4.7 Article

An Analytical Approach to Determine Coil Thickness for Magnetically Levitated Planar Motors

Journal

IEEE-ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 572-580

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMECH.2016.2631571

Keywords

Coil thickness; electromagnetic forces/torques; magnetic levitation; magnetic pole pitch; normalization function

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51465053]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China [31920140082]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes an analytical approach to directly determine coil thickness dimension only according to the magnetic pole pitch of magnetic levitation planar motors. Based on modeling of the electromagnetic forces/torques of magnetically levitated planar motors, three normalization functions about coil thickness, which are named the main forces/torques impact factor function, the y-axis attaching torque impact factor function, and the ratio factor function of the main forces/torques to coil mass, respectively, are abstracted and derived. These three normalized functions all are dimensionless and single value functions of coil thickness when magnetic pole pitch is specified. Taking the physical meanings of these three functions into account simultaneously and comparing the varying trends of these three functions synchronously, a narrower value range of coil thickness, which is between 0.318 times and 0.525 times of the magnetic pole pitch, is determined. By this approach, the coil thickness of magnetically levitated planar motors with Halbach permanent magnet array can be determined directly, instead of determining by numerical optimization usually including a few optimization parameters. This approach still allows coil thickness dimension to be fine-tuned to meet other design requirements of magnetic levitation planar motors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available