Analytical comparison of conventional and modified

winding for high speed bearingless permanent

magnet synchronous motor applications
Gael Messager1 , Andreas Binder1,2
[1] Institute for Electrical Energy Conversion,
Darmstadt University of Technology (Germany)
[2] Senior Member IEEE (Germany)
gmessager@ew.tu-darmstadt.de, abinder@ew.tu-darmstadt.de

Abstract—A Bearingless high speed drive force generation II. P ROPOSED W INDING S YSTEM
is based on the superposition of two fields of different pole
pairs differing by ± 1. This paper presents a comparison The winding system of an already presented high speed
of electromagnetic properties between the conventional double bearingless motor [8] is presented in Fig. 1. It is composed
distributed winding topology of bearingless motors with a non- of two three-phase single layer winding systems. The driving
conventional design, relevant for two pole bearingless drives. It winding system A has a number of pole pairs pA = 1 and a
will focus especially on the design equations, on the optimisation number of slots per pole and phase qA = 2. The levitation
and its specific properties. winding system B has a number of pole pairs pB = pA + 1 =
2 and a number of slots per pole and phase qB = 1.
I. I NTRODUCTION
To prevent mechanical wear of high speed electrical motor
bearings, magnetic bearings and bearingless motors are cur-
rently investigated. Magnetic bearing technology is already
used in industrial applications, whereas bearingless motors
are still under development. Magnetically levitated drives a)
require additional rotor length to insert the additional magnetic
bearings. For high speed applications, this additional length
reduces the critical speed and limits the maximal speed [1].
All types of AC motors have been designed up to now for
bearingless operation [2]. Among the different motor types, UA ZA VA XA WA YA
the permanent magnet synchronous motor turned out to be a
good solution as a high speed drive due to the low rotor losses
and the increased air-gap [1]. Rotor lateral force generation
is based on the superposition of two fields with a pole pair
numbers differing by one. The two fields are usually designed
b)
separately with two different distributed windings in the same
slots [3]. The main advantage of this split of functionality is
the simplicity of the design and field control, however at the
cost of reduced motor capability and increased manufacturing
complexity. Many applications with fractional windings are YB UB ZB VB WB XB
designed to satisfy the specific field requirement of bearingless
motors [4],[5],[6]. However these applications, due to the Fig. 1. Bearingless motor stator winding system with two single layer
fractional winding, display high field harmonic content and three-phase windings for a two-pole permanent magnet synchronous motor
are thus not well suited for high speed bearingless drives. (Q/(2pA ) = 12): a) Two pole driving winding (pA = 1, qA = 2), b) Four
A winding topology was proposed in [7] for a bearingless pole levitation winding (pB = 2, qB = 1)
induction motor to enable the generation of two fields by using
the harmonics of a distributed winding, where the symmetry The proposed new winding has two double layer windings,
of a three phase half pitch winding is broken. In this paper, the occupying together only two layers (see Fig. 2). The dispo-
winding properties will be investigated for a 2-pole motor with sition is also shown in axial direction in Fig. 3 for clarity.
a 4-pole levitation field. It will be shown that, under proper The two windings A and B have the same number of phases
design, the higher order field harmonics can be minimized to mA = mB = 3, the same number of pole pairs pA = pB = 1,
obtain the same magneto-motive force harmonic content as a the same coil span W = 21 τp , the same number of slots
conventional distributed winding. The capability of the drive per pole and phase qA = qB = 2, the same number of
will be increased due to a better copper utilization of the stator turns per phase NsA = NsB and the same winding coefficient
coils. This winding gives a certain redundancy as far as the kw,A,ν = kw,B,ν . Due to the different winding disposition, the
levitation field is concerned, which will be described in the north and south pole field curves are different (see Fig. 3),
last chapter. hence the winding coefficients kw,ν are not the same as for
978-1-4799-5183-3/14/$31.00 ' 2014 IEEE 330
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
a conventional distributed winding with symmetric north and To generate magnetic lateral forces from a single winding, one
south pole field curve. should choose two harmonics, from which the pole counts
2p1 and 2p2 fulfil the condition p2 = p1 ± 1 [3]. In a
conventional distributed winding, it can be noticed that no
consecutive harmonics (e.g. ν = 5,6,7...) can be excited due
to the lacking of even field harmonics. This is the reason, why
the two magneto-motive forces for driving and levitating the
rotor must be generated by two separated windings (Fig. 1).
However, if the current loading symmetry is broken by a split
of the two series connected facing coils, then the stator winding
can generate the harmonics with ordinal numbers ν = 1 + mg
UA YB WB XA VA ZB UB YA WA XB VB ZA (2), so that for m = 3 the fundamental field ν = 1 and the
field harmonic ν = −2 can be used simultaneously to generate
Fig. 2. Proposed alternative double layer winding system with two three- rotor levitation forces. The obtained winding is composed
phase windings A (thick) and B (thin) of equal coil span W. (Q/(2pA ) =
Q/(2pB ) = 12, qA = qB = 2) (phase U: bold, phase V: dotted, phase W:
of two three phase opposing systems A and B. Considering
broken line) only the component ν = 1 and ν = −2, the radial air-gap
magnetic flux density BA,ccw (resp. BB,ccw ), generated by a
three-phase symmetrical current system, rotating in counter-
Im clockwise direction IA,ccw (resp. IB,ccw ), can be written as
t=0 IAU equation (3).
Re IBU=IBV=IBW=0
µ0 πl

BA,ccw (l, t) = [V1,A cos( − ωt)
IAW IAV





 δ τp


 2πl
+V−2,A cos( + ωt)]


τ


p
(3)
 µ0 πl

 BB,ccw (l, t) = [V1,B cos( − ωt + π)
δ τ

p




2πl

+UA +UA +WB +WB +VA +VA +UB +UB +WA +WA +VB +VB

+V−2,B cos( + ωt)]



τp
-WA -VB -VB -UA -UA -WB -WB -VA -VA -UB -UB -WA
The fundamental field ν = 1 of the winding B is, due to
VA(l,t = 0) opposite disposition, phased shifted by π, whereas the field
harmonic ν = −2 is phased shifted by 2π. If the currents
IA,ccw and IB,ccw , rotating in counter-clockwise direction, are
l of the same amplitude and phased shifted by π, then the field
superposition gives (4).

Fig. 3. Winding disposition and magneto-motive force curve V (l, t) at the 2µ0 πl
time t = 0 for the given current phasor orientation Bccw (l, t) = V1 cos( − ωt) (4)
δ τp
The magneto-motive force of each winding can be calculated The combination of the two counter-clockwise rotating and
with the formulas (1) and (2). phase opposed currents IA,ccw and IB,ccw cancels the magnetic
field harmonic ν = −2, resulting in a single counter-clockwise
√ ∞ rotating fundamental magnetic field. In the same manner, the
2mNs I X kwν νπl air-gap magnetic field density BA,cw (resp. BB,cw ), generated
V (l, t) = cos( − ωt)
πp ν τp (1) by a three-phase symmetrical current system, rotating in clock-
ν=1+3g
wise direction IA,cw (resp. IB,cw ), can be written as equation
with g ∈ Z (5).

µ0 πl
 

 0 for ν ∈ 4Z 
 BA,cw (l, t) = [V1,A cos( + ωt)






 δ τp
 
kw,ν = kq,ν kp,ν = kq,ν for ν ∈ 2 + 12Z 
 2πl
+V−2,A cos( − ωt)]


τp
 

k

 √q,ν for ν ∈ 1 + 6Z


 (2) (5)
2  µ0 πl
νπ

 BB,cw (l, t) = [V1,B cos( + ωt + π)
δ τ

sin( ) W π π

 p
2m

kq,ν = νπ , kp,ν = sin( ν ) = sin(ν )

2πl


q sin( ) τp 2 4 

 +V−2,B cos( − ωt)]
2mq τp
331
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
If the currents IA,cw and IB,cw , rotating in clockwise direc- y
tion, are of the same amplitude and in phase, then the field
superposition gives (6).
+VA
+UB +VA
2µ0 2πl
Bcw (l, t) = V−2 cos( − ωt) (6) −WB
δ τp −WB −UA
+UB +WB
The combination of the two clockwise rotating and in phase −VA −UA
current systems IA,cw and IB,cw cancels the magnetic field
fundamental ν = 1, resulting in a single counter-clockwise l
rotating magnetic field harmonic ν = −2. Hence we get a +WA −VA −VB +WB x
field with 2pν = 2p poles for the fundamental and 2pν =
−4p = −2p0 poles for the second harmonic. For p = 1 the −UB −VB
condition p = 1 and p0 = p + 1 = 2 is obtained, as it is +WA +UA
required for a lateral magnetic force [3]. As a consequence, −UB −WA
the counter-clockwise rotating driving field is controlled by −WA
the counter-clockwise rotating current system and the counter- +VB +UA
clockwise rotating levitation field by the clockwise rotating +VB
current system.
The equations of the injected current in the phases U, V, W
of the windings A and B are defined in (7). Fig. 4. Position and orientation of coils in stator reference frame. The
circumferential point l = 0, at stator inner radius rsi , corresponds to the
position (x, y) = (rsi , 0).
 
iAU (t)
 
iA (t) =  wave equations of the magnetic flux densities in the air gap,
 iAV (t)  =

the position of the coils along the circumferential direction l
iAW (t) is defined as in Fig. 4. For the chosen position reference in
 
iccw cos(ωt + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt + ϕ2 ) Fig. 4 and the given current conditions (7), the fundamental
  and the harmonic ν = −2 of the current distribution I(l, t)
iccw cos(ωt − 2π + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt − 2π + ϕ2 ) are equivalent to two uniformly distributed infinitely thin layer
 
 3 3 
current loadings Accw (l, t) and Acw (l, t) at the stator bore,
4π 4π
 
iccw cos(ωt − + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt − + ϕ2 ) given by (9) and illustrated in Fig. 5 (resp. Fig. 6).
3 3
 
iBU (t) 
πl
 Accw (l, t) = −Accw sin( − ωt − ϕ1 (t))
  

iB (t) =  iBV (t) 

= τp
iBW (t) −2πl
 Acw (l, t) = Acw sin(

 + ωt + ϕ2 (t)) (9)
  τp
iccw cos(ωt − π + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt + ϕ2 ) 2mkw,s,i Ns 2ii
  with Ai = , i ∈ {ccw,cw}
iccw cos(ωt + π + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt − 2π + ϕ2 ) 2πrsi
 
 3 3 

π 4π
 The determination of the magnetic field strengths in radial
iccw cos(ωt − + ϕ1 ) + icw cos(−ωt − + ϕ2 ) −→ −→
3 3 direction Hn1 and Hn−2 is done by integration of Ampere’s
(7) law along the oriented path C1 (ϕ), defined on Fig. 7. In order
The two current systems A and B, defined in (7), can be to simplify the calculation, the air-gap width δ is assumed
written in space vector form (8). small, compared to the stator inner radius rsi , so that the
normal components of the magnetic field strength can be
assumed constant along the radial direction in the air-gap.
2π
i(t) = 23 (iU + aiV + a2 iW ), a = ej 3 Furthermore, the iron is assumed to have infinite relative
permeability, so that the magnetic field strength in the iron
iA (t) = iccw ej(ωt+ϕ1 ) + icw ej(−ωt+ϕ2 ) (8) is zero. The calculation gives (10).

iB (t) = −iccw ej(ωt+ϕ1 ) + icw ej(−ωt+ϕ2 ) 

πl
 Hnccw (l, t) = H1 − Hnccw cos( − ωt − ϕ1 (t))


III. F ORCES AND TORQUE EQUATIONS τp
−2πl
 Hncw (l, t) = H−2 + Hncw cos( + ωt + ϕ2 (t))

The calculations will be derived in two coordinate systems:

τp
A stator Cartesian coordinate system (→ −ex , →
−
ey , →
−
ez ) and a rotor Accw rsi Acw rsi
−
→ →
− →
−
cylindrical coordinate system (en , et , ez ) with the correspond- with Hnccw = , and Hncw =
δ 2δ
ing transformation parameters (ρ, ϕ). In order to determine the (10)
332
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 y
y

µfe = ∞
δ

x µfe = ∞
C2 (ϕ)
ϕ
x

Fig. 8. Path of integration for the calculation of the tangential magnetic field
strength components.

The constants of integration H1 and H−2 can be determined by

Fig. 5. Equivalent current loading of the fundamental of the current system
ϕ1 integrating again the magnetic field strength along the whole
at the time t = − .
ω air-gap. In absence of a flux component in z-direction, the
total sum of magnetic field strengths, as unipolar flux, is zero,
giving the constants H1 = H−2 = 0.
y From the previous equations (10), the normal component of
the fundamental flux density Bnccw and harmonic ν = −2
flux density Bncw can be determined (11).


πl
 Bnccw (l, t) = −2kn1 iccw cos( − ωt − ϕ1 )


τp
−2πl
 Bncw (l, t) = −2kn−2 icw cos( + ωt + ϕ2 ) (11)


x τp
µ0 m kw,s,i
with kni = Ns , i ∈ {1, −2}
πδ |i|

In the same manner, the tangential magnetic flux density

components are derived by integrating Ampere’s law along
the oriented path C2 (ϕ), defined on Fig. 8. The result is given
in (12).

Fig. 6. Equivalent current loading of the harmonic ν = −2 of the current

ϕ2 
system at the time t = . πl
ω  Btccw (l, t) = 2kt1 iccw sin( − ωt − ϕ1 )


τp
−2πl (12)
 Btcw (l, t) = −2kt−2 icw sin( + ωt + ϕ2 )


y τp
µ0 m
with kti = Ns kw,s,i , i ∈ {1, −2}
πrsi

The magnetic flux density due to the rotor magnets at the stator
µfe = ∞ inner-radius has a negligible tangential component due to the
assumed infinite stator iron permeability. The radial component
δ of the flux density of the rotor magnets at stator inner-radius
is given by (13).
µfe = ∞
→
− b0 cos( πl − ωt − ϕ0 )→
−
C1 (ϕ) B δ0 (l, t) = B en (13)
ϕ τp
x
The radial forces and the torque are calculated by integrating
Fig. 7. Path of integration for the calculation of the normal field strength the Maxwell’ stress components (14) along the closed sur-
components. face, covering the air-gap surface at inner stator radius rsi ,
considering the superposition of stator and rotor magnetic flux
333
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
densities. In order to simplify the calculation, the radial compo- IV. C OMPARISON OF ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPERTIES
nents (11) and tangential components (12) of the magnetic flux
density amplitudes, generated by the stator winding systems, A high speed motor design with the proposed winding,
are considered small, compared to the magnet flux density displayed in Fig. 2, is compared to the previous winding design
amplitude of the rotor magnet. (displayed in Fig. 1) of an already tested high speed motor [8].
The common motor characteristics are given in Table I.
    TABLE I. M OTOR PARAMETERS [8]
fn (l, t) Bn2 (l, t) − Bt2 (l, t)
→
−   1   Parameter Symbol
 ft (l, t)  = 2µ0  2Bn (l, t)Bt (l, t) 
f (l, t) =     (14) Rated Speed n 60 000 rpm
0 0 Rated Power Pm 500 W
Stator outer diameter dsa 60 mm
The radial forces in x- and y-direction are given by (15). Stator inner diameter dsi 32 mm
Magnet height hm 3.5 mm
Mechanical air gap δm 1.4 mm
lfe , 2τp
Stack length lfe 36 mm
ZZ
πl →
− πl →
−
Fx (t)= [ cos( ) f (l, t)·→
−
e n − sin( ) f (l, t)·→
−
e t ]dldz Slot area Aslot 58 mm2
τp τp
0, 0
b0 ( rsi +1)icw cos(ϕ2 −ϕ0 )
=−mNs kw,s,−2 lfe B The specific winding characteristics are given in Table II.
2δ
TABLE II. W INDING PARAMETERS
lfe , 2τp
ZZ
Fig. 1 Fig. 2
πl →− πl →
−
Fy (t)= [ sin( ) f (l, t)·→
−
e n + cos( ) f (l, t)·→
−
e t ]dldz Parameters Symbol Driving Levitation Proposed
τp τp winding A winding B windings A, B
0, 0 pole pair count p 1 2 1, 1
b0 ( rsi +1)icw sin(ϕ2 −ϕ0 )
=−mNs kw,s,−2 lfe B Turns per coil Nc 6 18 6, 6
2δ
(15) Number of slots q 2 1 2, 2
per coil and
The electromagnetic torque is given by (16). phase

lfe , 2τp Rated phase In 9A 3A 8.23 A, 8.23 A

ZZ current
→
−
rsi f (l, t)·→
− Covered slot area Aslot,c 41 mm2 17 mm2 29 mm2 , 29 mm2
M (t)= e t dldz
(16)
0, 0
b0 iccw sin(ϕ1 −ϕ0 ) Using (19), the magneto-motive force amplitudes and the Total
=−2mNs kw,s,1 lfe rsi B Harmonic Distortion (THD) of the MMF in the air-gap for a
pνπ
The lateral forces Fx , Fy for the magnetic levitation (15) are normalized current amplitude Ibs = 1 are calculated in
mNs
proportional to icw and to the related phase angle ϕ2 − ϕ0 . Table III.
The electromagnetic torque (16) is proportional to iccw and  m
to the related phase angle ϕ1 − ϕ0 . The forces Fx and Fy in  Vν = pνπ Nss

 kw,ν Ibs for ν ∈ 1 + 3Z
the x-y-plane can be expressed in complex form by defining (19)
1 ∞
F −2 = Fx +jFy . The torque can also be expressed in complex P
Vi2
 THD = |V |


form by defining F 1 = jM/rsi . If the complex forces F 1 and 1 i=2
F −2 are included in the space vector equations (8), it follows
(17).
TABLE III. H ARMONIC CONTENT COMPARISON FOR THE TWO FIELD
−F 1 j(ωt+ϕ0 ) −F −2 j(−ωt+ϕ0 ) GENERATION (1 ≤ |ν| ≤ |νmax | = 104 )

 iA (t) =
 e + e
k1 k−2
Winding Fig. Symbol Fundamental THD (%)
 iB (t) = −F 1 ej(ωt+ϕ0 ) + −2 ej(−ωt+ϕ0 )
 F amplitude (pu)
k1 k−2 (17) Driving 1 kw,A 0.966 17%
with k1 = 2mNs kw,s,1 lfe B0
b winding A

b0 ( rsi + 1)
Combined 2 kw,ccw 0.683 17%
and k−2 = mNs kw,s,−2 lfe B winding A, B
2δ
Levitation 1 kw,B 1 31%
The relation between the current space vectors and the complex winding B
forces in the stator reference frame can be written in a matrix Combined 2 kw,cw 0.866 31%
form (18). winding A, B
! ! !
iA (t) −1 k−2 k1 F 1 ej(ωt+ϕ0 )
= · · (18) The total amount of the higher order harmonics of the MMF
iB (t) k1 k−2 −k−2 k1 F −2 ej(−ωt+ϕ0 ) is the same for both windings, giving exactly the same THD.
334
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
As a consequence, the iron losses, caused by the stator field 60
of the proposed winding should be roughly the same as for
the conventional winding of Fig. 1. The amplitude of currents
for the proposed winding of Fig. 2 must be however increased

Copper losses (W)−→

due to the reduced pitch factor, which surprisingly does not
increase the copper losses (see below). Unfortunately, the 40
proposed winding design cannot further reduce the higher field
harmonics in comparison to the conventional design. This is
due to the increased number of constraints on kw,ν , tuned not Designed winding Fig.1
only for the fundamental field, but also for the field harmonic
ν = −2. In case that the bearingless motor with the windings 20
A, B of Fig. 1 is to be designed with a number of layers Optimum for Fig.1
higher than two, the half-pitching of the distributed winding of
Fig. 2 makes the new proposed winding unfavourable, as far as
field harmonic reduction is concerned. In this comparison, the Proposed winding Fig.2
geometry of stator and rotor is unchanged, so that air friction 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
losses are kept unchanged. The last loss reduction opportunity
concerns the copper losses, representing 25% of the total losses Slot share x of the driving winding (pu)−→
in this example [8]. The total copper losses of the considered
example are calculated at 155◦ C with (20). Fig. 9. Slot area share optimisation for rated magneto-motive forces
V1n = 99.6 A (drive winding A) and V2n = 51.6 A (levitation winding B,
2 Fig. 1)
X ρ155 pqi Nci 2(lfe + 1.5τp ) 2
Pcu = m Ii (20)
Kslot Asloti
i=A,B

One parameter to be determined, when the bearingless magneto-motive force as with the previous winding Fig. 1,
motor (Fig. 1) is designed, is the slot area share be- the two windings A and B are fed by a counter-clockwise
tween the two windings (Aslot,A for driving coils and component current with the r.m.s. rated value Iccw,n and a
Aslot,B for levitation coils). A pertinent strategy could be clockwise component current with the r.m.s. rated value Icw,n ,
to find the slot share that minimises the copper losses. giving an average rated current with the r.m.s. value In ,
In the given example, the copper losses are optimised for following (23).
rated magneto-motive forces V1n and V2n , using the slot
kw,A Nc1

area sharing parameter ξ = Aslot,A /(Aslot,A + Aslot,B ). 
 Iccw,n = I1n = 6.36A
The solution of the problem (21) is displayed in Fig. 9.


 2k w,ccw Nc


2 kw,B Nc2 (23)
X Icw,n = I2n = 5.2A
minimise Pcu,i (Vi , ξ) 
 2k w,cw Nc
ξ


i=1 (21)  q
 I = I2
 2
subject to Vi = Vin , i = 1, 2. n ccw,n + Icw,n = 8.2A

ξ ∈]0, 1[
The copper losses optimal share (at 53.8%), the actual share
of the measured motor [8] (at 70.8%) and the losses for the
proposed windings (at 50%) are given for the rated magneto-
motive forces V1n = 99.6 A (drive) and V2n = 51.6 A
(levitation). It can be seen that the already designed motor
has 19.5 W of copper losses, compared to the optimum point
with 17 W.
The slot share of the proposed winding (Fig. 2) is fixed to
50% for symmetry purpose. The total copper cross section is
evenly used for each steady state operating point. Inserting (7)
with the current r.m.s. values Icw , Iccw in the copper losses
equation (20), the sum of copper losses for both windings A
and B of Fig. 2 follows (22).
Pcu = mRph (|I 2A | + |I 2B |) = 2mRph (Icw
2 2
+ Iccw )
The increased instantaneous copper losses in one winding A
are compensated by the reduced instantaneous copper losses in
the second winding B, so that the overall losses stay the same.
Additionally, the two windings have the same average copper
losses over a half electrical period. Each current component
is using virtually the full available copper area. In order to
generate with the proposed winding Fig. 2 the same rated
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
The copper loss calculation (using (20)) for the proposed
winding Fig. 2 at rated magneto-motive forces gives a value
of 10.7 W, 37% below the optimum value for the distributed
winding Fig. 1. The main reason of this difference is the
winding overhang reduction due to W/τp = 1/2 and the better
copper utilisation. The driving winding overhang is halved due
to the short pitching, reducing the phase resistances Rph1 =
30.5 mΩ to Rph = 26.4 mΩ. This effect is substantial, as
the winding overhang represents 70% of the total resistance
of the driving winding, as it is a 2 pole motor. It is also the
point, where the local temperatures are highest. This advantage
tends to disappear for bigger machines, where the ratio of
stack length to stator inner diameter lfe /dsi increases, and the
optimum slot area share of the driving winding ξ increases
toward 1.
(22) This reduction of copper losses by 46% increases the efficiency
of the motor by 1.4% (1.0% in case of an optimum slot area
share). The same calculation can be done for a single levitation
field or single driving field, giving the results in Table IV.
It can be seen that due to the high slot area share of the
driving winding (70.8%) in case of Fig. 1 and [8], the reduction
of copper losses due to the winding overhang reduction is
compensated by the increased current requirement and the
335
 TABLE IV. C OMPARISON OF CALCULATED COPPER LOSSES FOR
DIFFERENT OPERATING POINTS
2

Operating point Double winding Complementary Loss reduction

Fig. 1 winding Fig. 2
Rated copper 19.7 W 10.7 W -46% 1.5 Combined inverter limit
losses

Torque (pu)−→
Levitation 12.3 W 4.3 W -65%
copper losses
Drive copper 7.4 W 6.4 W -14% 1
losses
Drive inverter limit

reduced slot area share of the proposed winding Fig. 2, giving 0.5
only a moderate improvement. The reduction of levitation
copper losses is substantial due to the high winding factor of Force inverter limit
the harmonic ν = −2 of the proposed winding Fig. 2 and 0
the virtual full use of the copper cross section. The result 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
is also true for bigger machines, as the √slot area for the Radial force (pu)−→
levitation winding is usually much below 3/2. In order to
reduce furthermore the iron losses of the high speed drive,
Fig. 10. Calculated torque and radial force limit at inverter current limit
the number of slots per pole and phase q could be increased. for: separated levitation and drive windings (Fig. 1) in dashed line, proposed
The previous comparison can be generalized for any integer winding (Fig. 2) in solid line.
q ∈ N∗ by calculating the ratios (24). Using (2), the ratios are
found to be independent of q, so that the current requirements
stay proportionals. Doing the same calculation for each field
harmonic ν, the THD displays the same relative improvement fault of the levitation winding would cause the rotor to fall
for both winding systems. into the emergency bearings. From this point of view, the so-
called bearingless motor should be named ”integrated magnetic
bearing” motor, as the levitation winding is sharing the same

kw,A √

 = 2, ∀q ∈ N∗ slot as the drive winding. On the other hand, each proposed
 kw,ccw winding A or B of Fig. 2 is generating a fundamental field ν =


π 1 and a field harmonic ν = −2 according to (3). The decoupled
sin( ) (24)
k w,B 2m , ∀q ∈ N∗ control of the two fields in the symmetrical component system
=2

π


 kw,cw

sin( ) is only possible, when both winding fields are superposed. In
m case of one winding fault (e.g. B), the other winding A is
able to take over the task of rotor levitation. In this case, only
V. OVERLOAD CAPABILITY
the force F −2 is controlled. The current space vector iA (t),
The previous designed motor Fig. 1 [8] is supposed to be transformed into the rotor reference frame, follows (25).
operating at rated conditions. If the radial force increases
above the maximum value, the force-generating current system 1
reaches the inverter current limit, and the rotor falls down into iA (t) = − F ej(−2ωt+ϕ0 ) (25)
k−2 −2
the emergency bearings. Starting again from rated condition,
the proposed winding Fig. 2 can adapt the counter-clockwise This clockwise current space vector is responsible for a clock-
current component iccw (t) and clockwise current component wise rotating fundamental field, which is not compensated
icw (t) to the required radial force requirement. In case of by the second complementary winding B. Transposed into
an increased radial disturbance force above the maximum synchronous frame, it results in a pulsating torque with double
value, the torque current component iccw (t) is decreased to rotating frequency. In this example, the two rotating current
increase further the radial force current component icw (t), systems I A and I B with a r.m.s. value of 5.21 A at rated
while keeping the r.m.s. current In constant. The torque-force levitation change to a single rotating current system with
diagram of the example [8] for the maximum inverter current double levitation current r.m.s. value, giving 17.2 W of copper
limit, set at rated condition, is derived in Fig. 10. losses. Furthermore, the torque mean value is zero, and the
The ratio of maximum lateral force to rated lateral force, torque pulsation amplitude is Icw,n /Iccw,n = 82% of nominal
without exceeding the motor thermal limit or the inverter torque.
In
maximum current limit, is = 158%. This property is
Icw,n VII. C ONCLUSION
of particular interest during the first rotor lift, as no torque is
required, but the rotor weight and unbalanced magnetic pull An alternative winding Fig. 2 for bearingless motors is
together increase the levitation current requirement. analysed and compared to a conventional winding implemen-
tation Fig. 1. It is shown that, due to a better copper utilization,
the proposed winding displays less copper losses for any
VI. W INDING FAULT
combination of levitation and driving magneto-motive force.
On the one hand, the double single layer winding of Fig. 1 In this example, the field harmonic amplitudes of higher order
has no redundancy, concerning the levitation field so that a stay unchanged, compared to the double single layer winding
336
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 1, so that this proposed winding displays no additional iron
losses. An overall calculated efficiency increase of 1.4% can
be obtained for the considered bearingless permanent magnet
synchronous motor prototype [8]. This new winding applica-
tion is however only relevant for bearingless motors with two
pole rotors. It concerns mainly small power high speed motors,
where copper losses are relevant. The proposed winding has
also an increased lateral force capability in absence of any rotor
torque. The coupled redundancy is an additional property of the
complementary winding to prevent emergency bearing touch-
down during a single winding fault, as any of the two windings
A or B of Fig. 2 could take over the levitation requirement in
case of one winding failure. This would be at the cost of a
purely pulsating torque with double rotational frequency and
reduced force capability. A future prototype will be designed
with the described alternative winding Fig. 2 to investigate the
torque-force characteristic and the fault tolerance capability at
high speed.
R EFERENCES
[1] Oshima, M.; Miyazawa, S.; Deido, T.; Chiba, A.; Nakamura, F.; Fukao,
T., ”Characteristics of a permanent magnet type bearingless motor,”
Conference Record of the IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual
Meeting, 1994, vol.1, pp.196-202, 2-6 Oct 1994, Denver, United States.
337
Authorized licensed use limited to: Cheongju University. Downloaded on December 08,2023 at 08:57:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[2] Munteanu, G.; Binder, A.; Schneider, T.; Funieru, B., ”No-load tests
of a 40 kW high-speed bearingless permanent magnet synchronous
motor,” International Symposium on Power Electronics Electrical Drives
Automation and Motion (SPEEDAM), 2010, pp.1460-1465, 14-16 June
2010, Pisa, Italy.
[3] Schneider, T.; Petersen, J.; Binder, A., ”Influence of pole pair combina-
tions on high-speed bearingless permanent magnet motor performance,”
4th IET Conference on Power Electronics, Machines and Drives (PEMD),
2008, pp.707-711, 2-4 April 2008, York, United Kingdom.
[4] Ooshima, M., ”Analyses of Rotational Torque and Suspension Force in
a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Bearingless Motor with Short-pitch
Winding,” IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (PES),
2007, pp.1-7, 24-28 June 2007, Tampa, United States.
[5] Reichert, T.; Kolar, J.W.; Nussbaumer, T., ”Design study for exterior
rotor bearingless permanent magnet machines,” IEEE Energy Conversion
Congress and Exposition (ECCE), 2011, pp.3377-3382, 17-22 Sept.
2011, Atlanta, United States.
[6] Oishi, R.; Horima, S.; Sugimoto, H.; Chiba, A., ”A Novel Parallel
Motor Winding Structure for Bearingless Motors,” IEEE Transactions
on Magnetics, vol.49, no.5, pp.2287-2290, May 2013.
[7] Min, K.; Jin, H.; Jia-qiang, Y.; Hai-bo, J., ”Analysis and experiment
of a 6-phase bearingless induction motor,” International Conference on
Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), 2008, pp.990-994, 17-20 Oct.
2008, Wuhan, China.
[8] Schneider, T.; Binder, A., ”Design and Evaluation of a 60 000 rpm
Permanent Magnet Bearingless High Speed Motor,” 7th International
Conference on Power Electronics and Drive Systems, (PEDS ’07) 2007.
pp.1-8, 27-30 Nov. 2007, Bangkok, Thailand.