Induction and Surface Permanent Magnets

Motor Design
Dalmonte Tommaso - 0001085316
January 19, 2024

Abstract
This study encompasses the comprehensive design, analysis,
and performance evaluation of both an induction motor and a
synchronous motor within the framework of the ’Electric Motor Part I
Design’ university course. Python was utilized as the primary
coding language for implementing the calculations and algo- Induction Motor
rithms integral to both motor designs.

The project involved utilizing a dataset as a foundational re- 1 Introduction

source for both motor types: employing a constrained method-
ology for the induction motor and integrating aspects of this Designing an induction motor involves a multi-faceted pro-
dataset within the unconstrained design approach for the syn- cess that combines electrical, magnetic, and mechanical
chronous motor. engineering principles. The objective is to create an effi-
cient, reliable, and cost-effective motor that converts elec-
For the induction motor, the initial dataset served as a critical
trical energy into mechanical energy.
starting point for the constrained design strategy. From these
The design of an induction motor typically revolves around
values, the reader can instantly identify that the machine is
an industrial type, with the widely used frequency of 50 Hz. several key aspects:
Utilizing specific parameters from this dataset, an informed se- • Requirements: the initial part is to analyze the
lection process led to the determination of optimal lamination
main characteristics of the machine, the main as-
geometries from a specialized catalogue (Eurotranciatura Spa).
pects are indeed rated power, rated voltage, efficiency,
Subsequently, an extensive study was conducted to explore and
analyze the motor’s operational characteristics. Furthermore, power factor, frequency and rated speed.
Finite Element Analysis (FEA) using FEMM and Matlab pro-
• Initial choices: from the rated power, important pa-
vided invaluable insights, validating the design choices and en-
rameters as magnetic loading, electric loading, aspect
hancing performance evaluations.
ratio and stator winding layout.
In the SPM, an unconstrained approach, the dataset served
• Sizing: diameter, length, number of windings, slots
as a reference point for critical parameters. This facilitated a
comprehensive exploration of lamination geometry and magnet all of the geometries are established.
configurations, allowing for customized parameterization and
• Weight and performance: now it is possible to
optimization of performance metrics.
calculate the weights of the apparatuses and of the
Both motors underwent rigorous FEA, ensuring accurate pre- total motor, and also evaluate the performance of the
diction and validation of their operational behaviors. The FEA machine.
served as a pivotal tool in scrutinizing various aspects, includ-
ing electromagnetic performance, efficiency, torque character- • Validation: at this point, close to the finish of the
istics, and overall operational efficacy. workflow, the validation procedure must have been
done. If all the requirements are full-filled the design
The findings and insights from this study offer valuable per- is finished.
spectives on motor design methodologies, demonstrating the
significance of datasets in informed decision-making and pro- To conclude, iterative algorithms (e.g., GA) are widely
viding valuable insights for engineers and researchers navigat- used in EM design workflows for optimization. The pre-
ing the complexities of electric motor design and optimization. sented procedure refers to the preliminary motor design.
2 Electric machine principles

Induction motors operate on the fundamental concept

of electromagnetic induction. Consisting of two primary
components, the stator and the rotor, these motors func-
tion based on the interaction of magnetic fields. The sta-
tor winding is often a distributed winding. In an induction
motor:
The stator contains multiple windings supplied with alter-
nating current (AC), creating a rotating magnetic field
upon energization. As this rotating magnetic field in-
teracts with the rotor, it induces an alternating current
within the rotor’s conductive material. The induced cur-
rent in the rotor generates its own magnetic field, interact-
ing with the stator’s magnetic field. This interaction be-
tween the stator and rotor magnetic fields creates a torque,
resulting in the continuous rotation of the rotor. The re-
lationship between the synchronous speed, representing
the speed of the stator’s rotating magnetic field, and the
slightly slower rotor speed, known as slip speed, defines the
operational dynamics of induction motors. These motors
find extensive applications across various industries, owing
to their reliability, simplicity, and widespread usability.

Understanding the principles of electromagnetic induction Figure 1: Data-set Induction Motor

is crucial in comprehending the functionality and applica-
tions of induction motors.
Efficiency class and the type of cooling system have been
specified. The rotor type must be a squirrel cage, but
the author had to select the shape of the slots and, in
general, the entire lamination from an industrial catalog.
The number of poles and winding connection could also
be chosen arbitrarily.

4 Initial choices
4.1 Design assumptions
The useful power at the shaft, so active power is given by:

P = Aη cos ϕ = 3V Iη cos ϕ ≃ 3EIη cos ϕ (1)

Neglecting the voltage drop on the stator resistance and

3 Requirements leakage inductance. With V and I rms values, Vrms =
V√max
2
.
√
V = Vu / 3 for a star connected winding.
V = Vu for a delta connected winding. The opposite for
the current.
Substituting the equations of E ∝ BM , I ∝ ∆, L = mτ .
BM is the magnetic loading and ∆ electric loading.
The requirements regarding motor in taken into consider-
ation are given by the Ing. Professor Giacomo Sala, PhD f π3 1
that is the examiner of this report. Here the dataset: P ≃ √ Kw BM ∆ 2 ηcos(ϕ)mD3 (2)
2 2 p

3
with
• m= L
τ Aspect ratio
• BM airgap flux density [T] represents the *magnetic
loading* of the motor.
S F
• ∆ = πD
3N
I = slots
πD
f
J Electric loading (linear distri-
bution of the rms current).
A first design diameter D′ can be chosen as:
√ !1/3
′ ∼ P 2 2 p2 1
D = (3)
η cos φ f π 3 Kw mBM ∆

πD′ (a) Stator slot (b) Rotor slot

L′ = m (4)
2p
Figure 2: Slots geometry
The parameter with the most variation are ∆ and m.
BM 0.7 − 0.9[T ]
∆ 20000 − 60000
√ [Arms /m] Here 2 images to clarify better the interesting geometry
m (0.25 ÷ 0.5) 4p values for the slots.
Kw (if unknown, set to 0.95 )
Initial guess on motor size is accomplished, as follows:

BM 0.9 T
∆ 31000 Arms
m 0.7071
Kw 0.95
Vphase 294.45 V
D′ 239.1 mm
L′ 132.7 mm

Table 1: First Design Parameters

Figure 3: Stator slot example
5 Sizing
5.1 Lamination
Following now the constrained design technique I chose
from the catalogue of EURO Tranciatura the diameter
D ≃ D′ . Specifically the lamination is the IEC.250/4.240:

Parameter Simbol Value [mm]

Diameter D 240
External diameter Dext 375
Shaft diameter Dint 85
Stator yoke height hy 40.20
Stator slot height hs 27.30
Rotor yoke height hsr 40.34 Figure 4: Rotor slot example
Rotor slot height as built hsR,ab 37.16
Stator slot pitch τs 15.7
Rotor slot pitch τsR 18.8 An important thing to check now, is to verify if the number
Stator tooth width wt 9.28 of pole pairs chosen (in this case p = 2) is suitable for the
Rotor tooth width wtr 10.09 lamination that you want to use.
Cross section stator slot Sslot 221 mm2
Cross section rotor slot SslotR 149.9 mm2 D
pcheck = 0.35 = 2.089 (5)
Number of stator slots Ns 48 hy
Number of rotor slots Ns r = Nb 40
As we can see the lamination is suitable, therefor we can
Table 2: IEC.250/4.240 main lamination parameters continue with the work.

4
5.2 Stator winding layout The maximum number of branches in parallel z (also called
machine groups) depends on the type of winding and in
The stator winding layout Kw must be chosen: q is number
any case cannot exceed 2p.
of slots per pole per phase. The winding layout affects
the magnetic field at the airgap, precisely the amplitude
spectrum of each harmonic, a figure with the flux density
at the airgap is possible to see in the FEA chapter. When
calculating q, if it doesn’t belong to natural numbers, the
lamination is not good for the number of pole pairs that
it has been chosen.
qsh is telling us how much we are shortening for e.g. qsh =
1 means we are shortening by 1 slot.
The performance of a winding layout are quantified by
its factors kw,h . A winding with a low Kwh value helps
limiting the effects of the h − th harmonic to the motor
performance (torque and losses).
While minimizing the higher order harmonics, the winding
must not reduce the fundamental 1 st, or pth in terms of
mechanical degrees) related to the main winding factor
Kw = Kw(h=1) .
α is the electrical angle between two neighboring slots:
Figure 6: Effect of shortening coefficient on winding factor
2π 2π
α=p = [rad] (6)
Ns 6q

β = qsh α [rad] (7)

sin(hq α2 )
Kd,h = (8)
q sin(h α2 )

β
Ksh,h = cos(h ) (9) Figure 7: Distributed winding Only Electrical Harmonics
2

Kw,h = Ksh,h · Kd,h (10) 5.3 Rotor Winding layout

The shortening factorKsh,h : takes into account the re- In this phase of the design we want to have the skew-
duced pitch of the coils of the winding with respect to a ing factor of the fundamental harmonic (h=1) as close as
full pitch layout. The shortening of a coil is typically ob- possible to one in order to reduce as least as possible the
tained with a dual layer winding where the second layer is amplitude of the first harmonic to optimize efficiency and
shifted to reduce the coil pitch. power:
2sin(h αskew
2 )
Kskew,1 = = 0.9971 (11)
hαskew
If the skew angle is close to an integer number of stator or
rotor slot pitches, then the slotting torque is minimized.
The next formula shows how to compute αskew that can
be equal to:
αskew ≃ qskew αslot (12)
Figure 5: Shortening Dual Layer Situation with αslot = αsR or α
αsR is defined as:
The distribution factor Kd,h : it is the ratio between the 2π
field produced by the winding and the field that would be αsR = p [rad] (13)
Nb
produced if the winding had all the coils in each pole pair
aligned (in the same slots). but to obtain the value of Kskew,1 as above I choose
The Kw of the fundamental harmonic is 0.949, an accept- αskew = α, qskew = 1 and so in this way I can also reduce
able value, as we can see in the Figure 6, shortening of the amplitude of low order harmonics in order to minimize
qsh = 2 would lead to a too much reduction of the funda- the interactions between stator and rotor harmonics in the
mental. airgap flux that lead to increased torque ripples and losses.

5
Ultimately, the decision was made based on the graphi- qsh h alphas kew kw · kskew [%]
cal representation in Figure 2, illustrating the decrease in 0 1 0.262 95.526
harmonics concerning qs kew (measured in the number of 0 5 0.262 18.972
slots). It’s important to highlight that while qs kew = 0 7 0.262 13.677
2 might have provided more significant attenuation for 0 11 0.262 8.602
higher-order harmonics, the chosen value sufficiently met 0 13 0.262 7.392
the design requirements. 0 17 0.262 5.55
0 19 0.262 5.099
0 1 0.314 95.407
0 5 0.314 18.368
0 7 0.314 12.806
0 11 0.314 7.15
0 13 0.314 5.547
0 17 0.314 2.661
0 19 0.314 1.107
1 1 0.262 94.629
1 5 0.262 15.066
1 7 0.262 8.31
1 11 0.262 1.101
1 13 0.262 0.99
Figure 8: Rotor skewing diagram
1 17 0.262 3.38
1 19 0.262 4.05
1 1 0.314 94.511
5.4 Combined stator and rotor winding 1 5 0.314 14.587
factor 1 7 0.314 7.781
1 11 0.314 0.915
Kw,h · Kskew,h (14) 1 13 0.314 0.743
1 17 0.314 1.62
In this part we identify the winding layout and from the 1 19 0.314 0.879
previous equations we obtain the following parameters. 2 1 0.262 92.236
Acting on qsh and αskew it is possible to selectively re- 2 5 0.262 4.929
duce specific harmonics. 2 7 0.262 3.549
The author decided to choose qsh = 1 and αskew = α, to 2 11 0.262 8.326
summarize: 2 13 0.262 7.16
2 17 0.262 1.423
• αsR = 0.314 rad 2 19 0.262 1.342
2 1 0.314 92.12
2 5 0.314 4.772
• α = 0.262 rad
2 7 0.314 3.323
2 11 0.314 6.921
• αskew = α = 0.262 rad 2 13 0.314 5.372
2 17 0.314 0.682
The number of slots per pole per phase is q = 4 and: 2 19 0.314 0.291

• kskew = 0.9971, rotor winding factor of the fundamen- Table 3: Table of combined windings factors
tal harmonic.
From the 3 we can update the initial choices, (remember
• kw = 0.949 stator winding factor of the fundamental that initially the Kw was equal to 0.95), in any case noth-
harmonic. ing is changed.

For the fundamental harmonic with qsh = 1:

5.5 Airgap
Combined stator and rotor factors: kw · kskew =
94.629%. For the 5th harmonic instead: The airgap δ is a design choice. The calculated value of the
the combined stator and rotor factors: kw,5 · kskew,5 = diameter at the air gap D (or that proposed by the lami-
15.066%. nation suppliers) is normally associated with the internal
Note that the coupling is very little for high harmonic or- diameter of the stator D In fact, the air gap is obtained by
ders. The next table 3 explains better the effect of the hth mechanical removal of material (from the rotor geometry
harmonic on the motor performance. following the die-casting process).

6
For motors at 50 Hz, minimum airgap: When D, L, Kw are chosen, the number of series conduc-
tors per slot n can be evaluated as:
D
δ ≈ 0.0055 √ = 0.66 mm (15)
2p E ≃ V · 0.965 (20)
Due to too high values of power factor that we will see in The factor 0.965 is in between 0.95 ÷ 0.98, this difference
the next pages, that is influenced by this parameter, the is due to the voltage drop on the stator resistance and
airgap that has been chosen is: leakage inductance, a better evaluation will be done at
the end of this part on the solution of electric circuit.
δ = 0.80 mm
Each side of the coil is placed in a different slot, and the
Subsequently it is possible to calculate the new rotor slot coil is made of 2n active series conductors. If the machine
height, resulting from turning operation. features more than one coil per phase, the coils are usually
series connected, leading to a set of N series conductors
hsR,ab − δ = 36.36mm (16) per phase. n number of conductors in each stator slot. In
general increasing the slot number, it is possible to split
5.6 Active length and number of wind- the winding in more coils. Defining N as a number of series
conductor per phase, remember that the coils repeat under
ings the poles of the motor.
When the motor main geometrical parameters L (active √
length) and D are defined, it is possible to identify a pre- V 2
n= 0.965 = 11.9 (21)
liminary stator winding. Phase voltage equation: 2πf Kw qBM LD
n has to be round to an integer (even number if
dix dφx
vx = RS ix + Lls + dual layer winding).
dt dt
with: e = dφx (EMF induced by the airgap flux). n = 12
x dt
Phase voltage equation (space vectors):
N
d¯l n= −→ N = 192 (22)
v̄ = RS ī + LiS + ē 2pq
dt
with q = number of slots per pole per phase
when sizing at rated speed: In each slot we have n number of equivalent con-
ductors (H = n · i) and each conductors can be composed
v̄ ∼
= ē
by a certain number of wires all in parallel (n′ ) in which
Continuing the equations, the end-windings are soldered, in order to have an inte-
ger number. z tells me how many parallel I’ve done and
V̄ = RS I¯ + jωLlS I¯ + Ē n′ = zn. nb is the bundle of coils, basically it tells me
V̄ ∼= Ē exactly how many wires are actually present in each slot.
ω
Ē = j 2√ N Kw ΦM τ In my case z = 1 because I’ve immediately round to
2
N = 2npq n = 12, I then will define the bundle of wires, because
ΦM τ = π2 BM Lτ the actual conductors in the slot must have an industrial
τ = πD diameter dw .
2p
Now we recalculate the following parameters with n = 12:
√
The phase voltage is proportional to the number of slot V 2
conductors in series n: BM = 0.965 = 0.89 (23)
n2πf Kw qLD
V =∼ √ω nqKw BM LD ∝ n (17) √
2 V 2
L= 0.965 = 131 mm (24)
n2πf Kw qBM D
Slot conductors preliminary value n:
The results is almost equal to the first computation.
sqrt2V
n∼
= (18)
wqKw BM LD n′ = zn = 12 (25)
According to the design approach, once the diameter and
the stator winding layout are defined the active length L 5.7 External housing
can be updated. To do not affect the initial choices for the
The dimensions of the external case can be chosen fol-
electric and magnetic loading, LD2 must be kept constant:
lowing the directive CEI EN IEC 60072-1. Knowing the
D
′
2 external diameter computed before it’s possible to choose.
L = L′ 2 = 131.5 mm (19)
D

7
 allow easily insert in the slot.
Cross section Sslot is fixed, and the cross-section of the
single equivalent conductor is:
Sslot Ff
Sconductor = = 7.367 mm2 (26)
n
with Ff = 0.4 slot filling factor.
The diameter of the equivalent conductor

deq,conductor = 3.06 mm

Figure 9: Case An important characteristic is the surface current density

that depends on the type of cooling system used:
I Ar ms
5.8 Assignment stator slots to phases J= = 5.393 (27)
Sconductor mm2
Recalling that the motor has 2 pole pairs it means that
◦ with:
the electrical periodicity is 360
p = 180. The stator has P
48 slots and need to provide 3 phases, with a code it is I= = 39.728 A (28)
3V ηcos(ϕ)
possible to assign each slot to one of the phases as we can
see in the Figure 11: J in the constrained design cannot be chosen but it must
be verified that it remains in a reasonable range, for self-
ventilated motors:
Arms
J = 4.5 ÷ 6.5[ ]
mm2
Ff = 0.4, can stays in this range: 0.38 ·· 0.42 in conventional
induction motors. Note that the linear current density ∆,
and J are strictly related:
3N Ns Arms
∆= I= Sslot Ff J = 30349.61 (29)
πD πD mm
After having passed those constrains, we calculate the ac-
Figure 10: Three Phases in the electrical angle tual diameter and cross-section of the industrial conduc-
tor. Remember we need to stay under the 1.2 mm thresh-
The code Appendix E, is based on the following schemes: old, so with a while loop in the Python script an iteration
has been done until a feasible value is obtained.
nb represents the number of bundle of parallel wires, in-
creasing that we can reduce the actual diameter of the
wire. The final value is nb = 8 and conductor diameter dw
= 1.0828 mm.
From the catalogue LWW I selected this product:
Figure 11: Slot conductors in the three phases DAMID 200, Standard IEC 60317-8. The insulation cho-
sen is the type 1, and it is possible to see the increase on
the dimension. The insulation is the thinner one being the
voltage not high and also for economical reason. The table
below shows the actual characteristics of the copper wire
used:

Parameter name Value

n 12
nb 8
Class 180
Nominal diameter 1.060 mm
Figure 12: Table format to compute the calculations Conductor tolerance +/ − 0.011 mm
min increase 0.034 mm
max overall diameter 1.124 mm
5.9 Stator slot area Nominal area 0.8825 mm2
The actual conductors in the slot must have an industrial
diameter dw that must not to be too high(1-1.2 mm), to Table 4: Wire DAMID 200

8
The new Fill factor coefficient: constrain design cannot be chosen, but it must be verified
that:
Ff = 0.3833 Arms
Jb = 3 ÷ 4.5 [ ]
mm2
The material is designed to maintain its insulating prop- so this is an acceptable value.
erties even at temperatures up to 200 degrees Celsius or To conclude an useful size to calculate is the surface of the
higher without experiencing significant deterioration in cage ring of the rotor:
its characteristics and performance. This information is Ir
crucial when selecting materials for applications involving SringR = = 479.1144 mm2 (34)
Jr
high temperatures, ensuring that the insulation of cables
or other electrical components remains effective and safe
5.11 Flux density tooth check
even under elevated temperatures.
The slot core is fully covered by two or more overlapped Now is the moment to check if the type of lamination re-
layers of solid insulating material (liner). The overall liner spects the constrains. The teeth are design for a peak flux
thickness increases with the voltage and power rating of density, and in a constrained design, the tooth width wt
the motor(e.g.dLin = 0.3 ÷ 0.6 mm). At the end of the and wtR are fixed. To limit the iron saturation and AC
winding process,the gaps in the slot are filled with varnish losses, the flux density value in the rotor and stator teeth
made of electrically insulated resins. must stay within a reasonable range, that for convectional
Due to the double layer winding an additional insulating IMs is for the stator:
layer is introduced as additional insulation between the τs
BM t = BM = 1.506 ≤ 1.6 ÷ 1.8 T (35)
turns of the two coils (the phase-to-phase voltage is higher wt
than the turn-to-turn voltage): dl ayers = 0.1 ÷ 0.3 mm. for the rotor:
τsR
BM tR = BM = 1.657 ≤ 1.6 ÷ 1.8 T (36)
wt R
with BM flux density at the airgap.
τs = πD
Ns
τr = πD
Nb
All the values respect the limits so it is possible to con-
tinue. Also it is worth to say that higher values can be
tolerated in the rotor teeth because the rotor iron losses
are negligible, unless MMF drop becomes too high.
Figure 13: and Double Layer Winding

5.12 Flux density yoke check

5.10 Rotor Slot area
To limit the iron saturation and AC losses a reasonable
In this section the bar current, ring current and related range for induction motors:
coefficients will be analyze, on the case of bar skewing. 1.1 ≤ BM y ≤ 1.5 T (37)
The rotor equivalent current from the analysis of the
equivalent circuit and if the power factor is known, in this The yokes are designed for a peak flux density limited by
case yes thanks to the requirements at the first iteration, the material B(H) characteristic and by the iron losses.
the rotor current can be approximated as: The values are lower that the limits for the teeth, because
the flux lines pass through the yokes for longer paths, lead-
′
IR ≃ Icos(ϕ) = 34.761 A (30) ing to higher MMF drops for the same saturation level.
Also, yokes volume of IMs are in general higher that teeth
Bar current: volumes, leading to higher losses.
3 N Kw D
Ib ≃ Icos(ϕ) ( ) = 476.400 A (31) BM y = BM = 1.328 T (38)
Nn Ks kew 2phy

and the ring current has an amplitude: D

BM yR =
BM = 1.324 T (39)
2phyR
Ib
Ir ≃ pπ = 1522.681 A (32) Check passed for these characteristics.
2sin( N b
) Here the yokes geometry calculations:
D − Dext − (2 · hstatorslot )
Jb =
Ib
= 3.1781
Arms
(33) hy = = 40.2 mm (40)
SslotR mm2 2

The cage bar fills almost completely the rotor slot, using D − Dshaf t − (2 · hrotorslot )
the die-casting process we can consider Ff ≃ 1. Jb , in the hyr = = 40.34 mm (41)
2

9
6 Weight and performance 6.1.2 Rotor conductors
The weight-performance correlation in induction motors rotor rings volume and mass
is pivotal for their efficiency and functionality. Weight, Vr = 2Sr π(D−hsR ) = 0.00061 m3 → Gr = γr Vr = 1.655kg
influenced by design and materials, impacts the motor’s (45)
operation. Materials used in the stator, rotor, and core Rotor bars volume and weight:
significantly affect both weight and performance. to clarify the notation, the cross-section of the slots are
Performance encompasses efficiency, power, speed, and equal to the bars (SslotR = Sb ).
torque. Balancing these elements is crucial for optimal mo-
tor operation. Achieving reduced weight without compro- Vb = NsR SslotR L = 0.00079 m3 → Gb = γb Vb = 2.128 kg
mising performance demands strategic design, advanced (46)
materials, and rigorous testing. with:
This chapter explores the intricate link between weight • Gb mass of the bars
and performance in induction motors, aiming to optimize
both without sacrificing functionality. Strategies to en- m3 electrolytic copper density
• γCu = 8.9 · 103 Kg
hance efficiency and operational capabilities across appli-
cations will be discussed. m3 aluminium density
• γAl = 2.7 · 103 Kg

6.1.3 Total conductors mass

6.1 Volumes and weights
To conclude the total mass of the conductors, considering
6.1.1 Stator Conductors both stator and rotor:
The end-winding length in an induction motor refers to Gtot,conductors = GCu + Gb + Gr = 23.283 kg (47)
the length of the conductor extending beyond the stator
or rotor core at the ends of the machine. This region is
crucial as it directly influences the motor’s electrical char-
6.1.4 Laminations
acteristics and efficiency. First of all remember that the number of rotor slots is
The length of the end windings impacts parameters like in- NsR = Nb . The lamination volumes (V ) and weights (W )
ductance, resistance, and overall impedance, affecting the can be evaluated from the preliminary motor sizing:
motor’s performance. Longer end windings can increase Stator teeth, volume and mass:
stray capacitance and inductance, potentially leading to
higher losses and reduced efficiency. Conversely, shorter Vt = Ns wt hs L = 0.00159839 m3 (48)
end windings can minimize these losses but might limit Gt = γlam Vt = 12.31 kg (49)
the motor’s performance in certain aspects.
End-winding length: Stator yoke, volume and mass:
π 2
2π D + hs Vy = [D − (Dext − 2hy )2 ]L = 0.00555846 m3 (50)
Lew = kew τew = kew yq = 384.88mm (42) 4 ext
Ns 2
Gy = γlam Vy = 42.8 kg (51)
ke w = 1.6÷2, the author used 1.7. yq coil pitch = 3q −qsh Rotor teeth, volume and mass:
Stator copper, given by the total length of the wires:
VtR = NsR wtR hsR L = 0.00197255 m3 (52)
VCu = Ns SCu (L + Lew ) = 0.002191 m 3
(43)

considering: GtR = γlamR VtR = 15.05 kg (53)

Rotor yoke, volume and mass:
• 6pqnScond (L + Lew ) = Ns SCu (L + Lew )
π
VyR = [(Dint + 2hyR )2 − Dint
2
]L = 0.00208818 m3 (54)
• Ff Sslot = SCu , I’m using a slightly larger value, pre- 4
cisely the equivalent conductor, for safety, disregard- GyR = γlamR VyR = 16.5 kg (55)
ing the small difference from the actual conductor
cross-section, which is smaller.
6.1.5 Total lamination mass
Total copper mass: Being rare to have different stator and rotor lamination
material (γlam = γlamR ). I have chosen FeSi(2%) with a
GCu = γCu VCu = 19.499 kg (44) density of 7.70 · 103 kg/m3 .
Total lamination mass:
ew= end-winding
GCu = mass of the copper. Gtot,lamination = Gt + Gy + GtR + GyR = 86.66 kg (56)

10
6.2 Losses are extracted from lamination datasheet:
Ploss
6.2.1 Iron losses = Ki f B α + Kc f 2 B 2 (57)
GF e
Hysteresis Losses: Hysteresis losses occur in ferromag- Power loss density in the stator teeth:
netic materials like iron when the magnetic domains within
the material change orientation as the magnetic field Ploss W
= 4.0789
varies. This continuous reorientation of the domains re- GF e kg
sults in energy losses, which are converted into heat. The Power loss density in the stator yoke:
energy lost due to hysteresis is proportional to the area
inside the hysteresis loop on a magnetization curve. Ploss W
= 3.1359
Eddy Current Losses: Eddy currents are circulating GF e kg
currents induced in the iron core of a transformer or induc-
Using the material M400-50A from Cogent datasheet, it
tor when it is exposed to a changing magnetic field. These
results a reference loss of 4 W/kg for a thickness of 0.5mm.
circulating currents cause resistance, and as a result, they
dissipate electrical energy as heat. Eddy current losses can
be reduced by using laminated or insulated cores to limit
the circulation of these currents.
Both hysteresis and eddy current losses contribute to iron
losses in electrical devices. These losses need to be min-
imized in the design and construction of electrical ma-
chines, to maximize the efficiency of these devices, as they
result in wasted energy in the form of heat.
The selection of a ferromagnetic material for induction
motors is typically constrained to Silicon Steel (FeSi).
However, for specific applications with high-frequency de-
mands or stringent efficiency requirements, alternative
materials may be considered. The key parameters in-
fluencing material choice include the percentage of sili-
con, which primarily affects saturation and losses, and the
Figure 15: Comparison between Specific Iron Losses, f and
thickness of the lamination.
B
Opting for a higher silicon percentage tends to decrease
specific iron losses but also lowers the material’s satura-
tion. In the context of this project, a material was cho- A specific script, that uses previous losses coefficient was
sen from the Cogent catalog, specifically the M400-50A provided. This code gives back:
grade. The B-H curve can be obtained from the interpo- W W
lation of several points: ki = 0.0206 [ ] kc = 0.00017 [ ] α = 2.14
kg kg

Ploss
PF e,t = kl Gt (Bt , f ) = 90.36 W (58)
GF e
Ploss
PF e,y = kl Gy (Bt , f ) = 241.59 W (59)
GF e
kl = 1.8 considers for the manufacturing process to realize
the desired lamination geometries.
It is not necessary to calculate the losses in the rotor, due
to the really low values, but since the implementation in
Python is very easy and for safety, hereafter I present the
results of rotor teeth and yoke:
Figure 14: B-H curve Cogent M400-50A Ploss
PF e,tR = kl Gt (Bt , f ) = 6.28 W (60)
GF e
The coefficients xi that it is possible to seen in the Fig- Ploss
ure 15 are useful to approximate this curve and will be PF e,yR = kl Gy (Bt , f ) = 4.20 W (61)
GF e
used in the Equation 93, in the chapter of "Teeth MMF
The total iron losses are therefor:
drop".
Density of losses at one frequency f and flux density B PF e = PF e,t + PF e,y + PF e,tR + PF e,yR = 342.44 W (62)

11
6.2.2 Joule Losses 6.2.4 Additional losses
Let’s see briefly the useful properties of the materials. These losses are mainly caused by eddy currents in the
Copper: magnetic circuit, frame, and rotor bars. According to IEC
• model DAMID180. 60034 2 these additional losses can be evaluated as a per-
centage of the input power (electrical power Pmains For
• Quality standard: ASTM B 49; EN1977 ETP/ETP1. rated power 1 < kW P < 10M W they can be evaluated
• Temperature coefficient of resistance (αCu ) = 3.93 · as:
10−3 .
Ωmm2
• Resistivity ρCu = 0.01709 P [W ]
m Padd = Pmains [0.025 − 0.005log10 ( )] = 544.88W
Aluminium: 1000
(70)
• Quality standard: EN 573-3 (EAI 99.7).
• Temperature coefficient of resistance (αAl ) = 4.30 · Pmains = 3V Icos(ϕ) = 30.7065kW (71)
10−3 .
IEC 600342:Padd ≈ 0.005Pmains , but in reality can vary
Ωmm2
• Resistivity ρAl = 0.02789 m . a lot.
To calculate the resistivity at the operating temperature,
the value of 75°C for stator and 75°C for the rotor it’s been 6.3 Motor Efficiency
chosen.
ρt = ρref × [1 + α × (Tt − Tref )] (63) The efficiency of the motor is defined as:
For copper:
P
ρ75,Cu = 1.709 × 10−8 × [1 + 0.0039 × (75 − 20)] (64) η= = 0.903 (72)
P + Pf e + PJ + PJR + Pf w + Padd
For Alluminium:
The efficiency is lower than the desired one but a better
ρ75,Al = 2.789 × 10−8 × [1 + 0.0043 × (75 − 20)] (65) evaluation will be done in the electric circuit analysis.
Joule losses in the stator of induction motors can be The efficiency is important to reduce costs (fuel consump-
calculated from the copper volume. the resistivity of the tion) International Electrotechnical Commission(IEC)
conductors, the operating temperature and the current standards identify the minimum efficiency for industrial
density as: motors according to their power rating and application
(grid connected at fixed speed, inverter fed at variable
PJS = PCu = ρCu VCu J 2 = 1324.35W (66) speed) The higher the power rating, the higher the effi-
ρCu = resistivity of the conductors at the operating tem- ciency requirements .Even in applications where high ef-
perature. ficiency has not strict requirements, the losses PF E , PCu ,
In the rotor, the currents in the bars and rings at rated op- P f w, must be kept low to limit the temperatures of the

eration can be assumed to be almost sinusoidal and evenly components and avoid damaging the motor materials.
distributed due to cage skewing and low rated rotor fre-
quency. 6.3.1 Rotor efficiency
The resistance of the rotor conductors must be consid-
ered at the expected temperature plus a slight increase of The rotor efficiency is:
8 ÷ 10% due to die-casting process of Aluminum:
P + Pf w PJR
PJR = Pb + Pr = 1.1 · ρAl (Vb Jb2 + Vr Jr2 ) = 536.90 W (67) ηR = =1−s→s=
P + PJR + Pf w P + PJR + Pf w
(73)
6.2.3 Mechanical Losses
For the mechanical losses a formula for motors operating ηR = 0.982
at constant speed:
slip at rated operation
n
Pf w = Pf w0 ( )3 = 287.59W (68)
n0
s ≃ 0.02 = 2%
For the totally enclosed fan cooled (TEFC) induction mo-
tors: The slip at rated operation should be in a reasonable
D
Pf w0 = kw D(L + 0.6τ )(wm )2 [W ] (69) range, for motors with similar size should be 2 ÷ 5% .
2 Higher rated slip value could lead to a motor with low
s2
kw = 15 [W m 4 ] small and medium-size TEFC motor. efficiency (high losses and over-temperatures), whereas a
n0 = 60f
p Pm = 28.25 kW , mechanical power lower slip may result in an oversized motor.

12
6.4 Power Factor
RR′
= Rb′ + Rr′ = 0.135 Ω (77)
The power factor is the ratio between the electrical ac-
tive power provided to the motor by the supply (grid or Here the results of single values:
converter) and the apparent power:
Pb 3 N Kw 2
Rb′ = [ 2] ( ) KR (f ) = 0.0758 Ω (78)
Pe l, in P/η Nb Ib Nb Kskew
cos(ϕ) = =p (74)
A (P/η)2 + Q2t
Pr 3 N K w 2
The overall reactive power of the electric motor Qt can Rr′ = [ ] ( ) = 0.059 Ω (79)
Nb Ib2 Nb Kskew
be evaluated with different levels of approximation. A
first evaluation can be done using a corrective factor that where KR (f ) = RR ac (f )
dc
from FEA, because the bar resis-
multiplies the reactive power associated to the magnetic tance has a frequency dependent component that as a first
energy in the airgap only, we can see that is a bit higher iteration we put KR (f ) = 1.
than the datasheet:
2 7.2 Stator resistance
1 BM
Qt,approx = w πDLδKQt = 0.893 (75)
2 µ0 PCu
RS = 2 = 0.28 Ω (80)
3Iph
with KQt = 2 is an empirical corrective factor that adds
the reactive contributions of:
7.3 Iron Losses
• Stator and rotor leakage inductances.
Considering only the stator due to really low values in the
• Stator and rotor Carter’s factors (airgap flux distor- rotor:
tion caused by the slots openings).
2 2
3Eph 3Vph
• MMF drops in the lamination (especially in case of RF e = ≈ = 707.14 Ω (81)
PF ey + PF et PF ey + PF et
significant saturation).
7.4 Evaluation of the magnetizing in-
7 Equivalent Circuit ductance
The electrical and mechanical characteristic of the motor To calculate all the types of inductances of the stator and
can be easily evaluated if the parameters of the equiva- rotor, first is necessary to evaluate the magnetizing in-
lent electric circuit are known If these analytical results ductance. The following approach aims to evaluate the
are convincing, they can be validated by FE numerical magnetizing inductance Lµ including:
simulations.
• the distortion of the flux lines at the airgap caused by
the stator and rotor slots (Carter’s factor).

• the magnetomotive force ( drop resulting from the

saturation of the magnetic circuit.

If the MMF drop is in the airgap only, the fundamental

harmonic of the airgap magnetic field

Figure 16: Equivalent Circuit

Referring to an equivalent star connected motor as in this

case: √
Vphase = Vline to line / 3

Iphase = Iline to line Figure 17: Fundamental harmonic at the airgap

7.1 Rotor resistances

Pb + Pr 3 N Kw 2
′
RR =[ ] ( ) (76) M M F = 2M M F +2M M F +2M M F +2M M F +2M M F
Nb Ib2 Nb Kskew µ δ t tR y yR
(82)
Pb could significantly change with the value of the slip
(rotor frequency). Therefore it is convenient to separate BM
the contributions: M M Fδ = δKC (83)
µ0

13
KC is the Carter’s factor: 7.4.2 Teeth MMF drop
1 From the flux density at the airgap BM,sat the flux densi-
KCarter = so/τs
= 1.0652 (84) ties in the stator (and rotor) teeth are evaluated as:
1− δ
1+5 so Stator
τs
with: BM t,sat = BM,sat = 1.46 T (90)
wt
• so = 2.5 mm: slot opening Rotor:
τsR
BM t,sat = BM,sat = 1.56 T (91)
• τs : slot pitch wtR
The B-H curve characteristic of the lamination identifies
Both stator and rotor effects are included in the factor. a working point of the ferromagnetic material associated
to a value of field strength HM t,sat (according to the level
7.4.1 Airgap MMF drop of saturation):

Due to magnetic circuit saturation, the peak of the airgap M M Ft = HM t,sat hs = 19.727 A (92)
flux is reduced (for the same flux per pole ΦM τ ) from BM
to BM,sat . With no saturation: where hs is the slot height equal to the tooth height. In
my case I use the lamination M400-50A, and this equation
(85) that describes the lamination magnetization curve:
2 ΦM τ
ΦM τ = BM Lτ → BM = 2
π π Lτ x3
H ≃ x1 BM + x2 BM (93)
When the circuit saturates:
with x1 = 126.5, x2 = 6.1, x3 = 12.4.
ΦM τ
BM,sat = = 0.86 T (86)
αsat Lτ

BM,sat
M M Fδ = δKC == 584.72 A (87)
µ0
The solution requires an iterative approach, with the first
value of ksat = 1 and BM,sat = BM .

αsat = f (ksat ) = 0.657 (88)

M M Fδ + M M Ft + M M FtR
ksat = = 1.1 (89)
M M Fδ
Then from literature values:

Figure 19: lamination M400-50A

For the rotor Rotor same approach:

M M FtR = HM tR,sat hsR = 62.568 A (94)

Now as I said before I can start the process again until

the difference of ksat with respect to the previous value
normalized is below a certain threshold (0.001) with max
10000 iterations.

Figure 18: αsat in function of ksat 7.4.3 Yoke MMF drop

From the flux per pole ΦM τ (that is supposed to do not
After I have calculated these values I can move on to the change as a consequence of the saturation because it is im-
teeth, and at the end of the next subsection I can re- posed by the voltage value E, the maximum flux densities
peat the process: ksat → αsat → BM,sat → BM t,sat → in the stator (and rotor) yokes are evaluated as, 38 and
HM t,sat → M M Ft , M M FtR ... 39:
All the results that are written are the final values D
of the iteration procedure. BM y = (95)
2phy

14
Stator:
τy
M M Fy = HM y,sat · = 89.57A (96)
2
Same for the rotor:
τyR
M M FyR = HM yR,sat · = 31.74A (97)
2
Figure 20: Ziz-zag leakage flux
with:
• By, ave = 0.85BM y All the analytical model of the electric motor refers to the
fundamental harmonic only (p-th) All the other field har-
π(Dext −hy )
• τy = 2p monics at the airgap generate losses and secondary torque
π(Dint −hyR )
contributions (e g ripple) All these harmonics are produced
• τyR = 2p by the stator winding Assuming that they do not signifi-
cantly interact with the rotor, can be considered as leak-
7.4.4 Magnetizing inductance age components, and be evaluated from the equation of
the overall stator inductance (net of the fundamental har-
The magnetizing current referred to one phase Iµ,ph that monic).
is required to generate the overall magnetomotive force of
the motor, M M Fµ . inf
τ3 X Kwh 2
At the end of the previous steps (and required iterations), λδ = µ0 2 ( ) = 1.22e − 7
the overall MMF drop is known, and the required mag- λπ h
h=5,7,11...
netizing current can be calculated, see Equation 82. This
current is necessary to generate the desired flux per pole From previous analyses, it was found that the slot leakage
of the motor, i.e. the EMF E. can be evaluated assuming a rectangular slot as:
pπ
Iµ,ph = M M Fµ √ = 12.66A (98)
3N Kw 2
Eph
Lµ ≃ = 0.07H (99) Figure 21: slot evaluation
wIµ,ph

7.5 Inductances
7.5.1 Stator Leakage Inductance
The equations describing the stator leakage inductance
Ll S require complex models. Under specific hypotheses,
some analytical models and semi empirical formulae are
used for a preliminary design.
In IM machines we can describe Ll S as:

Ll S = Ll,slot + Ll,ew + Ll,δ + Ll,ZZ = 1.54 · 10−3 H (100)

Here the formula for each term: Figure 22: Rectangular slot hypothesis

• Ll,slot = 2pqn2 Lλslot = 3.72 · 10−4 H

7.5.2 Rotor leakage inductance
• Ll,ew = 2pq 2 n2 τew λew = 6 · 10−4 H
The equations describing the rotor leakage inductance Ll R
• Ll,δ = 2pq 2 n2 Lλδ = 1.47 · 10−4 H require complex models, following the approach used for
• Ll,ZZ = 56 Lµ ( N
2p 2
) = 4.17 · 10−4 H the stator evaluation:
s

τew , Lλslot , λew , Lλδ are equivalent permeances. Ll R = Ll,slotR + Ll,rings + Ll,ZZR = 2.53 · 10−3 H (101)

λslot = 1.23e − 6 the different components are:

This contribution is complex to evaluate and is signifi- • Ll,slotR = LλslotR N3b ( K

N Kw 2
slew
) · KL (f ) = 1.62 · 10−3 H
cantly dependent on the end winding layout. For three
phase windings it can be approximated with a very simple • Ll,rings = 2 πD 3 N Kw 2
Nb λring Nb ( Kskew ) = 3.15 · 10
−4
H
equation:
λew = 0.30µ = 3.77e − 7 • Ll,ZZR = 65 Lµ ( N
2p 2
b
) = 6.0 · 10−4 H

15
KL (f ) = Lac (f )
from FEA. The bar inductance has a dc
Ldc
component and a ac component that depends on the fre- 3.5
quency, a specific equation will be used taking from the
3
FEA analysis, for the moment we put it equal as 1.

KR and KL [p.u.]
Nb are equivalent permanence of the bars and
LλslotR and πD
2.5
ring arcs. As for the stator the others 2 λ:
2
h1 h2 h3 a h4
λslotR = µ0 ( + + ln( + ) = 4.914e − 06
3a a a − so so so 1.5
(102)
λring = µ0 0.26 (103) 1

In this case I put 0.26 as a scaling factor, due to the less 0.5
complexity with respect to the end-winding of the stator.
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
fr [Hz]
7.6 Power Factor
Figure 23: Caption
The knowledge of the magnetizing and leakage inductances
allows to calculate the overall reactive power absorbed by The solution of the equivalent electric circuit has been
the motor from the supply. done with the use of Python in order to obtain the fi-
nal and more precise results and to confront them with
Qt = Qµ + QlS + QlR = 15766.22 V AR (104) the FEA results. Also the stator slot leakage inductance
(Ll,slot ) and the magnetizing inductance(Lµ ), for the lat-
ter an iterative process has been done thanks to the FEA
where:
analysis and Matlab, in which the magnetizing current
E2 where calculated analytically from Python and the Lµ has
• Qµ = 3 wLµ then been evaluated from the FEA.

• QlS = 3wLlS I 2

• Ql R = 3wLlR IR
2

• IR ≃ Icos(ϕ)

The power factor results as:

P/η
cos(ϕ) = p = 0.893 (105)
(P/η)2 + Q2t

7.7 Solution Electric Circuit

The solution of the electric circuit allows to draw all the
motor characteristics. All the circuit parameters must be
evaluated with enough accuracy For a better evaluation, Figure 24: Correlation of Magnetizing and Stator Leakage
the rotor resistance and leakage inductance should be con- Inductance
sidered as function of the rotor frequency, fr = sf . The
functions KR (f ) and KL (f ) are predicted thanks to the
FEA. This simulation enables the examination of varia- Final value of Lµ at the specific Iµ , and Ll , slot from the
tions in current density across the bars. It also derives FEA analysis (see Table 6:
corrective factors KR and KL in relation to the rotor fre-
quency (ωr = sωs ). These coefficients facilitate the deriva- Lµ FEA [H] Lµ [H] Ll , slot FEA [H] Ll , slot [H]
tion of frequency-dependent values for Lbar and Rbar . The 0.079 0.072 0.000721 0.000372
blue line represents the inductance and the red the resis-
tance factors: Table 5: Inductances from FEA and from the calculations

16
 2
1.8
1.6
Flux density B [T]

1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 5000 10000 15000
Field strength H [A/m]
Figure 26: Correlation between Output Power and Veloc-
Figure 25: B-H curve for non-linear FEA
ity

8 Validation
So in the next pages the reader can see the plots and the
numerical results.
Let’s start with the several values at operating condition
(28.25 kW):

Parameter result datasheet FEA

velocity 1473.92 rpm 1475 rpm 1473.92
Iµ 12.66 A / 11.08 A
E 275.25 V / 282.57 V
Efficiency η 0.93 0.92 /
cos(ϕ) 0.900 0.875 /
Torque 183.0 N 182.6 183.31
slip 0.0174 0.0168 0.0174
Is 38.12 A / 38.48 A

Table 6: Final results equivalent circuit

We can start to say that the efficiency is a bit higher than

the dataset of 0.92, but is worth to note that the class
efficiency of this motor is IE2 and this results stay within
the margins. Instead the velocity is almost the same just
1 rpm of difference. Furthermore it is possible to see that
the EMF (E) calculated with Finite Element tool, has a
value very close to the expected one, that is Vphase ·0.965 =
284.14V , the one from analytical result is slightly different.
It is important to note that the power at the velocity in Figure 27: Correlation of Output Torque with Velocity
the Table 6, evaluated in the FEA is a bit higher than the
requirement:
Pout,F EA = 28.276 kW
Using the equivalent circuit parameters as a starting point,
it becomes feasible to derive expressions for torque and me-
chanical power in relation to speed. This process involves
verifying whether the chosen lamination and design deci-
sions meet the specified criteria. Following this discussion,
the plot mentioned earlier is presented. The current operating point is = 38.12 A.

17
 9 FEA Simulations

Commencing with the selection of the lamination and en-

suring compliance with all established constraints, the sub-
sequent stage involves validating the model. This is ac-
complished through the utilization of FEMM, an open-
source application seamlessly integrated into a specialized
MatLab code, capable of generating highly dependable
outcomes. The mesh pattern depicted in represents the
visual manifestation derived from FEMM, accessible upon
the construction of the model.

Figure 28: Stator Current Variation with Velocity

Figure 31: Caption

The initial simulation conducted pertains to the operation

at the specified speed (1475rpm), aligning precisely with
the data obtained through analytical calculations.
Figure 29: Efficiency Variation in Relation to Power

Torque vs slip.
500
450
400
350
Torque [Nm]

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Slip [pu]

Figure 30: Power Factor Fluctuations with Power Figure 32: Correlation Torque and Slip FEA

18
 Current vs slip. Current vs slip.
300 300
–Is analytical
250 250 Is FEA
Current [A rms]

Current [A rms]
200 200

150 150

100 100

50
50

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0
Slip [pu] 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Slip [pu]
Figure 33: Correlation Current and Slip FEA
Figure 35: Comparison Of Stator Current Between Ana-
lytical And FEA

The next images represents the comparison between ana-

lytical results and the Finite Element Analysis:

Torque vs slip.
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150 Figure 36: Airgap Flux Density Decomposition
100
50

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Slip [pu]
Figure 34: Comparison Of Torque Between Analytical and
FEA

Figure 37: Amplitude Spectrum Flux Density

We can see the difference with the analytical results for We can see that all the side harmonics have low amplitude.
high slip value, because losses in the rotor bars could sig- We can see that the harmonics 23 and 25 are higher with
nificantly change and the analytical model has some limi- respect to the others due to the slotting effect in the stator,
tations. indeed Nps ± 1, and same for the rotor the harmonics are

19
21 and 19 (Nb = 40), the value is really small, although sients, often spanning tens of minutes or more. Accurately
the harmonic 21 should not appear due to the fact that in modeling this behavior requires consideration of numer-
a star connection the harmonics multiple of 3 are zero, so ous parameters. In addressing this complexity, a model
this means that the tooth goes a bit in saturation. was devised based on a research paper titled "A simplified
thermal model for variable-speed self-cooled industrial in-
Voltage vs Current. duction motor" (doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2003.814555). This
300 E FEA model yielded noteworthy insights into the motor’s ther-
E=Vrated x 0.95
mal classification.
Voltage [Vrms]

250

200

150

100

50

02 4 6 8 10 12 14
Current [A rms]

Figure 38: Correlation between EMF and current thanks

to FEA

9.1 Rotor simulations

Here instead the voltage of E with respect to the expected
one.

Figure 40: Thermal Circuit

Figure 39: Density plot of the rotor

To evaluate the change of the rotor bar resistance and in-

ductance with the frequency, a FE model is defined. The
resistance and inductance are evaluated for each frequency
by supplying the bar with a sinusoidal current and “mea-
suring” the voltage at its terminals. When dividing the
voltage by the supplied current, the resistance is the real
part, whereas the reactance is the imaginary part.

Parameter Analytical FEA

Rb 0.0757Ω 0.0771Ω
Ll , slot, rotor 0.001618 H 0.001610 H

Table 7: Comparison between rotor resistance and induc-

tance

We can see very similar results, this are at low slip value
that’s why the difference between the two are very small.

10 Thermal model
Analyzing the thermal characteristics of a motor is a intri-
cate task, given the prolonged duration of thermal tran- Figure 41: Thermal resistances name

20
The model compute the results in this way: Thermal Resistances Names Values
R1 0.031
• The user insert the losses PF e , PJs and PJr to create R2 0.020
the source of heat. R3 0.014
R4 0.015
• Evaluation of the thermal resistances thanks to geom- R5 0.252
etry and materials. R6 0.210
R7 0.435
• Calculation of the conductance matrix. Table 9: Resistances of the simplified circuit

• Set the ambient temperature to θ0 = 40C.

• Solution of the equivalent circuit and calculation of

the temperatures as θ = θ0 + ∆θ .

• Computation of the heat flow. Figure 43: Conductance Matrix Gt h

In the following tables we can see the results of the cal-

Thermal Resistances Names Values [Ohm] culation with the different temperatures of the different
Reca 0.035 component.
R0 0.329
Ria_ec 0.040 Temperature Names Temperature Values
Rsy1 0.003 T case (external surface) 108.85°C
Rsy2 0.003 T stator yoke 142.6°C
Rst 0.010 T stator teeth (inner surface) 161.14°C
Rcu_ir 0.015 T copper (stator) 176.9°C
Rew_ec 6.523 T rotor 220.19°C
Rew_ia 0.222 T ambient (Air) 40°C
Rs_ag 0.105 T thermal class 155 °C
Rr_ag 0.105
Rsig 0.017 Table 10: Temperature values for the different components
Rshf 0.185
It’s crucial to highlight that the rotor reaches its maximum
Table 8: Resistances thermal circuit temperature of approximately 220°C. Consequently, the
assessment of resistivity and losses must be re-evaluated
to account for the rise in temperature.
The thermal class F (155°C) assumes 20000 working hours.
From the table we can affirm that the type of wire choose
for this motor is suitable, having a temperature index of
200°C. The insulation is a THEIC-modified polyester or
polyesterimide, overcoated with polyamide-imide, that is
suitable Instead the rotor has a temperature near with the
critical one of 230 °C of the aluminium.

Heat Flow Variable Value

Q1 2193.25
Q2 1667.27
Q3 1335.27
Q4 1054.47
Q5 269.88
Q6 280.80
Q7 256.10

Table 11: Heat Flows Q

Figure 42: Equivalent Thermal Netwotk

21
 ters under rated conditions. The resulting values are pre-
sented in the table below.

Parameter Value
Part II Mechanical Torque (T ) 160 Nm
Synchronous Motor Pole Pairs (p) 4
Mechanical Rated Speed (n) 4200 rpm
Mechanical Rated Speed (wm ) 439.82 rad/s
The second project revolves around creating a blueprint
Mechanical Power (Pm ) 70371.67 W
for a brushless AC motor, recognized for its exceptional
Mechanical Frequency (fm ) 70 Hz
torque and power output. This motor model finds exten-
Electrical Speed (w) 1759.29 rad/s
sive use in various automotive applications. This project
Electrical Frequency (f ) 280 Hz
aims at an initial design phase, where the focus is on flexi-
DC Link Voltage 650 V
bility, particularly regarding the selection of lamination.
Phase Voltage 252 V
Despite this freedom in lamination choice, the project
commences by considering the motor specifications as the Table 13: Dataset of the machine
fundamental reference point.

11 Preliminary considerations 11.1 Initial assumptions

To simplify the fundamental equation, certain initial as-
Here the main specifications: sumptions are required, aimed at reducing the overall
number of variables.
Torque 160 Nm
Poles (2p) 8 π
Tavarage = √ KS Kw LD2 BM R ∆ (106)
rated speed 4200 rpm 2 2
DC link voltage 650 V The term BM R [T], known as the no-load magnetic load-
Torque overload (p.u.) 2 ing, signifies the peak value of the fundamental harmonic
Max external diameter 310 mm of the flux density at the airgap, solely due to the rotor
Max active length 180 mm magnets. Under rated conditions, the magnetic loading
(BM ) incorporates the contribution from the stator wind-
Table 12: Data-sheet requirements
ing, yet remains nearly equivalent to the no-load magnetic
loading, given the minimal impact of the stator contribu-
tion.
A common range for this parameter falls between 0.6T and
0.9T, ensuring that the magnetic flux within the ferromag-
netic components (yokes and teeth) approaches saturation
on the B-H curve. If BM is too small, the full potential
of the ferromagnetic material is not adequately utilized.
Conversely, if it is too large, material saturation becomes
excessive. In this project, after thorough evaluations, the
chosen value for BM R is set at 0.9 T.
∆[Arms /m], referred to as electric loading, indicates the
extent to which current is utilized, thereby reflecting the
exploitation of copper. ∆ is closely tied to the current den-
sity J, which, in turn, relates to the cooling system. After
multiple attempts, a suitable value for ∆ was determined
as ∆ = 29000 Arms /m.
The parameter ’m’ represents the aspect ratio, calculated
as the active length (L) divided by the pole pitch (τ =
2p ). A larger aspect ratio implies a longer active length
πD

and a shorter end-winding length. However, it also results

in a more compact motor that is challenging to cool. In
this project, an aspect ratio of m = 1.8.
kw is the winding factor that take into consideration the
Figure 44: SPM requirements shortening and the distribution factor of the windings.
kS instead, is the segmentation factor that includes the
Following the specified design requirements, the initial number of segments in which the magnet is divided, and
stage involved the calculation of various essential parame- how much the segments are angularly positioned relative

22
to each other. mind that the number of slots will be very high.
In general the last 2 factors depends on the harmonic of the The number of slots per pole per phase is:
signal, but from now on if the subscript has no numbers
the author is referring to the factor of the fundamental Ns
q= (109)
harmonic. 6p
with Ns the number of slots.
12 Sizing So considering these options:

1. q = 1 −→ Ns = 24 but means no distribution factor

It’s time now to define the first main parameters, diameter
and high side harmonics;
and active length of the motor:
2. q = 2 −→ Ns = 48 this could be a good solution
s √ but after some steps not so satisfying with respect to
4 2pT harmonic optimization.
(107)
3
D= = 201.8mm
π 2 · Ks Kw · BM R · ∆ · m
3. q = 3 −→ Ns = 72 leads to a lot of thin slots with
This just found was the airgap diameter. For initial siz- difficulties to reach a good fill factor and complexity
ing we consider the product Ks Kw = 0.95, later a better in the manufacturing.
evaluation will be done. The fractional winding tooth-wound type was therefore
mπ chosen, also to analyze this kind of structure. The primary
L= D = 142.6mm (108) challenge associated with this arrangement arises from
2p
the occurrence of mechanical sub-harmonics. These sub-
Being the maximum active length (180 mm) higher that harmonics have the potential to induce additional losses
the calculated one we can proceed, remembering that now and generate elevated radial forces, particularly when
we are in an unconstrained designed we don’t need to find N s = 2p ± 1. However, it is noteworthy that the max-
the right lamination geometry we just need to respect the imum fill factor can be increased, especially in the case of
constrains of the datasheet. tooth-wound configurations.
Another point to consider is the multiplicity (M ) of the
overall machine that identifies that every 2π/M the stator
13 Winding layout initial thoughts and rotor geometries and flux distributions are identically
repeated or mirrored.
The 2 possible solutions are distributed and fractional Considering that the number of poles from requirements
winding layout. is 2p=8, the number of slots must be multiple of 3 and
The arrangement of the winding in the SPM mirrors the that 2p should be close to Ns, 4 in order to have a good
stator layout employed in the IM. In this layout, the num- coupling between stator and rotor, hence a good electro-
ber of slots per pole and per phase, which determines the motive force, the coil pitch should be as close as possible
distribution factor, is an integer value denoted as q. How- to the pole pitch. Given that, the number of slots has been
ever, a challenge arises in the SPM due to a higher number computed:
of poles compared to the IM. Consequently, the value of Ns = 9 (110)
slots per pole and per phase must be restricted to prevent
an excessively high total slot count (Ns ), which could lead Number of slots per pole per phase (q) calculation:
to overly thin slots and teeth. As mentioned earlier, this
Ns
configuration results in a heightened low-frequency cog- q= = 0.375 (111)
6p
ging torque and relatively high leakage inductance. This
is attributed to the thin and deep shape of the slots. Multiplicity:
On the other hand, the fractional winding layout features M = gcd(N s, 2p) = 1 (112)
a reduced number of slots usually preferred with high num-
ber of poles, resulting in significantly larger teeth and slots. It is worth to note that when M = 1 the resultant of the
In this arrangement, the number of slots per pole and per radial forces is ̸= 0, this leads to stress to the rotor and
phase (q) is not an integer, hence the term "fractional." bearings, and also vibrations due to the fact that this force
The common fractional winding layout is referred to as has a certain frequency, that we will analyze in the final
tooth-wound SPM, where each coil is wound around an chapter.
individual tooth. Equivalent number of slots per pole per phase (qr ) calcu-
Also it is important to note that the assignment of the lation. Represents the possible electrical positions for the
phases to the slots could lead to asymmetrical or unfeasi- slots of each phase. The slots of one phase feature an equal
ble windings. To avoid this, windings with 2p/M multiple displacement, thus covering 60 electrical degrees:
of 3 are not considered. As a first examination some cal- Ns
culations for the distributed winding was done, keeping in qr = =3 (113)
3M

23
This value is pretty high, that means more sinusoidal
MMF, lower torque ripple and rotor losses.
Distribution factor (alpha) calculation, is the difference of
the electrical angles of the coils of the same phase:
2π
α= = 3.142rad (114)
6qr

Coil pitch in number of slots:

yq = 1 (115)

being a tooth-wound configuration the coil pitch is equal

to one.
Slot pitch calculation:

τs =
πD
= 0.0704 m (116) Figure 45: Kw values for the harmonics
Ns
Pole pitch calculation: The value of the fundamental harmonic Kw = 0.945, not
so high but reasonable for this layout, also the higher order
πD
τ= = 0.0792 m (117) harmonics have not so high values and that’s a good start.
2p This values is used together with the segmentation factor
of the rotor in the fundamental equation of the Torque.
Coil pitch as length calculation, for the tooth-wound is the
Remember that for the tooth-wound layout also non-
same of the slot:
electrical harmonics are present in the magnetic field pro-
duce at the airgap:
τcoil = 0.0704 m = τs (118)

The shortening angle beta in electrical degrees (i.e. re-

ferred to the magnet pole pitch) is:
 τcoil 
β =π 1− = 0.3507 rad (119)
τ
In the fractional winding the shortening angle is uniquely
determined by the choice of the number of poles and the Figure 46: Non-electrical harmonics
number of slots. Cogging torque pitch calculation

τcogg = τs (120) 14 Magnet sizing

Slot opening (so) value To further reduce specific harmonics it is possible to shape
and shift the rotor magnets.
so = 0.005 m (121)
14.1 Magnet skewing
13.1 Calculation of Winding Factor
It’s been chose to divide the length of each magnet in 2
The distribution factor is given by: parts so:
nseg = 2 (125)
sin h · π6


Kd,h = (122)
The skew (continuous or discrete) of the magnets has a
 
π
qr · sin h · 6·q r
reduction effect on all the harmonics of the no load EMF,
  but it is necessary to avoid reducing the 1 st harmonic:
β
Ksh,h = cos h · (123)
2
And for each harmonic the winding factor is:

Kw = Ksh,h · Kd,h (124)

The computation for each harmonic is presented in the

Figure 45: Figure 47: No load EMF

24
 it is the fact that αm can reduce also the cogging torque:
2π
αm ≃ (K + 0.03 ÷ 0.07) (129)
Ns

Figure 49: Airgap B shape

And choosing also the skewing angle (σ) of this 2 part in

the right way it is possible to eliminate a certain harmonic
thanks to the skewing factor ks,h . σ is the shift among
neighbouring segments in mechanical radians:

2π Figure 50: Magnet shape factor

σ= = 0.157 rad (126)
5 · nseg · p
  From this graph we can see that the 5t h harmonic is equal
sin
nseg hpσ to zero as anticipated before.
2
ks,h =   (127) So it is a compromise between these 2 things, in my project
nseg sin hpσ
2 I choose to try to reduce the cogging torque because that
value of αm reduce also drastically the 11th harmonic as
ks = 0.951 fundamental harmonic skewing factor. we can see in the Figure 50, because I use:
In the following chart we can see that the 5th harmonic
2π
has been canceled out. αm ≃ (1 + 0.05) = 0.733 rad (130)
Ns
It means that from the electrical magnet pitch angle αm ·
p = 167.99, indeed in the Figure 50 we can see that the red
curve is low together with the purple one also, the latter
describing the evolution of the 13th harmonic.
Now defining magnet shape factor, kmag as:
pαm
kmag,h = ks,h · sin(h ) (131)
2
kmag = 0.946 of the fundamental harmonic.
And so the final results of all these factors is given by the
following graph:

Figure 48: Ks values for the harmonics

14.2 Magnet pitch

The magnet pitch is another important parameter to eval-
uate the rotor magnetic loading at the airgap. The magnet
pitch αm affects the harmonics BM R,h of the rotor flux:

4 1 pαm Figure 51: Final factors harmonic results

BM R,h = Bδ sin(h ) (128)
π h 2
14.3 characteristics of permanent mag-
A magnet pitch with an electrical angle pαm multiple of 2π
h nets
eliminates the hth contribution. So in general a shortening
of 1/h eliminates the harmonic h. The characteristics of permanent magnets are chiefly de-
But another thing it is necessary to take into account and scribed by the following quantities:

25
 • remanence Br ; Remanence at 20°C Br (20C) = 1.21 T
Rem. Temperature coefficient α(Br ) = −0.0012 C −1
• Intrinsic coercivity HCI (or HcB ); Remanence at 100°C Br (100C) = 1.0938 T
Intrinsic coercivity at 20°C HCI = 1592 kA/m
−1
• the second quarter of the hysteresis loop; Coe. temperature coefficient α(HCI ) = −0.0055
Intrinsic coercivity at 100°C HCI = 891.52 kA/m
• energy product (BH)PMmax ; Relative permeability µr = 1.05
Density γmag = 7600 kg/m3
• temperature coefficients of Br and HCI , reversible
Table 14: N35SH Parameters
and irreversible portions separated;

• resistivity ρ; With Br = Br,T O (1+α∆T ) and HCI = HCI,T 0 (1+α∆T ).

• mechanical characteristics; 14.4 Airgap

The airgap is divided in:
• chemical characteristics.
• thickness of the magnet;
In general, we may state that the decisive requirements
• air space for mechanical reason
for good permanent magnet materials are a high satura-
tion polarization, a high Curie temperature, and either The last one is δ0 = 2 mm, a typical minimum value.
a high crystal anisotropy as a material property or the
possibility to shape the anisotropy significantly. As with 14.5 Magnet thickness
magnetically soft materials, the hysteresis loop is now an
important characteristic curve. Usually, only the section Now it’s the moment to compute the last geometry value to
in the second quadrant of the hysteresis loop is given. finally complete identify the magnet, the thickness is given
After determining the magnet layout, the selection of a by the following formula considering a BM R = 0.9 T .
hard magnetic material can be made from commercial cat- BMR µr δ0 KCarter
alogues. Following considerations regarding the operating lmag = = 4 mm (132)
4
sin pα2m − BMR


temperature of approximately 100°C and the substantial π Br
overload request at 2 times the nominal value, indicat- Now it is possible to compute the positive value of the
ing high currents, the ultimate decision was to opt for a square wave of the flux density produce by the magnets:
Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnet (N35SH).
br lmag
Bδ = = 0.710 T (133)
lmag + µr δ0 KCarter
The Carter’s coefficient representing the slotting effect on
airgap, the flux lines that cover a path larger than the
actual airgap in correspondence of the slot openings:
1
KCarter = s0 (134)
τs
1− 
δ0

1+5 s0

Figure 52: Magnetic properties N35SH

The total airgap is therefore δ0 + lmag = 6 mm

15 Winding layout
Now it’s time to calculate a winding layout for the stator.
To evaluate the number of series conductors per phase
N , a key parameter to continue the workflow, it is first
necessary to approximate the BM ≃ BM R .
The machine must be adapted to the converter and control
requirements These determine the DC link voltage VDC
the voltage control margin, like the one use of 0.95, and
the maximum peak current Ipk,max . These voltage limits
identify the actual number of series conductors per phase
N which indirectly determines the inverter current rating
Figure 53: Thermal and other properties N35SH and its peak value.

26
Starting from the steady state fundamental equation: Current density mainly depends on the type of cooling
system used in the motor, in this case considering a natural
V = RS I + jXS I + E (135) convection one:

J = 3 × 106 Arms /m2 (138)

Slot area:
πDδ
Sslot = = 1621.27 mm2 (139)
Ns Ff j
Equivalent copper area cover by the conductors:
Figure 54: Vector diagram SPM SCu = Ff sslot = 680.93 mm2 (140)

The maximum torque per Ampere ( operation is obtained Given the electric frequency of this motor as 280Hz, sig-
when the current vector is in phase with the rotor Back nificantly higher than the grid frequency of 50Hz for the
EMF E = jwϕR . More precisely, the current control aims induction motor (IM), it is preferable to restrict the flux
to keep the stator MMF (i.e. the current I in quadrature density in the teeth to a lower value, such as BM τdesired =
with the rotor flux ϕR . 1.55 T. Two primary reasons support this choice: firstly,
iron losses are directly proportional to both frequency and
peak flux density; hence, with the elevated frequency, miti-
gating the flux density becomes a pertinent strategy. Sec-
ondly, anticipating larger iron losses, it is customary to
opt for an electric steel material with a higher silicon (Si)
content, thereby inducing premature saturation.
Stator tooth width:
Figure 55: Vector diagram working at MTPA BM
wt = τs = 40.88 mm (141)
BM t,desired
The voltage of the motor is:
with BM t,desired = 1.55 T
(136)
p
V = (ER + RS I)2 + (XS I)2

The explicit equations of all the terms show that, for a

given machine design, the voltage is proportional to the
number of conductors in series per phase.

Figure 57: Tooth width and slot pitch

Slot height assuming a trapezoidal shape a second order

Figure 56: Equations that correlate N with V equation give the following result:
Ns Ns
So as we can see we need to find the values of the a1 , a2 , a3 h2s + (τs + wt ) hs − Sslot =0 (142)
in order to compute N but before several parameters need π π
to be evaluated to find a solution of the system in the Fig-
ure 56. In the next lines I’m going to define the geometry hs = 37.91 mm (143)
of the slots. Now is possible to calculate the maximum and minimum
value of the slot width.
15.1 Slot geometry Min slot width:

So now the different slot parameters are going to be eval- wsmin = τs − wt = 29.52 mm (144)
uated.
Fill factor can be pretty high for a tooth-wound configu- Max slot width:
ration: π(D + 2hs )
Ff = 0.42 (137) wsmax = − wt = 56.03 mm (145)
N s

27
The next parameter consider the length of the end wind- 15.2 N calculation
ings
2π(D + hs ) Now it is possible to calculate the parameters a1 , a2 , a3
τew = yq = 83.67 mm (146) and then compute N.
Ns
End-winding coefficient
   
1 2
kew = 1.6 (147) a1 = w √ Ks Kw BM R Lτ = 3.62
2 2 π
End-winding length, more details in the section of "Vol- (158)
ume and Weights": ρ(L + Lew )
a2 = = 1.01 (159)
Lew = kew τew = 133.88 mm (148) sCu Ns
 
The slot permeance has to be calculated like for the IM, 3Dλslot τew λew 3Dλδ
a3 = δπDw + + +
being in the dual layer case: Ns 2p Ns
(160)
3kw Dτ
 2 
µ0 = 1.7 (161)
2pπ 2 δ ′
Figure 58: permeance evaluation equation
q
aV = a21 + 2a1 a2 + a22 + a23 = 3.99
(162)

So finally
vphase
N= = 63.24 −→ 66 (163)
aV
It’s been rounded to 66 in order to have the number of
equivalent series conductors per slot (n) an integer num-
ber.

16 Recalculation of electric and mag-

netic loading
Figure 59: Rectangular slot hypothesis
It’s possible now to calculate the nominal current and the
Calculations of the various geometries of the rectangular EMF:
shape:
a = 0.5(wsmin + wsmax ) (149) wN Ks Kw 2BM R Lτ
ER = √ = 238.90 V (164)
2 2π
h2 = 0.9 × 10−3 m (150) T wm
I= = 98.18 A (165)
3ER
h3 = 3 × 10−3 m (151) And the overload current:

h4 = 2 × 10−3 m (152) Ioverload = I · 2 = 196.36 A (166)

Following the various approximations made thus far con-

h1 = hs − (h2 + h3 + h4 ) = 0.032 m (153)
cerning magnet geometry and winding layout, it becomes
Slot permeance: possible to recalculate both the magnetic loading and the
λslot = 6.8189 × 10−7 (154) electric loading. This is undertaken with the objective of
maintaining the torque consistent with the fundamental
End-winding permeance sizing equation.
λew = µ0 × 0.26 = 3.267 × 10−7 (155) 4
BM R,new = (167)
Bδ sin(pαm /2) = 0.9 T
Permeance for airgap and magnet π
  
5(δ0 + lmag ) δ0 + lmag T
λδ = µ0 / 5+4 = 7.688×10−7 ∆new = π = 30665 Arms /m
s0 s0 LD2 2√ K K B
2 s w M R,new
(156) (168)
Effective airgap Finally, the stator contribution to the airgap flux density
lmag BM S can be included, by assuming a perfect MTPA con-
δ ′ = δ0 kCarter + = 0.005849 (157) trol with rotor and phase flux density shifted by 90°:
µr

28
 Figure 60: BM as a vector

√
2D
M M FM S = Kw ∆ = 1033.83 A (169)
2p

M M FM S
BM S = µ0 = 0.22 T (170)
δ′ Figure 62: The behavior of the polarization and demagne-
tization curves under increasing temperature T [1]

q
BM = 2
BM 2
R,new + BM S = 0.926T (171)

17 Non-Demagnetization check

The distribution of the stator Magnetomotive Force

(MMF) affects the magnetic circuit, leading to a minor
increase in the overall magnetic field when the two contri-
butions are in phase. Conversely, if the two contributions
are in phase opposition, it results in a reduction of the
total magnetic field

Figure 63: Load curve on B-H graph

In this project, the magnet temperature is assumed to be

constant at 100°C, and the magnetic operating point is
determined solely by the load curve. As the current in
the stator windings increases, the load curve (depicted in
red) shifts leftward, leading to a decrease in magnetic flux
density (B) and an increase in the absolute value (more
Figure 61: MTPA demagnetization negative) of the magnetic field strength (H).
Consequently, the non-demagnetization assessment in-
volves three key steps: firstly, evaluating the maximum
Recalling that the BH curve of each hard magnetic mate- current that can flow in the circuit; secondly, identifying
rial can be divided into two segments—a linear one, ben- the working point by finding the intersection between the
eficial for assessing the magnetic circuit’s operating point, load curve and the linear BH curve of the material; and
and a non-linear one, referred to as the intrinsic magnetic finally, ensuring that the magnetic field strength (Hmag ) is
curve, valuable for investigating demagnetization limits. located in the non-demagnetized region, indicating a con-
It is important to note that both these curves are signifi- siderable distance from the intrinsic coercivity (HCI ).
cantly influenced by temperature, as magnetic properties The overload current has been already computed instead
tend to degrade at elevated temperatures. Alongside these the short-circuit one can be now evaluated starting form
two curves, a third one is introduced, depicting the load the fundamental voltage equation describing the phasors,
curve attributed to the magnetic circuit. and fixing the voltage phase = 0:

29
 Figure 64: Short circuit vectors diagram operation

And now the diameter of the equivalent conductor:

ϕR
ISC,max= = 197.68 A (172) r
LS 4SCu /n
deq,conductor = = 6.27 mm (176)
This calculation, actually, it’s has been done at the end π
of the workflow when LS can be computed. Anyway this Considering that the conductors must fit in the slot, and
current is almost equal to the overload one so the evalua- so they must be smaller than the slot opening (5 mm), this
tion of the minimum magnet thickness is pretty the same diameter is certainly too large. Indeed Each slot conductor
with both currents. is often made of a bundle of parallel wires in order to
To conclude this chapter here the other term: facilitate the manufacturing of the winding, increase the
  fill factor and limit the skin effect.
N 2
ϕR = √ Ks Kw BM R Lτ (173) In this case the number of bundles (nb ) is 28, in order
2 2 π to have a final diameter of:
r
17.1 Minimum magnet thickness 4SCu /n ∗ nb
dw = = 1.186 mm
π
Moving on it’s time to find the working point given by the
From the same catalogue of the induction motor the
intersection of the load curve with the linear BH curve.
DAMID 180 was chosen with a nominal diameter of 1.18
µ0 N Imax Hmag µ0 lmag mm and a insulation grade 2. For this motor no thermal
Bmag = −
2pδ0 δo model was used so the prediction on the operating temper-
Bmag = Br + µ0 µr Hmag ature are just hypothesis, a more specific evaluation need
to be done to make sure that the wire and the insulation
Resolving for Hmag we can then find the formula for the are suitable.
minimum magnet thickness taken into consideration that
we need to stay far from the intrinsic coercivity with a 19 Stator Geometry
margin of 15%:
N Imax
Similar to the considerations for the tooth-width a certain
2p − µδ00 Br amount of desired flux is been considered and then the
lmag > − µr δ0 = 3.24 mm (174)
0.85|HCI | computation of the stator yoke has been done.

The minimum thickness value is lower than the chosen one, BM D

hy = = 15.59 mm (177)
so we can proceed without doing any adjustment. BM y,desired 2p
with BM y,desired = 1.5 T . It is worth to note that greater
18 Conductors per slot is the number of poles of the machine smaller is the yoke.

Now it’s time to calculate the number of conductors per

slot considering that n has to be an integer number.
20 Rotor Geometry

3N No slots are present here but the calculation of yoke must

n= = 22 (175) be done. So just ferromagnetic material is present and
Ns

30
sleeves or ribs to keep in place the magnets otherwise the Motor part Volume (V ) [m3 ] Mass (G) [kg]
centrifugal force would detach the magnets from the rotor. Stator teeth 1.99e-3 15.12
Stator yoke 2.04e-3 15.56
BM D
hyR = = 15.38 mm (178) Rotor yoke 1.2e-3 9.14
BM yR,desired 2p Magnets 0.32e-3 2.46
Stator copper 1.69e-3 15.18
21 Diameters
Table 15: Volume and weights of the machine
Now it’s possible to find the other geometry values of the
motor, external and internal diameter.
The total mass net of the external housing and internal
Dext = D + 2(hs + hy ) = 308.81 mm (179) rotor shaft is:
Gtot = 57.462 kg
Just below the maximum impose by the requirements.

Dint = D − 2(δ0 + lmag + hyR ) = 159.05 mm (180)

22 Volume and weights

In this section the calculation of the volume and weights
of the motor will be done. Starting from some properties
obtained from the respective catalogues:
• Copper density γCu = 8.96e3 kg/m3
• Lamination density γCu = 7.6e3 kg/m3
• Magnet density γCu = 7.6e3 kg/m3
Certain simplifications are introduced to streamline the ge-
ometry, adopting a rectangular shape for the teeth and em-
ploying a simplified equation for the end-winding length.
Specifically, the end-winding length is determined by aug-
menting the end-winding pitch with a factor kew = 1.6,
accounting for the additional length attributed to end-
winding overlapping and the minimum fillet radius of the
wire bundles. But actually this length is already been cal-
culated at the beginning of the report with:
2π D + hs
τew = yq = 84 mm (181)
Ns 2

Figure 65: Wire and the different lengths

The same steps has been done like for IM and in the next
table we can see the results for different components:
The total mass of the lamination is 39.82 kg. With the
volume of the magnets as:
αm
Vmag = 2p Llmag (D − 2δ0 − lm ag) (182)
2

31
23 Losses

23.1 Joule Losses

Temperature coefficient of copper, from the same cata-
logue of IM:

αCu = 3.93 × 10−3 (183)

Resistivity of copper at 20°C:

ρCu,20 = 1.709 × 10−8 Ωm (184)

Figure 67: Cogent M250-35A specific losses

Resistivity of copper at operating temperature of 100°: The 3 coefficients:

ρCu = ρCu_20 (1 + αCu (Toperating − 20)) = 2.246e − 8 Ωm • Ki = 0.017883 W

kg
(185)
I will consider ρ = ρC u as the resistivity at operating • Kc = 6.4451e − 5 W
kg
temperature.
• α = 2.1587
It’s possible now compute the Joule losses as:
with Ki hysteresis coefficient and Kc eddy current coeffi-
PJ S = ρCu VCu J 2 = 342.55W (186) cient.

23.2 Iron Losses

The selection of a ferromagnetic material for this SPM
motor aligns with Silicon Steel (FeSi), similar to the IM.
However, a more specific choice involved opting for a thin-
ner variant with an increased silicon content. As discussed
earlier, anticipating elevated frequency implies higher iron
losses. Consequently, the higher silicon content, coupled
with reduced thickness, was aimed at mitigating specific
iron losses, albeit with the trade-off of potential early sat-
uration.
This curve has been obtained by interpolation of a big
number of points:

23.2.1 Specific Iron losses Figure 68: Power Density vs Magnetic Flux Density

The specific iron losses at rated operation have been com-

So now like for the induction motor it’s time to multiply
puted thanks to the interpolation of a lot of points coming
the density of losses with the several masses and find the
from the catalogue Cogent, using the frequency of 200
total iron losses. We expect more losses with respect to
Hz end 400 Hz because the specific one at 280 Hz for my
the IM due to the high dependency on frequency and in
case, it’s not present in the catalogue. After that the 3
this case the f is more than 5 times larger.
coefficients of the Steinmetz’s equation were extrapolated:
We will distinguish the yoke from the teeth due to the dif-
ferent flux density and also a coefficient kl = 1.4 is added
Ploss
pF e = = Ki f BMα
+ Kc f 2 BM
2
(187) to consider the manufacturing process of the lamination
GF e and the deterioration of the material.
So recalling the Equation 187, and substituting the BM
The resulting specific iron losses in the rotor teeth, consid- with the specific one for each term. Respectively teeth,
ering a frequency f=620Hz and a flux density BM t,desired stator yoke, rotor yoke:
= 1.55T are: And now the losses:

32
 pF e,t 25.04 W/kg 23.3 Mechanical losses
pF e,y 23.38 W/kg
pF e,yR 24.04 W/kg
Mechanical losses primarily arise from windage and fric-
Table 16: Power density losses tion contributions, with no ventilation losses as the mo-
tor is not self-ventilated. Typically, mechanical losses are
calculated as if it were a TEFC (Totally Enclosed Fan-
PF e,t = kl Gt pF e,t 529.89 W
Cooled) self-ventilated motor, and then only a minor per-
PF e,y = kl Gy pF e,y 509.50 W
centage is taken into consideration.
PF e,yR = kl GyR pF e,yR 307.47 W
PF e,tot = PF e,yR + PF e,y + PF e,t 1346.88 W

Table 17: Iron Losses D 2

Pf w0 = kw D(L + 0.6τ )(wm ) = 1133.55 W (188)
2

They are obviously higher with respect to the IM as ex-

pected, so to reduce better material selection can be done,
using a percentage of Si in the material higher or with
better manufacturing process a lower kl can be obtained.
Pf w = 0.15Pf w0 = 170 W (189)
Additional iron losses are not considered in the prelimi-
nary design but can be important to predict unexpected
overtemperature in the machine. Eddy currents and iron
losses in non laminated magnets and rotor yoke can pro-
duce a temperature of the rotor higher than expected (risk
of demagnetization). 24 Efficiency

The overall efficiency is:

Pmech
η= = 0.974 (190)
Pmech + PF e,tot + PJS + Pf w

This value is pretty high due probably to the hypothesis

of the coefficients use in the iron losses and end winding
length for example.

Figure 69: Eddy currents induced by the slotting effect

Moreover fractional windings generate a field harmonic of

order close in amplitude and harmonic order to the fun-
damental one (counter-rotating).
In wound tooth motors, to limit losses, it may be neces-
sary to laminate both the rotor iron and the permanent
magnets.
Low order mechanical sub-harmonics induce significant
magnet losses:

Figure 70: Linear Bars diagram of the powers

33
 Ll = Ll,slot + Ll,ew + Ll,δ = 0.315 mH (195)
The reactance is:

XS = wLS = 1.186Ω (196)

Indeed the total flux linking the stator winding is com-

posed of:
• the airgap flux produced by the rotor, ΦR , that ap-
pears through ER in the equivalent circuit;
• the airgap flux produced by the stator currents, ΦSS ,
which is represented in the equivalent circuit with the
inductance LSS ;

Figure 71: Logarithmic Bars diagram of the powers • the airgap flux produced by the stator currents not
crossing the airgap, Φl , which is represented in the
equivalent circuit with the leakage inductance Ll .
I plot also in logarithm scale to visualize better what are
the losses that more affects the efficiency. Instead the lin- Let’s see now each term that compose the equations above.
ear emphasizes the general high efficiency of this kind of Starting from the leakage, different effects have been eval-
machines. uated like for the induction motor.
Slot leakage:
25 Equivalent circuit
3N 2
Ll,slot = = 0.1412 mH (197)
Ns
This is represents the flux lines crossing the slots and mag-
netizing the air inside them. The conductors have the
same permeability so they are considered as air. It de-
pends on the slot permeance λslot that is function of the
winding layout and the slot shape.
Figure 72: Equivalent circuit SPM End-winding leakage, this inductance is a result of the
conductors having to traverse from one slot to another
The equivalent circuit is useful to find the parameters that outside the active length. In general, this configuration
still are unknown thanks to the quantities already calcu- introduces an undesired inductance.
lated.
N2
The single phase space vector equation, from the electric Ll,ew = τew λew = 1.488e − 2 mH (198)
circuit: 2p
with λew = 0.26µ0 .
(191) Tooth top leakage, this represents the fact that some
di
v = RS i + Ls + eR
dt lines doesn’t cross the airgap and close the loop in the
stator.
25.1 stator resistance
The stator resistance has been computed thanks to the re-
sistivity and the geometrical properties of the conductors:
3ρN 2 (L + Lew )
Rs = = 13.24Ωm (192)
SCu Ns

25.2 Inductances
The total stator inductance is the following sum:
LS = LSS + Ll = 0.6741 mH (193) Figure 73: Explanation of the flux lines of the tooth top
leakage
That is the given by the inductance due to the airgap flux
and the leakage one.
µ0 3(kw N )2 Lτ 3N 2
lSS = = 0.3588 mH (194) Ll,δ = Lλδ = 0.159 mH (199)
2pπ 2 δ ′ Ns

34
25.3 Power Factor degrees, that we can see in the plots of FEA. The frequency
is therefor:
Now it’s possible to compute the power factor, the phase
fcogg = 5040 Hz (206)
displacement among input voltage and current:
An high value as desired, a useful parameter to confront
(200) how much it will disturb the rated torque and in general
XS I
ϕ = V − I = arctan( ) = 0.4514
RS I + ER the behaviour of the machine, creating vibrations for ex-
ample.
P ower f actor = cosϕ = 0.8998 (201)
Now a possible recalculation of the current and voltage
can be done as:

I = a3 N/XS = 92.85A (202)

A bit lower with respect to the one calculated.

Checking now the voltage thanks to the equivalent circuit
and the vector diagram MTPA, where ER is in phase with
the current and the voltage displaced by ϕ:

Vphase,check (ER + RS I)2 + (XS I)2 = 264.19 V (203)

p

A value close to the one initially used of 252.09 V with Y

connection, ≃ 5% of discrepancy.
With the new current we can calculate again the new angle
ϕ and consequently the new power factor:

P ower f actor = cosϕ = 0.909 (204)

To conclude this iteration a new value of N has been com-

puted with the new voltage, but the result was almost
equal to the one used, indeed this time N = 66.28 that
rounded to 66 leads to the same parameters.

26 Cogging Torque
The last thing to analyze is the frequency of the cogging
torque. This torque is due to the interaction between the
magnetic field of the rotor magnets with the reluctance of
the stator.

Figure 74: Cogging torque explanation

The magnets are attracted to some positions where the

flux lines have to follow the minimum reluctance path. It
has a certain number of pulses:

Ncogg = lcm(Ns , 2p) = 72 pulses (205)

So 72 pulses in a complete revolution and so 360°/72 =

5 mechanical degrees of period and 5 · p = 20 electrical

35
27 FEA 27.1 Cogging torque
As for the induction motor a Finite Element Analysis has
been done to evaluate the characteristic of the machine. From the FEA it’s possible to evaluate the no load torque
The softwares used were Matlab and FEMM as for the so the cogging.
previous case.

No Load Torque
0.8
0.6
0.4

Torque [Nm]
0.2
0
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Rotor position [el deg]

Figure 77: Cogging torque

It is centered in zero and it has the periodicity has already

discussed in the dedicated chapter.

Rated torque: sum of skewed segmented rotors.

0.5
Torque [Nm]

-0.5

-1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Rotor position [el deg]

Figure 78: No load torque of the skewed segments

We can see from the last graph that in some electrical

position the sum of the 2 torque is less than the single one
and in other is grater, this leads to higher amplitude of
the pulses but in general the magnitude with respect to
the nominal one is basically insignificant.

36
 Figure 75: Mesh of the motor

Figure 76: Density plot of the flux at no load conditions

37
 The maximum torque value is 155.31 Nm, at the peak of
0.8
the curve.
0.6
0.4
0.2 27.3 Rated operation
[T]

0
Here the stator winding effect is included and so important
-0.2 quantities can be evaluated as follows:
-0.4
-0.6 Rated Torque
160
-0.8
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 140
Mechanical Rotor position [deg]

Torque [Nm]
120
Figure 79: Airgap Flux Density at no load
100
80
From the last figure we can see the curve of the flux density
at the airgap at no load only, due to the magnets it has 60
a square wave shape with low spikes due to the magnets.
40
Also is difficult to see the intermediate level due to the
magnet pitch very similar to the pole pitch. The period is 20
360◦
p = 90 deg. We can see the slotting effect looking at the 0
peaks that are basically one like the slots per pole. To con- 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Rotor position [el deg]
clude the amplitude is almost equal to the one computed
analytically with Bδ . Figure 81

27.2 MTPA
An SPM (Surface Permanent Magnet) motor exhibits op-
timal performance when operated in Maximum Torque Rated torque: sum of skewed segmented rotors
per Ampere (MTPA) mode, meaning id = 0 A (control 180
angle=90◦ ). Furthermore, it is worth noting that deviat-
160
ing from this operating condition results in a reduction in
Torque [Nm]

torque, as illustrated in the MTPA curve. 140

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Rotor position [el deg]

Figure 82

The output torque is lower than the desired 160 N, a way

to solve the problem could be increase the active length,
that it’s still pretty lower the maximum value.
With the FEMM software it is possible to evaluate the ra-
dial forces, that being the multiplicity of this motor equal
to 1 we expect high values that must be considered in the
Figure 80: Torque curve at MTPA operation mechanical design, and in general at the operation.

38
 Figure 83: Radial forces
Figure 85: Voltage Line to Line

The frequency of the force:

ff orce = 2f = 560Hz (207)

The value of the voltage exceeds the maximum admissible
given by the DC link minus a 5% due to the voltage mar-
The amplitude is pretty high as expected so actions to gin, essential to ensure controllable operations, including
avoid any problems need to be considered. the voltage distortion to maintain sinusoidal current wave-
shapes (Erh ) and change in DC link voltage.
Simultaneously, it is possible to validate compliance with
voltage constraints by examining the waveforms of the
fluxes. Specifically, the following calculations have been
This means that the value of N has to change to reduce
performed.
the voltage because, as already discussed, they are strictly
related. After 2 attempts the value of N = 54 it has been
considered acceptable and indeed new graphs was created:

dϕX
VX = wel (208)
dθel
VXY = VX − VY (209)

0.2
Phase A
0.15 Phase B
Phase C
0.1
0.25
Phase A
Flux [Wb]

0.2 Phase B 0.05

Phase C
0.15
0.1 0
Flux [Vs]

0.05 -0.05
0
-0.05 -0.1
-0.1
-0.15 -0.15
-0.2
-0.2
-0.25
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Rotor position [el deg] Rotor position [el deg]

Figure 84: Fluxes from FEA at rated operation Figure 86: Fluxes from FEMM with N = 54

39
 800
VA-B
600 VB-C
VC-A
400

200
[V]

-200

-400

-600
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Rotor position [el deg]

Figure 87: Voltage Line to Line with N = 54 Figure 88: Stator Simulation

Now the limits are respected and so the machine is con-

trollable and observes the safety margins.
So here I calculated the new results affected by the chang-
ing of N:

Table 18: New Results

Parameter Value
n 18.0
deq_conductor 6.94 mm Figure 89: Stator details section
nb 34
dw 1.19 mm
rs 8.8654Ω 27.5 Overload
eR 195.47 V In this simulation non linear curve of the material is actu-
cos ϕ 0.909 ally used.
XS 0.7939Ω
I 113.49 A Overload Torque
360
340
So the next simulations were done with the new N. 320
Torque [Nm]

300
280
260
27.4 Stator leakage Inductance
240
The fourth simulation establishes a Finite Element (FE) 220
model of the motor, excluding the stator. It imposes a 200
Dirichlet boundary condition along the inner stator cir- 180
cumference to prevent any flux from crossing this bound- 160
ary. Consequently, the remaining flux lines are exclusively 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Current [Arms]
associated with the slot stator leakage flux.
From the finite element analysis the stator slot leakage Figure 90: Overload Torque vs Current
inductance is 203.870µH.
Similar to the analytical one computed before, to recall, We can see that at the overload 2 as for the requirements,
Ll,slot = 94.51µH. The value from the FEA is not similar the current is not the double but higher, so a useful check
to the one computed so this also explains the difficulties would be to recalculate the demagnetization check, a quick
in the calculation of such parameter and how essential are computation leads to a minimum value of 3.58 mm, so still
this software. in the range.

40
A Ferromagnetic Material

Cogent Catalogue useful data:

Figure 91: Typical specific total loss at 50 Hz

Figure 92: Typical specific total loss at 60 Hz

Figure 97: LWW group

Figure 93: Typical specific total loss at 100 Hz

Figure 94: Typical specific total loss at 200 Hz

Figure 95: Typical specific total loss at 400 Hz

Figure 98: Types of wire

Figure 96: Typical physical and mechanical properties

41
 Table 19: Interpolation points of M400-50A

H B
0.000000e+00 0.000000e+00
3.584800e+01 9.879000e-02
4.896600e+01 1.986400e-01
5.779100e+01 2.924100e-01
6.552500e+01 3.894500e-01
7.297200e+01 4.867600e-01
8.101500e+01 5.852800e-01
9.039800e+01 6.867100e-01
1.013240e+02 7.866300e-01
1.150270e+02 8.872600e-01
1.335990e+02 9.934700e-01
1.597910e+02 1.092690e+00
2.010910e+02 1.193410e+00
2.824990e+02 1.296380e+00
4.970900e+02 1.399140e+00
4.999998e+03 1.662280e+00
9.999997e+03 1.786090e+00
1.500000e+04 1.874540e+00
Figure 99: Technical data wires 1.999999e+04 1.939950e+00
2.500000e+04 1.984530e+00
2.999999e+04 2.016380e+00
B Technical data for winding wire 3.499999e+04 2.037100e+00
4.000000e+04 2.051280e+00
C B-H curve

Code for B-H curve and relative permeability.

materialname=’M250-35A’;
BHin=[HBin(:,2) HBin(:,1)];
Bcut=0.1; % do not consider the B values below Bcut
Hcut=20000; % do not consider the H values above Hcut
B = BHin(:,1);
H = BHin(:,2);
Bcut = max(Bcut, B(2));
cBoffset = find(min(abs(B - Bcut)) == abs(B - Bcut));
cHoffset = find(min(abs(H - Hcut)) == abs(H - Hcut));
B = B(cBoffset:cHoffset);
H = H(cBoffset:cHoffset);
B = [0; B];
H = [0; H];
H(1) = 1e-6;
x0 = [100; 10; 10];
options = optimset(’Display’, ’iter’);
fprintf(’Convergence history:\n’)
ff = @(x) norm(((- H + x(1) * B + x(2) * B.^x(3)).*(B./H)));
x = fminsearch(ff, x0);
fprintf(’\n\nEval:\n’);
fprintf(’x1 = %1.3d\n’, x(1));
fprintf(’x2 = %1.3d\n’, x(2));
fprintf(’x3 = %1.3d\n\n’, x(3));
B_ = 0:0.001:B(size(B,1));
H_x = x(1) * B + x(2) * B.^x(3);
H_ = x(1) * B_ + x(2) * B_.^x(3);

42
Table 20: Interpolation points of M250-35A D Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnet
(N35SH)
H B
0.000000 0.000000
15.120714 0.050000
22.718292 0.100000
27.842733 0.150000
31.871434 0.200000
35.365044 0.250000
38.600588 0.300000
41.736202 0.350000
44.873979 0.400000
48.087807 0.450000
51.437236 0.500000
54.975221 0.550000
58.752993 0.600000
62.823644 0.650000
67.245285 0.700000
72.084406 0.750000
77.420100 0.800000
83.350021 0.850000
89.999612 0.900000
97.537353 0.950000
106.201406 1.000000
116.348464 1.050000
128.547329 1.100000
143.765431 1.150000
163.754169 1.200000
191.868158 1.250000
234.833507 1.300000
306.509769 1.350000
435.255202 1.400000
674.911968 1.450000
1108.325569 1.500000
1813.085468 1.550000
2801.217421 1.600000
4053.653117 1.650000
5591.106890 1.700000 Figure 100: Arnold magnetic technologies
7448.318413 1.750000
9708.815670 1.800000 E Assigning the slots to each phase
12486.931615 1.850000
16041.483644 1.900000 Code to create a list to use in Matlab to simulate the
21249.420624 1.950000 motor.
31313.495878 2.000000
from itertools import cycle
53589.446877 2.050000
88477.484601 2.100000
windings = []
124329.410540 2.150000
slot = 1
159968.569300 2.200000
phase=[1,3,2]
197751.604272 2.250000
orientation = [1,-1]
234024.751347 2.300000
phase_cycle = cycle(phase)
orientation_cycle = cycle(orientation)

while slot <= Ns:

u = next(phase_cycle)
v= next(orientation_cycle)
start = 1

43
 while start <= q:
windings = windings + [slot, u, v]
slot += 1
start += 1 Ns θm [deg] θel [deg] phase orient.
print(f’ windings = {windings}’) 1 0 0 1 1
With Excel was created the other patterns for the angles: 2 7.5 15 1 1
3 15 30 1 1
4 22.5 45 1 1
5 30 60 3 -1
F Euro Tranciatura Lamination frame 6 37.5 75 3 -1
7 45 90 3 -1
8 52.5 105 3 -1
9 60 120 2 1
10 67.5 135 2 1
11 75 150 2 1
12 82.5 165 2 1
13 90 180 1 -1
14 97.5 195 1 -1
15 105 210 1 -1
16 112.5 225 1 -1
17 120 240 3 1
18 127.5 255 3 1
19 135 270 3 1
20 142.5 285 3 1
21 150 300 2 -1
22 157.5 315 2 -1
23 165 330 2 -1
24 172.5 345 2 -1
25 180 360 1 1
26 187.5 375 1 1
27 195 390 1 1
28 202.5 405 1 1
29 210 420 3 -1
30 217.5 435 3 -1
31 225 450 3 -1
32 232.5 465 3 -1
33 240 480 2 1
34 247.5 495 2 1
35 255 510 2 1
36 262.5 525 2 1
37 270 540 1 -1
38 277.5 555 1 -1
39 285 570 1 -1
40 292.5 585 1 -1
41 300 600 3 1
42 307.5 615 3 1
43 315 630 3 1
44 322.5 645 3 1
45 330 660 2 -1
46 337.5 675 2 -1
47 345 690 2 -1
48 352.5 705 2 -1

Table 21: Orientation of the phase in the slots

44
Figure 101: IEC.250/4.240

45
References
[1] Design of Rotating Electrical Machines
[2] Slides from the lessons of Professor Giacomo Sala, PhD

46