Article

A Novel Interior Permanent Magnet Machine with Magnet Axis

Shifted Effect for Electric Vehicle Applications
Yongsheng Ge , Hui Yang *, Weijia Wang, Heyun Lin and Ya Li

School of Electrical Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China; [email protected] (Y.G.);
[email protected] (W.W.); [email protected] (H.L.); [email protected] (Y.L.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-15251867159

Abstract: This paper proposes a novel interior permanent magnet (IPM) machine with asymmetrical
PM configuration. Different from the traditional IPM counterparts, the proposed machine can
perform a magnet axis shifted (MAS) effect. The magnet axis is shifted towards the reluctance axis
so that a higher resultant torque capability can be obtained. Firstly, the configuration and the basic
principle of the proposed machine are described. The design parameters are optimized to improve
the torque capability, and the effect of the PM asymmetry ratio on the torque performance is then
evaluated in detail. In addition, the major electromagnetic characteristics of the optimized machine
are investigated and compared with those of the Prius 2010 IPM machine by finite element method
(FEM). The results demonstrate that the proposed asymmetrical PM configuration can achieve the
torque improvement due to the MAS effect.







Citation: Ge, Y.; Yang, H.; Wang, W.;

Keywords: asymmetrical permanent magnet configuration; interior permanent magnet (IPM); mag-
Lin, H.; Li, Y. A Novel Interior net axis shifted; permanent magnet (PM) machine
Permanent Magnet Machine with
Magnet Axis Shifted Effect for
Electric Vehicle Applications. World
Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189. https:// 1. Introduction
doi.org/10.3390/wevj12040189 Due to high torque density and high efficiency, permanent magnet (PM) machines
have gained extensive attention recently. Amongst the conventional PM machines, interior
Academic Editors: C. C. Chan, Yoichi
PM (IPM) machines are regarded as popular choices for electric vehicles [1,2]. In order
Hori, James L. Kirtley, Jr., Joeri Van
to improve the reluctance torque (RT) component, PM-assisted synchronous reluctance
Mierlo, Myoungho Sunwoo and
machines (PM-SynRMs) are extensively investigated in [3–5]. However, the conventional
Xuhui Wen
IPM machines suffer from a compromised utilization ratio of magnet torque (MT) and
RT components, whose optimal current angles differ by 45 electrical degrees theoretically.
Received: 21 August 2021
Accepted: 11 October 2021
In order to deal with this issue, dual rotor [6], hybrid rotor [7,8], and asymmetrical PM-
Published: 15 October 2021
SynRMs [4,9] were developed in recent years. However, the former two machines have
relatively complicated structure and the latter one suffers from significant flux leakage as
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
well as sophisticated magnetic flux paths.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
The purpose of this paper is to propose a magnet axis shifted (MAS) IPM (MAS-
published maps and institutional affil- IPM) machine with an asymmetrical PM arrangement, which aims to improve the torque
iations. component utilization ratio, and hence the torque density. In this paper, the configuration
and the operating principle of the proposed machine are described. The effects of the PM
asymmetry ratio on the torque performance are evaluated, and the design parameters are
optimized to improve the torque capability. In order to validate the MAS effect of the
proposed asymmetrical PM arrangement, the major electromagnetic characteristics of the
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
optimal MAS-IPM machine are analyzed and compared with those of the Prius 2010 IPM
This article is an open access article
machine (Toyota Motor Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) by finite element method (FEM).
distributed under the terms and
2. Machine Configuration and Basic Principle
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// The configurations of the Prius 2010 IPM machine and the proposed MAS-IPM ma-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ chine are shown in Figure 1a,b, respectively. For a fair comparison, the two machines
4.0/). share the same stator structure, active stack length, air gap length, current density and

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189. https://doi.org/10.3390/wevj12040189 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/wevj

 MT and RT components reach their peak values are different, the difference of which is
expressed as
 s   PM   R (1)
In the traditional IPM machine with a symmetrical rotor configuration, as we know,
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 2 of 9
the current angle difference γs is theoretically an electrical angle of 45. On the other hand,
in the proposed machine, since the magnet axis is shifted towards the reluctance axis due
to the asymmetrical PM arrangement, the difference of the current angles γs can be signif-
PM usages, as reduced,
icantly shown inwhich
Table 1.
canThe mainimprove
further feature of
thethe MAS-IPM
torque machine refers to an
capability.
asymmetrical “5”-shaped PM rotor structure, in which the lengths of the second-layer
two PMs are unequal to achieve the MAS effect.

(a) (b)
Figure 1. Machine
Figure configurations.
1. Machine (a) The
configurations. Prius
(a) The 20102010
Prius machine. (b) The
machine. MAS-IPM
(b) The machine.
MAS-IPM machine.

Table 1. Key common design

The no-load parameters
magnetic of Prius
fields of the2010
twoIPM and Mas-IPM
machines machines. are plotted in Figure
for comparison
2. It can be seen that the magnet d-axis is shifted by an angle in the proposed MAS-IPM
Items Parameters
machine, while the reluctance d-axis remains unchanged. It means that the magnet and
Stator outer
reluctance diameter
axes become(mm)closer compared with the Prius 264
2010 machine. As a result, the
Air gap length (mm) 0.75
difference of the current angles γs of the proposed machine can be reduced and the corre-
Rotor outer diameter (mm) 160.4
sponding total torque is
Rotor inner diameter (mm)improved, confirming the feasibility
100 of the MAS effect.
Active stack length (mm) 50.8
Peak current (A) 246
Rated speed (rpm) 3000
PM volume per pole (mm3 ) 12,802

For the conventional IPM machine, the optimal current angles βPM and βR when the
MT and RT components reach their peak values are different, the difference of which is
expressed as
γs = β PM − β R (1)
In the traditional IPM machine with a symmetrical rotor configuration, as we know,
the current angle difference γs is theoretically an electrical angle of 45. On the other hand,
in the proposed machine, since the magnet axis is shifted towards the reluctance axis
due to the asymmetrical PM arrangement, the difference of the current angles γs can be
significantly reduced, which can further improve the torque capability.
The no-load magnetic fields of the two machines for comparison are plotted in Figure 2.
It can be seen that the magnet d-axis is shifted by an angle in the proposed MAS-IPM
machine, while the reluctance d-axis remains unchanged. It means that the magnet and
reluctance axes become closer compared with the Prius 2010 machine. As a result, the
difference of the current angles γs of the proposed machine can be reduced and the
corresponding total torque is improved, confirming the feasibility of the MAS effect.
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 9

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 9

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 3 of 9

Magnet d-axis Magnet d-axis Actual magnet d-axis

Reluctance d-axis Reluctance d-axis
Magnet d-axis Magnet d-axis Actual magnet d-axis
Reluctance d-axis Reluctance d-axis

(a) (b)
Figure 2. No-load magnetic
(a)fields. (a) The Prius 2010 machine. (b) The MAS-IPM
(b)machine.
Figure
Figure 2. No-load
2. No-load magnetic
magnetic fields.
fields. (a) (a)
TheThe Prius
Prius 2010
2010 machine.
machine. (b) (b)
TheThe MAS-IPM
MAS-IPM machine.
machine.
3. Optimization of The Proposed MAS-IPM Machine
3. Optimization
In order of The Proposed
to maximize
3. Optimization of the
ThetorqueMAS-IPM
Proposed Machine
capability
MAS-IPM by effectively
Machine employing the proposed
MASIn effect,
ordersome design variables are selectedby
to effectively
be optimized, as shown in Figure 3.MAS
The
In order to maximize the torque capability byemploying
to maximize the torque capability effectivelythe proposed
employing the proposed
peak current
effect, 246 A was
some design used for
variables areobtaining
selected tothebemaximum
optimized,torque,
as shownwhich is accordance
in Figure with
3. The peak
MAS effect, some design variables are selected to be optimized, as shown in Figure 3. The
that of Prius
current 246 A2010was machine. A coefficient
used for obtaining α is defined
the maximum as lpm1which
torque, /lpm2 toisdescribe
accordancethe with
asymmetry
that of
peak current 246 A was used for obtaining the maximum torque, which is accordance with
level of PM1 and PM2, which is associated with the MAS effect. The
Prius 2010 machine. A coefficient α is defined as lpm1 /lpm2 to describe the asymmetry level design global opti-
that of Prius 2010 machine. A coefficient α is defined as lpm1/lpm2 to describe the asymmetry
mization
of PM1 and is performed
PM2, whichby is aassociated
multi-objective
with thegenetic algorithm
MAS effect. with the
The design constraints
global of the
optimization
level of PM1 and PM2, which is associated with the MAS effect. The design global opti-
overall
is sizing,by
performed e.g., stator outer diameter
a multi-objective genetic and stack length,
algorithm with as
theshown in Table
constraints of 1.
theThe opti-
overall
mization is performed by a multi-objective genetic algorithm with the constraints of the
mization
sizing, target
e.g., statorisouter
to maximize
diameterthe andaverage torqueasand
stack length, minimize
shown in Table the1. torque ripple, the
The optimization
overall sizing, e.g., stator outer diameter and stack length, as shown in Table 1. The opti-
target is to maximize
corresponding weight thefactors
average of torque
which andare 1minimize
and 0.5, the torque ripple,
respectively. the corresponding
In addition, the major
mization target is to maximize the average torque and minimize the torque ripple, the
weight factors of which are 1 and 0.5, respectively. In addition, the
design parameters of the optimized IPM machines and their variation ranges are pre- major design parameters
corresponding weight factors of which are 1 and 0.5, respectively. In addition, the major
of the optimized
sented in Table 2.IPM machines and their variation ranges are presented in Table 2.
design parameters of the optimized IPM machines and their variation ranges are pre-
sented in Table 2.

Figure 3. Design variables of the proposed machine.

Figure 3. Design variables of the proposed machine.

Table 2. Definitions
Table 2. Definitions and
and variation
variation range
range of
of the
the design
design parameters
parameters of
ofproposed
proposedMAS-IPM
MAS-IPMmachine.
machine.

Table
Items2. Definitions and variation
Items range of the design parameters
Descriptions
Descriptions TheThe of proposed
MAS-IPM
MAS-IPM MAS-IPM machine.
Machine
Machine
hh11 (mm)
(mm) Items thickness of PM1
thicknessDescriptions
of PM1 3.5~4.5
The3.5~4.5
MAS-IPM Machine
hh22 (mm)
(mm) thickness
thicknessofofPM3PM3 2.5~3.5
2.5~3.5
h 1 (mm) thickness of PM1 3.5~4.5
llpm1 (mm)
pm1 (mm) length
length ofofPM1
PM1 7~21
7~21
lpm2 (mm) h 2 (mm) thickness
length of PM2 of PM3 20~25 2.5~3.5
lpm2 (mm) length of PM2 20~25
lpm3 (mm)lpm1 (mm) length length
of PM3 of PM1 25~35 7~21
lpm3 (mm) length of PM3 25~35
α lpm2 (mm) lpm1 /lpm2 (the asymmetry
length of PM2 ratio) 0.3~0.9 20~25
α lpm1/lpm2 (the asymmetry ratio) 0.3~0.9
lpm3 (mm) length of PM3 25~35
For illustratingαthe definitionlpm1 of/lthe
pm2 (the
torqueasymmetry
component
component ratio) 0.3~0.9
utilization ratio, the diagram
diagram
for the torque separation of a conventional IPM IPM machine
machine is is shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 4.4. The torque
torque
For illustrating the definition of the torque component utilization ratio, the diagram
component utilization ratios of the MT and RT upm and u are defined as follows
pm and urr are defined as follows
for the torque separation of a conventional IPM machine is shown in Figure 4. The torque
component utilization ratios of the MT MT and
MTcomp RT upm and ur are defined as follows
pm 
comp
u pmu= (2)
(2)
MTMTmaxmax MTcomp
u pm  (2)
RTcomp MTmax
ur = (3)
RTmax
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 9
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 9

RTcomp
ur  RT (3)
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 ur  RTmax 4 of 9
comp
(3)
RTmax
where MTcomp and RTcomp are MT and RT when the total torque reaches the peak value,
where
and MTMT and
maxcomp and
RTRT are MT
denote
max comp and
their RT whenvalues
maximum the total torque
of MT andreaches
RT. the peak value,
MTmaxMT
andwhere RTand
andcomp RTcomptheir
max denote
MT and RTvalues
are maximum whenofthe
MTtotal
andtorque
RT. reaches the peak value,
and MTmax and RTmax denote their maximum values of MT and RT.
RT
RT

RT
RT
MT
Tmax
MT

MT
Tmax
MT
TT

(Nm)(Nm)
Torque(Nm)
TT MTmax RTcomp RTmax
Torque(Nm)
Torque
MTmax MTcomp
RTcomp RTmax
Torque

MTcomp

s
 PM R
s
-90 -45  PM 0 45 R 90

-90 Currentphase
-45 Current phaseangle
0angle(Elec.
(Elec. degree)
45 90
Currentphase
Current phaseangle
angle(Elec.
(Elec. degree)
Figure 4. Diagram of torque component separation of a conventional IPM machine.
Figure
Figure 4. Diagram
4. Diagram of torque
of torque component
component separation
separation of a of a conventional
conventional IPM IPM machine.
machine.
A preliminary model is obtained based on the global optimization. To better illustrate
A preliminary model is obtained based on the global optimization. To better illustrate
A preliminary
the influence of α onmodel
torque is performance,
obtained based onsingle
the the global optimization.
parameter To better
optimization illustrate
is performed.
the influence of α on torque performance, the single parameter optimization is performed.
the
Theinfluence of α on torque
torque component performance,
utilization ratios ofthe
MTsingle
and RTparameter optimization
as functions of differentis performed.
asymmetry
The torque component utilization ratios of MT and RT as functions of different asymmetry
The torque component
coefficients utilization
α are presented ratios
in Figure of MTthe
5. With andincrement
RT as functions ofRT
of α, the different asymmetry
utilization ratio ur
coefficients α are presented in Figure 5. With the increment of α, the RT utilization ratio ur
coefficients
is increasingα proportionally
are presented in Figure
until 5. With0.8,
α reaches thewhere
increment of α, the RT
ur reaches peakutilization ratio ur
value of 93.77%.
is increasing proportionally until α reaches 0.8, where ur reaches the peak value of 93.77%.
is
Atincreasing
the same proportionally until α reaches
time, the MT utilization ratio 0.8,
upm where ur reaches
decreases with thetheincrease
peak valuein α,ofwhich
93.77%. is
At the same time, the MT utilization ratio upm decreases with the increase in α, which is
At the same
attributed totime, the MT utilization
the weakening of the MAS ratio upm decreases
effect with
in that case. the increaseFigure
Nevertheless, in α, which
6 shows is
attributed to the weakening of the MAS effect in that case. Nevertheless, Figure 6 shows the
attributed
the toque to the weakening
component of the
variation MAS
with theeffect in that case.
asymmetry Nevertheless,
coefficient. It shows Figure 6 shows
that the total
toque component variation with the asymmetry coefficient. It shows that the total torque
the
torquetoque
andcomponent variation can
the MT component withbethe asymmetry
improved withcoefficient.
the incrementIt shows that itthe
of α until total
reaches
and the MT component can be improved with the increment of α until it reaches 0.8. The
torque
0.8. Theand the MT component
improvement in the MTcan be improved
component can be with the increment
explained of α until
by the increase it reaches
in PM usage,
improvement in the MT component can be explained by the increase in PM usage, despite
0.8. The improvement
despite upm decreasing.inThe
theRT MTcomponent
componentiscan be explained
almost invariantby the increase
because in PM
the rotor steelusage,
lam-
upm decreasing. The RT component is almost invariant because the rotor steel lamination
despite
ination uremains
pm decreasing. The RT component is almost invariant because the rotor steel lam-
unchanged.
remains unchanged.
ination remains unchanged.

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 9

Figure
Figure 5. The
5. The torque
torque utilization
utilization ratios
ratios versus
versus the the asymmetry
asymmetry coefficient
coefficient α. α.
Figure 5. The torque utilization ratios versus the asymmetry coefficient α.
300

250

200
Torque (Nm)

150

100

50 T RT
RT MT
MT

0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Asymmetric variable α

Figure
Figure 6. 6.
TheThe total
total torque
torque and
and torque
torque components
components versus
versus thethe asymmetry
asymmetry coefficient
coefficient α. α.

After the optimization, the optimal asymmetrical structure is confirmed. The opti-
mized design parameters of the proposed MAS-IPM machine are obtained, i.e., h1 = 3.9
mm, h2 = 2.7 mm, lpm1 = 18.4 mm, lpm2 = 23 mm, lpm3 = 33 mm, and α = 0.8.
 50 T RT
RT MT
MT
50 T RT
RT MT
MT
0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0.2 0.3
Asymmetric 0.4
variable α0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Asymmetric variable α
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 5 of 9
Figure 6. The total torque and torque components versus the asymmetry coefficient α.
Figure 6. The total torque and torque components versus the asymmetry coefficient α.

After the optimization, the optimal asymmetrical structure is confirmed. The opti-
After the optimization, the optimal asymmetrical structure is confirmed. Th
mizedAfter
design theparameters
optimization,
mized design of the
the proposed
optimal
parameters of MAS-IPM
asymmetrical
the proposed machine
structure
MAS-IPM are obtained,
is confirmed.
machine are i.e., hopti-
1 = 3.9
Theobtained, i.e., h
mm,
mized h2 =design
2.7 mm, lpm1 = 18.4
parameters ofmm,
the lpm2 = 23 mm,
proposed l
MAS-IPMpm3 = 33 mm,
machine and
are α = 0.8.
obtained,
mm, h2 = 2.7 mm, lpm1 = 18.4 mm, lpm2 = 23 mm, lpm3 = 33 mm, and α = 0.8. i.e., h 1 = 3.9 mm,
h2 = 2.7 mm, lpm1 = 18.4 mm, lpm2 = 23 mm, lpm3 = 33 mm, and α = 0.8.
4. Performance Comparison
4. Performance Comparison
4. Performance Comparison
4.1. No-Load Performance
4.1. No-Load Performance
4.1. No-Load Performance
The back-EMFs The at rated speed of
back-EMFs at the
ratedtwo investigated
speed of the twomachines are shown
investigated machines in are
Figure
shown in
The back-EMFs at rated speed of the two investigated machines are shown in Figure 7.
7. It can be found7.that the
It can beroot-mean-square (RMS) EMF of (RMS)
found that the root-mean-square the proposed
EMF of machine
the proposed is 20.2%
machine is
It can be found that the root-mean-square (RMS) EMF of the proposed machine is 20.2%
higher than thathigher of thethanPriusthat
machine. Meanwhile,
of the Prius machine. it Meanwhile,
shows that the MAS-IPM
it shows that the machine
MAS-IPM m
higher than that of the Prius machine. Meanwhile, it shows that the MAS-IPM machine
exhibits better sinusoidal
exhibits betterback-EMF thanback-EMF
sinusoidal the conventional
than the machine.
conventionalThe machine.
cogging torque The cogging
exhibits better sinusoidal back-EMF than the conventional machine. The cogging torque
waveforms
waveformsare are illustrated
waveformsinare
illustrated in Figure 8. It
illustrated
Figure 8. It can
can be seen
in Figure
be seen8. that the
It can
that the
bePrius 2010machine
seen that
Prius 2010 machine
the Prius 2010exhibits
exhibits
machine ex
higher cogging higher
torque cogging
than the torque
MAS-IPM than the MAS-IPM
machine. This machine.
is
higher cogging torque than the MAS-IPM machine. This is mainly attributed to lower THD mainly This is mainly
attributed to attributed
lower to
THD of the THD
back-EMF ofofthe
theback-EMF
proposed
of the back-EMF of the proposed MAS-IPM machine. of the
MAS-IPMproposed MAS-IPM
machine. machine.

200 200 200 200

Prius 2010 machine Prius 2010 machine
Prius 2010 machine Prius 2010 machine

Back FMF harmonic (V)

MAS-IPM machine

Back FMF harmonic (V)

100 MAS-IPM machine 150 MAS-IPM machine
100 150 MAS-IPM machine
Back EMF (V)
Back EMF (V)

0 100
0 100

-100 50
-100 50

-200 0
-200 0 60 120 180 240 3000 360 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
0 60 120 180 240 300position (Elec.
Rotor 360 degree) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Harmonic number
Rotor position (Elec. degree) Harmonic number

(a) (b)
(a) (b)
FigureFigure 7. No-load
7. No-load back-EMFs
back-EMFs of the
of the two two investigated
investigated machines
machines (3000(a)
(3000 rpm). rpm). (a) Waveforms.
Waveforms. (b) Har-spectra.
(b) Harmonic
Figure 7. No-load back-EMFs of the two investigated machines (3000 rpm). (a) Waveforms. (b) Harmonic spectra.
monic spectra.
1.5
1.5 Prius 2010 machine
1
Cogging torque (Nm)

Prius 2010 machine MAS-IPM machine

1
0.5
Cogging torque (Nm)

MAS-IPM machine
0.5
0

0
-0.5

-0.5
-1

-1 -1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-1.5 Rotor position (Elec. degree)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Rotor position (Elec. degree)
Figure 8. Cogging torque waveforms.
Coggingtorque
Figure8.8.Cogging
Figure torque waveforms.
waveforms.
4.2. Torque Characteristics
4.2. Torque Characteristics
4.2. Torque Characteristics
The on-load torque characteristics of the Prius 2010 and the MAS-IPM machines
are shown in Figures 9 and 10. The torque separation results obtained by the frozen
permeability method [10,11] are shown in Figure 9a,b, respectively. Due to the asymmetrical
PM configuration, γs of the proposed MAS-IPM machine is reduced by 15 electrical degrees
compared to the Prius IPM machine.
 shown in Figures 9 and 10. The torque separation results obtained by the frozen pe
The on-load torque characteristics ofofthe
thePrius 2010
2010and
andthe
theMAS-IPM machine
bilityThe on-load
method torque
[10,11] are characteristics
shown in Figure 9a,b, Prius
respectively. Due MAS-IPM machin
to the asymmetric
shown in Figures
shown in Figures 9 and
9 and 10. The torque
10. The torque separation
separation results
resultsobtained by the
obtainedbyby15thefrozen
frozenperm
pe
configuration, γs of the proposed MAS-IPM machine is reduced electrical d
bility
bilitymethod
method [10,11]
[10,11] are shown ininFigure
Figure9a,b,
9a,b,respectively.
respectively.Due
Duetotothe
theasymmetrica
compared to the Priusare
IPMshown
machine. asymmetric
configuration,
configuration,γγs sof
ofthe
theproposed
proposedMAS-IPM
MAS-IPMmachine
machineisisreduced
reducedby by15156electrical
electricaldeg
d
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 of 9
compared to the Prius IPM machine.
compared to the Prius IPM machine.
300 300
Max torque 255.44Nm Max torque 262.27Nm
TT
200 200
300 RT 300
300 Max torque 255.44Nm 300 Max torque 262.27Nm
Max torque 255.44Nm TT Max torque 262.27Nm
100 MT
MT
TT 100

Torque (Nm)
(Nm) (Nm)
200 200
200 RT 200
RT
100 0

Torque
1000 MT
MT

Torque (Nm)
100 MT
MT 100

Torque (Nm)
(Nm)
TT
-100  s  1   2 -100
0  s  1   2

Torque
0
0

Torque
0 RT
-200 -200 TT
-100  s  1   2 -100
MT
MT
TT  s  1   2
-100  s  1   2 -100
RT  s  1   2
-300
-200 -300
-200 RT
-200 0 30 60 90 120 150 180
-200 0 MT 30
MT 60 90 120 150 180
Current phase angle (Elec. degree) MT
MT Current phase angle (Elec. degree)
-300 -300
-300 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 -3000 30 60 90 120 150 180
0 30 60 phase angle
Current 90 (Elec. degree)
120 150 180 0 30 60 phase angle
Current 90 (Elec. degree)
120 150 180
(a)
Current phase angle (Elec. degree) (b)
Current phase angle (Elec. degree)

(a)
Figure 9. The torque component (b)(b) The MAS-IPM machine.
segregation. (a) The Prius 2010 IPM machine.
(a) (b)
Figure 9. The torque component segregation. (a) The Prius 2010 IPM machine. (b) The MAS-IPM machine.
Figure 9. The
Figure torque
9. The component
torque segregation.
component (a) The(a)
segregation. Prius
The2010 IPM
Prius machine.
2010 (b) The MAS-IPM
IPM machine. machine.
(b) The MAS-
IPM machine.
350 350
Average torque: 255.44Nm Average torque: 262.27Nm
TT RT
RT MT
MT TT RT
RT MT
MT
300 Torque ripple : 12.3% 300 Torque ripple : 18.2%
350 350
Average torque: 255.44Nm Average torque: 262.27Nm
350
250 TT RT
RT MT
MT 350 TT RT
RT MT
MT
300 Average torque:
Torque ripple 255.44Nm
: 12.3% 250 Torque
Averageripple : 18.2%
torque: 262.27Nm
300 TT RT
RT MT
MT torque: 157.21Nm
(Nm) (Nm)

TT RT
RT MT
MT
Average torque: 166.36Nm

Torque (Nm)
300 Torque ripple : 12.3% Average Torque ripple : 18.2%
200 300
250 Torque ripple : 14.0% 200 Torque ripple : 28.2%
250
Torque

Average torque: 166.36Nm

Torque (Nm)
250
150 250 Average torque: 157.21Nm
200 150
(Nm)

Average torque:
Torque ripple 166.36Nm
: 14.0% 200 Torque ripple : 28.2%

Torque (Nm)
Average torque: 157.21Nm
Torque

200
100 Torque ripple : 14.0% 200 Torque ripple : 28.2%
150 100
150
Torque

150 Average torque: 89.08Nm 150 Average torque: 105.09Nm

50
100 10050 Torque ripple : 21.6%
Torque ripple : 21.9%
1000 100 Average torque: 105.09Nm
Average torque: 89.08Nm
50
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 50 0
Torque
Averageripple : 21.9%
torque: 89.08Nm 0 60 120 Torque
Average
180 ripple
240 : 21.6%
torque: 105.09Nm
300 360
50 50
0 Rotor positon (Elec. degree) Torque
Rotor positon (Elec. ripple : 21.6%
degree)
Torque ripple : 21.9% 0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
0 0
0 60 Rotor
120 positon (Elec.
180 degree)
Rotor 240
120positon (Elec. 300 360
(a) 0 60
(b)180 degree)240
Rotor positon (Elec. degree)
Rotor positon (Elec. degree)
300 360

Figure 10. The steady-state total(a) (b)

torque, reluctance torque and magnet torque under maximum torque conditions. (a) Priu
(a) (b)
2010 machine.
Figure 10. The (b) 10.
Figure MAS-IPM
steady-state machine.
The total torque, reluctance
steady-state torque
total torque, and magnet
reluctance torque
torque andunder maximum
magnet torque maximum
torque under conditions. (a) Prius
Figure
2010 10. The(b)
machine. steady-state
MAS-IPM total torque, reluctance torque and magnet torque under maximum torque conditions. (a) Priu
machine.
torque conditions. (a) Prius 2010 machine. (b) MAS-IPM machine.
2010 machine. (b) MAS-IPM4.3. machine.
Torque/Power versus Speed Curves
4.3. Torque/Power
4.3.vs. Speed
The Curves
Torque/Power versus Speed
field-weakening Curves is a key characteristic for the traction machin
capability
4.3. Torque/Power
The field-weakening versus
capability Speed
keyCurves
is acapability
characteristic for the
electric
Thevehicles. The torque/power-speed
field-weakening is a keycurves aretraction
shown
characteristic machines
forin Figure
the formachine
11a,b,
traction respec
electric vehicles.
It The The field-weakening
torque/power-speed
demonstrates that the capability
curves
proposed is
are
machinea key
shown characteristic
canin Figure
achieve for
11a,b,
higher the traction
respectively.
torque
electric vehicles. The torque/power-speed curves are shown in Figure 11a,b, respectiand machin
power ca
electric
It demonstratesItity
that the
over vehicles.
proposed
a whole The torque/power-speed
machine
speed can
range. achieve curves
higher are
torque shown
and in
power Figure 11a,b,
capability
demonstrates that the proposed machine can achieve higher torque and power cap respec
It demonstrates
over a whole speed
ity range.
over that the
a whole speed proposed machine can achieve higher torque and power ca
range.
ity over a whole speed range.
300 100

300
250
Prius 2010 machine 100
80
power (kW)

300 MAS-IPM machine 100

250
Prius 2010 machine
(Nm)(Nm)

200 80
Output power (kW)

MAS-IPM
Prius 2010machine
machine 60
250 80
Output(kW)

200
150 MAS-IPM machine
Torque

60
(Nm)

200 40
150
Torque

Output power

100 60 Prius 2010 machine

150 40
Torque

100 20 MAS-IPM machine

50 Prius 2010 machine
40
100 20 MAS-IPM machine
Prius 2010 machine
500
0
20 0 MAS-IPM machine
50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
10,000 12,000 14000
14,000
0 Speed (rpm) 0 Speed (rpm)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000
0 Speed (rpm) 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000 Speed (rpm)
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000
(a) (rpm)
Speed (b) (rpm)
Speed
(a) (b)
Figure 11. Torque/power-speed
(a) curves. (a) The torque-speed curve. (b)(b)
The output-speed curve.
Figure 11. Torque/power-speed curves. (a) The torque-speed curve. (b) The output-speed curve. (Imax = 246 A, Udc = 650 V
(Imax = 246 A, Udc = 650 V).
Figure 11. Torque/power-speed curves. (a) The torque-speed curve. (b) The output-speed curve. (Imax = 246 A, Udc = 650 V).
Figure 11. 4.4.
Torque/power-speed curves. (a)
Iron Loss and Efficiency MapsThe torque-speed curve. (b) The output-speed curve. (Imax = 246 A, Udc = 650 V

The loss in the machine mainly contains the iron and copper losses. The iron, hystere-
sis, eddy current, and copper losses can be calculated by

Pi = Ph + Pe (4)
α
Ph = Kh f Bm (5)
 resis, eddy current, and copper losses can be calculated by
Pi  Ph  Pe (4)

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 Ph  K h fBm 7(5)

of 9

Pe  K e f  Bm (6)
Pe = Ke f γ Bm
δ
(6)
PPc= 3R
c
3RaII2a2
a a
(7)
(7)
where
wherePPi,i ,PPh,h Pe, eand
,P , andPPc are
c areiron,
iron,hysteresis,
hysteresis,eddyeddycurrent,
current,andandcopper
copperlosses,
losses,respectively;
respectively;
KKh hand
andKKe eare
arethethecoefficients
coefficientsof ofhysteresis
hysteresisand andeddy
eddycurrent
currentlosses,
losses,respectively;
respectively;ff isisthe
the
operating frequency of the machine; B is the flux density; α, γ, and
operating frequency of the machine; Bm is the flux density; α, γ, and δ are the coefficients
m δ are the coefficients
ofofthe
theempiric
empiricformula;
formula;RRa aisisthethearmature
armaturewinding
windingresistance;
resistance;andandIIaaisisthe
thephase
phasecurrent
current
RMS
RMSvalue.
value.
The
Theiron
ironlosses
lossesof ofthe
thetwo
twomachines
machinesare aregiven
givenin inFigure
Figure12.
12.ItItcan
canbe beobserved
observedthat
thatthe
the
twomachines
two machinesshow showsimilar
similarironironlosses
losseswhen
whenthe thespeed
speedisislower
lowerthanthan60006000rpm.
rpm.Besides,
Besides,
duetotolower
due lowerTHD THDof ofthe
theback-EMF,
back-EMF,the theMAS-IPM
MAS-IPMmachine machineshows
showslower
lowerironironloss
lossunder
under
high speed
high speed range. range. The efficiency
efficiency maps of the two machines are illustrated in Figure The
maps of the two machines are illustrated in Figure 13. 13.
maximum
The maximum efficiency of the
efficiency ofMAS-IPM
the MAS-IPM machine is 0.7%
machine is higher than that
0.7% higher than ofthat
the Prius
of the2010.
PriusIt
can be
2010. seenbethat
It can seen the high
that theefficiency over aover
high efficiency wider operating
a wider regionregion
operating can becan achieved in the
be achieved
inMAS-IPM
the MAS-IPM machine due todue
machine its lower iron loss.
to its lower ironTheloss.related electromagnetic
The related performances
electromagnetic perfor-
of the two
mances of themachines are given
two machines are in Table
given in 3. As 3.
Table a whole, the MAS
As a whole, effecteffect
the MAS of theofproposed
the pro-
asymmetrical PM configuration for the torque improvement
posed asymmetrical PM configuration for the torque improvement is confirmed. Mean- is confirmed. Meanwhile,
compared
while, to thetoPrius
compared IPM machine,
the Prius IPM machine, the proposed
the proposed machine
machineexhibits higher
exhibits RMSRMS
higher flux
linkage, RMS back-EMF and lower cogging torque, as well
flux linkage, RMS back-EMF and lower cogging torque, as well as higher MT, RT utiliza-as higher MT, RT utilization
ratio,
tion andand
ratio, operating
operatingefficiency.
efficiency.
7

6 Prius 2010 machine

MAS-IPM machine
5
Iron losses (kW)

World Electr. Veh. J. 2021,

0 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
10,000 12000
12,000 14000
14,000
Speed (rpm)

Figure 12. Iron losses versus speed curves.

Figure 12. Iron losses versus speed curves.
300 98 300 98

90 90
250 250
82 82

200 74 200 74
Efficiency (%)
Efficiency (%)

Torque (Nm)
Torque (Nm)

66 66
150 150
60 60

100 52 100 52

44 44
50 50
36 36

0 28 0 28
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10,000 12,000 14,000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10,000 12,000 14,000
Speed (rpm) Speed (rpm)

(a) (b)
Figure 13. Efficiency
Figure maps.
13. Efficiency (a) The
maps. (a) Prius 2010 2010
The Prius machine. (b) The
machine. (b)MAS-IPM machine.
The MAS-IPM (Imax = 246
machine. A,=U246
(Imax dc = 650
A, V).
Udc = 650 V).
Table 3. The electromagnetic performance of the two investigated machines.

Items Prius 2010 Machine MAS-IPM Machine

RMS back-EMF (V) 104.42 125.31
Rated torque (Nm) 255.44 262.27
Reluctance torque (Nm) 166.36 157.21
Magnet torque (Nm) 89.08 105.09
Peak cogging torque (Nm) 1.21 0.83
γs (elec. deg.) 45 30
Torque pulsation (%) 12.3 18.2
upm (%) 80.21 83.77
ur (%) 91.24 93.31
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 8 of 9

Table 3. The electromagnetic performance of the two investigated machines.

Items Prius 2010 Machine MAS-IPM Machine

RMS back-EMF (V) 104.42 125.31
Rated torque (Nm) 255.44 262.27
Reluctance torque (Nm) 166.36 157.21
Magnet torque (Nm) 89.08 105.09
Peak cogging torque (Nm) 1.21 0.83
γs (elec. deg.) 45 30
Torque pulsation (%) 12.3 18.2
upm (%) 80.21 83.77
ur (%) 91.24 93.31
Maximum efficiency (%) 97.4 98.1

5. Conclusions
A novel IPM machine with a MAS effect is proposed in this paper. Due to the asym-
metrical PM configuration, the proposed machine benefits from the reduced γs , improving
the MT and RT utilization ratios. Hence, the total torque can be further improved. Based on
FEM, the design variables of the proposed MAS-IPM machine are optimized to maximize
the torque capability by defining an asymmetry ratio. Afterwards, the electromagnetic
characteristics of the proposed MAS-IPM machine are investigated and compared with
those of the Prius 2010 machine. It can be found that the proposed machine shows higher
RMS back-EMF, lower total harmonic distortions, and lower cogging torque. In addition,
the MAS-IPM machine exhibits a higher peak torque, a higher high-speed power main-
taining capability, as well as wider high efficiency operating regions. In summary, the
results confirm the MAS effect of the proposed asymmetrical PM configuration due to its
performance improvement. A prototype of the MAS-IPM machine will be manufactured
and the test results will be reported in due course.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.G., H.Y. and W.W.; methodology, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.;
software, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.; validation, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.; formal analysis, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.;
investigation, Y.L.; resources, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.; data curation, W.W.; writing—original draft
preparation, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.; writing—review and editing, H.Y., W.W., and H.L.; visualiza-
tion, H.Y., H.L. and Y.L.; supervision, H.Y., Y.G. and W.W.; project administration, H.Y., and H.L.;
funding acquisition, H.Y. and H.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This work was jointly supported in part by National Natural Science Foundations of
China under Grants (52077033 and 52037002), in part by Key R&D Program of Jiangsu Province
(BE2021052), in part by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2242017K41003),
in part by Supported by the “Zhishan Youth Scholar” Program of Southeast University, in part the
Jiangsu Provincial Key Laboratory of Smart Grid Technology and Equipment, Southeast University
(7716008046), and in part by supported by “the Excellence Project Funds of Southeast University”.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Yang, Y.; Castano, S.M.; Yang, R.; Kasprzak, M.; Bilgin, B.; Sathyan, A.; Dadkhah, H.; Emadi, A. Design and comparison of interior
permanent magnet motor topologies for traction applications. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2017, 3, 86–97. [CrossRef]
2. Zhu, S.; Chen, W.; Xie, M.Q.; Liu, C.; Wang, K. Electromagnetic performance comparison of multi-layered interior permanent
magnet machines for EV traction applications. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2018, 54, 1–5. [CrossRef]
3. Huynh, T.A.; Hsieh, M.F. Comparative study of PM-assisted SynRM and IPMSM on constant power speed range for EV
applications. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2017, 53, 1–6. [CrossRef]
4. Zhao, W.; Chen, D.; Lipo, T.A.; Kwon, B.-I. Performance Improvement of ferrite-assisted synchronous reluctance machines using
asymmetrical rotor configurations. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2015, 51, 1–4. [CrossRef]
5. Zhao, W.; Xing, F.; Wang, X.; Lipo, T.A.; Kwon, B.I. Design and analysis of a novel PM-assisted synchronous reluctance machine
with axially integrated magnets by the finite-element method. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2017, 53, 1–4. [CrossRef]
World Electr. Veh. J. 2021, 12, 189 9 of 9

6. Li, Y.; Bobba, D.; Sarlioglu, B. Design and optimization of a novel dual-rotor hybrid PM machine for traction application.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2018, 65, 1762–1771. [CrossRef]
7. Yang, H.; Li, Y.; Lin, H.; Zhu, Z.Q.; Lyu, S.; Wang, H.; Fang, S.; Huang, Y. Novel reluctance axis shifted machines with hybrid rotors.
In Proceedings of the IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, Cincinnati, OH, USA, 1–5 October 2017; pp. 2362–2367.
[CrossRef]
8. Ocak, O.; Aydin, M. A new hybrid permanent magnet synchronous motor with two different rotor sections. IEEE Trans. Magn.
2017, 53, 1–5. [CrossRef]
9. Xing, F.; Zhao, W.; Kwon, B.I. Design and optimisation of a novel asymmetric rotor structure for a PM-assisted synchronous
reluctance machine. IET Electric Power Appl. 2019, 13, 573–580. [CrossRef]
10. Zhao, W.; Lipo, T.A.; Kwon, B.-I. Optimal design of a novel asymmetrical rotor structure to obtain torque and efficiency
improvement in surface inset PM motors. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2015, 51, 1–4. [CrossRef]
11. Xu, G.; Liu, G.; Zhao, W.; Chen, Q.; Du, X. Principle of torque-angle approaching in a hybrid rotor permanent-magnet motor.
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 66, 2580–2591. [CrossRef]