Design and FEM Validation for an Axial Single

Stator Dual Rotor PMSM

Lucian Nicolae Tutelea
1
, Sorin Ioan Deaconu
2
, Ion Boldea
1

1
Electrical Engineering Department
2
Electrical Engineering and Industrial Informatics Department
Politehnica University of Timisoara
sorin.deaconu@fih.upt.ro


Abstract-A novel synchronous machine-the single stator dual PM
rotor brushless, axial-flux, concentrated double layer fractional
tooth winding, single inverter with dual frequency PWM
independent control for two shafts has been proven in
previous papers of these authors to be able to improve the
machine efficiency and boost the torque density. This paper will
present the key design equations and design procedure of the
Single Stator Dual Rotor PMSM by the equivalent magnetic
circuit method , analyze skewed PM angle effects on machine
performance and give design guidelines to achieve specific
design objectives. A quasi-3D finite-element analysis with
specialized software is given to prove the effectiveness of the
design equations and find the main characteristics of the
machine.

I. INTRODUCTION
The axial flux permanent magnet (AFPM) machine, also
called the disc-type machine, is an attractive alternative due
to its pancake shape, compact construction and high power
density. AFPM motors are particularly suitable for electrical
vehicles, pumps, fans, valve control, centrifuges, machine
tools, robots etc [1], [2].
Axial flux machines appeared in the technical literature in
the early 70s and trading of axial flux induction motors
started few years later [3]-[6]. Nowadays, direct drive
applications that require actuators or generators capable of
operating at low speeds with large torques have revived the
attention towards Axial Flux Machines, especially for the PM
type, as they are capable of larger torque density and
efficiency [3], [7]-[11].
However, AFPM Synchronous Machines become
advantageous whenever a number of design prescriptions are
fulfilled. Most notably, it is widely accepted that the number
of pole pairs must be conveniently high [3], [12].
Fractional slot windings can be often realized in
concentrated layouts: this happens when windings overhangs
are not overlapped and the coils are wound individually
around the stator teeth. Fractional Slot Concentrated
Windings offer remarkable advantages both on the end user
and to the manufacturer. In fact, they allow the physical
separation of the phases and of the magnetic circuits of the
phases, thus reducing the risk of phase-to-phase faults and
minimizing the mutual inductance among the phases [3], [13].
The features of Single Stator Dual Rotor PMSM are
summarized as the following: greatly shortened end windings,
high ratio of diameter to length, high efficiency, high torque
density and low material costs [14], [15].
II. DESIGN EQUATIONS
This paper will derive the main design equation and a
design procedure for these machines, but provided with two
rotors. In addition, quasi 3D finite-element analysis is
employed to prove the effectiveness of the design equations
and the main machine characteristics.
In fig. 1 a drawing of longitudinal section is shown. The
single stator dual PM rotor axial synchronous machine has in
centre the stator assembly (1) with the two three-phase
windings (2) placed in open slots, fixed rigid in the casing
(3), provided with two side covers (4), (5) in which the two
ball bearings supports (6), (7), one radial and one axial, are
introduced. The ball bearings allow the two shafts (8), (9) to
rotate independently, each shaft having in the side towards
the stator a disk of solid steel on which the permanent magnet
poles are placed in circular and symmetric manner . The
other end of the shaft is inserted into a half-coupling which is
connected to the thermal engine (10), respectively, to the
gears towards the drive wheels (11).
Many unknown parameters are involved in the design of
the Single Stator Dual Rotor PMSM. As a result, it is
necessary to assign some description to these parameters.
They will be further explored in the design equations. Table I
gives a list of the parameters used in the design approach.

8
2 3
1
10
6
4
5
7
11
9

Fig.1. Longitudinal section through the dual PM rotors machine.
TABLE I
DESIGN PARAMETERS
Symbol Description
f
s
tangential force per surface unit
R
in
inner radius
R
out
outer radius
T
1
torque of rotor 1
T
2
torque of rotor 2
H
c
cohercive field of PM
h
ag
air-gap height
k
c
Carter factor for air-gap
h
pm
PMs height

0
permeability of the air-gap

PM
permeability of the PM
k
yPM
pitch factor for PM
alpm x ratio between PM width and pole pitch
t pole pitch for rotors
h
cs
equivalent machine length
k
w
winding factor
k
y
pitch factor
k
q
zone factor for winding
w
st
width of one slot
h
st
slot height
rho_copper stator winding resistivity at 20
0
C
alfa_copper temperature winding coefficient at 20
0
C
T
w
winding temperature
S
copper
copper section
J
s
current density
h
ry
tickness of the rotor discs on which the PM are fixed

ry
magnetic permeability in the rotor discs
h
s4
slot neck height

Fez
magnetic permeability in stator teeth
w
t
teeth width

Fesy
magnetic permeability in the stator yoke
h
sy
stator yoke width
I
s
stator current
b
ipm
interpole PM width
G
mPMo
leakeage permeance of PMs
beta skewing PM angle
alpm ratio between PM width and pole pitch at beta=0
R
med
medium radius
g air-gap

PM
PM linkage flux
U
f
phase voltage

TABLE II
RATED PARAMETERS
Parameters
Machine
M1
Machine
M2
Base continuous power P
n
[kW] 55 110
Base speed, n
b
[rot/min] 4200 2200
Maximum speed, n
max
[rot/min] 5500 12000
Maximum voltage, V
n
[V] 220
Number of phases, nphase 3
Pole pairs p 7 5
Number of stots N
st
12 12

In general to fulfill the imposed performance, the
dimensioning calculus has to be redone a few times. So the
geometrical dimensioning is found iteratively even within a
classical design. The number of iterations depends on the
strategy chosen to change the electric/magnetic stresses after
each verification calculus routine. To reduce the number of
iterations, a correlation between electric/magnetic stress
changes and geometrical parameter variations has to be
established. However, the number of iterations remains high,
except for a highly experienced designer [16], [17], [18].
The main parameters used in the design and optimization
of the axial PM rotor single stator machine are given in Table
II. For an axial machine the torque is:

}
t =
out
in
R
R
2
s
dr r 2 f T . (1)
If

out
in
r
R
R
k = , (2)
( )
3
out s
3
r
R f k 1
3
2
T
t
= . (3)
In many cases the design theme contains the maximum
power at a certain speed, wherefrom the maximum torque is
extracted:

b
n
n 2
60 P
T
t

= . (4)
Based on the equation (3), with the help of equation (4),
there results the fundamental equation of dimensioning (5) is
obtained:

( )
3
3
r s
max
out
k 1 f 2
T 3
R
t

= , (5)
T
max
= max(T
1,
T
2
), (6)
R
in
= k
r
R
out
. (7)
For machines with surface permanent magnets, the
magnetic gap (the mechanic gap and the equivalent thickness
of the permanent magnets) is high enough , so, that for
preliminary calculations of magnetic flux density in the gap ,
we may neglect the magnetic saturation (we consider the
saturation factor as being unitary). The PM air-gap flux
density peak value (8) and its fundamental magnitude (9) are:

|
|
.
|

\
|

+

=

PM
0
pm
c
ag
c 0
pm ag
h
k
h
H
B , (8)

yPM pm ag pm ag 1
K B
4
B
t
=

, (9)
where
|
.
|

\
| t
=
2
alpmx sin k
yPM
. (10)
The PM linkage flux without saturation (one turn/coil) is:

pm ag w cs
phase
st 0 pm
B k h
n
1
N
2

t
t
= , (11)
where

q y w
k k k = - is the winding factor. (12)
The phase mmf (peak value) yields:

0 pm
n
t
p 3
T 2
I

= , (13)
while the stator main inductance (one turn per coil) is:
( )
c ag
2
in
2
out
2
w 0
phase
sm
k h
1
R R k
n
L

t
= . (14)
Slot geometric permeance
( )
st
st 4 s
w
1
3 / h h lambdac + = , (15)
end coil length

st slot f
w l + t = , (16)
coil turn length
( )
f cs turn
l h 2 l + = , (17)
end coil geometric permeance

st st st
in
st st
out
N 2
1
w h
R 7 4
lg
w h
R 7 4
lg lambdaendc
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
+

+
|
|
.
|

\
|
+

= , (18)
are used to calculate slot leakeage inductance (one turn/coil)
lambdac h
n
N
4 L
cs
phase
st
0 sigma
= , (19)
end coil leakeage inductance (one turn/coil)
lambdaendc l
n
N
2 L
f
phase
st
0 sigmaend
= , (20)
total phase inductance of machine (one turn/coil)

sigmaend sigma sm s
L L L L + + = . (21)
Stator winding resistivity

( )
( ) copper _ alpha 20 1
1
T copper _ alpha 1 copper _ 0 rh 01 rh
w
+

+ =
, (22)
phase resistance

phase
st
copper
turn s
n
N
S
1
l 01 rh R = , (23)
with





































Fig. 2. Matlab diagram design and optimization program.

s
t
copper
J 2
I
S

= (24)
complete the picture of circuit parameters.
The program used for design and optimization was made in
Matlab. Figure 2 presents the utilized subroutines, starting from the
constants and input data and ending with the files in which the
results are being saved, the characteristics are being drawn and the
necessary data for validating the results using the finite element
method is collected.
Besides electric circuit the equivalent magnetic circuit is
crucial in the design. The equivalent magnetic circuit for one
pole is presented in fig.3. R
mry
represents the magnetic
reluctance of the portion from the rotor disc (1 or 2) that
corresponds to one pole:

cs ry ry
c
mry
h
1
25 , 0
h p 6
R
R

|
|
.
|

\
|
+

t
= , (25)

h
cs
= R
out
R
in
. (26)
With R
mpM
, the magnetic reluctance of a permanent
magnet:

cs pm PM
c pm
mPM
h b
k h
R


= . (27)



























R
msz1
R
mag1
R
mPMo1
R
msy
e
s1
R
mry1 R
mPM1
e
mPM1
R
mso1 R
mso2
e
s2
R
msz2
R
mag2
e
mPM2
R
mPM2
R
mry2
R
mPMo2
Fig. 3. The equivalent magnetic circuit for one pole at R
c
radius (between R
in
and R
out
) (explicit section).

h
ry1
h
pm1
h
ag1
h
s4
h
st1
w
st1
w
t1
w
t2
w
st2
h
st2
h
ag2
h
pm2
h
ry2
h
s4
h
sy
The magnetomotive force (mmf) of a permanent magnet is:

c pm PM
H h e = . (28)
The magnetic reluctance of the air-gap R
mag
, of one stator
teeth R
msz
, of the portion from the stator yoke that
corresponds to one pole R
msy
, the one pole armature mmf e
s
,
the magnetic leakage reluctance of the slot R
ms
and the
leakage reluctance of the permanent magnet R
mPM
are:

cs c y 0
c ag
mag
h R k
p k h
R
t

= , (29)

|
|
.
|

\
| t
=
st
y
N
p
sin k , (30)

cs t Fe
sy st 4 s
msz
h w
4 / h h h
R
z

+ +
= , (31)

cs sy st Fe
c
msy
h h N 4
R
R
sy

t
= , (32)
e
s
= I
s
, (33)

cs 4 s
st
0
st
ms
h h
2
h
2
w
R
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
o
, (34)

cs mPM
mPM
h G
1
R

=
o
o
, (35)
where G
mPMo
is:
if
ag ipm
h 2 b s

0
pm
ag
mPM
2
h
h
1 log
G
t
|
|
.
|

\
| t
+
=
o
, (36)
else

0
ipm
ag
pm
ipm
mPM
2

2 / 1
b
h
1
h 2
b
1 log
G
t
(
(
(
(
(

t +
t
+

|
|
.
|

\
| t
+
=
o
. (37)
The ratio between PM width and pole pitch at R
c
radius and
optimum skewed PM angle is:

( )
beta
R
beta sin R
arcsin
p
alpm
alpmx
c
med
+
|
|
.
|

\
|

t
= , (38)

t
=
PM
b
alpm , (39)

( )
p 2
R R
in out
+ t
= t , (40)

2
R R
R
out in
med
+
= . (41)
If beta > 0 the conditions of existence are (for the radius
Rin we need to have at least a point of the magnet both in the
upper and the lower side so that the magnets wont share
positions):

( )
0 beta
R
beta sin R
arcsin
p
alpm
in
med
> +
|
|
.
|

\
|

t
, (42)


















Fig. 4. Skewed PM angle.

( )
p
beta
R
beta sin R
arcsin
p
alpm
out
med
t
s +
|
|
.
|

\
|

t
. (43)
If beta < 0 only one condition is required:

( )
p
beta
R
beta sin R
arcsin
p
alpm
out
med
t
s +
|
|
.
|

\
|

t
. (44)
Then, the width of the PM is:

c pm
R alpmx b = , (45)
and the width of teeth

st
st
c
t
w
N
R 2
w
t
= . (46)
The slot pitch t
st
is:

st
c
st
N
R 2t
= t , (47)
with the equivalent magnetic air-gap:

PM
0
pm ag age
h h h

+ = , (48)

|
|
.
|

\
|
+

|
|
.
|

\
|
=
age
st
age
st
h
w
5
1
h
w
g , (49)

age st
st
c
h g
k
t
t
= . (50)
Few sample results of design (Table III) for a case study
are given here (these all machines data will used in quasi 3-D
FEM validation):
TABLE III
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RESULTS
Parameters
Machine
M1
Machine
M2
Mechanical base speed w
b
[rad/s] 439.82 230.38
Rated torque rotor M
n
[Nm] 125.05 477.46
Inner radius R
in
[mm] 110
Outer radius R
out
[mm] 197
Equivalent machine length h
cs
[mm] 87
Slot pitch tauslot [mm] 80.37
0
R
c
R
in
R
out
R
med
PMs

b
ipm
b
pm
beta

beta

t/p

Parameters
Machine
M1
Machine
M2
Polar pitch for rotor tau [mm] 68.89 96.44
Slot height h
st
[mm]

29.5 65
Slot width w
st
[mm] 30.2 32.7
Average teeth width b
t_med
[mm] 50.12 47.61
Outer teeth width b
t_out
[mm] 72.91 70.41
Inner teeth width b
t_inn
[mm] 27.3 24.77
PM height h
pm
[mm] 3 6.3
Inner PM width b
pm_in
[mm] 31.44 61.49
Average PM width b
pm_med
[mm] 41.33 79.08
Outer PM width b
pm_out
[mm] 51.22 96.7
Carter factor for airgap k
C
1.258 1.218
III. QUASI - 3D FEM VALIDATION
It is possible to divide the machine into a certain amount of
computation planes: nlayer number of computation planes,
ilayer current computation plane, nlayer , 1 ilayer =
( ) ( )
( ) 1 nlayer
1
R R 1 ilayer R R
in out in c

+ = . (51)
The number of computation planes needed for computation
depends on the purpose (precision) of the computation.
The finite element method (FEM) analysis may be
necessary to verify the analytical result and to calculate the
flux distribution more accurately. Figure 10 shows the
magnetic flux lines at no load in the q axis of machine 1.
The total distribution of the flux density at full load for the
full scale machines considered here in d axis of rotor 1 is
presented in fig. 11.
Figure 12 presents the flux density amplitude in an axial
section in rotor discs, permanent magnets, air-gaps, teeth and
stator yoke at five loads ( -2I
n
, - I
n
, 0, I
n
, 2 I
n
) and in the fig.
13 the flux density Y component at the same X coordinate at
full load.

Fig. 10. A portion of magnetic field lines with rotor 1 in q axis at no load.












Fig. 11. The total distribution of the flux density at full load and d axis position of
rotor 1.











Fig. 12. The values of flux density module in an axial section in rotor discs,
permanent magnets, air-gaps, teeth and stator yoke at five loads ( -2I
n
, - I
n
, 0,
I
n
, 2 I
n
)











Fig. 13. The values of flux density Y component in an axial section at full load

The results obtained with Matlab optimization were
compared with results from quasi 3D FEM validation (Table
III). Due to high saturation in rotor disk (yoke) and stator
tooth corner, and reduced order of analytical model it a
notable difference could be observed. The mesh has 68
regions, 12 symmetry pairs and 76430 elements.
The linkage PM flux per phase is quite sinusoidal (fig.14)
despite of fractionary tooth wound windings. The largest harmonics
is the third harmonic and it represents only 2.21% of fundamental
for M1, respectively 0.7% of fundamental for M2. Classical vector
control with PWM inverter could be used with good results in order
to control the proposed machine. Figure 15 shows the d-q
inductances for machines 1 and 2. The d axis inductances become
larger than q axis inductances for deep flux weakening, leading an
increase in speed range. The interaction torqueses T1, T2, (fig. 16)
have been computed as a difference between total torque and
cogging torque from FEM. The cogging torque is acceptably low for
an automotive power drive application: 1.8% for generator (M1) and
2.9% for traction machine (M2). The torque and PM flux computed
in FEM (Table IV) are larger than values from analytical model for
M1 (about 10% for torque) and they are smaller than values from
analytical model for M2 (about 8% for torque). These results are in
relation with the saturation level on M1 respectively M2 rotor disk
as noticed in fig. 17, 18.
The points 3 on this characteristic curves correspond to
the rated current, and, because of saturation effect the
inductances drop.

BY
[T]
[mm]
Bmed
[T]
[mm]
TABLE IV
PARAMETERS COMPARISON
Parameters
FEM
quasi 3D
MATLAB
design
Torque of machine 1 [Nm] 138.8 125
Torque of machine 2 [Nm] 438.1 477.5
Inductance of machine 1 [mH] 0.5 0.567
Inductance of machine 2 [mH] 0.35 0.398
Linkage PM flux of machine 1 [mWb] 73.8 63.7
Linkage PM flux of machine 2 [mWb] 191.5 206.4














Fig. 14. Linkage PM flux for machines 1 and 2 and three phase.

















Fig. 15. D-q inductances for machines 1 and 2 versus current.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
Position (deg)
T
o
r
q
u
e

(
N
m
)
FEM Torques
T1cg
T2cg
T1
T2

Fig. 16. Interaction and cogging torques computed with FEM.

The points denoted with 1 on the characteristics Ld1 and
Lq1 from the figure 15 correspond to a current I = -I
n
. They
are shown in the figures 17 and 18. Where a more significant
drop for Lq1 with respect to Ld1, due to a higher saturation in
this axis (figure 17 with respect to the figure 18) is to be
noticed. When the current is zero (at the points denoted by 2)
a higher saturation in the axis d1 appears, in comparison with
axis q1; and this is why the inductance L
d1
is lower.


Fig. 17. The total distribution of the flux density at full load and q axis position of
rotor 1


Fig. 18. The total distribution of the flux density at full load and d axis position of
rotor 1.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
A novel machine family is analized in order to improve
machine radial and axial dimensions, torque density and
efficiency. The key design equations and procedure for the
Single Stator Dual Rotor PMSM have been presented, some
design guidelines to achieve the design objectives have been
given and a quasi 3D FEM analysis was presented the
influence of the saturation effect on machine inductances.
The proposed analytical model was validated by FEM with
an accuracy of 8-10% for torque, and 13% for inductances.
This is acceptable but it could be further reduced by a more
complex analytical model. The maximum computed torque
versus speed shows that both machines are able to produce
the requested torques over the entire speed range.
This paper shows that it is possible to design an assembly
of two machines (generator 55 kW/motor 110 kW) for a
hybrid electric vehicle with a mass of active materials of only
133kg at 6000 rpm, an outer diameter 394 mm and an axial
length of 188 mm.
REFERENCES
[1] J.F. Gieras, R.J. Wang, and M.J. Kamper, Axial Flux Permanent
Brushless Machines, Second Edition, Springer Science, 2008
[2] I. Boldea, M. Topor, F. Marignetti, S.I. Deaconu, and L.N. Tutelea, A
Novel, Single Stator Dual PM Rotor, Synchronous Machine: topology,
circuit model, controlled dynamics simulation and 3D FEM Analysis of
Torque Production, 12th International Conference on Optimization of
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Position (deg)
P
M

f
lu
x

(
W
b
)
Linkage PM flux
a2 b2 c2
a1 b1 c1
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
d-q inductances
I
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
c
e
s

(
m
H
)
Current magnitude (A)
Ld2 Lq2
Ld1
Lq1
1
3
2
Electrical and Electronic Equipment OPTIM 2010, pp. 343-351, May
20-22, 2010, Brasov, Romania.
[3] Tutelea, L.N., Deaconu, S.I., Boldea, I., Marignetti, F., and Popa, G.N.,
Design and Control of a Single Stator Dual PM Rotors Axial
Synchronous Machine for Hybrid Electric Vehicles, EPE 2011, 30 August
2 September, 2011, Birminghan, England, Art. No. 6020137, 10 pp.
[4] Boldea, I., Tutelea, L.N., Deaconu, S.I., Marignetti, F., Dual rotor
single stator brushless PMSM motor/generator system for full HEVs,
ECAI 2011, 30 June-2 July, 2011, Pitesti, Romania, pp. 95-102.
[5] Tutelea, L.N., Deaconu, S.I., Boldea, I., Marignetti, F., Popa, G.N.,
Quasi-3D FEM Analysis of an Single Stator dual PM Rotors Axial
Electric Vehicles, Electrimacs 2011, 6-8
th
June, 2011, Cergy-Pontoise,
France, 7pp.
[6] L.N. Tutelea, I. Boldea, and S.I. Deaconu, Optimal Design of Dual Rotor
Single Stator PMSM Drive for Automobiles, International Electric
Vehicle Conference, March 4-8, Greenville, SC, USA, 2012, pp.8.
[7] F. Marignetti, V.D. Colli, R.Di Stefano, and A. Cavagnino, Design Issues
of a Fractional Slot Windings Axial Flux PM Machine with Soft
Magnetic Compound Stator, IECON 2007, Taipei, Taiwan, pp. 187-192,
November 5-8, 2007.
[8] F. Profumo, Z. Zhang, and A. Tenconi, Axial flux machine drives a
new viable solution for electric cars, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Electronics,
vol. 44, issue 1, pp. 39-45, February, 1997.
[9] J.F. Eastham, F. Profumo, A. Tenconi, R.J. Hill-Cottingham, P.C.
Coles, and G. Gianolio, Novel Axial flux Machine for aircraft drive:
design and modeling, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 38, issue 5,
pp. 3003-3005, September 2002.
[10] A. Cavagnino, M. Lazzari, F. Profumo, and A. Tenconi, A comparison
between the axial flux and the radial flux structures for PM
synchronous motors, IEEE Trans. on Ind. Appl., vol. 38, issue 6, pp.
1517-1524, November-December, 2002.
[11] K. Sitapati, and R. Krishnan, Performance Comparisons of Radial and
Axial Field, permanent-Magnet, Brushless Machines, IEEE Trans. on
Ind. Appl., vol. 37, issue 5, pp. 1219-1226, September-Octomber, 2001.
[12] F. Marignetti, and M. Scarano, An Axial-flux PM Motor Wheel, Proc.
Electromotion 99, Patras, Greece, pp. 1-6, July, 1999.
[13] A. Parviainen, Design of AFPM low-speed Machines and Performance
Comparison between Radial-Flux and Axial-Flux Machines,
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland, Doctoral Thesis,
April, 2005.
[14] Q. Ronghai, and T.A. Lipo, Design and Parameter Effect Analysis of
Dual-Rotor, Radial-Flux, Troidally Wound, Permanent-Magnet
Machines, IEEE Trans. on IA, vol. 40, no.3, May/June 2004, pp. 771-
779.
[15] R. Krishnan , Permanent Magnet Synchronous and Brushless DC Motor
Drives , CRC Press 2010, ISBN 978-0-8247-5384-9.
[16] I. Boldea, and L.N. Tutelea, Electric Machines. Steady State, Transients
and Design with MATLAB, CRC Press, ISBN 978-1-4200-5572-6,
2009.
[17] J. M. Miller, HEV propulsion system arhitectures of the e-CVT type,
IEEE Transactions on Power Electronic, vol. 21, no.3, May 2006, pp.
756-767.
[18] I. Boldea, and S. Scridon, Electric propulsion systems on HEVs:
review and perspective, EVER 2010, 25-28 March, Monaco, 8pp.