Comparative study of Structural Rigidity of Induction Machine and Switched Reluctance Machine

ABSTRACT Extensive use of Induction machines (IMs) demands for comprehensive fault analysis. At the same time, the comparable cost, versatility and rigidness of Switched Reluctance Machines (SRMs) make them serious candidates for different applications. The motivation behind this paper is to perform structural analyses for SRMs and IMs under different conditions to determine the causes of structural failures and to offer a comparative study. Stresses and deformations experienced by the machines under different scenarios such as rated speed, start-up/speed reversal and transient load change, and high speed operations, have been explored to identify the causes of structural failures, hence, facilitating application specific machine selection. I. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Magnetic forces due to the stator and rotor magnetic fields and centrifugal forces due to rotation are the sources of stresses and deformations on rotor teeth and bars. The deformations experienced are mainly radial in direction, infringing upon the airgap. Extreme deformations can cause contact between rotating and stationary parts causing permanent damage to the machine and safety threats. Similarly, stress exceeding tensile yield strength of the rotor material is another source of structural failure. The magnitude of the stress experienced by the rotor depends on rotor mass and rotational speed, but the geometry of the rotor determines the stress distribution. Depending on the geometry, two rotors with same mass and same rotational speed can experience stress concentrations of different magnitudes at different points. Tooth faces along the air gap:

fr
Tooth faces perpendicular to the air gap:

1 ( Br2 Bt2 ) 2 0

ft

0
1

Br Bt

ft
where

1 ( Bt2 Br2 ) 2 0

fr

Br Bt

Bt , Br , and 0 are Magnetic flux in tangential direction, flux in radial direction and permeability of air.

Centrifugal forces were calculated in Ansys 14.5 by applying rotational velocity to the rotor structure. The results obtained from these two Finite Element Analysis (FEA) tools at corresponding operational speed were combined to observe the structural deformation and stress distribution on the rotor of each machine. i. BASE SPEED OPERATION

Fig.3(a) Deformation of an IM rotor at base speed

(b)Deformation of a SRM rotor at base speed

Fig.4 (a) Stress on IM rotor at base speed

(b) Stress on SRM rotor at base speed

ii. HIGH SPEED OPERATION - ATTAINABLE TOP SPEED SRM rotor structure displayed the capability of rotating at speeds of up to 53900 rpm, whereas IM machine rotor reached failure point at 28400 rpm. Hence, for high power high speed applications, structural of rigidity of SRM rotors proves beneficial over IM rotors. iii. TRANSIENT/START UP

150 100 Force (N) 50 0 0 -50 100 200

Transience Force Profile

Radial force

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Time (ms)
Fig.5. Magnetic force profile for IM during start up

Fig.6(a). Deformation due to transient forces

(b) Stress due to transient forces

II.

CONCLUSION

The causes of structural failures; stresses and deformations due to magnetic and rotational forces were analyzed during start up, base speeds and high operational speeds. For machines with similar output characteristics, lower mass of SRM rotor helps with reduction of stresses due to centrifugal forces. At the same time, the geometry of the SRM rotors helps with better stress distribution. Although SRM rotors display better structural rigidity over wide range of operational speeds, they have significant advantages over IM rotors for high power high speed applications. The absence of transient stresses during start up is another key consideration that makes SRMs more reliable than IMs.