You are on page 1of 6

ANALYTICAL CALCULATION OF THE AIRGAP FLUX DENSITY OF PM SYNCHRONOUS MOTORS WITH BURIED MAGNETS INCLUDING AXIAL LEAKAGE, TOOTH

AND YOKE SATURATIONS

P Thelin and H-P Nee KTH, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden

ABSTRACT
It has been shown earlier that the airgap flux density of PM motors with buried magnets can be calculated with a satisfactory result, if saturated iron bridges, axial leakage flux (from 2D-FEM) and teeth saturation are taken into account. In this paper, instead of using 2DFEM, an analytical expression for the axial reluctance is derived. By including the saturation of rotor and stator yokes, the model is even further improved. The result is a complete analytical model, which takes into account all,phenomena mentioned above, and improves the agreement with experimental values. flux concentration), see Figure 1. A disadvantage with buried magnets is that some of the magnet flux is lost due to leakage through the thin iron bridges. The iron bridges are required to keep the iron lamination together mechanically. The intention of this paper is to improve the analytical calculation of the airgap flux density of such motors.

INTRODUCTION

AXIAL LEAKAGE FLUX


The axial leakage flux is often neglected in radial flux machines. This is due to the fact that the axial leakage flux is normally very small. The analytical calculations are therefore based on a cross-section of the motor. The same assumption is normally made in FEM calculations, since 2D-FEM is more common, faster and easier to use than 3D-FEM. For PM machines with relatively short rotor lengths, the axial leakage flux has a larger influence on the radial torque-producing flux.

Axial Reluctance From 2D-FEM


In the earlier paper, Thelin and Nee [7], the axial reluctance "seen" by the magnet, i.e. 9 i a , when the radial reluctance is assumed to be infinite, was obtained from 2D-FEM calculations. This was a drawback, since the remaining expression could be evaluated without the aid of FEM calculations. To overcome this drawback, five different -but typical- magnet configurations will be studied and some analytical expressions will be presented in this paper.

Figure 1: Example of an 8-pole PM-motor design with a thin squirrel cage and buried magnets in Vshape. Permanent magnet synchronous motors (PMSM) with buried magnets have been considered in a wide range of drives including both variable-speed, Morimoto et al [I]. and mains-connected (i.e. line start), Herslof [2], Chalmers [3], drives. A buried magnet design can have some advantages compared to surface mounted, Slemon and Xian [4], and inset, Nipp [ 5 ] , magnet designs. Buried magnet designs are likely to be less complicated to manufacture than surface mounted designs. For example no bandaging is required. The magnets are just inserted into punched slots in the laminated rotor iron. Other advantages are that the magnets are protected from physical damage and demagnetizing currents. Burying the magnets admits different magnet configurations, Hippner and Harley [ 6 ] .The magnets can e.g. be placed close to the circumference, or in V-shape (i.e.

A typical magnetic field line plot of the axial leakage flux for a motor with buried magnets is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows an axial cross-section view of the upper half of the stator and the rotor. The two magnets, which originally were placed in V-shape, have been replaced by one single magnet at the average height of the V [7]. The influence of the saturation (from the radial flux) on the axial leakage flux has been neglected. The iron material of the rotor and the stator is set to have a very high permeability. The shaft is non-magnetic. The axial reluctance of one pole for the two sides of the rotor is then found to be [7]
R = ,

4224 -431,5. lo3 = ~ J ~ M H -(1) ' (0,M+ 0,04)0,01257

by using a FEM calculation. (H"=A/Wb=ANs)

Power Electronics and Variable Speed Drives, 18-19 September 2000, Conference Publication NO. 475 @ IEE 2000
218

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Stator \

,Rotor body

qa= 0,005507 Vs/m

11
5

39

qa= 0,01257 Vs/m


Figure 2: Typical field lines of the axial leakage flux. As can be seen from Figure 2, the main part of the axial leakage flux is concentrated to the vicinity of the magnet, though some penetrates the stator iron. The part of the flux that penetrates the stator iron will partly link with the stator winding, thereby slightly contributing to the torque production. Due to these two reasons it is enough to deal with the leakage flux close to the magnet. Therefore the stator and the rotor shaft are omitted in the five following cases. Case 1. Centred magnet. Figure 3 shows a simplified geometry of the machine in Figure 2. Due to symmetry, only the left half of the rotor in Figure 2 is depicted in Figure 3. 0,005914 Vs/m

-//

Figure 4: Axial field lines from the left half of the rotor when the magnet is displaced vertically. The axial reluctance is again calculated with FEM:
% = ... = 4,36MH-' ,

(3)

This measure increases the axial reluctance only slightly. Case 3. Magnet close to edge. Figure 5 shows the field lines when the magnet is moved to a new position, even closer to the edge.

y , =

qa= 0,00431 Vs/m

Figure 3: Axial field lines from the left half of the rotor. Again the total axial reluctance per pole for both sides of the rotor is calculated by the use of FEM,and the result is
So =

Figure 5: Axial field lines from the left half of the rotor when the magnet is close to the edge. The axial reluctance is again calculated with E M :

31, =

... = 4,03MH-'

... = 5,69MH-'

(4)

(2)
The axial reluctance has now increased further.

As can be seen from Equation (2) the axial reluctance is now slightly higher but still in the same range, compared to the value of Equation (1). Case 2. Displaced magnet. It is also interesting to see how a vertical displacement of the magnet effects the axial reluctance, see Figure 4.

Case 4. Thicker magnet. It is also interesting to see how a thicker magnet effects the axial reluctance. Figure 6 shows the field lines when the thickness of the magnet slot is 10 mm instead of 5 mm.

219

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

which has a simple mathematical law.

= 0,009338 Vslm

/ d \ \ of probable flux paths. With this method ap\ meances


22

[S) suggests the heuristic method of estimating the per-

10
22

plied on the problems above the field lines are divided into two regions, one at a distance from the magnet where the field lines follow a circular path and one close to the magnet where the field lines follow a path with a mean length. This results in the following approximate expression for the total axial reluctance per pole of the two rotor sides:

Figure 6: Axial field lines from the left half of the rotor with a thicker magnet slot. The axial reluctance is again calculated with FEM:

05 .

(7)

3, = ... = 4,91 MH-


This measure increased the axial reluctance.

(5)

Case 5. Thinner magnet. Figure 7 shows the field lines when the thickness of the magnet slot is reduced to 2,5 mm.

Parameter definitions, see Figure 8. [SI mentions that functions of complex variables (i.e. the method of conformal mapping, see e.g. Fisher [lo]) may also be used. The result of this is that the factor 0,26 in Equation (7) reduces to 0,24 and 0,22 for a thick and a thin sample, respectively [8]. From this one can conclude that the approximate method is accurate enough in this case. Another approach, which shows quite good agreement with the FEM calculated values, is to assume that the flux goes the shortest way from the north pole to the south pole, see Figure 8. North pole

,,- - A, ,, - - \

q: = 0,003494 Vs/m

I
Figure 7: Axial field lines from the left half of the rotor with a thinner magnet slot. The axial reluctance is again calculated with FEM:

South pole

I i;

Figure 8: Derivation of axial reluctance for the left rotor side with a vertically displaced magnet slot. This is -of course- a less physical model, but anyhow it seems to be a good estimate of the total axial reluctance. This reluctance can be derived in the following manner: The differential permeance of the air path from the centre of the magnet slot up to the height y in Figure 8 is given by

R = ... = 3,40MH- ,
This measure reduces the axial reluctance.

(6)

Analytical Expressions For the Axial Reluctance


The analytical calculation of the axial reluctance is not easy, or as Roters [8] expresses it: The precise mathematical calculation of the permeance of flux paths through air, except in a few special cases, is a practical impossibility. This is because the flux does not usually confine itself to any particular path where w,, is the magnet width and lslo, is the thickness of the magnet slot. The total permeance of the upper air path is then given by integrating over the height h , :

220

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

The permeance of the lower air path is found in the same manner: ')

COMPENSATION FOR IRON SATURATION


The increased reluctance of the rotor and stator teeth, due to iron saturation, can theoretically be represented by an extra airgap in the magnetic circuit of the machine [7]. The length of the extra airgap is found as [7]

The total axial reluctance per pole of the two rotor sides is then given as where L is the axial length of the stator or the rotor, and wR is the true circumferential pole-width on the rotor surface, found in Figure 9. In [7] Rfo, was the resulting reluctance of the teeth in the stator 9ifS in the rotor and R,, . By adding reluctances representing the most saturated part of the stator yoke Rys and of the rotor yoke 9tyr the model is further improved, that is

By calculating the axial reluctance with Equation (7) and (1 I), respectively, a comparison with the FEM calculated values of Equations (2)-(6) can be made. In this comparison, the FEhI calculated values are regarded as the correct values. The results of the calculations are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: FEM and analytically calculated values of the axial reluctance for Case 1-5.

Reluctances of Teeth and Yokes


The resulting reluctances of the stator and rotor teeth under one pole are given in [7]. In the same manner, the reluctances representing the most saturated part of the stator and rotor yokes under one pole are found as

2 3 4 5

4,03 4,36 5,69 4,9 1 3,40

4,86 6,19 20,70 6,22 4,O1

I
I
I

4,16
5,87

8,84
587

I
where H is the magnetic field intensity, B is the flux density, L is the rotor or stator length, k f is the stacking factor for the iron lamination, I,, is equal to the slot width at the bottom of a stator slot, wys is the thickness of the stator yoke (i.e. back), w y r is the width of the most narrow part of the rotor yoke (i.e. the part that will carry most flux per width), and 1,, is the length -inside the pole- of the same narrow part. Further: 1 if most narrow part carries total pole-flux

323

TANGENTIAL LEAKAGE FLUX


The tangential leakage flux, i.e. the inter-pole leakage through the airgap or through airgap-statortoothtip-airgap, has not been taken into consideration in this paper. There are several reasons for this: The tangential leakage flux influences the shape of the flux in the airgap only where it is less weighted in the Fourier analysis depends on the rotor position is contributing to the airgap flux density even in static FEM calculations 2 if most nanow part carries half pole-flux

(15)

Magnetic Flux Density in Teeth and Yokes


Equations for the flux densities of the active stator and rotor teeth are given in [7]. The flux densities of stator and rotor yokes are found in a similar way as

221

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

where w,,, is the yoke width of stator and w y , is explained in the subsection above. The flux density values from the equations for the teeth and the yokes give a good indication of how hard the iron is used. Values above e.g. 1,7 T -of course depending on the iron quality used- indicate that the MMFdrops of the teeth and yokes must be taken into consideration, at least if the teeth and the narrow parts of the yokes are relatively long.

where k, is the Carter factor (see e.g. [lo]), g is the airgap length and gc is the fictitious extra airgap which compensates for iron saturation given by Eq. (12). Inserting Equation (I 1) into the old equation for w/i in [7], and rearranging, gives the new equation

! f

= WFeI
Fe1

-+-+...+%+-+...+x w, k, (23)
wFc2 W62
6,

Fe2

61

where L is the axial length of the rotor and

Magnetic Field Intensity in Teeth and Yokes


To find the magnetic field intensity H for a given flux density B , a simplified Langevin-expression -together with Newtons method- was employed [ 7 ] .

AN ANALYTICAL EXPRESSION FOR THE AIRGAP FLUX DENSITY


The airgap flux density can now be calculated analytically with the following equation (compare to [7]):

where h , and h, are the two heights defined in Figure 8. The other geometrical parameters are defined in Figure 9. The peak value of the fundamental airgap flux density can, using Fourier analysis, be found as:

where a is the electrical angle of half the true pole width on the rotor surface, see Figure 9. where B, is the remanent flux density of the magnet, BSar is the assumed saturated flux density level of the iron, k f is the stacking factor for the iron lamination, I, is the thickness of the magnet, and p is the relative , permeability of the magnet. wFe is the sum of the (different) iron bridge widths under one pole:
WFe
9

WFel

+ W F e , + ...

(18)

w , is the sum of the (different) magnet widths under one pole: w, = wm1+wm2+ ...

(19)
I

and the true circumferential pole-width on the rotor surface is given by


wg = r 2 a . -. d 180

2 p

Figure 9: Definition of parameters for one rotor pole.

where r is the rotor radius, a is the electrical angle of half the true pole width and p is the pole-number.
ki =

COMPARISON OF CALCULATIONS AND EXPERIMENTS Motors A-E

To check the expression of Equation (17), five PM motor designs have been examined. The 2D-FEM calculations were performed with the software ACE (from ABB Corporate Research). All five PM motors have been manufactured so experimental, back-calculated values of the airgap flux densities are also available.

where Ii is the thickness of the internal airgap surrounding the magnet and I, is the thickness of the magnet.

222

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Motor A. Motor; A, which has ,8 poles and is inverterfed, has the geometry shown in Figure 1. The geometrical parameters of Motor A were identified by using Figure 9. The axial leakage flux of Motor A is shown in Figure 2. The results of the calculations and the measurements are shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Flux densities of the five examined motors A-E.

of the iron are also shown in Table 2.

Motor A

E T

B(I ) &

2D-FEM

0,88 0,64 0,82 I , 1 1 0,79

Motors B-E. Motors B-E all have geometries which are somewhat similar to the one in Figure 1, but the rotor cage has deeper bars and a higher number of bars since these motors are line-start motors. Motors B-E have 4, 6, 16 and 4 poles, respectively. The results of performing the sa-me exercises for Motors B-E as for Motor A, are presented in Table 2. Here the product of the Carter factor for stator and for rotor was used in the analytical calculations. CONCLUSION
It has been shown earlier that the airgap flux density of PM synchronous motors with buried magnets can be calculated with satisfactory result, if saturated iron bridges, teeth saturation and axial leakage flux are taken into consideration. In this paper an analytical expression -instead of a 2D-FEM calculation- for the axial reluctance is derived. Also the magnetic model is further improved by including the effect of iron saturation of rotor and stator yokes. The result is an analytical expression for the airgap flux density, that includes saturation and axial leakage phenomena.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABB Corporate Research, ABB Motors, Atlas Copco Controls, ITT Flygt and the Swedish National Energy Administration are gratefully acknowledged for the financial support of the work.

The different subscripts of the peak value of the fundamental airgap flux density from the magnets of Table 2 are explained below:

REFERENCES
[I]

B(I)g.2D-EM : 2D-FEM calculated value.


B(
)R

: Analytical value from Eq. (17). Without axial


121

leakage (k, =O) and without iron saturation (g, =O).

Morimoto S., Sanada M., Takeda Y. and Taiguchi K.. 1994. Optimum Machine Parameters and Design of Inverter-Driven Synchronous Motors for Wide Constant Power Operation, Conferencecord of thc pp. 177-182. E E E IAS Annual Mte, Denver, Colorado, HerslOf U,, 1996. Design. Analysis and Verification of a Line Start Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor, Licentiates thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,ISSN-I 100-1631. Chalmers B.J.. 1996, Exploitation of Old Phenomena and New Mate Vigo. Spain, rials in Electrical Machines 10-12 September, pp. 1-6.

B( 1 )n.

: Value from Eq.(17), taking axial leak<<

age flux into account with 2D-FEM (%, out iron saturation (g,

). With-

131

a).
141

b(l)g,,x,Analytical value from Eq. (17), taking axial :


leakage flux into account with Eq. (24) (k, 9). With-

f Slemon G.R. and Xian L.. 1992, Modelling and design optimization o . . permanent magnet motors.. WC Mach= and Power .Sy&DS,

U, 71-92. pp.
151 Nipp E , 1995, Extending the Field-Weakening Range of Surface. Mounted Permanent-Magnet Motors, & & @ StockI holm, 18-22 June. pp. 408-413. Hippner M. and Harley R.G., 1992, Looking for an optimal rotor for high speed permanent magnet synchronous machine, G&WKL&L p 4-9 Oct., ynL Houston. . , L pp. 265-270. Thelin P.and Nee H.-P., 1999, Calculation of the Airgap Flux Density of PM Synchronous Motors with Buried Magnets including Axial Leakage and Teeth Saturation, EMD99. Canterbury, United Kingdom. September, pp. 339-345. Roters H.C., 1941, Electromagnetic Devices, Chapter V. John Wiley & Sons Inc. Fisher S.D. 1990. Complex Variables, 2nd Ed., Wadswonh & BrookslCole Mathematics Series. ISBN 0-534-13260-X.

) out iron saturation (gea .


b(l)R, :Analytical value from Eq. (17), compenromp
sated for tooth and yoke saturations (g, > 0 ). Without axial leakage (k,

161

a. )
171

B, I ) ~ ,

camp

:Analytical value from Eq. (17), taking

axial leakage flux into account with Eq.(24) (k, 9). Compensated for tooth and yoke saturations g, > 0 .
[8]

3(l)g, : Value calculated from measurements. expe


The highest flux density level in the rotor and stator teeth, and in the rotor and stator yokes (from FEM calculations), and the assumed saturated flux density level

191

1101 Thelin P; and Nee H.-P., 1998. Analytical Calculation of the Airgap Flux Density of PM-Motors with Buried Magnets, 1 E 8 Istanbul. Turkey, September, y~L-2 1166-1 17 1. CM9. pp.

223

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY. Downloaded on May 24,2010 at 04:01:43 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

You might also like