Journal of Magnetics

The Korean Magnetics Society (한국자기학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Study of Armature Reaction Field Analysis for Tubular Linear Machine with Axially Magnetized Single-sided and Double-sided Permanent Magnet Based on Analytical Field Calculations

  • Shin, Kyung-Hun (Department of Electrical Engineering, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Park, Min-Gyu (Department of Electrical Engineering, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Cho, Han-Wook (Department of Electric, Electronic & Communication Eng. Edu., Chungnam National University) ;
  • Choi, Jang-Young (Department of Electrical Engineering, Chungnam National University)
  • Received : 2014.12.09
  • Accepted : 2015.03.03
  • Published : 2015.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative study of a Tubular Linear Machine (TLM) with an Axially Magnetized Single-sided Permanent Magnet (AMSPM) and an Axially Magnetized Double-sided Permanent Magnet (AMDPM) based on analytical field calculations. Using a two-dimensional (2-D) polar coordinate system and a magnetic vector potential, analytical solutions for the flux density produced by the stator windings are derived. This technique is significant for the design and control implementation of electromagnetic machines. The field solution is obtained by solving Maxwell's equations in the simplified boundary value problem consisting of the air gap and coil. These analytical solutions are then used to estimate the self and mutual inductances. Two different types of machine are used to verify the validity of these model simplifications, and the analytical results are compared to results obtained using the finite element method (FEM) and experimental measurement.

Keywords

References

  1. B. L. J. Gysen, J. J. H. Paulides, E. A. Lomonova, and A. J. A. Vandenput, IEEE Trans. Magn., 44, 1751 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2008.922416
  2. S. M. Jang, and J. Y. Choi, KIEE J. Electr. Eng. Technol., 2, 221 (2007). https://doi.org/10.5370/JEET.2007.2.2.221
  3. Jiabin Wang, Geraint W. Jewell, and David Howe, IEEE Trans. Magn., 35, 1986 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1109/20.764898
  4. N. Bianchi, S. Bolognani, and D. D. Corte, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., 39, 466 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2003.809444
  5. Jiabin Wang, Geraint W. Jewell, and David Howe, IEEE Trans. Energy Conv., 19, 289 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1109/TEC.2004.827026
  6. Z. Q. Zhu, D. Howe, and C. C. Chan, IEEE Trans. Magn., 38, 229 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1109/20.990112
  7. W. J. Kim, M. T. Berhan, and J. H. Lang, Proc. IEEE Industry Application Soc., 31st Annu. Meeting, 1, 471 (1996).
  8. N. Bianchi, Proc. IAS, 1, 21 (2000).
  9. H. W. Cho, S. M. Jang, and J. Y. Choi, IEEE Trans. Magn., 42, 3491 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2006.879087
  10. S. M. Jang, J. Y. Choi, and H. W. Cho, IEEE Trans. Magn., 41, 2028 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2005.846266

Cited by

  1. A Model for Analyzing a Five-Phase Fractional-Slot Permanent Magnet Tubular Linear Motor with Modified Winding Function Approach vol.2016, pp.2090-0155, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4501046