17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022].

See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
IET Electric Power Applications

Research Article

Analysis and evaluation of novel rotor ISSN 1751-8660

Received on 28th March 2017

permanent magnet flux-switching machine for

Revised 19th June 2017
Accepted on 10th July 2017
E-First on 11th August 2017
EV and HEV applications doi: 10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182
www.ietdl.org

Peng Su1,2, Wei Hua1 , Gan Zhang1, Zhe Chen2, Ming Cheng1
1School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China
2Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
E-mail: huawei1978@seu.edu.cn

Abstract: To relieve the serious saturation in stator teeth of stator-permanent-magnet flux-switching (SPM-FS) machines due to
the co-existence of magnets and armature windings in stator, this study proposes and analyses a novel rotor-permanent magnet
flux-switching (RPM-FS) brushless machine. Different from the conventional SPM-FS machines, the magnets are removed from
stator to rotor, and magnetised in a unique direction, resulting in a significant alleviation of stator tooth saturation level for the
RPM-FS machines. The concentrated armature windings are still wound around stator teeth with an even shorter end-part
winding length due to the absence of magnets. To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of RPM-FS machines, a
comprehensive comparison between a RPM-FS machine, a SPM-FS machine, and an interior permanent magnet machine used
in Toyota-Prius 2004 hybrid electric vehicle, is conducted and the electromagnetic performances of three machines are
investigated by finite element analysis. The predicted results indicate the proposed RPM-FS machine exhibits the largest power
density, greatest torque capability, highest efficiency under rated operation, and improved flux-weakening ability. Therefore, the
RPM-FS machine is a promising candidate for EV and hybrid electric vehicles applications especially for direct driven systems
where the superior overloaded performance is crucial.

1 Introduction the above disadvantages of SPM-FS machines. In addition to

For electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrid EV (HEVs) driving systems,
some crucial performances are desired, namely high-power
(torque) density, wide speed regulation range, strong overload
capability, low noise and high efficiency [1]. Recently, stator-
permanent magnet flux-switching (SPM-FS) machines have re-
emerged and developed rapidly with considerable attentions, since
the SPM-FS machines exhibit a special topology that the magnets
are mounted on the stator, and the rotor is composed of only
salient-pole iron laminations, resulting in a wonderful torque
capability, and an improved operation reliability [2–4].
However, for the SPM-FS machines, since both magnets and
armature windings co-exist on the stator, resulting in a reduced
armature slot area and an increased winding end-part length.
Hence, the torque capability, over-load capacity and efficiency are
influenced further due to the reduced electrical loading and the
serious saturation in stator teeth. In addition, the heat dissipation of
magnets is also a challenge especially for the EV and HEV
applications, since the magnets of SPM-FS machines are
sandwiched by the adjacent stator cores, and wound around by
concentrated armature coils, thus, the high temperature of armature
windings will transfer to permanent magnets (PMs) directly [5].
For the machines used in EV and HEV driving systems, the phase
armature current density is relative large, e.g. the armature current
density of the interior permanent magnet (IPM) machine in Toyota
Prius 2004 at maximum torque and based speed 1200r/min is in
excess of 20.8 A/mm2, and an oil cooling system is required [6].
The high-armature temperature may cause irreversible
demagnetisation on the end-part of PMs in stator. In addition, the
stator core loss and PM eddy loss will also cause PM temperature
rise, especially under high-speed operation. Further, when modified
to be a hybrid-excited flux-switching machine by reducing the
magnets dimension and introducing additional DC-current field
windings into the stator, the flux-regulation capability, especially
the enhanced-flux effect is rather poor due to the over-saturated
influence [7, 8].
Therefore, this paper proposes a novel flux-switching machine,
namely rotor-PM flux-switching (RPM-FS) machine, to address
inheriting the high air-gap flux-density due to flux-switching
operation principle, the PMs are removed from stator to rotor in the
RPM-FS machines, which alleviates the armature winding slot area
effectively, and results in an improved electrical loading and a
significantly reduced stator teeth saturated level [9]. Consequently,
a remarkable improvement of torque capability can be achieved
under overloaded condition due to the reduction of saturation level
in stator iron, which is crucial for the applications of EV and HEV.
In this paper a three-phase 24-slots/ten-pole-pairs RPM-FS
machine is proposed, analysed and evaluated based on the
preliminary concept of RPM-FS machines in [10]. The
arrangement of this paper is as followed. First, the topology and
operation principle of RPM-FS machines are analysed and
validated by the experiments on a 2.5 kW prototyped machine in
Section 2. Then, in Section 3 to comprehensively evaluate the pros
and cons of RPM-FS machines, electromagnetic performances
comparison between a RPM-FS machine, a conventional SPM-FS
machine and an IPM machine used in Toyota Prius 2004 is
conducted, where the three machines are artificially designed to
have the same stator outer diameter, stack length, armature current
density, DC-linkage voltage and rated speed. The results indicate
that the proposed RPM-FS machine exhibits the largest power
(torque) density, lowest torque ripple, and highest efficiency at the
same current density of 20.8 A/mm2, meanwhile the constant-
power speed range is the same as the Prius-IPM machine, and
wider than the SPM-FS counterpart. Finally, the merits and
disadvantages of the RPM-FS machines are summarised and
highlighted in Section 4.
2 Topology and operation principle
2.1 Topology
Fig. 1a shows the topology of a three-phase RPM-FS machine with
24-stator-slots and 10-rotor-pole-pairs (24 s/10 p). The stator core
is composed of salient-pole iron laminations, and 12 concentrated
armature winding coils are wound around 24 stator teeth
alternatively, leading to the negligible mutual-inductances, and

IET Electr. Power Appl. 1

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017

Fig. 1 Cross section of a three-phase 24-stator-slots/10-pole-pairs RPM-FS machine
(a) Whole structure, (b) Part of rotor structure, (c) Prototyped rotor structure, (d) Key geometric parameters
then the fault tolerant capability can be improved [11]. Compared
with the traditional SPM-FS machine, the end-part length of
armature windings in RPM-FS machines is significantly reduced,
due to the absence of magnets in stator, and then the corresponding
copper loss can be decreased as will verified in Section 3.
Moreover, a modular rotor structure composed of ten modular rotor
cells is proposed, where each modular cell consists of a pair of
rotor teeth and a sandwiched PM as shown in Fig. 1b. It should be
emphasised that different from SPM-FS machines, all the PMs in
RPM-FS machines are magnetised with the same direction to
realise flux-switching principle. However, if opposite magnetised
direction is utilised, the open-circuit back electro-motive-force
(back-EMF) waveform of individual coils will deteriorate, and it is
difficult to obtain essentially sinusoidal phase back-EMF as SPM-
FS machines. Fig. 1c shows the rotor topology of a 24 s/10 p RPM-
FS prototyped machine, and the key design dimensions of the
RPM-FS machines are illustrated in Fig. 1d.
2.2 Operation principle
The operation principle of the three-phase 24s/10p RPM-FS
machine can be illustrated in Fig. 2. It should be emphasised that to
be fair, the rotor poles number is specifically chosen as the same as
that of a 12-stator-slots/10-rotor-poles SPM-FS machine for the
following comparisons. In addition, for stator-PM machines the
rotor poles number is equivalent to the poles-pair number for rotor-
PM machines [12].
When the rotor teeth of RPM-FS machine are overlapped with
the corresponding stator teeth as shown in Fig. 2a, the PM flux
linking the armature coil A1 goes out of the rotor pole and through
the air-gap, then into coil A1, i.e. the PM flux of coil A1 is defined
as the positive polarity. However, when the rotor teeth moves and
aligns with the neighbouring stator teeth as shown in Fig. 2b, the
PM flux of coil A1 goes through the air-gap from the coil to the
rotor tooth, i.e. the PM flux polarity of coil A1 reverses.
Consequently, both the polarity and magnitude of PM flux-linkage
of coil A1 will change periodically as the rotor rotates
continuously. Hence, the resultant back-EMF vector distributions
of the slot conductors in electrical degrees are shown in Fig. 2c.
Obviously, coil A1 (including conductors 1 and 2) and coil A3
(including conductors 13 and 14) can be connected in series to
2 IET Electr. Power Appl.
17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
obtain a large amplitude of back-EMF or in parallel to acquire the
maximum amplitude of current, since the back-EMF vectors of
coils A1 and A3 are with the same phase position. On the other
hand, it can also be found from Fig. 2c that the back-EMF vector of
coil A1 (A3) is contrary to the coil A2 (A4), thus, the coils A1
(A3) and coils A2 (A4) is required to be connected in opposite
series. Therefore, the back-EMF vectors of coils A1, A2, A3 and
A4 are superposed, and the distribution factor of the RPM-FS
machine is calculated to be 1. Consequently, the maximum back-
EMF of phase A can be obtained. The phases B and C can be
constituted based on the same constituting principle as shown in
Fig. 2. In addition, the even-order harmonics existing in the back-
EMF waveform of individual coils can be cancelled in the resultant
phase back-EMF waveform due to the compensation effect as in
SPM-FS machines [12, 13]. Hence, a symmetrical and sinusoidal
phase back-EMF waveform can be exhibited for the 24s/10p RPM-
FS machine as shown in Fig. 2d. Therefore, the prototyped RPM-
FS machine is analysed and controlled under BLAC operation (id 
= 0) in the followings.
Fig. 3a shows the details of the experimental test bench and a
2.5 kW prototyped RPM-FS machine is manufactured to validate
the operation principle. Both the predicted and measured phase to
phase (line) back EMF waveforms at 1500 r/min are shown in
Fig. 3b, and it can be seen that the measured line back-EMF
waveform is sinusoidal and the amplitude of the fundamental
component is 372 V, which is about 90 and 97% of that from 2D
and 3D finite element analysis (FEA) results, respectively. The
total harmonic distortion (THD) values of the measured and FEA-
predicted line back-EMF is 2.69, 2.56 (2D) and 2.57% (3D),
respectively. The measured and FEA-predicted output torques of
the RPM-FS machine versus armature currents are shown in
Fig. 3c. It can be found that the measured output torque increases
almost linearly as armature current rises. The 2D and 3D FEA
results are nearly parallel to the measured one with satisfied
agreements. The root mean square (RMS) value of rated current is
6 A and the measured output torque is 15 Nm, which is about 86%
and 93% of that from 2D-FEA and 3D-FEA results, due to the
neglecting of friction torque, the manufacturing tolerances such as
an inaccurate air-gap length, and the operation temperature
influence.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017

Fig. 2 Operation principle of the RPM-FS machine
(a) θe = 0°, (b) θe = 180°, (c) Conductor back-EMF vectors, (d) Ideal phase ΨPM, e and i
Fig. 3 Experiments of the RPM-FS machine
(a) Experimental platform, (b) Line back-EMF, (c) Output torque with different current
3 Performances evaluation of three machines
having magnets in stator and rotor
Based on the above validation of a 2.5 kW prototyped RPM-FS
machine, in this section a 50 kW (peak value) RPM-FS machine is
designed to further evaluate the merits and disadvantages for EV
and HEV applications. Considering the compared results between a
12s/10p SPM-FS machine [14] and a 48s/8p Prius-IPM machine
[15, 16] as shown in Fig. 4, a comparative evaluation of
electromagnetic performances between the RPM-FS machine and
the two machines in [14], will be performed. It should be noted that
the performances of the SPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines in [14]
have been verified by FEA in advance and adopted directly in the
followings. For a fair comparison, some rules and constraints are
listed as follows:
(i) The stator outside diameter and stack length of three machines
are the same. The materials properties, i.e. magnets, wires gauge,
and stator and rotor irons are also the same.
(ii) Three machines are designed to operate at the maximum torque
under the same based speed of 1200 r/min, the same DC-link
voltage of Udc = 500 V, and the same armature current density of
Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2.
The key geometric parameters and dimensions of the three
machines are shown in Fig. 1d (RPM-FS machine), Fig. 4a (SPM-
IET Electr. Power Appl.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017
17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FS machine) and Fig. 4b (Prius-IPM machine), respectively, and
the crucial specifications and parameters of the three machines are
listed in Table 1.
3.1 Static characteristics
The maximum open-circuit flux density at different parts of the
SPM-FS machine, RPM-FS machine and Prius-IPM machine are
compared in Table 2. It can be found that the maximum PM flux
density in the stator tooth and rotor tooth of the SPM-FS machine
is 2.01 and 1.81 T, respectively, which is significantly higher than
those of the RPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines. Hence, the
overload capability of SPM-FS machine is limited due to the
serious saturated stator and rotor teeth.
Fig. 5 shows the phase and line open-circuit back-EMF per turn
of three machines at the based speed of 1200 r/min. Based on the
Fourier analysis, it can be found that a high three-order harmonic
exists in the phase back-EMF waveform of the RPM-FS machine.
However, by employing star-connection armature windings, the
three-order harmonic can be cancelled, and then the line back-EMF
waveform of the RPM-FS machine is more sinusoidal as shown in
Fig. 5c. The peak value of the fundamental component of the line
back-EMF per turn of the RPM-FS machine, SPM-FS machine and
Prius-IPM machine is 15.2 V, 20.7 V and 20 V, respectively, and
the corresponding THD value is 2.7%, 0.77% and 6.35%. Hence,
from the viewpoint of back-EMF, the RPM-FS machine exhibits
the lowest fundamental magnitude of phase (line) back-EMF per
3
 17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Fig. 4 Cross-sections and key geometric parameters of the 12 s/10p SPM-FS machine and the 48 s/8p Prius-IPM machine
(a) SPM-FS machine, (b) Prius-IPM machine

Table 1 Key specifications of the RPM-FS, SPM-FS and SPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines due to the highest least common
Prius-IPM machines multiple between stator slots and rotor poles [17]. Furthermore, the
Specifications RPM-FS SPM-FS Prius IPM average output torque of the RPM-FS machine is largest (424.5 
Ps/Pr 24/10 12/10 48/8 Nm), being 1.11 and 1.22 times of that of the Prius-IPM machine
and SPM-FS machine, respectively, since the RPM-FS machine
la, mm 83.56
exhibits the highest electrical loading, and the magnetic saturation
Dso, mm 269 is alleviated in the stator and rotor teeth. In addition, the peak-to-
Dsi, mm 193.68 195.83 161.86 peak torque ripple is lowest (12.4 Nm) in the RPM-FS machines,
which is only about 24% of the Prius-IPM machine (51.6 Nm), and
g, mm 0.73
59% of the SPM-FS machine (21.0 Nm). Meanwhile, the torque
Dro, mm 192.22 194.37 160.4 ripple ratio of the RPM-FS machine is only 2.9%, which is 50% of
Dri, mm 124.94 110 110.64 the SPM-FS machine, and 21% of the IPM machine, respectively.
stator teeth arc βst, ° 8.1 9 — From Fig. 6c, it can be seen that the average output torque
values of the RPM-FS machine are always the largest among the
rotor teeth arc βrt, ° 8.1 11.25 —
three machines versus different armature current densities.
rotor slot arc βrs, ° 9.0 − — Moreover, the output torque of the RPM-FS machine increases
rotor teeth width wrt, mm 10.03 19.05 — almost linearly versus armature current densities, which is almost
PM width wPM, mm 12.89 10.25 18.9 parallel to that of the Prius-IPM machine. However, for the SPM-
FS machine, the saturation effect is obvious as the current density
PM height hPM, mm 31.64 36.58 6.5
surpasses 12 A/mm2, which is also the main demerit of SPM-FS
iron type M19_29G machines as analysed aforementioned due to the co-existences of
PM type N36Z_20 magnets and armature windings in stator. Hence, it can be
Br, T 1.24 concluded that the overload capacity of the RPM-FS and Prius-
Hc, A/m 846,625 IPM machine are considerably stronger than the SPM-FS machine,
since the magnetic saturation of stator tooth can be significantly
wires size, AWG 19 reduced by removing PMs from stator to rotor. In addition, the
number of turns per coil 18 14 9 mass of magnets material (kg) and the utilisation ratio kT/MPM
series coil per phase 4 4 8 (torque per magnet mass) are listed in Table 3. It is worth noting
that the PM utilisation ratio of the RPM-FS machine is kT/MPM = 
165.11(Nm/kg), which is only 54% of that Prius-IPM machine.
Table 2 Maximum open-circuit PM flux density at different However, for the SPM-FS machine, the torque per magnet mass is
parts of the three machines only kT/MPM = 123.37(Nm/kg), being 75% of the RPM-FS
Parts RPM-FS SPM-FS Prius-IPM machine.
stator teeth 1.51T 2.01T 0.96T On the other hand, the output torque waveforms of three
stator yoke 0.82T 1.12T 0.72T machines versus different current angles (β) at the current density
rotor teeth 1.64T 1.81T 0.98T of Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2 are shown in Fig. 6d. It can be found that
rotor yoke 0.81T 0.73T 0.86T the RPM-FS machine, SPM-FS machine and Prius-IPM machine
reaches the maximum torque when the corresponding current angle
is about β = 0°, 5° and 48°, respectively, which indicates that the
turn, whereas the THD is between that of SPM-FS and Prius-IPM dq-axes inductances (Ld/Lq) are approximately equal in both RPM-
machines. FS and SPM-FS machines, which is the common feature for flux-
The cogging torque and output torque (at the rated current switching machines employing concentrated windings. However,
density of 20.8 A/mm2) waveforms of three machines under for the Prius-IPM machine employing distributed windings, the q-
maximum-torque-per-ampere (MTPA) control are shown in axis inductance Lq is greater than d-axis inductance Ld, which is
Figs. 6a and b. Obviously, the cogging torque of RPM-FS machine also verified in Table 3. Hence, the reluctance torques of both
is only 1.4 Nm, which is about 42% and 46%, respectively, of the RPM-FS and SPM-FS machines are approximately equal to zero

4 IET Electr. Power Appl.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017

Fig. 5 Back-EMF per turn of the three machines at based speed of 1200 r/min
(a) Phase back-EMF per turn waveforms, (b) Harmonics of phase back-EMF waveforms, (c) Line back-EMF per turn waveforms, (d) Harmonics of line back-EMF waveforms
Fig. 6 Cogging and rated output torque waveforms of the three machines
(a) Cogging torque, (b) Maximum output torque at Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2, (c) Torque-current density curves, (d) Output torque versus current angles
and id = 0 control are suitable for both machines. It can also be
found that the PM-excited torques of the RPM-FS and SPM-FS
machines are larger than that of the Prius-IPM machine. However,
the maximum output torque of the Prius-IPM machine is greater
than the SPM-FS machine because the reluctance torque is also a
main part of the output torque in the Prius-IPM machine. It also
indicates that the flux-weakening capability of the Prius-IPM
machine is stronger than that of SPM-FS machine due to the
relatively larger d-axis inductance as presented in the followings.
In addition, it should be emphasised that the output power
(torque) density of the RPM-FS machine is the highest among the
three machines at maximum output torque and based speed
conditions, where the total mass of the RPM-FS machine is
smallest and the output power (torque) is largest. The power factor
of three machines can be calculated based on the values of dq-axes
inductances and open-circuit back-EMF and the results are shown
IET Electr. Power Appl.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017
17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
in Table 3. It can be found that the power factor of the RPM-FS
machine and SPM-FS machine is 0.74 and 0.76, respectively,
which is only 80 and 83% of the Prius-IPM (0.92) by utilising
MTPA control, due to the special structure topologies.
3.2 Flux-weakening constant-power capability
The constant-power speed range is a key characteristic of drive
motors for EV and HEV applications. Generally, the flux-
weakening ability of the PM brushless machines can be expressed
by a coefficient kfw [18, 19]
kfw =
ψm
(1)
ψ m − Ldid
5
 17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
switching machines are concentrated coils which have shorter end-
part winding length. Hence, the torque per copper loss of the RPM-
FS machine is highest among the three machines.
The core loss is regularly composed of hysteresis loss ph,
classical eddy-current loss pc and excess loss pe, and thus, can be
expressed as (2). It should be emphasised that the DC-biased
magnetic induction exists in the different parts of three machines,
and consequently, it is necessary to take the influence of DC-biased
magnetic induction on core loss into account. Meanwhile, a
number of minor local hysteresis loops exist in the machines, and
hence the core loss calculation should consider this phenomenon.
So, the hysteresis loss density of each meshed element is calculated
by an improved Yamazaki's model [20, 21], expressed as
Fig. 7 Output torques and efficiencies versus speeds of the three machines p f e = ph + pc + pe (2)
where ψm is the d-axis PM flux-linkage, Ld and id is the d-axis N pr N pt
inductance and armature current, respectively. From Table 3, it can ph = kh f ∑ ε(ΔBM j)BmM j + ∑ ε(ΔBN j)BmN j
2 2
(3)
be found that for the Prius-IPM machine, ψm is less than Ldid, j=1 j=1
which means the PM flux-linkage can be fully weakened by d-axis
armature reaction, i.e. satisfying infinite speed constant-power pc = kc( f Bm)2 (4)
operation condition. However, for the SPM-FS machine, the flux-
weakening coefficient kfw is predicted to be 3.73, which agrees pe = ke( f Bm)1.5 (5)
well with the result in [14]. Hence, the maximum speed of SPM-FS
machine is ∼4500 r/min as shown in Fig. 7, due to the limited DC- where, kh, kc and ke is the coefficients of hysteresis loss, eddy-
link voltage and small flux-weakening capability kfw. current loss and excess loss, respectively, f is the magnetic field
For the RPM-FS machine, the flux-weakening capacity can also frequency, Npr and Npt is the number of hysteresis loop in radial
be evaluated by (1), where the d-axis PM flux-linkage is 0.126 Wb and tangential direction, ΔBMj and ΔBNj is the major and minor
by 2D-FEA. Hence, the d-axis PM flux linkage ψm is less than
components of DC-biased magnetic inductions in each hysteresis
Ldid, which is similar to the Prius-IPM machine and means the loop respectively, BmMj and BmNj is the amplitude of AC flux
infinite constant-power region can be achieved. density along radial and tangential, and Bm is the peak flux density.
To comprehensively analyse the core loss in different parts of
3.3 Losses and efficiency three machines, some key points are determined as shown in Fig. 8,
The copper loss of three machines at maximum output torque and where point 1 is stator tooth tip, point 2 is stator tooth yoke
based speed condition is analysed and listed in Table 3. It can be coupling, point 3 is stator yoke, point 4 is rotor tooth tip, point 5 is
found that the copper loss of the Prius-IPM is the highest at the rotor tooth yoke coupling, and point 6 is rotor yoke. It can be
same current density, since the armature windings of two flux- concluded some conclusions as listed below:
Firstly, a DC-biased magnetic induction reveals in the stator
tooth-yoke coupling, stator yoke and all rotor cores of the RPM-FS
Table 3 Performance comparison of the three machines machine, the stator tooth of the SPM-FS machine and all rotor
Specifications RPM-FS SPM-FS Prius-IPM cores of the Prius-IPM machine. It should be emphasised that for
mass of stator iron, kg 11.98 11.18 19.05 the SPM-FS machine, the PMs are embraced in the stator, which is
different from RPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines. Then, the flux
mass of rotor and shaft, kg 11.40 15.16 11.58
density of the rotor core in the SPM-FS machine is an alternating
mass of copper mass, kg 4.35 4.76 6.8 magnetic field, whereas the magnetic field direction of stator tooth
mass of PM, kg 2.571 2.837 1.239 tip will not change, hence the DC-biased magnetic induction exists
total mass, kg 30.30 33.94 38.67 in the stator tooth tip, but not in rotor core.
based Speed, r/min 1200 1200 1200 Secondly, for the RPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines, the PMs
Rphase, Ω @21oC 0.038 0.049 0.07 are located in the rotor, and the magnetic field direction of rotor
core will not change as rotor rotates, hence the DC-biased magnetic
PM flux linkage ψm, Wb 0.126 0.1171 0.2007 induction exists in the rotor cores of these two machines. It should
d-axis inductance Ld, mH 0.51 0.343 1.296 be noted that the rotor core flux density of the Prius-IPM machine
q-axis inductance Lq, mH 0.52 0.480 2.308 is a constant value as the rotor rotates, which is different from the
RPM-FS machine, and can be explained by the fact that the air-gap
kfw Fully 3.73 Fully
permeance of the Prius-IPM machine is nearly invariable.
peak cogging, Nm 1.4 3.34 3.06 Therefore, the rotor core loss density (the core loss of per mass) of
the performance at maximum output torque and based speed the Prius-IPM machine is lower than the others at the same speed.
condition Moreover, the flux density in the rotor core of RPM-FS machines
output torque, Nm 424.5 350 382 is an alternating magnetic field with a DC-biased magnetic
torque ripple, Nm 12.4 21.0 51.6 induction, due to the ‘flux-switching’ principle.
Thirdly, the minor local hysteresis loops reveal in the rotor
torque ripple ratio kripple/T 2.9% 6% 13.5%
tooth and rotor yoke of the SPM-FS machine and the stator tooth of
kT/MPM, Nm/kg 165.11 123.37 308.31 the Prius-IPM machine. However, the stator and rotor cores of the
copper loss, W 4405 4593.8 6562.5 RPM-FS machine have no minor local hysteresis loops as shown in
Tout/Pcu kT/Pcu 0.096 0.076 0.058 Fig. 8a, which is different from other two machines.
Lastly, the magnets magnetisation width and the PMs volume of
core loss, W 256.6 225.1 162.1
the Prius-IPM machine are the lowest, resulting in the least MMF.
PM loss, W 712 685.4 3.08 Therefore, the amplitudes of the AC flux density waveforms of the
output power, W 53340.3 43979.1 48000.0 key points of the Prius-IPM machine are lower than those of the
efficiency, % 89.3% 87.2% 86.2% RPM-FS and SPM-FS machines, and then the core loss density of
power factor 0.74 0.76 0.92 the Prius-IPM machine is also the smallest at the same speed. The
detailed predicted core losses of different parts for three machines

6 IET Electr. Power Appl.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017
 17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Fig. 8 PM flux density waveforms of three machines at no load condition
(a) RPM-FS machine, (b) SPM-FS machine, (c) Prius-IPM machine

Table 4 Core loss comparison of the three machines @ from stator to rotor. However, from Fig. 7 the efficiency of the
Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2 and nb = 1200 r/min Prius-IPM machine becomes highest in the three machines when
Parts RPM-FS SPM-FS Prius-IPM the speed exceeds 4000 r/min. Since the core loss and PM eddy
loss both increase as speed accelerates, and these two loss
stator tooth, W 127.8 72.9 77.4
components in both RPM-FS and SPM-FS machines are higher
stator yoke, W 81.4 76.4 78.4 than that of the Prius-IPM machine due to larger rotor poles
rotor tooth, W 47.4 54.5 4.8 (electromagnetic pole-pair number) and more PM materials used,
rotor yoke, W 21.3 1.5 as listed in Table 3. Especially at the speed of 6000r/min, the
core loss, W 256.6 225.1 162.1 efficiency of the Prius-IPM machine is 84%, which is about 1.04
times of that of the RPM-FS machine.

Table 5 Output torque versus PM temperatures 3.4 Operation temperature and ending-effect influence
Temperature, °C 90 110 130 150 For EV and HEV applications supplied by larger armature currents
TRPM-FS, Nm 397.3 388.9 380.3 371.5 and lower DC-linkage voltages, the operation temperature is
TSPM-FS, Nm 343.3 336.6 329.6 322.5 directly related to PM demagnetisation, and then the flux linkage
TPrius-IPM, Nm 364.4 359.3 354.6 349.6
and output torque are also influenced. Both temperature
dependence of remanence Br and coercive force Hc can be
described as [22]
at the current density of 20.8 A/mm2 and based speed of 1200  Br T = Br T 0 (1 + α1 T − T 0 + α2 T − T 0 2) (6)
r/min are compared in Table 4. It worth noting that the rotor tooth
loss and rotor yoke loss of the RPM-FS machine are added
together, because it is difficult to separate rotor tooth from rotor Hc T = Hc T 0 (1 + β1 T − T 0 + β2 T − T 0 2) (7)
yoke by utilising the magnetic circuit analysis.
It can be found from Table 4 that the core loss of the RPM-FS where, T0 is the reference temperature, and α1, α2, β1 and β2 are
machine is 256.6 W, which is about 1.58 and 1.14 times of that of coefficients.
the Prius-IPM and SPM-FS machines, respectively. Meanwhile, the For the RPM-FS and SPM-FS machines, the maximum PM
core loss density of RPM-FS machine is highest in three machines, operation temperatures (TempPM) are difficult to estimate
because the flux density amplitude of stator tooth core is much accurately without enough experiments. Therefore, to analyse the
higher than other two machines as shown in Fig. 8. In addition, the PM temperature influence on the performances of the three
rotor core loss of the Prius-IPM machine is the lowest as only 6.3  machines, the torque capability at Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2 and flux-
W, which agrees with the above analysis. The efficiencies of the weakening capacity with different PM temperatures are shown in
three machines can be obtained as shown in Table 3. The RPM-FS Tables 5 and 6. The output torques of the three machines decrease
machine exhibits the highest efficiency at Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2 as PM temperature increases due to the degraded performance of
and based speed nb = 1200 r/min, where the copper loss of the magnets, and the output torque of the RPM-FS machine is always
RPM-FS machine is lowest, and meanwhile the output power of largest among the three machines at the same PM temperature. The
the RPM-FS machine is highest. Furthermore, it also can be found output torque of the RPM-FS machine is 384.6 Nm, which is,
that the phase resistance of the RPM-FS machine is smallest due to respectively, ∼1.15 times and 1.07 times of that of the SPM-FS and
the reduced end-part of windings length by removing the magnets Prius-IPM machines at TempPM = 150°C. It can be found from
Table 6 that the maximum speed of the SPM-FS machine in
constant-power operation region improves as the PM temperature
Table 6 Flux-weakening coefficient kfw versus PM rises since the rising temperature can reduce the PM flux-linkage.
temperatures In addition, the RPM-FS machine and the Prius-IPM machine still
Temperature, °C 90 110 130 150 satisfies infinite speed in constant-power operation range at
RPM-FS fully TempPM = 150°C. However, the PM operation temperature is
SPM-FS 4.94 5.59 6.34 7.46 different among the three machine topologies, although they
Prius-IPM fully employ the same oil cooling system. The detailed thermal analysis
will be conducted further.

IET Electr. Power Appl. 7

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017

Table 7 Output torque performances considering ending-
effect
RPM-FS, Nm SPM-FS, Nm Prius-IPM, Nm
2D-FEA@25oC 424.5 350 382
2D-FEA@120oC 384.6 333.1 357.1
3D-FEA@120oC 347.2 305.7 339.7
measured-results — — 335
On the other hand, since the ratio of stack length to stator outer
diameter is ∼1/3 for three machines, the end-effect on performance
cannot be neglected. Table 7 shows the output torque at Jsa_rms =  The main drawbacks and future work of RPM-FS machines are
20.8 A/mm2 obtained by 2D and 3D FEA models, respectively. It
can be found that the torque of the Prius-IPM by 3D-FEA at
TempPM = 120°C is approximately equal to the measured result
[15]. In the followings, the PM operation temperature of three
machines is assumed to be 120°C. The output torque of the RPM-
FS, SPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines by 3D-FEA at TempPM =  (ii) Compared with the Prius-IPM machine, the PM utilisation ratio
120°C is 347.2 Nm, 305.7 Nm and 339.7 Nm, respectively, which
decreases 9.7%, 8.2% and 4.9% compared with the corresponding
2D-FEA results, which verifies that the end-effect has more
significant influences on the two flux-switching PM machines than
the Prius-IPM machine due to the special magnet configurations.
However, the electromagnetic torque of the proposed RPM-FS
machine is still larger than that of the Prius-IPM machine. Further,
the efficiencies of the RPM-FS, SPM-FS and Prius-IPM machines
at TempPM = 120°C is calculated and modified to be 84.7%, 82.8%
and 81%, respectively. From the above analysis, it should be
emphasised that although the PM temperature and end-effect
influence the output torque (power) of the two flux-switching
machines significantly at based speed, the RPM-FS machine still
exhibits the highest efficiency. Since the main loss is copper loss at
based speed, which increases seriously as the winding temperature
rises, the copper loss of RPM-FS machine is lowest among three
machines at the same operation temperature. In addition, the PM
temperature of the SPM-FS machine may higher than other two
machines at Jsa_rms = 20.8 A/mm2 and based speed, because the
armatures coils are wound around the PMs and stator teeth, and the
copper loss-caused temperature rise will transfer to PMs directly.
Further, the PM loss of the SPM-FS machine is also higher than
that of the Prius-IPM machine.
4 Conclusions
In this paper, a novel RPM-FS machine is proposed and the
electromagnetic performances are investigated in detail by 2D/3D-
FEA. Moreover, a comprehensive comparison between three
machines, namely, a 24-stator-slots/10-rotor-poles RPM-FS
machine, a 12-stator-slots/ten-rotor-poles SPM-FS machine, and a
48-stator-slots/eight-rotor-poles Prius 2004-IPM machine, is
conducted with the same overall dimensions, main material
properties, current density, and DC-link bus voltage. It can be
concluded that the RPM-FS machine possesses some merits as
summarised here:
(i) The RPM-FS machine can exhibit a sinusoidal back-EMF
waveform with concentrated windings and straight stator and rotor,
thus the BLAC operation is suitable, which is the same as that of
SPM-FS machines and conventional rotor-PM brushless machines.
(ii) Similar to the SPM-FS machine, the RPM-FS machine inherits
the flux-switching principle, and exhibits compact structure, large
torque (power) density, and high efficiency.
(iii) Compared with SPM-FS machines, the slot areas of armature
windings in RPM-FS machines are alleviated effectively, since the
PMs are removed from stator to rotor. Consequently, the
magnetisation saturation in stator teeth can be significantly reduced
and the electrical loading can be improved, which results in
obvious improvements of output torque and overload capacity.
(iv) Thankful for the concentrated armature windings, the windings
end-part length of RPM-FS machines can be reduced further
8 IET Electr. Power Appl.
17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
without the magnets sandwiched in SPM-FS machines, resulting in
reduced phase resistance, copper loss and increased efficiency.
(v) The flux-weakening capacity of RPM-FS machine is the same
as that of the Prius-IPM machine, which has infinite speed in
constant power range condition.
(vi) Compared with SPM-FS machines, the heat caused by
armature currents have less influence on magnets and can be
directly transferred to stator irons and dissipated by the cooling
liquid circulating in stator housing. Moreover, the current density
and the overloaded capability can be enlarged further without the
direct effects on magnets at low speed condition.
as follows:
(i) The PMs are located in the rotor, and the rotor structure is more
complex than SPM-FS machines. Further, the investigation on
mechanical strength of RPM-FS machines especially under high-
speed is undergoing.
of the RPM-FS machine is relatively smaller although it is larger
than the SPM-FS machine. Hence, the modification of magnets
topology is the work undergoing.
(iii) The core loss and PM loss of the RPM-FS and SPM-FS
machines are significantly larger than the Prius-IPM machine at
high speed condition, due to higher rotor-pole-number. The PM
loss and core loss cause PM temperature-rise, and then the PMs
will be more easily demagnetised. The new combination of stator
slots and rotor poles will be explored, and the PM volume
reduction will be an optimal objective to reduce the PM loss.
(iv) The power factor of the RPM-FS machine and the SPM-FS
machine is 0.74 and 0.76, respectively, which is significantly lower
than that of Prius-IPM machine by utilising MTPA control.
In general, the RPM-FS machine has exhibited favourable
advantages to address the weakness of SPM-FS machine and Prius-
IPM machine, and proves to be a promising candidate for the EV
and HEV driving systems.
5 Acknowledgments
This work was supported by 973 Program of China (grant no.
2013CB035603) and National Natural Science Foundation of
China (grant no. 51322705).
6 References
[1] Urquhart, I., Tanaka, D., Owen, R., et al.: ‘Mechanically actuated variable
flux IPMSM for EV and HEV applications’. Proc. Conf. World Electric
Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS27), Barcelona, Spain, November
2013, pp. 1–12
[2] Xiang, Z., Zhu, X., Quan, L., et al.: ‘Multilevel design optimization and
operation of a brushless double mechanical port flux-switching permanent-
magnet motor’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2016, 63, (10), pp. 6042–6054
[3] Zhu, Z.Q., Al-Ani, M., Li, B., et al.: ‘Comparative study of the
electromagnetic performance of switched flux permanent magnet machines’,
IET Electr. Power Appl., 2015, 9, (4), pp. 297–306
[4] Wang, Y., Jin, M.J., Fei, W.Z., et al.: ‘Cogging torque reduction in permanent
magnet flux-switching machines by rotor teeth axial pairing’, IET Electr.
Power Appl., 2010, 4, (7), pp. 500–506
[5] Evans, D.J., Zhu, Z.Q.: ‘Novel partitioned stator switched flux permanent
magnet machines’, IEEE Trans. Magn., 2015, 51, (1), p. 8100114
[6] Olszewski, M.: ‘Evaluation of the 2004 Toyota Prius hybrid synergy drive
system’, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, US Department Energy, 2005
[7] Wang, Y., Deng, Z.Q.: ‘Comparison of hybrid excitation topologies for flux-
switching machines’, IEEE Trans. Magn., 2012, 48, (9), pp. 2518–2527
[8] Wu, Z.Z., Zhu, Z.Q.: ‘Analysis of air gap field modulation and magnetic
gearing effects in switched flux permanent magnet machines’, IEEE Trans.
Magn., 2015, 51, (5), p. 8105012
[9] Su, P., Hua, W.: ‘Investigation of a novel rotor permanent magnet flux
switching machine for EV and HEV applications’. 2015 IEEE Int. Magnetics
Conf., Beijing, China, May 2015, p. 7157391
[10] Hua, W., Su, P., Zhang, G., et al.: ‘A novel rotor-permanent magnet flux-
switching machine’. Tenth Int. Conf. on Ecological Vehicles and Renewable
Energies, Monaco, 2015, p. 7112960
[11] Zhu, Z.Q., Chen, J.T.: ‘Advanced flux-switching permanent magnet brushless
machines’, IEEE Trans. Magn., 2010, 46, (6), pp. 1447–1453
[12] Hua, W., Cheng, M., Zhu, Z.Q., et al.: ‘Analysis and optimization of back-
EMF waveform of a flux-switching permanent magnet motor’, IEEE Trans.
Energy Convers., 2008, 23, (3), pp. 727–733
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017

[13] Zhu, Z.Q., Al-Ani Liu, M.X., Lee, B.: ‘Comparison of electromagnetic
performance of switched flux permanent magnet machines with mechanical
flux adjusters’, IET Electr. Syst. Transp., 2015, 5, (4), pp. 175–184
[14] Cao, R., Mi, C., Cheng, M.: ‘Quantitative comparison of flux switching
permanent magnet motors with interior permanent magnet motor for EV,
HEV, and PHEV applications’, IEEE Trans. Magn., 2012, 48, (8), pp. 2374–
2384
[15] Hsu, J.S., Ayers, C.W., Coomer, C.L.: ‘Report on Toyota/Prius motor torque
capability, torque property, no-load back EMF, and mechanical losses’, US
Department Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2007
[16] Hsu, J.S., Ayers, C.W., Coomer, C.L.: ‘Report on Toyota/Prius motor design
and manufacturing assessment’, U.S. Dept. Energy, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, 2004
[17] Fasolo Alberti, L., Bianchi, N.: ‘Performance comparison between switching-
flux and IPM machines with rare-earth and ferrite PMs’, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Appl., 2014, 50, (6), pp. 3708–3716
IET Electr. Power Appl.
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2017
17518679, 2017, 9, Downloaded from https://ietresearch.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1049/iet-epa.2017.0182 by Cochrane Romania, Wiley Online Library on [25/11/2022]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
[18] Fei, W., Chi, P., Luk, K.: ‘A novel permanent-magnet flux switching machine
with an outer-rotor configuration for in-wheel light traction applications’,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 2012, 59, (5), pp. 1496–1506
[19] Yin, J., Zhu, X., Quan, L., et al.: ‘Comprehensive multi-objective
secularization optimization of a permanent magnet machine with correlation
parameters stratified method’, IET Electr. Power Appl., 2017, 11, (1), pp. 72–
79
[20] Yamazaki, K.: ‘Torque and efficiency calculation of an interior permanent
magnet motor considering harmonic iron losses of both the stator and rotor’,
IEEE Trans. Magn., 2003, 39, (3), pp. 1460–1463
[21] Zhu, S., Cheng, M., Dong, J., et al.: ‘Core loss analysis and calculation of
stator permanent-magnet machine considering DC-biased magnetic
induction’, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., 2014, 61, (10), pp. 5203–5212
[22] Zhou, P., Lin, D., Xiao, Y., et al.: ‘Temperature dependent demagnetization
model of permanent magnets for finite element analysis’, IEEE Tran. Magn.,
2012, 48, (2), pp. 1031–1034
9