-current loss are given
in the Appendix.
Fig. 5. Normalized skin depth as a function of harmonic order. (a) Normal-
ized to axial length of radially magnetized magnets. (b) Normalized to radial
thickness of magnets. III. VALIDATION BY FINITE-ELEMENT ANALYSIS (FEA)
where is the electrical resistivity of the permanent magnets or A. Validation With Infinitely Long Model
the titanium tube. C(t) is a function of time which is introduced The developed analytical model has first been validated by a
to ensure that zero net total current flows in each magnet and in series of time-stepped transient finite-element analyses (FEAs)
the supporting tube at any instant, i.e., of an ideal, infinitely long modular machine using one periodic
R 2 z r 0 + /2 (i.e., 9-slots/10-poles) segment as shown in Fig. 1, with a peri-
Je dzr dr odic boundary condition imposed at the two axial boundaries,
R1 z r 0 /2
and the natural Dirichlet condition imposed at the boundaries
R2 z r 0 + /2
1 A(r, zr , t) r = 0 and r = 0.12 (m), which is sufficiently remote from the
= + C(t) dzr dr = 0 outer surface of the stator core. In order to maximize the attain-
R1 z r 0 /2 t
able acceleration, the machine employs sintered NdFeB perma-
(9) nent magnets which are supported by a titanium tube, which has
where zr 0 , R1 , R2, and are the axial center, the inner and outer a high tensile strength, a low electrical conductivity and a low
radii, and the axial length of each magnet or the titanium tube, mass density. Both the NdFeB magnets and the titanium have
respectively. approximately the same electrical resistivity of 1.5 m.
The vector magnetic potential distribution A is obtained by The permanent magnets are assumed to be electrically conduct-
solving Laplaces equation ing, but un-magnetized. Thus, the FEAs do not account for the
1 1 induced eddy-current component which results from the varia-
(rA ) + (rA ) = 0 (10)
z r z r r r tion of the magnet working point due to stator slotting. However,
AMARA et al.: ANALYTICAL PREDICTION OF EDDY-CURRENT LOSS IN MODULAR TUBULAR PERMANENT-MAGNET MACHINES 765
Fig. 6. Variation of vector magnetic potential. (a) Variation with axial position.
(b) Variation with time.
saturation of the stator core, albeit due only to the stator MMF,
is represented in the FEA by their B-H curves.
Fig. 6(a) and (b) compares the analytically and finite ele-
ment predicated variation of A in the middle of the magnets
(r = 52 mm) with axial position zr at t = T /2 and the varia-
tion with time at zr = 0, respectively, where T is the period of
the fundamental frequency, while Fig. 7 compares the analyti-
cally and finite element predicted variation of the flux density
components with axial position zr .
It can be seen that, in both cases, the analytical predictions
agree extremely well with the finite-element calculations. Fig. 8
compares the time variation of the induced eddy-current density
in the magnets at zr = 0. As will be seen, good agreement is
again achieved, despite the fact that the analytical prediction is Fig. 8. Variation of eddy-current density in magnets with time (at r = 52 mm,
based on a resistance-limited eddy-current model. zr = 0).
766 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENERGY CONVERSION, VOL. 20, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2005
TABLE II
MAGNET SEGMENTATION SCHEMES