Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided

Narges Taran; Greg Heins; Vandana Rallabandi; Dean Patterson; Dan M. Ionel

doi:10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided

Narges Taran, Greg Heins, Vandana Rallabandi, Dean Patterson, Dan M. Ionel

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › peer-review

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

This paper systematically compares two axial flux permanent magnet (AFPM) machines designed for a university student racing car application: a double-rotor single-stator yokeless and segmented armature (YASA) structure, and a single- stator single-rotor configuration. Both machines are optimized for minimum loss and active weight using 3D finite element analysis and the highest performing candidate designs are compared in more detail. The studies indicate that the benefits offered by the YASA configuration over the single-stator single-rotor machine are achieved only for specific designs that are heavier. For the design space with lower mass, albeit with increased losses, the Pareto front designs overlap which shows the performance of the two machines is very close to each other.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019
Pages	4477-4482
Number of pages	6
ISBN (Electronic)	9781728103952
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104
State	Published - Sep 2019
Event	11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019 - Baltimore, United States Duration: Sep 29 2019 → Oct 3 2019

Publication series

Name	2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019

Conference

Conference	11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019
Country/Territory	United States
City	Baltimore
Period	9/29/19 → 10/3/19

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 IEEE.

Keywords

3D FEA
Axial flux permanent magnet
Multi-objective optimization
Single sided
Topology advantages
YASA
Yokeless and segmented armature

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Mechanical Engineering
Control and Optimization
Energy Engineering and Power Technology
Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Access to Document

10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

Cite this

Taran, N., Heins, G., Rallabandi, V., Patterson, D., & Ionel, D. M. (2019). Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided. In 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019 (pp. 4477-4482). Article 8913104 (2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

@inproceedings{9ccaacc3c66444b3a270fbfc6ea8fa50,

title = "Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided",

abstract = "This paper systematically compares two axial flux permanent magnet (AFPM) machines designed for a university student racing car application: a double-rotor single-stator yokeless and segmented armature (YASA) structure, and a single- stator single-rotor configuration. Both machines are optimized for minimum loss and active weight using 3D finite element analysis and the highest performing candidate designs are compared in more detail. The studies indicate that the benefits offered by the YASA configuration over the single-stator single-rotor machine are achieved only for specific designs that are heavier. For the design space with lower mass, albeit with increased losses, the Pareto front designs overlap which shows the performance of the two machines is very close to each other.",

keywords = "3D FEA, Axial flux permanent magnet, Multi-objective optimization, Single sided, Topology advantages, YASA, Yokeless and segmented armature",

author = "Narges Taran and Greg Heins and Vandana Rallabandi and Dean Patterson and Ionel, {Dan M.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 IEEE.; 11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019 ; Conference date: 29-09-2019 Through 03-10-2019",

year = "2019",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104",

language = "English",

series = "2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019",

pages = "4477--4482",

booktitle = "2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019",

}

Taran, N, Heins, G, Rallabandi, V, Patterson, D & Ionel, DM 2019, Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided. in 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019., 8913104, 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019, pp. 4477-4482, 11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019, Baltimore, United States, 9/29/19. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided. / Taran, Narges; Heins, Greg; Rallabandi, Vandana et al.
2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019. 2019. p. 4477-4482 8913104 (2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution › peer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies

T2 - 11th Annual IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019

AU - Taran, Narges

AU - Heins, Greg

AU - Rallabandi, Vandana

AU - Patterson, Dean

AU - Ionel, Dan M.

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - This paper systematically compares two axial flux permanent magnet (AFPM) machines designed for a university student racing car application: a double-rotor single-stator yokeless and segmented armature (YASA) structure, and a single- stator single-rotor configuration. Both machines are optimized for minimum loss and active weight using 3D finite element analysis and the highest performing candidate designs are compared in more detail. The studies indicate that the benefits offered by the YASA configuration over the single-stator single-rotor machine are achieved only for specific designs that are heavier. For the design space with lower mass, albeit with increased losses, the Pareto front designs overlap which shows the performance of the two machines is very close to each other.

AB - This paper systematically compares two axial flux permanent magnet (AFPM) machines designed for a university student racing car application: a double-rotor single-stator yokeless and segmented armature (YASA) structure, and a single- stator single-rotor configuration. Both machines are optimized for minimum loss and active weight using 3D finite element analysis and the highest performing candidate designs are compared in more detail. The studies indicate that the benefits offered by the YASA configuration over the single-stator single-rotor machine are achieved only for specific designs that are heavier. For the design space with lower mass, albeit with increased losses, the Pareto front designs overlap which shows the performance of the two machines is very close to each other.

KW - 3D FEA

KW - Axial flux permanent magnet

KW - Multi-objective optimization

KW - Single sided

KW - Topology advantages

KW - YASA

KW - Yokeless and segmented armature

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85076751382&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85076751382&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

DO - 10.1109/ECCE.2019.8913104

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:85076751382

T3 - 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019

SP - 4477

EP - 4482

BT - 2019 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, ECCE 2019

Y2 - 29 September 2019 through 3 October 2019

ER -

Systematic comparison of two axial flux PM machine topologies: Yokeless and segmented armature versus single sided

Abstract

Publication series

Conference

Bibliographical note

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this