Performance comparison between consequent‐pole and inset modular permanent magnet machines. Issue 17 (30th April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ren, Bo; Li, Guang‐Jin; Zhu, Zi‐Qiang; Foster, Martin; Stone, David
• Is Part Of: Journal of engineering. Volume 2019:Issue 17(2019)
• Page Start: 3951
• Page End: 3955
• Publication Date: 2019-04-30
• Subjects: permanent magnet machines -- finite element analysis -- electric potential; inset modular permanent magnet machines -- consequent‐pole modular permanent magnet machines -- magnet volume -- FG widths -- consequent PM machines -- slot‐pole number combinations -- pole modular machines -- inset modular PM machines -- flux gap widths -- 2D FEA software -- CP modular PM machine; Engineering -- Periodicals; Engineering; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 620.005
• DOI: 10.1049/joe.2018.8200
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2051-3305

Abstract

Abstract : This paper proposes some consequent‐pole (CP) modular permanent magnet (PM) machines with different flux gap (FG) widths and slot/pole number combinations. The corresponding inset modular PM machines having the same magnet volume are also presented for comparison. It has been demonstrated that the output torques of the consequent pole modular machines are always higher than those of the inset modular machines regardless of FG widths and slot/pole number combinations. Other electromagnetic performances such as back‐EMF, cogging torque, and iron losses etc. are calculated by 2D FEA software and compared as well. The advantages and disadvantages of consequent and inset modular PM machines are summarised here.