Electromagnetic Force Analysis of a Driving Coil
Yadong Zhang, Jiangjun Ruan, Ting Zhan
School of Electrical Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430072, China
Abstract—Electromagnetic force (EMF) analysis and configuration
design of a driving coil is quite important for a coil launcher. Lots of
efforts have been focused on armature and control system to
improve efficiency or interior ballistic characteristic. By contrast,
EMF performance of a driving coil is rarely researched.
The paper is intended to provide guidance for the construction
and test of a driving coil. The article analyzes the EMF properties of
a coil from three respects. First, EMF performances of the whole
coil and its detailed construction are analyzed through three
different moveable single stage coil launchers, including a whole coil
and two 2-layer coaxial ring coils. Simulation results show that the
whole coil with strand model is satisfied to analyze the
electromagnetic performance instead of the detailed litz winding
coil. In the 2-layer coaxial ring coil, EMF performances of rings are
quite different from each other. Generally speaking, radial EMF
concentrates to the right flank section of the whole coil, while axial
EMF concentrates to the underside section of the whole coil. Radial
EMF is much bigger than axial EMF. It is best to pay more
attention to radial EMF which is quite useful for coil encapsulation.
Then, litz coil and ribbon coil are compared by the current filament
method. In terms of launch efficiency, EMF and fever, litz wire is
more suitable to manufacture a driving coil than ribbon wire,
although the whole progress of manufacture is a bit complicated. At
last, five different models are compared to select a test model for
practical situation. A static model whose armature and coil center
coincide (SM2) is verified to be a simple but reasonable test model.
A detailed numerical validation is presented in this paper.
Key words - coilgun; coil launcher; electromagnetic force; radial
force; axial force
I. INTRODUCTION
A coaxial induction coil launcher consists of a barrel formed
by an array of stationary coils, which create a magnetic field for
propelling an armature. The coils of the barrel are usually fed in
sequence by a set of capacitor-driven circuits. Lots of efforts
have been focused on the armature and control system to
improve efficiency or the interior ballistics performance [1]-[5].
In recent years, with some technical breakthroughs, force
analysis and construction methods of a coil have got more and
more attention [6]-[9]. Mechanical properties of the coil will be
quite different with different material and ways of manufacture.
Coils are often considered to be a strand model whose current
density is uniform in the whole coil. Based on this assumption,
lots of software has been developed to solve the coil launcher
problem, including a series of code based on current filament
978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.
method as Slingshot [5]. Experiments show that interior ballistic
performance could be well simulated with strand model coil. The
strand model could be realized by litz wire [10], [11]. Some
people thought that the strand model is too hard to make,
because the litz wire may rupture under enormous pressure and
friction. Coils should be constructed as solid model by two spiral
windings with ribbon wire. The two windings are connected in
series by a crossover wire at the inner radius of the coil. Feeds
are formed by bending the wire in a fold for connection to
coaxial cables to the capacitor bank. The windings, crossover,
and feeds are all constructed from a continuous ribbon wire [7].
When high pulse current is injected into the coil, however, skin
effect will occur in the ribbon wire which will influence the
resistance, temperature and electromagnetic force (EMF)
distribution of the coil. To sum up the above arguments, whether
litz wire (strand model) or ribbon wire (solid model) suits to
analyze and manufacture a driving coil is doubtful.
This paper analyzes the EMF of a coil to provide guidance for
construction and test of a driving coil.
II. DESIGN OF THE SIMULATION MODEL
When pulse current is fed into a driving coil, a changing
magnetic field is generated. According to current filament
method, governing equations of the coil and armature are
expressed with Kirchhoff law respectively [12]:
dIc dI dM ca
Vc =Ic R c +L c +M ca a +Ia v （1）
dt dt dz
dI dI dM ac
0=I a R a +L a a +M ac c +Ic v （2）
dt dt dz
Where,
v = velocity; z = displacement;
Lc, La = coil/armature self inductance;
Mca, Mac = coil/armature mutual inductance;
Vc = voltage applied to coil;
Rc, Ra = coil/armature resistance;
Ic, Ia = coil/armature current;
The driving coil will suffer a large EMF which could be
written as：
 F = ∫ J × Bdv （3）
v 175.00
Where,
J = current density; B = magnetic flux density;
EMF could be divided into axial component and radial
component. To compare the performance of strand model (litz
wire) and solid model (ribbon wire), three single-stage coaxial
induction coil launchers are constructed. A whole coil is set to be
a strand model with 10 turns as Fig.1.(a) whose geometry is
shown in Fig.2.(a). The other two 2-layer coaxial ring coils, as
Fig.1.(b), each have 10 rings which can be seen as the
approximate model of the actual windings in the whole coil.
Each ring represents a single turn of the winding. The number of
the coaxial ring is marked in Fig.2.(b). EMF was calculated
under transient solver in Ansoft Maxwell which has been widely
used in coil launcher studies [13]. The copper coil was powered
by an external circuit. To fit the actual operational environment,
the solid aluminum cylinder armature was assigned to an original
velocity of 50m/s.
(a) A whole coil; (b) 2-layer coaxial ring coil
Fig.1.Models of the single-stage coaxial induction coil launchers
(a) a whole coil; (b) 2-layer coaxial ring coil
Fig.2. Geometry parameters of the coil launchers
978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.
Curve Info
Radial EMF
Axial EMF
125.00
Force(kN)
75.00
25.00
-25.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Time(ms)
Fig.3. EMF of a whole coil with the strand model
The real-time EMF simulation results of the whole coil are
shown in Fig.3. The amplitude of radial EMF is much larger than
that of the axial EMF. The direction of axial EMF is opposite to
the direction of the movement of the armature. The direction of
the radial EMF points to the outside of the coils, vertical to the
axial EMF.
III. ANALYSIS OF THE 2-LAYER COAXIAL RING COIL
Two different models were loaded on the winding in the 2-
layer coaxial ring coil. The litz wire could be simulated with
strand model whose wire is considered to be filaments too thin to
model in a practical finite element grid. Eddy currents and
displacement currents are not computed inside the conductor.
Because of this, the transient solver in Maxwell assumes that
their contribution to the current density is averaged over the area
of problem region. The real-time simulation results of the strand
model is shown in Fig.4, include radial EMF (a), axial EMF (b)
and total EMF(c).
In the radial direction as shown in Fig.4.(a),
(ⅰ) The direction and sum of the ten rings’ EMF is the same
with the radial EMF of the whole coil in Fig.3. By delivering and
reiterating turn by turn among the coil turns, the force acts
finally at the outer cover of the coil.
(ⅱ) Due to the influence of the moving armature, nearly all
the radial EMF of the upper rings (No.6-10) are bigger than that
of the lower rings (No.1- 5).
(ⅲ) EMFs of the rings decrease gradually along the radial
direction until the rings of No.4 and 9. The direction of the radial
EMF of the outer rings (No.5 and 10) is opposite to that of other
rings. Radial EMF is concentrate to the right flank section of the
whole coil. It is caused by the different intensity and direction of
the magnetic fields where the rings (winding) lie in.
In the axial direction as shown in Fig.4.(b),
(ⅰ) Like radial EMF, the direction and the sum of ten rings’
EMF is the same to the axial EMF of the whole coil in Fig.3.
Axial EMF of the armature determines the interior ballistics
performance of the coil launcher which is equal but opposite to
that of the coil. It means that a whole coil could be used to
60.00
simulate the motion performance instead of the detailed winding 6
coil with strand model. It is also proved by speed curves in Fig.5.
50.00
(ⅱ) Opposite to the radial EMF performance, all the axial 7
EMFs of the upper layer rings (No.6- 10) are smaller than that of 40.00
the lower layer rings (No.1- 5).

Force(kN)
1
8
(ⅲ) Axial EMF of the rings has little difference in each layer. 30.00
2
EMF rise from No.1 until No.4 and then decrease. Rings of No.4 5 10 9
20.00 3
and 9 suffered the maximum axial EMF which is quite different
from the change tendency of radial EMF. The direction of the 4
10.00
axial EMF of the upper layer rings (No.6 - 10) is opposite to the
lower layer rings which means that the axial EMF is concentrate 0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
to the underside section of the whole coil. Time(ms)
(c) Total EMF
60.00 Fig.4. EMF of the 2-layer coaxial ring coil with strand model
6
50.00
Total EMF in Fig.4.(c) is the combined effort of the radial and
40.00 7
1
axial EMF. It is clear that the value of the total EMF much
30.00 depends on the radial department. It is best to pay more attention
Force(kN)

20.00
8 2 to the radial EMF which is quite useful for coil encapsulation.

10.00 3 75.00
9 Curve Info
0.00
4 70.00 solid model
-10.00 strand model
10
65.00 a whole coil
-20.00 5
Speed(m/s)

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

Time(ms)
60.00
(a) Radial EMF
55.00
15.00
4
10.00 50.00

5.00 45.00
1 2 3 5 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Time(ms)
Force(kN)

0.00
Fig.5. Speed curves of the three conditions.
-5.00 60
6 7 10
strand model
-10.00 50
solid model
-15.00 40

8 9 30
-20.00
Force• kN•

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

Time(ms) 20
(b) Axial EMF 10

-10

-20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Number of the rings
(a) Maximum radial EMF of the rings

978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.
 15
solid model, as shown in Fig.7.(a), current density is quite
strand model uneven due to skin effect which could increase the resistance of
10
solid model the winding and reduce the efficiency of the system as shown in
5 Fig.5. Excessive heating will be caused in the outer ledge of the
coil which is bad for insulation.
Force• kN•

0
Radial EMF curves of the filaments in No.6 ring are shown in
-5
Fig.8. Radial EMF curves of the filaments with solid model are
-10 mixed and disorderly. The biggest radial EMF of the filaments is
-15
5.2 kN at 0.24 ms. Whereas, the smallest radial EMF is only 0.7
kN at that moment. The huge difference in EMF of the filaments
-20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 will be a challenge for not only the strength of the ribbon wire
Number of the rings but also the inter turn insulation. In sharp contrast to the solid
(b) Maximum axial EMF of the rings model, radial EMF of the filaments with strand model change
Fig.6. Maximum EMF of the 2-layer coaxial ring coil. with regularity as shown in Fig.8.(b). All the EMF of the
filaments reach maximum at 0.34ms. The difference of each
Ribbon wire is simulated with solid model whose wire is
filament is not significant. Maximum radial EMF with strand
considered to be a solid conductor. The amount of eddy current,
model is much smaller than that with solid model. So does sum
displacement current and source current are included in the total
of the 20 filaments’ EMF. It is clear that in terms of launch
current in the calculation. Simulation results show that although
efficiency, EMF and fever, litz wire (strand model) is more
having the same EMF trends, the amplitude of the solid model is
suitable to manufacture a driving coil than ribbon wire (solid
less than that of the strand model, ether in the radial or the axial
model), although the progress of manufacture is a bit
direction. Fig.6 compares the maximum radial and axial EMF of
complicated. This conclusion has been verified in the experiment
the two models. The difference in axial EMF of the solid model
of reference [7].
causes the speed a bit smaller than strand model as in Fig.5.
According to the EMF analysis above, we can get three
conclusions. First, a whole coil with strand model is satisfied to
analyze the electromagnetic performance instead of the detailed
litz winding coil. Second, in the detailed winding coil, as 2-layer
coaxial ring coil, EMF performances of rings are quite different
from each other. Generally speaking, radial EMF concentrates to
the right flank section of the whole coil, while axial EMF
concentrates to the underside section of the whole coil. Third,
radial EMF is much bigger than axial EMF. It is best to pay more
attention to radial EMF which is quite useful for coil
(a) Solid Model
encapsulation. It is good practice to construct a detailed finite
element model to carry on mechanical analysis.

IV. COMPARISON OF THE STRAND MODEL AND SOLID MODEL

In the two 2-layer coaxial ring coils, although change
tendency with the strand model and the solid model are similar,
we can not verify whether EMF distribution in each ring of the
two models is the same or not. Current filament method is
introduced to analyze the EMF of a single ring. Take No.6 ring
for example, Fig.7 is the current density of the coil cross section
in Fig.1.(b) at 0.3ms. The No.6 ring is subdivided into 20 (b) Strand Model
filaments whose cross sections are squares with the sides of Fig.7. Current density of the coil cross section with current filament method
1mm. It is shown that current density distributions in the divided
ring No.6 and other rings are the same with that of the original
coil, no matter solid model or strand model. Speed curves are not
affected by subdivision which is the same with Fig.5. It proved
that current filament method is feasible to study the coil. In the

978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.
 velocity of 50m/s.

5.25

4.00
Force(kN)

2.75

1.50 Fig.9. Geometry of the different models

0.25 60
Reference
50 SM1
-1.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 40
SM2
Time(ms) MM1
(a) Solid model 30 MM2

Force• kN•
20

3.00 10

0
Force(kN)

-10
2.00
-20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Number of the rings
1.00 Fig.10. Maximum radial EMF of the rings

Radial EMF plays a crucial role in inter turn insulation and

0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 package, there for, it could be used to compare the EMF
Time(ms)
properties of the five models. Maximum radial EMFs of the five
(b) Strand model
Fig.8. Radial EMF curves of the filaments in No.6 ring models are shown in Fig.10. All the models have almost the
same change tendency of radial EMF, just as Fig.6. At any point
V. TEST MODEL OF THE DRIVING COIL in time, the reference model and SM2 suffered minimum and
maximum EMF respectively, except the two outer rings. (No.5
After being manufactured with litz wire, the structure and
and 10)
insulating properties of the driving coil should be tested like
The detailed analysis of the reasons is as follows. The mutual
Fig.1 with pulse power. Velocity and position of the armature
inductance Mac, between the armature and coil, is related to their
will influence the test result. But applying various initial
relative position. It will rise with the increase of the outer radius
velocities to an armature and igniting it at different position will
of the armature, whereas decrease with increase of the distance
increase workload significantly. Besides, matching target and
between the center of coil and armature. Mac of SM2 is the
recovery of the projectile will be another problem. If a static
biggest of the five models and Mac of the reference is zero.
model could be used to satisfy all the facts in the test, the
According to equation (1) and (2), when Mac is reduced, current
experiment will be readily conducted. To research the influence
amplitude of Ic and Ia will turn small. So does the magnetic flux
of movement and fire position of the armature, five strand
density. Due to equation (3), radial EMF of SM2 is bigger than
models are compared and analyzed, including a reference model,
that of SM1 and the reference model. Thus the test of the driving
two static models (SM1 and SM2), and two movement models
coil must introduce an armature and place it overlap the center of
(MM1 and MM2).
the test coil. Movement of an armature will also influence EMF
The reference model has no armature as shown in Fig.9.(a). In
of the coil. If the velocity of the armature increases, according to
SM1 and SM2, armatures are fixed and remained relatively static
equation (1) and (2), Ic and Ia will be increased and so does the
with the driving coil. The rear of the armature is at the coil center
EMF. If the velocity of the armature is 0, EMF will achieve the
in SM1 as shown in Fig.9.(b) and the centers of the armature and
maximum value. The simulation result indicates that the radial
coil are superposed in SM2 as shown in Fig.9.(c). MM1 have the
EMF of SM2 is bigger than that of MM2. So does SM1 and
same geometry with SM1 except the armature being assigned an
MM1. All in all, SM2 is preferred for the structure and insulation
initial velocity of 50m/s. MM2 is the same with Fig1.(b) which
test which could provide a certain domain-degree to any actual
simulates the typical motion of the armature with the initial

978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.
situation. It is beneficial to improve the quality of the driving
coil.

VI. CONCLUSION
EMF properties of a driving coil are analyzed in this paper.
The whole coil with strand model is satisfied to analyze the
electromagnetic performance instead of the detailed litz winding
coil. In the detailed winding coil, EMF of turns (rings) are quite
different from each other. Generally speaking, radial EMF
concentrates to the right flank section of the whole coil, while
axial EMF concentrates to the underside section of the whole
coil. Radial EMF is much bigger than axial EMF. It is best to pay
more attention to radial EMF which is quite useful for coil
encapsulation. Litz wire is prefer to manufacture a driving coil
than ribbon wire, although the whole progress of manufacture is
a bit complicated. A static model whose armature and coil center
coincide is selected to be a simple but reasonable test model.
Conclusions of the paper could provide a direction for
manufacture and test of a driving coil.

REFERENCES
[1] Yadong Zhang, Jiangjun Ruan, Ying Wang, Yujiao Zhang, Bao Shouliu,
“Armature Performance Comparison of an Induction Coil Launcher”. IEEE
Trans on Plasma Science, vol. 39, pp.471–475, January, 2011.
[2] M.S. Aubuchon, T.R. Lockner, R.J. Kaye, and B.N. Turman, “Study of
Coilgun Performance and Comments on Powered armatures,”. IEEE
international power modulator conference. pp.141–144, May, 2004.
[3] J. A. Andrews and J. R. Devine, “Armature design for coaxial induction
launchers,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 27, pp. 639–643, January. 1991.
[4] R. J. Kaye, “Operational requirements and issues for coilgun
electromagnetic launchers,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 194–
199, Jan. 2005.
[5] B. M. Marder, “SLINGSHOT—A coilgun design code,” Sandia National
Lab., Albuquerque, NM, Sandia National Laboratories Report SAND2001-
1780, Sep. 2001.
[6] J. A. Andrews, “Coilgun structures”, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 29, pp. 637-
642, January. 1993.
[7] R. J. Kaye Eugene C. Cnare, M. Cowan, Billy W. Duggin, Ronald J.
Lipinski, and Barry M. Marder. “Design and Performance of Sandia's
Contactless Coilgun for 50 mm Projectiles”, IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 29,
no. 1, pp.680–685, Jan. 1993.
[8] Ronald J. Kaye, Isaac R. Shokair, and Richard W. Wavrik. “Design and
evaluation of coil for a 50 mm diameter induction coilgun launcher,” IEEE
Trans. Magn., vol. 31, no. 1, pp.478–483, Jan. 1995.
[9] G.Hainsworth, P.J.Leonard and D.Rodger, “Finite Element Modelling of
Magnetic Compression Using Coupled Electromagnetic-Structural Codes”
IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 32, pp 1050-1053, May 1996.
[10] M. S. Aubuchont, T. R. Lockner, B. N. Turman, “Results from Sandia
National Laboratories/Lockheed Martin electromagnetic missile launcher
(EMML),” in Proc.15th IEEE Int. Pulsed Power Conf., pp. 75–78. 2005.
[11] Benjamin D. Skurdal and Randy L. Gaigler, “Multimission Electromagnetic
Launcher”. IEEE Trans. Magn, Vol. 45, pp.458–461, January. 2009.
[12] Yadong Zhang, Jiangjun Ruan, Ying Wang. “Capacitor-driven Coil gun
Scaling Relationships,” IEEE Trans on Plasma Science, vol. 39, pp.471–
475, January, 2011.
[13] Yadong Zhang, Jiangjun Ruan, Ying Wang, Zhiye Du, Shoubao Liu, and
Yujiao Zhang. “Performance Improvement of a Coil Launcher”. IEEE
Trans on Plasma Science, vol. 39, pp.210–214, January, 2011.

978-1-4673-0305-7/12/$31.00 ©2012.IEEE.