Analytical Prediction of Magnetic Field from Surface Mounted

Permanent Magnet Motor

Keld F. Rasmussen, Member, IEEE

Department of Motor & Mechatronics Engineering
Grundfos AIS
DK-8850Denmark
-
Abstriict An analytical method for predicting the airgap flux The magnetisation is defined by
density from surface mounted permanent magnet motors is de-
veloped. The method includes both radial and tangentid mag- l G = M r .?+Me.6
netisation of the magnet. Different magnetisation shapes are in- where r radius to point
vestigated and the importance of the tangential component is
discussed. The method is validated versus Finite Element Analy- 0 angle to point
sis and measurements.
and M, and M, are defined by
-
Keywords permanent magnet motors, air gaps, magnetic CO

fields, magnetic analysis, finite element methods, magnetic M r = C M , ,* c o s ( ~ * ~ * Q )

measurements. n=1,3,S. ...
1. INTRODUCTION

Surface mounted permanent magnets are widely used in where n is the harmonic number
electrical motors. The shape of the magnet can be a full ring p is the pole pair number
magnet or full pole pitch arcs. Several methods have been M radial magnetisation
developed in order to predict the magnetic field from the N tangential magnetisation
magnets [1,2]. However, the methods only account for the
radial component of the magnetisation. Often postassembly In Fig. 1 is a schematic drawing of the motor geometry. Due
magnetisation is used, and it is not possible to avoid a tan- to the assumption on infinite permeability of the iron, only
gential component in the magnetisation. As the magnetic cir- the magnet and the airgap is shown. The radii shown relate to
cuit is the basic of an electric motor, an accurate prediction of the inner stator radius, Ri, the outer magnet radius, & and the
the flux density is essential for a good prediction of the over- inner magnet radius, Rm.
all motor performance.
In this paper an analytical method for predicting the magnetic
field in the airgap of a motor is presented. The method ac-
counts for both the radial and tangential magnetisation due to
postassembly magnetisation.

2. PREDICTION OF MAGNETIC FIELD

The method is based on an analysis of a 2-D model in cylin-

drical coordinates. The following assumptions are made
Fig. 1 Schematic drawing of the geometry for full ring magnet and airgap.
-The permeability of both stator and rotor iron is infinity. The. rotor and stator core is assumed slotless with infinite permeability.
- Slotless stator and rotor. The boundary conditions in terms of field strength, H, and
-Isotropic full ring magnet or full pole pitch arc. flux density, B, are for the solution
-The magnet has linear demagnetisation curve in 2. quadrant
H&(r,8)lr=Ri =O (4a)
The magnetic scalar potential can be determined from
v2.qa=o Laplace's equation in air ( 1a) H& (r90)lr=Rm =O (4b)
v*M BM (r,')lr=Ro =B~(r3@)lr=Ro (4c)
v 2.(Pm
where
=-r Poisson's equation in magnet

cp scalar potential in air or magnet

(1 b)
HM (r,O)lpRo =H#711(r9')Ir=R, (4d)

p.,= p, permeability of the magnet, p, =relative where a refer to airgap

permeability m refer to magnet

0-7803-5293-9/99$10.00 0 1999 IEEE 34

Using (la) and (lb) with the boundary conditions listed in
(4), the radial and tangential flux density can be determined
at any point in the magnet and airgap. In (5a) and (5b) are
shown the solutions for the radial, B, , and tangential flux
@-W
Sine magnetisation

->o .................

@-W
density, B h ,in the airgap, F& < r < Ri, when np # 1.
Radialsine 0 90 180 270 360

>
' 0 .. .... ..... ,... ..

(np - 1)-R,2"' - (np + 1). R Z P + 2RiPp+'R:'-'

Radialmagnetisation 90 lE0 270 360

- (np - 1). R , ~ Y- (np + 1). R ~ +P2 np .R

I ~ + I R:P-'
-D -> 0 .. .... ..... .... ..

0 90 180

Fig. 2 Definition of different magnetisation for the magnet and the

270 360

corresponding flux density waveforms in the airgap.

Pr+l 2np-R?)
-(Ri All three waveforms can be used as an input to the analytical
Pr method. In Fig. 3 the radial airgap flux density is shown for
in the airgap (5a) the three different kinds of magnetisation. All other parame-
ters are the same. In the case of the radial magnetisation an
extra parameter is introduced, the magnet width factor. The
-RF,.-fIp-l)R-np+l
sin(np@) magnet width factor is the pole-arc to pole-pitch ratio [ 11.

-
(np 1). R,2"p- (np + 1). R F p + 2R:" R:'-' In Fig. 3 the radial flux density in the airgap is shown for all
three cases of magnetisation. All parameters except magneti-
sation shape are kept constant. From Fig. 3 it can be seen that
the magnetisation waveform has big influence on the airgap
flux density. An important result is that the tangential com-
ponent included in the sine magnetisation has increased the
peak flux density compared to radial and radial sine. In this
case it is a ca. 10% increase. It shows that it is important to
include the tangential component in the modelling.

Radial flux densitv

in the airgap (5b)

Similar equations can be derived for the flux density in the

magnet when np # 1 and in all cases when np =1.
I
3. MAGNETISATION WAVEFORMS -0.410 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Simulation data Motor data Plot data
Three different magnetisation waveforms are defined in Fig. Number o,
lllBStator bore dtameler [mm]
hrgap [mml 41Rsdius[mmI (198
2, referred to as a sine, radial sine and radial magnetisation. Magnet heism [mml 125
The three types have different characteristics regarding the Magneusinaw ~ f o Pole
~ pair number m Wsveformforpiot

i ~l~permeabilrty 112 tsngential

face.
Fig. 3 Analytical prediction of radial airgap flux density. 3 curves are
shown; solid - sine, dashed - radial, dashdot - radial sine. The parameters
used as input for the prediction are listed below the figure.

35
 4. COMPARISON WITH FINITE ELEMENT Table 1. Measured and analytical radial airgap flux density. The harmonics
relative values to the first harmonic.
In Fig. 4 the results from the analytical method are compared I Meas. I Analytical I
to similar finite element simulations, FEM.The comparison Airgap flux density
is made for radial and sine magnetisation. Rms [TI 0,234 0,236 0,236

“‘.
Peak [TI 0,294 0,33 1 0,288
Radial Magnetisation 1. harm. [TI 0,329 0,33 1 0,33 1
0.6 I 1

E
Q 0.2 . . . ., . . . . . . .4. . . . . . .n. . . . . . . . I
.o 0 5 3. harm. [%I I 12 1 01 12
5. harm. [%] 0 0 0
0 . +lxieo-e,.,. 9 044.04.’
37
........................ ......... 7.harm. [%I 0 0 0
.$-0.4c..
-0.2
..... _I.. ... ....I. .U.I . Magnetisation MIN MIN
-0.6 I I 1. harm. [%] 100/100 100/100
0 45 90 135 180
Rotor angle [degrees] 3. harm. [%I o/o 12/12
5. harm. [%] o/o o/o
Sinusoidal Magnetisation 7.harm. [%I 010 o/o
0.6 I I . r1

; 4 . 5 0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 0 0 5f The data for the measured flux density is given in Table 1
together with two results obtained with the analytical method.
U
=Y
0 SO-e.ito.-e.*~ : .+04.&m* The harmonic content of the magnetisation for the analytical
-0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . simulation is listed below the data.
5 -0.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-0.6 I As can be seen from Table 1 , there is a good agreement be-
0 45 w) 135 180 tween measurements and simulation. Especially in the case
Rotor angle ldeg-1 with magnetisation including a 31d harmonic content of 12%
Fig. 4 The radial, Br, and tangential, Bt, airgap flux density as a function of they match within 1-2%. It should be noted that in this case
the rotor angle from analytical and finite element simulation. Upper - radial the harmonic content in the flux density is very low com-
magnetisation,lower - sine magnetisation pared to the radial magnetisation.

As can be seen from Fig. 4, there is a good agreement be- 6. CONCLUSION

tween analytical and E M results for both cases of magneti-
sation. An analytical method for predicting the flux density from sur-
face mounted permanent magnets has been derived. The
5. COMPARISON WITH MEASUREMENT method includes both the radial and tangential component of
magnetisation.
A test rig has been constructed in order to measure the radial The analytical method has been compared to FEM and to
airgap flux density. The flux density is measured using a Hall measurements, and accuracy within 1-2%has been achieved.
probe and the angle using an encoder. The curve is shown in The analysis has shown that the tangential component of the
Fig. 5 magnetisation can have big influence on the flux density in
Measured airgap flux density the airgap. An example with an increase in peak flux density
0.4 I 1 of 10%has been shown. In order to achieve a good prediction
of the overall motor performance the tangential component of
E 0.2 ....... ...... the magnetisation should be included in the magnetic model-
ling.
......
3 4.2 .......
REFERENCES
a -0.3 ..
[ 11 Zhu, Z. Q.; Howe, D., ” Analytical determination of the instantaneous
-0.4 I I airgap field in a brushless permanent magnet DC motor”, Inrema-
90 180 270 380
iional Conference on Computation in Eleciromagneiics, 1991, pp.
Rotor angle Idee-]
268-7 1.
Fig. 5 Measured radial airgap flux density of a 4-pole rotor.
[2] Miller, T.J.E.;Rabinovici, R.; ”Back-EMF waveforms and core losses
in brushless DC motors”, IEE Pr0c.- Elecir. Power Appl., Vo1.141,
No.3, pp.144-54, May 1994.

36