Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4, JULYIAUGUST 1991
74 1
I. INTRODUCTION
[a-@],
0093-9994/91/0700-0741$01.00
0 1991 IEEE
142
Fig. 2.
wound-field
dc commutator
6 6
ac synchronous
l+b
PM commutator
ac induction
ac PWreluctance hybrid
PM brushless dc
switched reluctance
Fig. 1 . Family of motor types showing ac motors along the diagonal: the
SYNCHREL motor is the center motor with magnets removed [9].
IC
x,
m
T = -pIdIq(
2
Lq - L d ) .
(1)
743
d-Axis
Fig. 3 . Natural four-pole field of sine-distributed current sheet representing the stator winding, aligned with the q axis. The shaded sections
represent flux guides interspersed with flux barriers whose surfaces follow
the natural flux lines of the field. This structure was used by Cruickshank et
al. [2] in their line-start reluctance motor. Because of symmetry, only one
octant is shown.
_
x, -- ( t R + g )
~
xd
tR
= -
Web
Rlb
Rotor2
+ 1.
(b)
Fig. 4. Transversely laminated single-barrier
1 ; (b) rotor 2.
Fig 5.
SYNCHREL
thin ribs that attach to the q axis webs in the same way as in
the interior magnet motor described by Jahns, et al. [ 5 ] . Fig.
5 shows the components of the disassembled motor.
To minimize Ld, the ribs (Fig. 4) must saturate at a low
level of current. This requires them to be radially thin. L , is
not sensitive to the airgap length because of the large reluctance in the flux barrier. L , must be maximized; therefore,
saturation is undesirable in any part of the q-axis flux path.
Therefore, the pole piece needs to have adequate radial
744
TABLE I
Parameter
Pole arc (")
Rotor Diameter (mm)
Airgap length (mm)
Rib width (mm)
Web width (mm)
Flux-barrier thickness (mm)
Rotor material
L, [measured] (mH)
L, [finite-element] (mH)
L, [measured] (mH)
L [finite-element](mH)
R k o L, /Ld [measured]
Rotor 1
Rotor 2
68.0
40.5
0.45
0.5
1.o
5.4
Losil 800
62.3
41.1
0.15
0.5
2.5
5.4
Losil 800
10.3
11.3
41 .O
50.3
4.0
10.8
10.2
28.3
21.1
2.6
Fig. 7. Phase flux linkage versus current over a range of rotor positions
between the d axis and the q axis; rotor 2.
t. 501
&
y$
3.751
Rotor 2
3.00
/ \
1.00
745
2.00
3.00
Fig. 8. Running torque versus phase current. The points are measured; the
lines are calculated (by (l), with inductances read from Fig. 6).
B. Test Conditions
Because of differences in voltage, speed range, and lamination material between the motors, it was not considered
meaningful to compare efficiencies directly. Instead, the performance parameter used for comparison was the torque at
low speed, under conditions of equal stator copper loss in all
the motors. The results have been normalized by calculation
to the same copper weight (0.29 kg) in the stator windings.
Results are summarized in Table 11. Comparisons are made at
a copper loss of about 14 W, which represents about two
thirds of the dissipation capability of the (nonventilated,
totally enclosed) frame for continuous rated operation with a
temperature rise by resistance of about 55C. Assuming that
the copper losses are of the order of 2/3 of the total losses at
maximum power, this also gives a rough idea of the performance comparison at maximum power.
Even minor differences in frame size, length/diameter
~ _ _ _ _ _ _
746
Fig. 10. Cross section of BLDC motor (see also Appendix I).
TABLE I1
MOTOR
PERFORMANCE
COMPARISON
PARAMETER Un
Phases
Poles
1
BLDC
2
PMH-1
3
PMH-2
4
IM-1
5
IM-2
6
IM-3
7
IM-4
8
SR-1
9
SR-2
10
SR-3
3
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
3
614
3
614
3
614
2
4
2
4
77.0
40.6
50.0
86.0
4.0
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
4.5
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
4.5
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
1.0
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
2.0
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
3.0
77.8
40.6
50.0
90.0
4.0
73.7
35.5
44.5
74.0
2.0
73.7
35.3
44.5
74.0
3.0
73.7
35.1
44.5
74.0
4.0
77.8
40.5
50.0
90.0
4.5
77.8
40.0
50.0
90.0
2.0
11
12
REL-1 REL-2
Stator OD
Rotor OD
Stack Lgth
O/A Length
Airgap
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm/lO
Stator Cu
Magnet
Steel
Total wt.
Matl cost
kg
kg
kg
kg
0.29
0.11
0.80
1.20
2.0
0.29
0.16
1.28
1.73
13.3
0.29
0.11
0.98
1.38
2.1
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.29
1.25
1.54
2.0
1.25
1.54
2.0
1.24
1.53
2.0
1.24
1.53
2.0
0.94
1.23
1.6
0.94
1.23
1.6
0.94
1.23
1.6
1.28
1.57
1.8
1.28
1.57
1.8
Inertia
Ohms/ph
Current
P cu (st)
P Cu (ro)
%
Ohm
Arms
W
W
100
2.9
1.3
14.1
134
1.9
1.9
13.6
119
1.9
1.9
13.7
134
1.9
1.9
13.7
7.1
134
1.9
1.9
13.7
5.8
134
1.9
1.9
13.7
4.2
134
1.9
1.9
13.7
4.1
25
2.9
1.3
14.3
25
2.0
1.3
14.3
26
2.9
1.3
14.3
109
1.9
1.9
13.7
109
1.9
1.9
13.7
Torque
mNm
329
702
295
280
250
180
150
346
256
188
109
250
Torque
T/Vr
T/Vs
T/Vtot
T/J
T/Weight
T/f Matl
%
%
%
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
213
213
209
200
159
147
32
90
90
88
84
75
78
85
85
85
83
80
63
66
85
76
76
74
71
57
59
76
55
55
54
51
41
43
55
46
46
45
43
34
36
46
105
155
129
133
414
102
128
78
116
95
99
307
76
94
57
86
70
72
220
56
69
33
33
32
31
30
25
36
76
78
74
71
70
58
83
%
%
%
%
Copper f/kg
Steel f/kg
Aluminum f/kg
Ceram. Mag. f/kg
NdFeB Mag. f/kg
> 4.0
f0.5
f4.0
f4.0
E7 .O
30-Oct-90
747
SR-1
mi500-
a-
SR-1
BLDC
10
11
12
748
independent of temperature and freedom from demagnetization and other magnet-related problems. Although the performance is exceeded by the switched reluctance (SR) motor,
the SR motor has the disadvantage of a higher noise level and
higher torque ripple, and it cannot use a standard ac motor
stator.
These conclusions cannot be extrapolated to larger motors
because the effects of scale are too nonlinear. Future plans
include the extension to integral-horsepower motors [161 and
the investigation of small motors with much higher inductance ratios.
APPENDIX
OF BLDC MOTORDESIGN
PARAMETERS
Stator/rotor diameters
Airgap length
Stack length
Magnet thickness/pole arc
Magnet/remanent flux-density
Coercive force
Poles/slots/phases
Tooth width
Slot area
Winding type
Coil throw (slot pitches)
Turns in series per phase
Self/mutual inductance
Airgap flux density
Torque constant
Speed at test point
77/50 mm
0.4 mm
50 mm
3.8 mm/180 elec
ceramic/0.329T
269 kA/m
4/24/3
2.5 mm
61.5 mm2
Lap, single layer
5
200/0.6 mm dia
12.7/1.8 mH
0.246T (open circuit)
0.2 /A
200 r/min
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thanks are due to R. S. Boughton (Sherman Electromech),
S. E. Wood (Brook Crompton Parkinson), P. Ibbotson (Watson Marlow), A. J. Hutton (Motorola), K. Debebe, I. Young,
and J. Kelly of the University of Glasgow.
REFERENCES
[l] P. J . Lawrenson and L. A. Agu, Theory and performance of
polyphase reluctance machines, Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng., vol. 111,
pp. 1435-1445, 1964.
[2] A. J . 0. Cruickshank, A. F. Anderson, and R. M. Menzies, Axially
laminated anisotropic rotors for reluctance motors, Proc. Inst.
Elec. Eng., vol. 113, pp. 2058-2060, 1966.
[3] W. Fong, and J . S. C. Htsui, New type of reluctance motor,
Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng., vol. 117, pp. 545-551, 1970.
[4] V. B. Honsinger, Steady-state performance of reluctance machines,
IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst., vol. PAS-90, pp. 305-317, 1971.
[5] T. M. Jahns, G. B. Kliman, and T. W. Neumann, Interior magnet
synchronous motors for adjustable-speed drives, IEEE Trans. Industry Applications, vol. IA-22, pp. 738-747, 1986.
[6] T. Fukao, Principles and output characteristics of super high-speed
reluctance generator system, IEEE Trans. Industry Applications,
vol. IA-22, pp. 702-707, 1986.
[7] A. Fratta and A. Vagati, A reluctance motor for high dynamic
performance applications, in Conf. Rec. 1987 IEEE Industry
Applications Soc. Ann. Mtg., Part I, pp. 295-302, Paper ID-87-24.
(81 A. Chiba and T. Fukao, A closed-loop control of super high-speed
reluctance motor for quick torque response, in Conf. Rec. 1987
IEEE Industry Applications Society Ann. Mtg., Part 1, pp.
289-294, Paper ID-87-23.
[9] T. J . E. Miller, Brushless Permanent-Magnet and Reluctance
Motor Drives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
[lo] T. J . E. Miller and M. I. McGilp, PC CAD for switched reluctance
MILLER
er
749
David A. Staton was born in Chesterfield, England, on July 29, 1961. He received the B.Sc.
(Hons.) degree in electrical and electronic engineering from Trent Polytechnic, Nottingham, England, in 1983 and the Ph.D. degree from the
University of Sheffield, England, in 1988.
From 1977 to 1984, he was employed by British
Coal, who sponsored him while he was undertaling his B.Sc. degree. While at the University of
Sheffield, he developed CAD software for permanent-magnet dc motors in collaboration with GEC
Electromotors Ltd. From 1988 to 1989, he was with the Thorn EM1 Central
Research Laboratories and was engaged in the design of motors for the
Kenwood range of food processors. Over the last year, he has been
employed as a research assistant at the University of Glasgow and is
involved in optimizing the design of synchronous reluctance motors.
Dr. Staton is an associate member of the IEE.