DESIGN CRITERIA FOR DETENT FORCE REDUCTION OF PERMANENT

MAGNET LINEAR SYNCHRONOUS MOTOR WITH HALBACH ARRAY

Seok-Myeong J ang, Sung-Ho Lee, In-Ki Yoon, J ung-Ho Lee
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, ChungnamNational University,
220, Kung-Dong, Yu-Sung Gu, Taejeon, 305-764, Korea
This paper presents the design criteria for the detent force reduction of the permanent
magnet linear synchronous motor (PMLSM) with Halbach array. Therearethreeapproaches
to improve power efficiency of short PM poles type LSM. The first approach is the
comparison on themagnetic field and forces of two types of PMLSM. Oneis the PMLSM
with Halbach array (HA-PMLSM) and theother is thePMLSM with conventional array (CA-
PMLSM), as shown in Fig. 1. Thesecond oneis thedetermination of PM lengthhlot pitch of
two types with the minimumdetent force. The third one is the comparison on the force
performanceof two types with theminimumdetent force. Fig. 2 shows thecomparison on the
open-circuit magnetic field distribution. Fig. 3 shows the detent force versus PM position
when CA-PMLSM and theHA-PMLSM havetheratio of PM length to slot pitch, 2.353 and
1.176, respectively. The detent forceis periodic and repeats itself over every slot pitch. Fig. 4
ihows therequired PM sizeof HA-PMLSM for detent forcereduction and Fig. 5 thereduced
detent force in comparison with Fig. 3. It is observed that the power efficiency of HA-
PMLSM is better than that of CA-PMLSM, as shown inFig. 6. The detent forcereduction of
two types of PMLSM with skew of PMs will bepresented in next extended version.
[l ] T. Mizuno and H. Yamada, "Magnetic circuit analysis of a linear synchronous motor with
permanent magnets, " ZEEE. Trans. On Magnetics, vol. 28, pp. 3027-3029, 1992.
Bad
I Pim-$#ad ( - 10; 20 3.0 i o so 60 70 80 90 ,bo 5 0 m "
Pos,l,m ["I Pc618on [ mml
Fig. 1. Two types of PMLSM Fig. 2. Open-circuit magnetic Fig. 3. Detent force
field distribution vs. position
Fig. 4. Detent forcevs. airgap Fig. 5. Reduced detent force
and PM 1engtWslot pitch vs. position performance
Fig. 6. Comparison of force
COMPARISON OF TWO TYPES OF PM LINEAR SYNCHRONOUS SERVO AND
MINIATURE MOTOR WITH AIR-CORED FILM COIL
Seok-Myeong J ang, Sung-Ho Lee
Dept. of Electrical Engineering, ChungnamNational University,
220, Kung-Dong, Yu-Sung Gu, Taejeon, 305-764, Korea
Permanent magnet linear synchronous motor (PMLSM) has been developed for factory
automation, reciprocating servo system, conveyance system, transportation applications,
wafer steppers, and so on [l]. In our work, the air-cored filmcoil is used for the primary
winding of them. Such a winding is compatible with the servo, miniature, and precision
motion controlled linear machines. However, air-cored PMLSM have lower thrust density
than cored PMLSM. Fortunately, Halbach array improves the power efficiency of
electromagnetic machines. On thebasis of an analytical technique, FEA, and experiment, this
paper deals with the design guidelines and analysis of two types of PMLSM for the
application of the servo and miniaturelinear machines. One is the PMLSM with Halbach
array and theother is thePMLSM with conventional array, as shown in Fig. 1. Two types are
also compared with topology, magnetic field, back-emf, required magnet volume, optimal
winding thickness, forces, and efficiency. Fig. 2 shows the open-circuit magnetic field
distribution of two types. Fig. 3 shows the magnetic field density due to the PM height and
Fig. 4 the phase back-emf waveforms. Fig. 5 shows the thrust force due to the primary
winding thickness and the secondary PM height. Thedesign guidelines and analysis of two
types of PMLSM with theprimary back-corewill bepresented in next extended version.
[ 11J iabin Wang, Geraint W. J ewell, and David Howe, 'A general framework for theanalysis
and design of tubular linear permanent magnet machines," IEEE Trans. On Magnetics,
9
Y
s
w
@
IU
2
?
vol. 35, no. 3. May 1999, pp. 1986-1999.
I l l
Fig. 1. Two types of PMLSM topologies Fig. 2. Open-circuit magnetic field distribution
061 0 6 ,
Prnnawwinding thickness [mml
PM Hemt [mm] Tnne[secund]
Fig. 5. Thrust vs. primary Fig. 3. Magnetic flux density Fig. 4. Phaseback-emf
vs. PM height waveforms winding thickness and PM height
R
0
0
ru -
m
m
m
GU 06 GU 07