3 Axis Maglev Motor SUSTAINERGY 2014 FRICTION REDUCTION TEAM

LORENZO MANGONE, RON NISSIM, SAGI GIAT, MICHAEL HAREL

Motor Operation

Brushless vs Brushed Motors

Technology of the 1980s

Electromagnets on the stator work in harmony to

provide constant attractive force on the rotor.

Z axis friction (between the rotor and the plane)

Friction

There are five types of friction, namely:

Static

Kinetic

Rolling

Fluid

Magnetic Friction (Dampening)

“Friction is a force acting against the

relative motion between two surfaces in contact.”

How can we improve motor

efficiency?

Maglev

Suspension of an object in air with magnetic fields as the only

support

Magnetic forces counterbalance gravity and can accelerate

and decelerate the object

Cone

Double Cone

Capped - Rhombus

Stator

Rotor

Axle

Evolvement of technology

Octoagonal

Optimal Shape

Equilibrium

Symmetry

Optimal Cost / Stability Ratio

Ability to extend axle throughout the motor

Use of similar shape in other applications:

Subatomic stabilization at CERN

Magnetic field concentrated on one point

Vector calibration

The shape that we chose allow us to

counterbalance every magnetic

vector and grant stability to the

rotator

It is based on repulsion forces

Because of the Lorentz law, the

rotator is always brought back to the

equilibrium position

3D Model

The Devil Lies in the Details

Effect of Magnetic Dampening

Focault’s currents are reduced in this model of a motor in

two ways:

The Skin Effect: Prevents penetration of the magnet field in the

rotor at high speeds.

Magnetic Positioning: Magnetic fields are opposite one

another therefore canceling each other out.

Conclusion: The increased number of magnets doesn’t

increase magnetic dampening (friction)

Efficiency

In a average brushless motor the efficiency is about

85%

About the 30% of the losses is caused by the Joule effect

We calculated an energy loss due to Focault currents

about 175 mW (0.1% Energy Loss)

Considering other causes, projected energy loss as a

result of friction is ≈60%

Advantages

Lower susceptibility to mechanical wear

Little to no maintenance

Efficiency

Quiet

No vibration

Eliminate AC-DC Conversion loss

3 axis gimbal movement possible

4x the torque and the speed of the competition

Costs: Motor Implementation

Purchasing Costs 2%

Maintenance Costs 2%

Operating Costs (Electricity) 96%

Overall cost of motor will increase due to the usage of more

magnets

80% of maintenance in brushless motors are of parts that do not

exist or are not stressed by the Maglev Motor

Overall resistance is similar and current draw is the same therefore operating costs do not change

Both in the short and long term, this motor would be economical

Comparison

Brushless Motor

Cost: $170

Power: 180W

Peak Torque: 1.70 N/m

Peak RPM: 3000

Rated Current: 7A

Resistance: 0.9 Ω

MagLev Motor

Cost: $350

Power: 180W

Peak Torque: 4.9 N/m

Peak RPM: 12000

Rated Current: 7A

Resistance: 0.9 Ω

*All numbers are approximated

Additional Applications: Generator

Can generate both AC or DC current

Prevent the 5% of energy is lost to AC to DC

conversion

Maglev Technology never implemented in such a

way

E.G. : Maglev wind turbine

Could work with lower wind and should be able to convert

a huge portion of the kinetic energy received in effective

electric energy

World-Wide Impact

Aerospace Industry

Automotive Industry

Electrical appliances

Margin for development

Thanks!

We wanted to say a special thanks to everyone who supported us

and helped us going throughout this process

Our Peers

Our Mentors

Naama

Tomas

And thank to you too, for listening to us until the very end

Physical background

Bibliography

"Brushless DC Motors Used in Industrial Applications." Ohio Electric Motors. Ohio Electric

Motors Inc., n.d. Web. 06 Dec. 2014.

Fleiter, Tobias, Wolfgang Eichhammer, and Joachim Schleich. Energy Efficiency in Electric Motor Systems: Technical Potentials and Policy Approaches for Developing Countries.

Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization, 2011. United Nations.

BIOT-SAVART LAW Introduction (n.d.): n. pag. The Arc.

<http://iit.edu/arc/workshops/pdfs/Georgi_Subashki_Workshop_Biot_Savart_Law.pdf>.

Holmberg, Kenneth, Peter Andersson, and Ali Erdemir. "Global Energy Consumption Due to

Friction in Passenger Cars." Tribology International 47 (2012): 221-34.

Hron, Tomas. "Model of the Electromagnetic Levitation Device." MODEL OF THE

ELECTROMAGNETIC LEVITATION DEVICE Tomáš Hron (n.d.): n. pag. Cez.cz. Faculty of Electrical Engineering - Prague.

Radhakrihnan, Abhishek. "Effect of Magnetic Dampening on Rotating Disks." National

University of Singapour, 2008.