A new (contributed) hub motor

After a 3 week intensive sprint and with a little help from me, Pierre has finalized his own motor model and it is now available in the repository. He also contributed a couple of small tweaks to my common Lua “libraries”. The GPL wins again. ;)

I helped out as much as I could (with just a few hints in magnetic design) in between my school exams and assignments, and after just a week he had my Lua/FEMM framework running with his new model. After two weeks he had a consistent motor and was running optimization scripts. Not bad at all, considering his haste and the sometimes flaky communication between two non-native English speakers! After 3 weeks he had the basic mechanic and cooling design too. So if anyone asks, you can tell them it is possible to completely design an electric wheel in under one month (I’m not so sure about the output quality, though). Anyway, hats off for a man who knows what he wants and works hard to get it. :)

I haven’t checked-in his optimization scripts yet, they are very redundant (extensive “copy-paste-modify” done in a hurry), but I intend to merge that feature into some “M-files” that I want to create for the project (FEMM has a nice integration level with Matlab & Octave). I did however spend some time cleaning up his model code and also refactoring some of mine to better allow multiple models in the framework. It’s all looking pretty usable now.

The new model  is also 3-phase fed, but otherwise it is quite different from what I had been experimenting with. He followed “industrial practice” and designed a single outer rotor version with a more standard slot/pole topology. He chose a base model of 9 slots & 8 poles (all multiplied by a factor of 8, yielding 72 coils & 64 magnets), and all the stator teeth are wound. Additionally, the rotor is very thin and the permanent magnets are embedded into the rotor shell (instead of just glued to its surface).

psabatier_fluxFig.1 – Pierre’s FEMM motor model with flux distribution and two active phases.

psabatier_flux_closeupFig.2 – A close-up of the air gap and rotor, showing the “hammerheads” he developed.

The magnets he chose are custom-designed from supermagnete.de for his dimensions. He picked a high-temperature grade (N40UH) capable of withstanding 180 degrees Celsius, which makes perfect sense in a high-power motor. Unfortunately, higher-temperature Neodymium magnets are a bit weaker in the magnetic field aspect. He chose a path of engineering I am not especially interested in: high-power / high-torque. As a consequence, his motor is to be forcefully cooled (and he did a fine job with that arrangement). Personally, I’d like to build a motor that is so efficient that it needs not be cooled.

Pierre was kind enough to share his initial mechanical design with me, although under a “verbal” non-disclosure agreement because he is seeking patents on this design. So, with his permission, I’m only showing here a large scale overview, which in fact contains nothing more than just common industry knowledge and common sense. His specific insight and choices on thermal management and mechanical assembly are purposely hidden (so don’t ask me for more details).

psabatier_assemblyFig.3 – Pierre’s basic mechanical assembly: the stator structure and the rotor “cap”.

This mechanical assembly does not show any magnetic parts; the stator is empty and ready to receive the ferromagnetic sheet and teeth and copper coils. The same is true about the rotor, it has no magnets or iron sheet in it, it’s just the outer shell.

Unfortunately, I didn’t have much time to follow his work up close, and he was really in a hurry to finish the magnetic and mechanical modeling and deliver the plans for a prototype. That’s right, this baby is going to be manufactured any day now. :)

According to Pierre’s simulations, his model shows a higher cogging torque (around 10Nm) than my LRK-based topologies (close to zero). But it gets a full 1000Nm for just 50A per phase, which is actually better than my double rotor model – almost twice the “bang for buck”! I have to investigate the reasons for this.

Speaking of phases, here is the snapshot of his motor (Pmult=8) with one phase active (in pink), so we can see the winding sequence:

psabatier_one_phase_8_spotsFig.4 – One phase active at 8 different spots.

And here is a close-up so we can count the teeth.

psabatier_phase_close_upFig.5 -Three teeth per phase pole.

This is a very curious arrangement to me…In fact, if we reduce Pmult to 1, we can see that the phases are not arranged in pairs unless Pmult is even…

psabatier_asymm_3coils_per_phaseFig.6 – Base, Pmult=1.

I have to find some time to run a few experiments on it… ;)

Explore posts in the same categories: Fabrication, Motors

14 Comments on “A new (contributed) hub motor”

  1. Vasco Névoa Says:

    One of the reasons his model is more powerful than mine (on a Nm/kW criterion) is that there are a lot more stator teeth activated at the same time. Not only he has twice the wound teeth, but he also has a different winding sequence which I still haven’t studied long enough to understand. If only I didn’t have so much to do… :(

  2. sandro Says:

    Can you show the winding sequence (yours and/or his), I was calculating volume and cooling for a coiling (based on your 100amps rated current) and it came to my mind that my idea involved a parallel connection, while I had no idea of the connection you’ve planned. I was focused on liquid cooling because it is independent from speed/RPM and can keep really cool the coil, so no harm to the magnets occurs.
    I will send you my small contribution soon, I had lost the link to your site…until today! I’m an electronic engineer (almost) from Italy, so knowing the winding sequence would make it possible to me to think and design the power electronics required…or at least try to. BTW I think the “active wheel” from Michelin has surpassed our goals, and it will be to the market in 2009-2010, still this project is really good for learning. See you

  3. Vasco Névoa Says:

    Welcome, Sandro!

    Both models were made with 3 phases and simulated with square wave switching. But they would work even better with 3 phase sine waves – less harmonics means less iron losses.
    I don’t think you need to know much more in order to design the controller; in fact I think any vector controller will work ok with such motors… However, it is imperative to have some positional feedback to the controller; this can be an optical resolver, a set of hall sensors, or some phase voltage/current detectors inside the controller.

    Our models put the multiple coils per phase in series, so when we say “50A” we really mean 50A per phase – total. It is the voltage that gets ramped up proportionally to the number of coils in series. High currents are bad for copper and silicon losses, so I try to keep them down.

    If you really want to study the windings, I suggest you run Pierre’s model in FEMM and take a look at the “circuit” property of each coil (first you should reduce “Pmult” to 1, it is easier to analyse a motor with 9 coils than with 72).

    Liquid cooling is fine, but remember that the rotor also warms up because of induction effects. Even if the stator is ice-cold, the magnets will warm up because they are doing real magnetic work when you turn on the coils. Cooling the stator does take some heat off the magnets (via radiation and convection), but it won’t take it all (there is no conduction). Be sure to control the magnet temperature in your design somehow.

    Michelin and Siemens and PML and all the others out there will not be very interested in selling motors to the public, nor even to small companies… they want big fat contracts with very large-scale vehicle producers. This is why I started this project: we have a right to use the best technology without asking for their permission. ;)

    Arrivederci!

  4. Vasco Névoa Says:

    I’ve added a couple of screenshots (figs.4,5,6) to show the phase windings.

  5. sandro Says:

    Thank you, now is really clearer to me. My idea is to make the windings with a small square copper tube, enamelled on the outside and bent gently enough so it is still a tube when the coil is complete. The cooling liquid is circulating into the coil itself, inside the tube only, keeping it quite cool and not needing a complex cooling circuit in the hub structure. The down side of this solution is that with N coils you need to connect 2N tube ends to the main in/outlet tubes (either with welding/soldering or screw joints) and this can be really challenging for N=72…
    Cooling of the magnets has to be done by air flowing in the gap and outside the rim, using the aluminum rim as a heat sink, I see no other way since it is a moving part.

  6. sandro Says:

    About the FEMM models, I must say that I don’t have FEMM and I would not be able to use it without specific training, my field of study is microcircuits and power circuits not magnetic finite elements modelling. My very first approximation of the coil yielded an inductance of 240nH for 50 turns and air (plastic?) core. Saturation should not occur since we have no ferromagnetic core (if I have well understood your model). For 24 coils in series as in fig.4 I get a total inductance per phase of 5,7mH. Please tell me if this value is anywhere near your model results. With the tube in my calculations the series resistance is 5,4mOhm per coil, totallling 0,13 Ohm per phase; at 100A of current the Joule effect losses will be 1300W per phase (this can be the total ohmic losses if only one phase is active at any given time). By comparison, using asolid square copper wire of 4,5mm by 4,5mm (that occupies the same volume) the losses are reduced to 1060W but the cooling is much less effective and non uniform, this can lead to higher working temperatures of the wires (more losses) and the air in the gap (less cooling for the rotor too). By the way the tube is 20% lighter than the solid wire, meaning less unsprung weight, cheaper coils, reduced inertial forces applied to the stator structures. For an accurate study of the heat flow and working temperatures we need at least a standard work cycle for the motor,a model of the other losses and an approximated model for conduction/convection paths (radiation should be small at less than 120°C, relative to the others factors). bye

  7. sandro Says:

    The last consideration for today: with all those strong magnets inside I think it must be sealed to avoid dust (especially the metallic particles that would stick to the rotor forever) and eventually water and mud from the road. This could be difficult to realize but it’s not my field, we have to ask some expert to get an educated answer. Another mechanical issue is where to put the bearings: is it possible/economic to put a bearing between the rotor rim and the stator rim, or being so large in radius it will be too difficult/pricy? This would give much better strengt to the assembly and make it rigid enough to have the small air gap needed. Mechanical experts needed…

  8. Vasco Névoa Says:

    Sandro, you’ve certainly given the coils a lot deeper consideration than I have. :)
    I’m still playing around with the larger aspects of the motor (geometry and such), so I didn’t bother calculating anything so fine. But your values do look good.

    Yes, sealing the motor is a must, for the reasons you pointed out. As to the bearings, I plan not to need any, because my model is going to take advantage of the bearings already in the wheel assembly. I’m designing a stator that can be bolted to the suspension arm and a rotor that can be bolted to the wheel hub. It is problematic to make a small air gap this way, but I’m experimenting. After this assembly, it is possible to seal the motor by bolting one or two outer rings to close any gaps.

  9. Vasco Névoa Says:

    Sandro, it took me a little while to understand your description about the “conducting tube” coil, but now I see it’s genius! :)
    You can largely reduce the number of connectors for liquid if you wind the coils continuously within the same phase (I’m assuming you’re also going for a 3-phase system).
    If you never cut the tube while winding one phase set of coils, you only need 2 liquid connectors per phase. Furthermore, you could establish 3 current and liquid supplying rings in the stator. But unless you use a strictly non-conductive cooling liquid, you will have to make sure the cooling circuits (one per phase) never swap liquid…

    • sandro Says:

      Sorry for the looong wait, I’m busy at university…but I’m almost done! One single tube per phase could be a solution but with such a tiny tube you will need much more pressure to get the fluid going; the temperature of the different coils will be different, the first being cold and the last much hotter.
      I think you could be interested to get involved into the project presented here:
      http://www.40fires.org/
      I discovered this today and you were the first to come to my mind…they are organizing for a project like yours, maybe the two can become one. bye

      • Vasco Névoa Says:

        Wow, thanks a lot!
        It really looks interesting, and I like the open attitude. :)
        There’s already an Open Source car initiative at http://www.theoscarproject.org/, but it’s the first time I see anyone worried about energy efficiency. Great, things are going the right way. People are living up to the challenge and investing in the “long tail” of energy. :D

  10. Mário Costa Says:

    Hi there Vasco,

    I found a kind of utopic machine, the kind no one believes, I figure u would like to take a look at it, if u haven’t already!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9UKcGTcfwo&feature=related

    Let me know what u think about it …

    Best regards

  11. HLJJ Meevis Says:

    I would like to find construction detail concerning the Siemens in-wheel hub motor.

    The detail I am mainly looking for is the placement of the magnets and the coils on the stator and the rotor. Are the magnets Neodymium or what.

    Also is the tire rim made of magnetic or non-magnetic material.

    Thanks to whomever can help. Henk


Comment: